Far-reaching decisions for an intensified program of evangelical cooperation at the world level were made at the annual convention of the National Association of Evangelicals in Los Angeles April 6–10. Action followed a world survey by Dr. Clyde W. Taylor, executive secretary of the Evangelical Foreign Missions Association and the Rev. Fred Ferris, executive secretary of the World Evangelical Fellowship (both NAE related). A sizeable portion of the NAE budget in 1959–60 will aid in undergirding the world program.

The team reported that in a world confronted with the rapid spread of atheistic Communism there is increasing evangelical unity and growth in many lands. In West Pakistan representatives from most of the missions and native churches in the country are forming a new fellowship. The Evangelical Fellowship of India at its national convention in Vizagapatam reported a greatly enlarged membership. In Ceylon evangelicals have completed a successful evangelistic campaign. Another is projected on a huge scale in Japan. Nepal is opening its doors to evangelical hospitals and schools. In the opinion of Taylor and Ferris, the world situation is ripe for the greatest evangelical advance in years.

Prior to the Los Angeles convention Dr. Taylor, accompanied by Dr. Herbert S. Mekeel, president of NAE, and Dr. George L. Ford, its executive director, conferred with President Eisenhower about the world situation. The President expressed a deep interest in the determination of evangelicals to train native lay leaders to spread the Gospel in their respective lands and in plans for a new series of booklets and tracts on Marxism answering the supporters and sympathizers of communism.

The World Evangelical Fellowship, which is to carry the load of the new program, grew out of conferences between the American NAE and the World Evangelical Alliance (British organization) in 1946. Some 20 national and regional evangelical bodies are now affiliated. The beliefs and objectives of the WEF are similar to those of the NAE and the WEA. It has active commissions on evangelism, Christian action, missionary cooperation and literature. Headquarters offices are maintained in London and Chicago.

Evangelicals are growingly conscious of the need for effective cooperative world fellowship. They need a strong united front to deal with communism, Romanism, liberalism, paganism, atheism and other enemies of the faith. They are concerned about growing restrictions against the propagation of the Gospel. There has been deep disappointment concerning leftist developments within the World Council of Churches and the International Missionary Council. Evangelicals at Los Angeles felt the time had come for united evangelical action at the world level. Leaders foresee an emerging organization big enough and broad enough to include all evangelicals around the world who see the need. It will bear malice toward none and have charity for all, it will give a united testimony for “the faith once for all delivered,” and be a medium through which the swelling tide against Christianity may be turned back.

This significant development was but one in a convention attended by some 1,500 delegates. Besides the public mass meetings at which the major addresses were heard, there were some 15 simultaneous “miniature conventions” of commissions and related agencies. Over 80 exhibitors represented special interests.

Dealing forthrightly with current issues, NAE reaffirmed its opposition to the recognition of Red China, its stand for the separation of church and state, its pleas for religious liberty in Spain and Colombia, its opposition to the manufacture and sale of intoxicating beverages, and called for Protestant unity to confront Rome’s coming Ecumenical Council with a strong biblical ecumenical testimony.

Major addresses were delivered by Dr. Taylor, General William K. Harrison, Dr. Paul S. Rees, Dr. Herbert Mekeel, Dr. Carl F. H. Henry, Dr. L. Nelson Bell, Dr. Jared Gerig, Dr. Mark Fakkema, Dr. Harold Erickson and Dr. Thomas Zimmerman.

Visitors and observers, including members of the press, were impressed by the deeply spiritual tone of the meetings. One reporter said, “I attend all the major inter-church conventions in America and this one exceeds them all in real religious commitment and fervor.”

For the first time in its 17 years of history the Association was debt free. Its Commission on World Relief with around $100,000 in reserves reported the largest distribution of food and clothing in its history. The expanding National Sunday School Association prepared to purchase a new headquarters building in Chicago’s loop district. The EFMA reported 50 member boards with a third of all the missionaries in the world. The National Religious Broadcasters with its 150 radio and television broadcasts includes most of the major paid-time programs on the air. Other related agencies reported equally encouraging progress.

NAE growth and effectiveness have come largely in these related groups, rather than through a strong central administration. A number of factors have contributed to this situation: Threats to evangelical churches and functional organizations demanded quick action. Emergency commissions and agencies were created to deal with these problems. Many of them were successful in gaining immediate financial support and cooperation far beyond the Association itself. The central body’s financial problems have kept it moving slowly within unfortunate limitations. Centralization and integration are due to come in plans for the future as adequate financial undergirding is available. This will make for greater effectiveness and larger impact on the life of American Protestantism.

The gravest weakness in the Association (41 member denominations; a service constituency of 10 million in all churches) seems to be its inability to rise above its present limited constituency and to think and plan in terms of the whole evangelical complex in American Protestantism. Many evangelicals believe that the reasons which called NAE into being are still valid in the thinking of 20 million more American Protestants inside and outside the National Council of Churches. Most of this potential constituency have not been convinced that the NAE is the answer to their problem. The Association has won to its standard a large number of Holiness and Pentecostal denominations and thousands of independent Baptist and Bible churches. It has made a favorable impact on some pastors and laymen in major denominations in the NCC, but these men feel their viewpoints have not been sufficiently reflected in NAE policy and program to make a strategic appeal to their denominations. Some thought has been given to the problem but other matters have been so pressing that conferences on the subject have been fruitless if not futile.

The Los Angeles meeting closed on a high note of faith and hope for the future. The 1960 convention will be held in Chicago, April 25–29.

Jazzy Communion

An instrumental quartet led by a Roman Catholic music teacher introduced jazz to the ritual of historic St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Norwalk, Connecticut, this month.

For Russell Martino, the music teacher who respects jazz, this was no ordinary Sunday morning. It began in a night club where his alto saxophone-piano-bass-drums ensemble played for a dance until 1 a.m. At 7 a.m. he and another member of the quartet attended Catholic mass.

By 9:30 a.m. the group was assembled at the Protestant Episcopal Church, where they had been hired by the Rev. Anthony T. Treasure to perform “The Twentieth Century Folk Mass,” reportedly to give the rector his sermon theme—that religion is part of every phase of life—and to show young people that religion is not “fuddy-duddy.”

The “Folk Mass,” also known as the “Jazz Mass,” was composed several years ago by an Anglican vicar in England, the Rev. Geoffrey Beaumont.

Throughout the communion service performance, a number of popular song hits were reported distinguishable in rhythms ranging from waltz to ragtime. While 500 would-be worshippers were crowding into the sanctuary, it was said, the ensemble played a progressive jazz improvisation of “I’ll Remember April”; after “There’s A Wideness in God’s Mercy,” “Bernie’s Tune”; following the “Agnus Dei,” “Lover Come Back to Me” and a few blues songs; with the rector’s blessing, “It’s Almost Like Being in Love.” The church choir sang the vocal part of the mass.

Martino said his participation in the service was solely on a professional level. “I did not worship God and Jesus Christ while there,” he said. He suggested that adverse reaction to the performance of jazz in a church could be blamed on the general public’s lack of understanding of the essence of jazz.

After the service, Treasure called it “very reverent, very impressive and very moving,” but some members of the church’s vestry expressed displeasure. The congregation had mixed feelings.

The Rt. Rev. Walter Henry Gray, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Connecticut, refused to comment.

Alva I. Cox Jr., director of the National Council of Churches’ audio-visual and broadcast education division, thought well of the jazz mass. “But the music is so bad I hope the experiment is not judged on the quality of the product,” he said.

It was at least the third time in recent years that Episcopalians made news with their interest in jazz. In 1958, St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church in Glendale, Missouri, began sponsoring free showings of jazz movies in the City Hall. Prior to that, the Rev. Alvin Kershaw, Episcopal rector of Peterboro, New Hampshire, won $32,000 on a television quiz program with his knowledge of jazz.

Tobacco Consumption

Americans smoked more than 436 billion cigarettes during 1958, an all-time record, according to U. S. Department of Agriculture figures reported by Religious News Service.

The figures represent an increase of 27 billion over the previous record of 409 billion cigarettes consumed in 1957.

Cigarette consumption now averages 185 packs annually per man and woman above the age of 15 in the United States.

In addition to domestic consumption, the report went on, the United States sent 13,400,000,000 cigarettes to members of the armed forces overseas.

Spacemen’S Faiths

The seven U. S. military officers chosen to try the first space flight represent a variety of faiths. They listed their religious affiliations as follows:

Navy Lieutenant Malcolm S. Carpenter, Episcopal.

Air Force Captain LeRoy G. Cooper, Methodist.

Marine Lieutenant Colonel John H. Glenn Jr., Presbyterian.

Air Force Captain Virgil I. Grissom, Church of Christ.

Navy Lieutenant Commander Walter M. Schirra Jr., Episcopal.

Navy Lieutenant Commander Alan B. Shepard Jr., Christian Science.

Air Force Captain Donald K. Slayton, Lutheran.

Exit Amish Schools

A court order closed two Amish schools in Hardin County, Ohio, this month.

The ruling from Judge Arthur D. Tudor culminated a legal hassle lasting several months. The Hardin County board of education sought to compel compliance with state standards.

Levi Beechy, bishop of the local Amish settlement, called the injunction a “test of faith and conviction.”

During the trial, Amish farmer Henry Hershberger admitted that the two schools do not teach science, a state requirement, because the settlement does not believe “in the monkey theory of man.” The Amish country schools also were criticized for not conducting sessions the required number of days and for failure to teach Ohio history.

In his ruling, Tudor also enjoined Amish teachers from continuing careers until they are legally qualified by state educational standards.

Last fall, during a controversy leading up to the court action, an Amish father took his children out of an Amish school. He said subsequently that the move resulted in his family being banned from church activities and that his neighbors would not talk to him.

Repairing Damage

Wearied by continuing accusations of ousted professors, President Duke K. McCall of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary says he would willingly submit to another hearing on charges that he abused his authority.

McCall, in his defense, points to the action of a board of trustees committee which cleared him of “abuse” charges brought by the professors. The committee, he said, found no evidence that he had misused his administrative authority. He added that he would be willing, however, for another examination to be made of his policies and practices.

Meanwhile, 12 of 13 professors dismissed from the seminary as a result of the controversy last June continued to blame McCall for all the trouble, despite a decision by trustees last month which rescinded the dismissals and asked the professors to resign instead. One of the ousted professors was reinstated last summer and continues to teach.

Dr. Heber F. Peacock, spokesman for the dismissed professors, says the problem at the seminary “is more acute now than it was a year ago.” The group claims to be “personally reconciled to all concerned,” but asserts that “to expect reconciliation to an uncorrected situation wherein the abuse of authority is allowed to prevail is to misuse the term.”

McCall repeatedly maintains that the point at issue has been a trouble spot since seminary trustees spelled out the president’s authority in 1943. He adds, however, that each of the dismissed professors took up his critical position gradually, for all were employed by the seminary since 1943.

A special committee of Southern Baptist Convention presidents is still investigating the Louisville institution’s dispute. A report will be presented to the convention’s executive committee next month.

A New Dean

Dr. Samuel H. Miller was named dean of Harvard Divinity School this month, succeeding Dr. Douglas Horton, who is retiring.

Miller is minister of Old Cambridge (Mass.) Baptist Church and has taught at Harvard since 1953, the same year in which Colgate conferred upon him an honorary doctor of divinity degree. Miller’s only earned degree is a B.Th. from Colgate.

Harvard University President Nathan Pusey noted “historical irony” in the new appointment. He recalled that the university’s first president, Henry Dunster, resigned his office when he became convinced that the Baptist attitude toward infant baptism was the correct one.

When the Harvard Divinity School was established within the university early in the nineteenth century, one of the provisions was that “no assent to the peculiarities of any denomination of Christians be required either of the students or instructors.”

Miller is the first Baptist ever to head the divinity school.

Barth Vs. Bultmann

Bishop Hanns Lilje, leading Lutheran church figure, says the theology of Bultmann is gaining increasing respect among students in Germany.

Nevertheless, Lilje told a press conference in Washington this month, Barthian principles still wield a great deal of influence among German clergymen. Lilje referred to Barth as the “greatest Protestant theologian of our time.”

The bishop is head of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Hannover, chairman of the United Evangelical Lutheran Church in Germany, and vice chairman of the Evangelical Church in Germany. He is a member of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches.

Theological Interest

Current interest in theology surpasses anything expressed since the days of early Christianity, according to Dr. Nels F. S. Ferré, professor of Christian theology at Andover Newton seminary.

“Because of our critical world situation as humanity,” Ferré told a Methodist convocation in Kansas City this month, “there is a rising tide in general theological interest, possibly unexcelled in Christian history and certainly not equalled since … the early councils.”

Noting that varying views are contending for theological leadership, he said that “what we need today is the kind of theology that centers in Christ, God’s own love come from his eternal being into our human history and into our personal situation.”

“We must go beyond stuffy orthodoxy and sophisticated modernity, beyond fundamentalism’s fanaticism and liberalism’s vagueness, beyond the neo-orthodox flight from reality and neo-naturalism’s refuge in modernity,” he added.

‘Practical Holiness’

Demonstration of “practical holiness” by efforts to solve such “tragic” social, economic and moral problems as unemployment, poverty, alcoholism, gambling and inadequate housing and medical care was urged by the National Holiness Association in a resolution adopted at its annual convention in Cincinnati.

Such problems, the resolution said, “challenge all who believe in the gospel of perfect love to demonstrate that their holiness is practical by doing all within their power to correct these tragic conditions.”

“When Christ transforms a man’s character, he becomes a worker together with Him to change his unwholesome environment,” the statement said.

“The fact that many methods of church groups end in disappointing failures,” it added, “challenged us anew to return to the principles and practices of John Wesley.” It noted that Wesley, 18th century founder of Methodism in England, laid the foundation for widespread social reform “in a vital and morally transforming personal experience of the grace of God.”

Fifteen hundred clergy and lay delegates from the association’s 1,500,000-member affiliated constituency attended the three-day convention. Featured at the meeting were discussions of means of “witnessing to the deeper spiritual life” as well as sermons of inspiration and Biblical exposition.

People: Words And Events

Deaths: The Rt. Rev. Edwin Anderson Penick, 72, senior Protestant Episcopal bishop in the United States, at Chapel Hill, North Carolina … Dr. John Van Ness, 92, noted Presbyterian minister, in Philadelphia … Dr. Frank Masters, 88, former president of Oklahoma Baptist University, at Mayfield, Kentucky.

Elections: As president of the National Religious Publicity Council, William C. Walzer … as president of the Southern Baptists’ Georgetown (Kentucky) College, Dr. Robert Lee Mills … as president of the National Holiness Association, the Rev. Morton W. Dorsey … as secretary of public relations for the Southern Baptist Executive Committee, Dr. W. C. Fields … as treasurer of the National Association of Evangelicals, Rufus Jones (all other NAE incumbent officials reelected).

Appointments: As professor of New Testament interpretation at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. Ray Summers … as an executive secretary of the American Bible Society, the Rev. A. P. Wright.

Resignation: As president of Taylor University, Dr. Evan H. Bergwall.

NEWS

CHRISTIANITY TODAY

What are the chief concerns of a Christian mother who seeks to maintain a happy and dedicated home life amid Nuclear and Space Age tensions? How is she to meet these concerns? What mental priorities must she establish?

CHRISTIANITY TODAY asked prominent Christian mothers to consider these questions and record their reactions. Here are their statements:

MRS. PERCY CRAWFORD, wife of the noted TV-radio evangelist: “We know that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. The principles of the Bible and human nature remain the same. I feel that the old-fashioned Gospel will weather the Space Age regardless of what it holds in store for us. In times like these let us be sure our anchor grips the Rock—Christ Jesus.”

MRS. HERMAN E. EBERHARDT, wife of the director of the Central Union Mission in Washington and “Mother of the Year” for the District of Columbia: “A Space Age mother needs to keep her feet on the ground and her heart in the heavenlies. The man in the moon will never replace the man in the home with a dedicated mother working with him to raise a Christian family. The answer is to put our thoughts and deeds in the right orbit. ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you.’ The home that is in orbit around the Lord Jesus Christ will never fail in the countdown.”

MRS. V. RAYMOND EDMAN, wife of the president of Wheaton College: “We know our future is in our Lord’s hand; and while we work for him we wait for his coming.”

MRS. EDWARD L. R. ELSON, wife of the minister of National Presbyterian Church, Washington, D. C.: “My chief concern as a mother has been increasingly that each child should achieve that inner poise which comes only from an understanding of his own individual worth and of a life purpose which God has for him. To meet this, we try to uphold them always with our constant love and faith in them and by our prayers with them. Even my own feeling of inadequacy helps me to relinquish their hands in mine to God’s own encompassing love and guidance which must sustain them in their pilgrimage beyond our home and beyond this life we share together on earth.”

MRS. LOUIS H. EVANS JR., former actress, now the wife of a distinguished Presbyterian minister: “In this age of speed, noise, super-activity, etc., one of my chief concerns for my children is that they might learn the secret of being quiet—that they might learn to ‘be still and know’ that God is God—a balance between service and activism and periods of stillness, without which service loses its proper motive and power, and the individual loses all sense of peace and contact with his God. I long for this balance in the lives of our children—in short, I want them to be part of the answer for the world, not part of the problem.”

MRS. BILLY GRAHAM, wife of the world-renowned evangelist: “In the Scriptures God has plainly staked out the course for Christian mothers. My chief concern, or certainly one of my chief concerns, is that of diversion—of being sidetracked from that course. Even legitimate, worthy undertakings, such as house cleaning, community projects, or personal hobbies, can sidetrack one from the main purpose. We have the Guide Book, and we have the Guide—the rest is up to us. It will involve pruning from our lives anything that would tend to divert us from this main purpose.”

MRS. E. C. MANNING, wife of the premier of Alberta, Canada: “A mother’s whole energies are directed toward the constructive task of rearing her children in a sound, consistent Christian atmosphere. So far, the primary emphasis in nuclear research has been destructive. Christian mothers should band together to press for peaceful, constructive uses of nuclear energy.”

MRS. EARL WARREN, wife of the Chief Justice of the U. S. Supreme Court: “In the rearing of their children, every generation of mothers must meet additional problems that growing complexities of the world thrust upon them. But their solution does not call for a new formula. It is the same in the ox cart and the space ages. There is but one solvent—Christian love.”

The Motherly Tribute

The “Mother’s Day” concept has a long history of religious connections which in modern times seem to have been predominantly Christian.

In ancient Greece, the idea of paying tribute to motherhood was given expression with a regular festival tantamount to mother worship. Formal ceremonies to Cybele, or Rhea, the “Great Mother of the Gods,” were performed on the Ides of March throughout Asia Minor.

For Christianity, the concept seems to date back to establishment of England’s “Mothering Sunday,” a custom of the people which provided that one attend the mother church in which he was baptized on Mid-Lent Sunday. Gifts were to be offered at the altar to the church and to worshippers’ mothers. The concept was divorced of any “mother worship,” but nevertheless perpetuated its religious association.

U. S. observance of Mother’s Day, too, has been characterized by church ties from the start. The first general observance of the occasion was in the churches of Philadelphia after Miss Anne Jarvis campaigned for a holiday for mothers more than 50 years ago.

Protestant Panorama

• A Doubleday book published this month, The Power of Prayer on Plants, claims proof that seedlings made the object of prayer were superior to others grown under identical laboratory conditions. Author is Dr. Franklin Loehr, Presbyterian minister and a trained chemist.

• A statement from Clarence House, London residence of the Queen Mother, denied that any religious significance was attached to a call that Princess Margaret and her mother were to make on Pope John XXIII this month.

• Directors of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod last month authorized some $2,000,000 worth of construction for their colleges.

• Gordon College says it has received a $25,000 grant from the Kresge Foundation to be applied toward a science laboratory building.

• Portions of the Bible now appear in at least 1,136 languages, according to the American Bible Society.

• Travellers reaching Hong Kong from the mainland report that the Red government is considering appointment of a “pope” to head the schismatic Catholics in Communist China.

• T. G. Peters, Sunday School superintendent of the First Baptist Church in Alice, Texas, attached a green trading stamp to a letter mailed to the congregation’s members. Come to Sunday School, he said, and get two more green stamps for each one received by mail. Attendance rose substantially.

• A 22-foot wooden cross was dedicated in a Youngstown, Ohio, cemetery this month in tribute to the late Rev. George Bennard, who wrote the hymn, “The Old Rugged Cross.”

• The U. S. Post Office Department is authorizing a special slogan cancellation to honor the 50th anniversary of Hesston College, a Mennonite institution. The slogan, to be used on mail at Hesston, Kansas, from May 1 to October 31, reads “50th Anniversary, Hesston College, 1909–59.”

• A new Armed Services Hymnal, seven years in preparation, was being distributed to service chapels this month. Like the Army-Navy Hymnal it replaces, the volume has Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish sections. Much of the music has been transposed to keys appropriate to choirs and congregations of predominately male voices.

• Mrs. Loriana Nunziati Bellandi said this month she will seek a legal separation from the man she married in an Italian civil ceremony which aroused the ire of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Prato. The Bellandi couple subsequently brought slander charges against the bishop.

• Missionaries have legal rights to enter Alberta Indian reserves under a ruling of the provincial Supreme Court. Persons not living on the reservations normally are barred.

• Construction is expected to begin in July on another Southern Baptist college, this one located on a 238-acre site in Louisville, Kentucky.

• The government of South Africa reportedly decided this month to take over all hospitals for non-whites which are located in non-white areas. The move was said to have affected 22 hospitals financed by missions.

• The National Evangelical Film Foundation voted Gospel Films’ “Centerville Awakening” the best movie of 1958.

• Harvard theologian Paul Tillich will lecture on the Galesburg, Illinois, campus of Knox College May 4–13.

• The 40th annual meeting of the Associated Church Press, largest fellowship of U. S. Protestant magazine editors, adopted a resolution registering “concern and protest over the tendency of governmental agencies to hinder the free flow of information between the churches of the United States and other nations.”

• A new $1,623,000 world head-quarters building for the Church of the Brethren was dedicated in Elgin, Illinois, this month.

Continent Of Australia

Coming To Life

It now appears that religious historians will need an extended chapter to properly record Billy Graham’s Australasian crusade of 1959. For thought the American public has heard comparatively little of the developments, there has been nothing to compare with this year’s revival-like enthusiasm “down under”—even when considered in Graham’s own phenomenal background.

Graham’s crusade seems to constitute Australia’s top news story of the season and virtually every daily on the continent is treating it so. But in Graham’s America, where “play” is often proportional to the geographical remoteness of a news story, communications media have generally failed to cover crusade news adequately. Despite the fact that Graham is “good copy” for the overwhelming majority of U. S. editors and TV-radio news directors, coverage has been small compared with the copious reports of, for example, the New York crusade. Yet the New York meetings, inspiring as they were, are far surpassed by the enthusiasm and response in Australasia. Here are the three major steps in Australasia’s coming to life:

—Melbourne saw a four-week crusade that drew an aggregate attendance of 719,000 and produced 26,400 decisions for Christ. The final meeting with between 135,000 and 150,000 was a record attendance in Christian evangelism.

—An abbreviated New Zealand campaign concentrated on just three cities in ten days, but attracted a total of 355,000, 15,982 of whom stepped forward to make commitments to Christ.

—A month-long crusade in Sydney, Australia’s largest city, began with a Sunday afternoon meeting attended by 50,000, largest opening day crowd Graham has ever experienced. At that service, more than 3,000 made decisions, also a record for the opening day of a Graham campaign.

North Americans can follow Graham’s current meetings most directly via hour-long weekly telecasts.

The outreach of Graham’s messages has been extended through the use of “landlines,” telephone cables which enable groups across the country to hear the meetings. “Landlines” were used in New Zealand and were to be set up this week for the remainder of the Sydney crusade.

The opening meeting on April 12 was chaired by the governor of New South Wales, Lieutenant General Sir Eric Woodward, joined on the platform by leaders of all major denominations.

More than 500 buses and thousands of cars jammed streets around Sydney Showground, site of the rally. The day began with overcast skies and showers, but these gave way to an afternoon of brilliant sunshine.

Graham’s text was John 3:16. Great international problems, he said, are “refractions of our personal problems.”

At Carlaw Park

“ ‘He made them sit down in flower beds,’ says the Greek text in one account of the feeding of the five thousand. It looked like that.”

So E. M. Blaiklock, CHRISTIANITY TODAY correspondent in New Zealand, described Billy Graham’s initial appearance at Carlaw Park in Auckland. Here are Professor Blaiklock’s impressions:

“The white mass of the choir, 2,000 strong, filled the wooden grandstand. A multi-colored 15,000 made a human mountain slope in the huge concrete stand. Another sweep of humanity covered the grass of the railway enbankment. And the ground itself, filled with seating, was a sea of men and women. A fifth of the city’s population was there, 60,000 in all.

“I became aware of a strangely thrilling portent. The sky was smeared with cloud, but two stars broke fire, the glittering pair of the Pointers, which carry the eye to the great constellation of this hemisphere, the Southern Cross. Then we watched fascinated as a patch of cloud thinned—and there was the Cross! It hung there for half an hour, the four stars of the Cross and the two Pointers, with no other star visible. It was a moving sight.

“Graham did precisely what the heavenly sign portended. He pointed men to Christ, passionately, compellingly, with Bible in hand and God’s Word lacing his speech. The mighty crowd listened like one man. Then came the invitation, and the people began to move. From far and near they filed down, leaving patches of green showing on the embankement, thinning the plank seats on the ground. Three thousand, seven hundred, another Pentecostal harvest, crowded the space before the rostrum. I bowed my head and remembered how I used to state with confidence that mass conversion was a vanished phenomenon, and the era of revival past. May God who taught us this week to ‘mount up with wings as eagles’ teach us in the months ahead to ‘run and not be weary, to walk and not faint’.”

Near East

Leaving Iraq

The first report on evacuation of Protestant missionaries from Iraq said 14 of them had been forced to leave. Another eight or ten were said still to be somewhere in Iraq, according to the report received early this month by an agency of the National Council of Churches.

Dr. Barnerd M. Luben, chairman of the Near East committee of the NCC’s Division of Foreign Missions, said that no reasons have been given by the government for expulsion of the missionaries. “We believe they are political,” he noted.

Luben said a compound has been confiscated which includes a hospital, a church, and four missionary residences. According to him, the property is to be converted into a public park.

The United Mission in Iraq makes up the country’s chief Protestant witness. Churches cooperating in the mission are the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., the Evangelical and Reformed Church, and the Reformed Church in America.

Religious News Service estimates the Christian community in Iraq as a very small part of the total population of 5,000,000. Roman Catholics are said to number about 200,000 and Protestants hardly more than 2,000.

The Bible And Israel

Tribute to the key role of the Bible in the colonization and modern development of Israel was paid this month by Premier David Ben-Gurion.

“But for the Bible, Israel would never have returned to its land,” Ben-Gurion told a Bible study congress.

“No book,” he declared, “has ever exerted such influence on any nation as the Bible has on Israel.

Farmers mingled with clergymen and statesmen among the 1,500 delegates.

The congress, sponsored by the Israel Society for Biblical Research, was devoted to lectures and discussions on the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. The congress is an annual event.

Dominion Of Canada

On Second Thought

Have British Columbia’s troublesome “Sons of Freedom” Doukhobors changed their minds about returning to Siberia?

In an unprecedented move early this month, the fanatical sect invited to a meeting Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers. A brief handed the RCMP, according to one source, indicated that their year-old plan to return to their homeland had been called off.

During the meeting, about a dozen men and women disrobed. Nude parades are well-known to “Sons,” sect members claiming that nudism is a religious symbol of equality before God. The “Sons” have defied governmental authority repeatedly, calling themselves pacifists even while setting off bombs and burning property. They claim they have been persecuted in Canada.

When news of their cancelled migration appeared, the sect branded it a distortion of the facts and wired a denial to the Russian embassy in Ottawa.

Doukhobors, natives of Russia, moved to western Canada about 50 years ago.

United States

Religious Preamble

West Virginians next year will vote to ratify or reject a religious preamble to the state constitution.

The legislature-approved preamble reads: “Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia, in and through the provisions of this Constitution, reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God and seek diligently to promote, preserve and perpetuate good government in the State of West Virginia for the common welfare, freedom and security of ourselves and our posterity.”

Hopeless Cause?

Is anti-alcohol legislation a hopeless cause?

The question took on new prominence this month when citizens of Oklahoma voted to legalize liquor sales. The repeal left Mississippi as the only state where “hard liquor” is sold in violation of state law.

“It’s a temporary setback,” said Clayton M. Wallace, executive director of the National Temperance League, “but we were not surprised.” He declared that the wets’ victory could be attributed to well-financed use of mass communications media. More money is being poured into liquor advertising, he added, because the industry is concerned that increases in alcohol consumption have not kept pace with the population rise.

Wallace called for greater use of mass media by temperance forces and more activity at grass roots level in support of local option laws.

G.G., B.G., & M.G.

According to our newsmagazine, Good Guys and Bad Guys are part of a TV myth that is disappearing. Soon existential man will be in the saddle. He shares in a larger identity of Good and Evil, and is neither hero nor villain. He is more than a myth, a Free Man. As I remember Olympus, the myths were not too strong on pure types of Good and Evil. Modern thinkers will make the mythical purely good to make the purely good mythical.

Western writers may need help in building up this mixed hero/villain to the point where kids will buy his autographed cap pistols. Perhaps he should be introduced between the G.G. and the B.G. and the M.G. (mixed, muddled, modern).

Scenario for M.G.

B.G. These knots is tight. You won’t get out of this. Light the fuse, M.G.!

G.G. (Gagged) Awg … ahlwahch!

M.G. Why don’t you tie me up too?

B.G. Like to oblige, but I need ya on my next job, M.G. Light the dynamite!

G.G. (Still gagged) See above.

M.G. You’re a dynamic man, B.G., but are you as free as you think? Why must you kill? You’re punishing yourself!

B.G. You got it wrong, kid. You’re the dynamite man in this outfit. And I ain’t killin’ G.G. You are. Light the fuse or I’ll ventilate ya.

M.G. Certainly. I was just looking for a match. You know I’m your partner. But couldn’t we take the gag out? No one will hear him in this abandoned mine. Besides your mortido urge …

B.G. Okay, okay. Take out the gag. Here! Now let me bung that big mouth of yours. There. Now light that fuse!

G.G. While that fuse burns, B.G., I want to say I never knew you salted the mine.

B.G. Why then … M.G., you rat … I will lace you up too, pardner! Gotta hurry. Keep still, or I’ll … WHOOM! BOOOOM! (etc.)

G.G. That was a break. I must have been blown clear up the air shaft.

B.G. (Muffled) Help!

G.G. You too! Here, I’ll drop this rope down to you. Where’s M.G.?

B.G. He’s done for. All mixed up, kinda.

G.G. Maybe it’s better that way. C’mon, hombre, I’m takin’ you to the sheriff.

SECOND TO NONE

Permit me to thank you very much for the magnificent statement of justification (Mar. 16 issue). I try to keep up with the best in the Reformed and in the Lutheran writings on this significant matter, and the article by Dr. Packer is second to none! It has my hearty amen! Our students here are grabbing up the issue … like hot cakes. Thanks be unto God for his great grace which justifies us sinners per fidem propter Christum.

Columbia Theological Seminary

Decatur, Ga.

COMING OR GOING?

Have just read your editorial comment on Markus Barth’s The Broken Wall in which he breaks down the wall between heaven and hell (Mar. 16 issue). As far as I am concerned, your analysis is well taken. I have always supposed that the purpose of preaching was to persuade sinners to enter into the ark, not to prevent them from jumping out of it.

Fuller Seminary

Pasadena, Calif.

EASTER POETRY

I don’t know who Rod Jellema is, but I have a feeling that this writer knows Barabbas and Mary Magdalene (Mar. 16 issue). Here is the kind of insight and poetic ability that warms the heart and kindles the mind of the reader. I hope sometime that the writer will give us something on John the Baptist, Paul, and John the Apostle.

Superintendent

The Akron District

North East Ohio Conference

The Methodist Church

Akron, Ohio

I read the Easter poems by Rod Jellema … and liked them.

Grand Rapids, Mich.

I am wondering … if you … carefully read this poem before it was accepted. If so, my disappointment and distress are increased.

Staten Island, N. Y.

Very literary and beautifully constructed verses.…

Newark, N. J.

NO OFFICIAL VIEW

I should like to correct a misconception fostered by Harold B. Kuhn in the first paragraph of his article, “Christian Surrender to Communism” (March 2 issue). He clearly states that “a segment of the (Central) Committee” of the World Council of Churches “went on record as favoring a free world surrender on the terms of the enemy in case of a threat of hydrogen warfare.” The fact is that this particular sentiment was advanced in a minority report by certain members of the Commission on “Christians and the Prevention of War in an Atomic Age—a theological discussion.” A majority of the members of the Commission were unable to accept this position, as the principal text of the document makes clear.

The Commission had been appointed by the Central Committee of the World Council, but no member of the Central Committee was himself a member of it. When the document came before the meeting of the Central Committee at Nyborg, Denmark, last August, the Executive Committee finally took the following action with respect to it: “The ensuing statement is but a first-step in a continuing study process. It is offered to the churches for their reflection and discussion. No point here expressed is to be understood as an official view of the World Council of Churches. This document is in no sense a statement of World Council policy. The statement is that of a contribution to Christian research and inquiry on a vital issue of our time.” The World Council of Churches has no control over a Commission, composed mostly of distinguished theologians asked by it to address itself to a particular question. By the same token, no statement that results can be construed as an official interpretation of the views or policies of the World Council of Churches, unless it is adopted as such by the appropriate body of the World Council itself. The Divinity School

Yale University

New Haven, Conn.

PROTESTANT WITNESS

I should be sorry … if any of your readers were left with the impression that … the Protestant Pavilion at the Brussels World’s Fair … was not a very strong witness for Protestantism (Nov. 24 issue, p. 31).… It was seen by every visitor to the fair. Since the walls of the chapel were of glass, even passers-by were aware of the services of worship and other activities which were constantly being held. Ten to fifteen million people visited the Pavilion.… One of the greatest surprises to everyone was the very large number of Roman Catholic priests and nuns who visited the Pavilion and asked many questions.… Pastor Pieter Fagel, the director of the Pavilion, said that he was convinced that this was the most effective piece of evangelism that was being carried on in any part of the world during those months.…

Washington, D. C.

SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE

I was especially interested in your article “Perspective for Social Action” (Jan. 19 issue). Thank you for the clear interpretation you gave of past interest in this field. I found it stimulating.

First Methodist

Belzoni, Miss.

NCC

Your article “Why Is NCC Prestige Sagging?” is a masterpiece! It is sensibly presented, precisely stated, and justifiably critical. Your diagnosis and prescription for Protestant ecumenism in America are at once safe, sane, and scriptural.

Cooper Avenue Baptist Church

Yuba City, Calif.

Did you call the attention of your readers to the fact that the vote of the Conference, two thirds of whose members were laymen (and of all of whom were expected to express their own opinions and not seek to represent the National Council of Churches), included two conditions which would have to be met before any approach would be approved to recognition of China? The first was the security of Formosa; the second was the security of South Korea.… You and other critics of the National Council have completely committed yourselves apparently to the idea that the only kind of Study Conference the National Council should hold would be one whose decisions were dictated to it or whose conclusions were repudiated if they did not agree with the predetermined views of the body responsible for the Conference.

Missions Council of the Congregational Christian Churches

New York, N. Y.

The Cleveland Conference on World Order, convened by National Council mandate, does not speak for all of its affiliated churches. I do not conceive that to be its purpose. Its purpose is rather to speak to those churches.

First Christian

Alhambra, Calif.

If the denominations did not send the right delegates to the study conference, that is not the fault of the NCC. It is possible that some denominations are not so organized that they can send delegates representing the diverse viewpoints within that denomination.

Wheaton, Ill.

Probably overlooked by many who register their disapproval of the Cleveland Conference is the fact that most of the 600 delegates had studied the facts and had a better knowledge of all the facts at issue than most people.

St. James Evangelical and Reformed

Saline, Mich.

Each issue of CHRISTIANITY TODAY is worse, in that you seem to have been captured by those who have no other purpose than to malign the National Council of Churches.

St. Paul’s United Church of Christ

Petersburg, Ill.

Nothing but wholesale condemnation.…

Philadelphia, Pa.

Could charity have written the paragraph “Tilting to the Left?” Is there no place in Christian journalism for love?

St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church

Durham, N. C.

The big difference between these two groups at their formation and through the years has been that the NAE refused to call for separation from the FCC while the ACCC did, and the NAE included in its membership evangelical churches still inside the FCC while the ACCC included in its constituent membership only evangelical churches outside the framework.…

We also would appreciate it when you refer to the American Council if you would include the word “Christian” in our title.

President

International Council of Christian Churches

Collingswood, N. J.

If the pronouncements of the conference had taken standpat political positions, had endorsed Mr. Dulles and all his works, I doubt that we should have had a whisper of complaint from such churchmen as Dr. Poling, Carl McIntire, and yourself.

Supt.

The Methodist Church

Springfield District, New England Conf.

Springfield, Mass.

The NCC is not the only group who makes mistakes. They are still human … Some of us agree with Old Testament history that alliances with heathen nations of idolaters was not good. Monmouth, Ill.

The article … was fine and a credit to your magazine. Its approach is quite different to that I have thought of, namely, the ethics of a setup which positions men so they are beyond democratic processes. How for instance can the grass roots people make any changes in the council though the council gets its power from claiming to represent the grass roots.

Morristown, N. J.

As a person who was a non-paying “guest” of that same Red China for more than four and a half years, and who was one of the ten Americans who were released and came out of that country in September 1955, I am impelled to add some comments. Such a recommendation can only come, it seems to me, from those who do not have all of the facts, or from leftists, or from defeatists. They probably do not know that recognition of our enemy, Red China, would involve the withdrawal of recognition from our good friend, Nationalist, or Free, China. Admitting our enemy, Communist China, to the United Nations would also mean expelling our good friend, Free China.…

Probably most people do not know, or have forgotten, the treatment that our American consul in Mukden, Mr. Ward, received when the Reds took over that place. Such treatment of an official representative of a government by another government has been the cause of wars in the past. Our government was very patient about the incident, but it certainly did not make our State Department any more inclined to admit Red China into the family of nations. From the time that the Reds took over mainland China they did everything that they could to build up hatred against America. In their newspapers they blamed America for having stirred any and every opposition that the Reds met up with in just about anywhere in the whole world.…

As a Baptist missionary, now technically retired, what goes against the grain most, though, is any talk on the part of any professing Christian of doing anything that might encourage the atheistic, God-hating government on the mainland of China, which has done and is doing everything it can to bring under its own control or destroy all trace of religion in the area it controls. If we are true to God we cannot aid such a government. Any appeasement would only be interpreted by them as a sign of weakness on our part and would not decrease in any smallest degree their working against us and their enmity for us.

The people on the mainland of China are under a hideous tyranny, and we are wondering whether some of our friends there are still alive, or if they are in communes, where they are only work animals—where they cannot live as human beings. To quote a verse that came to me when I was in prison in China,

He who always stayed at home,

And never left our freedom’s land,

Little can appreciate

What we’ve received at freedom’s hand.

Taiwan Christian College

Chung Li, Taiwan, Free China

The National Council of Churches has now issued a directive to the administration in Washington that Red China be admitted to the U. N. and recognized by the U. S. Will the World Council of Churches now declare the Reformation ‘null and void?’

Eagle Baptist Church

Eagle, Idaho

As to the Cleveland Conference …, let us consider.… “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 10–11). “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11). How can we Christians possibly have fellowship in any form with atheistic Communism?

Norwalk, Calif.

There is no immediate need for … recognition in 1959 … for: 1) Red China has sufficient recognition by several nations to insure her of contact with the outer world …; 2) She has representation in the United Nations through Russia and her satellites.… We must never give the … world any idea that we approve of Communism in any shape or form. We did that to some extent when we gave our absurd recognition to Red Russia before World War II. For that mistake we have paid and will yet pay and pay.… Surely to recognize Red China would not help … the peoples of Red China … but would only tend to prolong their life under one of the most cruel dictatorships in all human history.… It seems best then that we maintain the status quo, evil as that is, for almost any alternative would be worse, except actual liberation and this means war.…

Pequea Presbyterian Church

Narvon, Pa.

You have rendered a great service in this report to us Methodists.… Without publications like yours we Methodists would never know what is going on in administrative circles and what part of our contributions are being used for.

El Sobrante, Calif.

The magazine is a most commendable champion of our historic Christian faith as opposed to the vagaries of destructive criticism, the encroachments of the papacy, the paganism of … communistic propaganda, the moral and political corruption of our time, and the blindness of churchmen who would sell us out to foreign dictatorships.

Dixon, Mo.

I want to heartily compliment you on your courage and fidelity to the basic Christian principles! What we so need in journalism and in our pulpits is that non-compromising, positive line against the spineless social gospel of our day; against leftists in church boards and wider organizations (like the NCC); and the increasing disregard of laymen who see secular trends in leaders and front offices. You are the voice of many a fine, experienced, solid Christian in pulpit and pew.…

Bay City, Mich.

“Almost anything can be read into any book if you are determined enough,” C. S. Lewis recently observed. Commenting on interpretations suggested for his own fantastic fiction he added: “Some of the allegories thus imposed on my books have been so ingenious and interesting that I often wish I had thought of them myself” (Reflections on the Psalms, 1958, p. 99).

If you cock your ear just right perhaps you will detect afar off a chuckle and the “Amen” of the author of the Song of Songs. He has had his troubles with the interpreters too. In fact, “there is no book of the Old Testament which has found greater variety of interpretation than the Song of Songs” (H. H. Rowley’s opening remark in his helpful chapter, “The Interpretation of the Song of Songs,” The Servant of the Lord, 1952, pp. 189–234). What seems at first bewildering but after a while amusing too is that most of these utterly contradictory interpretations come with a manufacturer’s guarantee that each claims to be the one and only understanding of the book which the totally unbiased reader can reach! Naturally the interpretation offered in this article does not lack such an endorsement—except that one enlightened prejudice is admittedly presupposed, the prejudice of recognizing that the Song of Songs is an inspired revelation of the God of truth. But then a prejudice one way or the other on that subject is unavoidable.

The Literary Genre

The particular literary form an author selects as the vehicle of his message can be the most important single clue to his true intent.

1. Love Song: It is being more and more recognized as archaeological discovery enlarges our library of ancient literature that the biblical Song was not a novel literary phenomenon in the world in which it appeared. In its general framework and in numerous individual motifs and metaphors it is seen to be stylistically similar to what is found in ancient love lyrics. An Egyptian love poem, found on one of the Chester Beatty papyri dating about 1100 B.C., consists of seven cantos in dialogue form with the lovers addressing each other as “brother” and “sister” (For a partial translation see J. B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 1950, pp. 468, 469). There are enough parallels to Canticles in structure, situation, and imagery in such love songs of the New Empire in Egypt to convince W. F. Albright that they “demonstrate the Egyptian origin of the framework of Canticles” (Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, 1942, p. 21). Other scholars are more impressed with parallels to the Song found elsewhere in Near Eastern or in primitive love poetry.

One variety of love song is the epithalamium or wedding song. From the time of Origen many have held that Canticles was composed for the occasion of Solomon’s wedding to Pharaoh’s daughter (1 Kings 3:1) and from the end of the seventeenth century expositors have tried to explain the character of the Song in terms of customs followed at ancient Jewish marriage festivals. In 1873 J. Wetzstein published his study of the marriage-week customs of modern Syrian peasants, and directed attention to the facts that bridegroom and bride played the roles of “king” and “queen,” a mock throne being set up on the threshing floor; that poems of praise (wasf) were sung extolling their physical beauty; and that on occasion the bride performed a sword dance. The obvious comparisons were then drawn with Canticles where the hero is several times called “king,” the lovers repeatedly sing the praises of each other’s charms, and the Shulammite maiden performs a dance (7:1 ff.). Efforts were made too to demonstrate that the Song was composed of seven parts, one for each day of the wedding week, but with little success.

Critics of the epithalamium view have questioned both the existence of such a “king’s week” among the Arabs in Palestine and the reliability of modern Syrian practices as a guide to Judean wedding customs of the first millennium B.C.

They also argue that some of the poetry in Canticles is clearly prenuptial and that even the wasf type of song was not confined to wedding festivals. Furthermore there is an obvious reason for calling the hero “king” (1:4, 12; 7:5) if he is “king Solomon” (3:9, 11) and his beloved, it must be noted, is never designated “queen.” Certainly she is not a princess from Pharaoh’s court but a maiden from the village of Shunem.

R. Gordis in his excellent study, The Song of Songs (1954), seeks to meet some of these criticisms of the relevance of the “king’s week” (p. 17); but he too joins the majority of those who regard Canticles as love poetry in concluding that it was not composed for a wedding but is an anthology of various types of love songs—“songs of love’s yearnings and its consummation, of coquetry and passion, of separation and union, of courtship and marriage” (p. 18).

2. Drama: In the eighteenth and especially the nineteenth centuries the view was developed and popularized that Canticles was dramatic in structure. The beginnings of this view were much earlier. Origen, for example, considered it “a nuptial poem composed in dramatic form” and Milton called it a “divine pastoral drama.” Extremists treated the Song as a theatrical piece actually intended for the stage. In this they succeeded more in displaying a flair for creating musical comedies than in manifesting a gift for exegeting ancient texts. But nineteenth century exegetes of the calibre of Franz Delitzsch, H. Ewald, and S. R. Driver also championed the dramatic view of the Song and this approach continues to enjoy some support in our century.

The dramatists are divided over the question of whether the Shulammite’s true love is Solomon or a rustic lover to whom she remains faithful in a triumph of pure love over the seductions of Solomon’s royal court. The second plot obviously has greater dramatic tension and that perhaps is why it is the more popular; but it has little else to commend it.

Critics of the dramatic view correctly observe that full-fledged drama was unknown among the Hebrews or the Semites in general; some of them also protest, but incorrectly, that the Song cannot be a drama because it is not a literary unity. The real question vis-a-vis sober proponents of the dramatic view is whether Canticles traces the love of Solomon and the Shulammite through a temporal sequence of scenes from courtship to their wedding and marriage life.

Expounding the thesis that such a sequence does emerge in the Song, Delitzsch locates the wedding in the third of six acts. The successive acts end at 2:7; 3:5; 5:1; 6:9; 8:4; and 8:14. Each act is divided into two scenes, the first scenes ending at 1:8; 2:17; 3:11; 6:3; 7:6; and 8:7. Hand in hand with the temporal sequence Delitzsch traces a thematic movement: “Solomon appears here in loving fellowship with a woman such as he had not found among a thousand (Eccles. 7:28); and although in social rank far beneath him, he raises her to an equality with himself.… We cannot understand the Song of Songs unless we perceive that it presents before us not only Shulamith’s external attractions, but also all the virtues which make her the ideal of all that is gentlest and noblest in woman.… Solomon raises this child to the rank of queen, and becomes beside this queen as a child. The simple one teaches the wise man simplicity … [he] wanders gladly over mountain and meadow if he has only her” (Commentary on The Song of Songs, Keil and Delitzsch series, 1950 ed., p. 5).

Though not persuaded by A. Bentzen’s contention that the many possibilities advanced to explain the book as a drama prove its impossibility (Introduction to the Old Testament, II, 1949, p. 181), the present writer is not convinced that the scenic-chronological structure has been satisfactorily demonstrated. The criticism that the dramatic view is almost as guilty of eisegesis as the allegorical view goes much too far; but it does seem to contain an element of truth.

It is a virtue of the dramatic view that it recognizes the unity of the Song. That unity, however, is unfolded in cyclical rather than chronological fashion. The divisions suggested by Delitzsch for his six acts mark the bounds of these cycles; observe, for example, the recurring opening and closing refrains of these divisions. Within each of these cycles the dominant love motif is that of longing and fulfillment. Each cycle closes with the satisfaction or consummation of love. Even though the Song is not structurally a drama, this recapitulated theme of seeking and finding does impart to it a certain dramatic quality.

3. Cultic Liturgy: In the present century the theory has appeared that Canticles is a liturgy belonging to the widespread Near Eastern cult of the dying and reviving god. This is part of the current fad of discovering cultic vestiges everywhere in the Old Testament. The interpretation rests primarily on alleged terminological similarities to the Song in extant texts of the fertility cult and on corresponding ritual themes in the cult, such as the goddess’ search for and finding of the slain god and the sacred marriage. Proponents disagree as to the extent, if at all, that the original pagan liturgy was camouflaged to make it acceptable in the cult of Yahweh.

The Old Testament indicates that apostate Israelites, whoring after pagan deities, engaged in the rites of the Tammuz cult. But those who share the prejudice concerning the Song acknowledged earlier cannot entertain it as a serious possibility that the covenant God adopted as a legitimate element in the worship of his name a liturgy from such an idolatrous source with all its sexual associations. Suffice it then that the great majority of all scholars is unconvinced by the liturgy theory and that it has been effectively criticized by Eissfeldt, Rowley, and others. Bentzen suggests that the ancestry of love songs as a literary form may in part be found in the ritual of the hieros gamos, just as T. Gaster traces the drama through the medium of myth to cultic ritual. If so, the liturgy theory contributes something to the history of the literary genre represented by our Song, but it still contributes nothing as an interpretation of the Song itself.

Allegorical Or Natural

Beyond the question of the literary genre of Canticles, but certainly not divorced from it, lies another issue which concerns our understanding of the book as a whole: To allegorize or not to allegorize?

1. Allegorical: That the Song deals primarily with human love, the mutual love of a man and a maid, is the least that must be deduced from the facts that it is cast in the mold of ancient human love poetry and confronts us with the human figures of Solomon and the Shulammite as the lover and the beloved. But is there warrant for seeking a second message hidden in the Song, one concerned with the mutual love of God and his people?

As is well known the allegorical approach is ancient. Mishnah, Talmud, and Targum treated the Song as an allegory of Yahweh’s dealings with Israel. From Judaism the allegorization of the Song passed over into Christianity, the Church as bride of Christ replacing Israel as the beloved. The later popularity of the allegorical method is reflected in the chapter headings assigned to Canticles in the Authorised Version.

The allegorists are not, of course, agreed on particulars. Some, for example, interpret Solomon’s beloved not as the Church but as Wisdom; others, as his kingdom of loyal subjects. Indeed, there is no limit to the plausible possibilities. And there is the rub! Anyone with a knack for autosuggestion can readily convince himself that his latest flight of fancy is the true decipherment of the Song’s esoteric sense.

Is there, however, amid all the allegorical abuse a proper, verifiable, allegorical use of the Song? The most cogent argument for allegorizing Canticles is the alleged analogy of Psalm 45. This Psalm is an extended metaphor picturing Messiah and his bride, the Church, under the imagery of an ancient royal wedding such as the Psalmist might have witnessed in the court of one of David’s successors.

There are, however, decisive differences between Canticles and Psalm 45. The Song speaks about king Solomon and a particular woman from Shunem. The Psalm describes directly a divine king in language which would be utterly extravagant if intended for any merely human king of Israel. Nothing in the historical narratives of the Old Testament supports the idea that the flamboyantly flattering oriental court style was adopted in Israel. Psalm 45, therefore, does not provide an analogy for a royal epithalamium with a double meaning. It is moreover most important to observe that in Psalm 45 and in every other biblical passage where the figure of marriage is used to depict the covenantal relationship of God and men the context leaves no doubt that such is the meaning. But there is not even the slightest hint anywhere in Canticles that it was intended as an allegory of things divine. Finally, the Song differs from Psalm 45 and all other alleged biblical parallels in that the Song abounds in detailed praises of the two lovers’ bodily charms and in allusions to the intimacies of conjugal love. As a song of human love this might surprise the modern Western reader of holy Scripture but it should not offend him. To interpret such imagery as a song of God’s relationship to his people, however, appears to involve irreverence. Certainly it ignores the care manifested everywhere else in biblical anthropomorphism to avoid attributing to the holy One of Israel the erotic passions and sexual functions characteristic of the gods of pagan mythology. Observe by way of contrast to the Song the restraint exercised in carrying out the nuptial metaphor in the Messianic Psalm 45.

2. Typical: There is another view, the typical, which would also find a Messianic meaning in Canticles. But whereas an allegorist might ignore the natural meaning of the language, esteeming the mystical meaning as the only message of the Song, the typologist must always insist there is a double meaning—a typical and an antitypical. The typologist shares the allegorist’s appeal to the biblical use of marriage as a literary figure for Christ’s relationship to his Church, but the typical view, as its name implies, appeals particularly to the historical status of Solomon as a type of Christ. Typologists differ further from the allegorists in not groping after a mystical reinterpretation of every detail in the Song. They are satisfied to discover a more general correspondence between type and antitype.

The fallacy in the typical view is that while Solomon in his royal office typified the kingship of Christ, nothing in Scripture justifies our regarding all and sundry aspects of Solomon’s life as divinely appointed historical types. Certainly Solomon’s love relationship with one or all of his wives was no more a Messianic type than the marriage life of any other Israelite or Gentile. Since then the supposed typical elements in the Song are illusory, the typical view is not a genuine option. The only real alternatives are the allegorical and the natural.

3. Natural: “Natural” is preferable to “literal” as a designation for the correct interpretation of Canticles since “literal” is liable to suggest a lack of appreciation for the Song’s erotic symbolism.

This view, though only in modern times enjoying ecclesiastical respectability, can be traced as far back as the evidence for the history of interpretation goes. And why should the Church stumble at the presence in her inspired canon of a song extolling the dignity and beauty of human love and marriage? Considering how large the subject looms in the attention of men, had it not been remarkable if there were not such an extended treatment of it in the volume God has given us for “reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”? And all the more so when we think how sordid is the world’s attitude towards the matter and how dim had become even the Old Testament saint’s apprehension of the paradisaic ideal of marriage. Thus understood, Canticles unites with the other poetical books of the Old Testament in displaying the inspired fruits of godly reflection upon the Law and especially in eliciting the relevance of the Law for the great issues of human life.

The heading assigns the authorship to Solomon and there is no compelling reason for not regarding this certainly very ancient tradition as an original part of the inspired text. Advocates of the love song view often treat Canticles as an anthology of poems by many authors but Rowley has well observed: “The repetitions that occur leave the impression of a single hand, and there is a greater unity of theme and of style than would be expected in a collection of poems from several hands, and from widely separated ages. It is probable, too, that there is artistry in the arrangement of the pieces” (op. cit., pp. 212, 213).

There is a puzzle of the selection of the Israelite most notorious for his departure from the marriage ideal to compose the biblical tribute to true love and this is not solved by facetious remarks about Solomon’s superior experience in the arts of love. More helpful is the consideration that the arts of poetry and song were branches of Wisdom and the wisdom of Solomon needs no introduction (cf., 1 Kings 3:5 ff.; cf. 4:32).

That, however, does not solve the enigma of why Solomon of all people should be this Song’s hero as well as its author—which raises the problem of historicity. Now it should be observed that the personal perspective in the Song is consistently that of the beloved, not of the king (cf., e.g., 2:10; 5:2). If, therefore, Solomon (or for that matter, anyone other than the Shulammite herself) is the author, Canticles is, as Ecclesiastes seems to be, fictionally autobiographical. Such a fictional literary garb permits that the historical element consists in little more than that one of Solomon’s favorites was from Shunem. The mutual love of the king and this Shulammite would then have been freely adapted to the ideal, and idyllic design of the Song and this would explain the purity of the affections of the Song’s king Solomon, as well as his romantic shepherd’s role.

If this is so, the choice of Solomon as hero is not enigmatic but indicative of Canticles’ Edenic milieu. With true insight the poet Herder observed: “The Song is written as if in Paradise. Adam’s song: Thou art my second self! Thou art mine own! echoes in it in speech and interchanging song from end to end.” In the unfolding divine plan of redemptive history God appoints Canaan to his people Israel as an earnest of Paradise regained. And who better than Solomon—not in his personal but official character and glory as theocratic king set over the paradisaic land of milk and honey—to recall Adam, vicegerent over the garden of God?

The Song confronts us with love as it was in the beginning and it lets us hear again the divine marriage benediction first addressed to the lover and his beloved in man’s home primeval (Gen. 1:28a). What the incarnate Word did for the sanctity of marriage by his presence at the Cana wedding, the written Word does by dwelling with joy upon conjugal love in the Song of Songs.

MEREDITH G. KLINE

Assistant Professor of Old Testament

Westminster Theological Seminary

It is obvious that there must be some foundation on which the Christian faith rests, and that a knowledge of this basis is of greatest importance to man.

The Bible has held this unique place in the Christian religion, and because of its centrality there has been an unending debate as to what the Christian’s attitude should be to it.

Anyone who has recently studied in a college, university, or seminary knows something of the relevancy of this question. In some quarters the Bible is considered merely a human document. Elsewhere it is accorded a higher status but accepted with reservations because, it is assumed, the human element in the agents who wrote and compiled the writings was susceptible to error, even willful distortion. With others the Bible is truly the written Word of God in its entirety.

How shall a young Christian reconcile these differences in his own mind? Can they be reconciled?

We all know that there are many Christians, ordained and otherwise, who have no power from God nor convincing message to man.

There are many reasons for this lack of spiritual power, and one cause is the failure of Christians to believe God’s Word as the Sword of the Spirit.

Too often we have confused the power of organizational ability, eloquence, scholarship, an attractive personality, technical know-how, and many other desirable qualities and accomplishments with the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

It is our observation that there is a definite relationship between what a man believes about the Bible and the spiritual effectiveness of his work for God. And something vital is missing when the Holy Spirit has, in men’s minds, been denied his rightful authorship of the Word.

Here is the problem: Is the Bible the Word of God or does it merely contain the Word of God. Is the Bible completely reliable and authoritative, or must it be read and accepted with reservations?

To a layman the answer is so simple one wonders why people become confused. If the Bible only contains God’s revelation, mixed with inaccuracies, predated history palmed off as prophecies, and thought forms which really mean just the opposite of what they affirm, then who is to determine what is true from what is false? Is that to be left to the scholars? And must we accept their conclusions?

If we are, then we certainly are reduced to an amazing situation. No longer are we to accept the Word of God for what it claims to be, God’s holy and inspired revelation, but we are forced to turn to men for comfort and instruction—men who constantly disagree with one another as to facts and meanings, and whose conclusions and affirmations of yesterday are discarded for new ones today.

Or, we may decide that we will read the Bible, accepting that which seems reasonable to us, and reject the rest.

In either case we find ourselves adrift, subject to the changing whims of human thought, rather than anchored in the assurance that God has given us a fully inspired and authoritative revelation of himself and his dealings with us.

Are we anchored, or are we adrift?—that is the question.

We shall surely never be able to explain everything that we find in the Bible. And at time certain minor parts will seem confusing to us or less relevant to our particular situation than others.

All of the Bible, however, is true. But is it reasonable to think that God, in giving us a revelation of himself, should have made all parts of his Word equally clear to our finite minds? For his divine purposes and for our own good, he has many truths for us which we, through the aid of the Holy Spirit, must search the Scriptures for meaning.

Again, is it reasonable that God would have given us a Book with errors, frauds, and ignorant or spurious prophecies, intermixed with divine truth? All through his earthly ministry, Jesus made constant reference to the Old Testament, affirming both its trustworthiness and its authority.

We need not decry a reverent and critical study of the Bible, however. Such research and study is both desirable and necessary. But, it is incumbent upon every Christian that he distinguish between rationalistic and destructive criticism and that which is honest, reverent, and factual.

In this matter we are confronted with a question of attitude. Many years ago the writer was doing a year’s study in advanced surgical procedures. We began with a complete dissection of a cadaver in the dissecting hall. Later we worked in operating rooms of various hospitals.

There was a tremendous difference in our attitude toward the cadaver in the dissecting hall and the living patients in the operating rooms. In the dissecting hall most of the precautions were taken to protect our own hands. In the operating room our concern was the patient—the living person.

In our study of the Bible we may take a critical attitude, standing in judgment on the Book, or we may let the Book stand in judgment upon us. The difference in attitude is a great one.

This is not to assert a theory that only certain words can be inspired and any deviation from these words and phrases is a deviation from faith in the fully-inspired Scriptures.

This is to declare the doctrine of full, or plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. It is interesting that those who most vehemently inveigh against “verbal” inspiration are not primarily concerned with words but with the doctrines conveyed.

Why are the Scriptures the subject of such repeated attacks? Is it not because Satan hates and fears the Bible more than anything else? “Yea, hath God said?” is still his favorite question today. Satan has never been able to stand up against the Bible because it is a divinely-forged weapon for all believers. Paul tells us that the Word of God is the “Sword of the Spirit.” It is the only weapon of offense described with the arsenal for defense.

Many young people today are finding themselves in a quandry. Anxious to believe the Bible and have an anchor for their faith, they are being told that Scripture is “scientifically inaccurate,” “historically muddled,” “often sub-Christian in concept,” or “full of palpable errors.”

And many of them fear that if they accept the Bible as it stands, it would be intellectual suicide. Such is not the case, however. If one starts with the premise that God has given a faulty and impaired revelation and that the “chaff” must be separated from the “wheat” before one can find the truth, he is adrift already as to what he can know to be the truth.

What effect does reliance on man and his interpretations or denials have? It is like a ship cutting loose the anchor and drifting to and fro.

It is at this point that we must face the issue. It is here that we must determine whether our faith shall be anchored or whether it shall be adrift on the sea of human speculation.

Few questions in the church, in the last decade or so, have aroused more debate, concern, and disagreement than the ordination of women. Objections have generally come from some of the old Protestant churches in the Western world. At the same time, some of these churches have accepted the idea. Among the so-called “younger churches” in the Orient, for instance, there appears to be considerable freedom in ordaining women to church offices, and where this has been allowed considerable variance in practice has resulted. Churches have allowed women to serve in the posts of minister, elder, and deacon. Others have limited women to the offices of elder and deacon, or have admitted them to the deaconry only. Even where women have been permitted to become ministers, relatively few have taken the office. All denominations prefer the male minister.

Pull And Tug Of Feminism

It is quite understandable that this question of feminine ordination to church offices should have arisen in our modern era. Feminism, or the modern theory of “women’s rights,” has impressed us so thoroughly with what women have been able to accomplish, that one is likely to feel boorish if he obstructs the modern advance. In fact, one feels that there is a kind of inevitability about opening offices to women. One advocate of the plan stated that it will come into general practice “when the cultural pattern of the day has removed the bias which is present.” In other words, the difficulty women had being accepted into the professions once reserved for men will have to be experienced again in reference to the eldership and the ministry.

In all this debate, however, few people have inquired whether feminine elders and ministers would not be something different from feminine doctors and lawyers. The assumption is that if women have achieved success and status in secular professions, why should they not have the same opportunities in the church? There is a curious reasoning process here that involves two fundamental fallacies: first, that everything included in the modern feminist movement is unquestionably good (“Give the little woman credit for anything she can get, man”), and second, that our modern day demands that we think like modern men.

The first supposition may be questioned on the ground that some women may be occupying positions today which ought to be held by men, and that they are in those spots only because men have not been available. The second fallacy rests on the idea that what is “up-to-date” is necessarily an improvement over what has previously stood as truth. Nondiscernment in this respect has tended to favor secularistic thinking above “biblical reasoning,” the kind of reasoning that is oriented in divine order and revelation.

There is general agreement that churches ought to be governed in thought and practice by the teaching of the Word of God. This means that there must be no easy capitulation to modern ways of thinking simply because they are modern. Rather, we should endeavor to determine God’s will and way. With respect to the question, therefore, let us search the Scriptures to see whether God has revealed his mind on the matter.

Is there any revelation that will help in determining whether we shall ordain women to the offices of the church? Both sides agree that there is, but there is disagreement as to interpretation. Care must be given to examining relevant passages and allowing Scripture to speak for itself. A biased attitude against women could cause an interpreter to conclude that women ought not be ordained, just as a feminist enthusiast could assume an opposite conclusion.

Difficulty Of Interpretation

It is important for us to recognize that Scripture deals with both permanent and temporary matters, and that our most difficult task is discerning which is which. The commandment “Thou shalt not steal” is looked upon by everyone as permanent; yet there has been considerable disagreement over whether the Sabbath commandment is permanent (as prescribed, for example, in Exodus), or whether it is temporary with some aspect of permanence. Features of New Testament Church practice, like foot washing and the bestowal of the holy kiss, are recognized by the greater part of the Church today as ordinances no longer obligatory. Sometimes the temporary and the positive are intertwined with one another in the same Scripture passage as in 1 Corinthians 11:1–16 where the ordination of women to church offices is not actually discussed (nor is it discussed anywhere else in the New Testament), but rather the proper behavior of Christian women in public gatherings.

The Permanent Element

The permanent element, of course, is the “natural subordination of woman to man,” to which should be added “in the divine order of creation.” This is set out in the third verse of the chapter as follows: “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” God was the “head” (sign of authority) of Christ, for Christ had subjected himself to the Father in order to achieve our redemption. Jesus says in John 5:30: “I can of mine own self do nothing. As I hear, I judge … because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.” The Son was not inferior to the Father, but for the sake and requirements of our redemption, he made himself subordinate (cf. Phil. 2:5–11).

Hence, Christ is called the “head of man,” whether every man accepts this headship or not. Ultimately, “every knee” shall bow before him, and “every tongue” shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Phil. 2:10, 11).

By the same token man is considered the “head” of the woman. The woman, of course, has Christ as her spiritual head. Paul in his letter is affirming the double authority that rests over her.

Many people have held that the Apostle is speaking in 1 Corinthians 11:3 not of the original created order, but the order of redemption—God’s “scheme of things” after man had fallen into sin. This interpretation may be granted if we consider that after sin had become a reality God declared to woman, “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. 3:16). It is odd that proponents of the ordination of women have used this fact to argue that the case would be otherwise in an ideal situation. They also cite Galatians 3:28 (“there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus”) to assert that with Christians subordination of women to men no longer holds.

Paul in writing to the Galatians refers to our position in the spiritual kingdom of Christ; and with regard to our redemption in that respect, he states that God makes no distinction between the sexes. In the created, natural order, however, the principle of subjection is permanent, even with Christians. It belongs also to creation itself. “For the man is not of the woman; but the woman for the man” (1 Cor. 11:8, 9). The basis for this statement is that the man “is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man” (v. 7). The woman has also the image of God (Gen. 1:27), but having been made from man, hers is an “intermediate” one. She was created to be man’s “help meet”; “bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh.”

Temporary Features

Set in the midst of these permanent principles in Paul’s argument are certain temporary features. In the passage of 1 Corinthians 11, we note a reference to the wearing of the veil or headcloth by women in public gatherings. This was proper custom for that time. Women of honor were always to appear with their heads covered, for this signified that their proper sphere was in the home, and that they were under the authority of the man (whose proper sphere was in public life). Women today show their natural subjection to men in other ways.

In 1 Timothy 2:11–13 and 1 Corinthians 14:34 we note that women were enjoined to keep silence in the churches. Apparently some women at the time had been abusing their privileges in Christ and were making it appear as though the principle of subordination no longer existed. The principle could only be protected when women observed the rule that held within the general cultural situation.

It must be emphasized that the Bible does not teach a doctrine that men are by nature superior to women, any more than God the Father was superior to God the Son. Yet as the Son became subordinate to the Father in order to secure our redemption, so in the created order the woman is intended to be functionally subordinate to man. Only sin can turn a natural subordination into a subjugation on the part of man over woman. It is in the Church of Jesus Christ then that we expect to find the best expression of God’s order of human relationships. Where the gracious influences of the Gospel have not been laid, we often find women the mere property of man and, too often, regarded as of little value.

Perhaps we might conclude by saying that those who are subordinate must not attempt to bear rule or authority over people whom God has placed in authority (Heb. 13:7, 17; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2; 1 Tim. 3:5; 5:17). A woman who by divine ordinance is subject to her husband in the home can hardly bear rule over him in the house of God. She may, however, exercise authority over those who are subordinate to her, such as children or in official capacity other women. The principle of subjection is with us on every hand: wife to husband, children to parents, citizens to the state, and congregations to elders or bishops. This is not our arrangement, but God’s.

END

Elton M. Eenigenburg is Professor of Historical Theology at Western Theological Seminary, Holland, Michigan. He holds the Th.M. from Princeton and the Ph.D. from Columbia University. He has written The Second Coming of Christ and A Brief History of the Reformed Church in America.

The apostolic age is the period from Pentecost to the end of the first century, or the period covered by the New Testament except for the gospels. During this period women had an important part in the founding of the church—a phase of their activity which is often overlooked. I suppose that in their thinking about this subject many Christians never get past certain passages in Paul which deal with the status of women, and consequently they miss seeing the large place women occupied in the early missionary activity of the church. Harnack rightly says that “no one who reads the New Testament … can fail to notice that in the apostolic and subapostolic age women played an important role in the propaganda of Christianity and throughout the Christian communities” (Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, 1908, II, p. 64). Yet some do fail to notice this.

Immediately after Christ’s ascension women gathered with the apostles and disciples in the upper room in Jerusalem. They were not there to cook for the men but to pray with them, and there is certainly no reason to believe that they were not included in the group who prayed for Judas’ successor. Nothing could be more unlikely than that Mary and the other women were asked to withdraw at that point in the proceedings. The group probably included those women who ministered to Jesus, and there is no reason to exclude them from the number of 120 disciples.

In the very first weeks of the history of the Church there were not many women converts, but that condition did not last long. After the death of Ananias and Sapphira “believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women,” and by the time of the first scattering women were mentioned as particular objects of the persecution. All of this gives some indication of their increasing number. One of these early Jerusalem converts, Mary the mother of John Mark, donated her house as a meeting place for part of the church in that city. Indeed, it must have been an important meeting place, because Peter made his way there almost automatically after his release from prison. Some authorities believe that the upper room was in her house.

When the Gospel reached Samaria, again the record mentions the women who believed it and who were baptized along with the men. Why is it not true, too, that they were among those upon whom the apostles laid hands and who received the gift of the Holy Spirit? When the Christian message went into Europe, women again were prominent in the record. The first European convert was a woman named Lydia, “a seller of purple of the city of Thyatira.” Because she is mentioned as head of her household she was probably a widow, and evidently she was a wealthy one. Shortly after her conversion another woman, a demon-possessed slave, also believed the message—an illustration of how the Gospel is able to reach all classes. It is not at all unlikely that among the women who gathered with Lydia at the Proseuche and who were converted in the early days of the mission in Philippi were Euodia and Syntyche. Lightfoot suggests that at the time of the writing of the Philippian letter they were deaconesses in that church (Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, 1896, p. 55), while Harnack (op. cit., II, p. 67) and Vincent (Philippians, 1897, p. 130) both suggest that two congregations met in their respective houses. Whatever was their position in the Philippian church, they held a place of honor and usefulness—perhaps even in evangelistic work—since they are said to have wrestled together with Paul in the Gospel.

Both in Thessalonica and Berea there were honorable women among those who believed. “Honorable women” likely means wives of leading citizens of the community who were probably reached with the Gospel simply because the social position of women was higher and more free in Macedonia than in most parts of the civilized world. In Athens one woman, Damaris, is mentioned among the few converts whom Paul had in that city. She was probably one of the hetairai since no Greek woman of respectable position would have been present in St. Paul’s audience on Mars’ hill.

It is, however, in the story of the work at Corinth that one of the most interesting women of the period is introduced. Priscilla is mentioned along with her husband six times in the New Testament, and in four of these instances her name stands first. Although there can be little doubt that she was a woman of culture and education, her precedence is due primarily to “her greater fervency of spirit or ability of character” (R. J. Knowling, The Acts of the Apostles, 1900, II, p. 384.) Her ability to instruct the cultured Greek Apollos is probably only one of the many ways in which she served the church. One would like very much to know exactly in what ways she ministered or was active in the church in her house, for she could hardly be excluded from the ranks of a teacher, though whether she exercised a public teaching ministry is an unanswerable question.

One of the most startling evidences of the prominence of women is found in the last chapter of the epistle to the Romans where eight women are named among the 26 persons specifically mentioned in that chapter. The question is, however, what kind of work did they do? Priscilla in verse three is called a helper, sunergos, of Paul. Probably the term is to be understood as signifying the help she gave the church by furnishing a meeting place for the local group and whatever private instruction she gave as in the case of Apollos. Admittedly it would be difficult to prove that the “helping” did not include public teaching and even possibly missionary work. And yet, if this were the case one is surprised not to find mention of it elsewhere in the New Testament.

Mary, mentioned in verse six, evidently performed a personal ministry for Paul like that of the women who ministered to Christ during his life. The problem of verse seven is determining the correct gender of the name Junia which appears in the accusative form Iounian. It might be from Iounias (masculine) or from Iounia (feminine). Some are afraid to see this as a feminine form because that might mean that a woman was “of note among the apostles.” However, the phrase “of note among the apostles,” episemoi en tois apostolois, may mean, it is true, “distinguished as apostles” or, equally accurately, “well-known to the apostles.” Thus before one could say that Junia was a female apostle he would have to prove a feminine nominative from the ambiguous accusative and establish that episemoi meant “of note” and not merely “well-known.” Though Junia is undoubtedly a woman, she was not an apostle. One other woman stands out in this list, and she is the mother of Rufus mentioned in verse 13. Paul calls her “his mother,” which probably means “that this matron—whoever she may have been—had at some time shown him motherly kindness, which he had requited with filial affection” (Alice Gardner, “St. Paul and Women,” The Ministry of Women, SPCK, 1919, p. 43). The import of this passage is well stated by Knowling:

St. Paul has sometimes been accused of a want of due respect towards women. This last chapter of his Epistle to the Romans is sufficient in itself to refute such a charge. From the beginning to the end, the writer chooses with the most apt consideration the title and the merit which belongs to each member of the household of God, and recognizes the special work which a woman, and often only a woman, can do in the church (The Testimony of St. Paul to Christ [1905], p. 466).

Thus in the early propagation of the Christian message women played an important role. The number of times specific women are mentioned in the accounts of the founding of various churches is in itself a striking evidence of this fact.

But, it must be added, to say that women played a leading role is another matter. The Incarnation was in a man; the apostles were all men; the chief missionary activity was done by men; the writing of the New Testament was the work of men; and, in general, the leadership of the churches was entrusted to men. Nevertheless, a prominence and dignity which women did not have either in Judaism or in the heathen world was theirs in the early propagation and expansion of Christianity, the historical record of which would be immeasurably poorer without this prominence secondary though it was.

END

Charles C. Ryrie is President of Philadelphia College of the Bible. This essay is from his book The Place of Women in the Church, published by Macmillan, 1958. He holds the B.A. degree from Haverford College, Th.D. from Dallas Theological Seminary, and Ph.D. from University of Edinburgh.

Orthodoxy does not have all the answers; nor does it always ask the right questions. And when it gives the right answers to the right questions, it often corrupts its claims with bad manners.

But beneath these outer garments is the warm flesh of Christian truth: the truth that love is the law of life; that all men are sinners; that Christ bore the penalty of sin; that repentant sinners are clothed with the righteousness of Christ; that Christ is confronted in and through the written Word; and that the Word is consistent with itself and with the things signified.

We have defined orthodoxy as “that branch of Christendom which limits the ground of religious authority to the Bible.” The testimony of Christ is normative for the Church, and included in this testimony is the assurance that the written Word is inspired of God, and that it has the force of law.

Orthodoxy is often branded as literalism. The charge is that orthodoxy defends the plenary inspiration of the Bible, even though destructive criticism has ostensibly demolished this doctrine. But it is instructive to note that the critics seldom give a precise definition of literalism; nor do they go on to tell what they mean by the Bible as the Word of God. If orthodoxy neglects destructive criticism out of a respect for the testimony of Christ, the critics neglect the testimony of Christ out of a respect for destructive criticism. Not only is the neglect mutual, but it is by no means clear that the neglect of the critics is more praiseworthy, let alone more Christian, than that of orthodoxy.

If we nullify the testimony of Christ at one point, we operate on a principle that leaves the mind free to nullify this testimony at all points. In this case we have little reason to believe that our hope rests on divinely appointed evidences—not even our hope that God sent his Son to be the Saviour of the world. The evidences that support the plan of salvation are precisely the same in quantity and quality as those which support the plenary inspiration of the Bible.

If orthodoxy is literalistic because it honors the rights of language in Scripture, it is in very good company, for Christ and the apostles approach the text in precisely the same manner. Critical reinterpretation may relieve faith of the scandal of plenary inspiration, but it also relieves faith of the scandal of the Cross. Tested by the canons of science and philosophy, the doctrine of justification fares no better than the doctrine of plenary inspiration.

When the Gospel is absorbed into a world system, the minister can no longer stand behind the sacred desk and cry, “Thus says the Lord!” And when the voice of the prophet is silenced, let “Ichabod” be written over the Church: the glory has departed.

The cause of destructive criticism cannot be rescued by contending that revelation is personal encounter with Christ, and that this encounter is valid whether or not the Bible is inspired. Not only is the contention void of proof, but it reduces Christian commitment to a variety of religious experience. By no analysis of personal confrontation could we discover that God made a covenant with Abraham, and that Jesus Christ is the blessing of this covenant. Only propositional revelation can clarify the state of a sinner before a holy God.

Christ taught that the plan of salvation was mediated to the Church through the office of inspired prophets and apostles. If we reject this office, we forfeit the norm by which the limits of valid confrontation are decided. In this case the religious experience of an animist has the same rights as that of a Christian, for neither the animist nor the Christian has any proof that his faith terminates in the mind of God. Religion becomes an exercise in personal feeling.

Critics also brand orthodoxy as fundamentalism, but in doing so they act in bad taste. Not only is it unfair to identify a position with its worst elements, but the critics of fundamentalism often manifest the very attitudes that they are trying to expose. The mentality of fundamentalism is by no means an exclusive property of orthodoxy. Its attitudes are found in every branch of Christendom: the quest for negative status, the elevation of minor issues to a place of major importance, the use of social mores as a norm of virtue, the toleration of one’s own prejudice but not the prejudice of others, the confusion of the Church with a denomination, and the avoidance of prophetic scrutiny by using the Word of God as an instrument of self-security but no self-criticism.

The mentality of fundamentalism comes into being whenever a believer is unwilling to trace the effects of original sin in his own life. And where is the believer who is wholly delivered from this habit? This is why no one understands fundamentalism until he understands the degree to which he himself is tinctured by the attitudes of fundamentalism.

Critics have not performed their full task until they leave the externals of orthodoxy and probe into the heart of the system itself. And once this nobler task has been executed, the critics may discover that orthodoxy is a worthy Christian option. In any case, the problems of orthodoxy are common to all who try to discover the essence of Christianity and to live by its precepts.

In the sweep of history it may turn out that orthodoxy will fail in its vocation. But in this event it should be observed that it is orthodoxy, not the Gospel, which has failed. The Word of God is not voided by the frailties of those who come in the name of the Word of God.

END

This essay is from The Case for Orthodox Theology by Edward J. Carnell (Copyright, 1959, by W. L. Jenkins, The Westminster Press. Used by permission). The work appears in a trilogy with The Case for Theology in Liberal Perspective and The Case for a New Reformation Theology by others.