The Question Remains

Whither Africa?, by G. McLeod Bryan (John Knox Press, 1961, 157 pp., $3), is reviewed by Francis Rue Steele, Home Secretary, North Africa Mission.

Sometimes a rapid ferment produces positive results; sometimes, explosion and destruction. The question is, “whither, Africa?” And it is this question to which Mr. McLeod addresses himself. During three extensive trips to Africa between 1954–61 he met and interviewed leaders in many fields and many countries. His book, packed with statistics, facts and quotes, attests to that. But a liberal theological bias and a tendency to compare the worst of the West with the best of Africa sometimes colors his analysis and warps his conclusions.

As a scheme for viewing the situation today Bryan has selected what he considers to be the seven main ideologies competing with each other in Africa. They are (in order of treatment): tribalism, Islam, Christianity, nationalism, racism, communism and educationalism. Space does not permit us here to comment fully on each one. A few notes must suffice.

Beginning with Africa’s cultural roots, tribalism is presented as having been ignored and defamed by Westerners in the past so that its true value is only just being recognized. There is much truth in this. But to suggest that “the missionary must … help reclaim and restore the good in the old (African animism) and blend it with the best in the new (Biblical Christianity)” surely overstates the case.

Islam is revealed in a role beyond the understanding of most outsiders. Bryan bluntly states, “the greatest surprise for the visitor who covers all Africa is the activity and extensiveness of Islam” and adds, “Islam is the religion of Africa” (p. 31). Moreover he proves it with facts. Not only North Africa, historically Muslim, but East, West, Central and South Africa as well contain large and rapidly growing Muslim communities. But then Bryan presents what even he terms “a highly debatable thesis” that “Islam constitutes an intermediate position between Africa’s tribal religion and the refinement (his provocative word) of Christianity.” He adds below, “Conversion is progressive, and getting the African to become a Moslem is one step on the way” (p. 39). Then he cites objections to this view. In point of fact, the thesis is fantastic and utterly absurd. It is unfortunate that Bryan entertained it at all.

In the chapter on Christianity Bryan is at his weakest since he tends to identify all missionaries with their worst examples and gives too much weight to African criticism. Against a score of negative criticisms many admittedly “scurrilous” (p. 59), there is hardly a single unqualified positive statement. Rather, he commends among men of “true missionary zeal” Dr. Albert Schweitzer (p. 56) who recently accepted membership in a Unitarian organization! Mr. Bryan’s true colors show most clearly in his statement (p. 52) “the tragedy is that, just at the moment Christianity is awakening to the total cultural challenge of new Africa, more and more mission stations are being … manned by sectarians,” that is, “the soul-saving variety rather than the culture-appreciating.” There is no need for such an alternative but certainly theology takes priority over anthropology.

Regarding nationalism Bryan cites many witnesses to the effect that “Christianity planted the seed of independence” (p. 84). His concern is that, by and large, the Church has remained aloof from politics and thereby lost favor with nationalist leaders. He believes the future hope of African nationalism is the influence and, in part at least, control of the Christian gospel (p. 93).

Racism as defined by Bryan is the European attitude toward Africans. This has been a long-standing and justifiable complaint. Where non-Christians are at fault it is too bad but where Christians err it is tragic. Presently, there is a reverse-racism in Africa which Bryan appears to have overlooked.

That communism is an increasing threat everyone realizes. Bryan feels that most Africans, even leaders, are naïve concerning communism and inclined to follow a line of expediency which can only lead to a rude awakening, disillusionment and possibly disaster. He hopes that Islam and Christianity will support nationalism in resisting communism.

Educationalism in Africa is, according to Bryan, new, secular and unbalanced (p. 153). He argues for giving adequate place to theological training in order to restore balance and ensure stability. But this must be evangelical Christianity or there will be little benefit. Liberal theology largely lacking authority cannot transmit what it does not possess.

Whether or not we agree with all he says, Bryan deserves a careful study. His own findings together with numerous citations from current books provide much thought-provoking material on a pressing question, “Whither Africa?”

FRANCIS RUE STEELE

The Bomb

The Irreversible Decision 1939–1950, by Robert C. Batchelder (Houghton Mifflin, 1962, 306 pp., $5), is reviewed by A. P. Cagle, Department of Political Science, Baylor University.

This thought-provoking book should be read by every literate American. Indeed, the peace of the world could very well be promoted if the pages of this book were pondered by every adult around the globe. The book is well-documented; the author shows no passion or prejudice. Besides being provocative in the field of ethics, the volume rates high as history of the area covered.

First, a review is given of the decision of scientists to make an atom bomb. Many of these people had been driven out of Europe by Hitler and his kind. The decision to make the bomb was born of fear that the Germans were about to make and would use such an instrument of destruction against us. Secondly, the decision is revealed to use the bomb against Japan in order to hasten the end of the war. The actual dropping of the bomb on the Japanese cities is described. Finally the ethical considerations of the bomb’s use are weighed, description being given of how various individuals and groups sought to justify the killing of over 100,000 men, women, and children.

The author agrees that the use of the bomb perhaps hastened the end of the war in Asia. But even if one agrees with the decision to use the bomb when viewed from the standpoint of immediate considerations, one is made to wonder what the future will bring because of its use. Will it mean the loss of respect for America around the globe as a great humanitarian nation? Will the future ultimately support the view of the “frightened men,” the scientists, who see the possible destruction of civilization itself if an all-out war is decided upon by ruthless men, or even if triggered by accident?

The world is indeed awaiting the answers to several of the questions raised as to the right or wrong of this August, 1945, bombing. One wonders if the horrors of atomic warfare will cause men to find a way to peace—worldwide permanent peace. At least will regional conflicts, such as in Korea, be the order of the day and in such will nations refrain from the destructive bombs? Where will the present arms race lead us? In any event, Dr. Batchelder’s plea for a new ethic that will provide relative restraints upon both the ends and means of warfare had better not go unheeded.

A. P. CAGLE

Sermons From Scotland

Free Presbyterian Pulpit (The Free Presbyterian Publications Committee, 1961, 86 pp., 6s 6d), is reviewed by Kenneth D. MacDonald, Assistant Lecturer in Celtic, University of Glasgow, Scotland.

This volume of seven sermons from bygone ministers of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, with brief biographical notices of the preachers, reflects the history and character of the small, mainly Highland, denomination which originated in a secession from the fifty-year-old Free Church of Scotland in 1893.

That the break with the Free Church took place in defence of an undiluted Westminster Confession of Faith is sufficient indication of the doctrinal standpoint of these forthright, unadorned expositions of the Word.

KENNETH D. MACDONALD

Deceptively Simple

Sacraments: A Language of Faith, by Kendig Brubaker Cully (The Christian Education Press, 1961, 83 pp., $2), is reviewed by Robert Paul Roth, Professor of Systematic Theology and Dean of the Graduate School, Northwestern Lutheran Theological Seminary, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

This book is so small and so simple in its style that it is almost deceptive in tempting a cursory reader to brush it aside. With artistic simplicity and scholarly restraint Dr. Cully, professor of religious education at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, has produced a book which should prove valuable for both laymen and pastors.

The author first describes the historical origins of the sacraments as they developed in the experience of the worshipping community. Throughout Christian history different uses and meanings developed. Most of the book is concerned with baptism and the Eucharist, but one enlightening chapter describes the five rites which some branches of Christendom hold to be also valid sacraments. The amazing virtue in this book is its utter fairness to all positions and the absence of any special pleading of a partisan nature. This is not done with clinical objectivity since one can never understand the sacraments as a mere spectator. The sacraments are presented as the language of faith. They are more than symbols. They communicate to us a saving grace as a sign which proclaims the Lord’s death till he comes.

Reading for Perspective

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

★ Pentecost and Missions, by Harry R. Boer (Eerdmans, $5). A theology of missions built on the New Testament teaching that the Church was created at Pentecost to witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ by its very existence and action.

★ Science and Religion, edited by John Clover Monsma (Putnam’s, $3.95). Twenty-three prominent churchmen, several of them contributing editors of CHRISTIANITY TODAY, write on a relationship vital for our day.

★ Christ and the Meaning of Life, by Helmut Thielicke (Harper, 1962, 186 pp., $3). Here is vivid preaching on a variety of themes highly relevant to our times by the gifted Hamburg university professor and author.

In conclusion the author offers some practical uses of sacraments both to the Church as the corporate community and to the individual as a member of this body. The personal nature of our faith is demonstrated by the fact that although we stand now divided in Christendom, it is through our common baptism and our common celebration of the presence of Christ that we shall be united.

ROBERT PAUL ROTH

For Marital Disorders

The Healing of Marriage: A Practical Handbook of Marriage Counseling, by William L. Carrington,

M. D. (Channel Press, 1961, 255 pp. $3.50), is reviewed by Glenn W. Samuelson, Associate Professor of Psychology, Eastern Baptist College, St. Davids, Pennsylvania.

The theme of this book is succinctly stated in the author’s introduction. “Sick and broken marriages like sick and broken persons can be healed.”

Dr. Carrington, a former president of the National Marriage Guidance Council in Australia, has developed this fascinating book to show how marriages can be healed through proper counseling. Chapter II is especially stimulating and revealing. It deals with the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and environmental factors of marital disorders.

For people with little or no training or experience in marital counseling, this volume will be most helpful. Ministers, doctors, lawyers and social workers will find it refreshing and a valuable reference source. Colleges and seminaries will discover it to be worthwhile as a companion text in counseling courses.

GLENN W. SAMUELSON

Sacramental Sacrifice?

Sacrament, Sacrifice & Eucharist, by A. M. Stibbs (Tyndale Press, 1961, 93 pp., 5s); Reservation, by J. A. Motyer (Church Book Room, 1960, 23 pp., Is); and The Thirty-Nine Articles Revised, by C. B. Moss (Mowbray, 1961, 37 pp., 2s 6d), are reviewed by John Goss, Proctor in Convocation and Vicar of St. Peter’s, Hereford, England.

With an optimism that may be three-parts wishful thinking, the Lambeth Committee on “Progress in the Anglican Communion” declared their belief that “controversies about the Eucharistic Sacrifice can be laid aside.” The three years which have elapsed since that bold declaration have produced nothing to confirm it. Rather has the theological world become aware that this “storm centre of controversy” is likely to remind us of its presence so long as the protagonists of an unscriptural sacramentalism insist on trying to gear liturgical revision in general, and the Communion Canon in particular, to their own interpretation of “sacrifice.”

New writers, and notably Joachim Jeremias, are questioning their presumption and probing their hypotheses, and, with these fuller treatments of the subject, it is good to have a convenient representation of the cardinal facts of Scripture and the principles of the Reformers from the pen of so solid and methodical a scholar as Alan Stibbs, viceprincipal of Oak Hill Theological College. His contribution has been criticized in some quarters as a light treatment of a deep subject, and a rehash of the old polemics, but none can deny that in outlining again the irrefutable arguments against medievalist errors, and confronting every assertion with the plain question “Is this what Scripture teaches?” Stibbs has done a real service to serious enquirers. Where the claim for a sacrifice in the Lord’s Supper in relation to the elements is concerned, he asks, “Can the words ‘Do This’ mean ‘Offer this’?” and shows in detail why the answer must be “No.” In his chapter on Scriptural Administration Stibbs quotes with approval Stephen Neill’s assessment of the intention of Cranmer’s Canon with its central principle of consecration and communion as a single act. “Simple loyalty to this principle” says Stibbs, “makes both Reservation and Godward offering of the consecrated elements alike impossible.”

This question of Reservation is the point at which the “storm-centre” is most likely to burst upon the Church. It has long been realized that the Anglo-Catholics are determined that this practice shall be legalized, and Archbishop Fisher declared more than once that there must be a Canon about it. Any official attempt to restrict the practice to the purpose of communicating the sick is doomed to failure. That has never been anything but a cloke. The real purpose was, and remains, adoration of the reserved elements, and that fact brings us to the logical climax of the “sacrifice” theory in all its crudity’. A few years ago, R. J. Coates did a great service to the defenders of scriptural truth by his “Latimer Day” lecture on Reservation, delivered at the request of the Fellowship of Evangelical Churchmen. As an effective summary of the teaching of Scripture and the Church of England on this matter, it is quite masterly, and both Mr. Motyer and Dr. Packer, themselves scholars of standing, lean heavily upon it in their papers on the same subject.

These papers were delivered at an Annual Meeting of Church Society, a body of clergy and laity of Evangelical and Protestant conviction in the Church of England. The occasion of their delivery has inevitably restricted their scope. Deeper delving into the theological issues would have been acceptable to many, but we are grateful for their bold treatment of the controversy and their insistence that “the very idea of reserving a sacrament is theological non-sense, serving only to obscure the true notion of a sacrament and to foster the false impression that sacraments are essentially material things charged with supernatural potency, and that therefore, adoring the elements is just as valid sacramental worship as receiving them.” There is a revival today of the old Tractarian argument that Article 28 of the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion does not mean what anyone reading with an unbiased mind would take it to mean when it declares that “The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved.” The feeble attempt is made to draw the sting of this clear statement by holding that it merely remarks that Christ did not order Reservation. This is childish in the extreme, but since the plea is still being made, Mr. Motyer has done well to exhibit once again its ridiculous nature and the fact that this very Article, to say nothing of the whole character of the Communion service, utterly refutes it.

It is not surprising, in view of all this, that demands are being made for the abolition, or drastic revision, of the Thirty-Nine Articles, which must still be assented to on ordination or preferment in the Church of England. Dr. C. B. Moss, a moderate Anglo-Catholic, has now produced a revision which, he claims, removes the “obscurity and ambiguity” of the Articles. It is at once noticeable that the “obscurities and ambiguities” are invariably statements which emphasize the Protestant character of the Church of England. Thus, we are not surprised to find that the proposed replacement for the Article (28) to which we have already referred omits the final paragraph repudiating Reservation. On the other hand, we are given a eulogy on the ‘Five Sacraments’ of Confirmation, Absolution, Ordination, Matrimony, and Unction, and Article 17 “Of Predestination and Election” is omitted altogether.

The Article (19) on The Church has been rewritten because “a congregation of faithful men” is insufficient to describe that unique Society, and the preaching of the Word and administering of the Sacraments are “not necessarily tokens of the presence of the Church.” Such an idea, says Dr. Moss, “has split Christendom into innumerable fragments.” We are not surprised that all reference to and quotation from the Books of Homilies is discarded as “unsuited to this age.” Their solid Protestant and Evangelical principles would doubtless be too indigestible for those who delight in the sweetmeats of medievalist sacramentalism with their garnishings of ornate ritual and ceremonial. Let us, however, be careful to give credit where it is due and commend Dr. Moss for his forthright rejection of the papal claims and his emphasis on the sufficiency of Holy Scripture for salvation.

Evangelical churchmen must be ready to defend the Articles as a bastion of the Reformation and a sally-port for the reclaiming of the large territory now overrun by strange doctrine, but which must at length submit to the overwhelming force of scriptural truth. In this they have an unexpected ally in the person of the new Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Ramsey, who feels, with many others, that we cannot and should not, separate ourselves from our historical past. In contrast to many in these days, he would seem to hold fast to the confessional position of the Church of England as an essential part of her character, and to the Articles as effectively revealing that position. “Must not the Articles still have some role, authoritative within certain limits, just because we have not yet jumped out of our historical skin?” What those limits might be, and how far the authority of the Articles can be controlled or balanced by recent liturgical development with its uncertain genesis and unproven assumptions, are points on which the Archbishop and Evangelical churchmen may well find themselves at variance. Nonetheless, it is good to know that we have a Primate of All England who is prepared to discuss such matters and to respect opinions opposed to his own, provided they have their roots in sound theology.

JOHN GOSS

Years Too Late

Theology of Seventh-day Adventism, by Herbert S. Bird (Eerdmans, 1961, 132 pp., $3), is reviewed by Walter R. Martin, Director, Christian Research Institute.

Apart from being somewhat overpriced, ($3 for less than 135 pages of text), Mr. Bird’s book is a sincere man’s effort to offer a critique of Seventh-day Adventist theology. Bird is at his best where he criticizes exegetically Sabbatarianism, the Spirit of Prophecy, Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism and the Investigative Judgment.

Unfortunately as his bibliography reveals, he did not do too much research in contemporary SDA literature or he would have discerned that the Adventists expunged over 15 years ago as unrepresentative his prime examples of their alleged Christological aberrations (pp. 64–93).

It is also worth noting that he seizes upon the infamous Wilcox statement (p. 69) concerning Christ, written in the 1920s and since categorically repudiated in print by Wilcox himself. This fact Mr. Bird would have discounted if he had checked his sources. But he relied here upon E. B. Jones and Louis Talbot, both secondary sources, and in this area still unmoved by the fact of Wilcox’s retraction and apology.

The author draws upon such writers as Canright, Talbot and Van Baalen, apparently oblivious to the prejudices and inaccuracies all too apparent in their writings. Mr. Bird singularly omits analysis of Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse’s writings on the SDA question and ignores completely any and all research work that tends to disprove his main thesis, i.e., that SDA is a revival of the Galatian heresy (p. 129) and “a serious corruption of the Gospel” (p. 130). Just how it is possible for SDAs to be Galatianists, whom God curses (Gal. 1:8, 9) and for there still to be “some of God’s” regenerate people in SDA “and that this need not be questioned” (p. 130), is more than this reviewer can understand as the terms are mutually exclusive in the Galatian context. Apparently SDAs are not heretical enough for hell and not orthodox enough for heaven, hence their relegation to the purgatory of paradox.

Mr. Bird here creates a problem he does not solve and his outdated quotations, particularly on the nature of Christ, tend to distort the true picture of contemporary SDA theology in a marked way.

The value of the book is that it soundly criticizes certain areas of SDA teachings and practices from an orthodox position, but it cannot be said to be either thorough in its research or dependable in its charge that SDA is a revival of Galatianism.

WALTER R. MARTIN

Church And Politics

The Rohe and The Sword, by Kenneth M. McKenzie (Public Affairs Press, 1961, 128 pp., $3.25), is reviewed by C. Gregg Singer, Catawba College, Salisbury, North Carolina.

This very interesting study concerning the relationship of The Methodist Church to American imperialism in the decade of the 1890s is largely based on the editorial opinion of the various Christian Advocates, although there is some dependence on other source material. The very truth of this work is somewhat suggestive of the conclusions of the author. Dr. McKensie clearly brings out that on the whole the leadership in The Methodist Church was very favorably disposed toward the various manifestations of American imperialism in this era. Both the annexation of Hawaii and the exporting of American democracy, and in the minds of quite a few leaders in the church American democracy was loosely equated with the Gospel. In short, imperialism was regarded as a great benefit to the missionary enterprise, but unfortunately in this identification of Christianity and democracy the content of the Gospel tended to be somewhat obscured and blurred.

This work is of real merit to those who are interested in what happens when a church begins to play a political role and takes a position on national policies without always understanding what is involved. It would be helpful if similar studies could be made on other large Protestant groups to see if a meaningful comparison could be achieved between those churches which are prone to become involved in political and diplomatic issues and those which are not.

C. GREGG SINGER

Book Briefs

The Fleeing Follower, by Poul Hoffman (Augsburg, 1962, 144 pp., $3). A novel of the Mark who fled his garments on the night of the Crucifixion; not a great literary success.

The Responsibilities of Man, by Rosalie B. Gerber (Public Affairs Press, 1961, 147 pp., $3.25). Author addresses himself to that problem predicted by Dostoevsky and described by Riesman that individual living within powerful organizations with methods of persuasion raised to high degree by technological techniques will succumb to temptation to abdicate his freedom and intergrity.

Brief and to the Point, by Arthur E. Dalton (James Clarke, London, 1961, 263 pp., 15s.). Suggested sermon headings, usually with alliteration, for the whole Bible divided up section by section.

Quench Not the Spirit, by Myron S. Augsburger (Herald Press, Scottdale, Pa., 1962, 113 pp., $2.50). A theology of the Holy Spirit, with special concern for the various sins against the Spirit.

All the Miracles of the Bible, by Herbert Lockyer (Zondervan, 1961, 480 pp., $5.95). An attempt to treat all the miracles of the Bible in terms of a definition of miracle in which creation and the Bible itself are regarded as miracles. Evangelical but unmarked by precision of scholarship.

Steps to Crucifixion, by Paul P. Fryhling (Zondervan, 1961, 117 pp., $1.95). Easy reading Lenten messages.

The Five Books as Literature, by Arthur Wormhoudt (Shakespeare Head Press, Eton, Windsor, Berkshire, England, 1961, 127 pp. 15s.). An attempt to account for the first five books of each Testament in terms of a theory of language and human communication.

But God Comes First, by Dewi Morgan (Longmans, 1962, 96 pp., 6s. 6d.) A meditation on the Te Deum by a well-known popular Anglo-Catholic writer, who is on the staff of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.

This We Believe, by Arnold T. Olson (Free Church Publications, Minneapolis, 1961, 371 pp., $4.95). The background and exposition of the Doctrinal Statement of the Evangelical Free Church of America.

Key Texts in the Epistle to the Hebrews, by Marcus L. Loane (Marshalls, 1961, 127 pp., 8s. 6d.). A devotional commentary in which an evangelical bishop from Australia selects and expounds what he considers the key text of each chapter.

God-Centered Evangelism, by R. B. Kuiper (Baker, 1961, 216 pp., $3.95). A God-centered theology of evangelism rooted in the principle that it is the eternal will of the triune God to bring the elect to heaven through the preaching of the Gospel, though, had God so willed, He could have brought them to heaven, apart from the Cross, by divine force alone.

Ructions at Ranford, by Paul White and David Britten (Paternoster, 1961, 156 pp., 6s.). The second adventure in the Ranford series; these stories have a Christian background.

The Children’s Simplified New Testament, by Olaf M. Norlie (Zondervan, 1962, 603 pp., $3.95). A very readable translation of the New Testament, as serviceable for adults as for children.

A Calvin Treasury, ed. by William F. Keesecker (Harper, 1962, 152 pp., $3.50). 535 selections from Calvin’s Institutes arranged under more than 400 key topics. A fine introduction to the thought of Calvin.

Seven Days that Changed the World, by Wallace T. Viets (Abingdon, 1962, 92 pp., $2). Lenten sermons based upon the events of the last week in the life of Jesus and overloaded with illustrative material.

Prisoner of War, by Kurt Molzahn (Muhlenberg, 1962, 251 pp., $3.75). The story of a Lutheran pastor’s three years in prison after conviction for conspiracy in espionage. He writes not to prove his innocence, but to tell a story of humanity “on the inside,” in both its attractive and repellent aspects.

Paperbacks

Nation Making, by Lawrence Toombs (Abingdon, 1962, 87 pp., $1). Volume 4 of projected 22 volumes of Bible Guides describes the processes and forces by which the Hebrew people, according to Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, and Judges, were molded into a nation.

Paul and His Converts, by F. F. Bruce (Abingdon, 1962, 88 pp., $1). The reader is led into the mind of Paul as reflected in his dealing with his converts at Thessalonica and Corinth.

Elijah and His Power, by F. B. Meyer (Good News, 1962, 64 pp., $.50). A “one evening” condensation of the book, Elijah: And the Secret of his Power.

New Life in Christ, by P. D. Clasper (Association, 1961, 79 pp., $1). A study of Paul’s theology understood as an explication of the believer’s new life in Christ.

Conversations with Children, by Edith F. Hunter (Beacon, 1962, 192 pp., $2.25). Conversations without Christian orientation or any discernable purpose.

Thoughts for Troubled Times, by W. J. Sullivan (Paulist Press, 1961, 128 pp., $.75). Brief, pithy spiritual booster shots to help Roman Catholics find peace and consolation amidst the downward pull of everyday troubles.

The Psychology of Christian Personality, by Ernest M. Ligon (Macmillan, 1961, 393 pp., $1.95). Book aims at interpreting the teachings of Jesus in terms of modern (published in 1935) psychology.

Historians of Israel (1), by Gordon Robinson, and (2), by Hugh Anderson (Abingdon, 1961, 88 pp. each, $1 each). Volume 5 and 6 of a projected series of 22 books which will seek to present a total view of the Bible. These two deal with the nature and meaning of history as expressed by the biblical historians themselves.

The Congress hereby finds that the security and welfare of the United States require that this and future generations of American youth be insured ample opportunity for the fullest development of their intellectual capacities.…”

—College Academic Facilities

and Scholarship Act of 1962.

A far-reaching religious issue lay in the hands of Capitol lawmakers. For the first time in U. S. history, both houses of Congress had passed a bill which would include federal aid to church-related colleges for general construction purposes, with ambiguous safeguards against sectarian deployment.

Most Washington newsmen missed the significance of grants and loans for public and private colleges, however, and hardly a ripple of public protest ensued. Leading Protestant churchmen were still praising President Kennedy for his church-state “stand,” although a few observers felt that guardians of U. S. church-state separation had been caught napping.

The House and Senate bills differed in two respects. The $2, 674,000,000 Senate bill included scholarship aid for some 212,000 students in the amount of $900,000,000, while the $1,500,000,000 House measure made no scholarship provisions. Perhaps more important from the standpoint of church-state principles was the fact that the House legislation authorizes construction grants while the Senate bill would mete out long-term low-interest loans.

Democratic Senator Sam J. Ervin of North Carolina had sought to bar aid to church-related institutions by introducing an amendment which would have made all private colleges ineligible. The amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 72 to 15. Three of the 15 senators who voted “no” are Mormons (Republican Bennett of Utah and Democrats Moss of Utah and Cannon of Nevada) and another is a Roman Catholic (Democrat Hickey of Wyoming). Only one other Republican supported the amendment (Tower of Texas).

It was obvious from floor debate that the church-state issue was complicated by the difficulty in defining a religious college. Ervin, a lawyer and former member of the North Carolina Supreme Court, conceded that his amendment may not have been properly drawn. He warned, however, that the college aid bill “is the first major breakthrough for those religious groups which have been demanding that they be given access to the federal treasury and permitted to finance their activities with tax money.” There was reason to believe that public apathy had again taken a toll. Republican Representative Eugene Siler of Kentucky, in an interview with Baptist Press, said, “One reason the other Congressmen were not concerned about the church-state issue in the college bill was that their constituents had not communicated with them.”

Other factors also were involved, however, and some observers felt that they added up to a smokescreen under which the bills sailed through rather readily (in the House by a vote of 319 to 79 and in the Senate by 69 to 17).

One factor was a new exchange between Kennedy and Cardinal Spellman in which the President reaffirmed his opposition to federal aid to parochial schools on the elementary and secondary level. Spellman insists this is discriminatory. Church-state specialists in Washington observed that it would be difficult to find a legal distinction between grade schools and higher educational institutions from the standpoint of constitutional federal financing.

Recalling Kennedy Campaign Promises

Will President Kennedy have violated campaign promises if he signs a bill providing federal loans or grants to church-related colleges?

CHRISTIANITY TODAY addressed this question to a number of leading students of the church-state scene.

“Yes,” said the Rev. Donald H. Gill, assistant secretary for public affairs of the National Association of Evangelicals. “Such action can be interpreted as a breach of his campaign promises to uphold complete separation of church and state.”

Dr. Glenn L. Archer, executive director of Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State, declared:

“I hope he will veto the bill and thus be consistent with the promises he gave the American people.”

Dr. Stephen W. Paine, president of Houghton College, which is operated by the Wesleyan Methodist Church, stated, “I fear that it sets a precedent in church-state interference.

Paine added that “it would dull the edge of his [Kennedy’s] words” if the President signed such a bill.

A statement by Dr. Oswald C. J. Hoffmann, director of public relations of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and speaker of “The Lutheran Hour,” had this to say on the college aid legislation:

“President Kennedy appears to be following a pattern established by previous administrations in providing federal assistance on a limited basis to all colleges, some of which are closely and others more tenuously related to church bodies. The degree to which church-related colleges, especially Protestant schools, become dependent upon government subsidies will probably determine to a certain extent their future relationships with the church.

“Taking his stand on constitutional ground, President Kennedy has consistently maintained a stiff insistence, in the face of tremendous pressure from his own church body, on separation of church and state in the field of elementary and secondary education. It remains to be seen whether he or his successors will continue to take this stand, should government assistance to colleges gradually break down the constitutional argument, creating a situation in which decisions regarding government assistance to church-sponsored schools, on all levels, will be based purely on considerations of public policy.”

The current church-state issue recalled particularly a campaign speech made by Kennedy in Houston in which he declared:

“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute … where no church or church school is granted any public funds.”

Another factor was a paragraph in both bills which prohibits aid for construction of any facility “used for sectarian instruction or as a place for religious worship, or [any facility used] primarily in connection with any part of the program of a school or department of divinity.” “School or department of divinity” was defined as “an institution, or branch of an institution, whose program is specifically for the education of students to prepare them to become ministers of religion or to enter upon some other religious vocation or to prepare them to teach theological subjects.” A number of loopholes are apparent in the section, raising such questions as to what action could be taken if a school diverted a facility to sectarian use once it had been built with government funds. Moreover, the legislation fails to spell out the extent of eligibility of institutions where secterianism permeates the entire curriculum. Note: “Every subject taught,” said Pope Leo XIII, should “be permeated with Christian piety.”

One of the few newspapers to catch the significance of the church-state issue in the college aid legislation was The Christian Science Monitor, which made it the lead story for a day and followed up with an editorial quoting Supreme Court Justice Jackson in the Everson case:

“Catholic education is the rock on which the whole structure rests, and to render tax aid to its church school is indistinguishable to me from rendering the same aid to the church itself.”

There were some indications that whatever the final decision of Congress and the White House, the propriety of giving federal funds to church institutions may be challenged in the courts.

Democratic Senator Wayne Morse of Oregon, who shepherded the college aid bill through the upper chamber, said the National Defense Education Act offered a precedent. He recalled an NDEA provision that 12 per cent of all funds for loans to educational institutions for construction of facilities for teaching mathematics, science and foreign languages be set aside for private and parochial schools.

Nonetheless, Morse himself apparently had some reservations.

“It has become quite apparent,” he said, “that in this gray area of constitutional relationships, there is an evergrowing need for a definite statement by the Supreme Court of the United States upon the meaning of the First Amendment with respect to the aid which can be given to the non-public sectors of all education.”

As of the middle of February, the college aid bills faced a House-Senate conference committee. A compromise measure, to which no further amendments can be made, still needs approval of both houses—and the President.

The Bible In Class

The Pennsylvania law requiring Bible readings in the state’s public schools is again being appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court. For the second time in three years, the Federal district court in Philadelphia ruled such Bible readings and prayer recitations unconstitutional. The nation’s highest tribunal refused to hear an earlier complaint. The Pennsylvania legislature has since removed “compulsion” clauses involving teachers and students.

Meanwhile, the biennial assembly of the Pennsylvania Council of Churches adopted a report which recommends early elimination of tax exemptions on income derived from church business ventures unrelated to “ecclesiastical activities.” Churches were urged not to seek additional exemption.

Change Of Course

After more than five years of work on a book citing Lutheran-Roman Catholic differences, the Board of Parish Education of the United Lutheran Church in America reported it had cancelled publication plans.

Dr. Arthur H. Getz, a board editor, explained that “considerable time has elapsed since this course was first projected, and the climate has undergone a marked change in the interim.”

“At the time that the course was project,” he said, “it may have been timely to stress the difference between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism, but more recently the emphasis has been upon ‘conversations’ between the two faiths, and stress is being laid upon understanding each other.”

Controversial Lecturer

More than a year ago, Dr. Albert T. Mollegen accepted an invitation to deliver a lecture series at Clemson (South Carolina) College. But when word got around the state, a reaction set in, particularly among Episcopalians in Charleston, who recalled that Mollegen had been associated with the “popular fronts” of the 1930s. The upshot was that some days before the actual series was to have been delivered, Mollegen received a long-distance telephone call at the Episcopal Theological Seminary in Alexandria, Virginia, where he is professor of New Testament language and literature. The call was from Clemson President Robert F. Edwards, who explained that the Charleston Episcopalians were prevailing upon the school to cancel Mollegen’s lectures.

The Clemson lectures were called off, but Mollegen gave the substance of his lectures series anyway—at St. Philip’s in Charleston, largest Episcopal church in the city, at the invitation of its rector, the Rev. S. G. Clary. Mollegen feels that the misleading “popular fronts” charge was only partly responsible for the Clemson cancellation. He said those responsible were “right-wing extremists in every respect,” including insistence upon segregation which he opposes.

Net Gain: 14

Methodist researchers report that their denomination showed a net gain of only 14 new congregations for a three-year period which ended May 31, 1961. A survey made by the Methodist Division of National Missions also showed that new congregations are being organized at less than half the rate called for by the General Conference.

The Methodist Board of Missions devoted a five-page release to the results of the survey, which is part of a larger church extension survey being made by Protestant denominations through the Division of Home Missions of the National Council of Churches.

The Methodist survey showed a gain of 555 churches and a loss (through merger and abandonment) of 541.

‘Gideon’

Broadway has again turned to the Bible for dramatic theme. This time Paddy Chayefsky exploits the dramatic possibilities of the story of Gideon and his defeat of Israel’s enemies, the Midianites. Frederic March playing God, and Douglas Campbell portraying Gideon, give stormy, moving performances. Chayefsky’s script follows the text of the biblical narrative with a greater faithfulness than does many a sermon.

In the biblical story Gideon struggles with the divine call to defeat the hosts of the Midianites by such unlikely weapons as will demonstrate that victory is not achieved by Gideon but given by God. Chayefsky bites deep into this question of grace as definitive of the relationship between God and man.

God assures Gideon of his love, but when this leads Gideon to pride, God assures him that he is loved only because he is just like any other man. To be loved because he lacks distinction, Gideon protests, is a reduction of his self to nothingness. God answers that just because God is God, Gideon is nothing. In such a God-relationship, Gideon repudiates God and against the threat of God’s destructive wrath insists that he will nonetheless be a meaningful and significant self.

This is not simple Promethean defiance. Gideon desires to love God and defies him only to avoid being nothing. But even such pathetic defiance is regarded by God as a threat to his unique status and elicits his destructive wrath. Paradoxically, however, in the play’s last two lines, contemplating man’s pretension to deity, God says: “Given time, man just might … perhaps …;” and adds: “With this conceit the play ends.”

Religiously sensitive souls repelled by human portrayals of God will recoil from a sacrilegious irreverence which elicits more laughs than feelings of awe.

A portrayal of the divine in which God sniffles and blows his nose, sounds the wolf whistle, and grins like a Cheshire cat when Gideon heeds his promptings, suggest that God has been lost in a quest for a meaningful human self.

Chayefsky’s play reflects a deep moral concern without benefit of the genuine religious dimension. The God of Gideon is to be defied, not because he is ungracious, but because Gideon living by God’s favor is regarded as nothing. Since both God and man cannot exist as significant realities, man must eliminate God in order to be himself.

The audience may see more than was intended at the very end of the play where God hesitates and finally asks Gideon: What were we talking about? Whatever it was, it was not about the Christian answer to Paddy Chayefsky’s problem.

J. D.

Observing City Churches

A prominent front-page news feature on the problems of urban churches in an era of social change marked the first issue of the new weekly National Observer.

Editor William Giles describes the Observer as “an unusual news concept which will reach out for significant trends rather than startling, sensational news lacking real substance.”

“Religious news,” he added, “will be measured on the same scale as other events that deeply influence national life.”

The first printing of the paper totaled approximately 400,000, with 125,000 going to prepaid subscribers and the balance to newsstands.

B. B.

The Latin Crusade

The following report was prepared byCHRISTIANITY TODAYNews Correspondent Tom McMahon, who accompanied the Billy Graham evangelistic team on its South American tour:

Statistics coming out of evangelist Billy Graham’s South American crusade did not compare with those recorded during his tours of Europe, Asia, and Africa. But they were highly significant when viewed against the background of the area. Graham and his associate evangelists had preached to an aggregate of nearly a quarter of a million persons in five countries, with the number of decisions for Christ approaching 10,000. Almost everywhere the team went, turnouts were two or three times the local Protestant population.

The Graham crusade in South America, the first of two scheduled there this year, closed February 17 in Santiago, Chile. Among the achievements under God were these:

—Protestant forces were welded into unprecedented unity both numerically and spirit-wise.

—Top echelons of society were reached as never before—right alongside all other strata—by the simple Gospel message.

—Protestantism was given a new image in the minds of literate Latins as scores of newspapers gave front-page coverage and radio and television stations also cooperated.

The reaction of Roman Catholics ranged from open hostility to warm welcomes, with many falling in the middle with sullen silence and puzzled looks. However, one veteran U. S. correspondent declared that Roman Catholic churchmen had been studying Graham methods closely with a view to adopting some of them.

The Latin Catholic problem, especially in Colombia and in some parts of other countries, lies with its brand of medieval Spanish Catholicism which one newsman in Venezuela summed up neatly in one sentence: The Colombia Roman Catholic Church is 500 years behind the Vatican.

In Cali, Colombia, and Lima, Peru, clerical pressure virtually silenced the press, but word got around through the efforts of crusading Protestants who courageously plastered cities with billboards and banners.

Lima young people broadcast 300,000 handbills and 5,000 posters. One night 50 of the youth worked from 11 p. m. until 5 a. m. superimposing Graham stickers on big “Come and Hear” signs of a presidential candidate whose rally just ended as they began their night’s work. Two of them were jailed briefly for posting posters everywhere after the municipality had donated space for 400 on the city’s own bulletin boards.

No offerings were taken in Colombia. The $5, 000 budget for Cali was raised without personal solicitations. A Dutch company donated $500 and personal gifts ranged from $200 given by a woman who drives a costly American-made car to $1 donated by a poor woman who explained that it had been given to her son at birth two years ago.

Among Latin political leaders who hailed effects of the Graham tour was former president Galo Plaza Lasso of Ecuador.

Protestant Panorama

• Dr. Franklin Clark Fry led a nine-man World Council of Churches delegation to the White House last month to present President Kennedy with the New Delhi assembly’s appeal for peace with justice and freedom. In another ceremony several days later, Kennedy was presented with the annual brotherhood award of the National Conference of Christians and Jews.

• The 12th annual assembly of the National Council of Churches’ Division of Foreign Missions voted to adopt an altered name and will hereafter be known as the Division of World Missions.

• Church World Service is implementing a detailed plan to resettle some 100,000 Cuban refugees now in Miami, Florida. Chartered plane flights will be utilized extensively.

• Free Methodist churches are organizing a world fellowship. An organizing conference which met in January at Greenville College, Illinois, elected Bishop Leslie R. Marston as president of the new fellowship.

• Polish Baptists expected eight or ten students to enroll at a new theological seminary in Warsaw. The seminary was to have opened soon after last September’s dedication of a Baptist building, but the government withheld permission for nearly six months.

• Evangelist Hyman Appelman saw more than 10,000 recorded decisions for Christ in his 1961 crusades.

• A commemorative service last month in Salem, Massachusetts marked the 150th anniversary of the sailing of the first American foreign missionaries. The service was held in the 300-year-old Tabernacle Congregational Church where five young Congregational ministers were ordained February 6, 1812, prior to leaving for India shortly after. They were sent by the former American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, oldest missionary organization in America. The board is now part of the United Church Board for World Ministries.

• The United Christian Missionary Society is shipping a single-engine aircraft to Africa for use by missionaries of the Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ) in the Republic of the Congo. The $30,000 cost of the Cessna 180 includes pontoons which are to be attached for river operation.

• The Far Eastern Gospel Crusade is setting up permanent headquarters in a new $65, 000 building in Detroit. The structure follows the Oriental style of architecture and resembles buildings of countries where the organization has missionaries.

• A charge of unfair labor practices made by the National Labor Relations Board against the Methodist Publishing House in San Francisco has been set aside by the U. S. Court of Appeals.

• More than 60 per cent of Southern Baptist ministers who died in 1961 were victims of heart diseases, a convention annuity board survey indicates. Cancer was said to have claimed 20 per cent and accidents 7 per cent.

• The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod’s Commission on Doctrinal Matters has turned down for the time being an invitation to meet with the Committee on Doctrinal Unity of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. The commission has called on the Missouri Synod’s convention to express itself on the issues.

Four-Year Reprieve

Protestants in Costa Rica feel they have been given a four-year reprieve with the election to the presidency of Francisco Orlich.

Orlich and his party take a more liberal position in favor of religious liberty than does Dr. Rafael Angel Calderon Guardia, who was Orlich’s strongest contender. Orlich, a coffee planter, helped throw out Calderon’s government by force in 1948 after the doctor had lined up with Communists and the Roman Catholic hierarchy in a regime characterized by graft and violence as much as by social reform and a tightening of church-state relationships.

For last month’s election, Calderon played down his former Communist associations and campaigned on his credentials from the Vatican as a “most Catholic ruler.”

The peaceful election was an exhibition of impeccable democracy and ballots were cast for a party (Liberation National) and a program (reform socialism) rather than a personality in the Latin American tradition of leader cult.

The president-elect is closely linked to—some people say manipulated by—ex-president José (“Pepe”) Figueres, the peppery little statesman who has been one of the most effective and friendly critics of U. S. policy in Latin America. Figueres led the 1948 revolution and saved Costa Rica from a Communist takeover at that time.

Questioned recently by representatives of the Costa Rican Evangelical Alliance, President-elect Orlich underlined his party’s position as supporting cordial relations with the Roman Catholic Church but respecting the liberty of all religious minorities. He specially declared himself to the Protestants on four points:

• All religious groups will enjoy equal freedom to carry on their educational programs, under the general oversight of the Ministry of Education, at all levels, including normal school and university, if a law now pending is approved by Congress.

• Church-sponsored institutions will not be exempted from taxation, despite pressure from the Roman Catholic archbishop.

• The Protestant request to license ministers to assist government agents in performing civil marriages will be given favorable consideration.

• Cabinet ministers will all share the new president’s views on church-state relations.

Somber note: Calderón carried most of the capital city of San José and the Pacific banana zone, reflecting growing Roman Catholic power and strong leftist trends among Costa Rican laboring classes.

W. D. R.

Marrying For Money

From Wales comes a new slant on the much-publicized danger of “union without tarrying for theology.” A Welsh millionaire, Sir David James, offers a gift of $700,000 if the country’s four Free Church denominations (Baptist, Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian) effect a union by January, 1963.

Said the President of the Free Church Council, the Rev. T. Ellis Jones: “Even if the theological difficulties could be ironed out in the time, there remain all the questions of rights of property invested in the various denominations.” The latter would involve the passing of an Act of Parliament. Mr. Jones, while acclaiming the offer as that of a good man and of a great benefactor, said it was regrettable that it had the appearance of an ultimatum.

J. D. D.

An Archbishop’S Lot

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. A. M. Ramsey, is planning a trip to the United States. His itinerary includes two lectures on ascetical theology at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, Evanston, Illinois, October 19–20. He will also address the House of Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church at their fall meeting in Columbia, South Carolina.

The Primate is now under fire from certain quarters in England because of his recent support of proposals to abolish capital punishment. “No wonder the police force is short of men,” said the Rev. Eric Judd to his Anglican congregation in Lincolnshire, “… crime demands sterner measures than a sugar-coated pill for the murderer who creates terror by stalking old ladies and little children.” (The present law permits hanging only in cases such as those in which robbery is involved or a policeman is killed while doing his duty.) Judd, whose son is a policeman, continued, “If the Government were to say to the Primate: ‘Here is a dastardly murderer who has cut an old lady into pieces after raping and robbing her, what do you propose to do?’, would his answer be sentiment, talk, a pat on the back—or nothing?”

J. D. D.

How Moral The Past?

Improved material conditions in the past 90 years have not necessarily involved a similar advance in the moral and religious training of young people. So said the Moderator of the Church of Scotland General Assembly, Dr. A. C. Craig, addressing the recent congress of the Educational Institute of Scotland.

This apparently innocuous statement evoked some lively comments from James Inglis, principal teacher of English at Airdrie Academy. “As far back as we can go historically,” writes Mr. Inglis in the Scottish Educational Journal, “it has been a favorite pastime of the ageing to castigate the immorality of the young, while stating or implying that things were better in their days.… If what they have said for thousands of years had been true, we could not possibly have by this time any moral standards left.”

After asserting what he described as the “magnificent” moral advance of humanity in the last hundred years, Inglis continued: “If I were a vindictive man, I would wish to see all our moaning clergymen and justices compelled to live in their moral paradises of the past; the club-law of the cave, the wergild of Anglo-Saxon justice, the helotry of Ancient Greece, the jealous Jehovah of the Jews, and the gin-palaces and work-houses of Dicken’s Victorian England.”

Inglis classed as “morally moronic” anyone who feels morally superior for having produced a world in which children face daily the threat of universal destruction.

J. D. D.

Mormons Go East

Mormons are stepping up a campaign to establish their church in Britain, under the direction of Marion Duff Hanks, a lawyer and one of the 38 senior “General Authorities” of the mother church in Salt Lake City. Some 1,100 young Latter-day Saints armed with street maps, “conversion kits” and tape-recorded sermons are to be deployed in systematic visitation and in youth work. They aim to get people “talking about God and religion,” to add 26 more churches by July to the present 24 in the country, and to increase the number of baptisms this year to 30,000 (13, 500 in 1961). The baptism course has been reduced from weeks to days.

The Mormons now claim some 33,000 members in Britain where the first congregation was founded in 1837. Their optimism is seen in that they are now seeking a site for a university which would accommodate about 4,000 students. This university, similar to one recently set up in New Zealand, would be open to all denominations, and would offer an educational standard equal to that of any other British university.

J.D.D.

Occasional Conformists

Following study of the now famous letter of 32 influential Anglican theologians (see “Review of Current Religious Thought,” February 2, 1962), the Council of Church Society, an influential movement within the Church of England, passed a resolution: “The historic position that the Church of England is in communion with the national Reformed Church, both on the Continent and in Scotland, should be maintained, and the traditional Church of England practice of admitting occasional conformists to the service of Holy Communion should be continued without restriction.”

A member of the council commented that the notion that Anglicans are only in communion with other episcopal churches is erroneous, historically untenable, and involves a denial of biblical principles.

J. D. D.

Incident On Mount Zion

An English woman tourist was shot and killed by a Jordanian sentry last month as she sought to place a religious banner atop Mount Zion.

Religious News Service reported that the shooting occurred in the no man’s land between the Israeli and Jordan sectors of Jerusalem.

The woman’s passport identified her as Mrs. Ann Lasbury, 57, a native of Newborough on Anglesey, an island off the northwest coast of Wales. Her home was at Folkstone, Kent.

Apparently in a “religious trance,” according to one report, the woman was challenged by the sentry, who saw in early morning darkness the outline of a figure climbing over barbed wire and through a minefield. Mrs. Lasbury turned abruptly, swinging her package toward the sentry. The sentry, apparently thinking that the package was a weapon, fired a bullet that struck her in the head.

Problems Of Liberty

The principle of religious liberty suffered another assortment of blows last month (CHRISTIANITY TODAY has already reported that a new wave of religious persecution seems to be developing around the world—see February 2, 1962 issue).

• Five Soviet evangelists were found guilty of “parasitic idleness” and were banished to “places set aside for that purpose,” which probably means forced labor in Siberia. The exiles were reported by Sovetskaya Kultura, newspaper of the Soviet Ministry of Culture, which added that a sixth evangelist was freed with a warning because of his advanced age.

Kowloon Cleanup

The Hong Kong government is cleaning up the old walled city of Kowloon and two missionary couples have capitalized on the renovation program by turning two brothels into a Christian school.

Reports missionary evangelist David Morken: “With the Donnithornes (another missionary couple) we have secured two filthy brothels, scoured them, put in windows, painted and transformed these houses of ill fame into the Good Samaritan School.”

Morken further reported that the influx of children was so great that another five-story building was rented, affording schooling to 300 more of the 80,000 youngsters who live in an area of about eight city blocks without any free education.

The six evangelists had been arrested, according to the report, after residents in a Moscow suburb complained to authorities against the playing of tape-recorded sermons at revival meetings. The sermons were alleged to have projected a “spirit of pessimism, dejection, doom and indifference to all things earthly.”

Another Soviet newspaper reported that four churchgoers in the republic of Moldavia had been sentenced to death on charges of slaying a nonbeliever they felt had some hand in the death of two of their parishioners. Details of the story were sketchy.

Still another paper told of two men and three women belonging to the Shakers sect who had been given prison terms for alleged “anti-social activities,” by a court in Novosibrisk, Siberia.

• Far East News Service reported that a Christian pastor in Nepal was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment for having given instruction and baptism to Nepali believers. Another preacher from Pokhra, Nepal, presently serving on the Indian side of the border, was given the same sentence in absentia.

Following a country-wide election in 1959, a democratic government and constitution were established under the king of Nepal. The changes allowed for a measure of religious freedom, but in December, 1960, the elected government and constitution were dissolved.

More recently, the king has said he would re-introduce most of the constitution and abolish old laws. Some observers consider that this may include a modification of the present discriminatory laws directed against converts to Christianity.

• In Malagasy, a 31-year-old medical student was tried and found guilty of “outrage” and “offense” against the government. He was fined the equivalent of $61.50.

The student, Roger Andrianaly, is general secretary of the Association of Malagasy Students in France. The charges against him resulted from publication in Fanasina, a newspaper of the Madagascar Christian Council, of a resolution adopted by the students’ group criticizing the Malagasy government as “repressive” and “corrupt.” The newspaper’s chief editor, Paul Rakotovolona, also was under arrest on similar charges.

Attorneys for Andrianaly announced they would appeal the verdict, although a retrial could result in a heavier sentence. A maximum sentence of three years’ imprisonment or a fine amounting to some $4, 100 could have been levied.

Andrianaly, who is studying at the University of Paris, was given back his passport, which had been seized at the time of his arrest, but he was not granted an exit visa to enable him to return to Paris. Andrianaly had interupted his studies to attend the funeral of his father, who was president of the churches associated with the Friends’ mission in Madagascar.

• Missionary schools in West Pakistan have been directed to include in their curriculum instruction in Islam, according to a report from Lahore. The schools were said to have been given three months to arrange for such instruction, which includes the recruitment of “qualified” staff.

• In Adana, Turkey, a Church of Christ missionary reported that the Turkish Minister of the Interior had revoked the governor of Adana’s permission for the church to operate there.

The missionary, Bill McCown, appealed the ruling. He is the only Church of Christ missionary in all of Turkey.

The Radio Pulpit

Dr. Ralph W. Sockman’s 34 years as National Radio Pulpit voice for the Federal and National Council of Churches were marked last month by the annual dinner of the NCC Broadcasting and Film Commission in Riverside Church, New York. There are reports that Sockman’s radio post will soon be filled by Dr. David H. C. Read, minister of Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church.

Dr. R. H. Edwin Espy, NCC associate general secretary, credited Dr. Sockman with “evangelical authenticity, pastoral sensitivity, social perspicacity, homiletic simplicity, and ecumenical (nonsectarian) validity.” Presenting a plaque for BFC’s Board of Managers, Harry C. Spencer described Sockman’s message as “evangelical in spirit, liberal on social questions,” and added that “of this we are very proud.”

Sockman succeeded Dr. S. Parkes Cadman as radio pulpit speaker, just before the crash of the stock market and during the great depression; his airwaves ministry continued through World War II and into the era of expansion. President Elmer W. Engstrom of Radio Corporation of America commented that Sockman’s remarkable capacity for “quiet discourse between one individual and another” was illustrated by the immense mail response of personal letters. One wit recalled that once, during Sockman’s illness, his church bulletin board announced the guest speaker, the sermon topic “God Is Good,” and the news “Dr. Sockman is Better.”

“If I were going to do it all over,” said Sockman, “I would lighten the content of those sermons. But the conditions of 30 years ago are now changing. The art of communication has improved so much faster than the content. Radio sermons of the future will be better … will have more in them. We’ve got to measure up! These are the Searching Sixties in which we are seeking out our purposes and goals.”

President Theodore Alexander Gill of San Francisco Theological Seminary pictured the new world already coming into view: an exploding population, divorce percentages riding these larger figures, multiplied danger of nuclear extinction, the unresolved conflict between work and leisure, and a civilized population returning to nomadic life. The Church can supply the alternative to “a new kind of panic” and to “unprecedented callousness.” But to do so, he contended, it must be skeptical of “fixed patterns” and “frozen molds.”

C. F. H. H.

The Message Of Genesis

A storm of criticism is swirling about a Southern Baptist professor and his probing book, The Message of Genesis.

By last month the controversy had reached the point of debate among members of the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, who finally voted to issue a statement of policy. The statement favors publication of books with varying doctrinal viewpoints “provided they represent a segment of Southern Baptist life and thought.”

The controversy lies primarily with the question of the critical orientation of a 209-page volume by Dr. Ralph H. Elliott, 37-year-old chairman of the department of Old Testament at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Kansas City, Missouri.

Elliott considers the board’s action “a tremendous breakthrough.” He said that “for the first time it puts on paper” a policy in favor of publishing varying viewpoints.

In the case of his book, the viewpoint is that of the “documentary hypothesis” relative the authorship of the book of Genesis. Though rejecting the theology of Julius Wellhausen, with whom the theory is mostly closely identified, Elliott regards the book of Genesis as the product of several writers.

Several Southern Baptist state papers have carried articles criticizing the book. Some have run supporting arguments.

Trustees of Midwestern seminary have given Elliott a vote of confidence, but one district Baptist convention (in Houston) asked them to reconsider. A resolution passed by the convention without a dissenting vote asked that Elliott’s book not be used in Southern Baptist seminaries or Texas Baptist colleges.

In recent decades the “documentary” view of the Pentateuch has been increasingly under fire. Dr. Cyrus H. Gordon, Jewish scholar, has thrust it aside as now discredited (see “Higher Critics and Forbidden Fruit,” CHRISTIANITY TODAY, November 23, 1959).

Seminary Survey

American Baptist leaders are taking a new look at their theological education policies, with a wide-ranging survey already having been put together for consideration by 450 key convention personnel at a special consultation this month in Chicago.

The 140-page mimeographed survey, more than a year in the making and still cloaked in secrecy, represents the work of a specially-appointed “Committee of Seventeen on Theological Education.”

It reportedly expresses concern that American Baptist seminaries are not producing enough graduates, that they are not properly located, and that they need more money.

While the survey apparently does not disapprove of conservative theology or of varying emphases and aims in American Baptist seminaries, it is said nonetheless to frown on divinity schools requiring faculty members and trustees to sign doctrinal statements.

A series of recommendations are reported, among them a proposal for a Council on Theological Education and programs for raising seminary finances and recruitment of students. Other reported recommendations would initiate discussions among seminaries in three areas (West Coast, Central and Lake States; Middle Atlantic States) with a view to uniting, would require accreditation by the American Association of Theological Schools, and would urge stronger denominational ties for the seminaries.

The survey concentrated on eight approved seminaries: Andover Newton, Berkeley, California Baptist, Central Baptist, Colgate Rochester, Crozer, Eastern, and Northern. After the consultation, which is scheduled March 12–13, the survey will be revised. The plan is to present it to the annual sessions of the convention in June.

The committee preparing the survey included Dr. George Armacost, Dr. H. R. Bowler, Dr. Edwin T. Dahlberg, Dr. W. A. Diman, Dr. Roger L. Fredrickson, Mr. H. Gordon Fromm, Dr. Robert T. Handy, Dr. Joseph H. Heartberg, Mrs. Maurice B. Hodge, the Rev. Ellis J. Holt, Dr. Lynn Leavenworth, Dr. Paul O. Madson, Dr. W. G. Mather, Dr. Samuel H. Miller, Dr. H. N. Morse, Dr. R. S. Orr, the Rev. E. S. Parsons, Dr. H. W. Richardson, and Dr. L. B. Whitman.

People: Words And Events

Deaths:Dr. F. Townley Lord, 68, former president of the Baptist World Alliance; in Greenville, South Carolina … Dr. Harold R. Willoughby, 71, noted Bible scholar and retired University of Chicago Divinity School professor; in Chicago … Dr. Jesse A. Engle, 61, general secretary of the Joint Section of Education and Cultivation of the Methodist Board of Missions; in Tarry town, New York … Dr. Karl Anton Mueller, 94, bishop of the Moravian Church in America; in San Francisco … the Rev. Samuel Charles Spalding, 83, Unitarian minister who wrote more than 100 “Nick Carter” detective novels; in Monterey, Massachusetts … Dr. J. 1. Peacocke, 96, Ireland’s oldest Anglican prelate; at Ballymena, County Antrim … the Rev. Edward J. Poole-Connor, 89, founder of the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches in Britain … the Rev. B. W. Isaac, 85, former secretary of the Church Pastoral Aid Society of the Church of England … the Rev. K. L. Parry, former chairman of the Congregational Union of England and Wales … Principal George Jeffreys, evangelist and founder of the Elim Pentecostal Movement of Britain and subsequently of the Bible Pattern Church Fellowship … the Rev. Alfred Maas, 66, director of the Church of the Evangelical Lutheran Confession in Germany.

Retirement: As head of the Lutheran Church of Würtemberg in West Germany, Bishop Martin Haug, effective March 31.

Resignations: As dean of Yale University Divinity School, Dr. Liston Pope. He plans to return to Yale in the fall of 1963 as professor of social ethics.

Appointments: As president of Lutheran Theological Seminary, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, Dr. Donald R. Heiges … as president of The King’s College, Dr. Robert A. Cook … as vice-president of Ursinus College, Dr. James E. Wagner … as moderator of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, Dr. J. H. Davey … as minister of University Presbyterian Church, Seattle, Dr. Robert B. Munger … as director of development of Overseas Crusades, Inc., the Rev. Ellsworth Culver … as executive secretary of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, Edward F. Snyder.

Elections: As Archbishop of Athens and Primate of the Orthodox Church in Greece, Metropolitan Chrysostom Hadjistavrou … as moderator of the Church of South India, Bishop A. H. Lagg … as Anglican Bishop of the Yukon, Canon Henry H. Marsh.

When asked to name our greatest problem, President Eisenhower, about to finish his administration, replied, “The spread of communism in the world.” Since he looked for eight years into the face of this foe of freedom, very few thoughtful people disagree with him.

Yet there is another ideology which is closely related to communism but sits in a reserved seat in our assembly, namely, the theory of evolution. Since the word evolution has different meanings, like many English words, it is necessary to clarify the meaning that is referred to in this essay. It is the doctrine that all the kinds of plants and animals, including man, have developed gradually, through species of increasing complexity, from very simple living matter. It is claimed that this development was caused by the same natural forces which operate today. T. Dobzhansky states that evolution has no program, and this is inherent in the doctrine of natural selection; a free-for-all fight with the elimination of the losers. Evolutionists who believe in God have objected to this denial of teleology, and they may very well do so, but it is a logical tenet of the original theory of Charles Darwin.

Both communism and evolution are founded on some data which cannot be denied but the data are interpreted wrongly. When the facts are scrutinized it may be that evolution will be discredited, but I fear that biology in general may suffer loss of confidence. Since I am a biologist, I should regret such a loss.

Marx and Darwin: Common Ground

The founder of communism was Karl Marx (1818–1883) while the most famous proponent of evolution was Charles Darwin (1809–1882). The two men did not deal with the same subject matter. Marx studied economic enterprise and its results in government while Darwin dealt with animals and plants, especially their changes.

But both leaders claimed that the results they described were due to the working of natural laws—a determinism, broad, slow, but sure. Advanced organization is certain but the rate is not fixed, depending partly upon the cooperation of man. Furthermore the end result is claimed to be an improved condition; of government on the one hand, of living things on the other. What a line to engender optimism and incite people to work with assurance!

Projection of a Motive Force

Thus the motive force in communism is supposed to be the same as in evolution. If we reject the one we should reject the other also. Note the argument of a British biologist: “This is not the place to discuss Marx’s theory of history, but if history is the history of class struggle (and to some extent it undeniably is) there is room for hope that when mankind has united in a world cooperative commonwealth unmarked by social classes a good many of the more unpleasant features of life in a semi-barbarous state will have ceased to exist.” (So far, the typical Communist line; now comes the evolutionary basis:) “And indeed this is not a hope at all but a faith based on that guiding thread of rise in level of organization, which we have seen running throughout the evolution of the world; and hence a scientific faith.” (J. Needham. Philosophy of A. N. Whitehead, P. A. Schilpp, ed., Tudor, 1951, p. 253.)

What We Learn from History

But does history support the claims of Marx? He recognized different types of productive systems and claimed that they naturally follow each other in the same order. A primitive society in which goods are owned by the tribe is followed by slavery, making more production possible through agriculture rather than hunting. The third stage is a military feudal state in which most of the people are serfs. This is followed by the capitalist system, in which all factories and tools are owned by a few men. But the workers rise up, liquidate the so-called oppressors, and establish a classless society—communism.

A little reflection reminds one that in the United States the feudal stage was omitted entirely. In Europe after the fall of Rome there was not a foreordained advancement but retrogression. And Carlyle had an entirely different interpretation of history. “As I take it, Universal History, the history of what man has accomplished in the world, is at bottom the History of the Great Men who have worked here” (Heroes and Hero Worship, Lecture 1, Odin). Thus, in the past, history has not followed a determined course and so we find it at present. Communism has not wiped out classes in Russia, but government officials and scientists make up a favored class.

What We Learn from Biology

Just as history fails to support Marx, careful biologists find that biology is lacking in support of Darwin. Most of them still give lip service to the theory of evolution rather than raise a quarrel in the family, but they see the difficulties.

The theory of advancement by inheritance of “acquired characters,” changes due to the environment, no longer is believed (Snyder & David, Principles of Heredity, Heath, 1957, p. 348). It is true that the environment does change an organism but the next generation does not show this change if raised in another environment. Experiments performed to test the theory do not give positive results. While the name of J. B. Lamarck is connected with this theory, Darwin also believed it and relied upon it more as he advanced in years.

Another theory to suffer eclipse is that of recapitulation, which claimed that an embryo resembles the adults of its ancestors (G. B. Moment, General Zoology, Houghton Mifflin, 1958, p. 201). Thus the human embryo was supposed to resemble a fish. But difficulties arose. The experimental embryologists, a very active group, did not find the theory helpful, it did not apply to plants, and as a whole it was founded upon selected evidence instead of the complete data.

Honest biologists, even the ones who call themselves evolutionists, admit difficulties. Among the changes which are observed to occur, there are more detriments than improvements. According to the original theory, new and improved organs arose in animals as the centuries came and went. This is indispensable to the plan, and we could not have evolution without it. But in the wide and careful search which is being made such organs are not seen to arise.

We could rather have a theory of degeneration. And why not? It would agree with what we know about entropy. For instance, heat comes from a fire under a boiler, it runs an engine and heats a shop, and while it cannot be destroyed, it is scattered through the atmosphere and lost to man. Energy in general tends to change into forms which are not useful and entail a loss.

But if we interpret the living world in terms of gradual loss we have not explained how living things were formed. We then have no substitute for creation. We have to admit the necessity for a Creator who planned and formed animals, plants, and man. Materialists would rather not admit creation for there is no place for it in their system.

Materialism on the March

Both communism and evolution are based on theories of necessary advancement and improvement through material laws. But real progress is based upon justice and wisdom. Marx said there is no God, and Darwin, although as a young man he recognized God, said he thought God never made a revelation. We are justified in coupling these two men, “For it is on the teachings … of Darwin that the whole annihilating materialist philosophy of our age is based. Indeed, without Darwin (and to a certain extent Hegel) there could hardly be a Stalin” (E. D. O’Brien, Illustrated London News, Nov. 18, 1950, p. 834).

Before the War between the States, Lincoln said that this nation could not endure half slave and half free. Does not our half-hearted attitude toward evolution endanger a softening attitude toward our enemy, communism?

WILLIAM L. TINKLE

Professor of Botany

(Retired)

Anderson College

Anderson, Indiana

The Chicago Daily News recently reported that Billy Graham, in talking about what Americans need most, stated: “It is absolutely impossible to change society and to reverse the moral trend unless we ourselves are changed from the inside out. Man needs transformation or conversion.… Our only way to moral reform is through repentance of our sins and a return to God.”

The Old Testament in no uncertain terms reiterates the same truth over and over again. A representative and very specific statement to that effect is found in 2 Chron. 7:14: “If my people, who are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

Meaning of Repentance and Conversion in the New Testament. Two Greek words are translated as repentance. Metamelomai has the basic connotation of feeling differently, or remorse (Matt. 21:29, 32; 27:3). Judas repented only in the sense of remorse, not with the idea of abandoning sin. Paul used this word with such a meaning (2 Cor. 7:8). Metanoeo (metanoia, noun) is regularly used to express the requisite state of mind necessary for the forgiveness of sin. It means to think differently or to have a different attitude toward sin and God, etc.

For conversion, strepho (strophe, noun), the root word, is used twice: Matt. 18:3, “Unless you become converted and become as little children you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven”; John 12:40, “become converted, and I will heal them.” The preposition prefix epi occurs on the word in the other passages where the sense of conversion is expressed. The basic idea of the word is to turn, and in most passages, where it denotes conversion, it is used in the active voice.

The Usage of These Words in the New Testament. In two passages in the New Testament both of these words occur, and in both cases the word for repentance precedes the other. Acts 3:19, “Therefore repent and turn (be converted) in order that your sins may be blotted out, so that seasons of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord”; Acts 26:20, “that they should repent and turn to God and perform deeds worthy (i.e., expressive) of repentance.”

In the above quotations we note that both words are used to describe an experience which has two aspects, namely that of turning away from displeasing God to pleasing him. And both words are used to denote the human volition and act by which man, convicted of sin by the Holy Spirit, determines to make his life conform to the will of God. Regeneration and justification are terms that denote God’s part in transforming an individual, while the words faith, repentance and conversion are used to express man’s necessary response to Christ and God if regeneration is to be experienced.

Repentance without turning one’s life over to God does not obtain remission of sins, neither does turning one’s life over to God without repentance, as we shall indicate, bring remission of sins. Thus it is obvious that the two words deal with the right commitment of one’s self to God with the definite intent of doing his will as long as life lasts. But before one makes such a life-transforming and epoch-making decision he of necessity must have faith, believing that God “rewards those who seek him” (Heb. 11:6). An example of this is cited in Acts 11:21, “a great number that believed turned to the Lord.”

The Emphasis Placed on Repentance in the New Testament.Mark 1:4, 5: “John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance [i.e., a baptism expressive of repentance, genitive of description in Greek] for the forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea and all the people of Jerusalem were going out to him, and, confessing their sins, they were being baptized in the river Jordan.”

Luke 3:7–14: “Who warned you, you serpent’s brood, to escape from the wrath to come? See that you do something to show that your hearts are really changed [metanoias]! Don’t start thinking that you can say to yourselves, ‘We are Abraham’s children,’ for I tell you that God could produce children of Abraham out of these stones! The ax already lies at the root of the tree, and the tree that fails to produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”

“Then the crowds would ask him, ‘Then what shall we do?’ And his answer was, ‘The man who has two shirts must share with the man who has none, and the man who has food must do the same.’ ”

“Some of the tax collectors also came to him to be baptized, and they asked him, ‘Master, what are we to do?’ ‘You must not demand more than you are entitled to,’ he replied.”

“And the soldiers asked him, ‘And what are we to do?’ ‘Don’t bully people, don’t bring false charges, and be content with your pay,’ he replied” (J. B. Phillips’ translation).

Matt. 3:5–12 is closely parallel to the statement in Mark and Luke, except that Luke has gone into greater detail in pointing out how the crowds, the tax collectors, and the soldiers were to demonstrate genuine repentance in their respective spheres of activity in society by using their time, talents, substance, and social position to serve others.

All three of the synoptic writers, we note, picture John the Baptist as being adamant in demanding real repentance and insisting on the expression of it in everyday living. They made it clear that being a descendant of Abraham was not enough, that fleshly descent would not abate God’s wrath. Any Israelite who did not repent became subject to the severe judgment of God. But apparently John also preached the necessity of openly and publicly confessing sins before or at the time of baptism, for both Mark and Matthew state that the baptismal candidates were confessing their sins. Furthermore, the repentance that was demanded was not to be only personal and negative, a cessation of sinning, but it was also to be social and postive.

But we are indebted mostly to Luke for the detailed and specific spelling out of how one’s repentance should and can be expressed in helpful acts of service to others. Jesus, like John, stressed the need of repentance and true conversion. “By their fruits you shall know them. Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 7:20, 21).

Repentance a Prerequisite to Baptism in the New Testament. Wherever any details are given either by direct statement or by inference, repentance (also faith) was regarded as a necessary prerequisite to baptism, according to the New Testament record. In Acts 2:38 the priority of repentance to baptism is stated very definitely: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.” And certainly it can be stated with less fear of contradiction that repentance was always regarded as a necessary prerequisite to forgiveness as the above passage implies. Note also Luke 13:5; 24:27; Acts 8:22; 17:30.

The Philippian jailer demonstrated his repentance before being baptized by his washing and treating the wounds of Paul and Silas (Acts 16:33). And since baptism in apostolic times was a public confession of faith in Christ it was very unlikely that anyone who had not repented and experienced regeneration would submit to baptism. For both among Jews and Gentiles hostility to the point of severe persecution at times was experienced by new converts to Christianity. Social pressure was so intense against becoming a Christian that people would not have had the courage to break with family and community traditions and customs unless the grace of God had been experienced in their lives. And repentance was a necessary prerequisite to that.

A correct interpretation of two expressions in the Greek New Testament throws additional light on this phase of the subject. One, baptisma metanoias, baptism of repentance, occurs four times, Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 13:24; 19:4. The word translated repentance in this phrase is in the genitive case and is descriptive in function. It was a repentance baptism, i.e., the baptism was characterized by and expressive of repentance. And without question the Lukan context in which the phrase occurs makes it very definite that baptism was not administered without some evidence of repentance. The Pharisees and Sadducees, the religious and political leaders at that time, who came to John for baptism, were called a “brood of vipers” and were told to “bear fruits that befit repentance” (RSV, Luke 3:7–8). Or in other words, John refused to baptize them on the grounds that they were not fit candidates for it. “John demands proof from these men of the new life before he administers baptism to them” (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, vol. I, p. 8).

The other expression is in Matt. 3:11 and is translated in the RSV, “I baptize you with (in, Greek) water for repentance.” The Greek preposition, translated for above, is eis, and is used to denote cause at times in the Greek of the first century and in the New Testament. Our word for can be used to express cause; for instance, “He was arrested for stealing.” In at least four Modern Speech translations eis is translated as having causal significance in Matt. 3:11. In Weymouth it is on profession of, in Goodspeed it is in token of, in Williams it is to picture and in Phillips it is as a sign of; all of these are causal in force.

(The most exhaustive and recent scholarly discussion on the causal use of eis in Matt. 3:11 and in the Greek of New Testament times is found in the Journal of Biblical Literature. Four articles appeared on the subject, three in 1951 in vol. LXX, and one in 1952, vol. LXXI. Two were by Ralph Marcus of the University of Chicago, two by myself. Numerous examples from secular and sacred Greek were cited to illustrate how eis was used with casual significance.)

Repentance and Conversion in Everyday Life. As is generally known, people do not repent and become converted until they know that they are sinners and that they need the Saviour. Hence as a precursor to salvation, people of necessity must become informed of the salient elements of the Gospel. LIntil they realize that they are shortchanging themselves and are jeopardizing their future, that they have brought the eternal wrath of God upon themselves, there is little likelihood of their becoming convicted and turning to Christ as Savior. Consequently there is urgency that every means available should be used to proclaim and to live the Gospel so as to lay the groundwork for the Holy Spirit to use the truth so disseminated to induce conviction and conversion. Jesus depicted graphically and bluntly the terrible doom that awaits the impenitent: “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (Matt. 25:46).

Not only do men need to know that their sins will bring the inescapable judgment of God upon themselves, but also that they can never enjoy life in its fullness here and now until they become converted and experience God’s marvelous transforming grace. Jesus offered a better existence when he declared, “I came that they may have life and have it abundantly” (John 10:10). And he promised: “that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full … and your sorrow will turn into joy … and no one will take your joy from you” (John 15:11; 16:21, 22). And the Apostle Paul described this experience in these words: “Wherefore if any one is in Christ he is a new creature; the old has passed away, behold it has become new” (2 Cor. 5:17).

The only normal man is the converted man. Only then is he most free from the tensions and frustrations of life. He is most likely to be at peace with both God and men. Then only does he enjoy in its fullness a clear conscience and freedom from guilt and fear. For the first time he is living in harmony with God’s will for his life. The realization that God’s favor is upon him and that “all things will work together for his good” cheers his spirit and fills his life with joyful expectancy. Like the Psalmist he visualizes as his possession the “goodness and mercy” of God and expects to “dwell in his house forever.”

Erik Routley in The Gift of Conversion in describing the benefits of conversion has stated: “Personality is not blurred or made negative in conversion. On the contrary, the converted man is more of a person than he was. The tension between what he is and what he would wish to appear to his neighbors is eased, and the result is a simpler, more direct, more clearly drawn personality. Confusion is replaced by integration and harmony.” In Galations 5:23 the Apostle Paul has mentioned nine exceedingly precious acquisitions of life and character that become one’s immediate or potential possession when he is truly converted: “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” How lovely life would be if we and all our associates always manifested such gracious characteristics!

Sinners, turn, why will you die?

God, your Saviour, ask you—Why?

He who did your souls retrieve,

Died himself that you might live.

Will you let him die in vain?

Crucify your Lord again?

Why, you ransomed sinners, why

Will you slight his grace and die?

—John Wesley

Bibliography: W. D. Chamberlain, The Meaning of Repentance; R. O. Ferm, The Psychology of Christian Conversion; E. Price, The Burden Is Light; E. Routley, The Gift of Conversion.

Former Professor of New Testament

Northern Baptist Theological Seminary

Chicago, Illinois

Effective Christian witness springs from Spirit-filled wells, not from broken cisterns; from a divinely given revelation accepted by faith and acted on in obedience, not from accumulated human wisdom or erudite reasoning.

Israel had forsaken God and the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah saying that they, “went after worthlessness, and became worthless … for my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns, that can hold no water” (Jer. 2:5, 13).

Let us beware today lest that which should be a stream of living water proceeding from a Spirit-filled life should in fact prove to be the parched ground surrounding a broken cistern!

In his infinite wisdom God has placed Christians in the world to witness to his saving power. Neither the Christian nor the Church is the agent of redemption, rather they are witnesses to God’s redemptive act in Christ.

Therefore, the Christian and the Church are the channels of the Gospel, the instruments of witness, the repositories of truth to be passed on to others—likened in the Scriptures to wells of living water and streams of blessing. What then can transform a cistern of spiritual life and witness into a broken repository of nothingness? Certainly three things—unbelief, neglect and disobedience.

Unbelief stretches back into the dim shadows of antiquity. “Yea, hath God said”? was the root of man’s downfall in the Garden and continues to blight class rooms and pulpits today.

“Thus says the Lord of hosts: … To whom shall I speak and give warning, that they may hear? Behold, their ears are closed, they cannot listen: behold, the word of the Lord is to them an object of scorn, they take no pleasure in it” (Jer. 6:9, 10). Do these words spoken through Jeremiah have relevance for our time? Surely they can be applied today!

Jeremiah speaks to us again: “The wise men shall be put to shame, they shall be dismayed and taken; lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord, and what wisdom is in them?” (Jer. 8:9).

Do we not need to hear and heed these words of that prophet: “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you, filling you with vain hopes; they speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They say continually to those who despise the word of the Lord, ‘It shall be well with you’; and to everyone who stubbornly follows his own heart, they say, ‘No evil shall come upon you’ ” (Jer. 23:16).

God’s word is not to be trifled with with impunity: “Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? says the Lord.… Let him who has my word speak my word faithfully” (Jer. 23:24, 28).

Do we long for power as we live and as we witness? Then let us pray to be delivered from unbelief, accepting the Holy Scriptures at face value: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer which breaks the rock in pieces” (Jer. 23:29)?

The sin of unbelief empties the cistern through the crack it has created. Following the cunning devices of men who deny the Bible may cater to our own ego and titillate our pride but the cistern of spiritual power is broken and only the dregs of a sandy futility remain.

Neglect. The first cousin of unbelief is that spiritual indifference which pays scant heed to God’s truth and blithely goes its disinterested way.

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells of God’s revelation of his truth through the prophets and then through His Son. He depicts Him as the Creator of the universe, the One who “reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power” (Heb. 1:3). Then he exclaims: “Therefore we must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For if the message declared by angels was valid and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?” (Heb. 2:1–3).

Neglect and indifference are just as deadly in their effect as open unbelief. We who know the truth—what are we doings about it? for ourselves; for others?

But God holds us responsible for the truth that He has imparted, and neglect in no way invalidates that responsibility.

Disobedience also takes its deadly toll. The cistern of spiritual power is broken by a disobedience which turns its back on the divine command in favor of our own personal preferences. Strange that we recognize the validity of a military command and recognize the necessity of obedience while we regard lightly the divine command and make its execution optional! Judas disobeyed God and his judgment followed (Jer. 29:19).

The writer knows gifted men who once appeared destined to become mighty channels of blessing, only to have the cistern of spiritual power cracked to its very bottom by the sin of disobedience.

Christianity is, thank God, a positive religion and one can mar its witness by emphasizing the negative. But Christianity is also a religion of, “Thou shalt nots,” and woe to him who disregards these warning signs on life’s road!

The zealous Paul had great advantages of learning, citizenship and social standing. But the risen Christ on the Damascus road gave him a commission which ultimately involved giving up all he had counted dear. To Agrippa he said: “I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision” (Acts 26:19), and he was not.

Suppose Paul had been disobedient. Suppose that he had counted the cost of discipleship and found it too great to pay; what a tragedy for his age and for succeeding generations, for the cistern of his spiritual power would have been broken from top to bottom by disobedience.

Have we been disobedient to the heavenly vision? Has disobedience marred God’s plan for our lives? Are we living right now with no more spiritual power than a broken cistern has water?

Unbelief, Neglect and Disobedience shatter the cistern of life but the cracks often begin with the supposedly “minor” sins of pride, selfishness, temper, jealousy, impurity and other similar sins.

Let any Christian, any minister of the Gospel, ask himself about his greatest need. An honest answer for many will be “spiritual power,” with its attending dependence on organizations, programs, etc. The cistern has been broken but we hate to admit it. The water of spiritual power has drained away and we try to be content with the sands of futile human endeavor.

“He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water’ ” (John 7:38).

L. NELSON BELL

Doomsday Week End

DISASTER PREDICTIONS POPULAR—This business of predicting individual or universal disaster has always had a certain popularity.… This superstition (or science) has prevailed since the dawn of man’s history. It can still depress the stock markets of a great Eastern nation, cause travel bookings to fall by 70 per cent.… Since this particular combination of planets has not occurred since the days of GENGHIS KHAN … we may hope that Indian astrologers will not become quite so excited again for a very long time.—London Daily Telegraph.

ACCIDENTAL POSSIBILITY—Who are we to make light of doomsday forecasts in an era marked by man’s mastery of means to destroy himself and his civilization in some nuclear doomsday of his own making? Nor would we have to await another century or so for a similar conjunction of the planets. An accidental triggering of intercontinental missiles might do the job effectively and quickly, not to mention the dreaded possibility of a calculated attack in some cataclysmic Armageddon.—Washington Evening Star.

PROOF COMES TOO LATE—There is a danger in prophecy of disasters; it is one form of prediction that requires some form of spectacular proof. Recall the plight of William Miller, the leader of Second Adventists in America, who forecast the final coming in 1843.—Washington Post.

CHAOS: FULL DETAILS—A London news-vendor’s billboard.

LESS CONCERN—The last time there was such a conjunction of planets was in February, 1524. Astrologers predicted the end of the world. There was panic in Europe, and many people built arks. England was fairly calm. Western astrologers seem less worried this time. By Western computations, there are seven planets aligned, not eight; and they are in the sign of Aquarius, not Capricorn. Even Brigadier R. C. W. G. Firebrace, former President of the Astrological Association and President of the College of Psychic Science, who does use the Eastern zodiac, is much less pessimistic than the Indians.… “No great disaster. But the initiation of a new phase in world affairs. I think it’s going to be a … difficult year.”—London Observer.

THE GOLDEN STREETS—Despite their professed fears that the end is near, Hindu holy men, astrologers, palmists and almanac sellers were looking to an earthly future. Sitting cross-legged offering prophecies, the holy men and others were reaping a rich harvest—in cash.—Associated Press, Detroit News.

FAITH IN ASTROLOGY—Most of the population of the astrology-minded Hindu world expect something dire.… Contrary-minded are Buddhist astrologers who cite the phenomenon as a good omen of peace and prosperity for the Buddhist New Year which begins Monday.… But astrologers the globe over are predicting everything from a rainy weekend to the Last Judgment.… An estimated 30 million Americans have varying degrees of faith in astrology.…—Frederich M. Winship, Los Angeles Herald-Examiner.

MUSLIM LEADERS DISSENT—Muslim religious leaders … ridiculed the prophecy by Indian astrologers.… Sheikh Ahmed Haridi Mufti, the highest religious authority on Islam, said yesterday that according to the teachings of Islam, ‘judgment day’ will be preceded by “a return to earth of Jesus, the son of Mary.”—Amrita Bazar Patrika (Calcutta), India.

STARS IN THE WEST—Millions of people here, no doubt, will continue to believe … that the stars in their courses influence their life for good or evil. But are they so very different from the men in other countries?… One has only to look at astrological forecasts in the mass circulation dailies in the West and the avidity with which millions of readers turn to these.…—The Times of India (Bombay).

END AFAR OFF—Britain’s Aetherius Society announced yesterday that the world has 30,000,000,000 years to go before it ends.…—National Herald (Lucknow, India).

ASTROLOGY RIGHT OR WRONG—Don’t believe the astrology columns this weekend.… The Ottawa Citizen intends to publish Monday. Watch for the astrology column.—STARE COTE, Ottawa (Canada) Citizen.

ONE LAST FLING—Two 16-year-old boys told authorities today they stole a white Cadillac for a trip to New Mexico because the world was coming to an end.—UPI news item.

THE PREDICTABLE FUTURE—We assert with unprecedented confidence that the world did not end yesterday and will not end today—probably.—San Francisco Chronicle.

THE SCRIPTURE STANDS—We are still alive this morning—the soothsayers and the Jeremiahs notwithstanding.… But as we look at the present-day world, we cannot help recalling the solemn words of the Old Testament: “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth.… And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth … for the earth is filled with violence.”—The Indian Express (New Delhi).

DOOM WILL COME—The Day of the Lord will come; it will come, unexpected as a thief. On that day the heavens will disappear with a great rushing sound, the elements will disintegrate in flames, and the earth with all that is in it will be laid bare. Since the whole universe is to break up in this way, think what sort of people you ought to be, what devout and dedicated lives you should live! Look eagerly for the coming of the Day of God and work to hasten it on; that day will set the heavens ablaze until they fall apart, and will melt the elements in flames. But we have his promise, and look forward to new heavens and a new earth, the home of justice.—2 Peter 3:10–13, NEB.

Ads, Novels, & Paradise

Deep in the artists’ quarter, down an old brick street, he found the auberge. The silver, three-pointed star of his Mercedes floated to a stop with stately grace on the ancient tile terrace. Entering the cool dimness of the old stone walls, he found a primitive antique chair near the smoked timber of the fireplace. The apple-green goblets, the flowered pottery, put him in the mood for rich, cream-and-butter cooking. Entranced by the aromas he sat waiting. His thoughts drifted back to the enchanted voyage: the painting of color and lights, the colossus ship bellowing its deep basso blast, the long glide through a confetti rainbow to the sleepy southern waters …

If, at this point, the traveler noticed a corpse in the corner, you would be reassured. The auberge passage was only standard atmosphere for a thriller. But imagine a novel continuing with the cream-and-butter fare. The luscious language is not original, of course. The paragraph is a blend of excerpts from the travel ads in one recent magazine.

I love them, and would never dream of traveling to discover what these mystical auberges are really like.

The same magazine reflects quite a different view of life in its reviews of books and plays. I note that one new novel finds a savior figure in a pornographer. He hears in the cynical obscenities of his customers the cry of man seeking a lost paradise.

It might be worth a try to get the ad-men to write novels and the novelists to write ads. I wouldn’t suggest having steamship companies sponsor French novels, however.

The slick Utopia of eternal youth and beauty found only in Ad-landis seems to offer the paradise that the messy pornographers of modern fiction have lost. The contrast could not be more dramatic. Ads are works of art. No disorder, filth or death—only dreams come true. Novels are works of art, too. No meaning, satisfaction or fulfillment—only misery and disgust in being human.

I took my magazine to Pastor Peterson. He didn’t agree that we need a more balanced view of man. Neither extreme is drastic enough, he said. The paradise of the ads dreams of too little. The Christian hope sees a risen Christ and a new heaven and earth. The hell of the novels is too mild. It sees misery, degradation, and despair, but not guilt under the wrath of God.

Christian preachers need more realism than novelists or admen.

EUTYCHUS

Critics’ Verdict: Mixed

I have just read the January 19 issue, and could not help wondering whether the person who wrote the first article (“Ambassadors, Not Diplomats”) had ever laid eyes on the next piece (“Against Cowardice”).

The Dibelius excerpt seemed … to be a shining example of all the lead article spoke against: This is not to say that the Dibelius sermon was not worthwhile reading, but how does it qualify as Gospel preaching, as “preaching up Christ Jesus”? A quick scanning does not even reveal a mention of Christ, nor any exposition of the Gospel. In fact, even the text seems to be a pretext.…

NICHOLAS MAY

Trinity Lutheran

Toledo, Ohio

Dr. Dibelius’ sermon is excellent in my opinion. Let us all do what he says, “Pray, pray, pray for God’s grace to be brave in Him.”

ALVIN KIRCHHOEFER

Wisconsin Rapids, Wisc.

Otto Dibelius is a bishop and a notable preacher. Yet his so-called sermon is hardly more than a well-written essay.…

Dr. Kerr is quoted as saying that we are sent to preach salvation, redemption, pardon (forgiveness of sins?), resurrection, the Gospel and Christ. Yet with the exception of a veiled reference to the Resurrection (“the faith of Easter”), Dr. Dibelius deals with none of these heavenly themes. He speaks of many men, … but of Jesus Christ we find no reference.…

DUNCAN S. STEVENSON

Emmaus Lutheran Church

Dorsey, Ill.

Congratulations on “Against Cowardice.” … This sermon shook me down to the soles of my feet. What a message! What illustrations! The rest of the series will have to be very good to top this one.

“Ambassadors, Not Diplomats” was also very much in the midst of time. A wonderful issue.

THOMAS J. BUCKTON

Herrin, Ill.

An article that has stirred my heart to the depths.…

H. HILDEBRAND

Principal

Briarcrest Bible Institute

Caronport, Saskatchewan

Bravo and amen to the proposal and purpose expressed in your editorial “Ambassadors, Not Diplomats.” It is high time and most fitting that CHRISTIANITY TODAY open the door to our homiletical shame and point the way to our faithful resurgence.

As one who listens to a guest preacher every other week, I substantiate the truth of your attack. As one who preaches, I pray a deepening from your challenge.

ALLEN F. BRAY

Chaplain

Culver Military Academy

Culver, Ind.

Face Bitter Fact

Your article (or conversation) “Revival for the Evangelical Press?” (Jan. 19 issue) both delighted and disturbed me. Recently I completed a master’s thesis on the subject of “Christian Fiction for Teen-agers.” My findings agree basically with Dr. Henry’s statement, “… the evangelical remnant is so withdrawn from the mind-set of the day it artificially handles modern life … and … does not speak to our times.” I would enlarge upon this and say that this is not limited to “the evangelical remnant.”

What disturbs me is Dr. Wirt’s charge that “in order to appear to be aware of ‘the changing social situation’ the Christian writer is being pressured to mix filth into his work.” This is undoing that which has just been done. If we are to “enter into the mind-set of the day,” “speak to our times,” it may well be necessary to mix “filth” into our work—not for its own sake, but in order to be realistic.… What need is there for the Gospel if modern man is lilywhite, untouched by “filth”? (And what is “filth”?) … Does the saved man never again have an impure thought? He certainly does! Now he can do something about it, but the problem hasn’t vanished into thin air. How are these things to be presented? As Christian writers, let’s come to the point, stop lifting our skirts daintily aside and face facts squarely.…

MRS. JANE VAN STONE

Shoshoni, Wyo.

For The Record

This note is in reference to an editorial, “Why Not A Federated Campus?” printed in the January 19 issue.

We are happy that Taylor was included … even though it was incorrectly listed as a Methodist college.

Taylor University was organized … by a group of Methodist lay preachers but has never been an affiliate of the Methodist denomination; … since the early 1900’s it has been … interdenominational. Taylor University is operated by a … board of directors, members of nine denominations, and all thoroughly evangelical.

Our student body represents 30 denominations from 40 states and 10 foreign countries.…

EDWARD W. BRUERD

Taylor University

Upland, Ind.

Enter The Village Priest

(Re “Southern Travellers,” “Brotherhood in Rome,” and “Peace Corps Baptists,” News, Jan. 5 issue): In good faith and candor, may I suggest that the above mentioned articles are definitely misleading?

The following excerpts from an article titled “Foreign Aid in Colombia Promotes Clerical Power” (Church and State, Dec. 1961) certainly is a very poor manifestation of the Pope’s statement, “We are brothers in Christ,” or President Kennedy’s “jesting” statement, “I’ll be your John the Baptist.” I quote from the article: “News that the Peace Corpsmen in rural Colombia are to be billeted with Roman Catholic priests appears to supply the final clincher as to the fundamentally sectarian nature of the operation in that country. The Corpsmen will obviously be under the sponsorship and tutelage of the village priest. It is in the rural areas …, that the Evangelical Confederation of Colombia lists 116 known dead as a result of the anti-Protestant persecution there.… This act of official deference to the village priest will undoubtedly be regarded as placing the stamp of United States approval upon his anti-Protestant behavior.… One of the tasks assigned to the Peace Corpsmen is the building of schools whose teaching program will be controlled by the Roman Catholic Church. Some … in areas where more than 200 Protestant schools have been closed in recent years as a result of a concordat between the Vatican and the Colombian government.…”

Yet, in view of these tragic conditions, a Dec. 9, 1961, news item under a “Vatican City” dateline reads: “Pope John XXIII made a powerful plea for Christian unity … into one church, under the authority of the Roman Pope.”

Have we reached the low ebb of American statesmanship when the Congress will submit to scuttling the First Amendment to our Constitution by flagrantly subsidizing Roman Catholicism, or any other religion, in effort to defeat the tyranny of Communism? May God forbid!

MRS. J. G. HANLIN

Oklahoma City, Okla.

Limited Concept

Just what church would Mr. J. A. Paulson (Eutychus, Dec. 22 issue) have “your agitated critical readers” attend who “are still going to ‘the church of their choice,’ after six years in the wonderful wilderness of words”?—the church of his choice?

In the practical world of dollars and cents (sense) we also have a choice of denominations, albeit at the possible risk of finding some counterfeit. One wonders if because of this situation certain brethren would prefer their salaries in undenominational “legal” tender.

C. M. GEORGE

Quakertown, Pa.

Evangelical Mongrels

So far as Philip E. Hughes’ article goes (Current Religious Thought, Jan. 19 issue), it is a clear and essential statement of what Anglo-Catholics believe, but I wonder about the evangelical statement. How many evangelicals would go that theological road? I have yet to find even fractional agreement among evangelicals nowadays—the reason being that the true evangelical is a vanishing breed that has in recent years been married to the so-called broad churchman thereby losing his pedigree.…

RICHARD TURNER

St. Andrews Church

Poison, Mont.

It is true that the liberal-Protestant-broad-church clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church often call themselves “evangelicals,” but the beliefs and practices of these men are not evangelical.… P. E. liberals, Anglo-Catholics, and “shades-in-between” may disagree on many things in their own denomination, but they are solidly united on one subject-evangelicalism (derisively dubbed “fundamentalism” by these clergy) has no place in the “respectable” and “progressive” Protestant Episcopal Church.

CHARLES E. MONAGHAN

Portsmouth, Va.

Still Spirit-Filled

Our assembly stands for loving cooperation with all the servants of God, whatever nationality they belong to, Jews or Gentiles, who were called of God to serve him here. If there have been some who made mistakes, it is not for us to judge them, much less to draw attention to any faults on their part and to enlarge upon those. We recognize our debt to the labors of dear consecrated Gentile Christians, who, under God, were the means of pointing us to our Messiah and of praying us through to salvation.

We take this opportunity to correct a misrepresentation—owing to a misunderstanding—which occurred in your article on “Christian Witness in Israel” (Aug. 28 issue).… You stated that there was no Hebrew-Christian Church as yet in the country, and followed on immediately to describe our work here, designating it “Pentecostal” in brackets. We, however, view our work as an altogether independent, indigenous, i.e., Israeli church, rooted in the country with regard to membership and leadership, since almost all our members, including our pastor, are Jews. We see in our church the rebirth of “the churches in Judea which are in Christ” of the first century A.D., just as the state of Israel can be viewed as the rebirth of the nation prior to its dispersion.

However, as to Mr. I. Ben-Maeir’s presumptuous statement about me in his letter (Nov. 24 issue) that I am no longer “Pentecostal” since coming to Israel: I wish to make it plain that I have always believed and have never ceased to believe, that nothing short of the experience of the first-century Christians, following the Pentecostal outpouring, is to be our aim in building the Church in Israel. Though we do not append any names to our assembly except that of “Israeli” and “Messianic” (i.e., Christian), yet we preach the Gospel and enjoin on our converts to seek the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as exemplified for us in the Book of Acts, Chapters 2; 8; 10, and 19.

W. Z. KOFSMANN

Pastor

Messianic Assembly of Israel

Jerusalem, Israel

Speaking of the Roman clergy, the late G. K. Chesterton said: “The direction of preferment should begin after seminary with the office of Bishop, and only after years of accumulated wisdom and experience should it result in promotion into the parish ministry.”

In the contemporary scene, some students see a movement that, if unchecked, could bring some very undesirable results. I refer to the movement of trained people away from the areas of difficult work, up (?) or into positions of programming and administration; in other words, the movement of skilled people from the areas of the particular and the specific into the areas of the vague and the general.

I have a dentist friend. He has applied at several dental supply houses for a position to sell and demonstrate dental equipment. He is no longer interested (after only a few short years) in the drudgery of office hours, appointments, human beings. This is prosaic and wearying—and no place for a person of talent in search of status, power, and position. He anxiously awaits the chance to leave his working profession for an administrative, selling position. He tells me that within his profession such a change represents promotion, such a change is up on the ladder of preferment. But is this really true? And it so, who says so? And if so, is this as it should be?

Obviously I cannot jump from this one incident to a conclusion about all of life. But I can note something very similar in some areas of the Protestant ministry. Here there is what may well be called a movement away from the parish into areas that have little or nothing to do with ordination vows. Along with this movement away from the parish is also developing the idea that this is a promotion up the ladder of preferment, that those who prefer to remain in the vineyard, both early and late, are untalented dullards capable of only lesser things. But again, is this really true? And if so, who says so? And if so, is this as it should be?

The most obvious movement to be seen within some areas of the Protestant ministry is the one that leads to the college campus. Now I am sure we are aware that “God moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform.” I am also sure we are all aware of how very understanding the Holy Spirit is in that he “always calls to larger parishes at higher stipends.” My question with regard to this movement is simply this: Is such a move up or down the ladder of preferment? If it is up I should like to know who says so. If it is down I should like to know whence the cause of self-immolation among the brethren. Surely it cannot be maintained that college campuses are the place where all the great issues of life are being met and debated and that therefore they require our best and most talented men. Except for visiting lectures, most campuses (especially church-affiliated campuses) are graveyards of unanimity, peace, and quiet.

My second concern has to do with the results, spiritual and material, that flow from vacancies left by men on the way up (?) the ladder of preferment. Congregations that are left without a pastor simply cease being a church and become a religious club. Such necessities as faith, discipleship, stewardship simply do not flourish in the absence of a pastor, or under an absentee pastor—a supply pastor from another church or from a college campus. As for the material side of this problem: How many congregations will continue in good spirit to support a denomination that allows its ministers to crowd away from the “lesser” tasks of preaching, marrying, burying, and baptizing for the “larger work of the Church”—teaching, or administrative positions within the hierarchy? In plain words, does not this movement up (?) cut off the source of revenue?

Thirdly, I am also concerned with an attitude that is beginning to develop regarding what I consider to be my sacred calling. All through seminary I was assured (and I still have no real reason to doubt it) that the parish ministry is the highest of all high callings. But now I find myself in this present movement the object of such remarks as, “Good that you are comfortable where you are” … “nice that you find your work rewarding” … this from those who are on the move up (?).

Dr. Jacques Barzun of Columbia University has addressed himself to this same problem in the teaching profession, that is, teachers who desert the classroom for “research” have not been promoted and thus have no reason for condescension toward those who remain to plod at mundane chores. Should not something similar be done to reverse the trend away from the parish?

The “macerated ministry” was the subject of much debate in one of our national journals some time ago. Is not the subject of the “decimated ministry” a part of this same problem? While America experiences a population explosion, many churches are without proper leadership because ordained men have moved up (?) to teach, to sell and program, and to administer the organization. Is it not time now to “Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth laborers into his harvest,” if not to remain in the parish at least to admit that one becomes defrocked when one moves from an active to a passive role while so much remains to be done?

Business And Life

BASIC AND VALID—Why, from a Christian point of view, should one broadcast religious programs? This is a matter in which I for a long time have had an interest and a concern. Let me as a Christian layman put this in the simplest of terms stating my convictions. First, we should use all practical means to propagate and to give witness to the good news our Lord has provided for us. Mass communications by radio and television are such means. Second, the purpose should be to point men to Jesus Christ. Third, the objective should be to develop in our fellow man a knowledge and an acceptance of His saving grace. These are the basic and the valid reasons.—Dr. ELMER W. ENGSTROM, President, Radio Corporation of America, in remarks at the annual meeting of the NCC Broadcasting and Film Commission.

ALL THE SAME—Don’t ask me please if I’m planning to change my religion. I have no guilts about myself, my religion or my color. I was brought up a Protestant and no matter what religion a person is, he worships the same God. I don’t think changing my religion is going to give me any more peace of mind or inner content, and it certainly isn’t going to change my color. I’m satisfied where I am.—EARTHA KITT, Hollywood star and songstress, who played the feature role in 1960 in the Presbyterian missionary film The Mark of the Hawk.

LAW AND HONESTY—We have always told and will continue to tell our members to live up to the letter of the law.—DAVID DEERSON, chairman of the Board of the New York-Bronx Retail Meat and Food Dealers, Inc., when told that the Department of Markets would seek an ordinance to prohibit dealers from concealing excessive fat by adding beef blood to ground beef. (New York authorities confiscated packages of hamburger containing 90 percent fat, which costs two cents a pound.)

THE CLAMOR FOR CHANGE—In college and seminary during the 1930s, I was persuaded that I had joined a gallant, prophetic band when I myself became a liberal-socialist. And I recall the hope which sustains every prophet, whether true or false, namely, the eventual triumph of his maligned minority view. Well, that earlier ‘prophetic minority’ has been in the saddle now for at least a generation. The Communists … now control a third of the world, and the Fabian Socialists … hold the reins in most of the other two-thirds. If the triumph of an idea is itself the index of prophetic truth, we must be living in the Golden Age! Except that we aren’t! We live in an age of chains.… Either something has gone terribly wrong with the ‘prophetic vision’ of the liberals and progressives, or else their vision was not really prophetic.… The Biblical prophets never thundered for change just for the sake of change. Their visions of the future were built upon insights and principles rooted in the past. Insofar as they offered something new, it was a fresh revelation of verities at once old and new, because eternal. The cry of the Biblical prophets was not simply ‘come up’ but also ‘go back’ to principles and values that were being betrayed and lost.… Liberalism is proving to be morally, intellectually, and spiritually bankrupt, therefore a false prophet. If ‘the conservative demonstration’ can rise to the stature of its inherent genius, it can prove itself the truer prophet of our century.—The Rev. EDWARD W. GREENFIELD, Chaplain of the Church of Reflection, Knott’s Berry Farm, Buena Park, California.

BETTER HEADS—The record of the beer industry during the past decade has been one of slow growth, declining profits, and increasing concentration. Total beer sales advanced only 6% from 1950 to 1960 because the prime age group of beer consumers, young adults between 20 and 39 years of age, remained almost static.… The combined effect of greater overall growth in consumption, continued concentration, and better pricing should permit the leading brewers to operate at higher rates of capacity than in the past and to achieve better profit margins. Between 1960 and 1965 they should average an annual growth of close to 5% in barrel output, of 6% in sales, and of 7% to 8% in earnings.—Fortnightly Review prepared by Carl M. Loeb, Rhoades & Co., New York.

WHAT’S ‘GOOD BUSINESS’?—In the fiscal year that ended last June 30, Playboy magazine … grossed $8, 295, 193 and has a pre-tax profit to sales ratio of nearly 22%—good for any business.… The average net paid circulation in the first six months of 1961 was 1, 223, 328.—Business Week, Jan. 20 issue.

FAITH’S POWER—Faith can move a slab of granite.—From the Warner Brothers film The Young Ones.

THE MINISTRY OF WORDS—We live in a country in which words are mostly used to cover the sleeper, not to wake him up.—JAMES BALDWIN, “As Much Truth As One Can Bear,” The New York Times Book Review.

Rudolf Bultmann claims that the New Testament teaches a three-storied universe which modern science has made incredible. Therefore, to preserve Christianity in our day, the New Testament “mythology” must be reinterpreted.

Bultmann writes, “The cosmology of the New Testament is essentially mythical in character. The world is viewed as a three-storied structure, with the earth in the center, the heaven above, and the underworld beneath.… Supernatural forces intervene in the course of nature.… Miracles are by no means rare.”

This introductory statement to his essay New Testament and Mythology, Bultmann expands in considerable detail. The idea of a Holy Spirit, or spirits generally, the mysterious cleansing effect of baptism and the still more mysterious Eucharist, the doctrine that death is a punishment for sin, and the resurrection of Jesus—all these are mythical and incredible. Bultmann locates the source of this mythology in Jewish apocalyptic literature and in the redemptive myths of Gnosticism. Indeed, from Gnosticism came the idea that Jesus was not a mere human being, but a God-man. All in all, Bultmann considers the New Testament to be pervasively mythical.

Therefore, the New Testament as it stands cannot be accepted. Modern science has now discovered the real truth about nature, and the scientific laws of causality prevent modern man from believing in any divine intervention. “All our thinking today is shaped irrevocably by modern science. A blind acceptance of the New Testament mythology would be arbitrary.… It would involve a sacrifice of the intellect which could have only one result—a curious form of schizophrenia and insincerity.”

Fortunately (as Bultmann sees it) “there is nothing specifically Christian in the mythical view of the world as such.” The real gospel, which even the modern man needs, can be obtained by reinterpreting and demythologizing the New Testament. Then we can leave behind the fairy tales of a divine Christ and a bodily resurrection and preach the pure, powerful gospel of Heidegger’s existentialism! (When accused of imposing Heidegger’s categories on the New Testament, Bultmann should rather be startled by existentialism’s independent discovery of biblical truth!)

Bultmann’s view is open to criticism both with respect to the “mythology” of the New Testament and with respect to the state of modern science. First, his picture of the mythical world, allegedly found in the Bible, depends for some of its details on Gnostic sources. Apparently Bultmann takes over the theories of Bousset and Reitzenstein, who claimed that many Christian ideas were borrowed from the mystery religions and Hermes Trismegistus. But while these theories were popularly received in the early years of this century, when Bultmann was a student, they are today completely exploded (see for example The Origin of Paul’s Religion, by J. Gresham Machen, chapters VI, VII). If, now, the New Testament does not in fact teach the mythology of Gnosticism, this latter cannot be used as an objection to accepting the New Testament. No doubt Bultmann would reply that even so the New Testament teaches the existence of spirits, the occurrence of a resurrection, and the doctrines of heaven and hell, and this is mythology enough. To this point we shall return in a moment.

The second and more important criticism strikes closer home: Bultmann’s view of science is defective. His repeated allusions to a “causal nexus” indicate that he conceives of science in terms of eighteenth century, or, at best, nineteenth century mechanism. But science dropped the concept of causality more than a hundred years ago; and in the twentieth century Heisenberg’s indeterminacy principle seriously called in question even the idea of mechanism.

No doubt some popular evangelical writers have made too much of indeterminacy by trying to find room, as it were, for God, miracles, and free will in the random motion of the ultimate particles. But at least mechanism can no longer be confidently used as an insurmountable objection to miracles. Indeed, contemporary science cannot be confidently used in objection to anything in the New Testament because contemporary science is in a state of confusion. With the destruction of the Newtonian gravitational mechanics and the introduction of quantum theory, the splitting of the atom, the mutually incompatible formulas for light, and all the wizardry of relativity research, the result has been and still is chaos. The basic concepts of mass, inertia, energy and the like are no longer well defined; and an accepted scientific world view, to be used either for or against the New Testament, simply doesn’t exist. Bultmann’s confidence is outdated.

Furthermore, the most recent philosophy of science, operationalism, denies that science has the purpose of describing nature. According to this theory scientific laws are directions for laboratory procedure and do not give any information at all on the constitution of the world. If therefore operationalism be accepted, there could never be scientific knowledge of nature to compel abandonment of the actual New Testament picture of the world.

This is not to say, however, that no problem remains. After Bultmann’s Gnosticism is removed from the interpretation of the New Testament, the New Testament picture of the world is still not that of the “modern mind.” Indeterminists and operationalists, for all their abandonment of Bultmann’s antiquated view of science, are not about to acknowledge the Holy Spirit, or Jesus Christ as true God and true man, or angels, or devils. They still oppose the teaching of the New Testament, even if they can no longer logically oppose it on the basis of science.

To accommodate these who disbelieve in spirit, who dislike vicarious atonement, who ridicule the Lord’s return, Bultmann proposes to reinterpret the New Testament so as to accord with modern existentialism. But sober thought, whether Christian or not, must reject this fanciful reinterpretation. No better reason exists for finding Heidegger in the New Testament than for finding Hegel there. Bultmann’s method of reinterpretation is on a par with the old allegorical method. If Bultmann finds Heidegger in the New Testament, so did Philo find Plato in the Old.

Honest examination of the text disallows demythologization. The Bible plainly teaches that the Almighty Spirit created the world, that mankind disobeyed God’s commands and became guilty of God’s wrath and curse, that the second Person of the Trinity was born of the Virgin Mary in order to satisfy divine justice by his death, and that he rose from the grave the third day for our justification.

This message is offensive to the modern mind. But this is nothing new. It was offensive to the Pharisaic and Epicurean minds as well. And it will remain offensive no matter what new philosophies of science may become popular in centuries to come.

It goes without saying that the sincere Christian wants to communicate with the modern mind. But the question how to communicate is not to be answered by substituting a different message. Heidegger is not Paul or John. And however much we agonize over the difficulty of reaching our contemporaries, we want to reach them, not with the message of a passing philosophy, but with the eternal New Testament message of Christ’s satisfaction for sin.

We Quote:

“… Perhaps one of the contributions of the post-Bultmannians will be to free the new research from a use of the Heideggerian analysis which gets perilously close to absolutizing it. Otherwise, Renan’s ‘Amiable Carpenter,’ Tolstoi’s ‘Spiritual Anarchist,’ Schweitzer’s ‘Imminent Cataclysmist,’ Klausner’s ‘Unorthodox Rabbi,’ Otto’s ‘Charismatic Evangelist’ may become Marburg’s Heideggerian Christ; and the new quest may leave as its bequest an ‘existential Jesus,’ and just as the old quest broke Jesus of Nazareth loose for ecclesiastical dogma, the next few decades may find scholars trying to release the Jesus of history from existential philosophy.”—Dr. J. BENJAMIN BEDENBAUGH, Professor, Biblical Department, Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary, Columbia, South Carolina.

Twelve years have passed since my escapes from the Communists in Rumania and Hungary. For a long time I refrained from writing of these experiences for fear of reprisal on those who risked themselves to help me. But now that danger is largely past, and I would like to share this story with those who may be reminded through it of the providences of God in the lives of us all. And more than this, I share it in the hope of providing one more bit of evidence that no middle ground exists between freedom and slavery, and hence no place in these decisive days for cowardice, complacency, or compromise.

In late 1944 when Russian armies drove into the Balkans to defeat the Nazis, I was a history professor in northern Transylvania, which then belonged to Hungary. The state university where I taught was in Kolozsvar, the capital of Transylvania, a beautiful city of 100,000 inhabitants. Today the Rumanians, to whom Transylvania was given, call the city Cluj.

Since I had worked in the anti-Nazi underground, I received identification with Marshal Malinovsky’s signature on it to show that I was acceptable to the Russians. But the Russians were far from acceptable to us. Their atrocities and intrigues confirmed our fears that they would place a permanent stranglehold upon us. After a conversation with Ferenc Nagy, who was then Hungarian prime minister, I began to gather evidence of Russian activities in Transylvania. With such material we hoped to prove to the western world what Russia really was doing. Soon the files became sizeable. Names, dates, photos of unbelievable killings and riots incited—we had them all.

In April, 1946, the Russians allowed an American newspaperman to visit various Balkan cities. Each of the persons he contacted disappeared mysteriously in the months that followed. In Kolozsvar he talked with me. A few weeks later I received a written invitation to meet an American colonel in a secret rendezvous. The meeting turned out to be a Communist trap, the colonel a fake. To make sure that I would not be seized on my way home, I offered to bring five friends to a meeting the following evening. I needed time to hide the files.

Early the next morning I packed the files in a large homespun knapsack and boarded a bus going south to a small college town where I had friends. Here I left the files and careful instructions with one of the professors. Two days later, as I was returning to Kolozsvar, soldiers stopped the bus on a winding mountain road and arrested me. In a pig sty, stripped naked, I waited until the chief of the secret police arrived to take charge.

Sixty Fantastic Charges

After 17 days of torture and interrogation in the secret police headquarters in Kolozsvar, I was moved to the army prison to await trial. Sixty fantastic charges were listed against me, but the basic one was that I had worked as a spy with the American underground to overthrow the people’s democracy. Meanwhile, ironically, Russia and the United States were officially allies, and the council of their foreign ministers was meeting in Paris.

Mine was the first spy trial in the Balkans after the war, and the Communists made front-page propaganda of it. The trial lasted a month, and was recessed three times to allow time for more torture and questioning. Death was the sentence, but two new lawyers volunteered to barter for my life if I would sign over to the Communists all my properties and goods. And so the sentence was commuted to eight years’ imprisonment. In the fall of 1947, after 14 months in Kolozsvar army prison, I was led in chains through three miles of city streets to the railroad station. People, many of them my friends, gathered to watch. Their faces were full of sympathy. The “iron train” took me to the fortress prison at Gherla to serve my sentence.

A sentence to Gherla was as good as death. Each day the living dug graves for the dead. There was hopelessness in every heart and a longing to be done with the cold, the hunger, the lice, the loneliness. No one lasted long at Gherla. I struggled to stay alert and hopeful. And I prayed.

It was a pickpocket named Paul Kokas who was my deliverer. Paulie himself had only a six months’ sentence, but he said to me one day, “Professor, sometime I will help you escape.” At the moment I did not believe him. No one escaped from Gherla.

In Search Of Liberty

One December morning, two months after I had come to Gherla, a guard took me from my cell. Without explanation he brought me out through the three gates, across the open street, and into the home of the Rumanian prison director. Here I found Paulie scrubbing floors for the director’s wife, the domnisoara. Paulie had asked the domnisoara to send for me to help him. The Russians had used the house and left it in filthy conditon. The next day again we were scrubbing dirt from the parquet floors when the director came home and found me there. He was enraged that a famous prisoner was so poorly guarded. Paulie overheard the man berating his wife in the kitchen and heard the domnisoara promise not to use me again.

Quickly the plan was devised. At noon, while our guard crossed the street to get his lunch, only the domnisoara would be watching us. If she left us alone, I would slip downstairs and out the door. Paulie put my cap, coat, and shoes in the vestibule, and we waited. When the guard left, the domnisoara appeared. “Carasho, carasho,” (very good) she said in Russian and disappeared into her kitchen. In seconds I was downstairs and out of the door, the coat over my shoulders, the shoes untied on my feet. At the prison gate our guard was talking with his back to me. I turned right, toward the village. As I passed along the prison walls, a guard above called, “Psst!” The third time he called I looked up, lest the man shoot me. Instead, amazingly, he pointed to my shoes. I knelt in the shadow of the wall and tied them.

When I gained the woods beyond the town, I remembered that Gherla is on an island in the River Szamos. Avoiding the two bridges at opposite ends of the island, I tied my clothes into a bundle around my neck and plunged into the water. The Szamos River is wide and swift, and that time of year it had ice in it. I thought I would never reach the other side. Struggling, panting, clawing, I inched my way up from the river to the top of the steep wooded ridge. As I lay exhausted at the top, I heard the great siren of the prison, and looking down, I saw two lines of armed guards bicycling furiously from the prison gates toward the bridges.

What Freedom Is

High in the woods I found a shepherd’s summer but where I spent the night. There was straw in the hut, and I covered myself gratefully. For a long time I lay thinking. Certainly this night on the mountain was a turning point in my life. I saw so clearly there in the but that freedom was more than being out of prison, and that I could never be a free man unless I was free also in my soul. Free to speak the truth and free to live by it in honesty and integrity. I thanked God for saving me not only from the fortress prison of Gherla, but also from a life of compromise, of teaching history for history’s sake. God had saved me for a purpose. Of that I was sure, even though I could not yet see what His plans for me included. But this I knew—that a man doubly saved from death had a message to bring and a work to do for the God who had saved him.

Before I fell asleep in the hut, I thought again of Paulie Kokas. In the split second when I had taken my things from the domnisoara’s vestibule, I had noticed that my fur cap and the detachable lining of my coat were missing. I chuckled to myself. Paulie, my deliverer, had been a pickpocket to the end.

It took me three months to work my way northwest to the Hungarian border. Everywhere placards offered a large reward for my recapture. I went from village to village where there were Reformed pastors who would hide me. In the first village, the pastor and his people bought me a horse and peasant’s cart. Without my prison beard and in my peasant’s clothes, I did not so much resemble the picture on the placards. But the Russians required passes for entering and leaving towns. I began to use the ruse of offering Rumanian soldiers a ride in my cart. The guards would then let me enter a town as the soldier’s driver. Sometimes I had to wait a day or two in the open country until a Rumanian soldier came that way.

When I came to Satu-Mare, the city nearest the Hungarian border, I had no idea how to evade the border guards. A Satu-Mare pastor provided the man to accompany me out of the city so that near the border area I could leave the cart and proceed on foot. That afternoon the sky became black with storm. Soon the rain fell in torrents and the wind blew fiercely. The poor horse plodded on; the man and I were drenched. But the storm had been sent to protect me. When I came on foot to the border guardposts in early evening, no one was there. Even the bloodhounds had been taken in. Covered by the storm, I passed the empty guardposts and crossed the border into my native Hungary.

It was in Mateszalka the next day that I ate the torte. Through the delicatessen window I saw it—the dobos tone, the Hungarian favorite, eleven thin layers put together with chocolate. After the first piece, I asked timidly for a second. The waitress set the whole torte before me. Suddenly there flooded over me a realization of my freedom. “I am a free man … eating dobos torte … in my own country … God be praised … it is a miracle.”

A Look Of Terror

But the Communists had headlined my escape in Hungary, too. They were watching to see where I would appear. For a few weeks I hid myself in the bigness of Budapest where I had many friends. One of them, Dr. Simon, arranged for me to have lunch at the home of another friend. As I approached the friend’s home in the suburbs, I saw his small boy kneeling behind the iron railing that fenced the yard. The boy’s hands were clasped tightly and on his face was a look of such terror when he saw me that I knew instinctively that something was wrong. Walking on, I turned a corner and disappeared.

The next day I learned that at the moment I passed the house, secret police were hiding inside to arrest me. The boy, hearing the police speak harshly to his parents, had gone outside to watch for me. And through the look on the face of a child I had been warned. But who had informed the police? This I had to know for my own satisfaction before leaving Budapest. There was one suspect. Dr. Simon, who had made the plan, had a sister-in-law, Agnes, living in his house. She was an ugly unloved woman who worked in the Communist-controlled Ministry of Culture. Could she have overheard and betrayed me?

I telephoned Agnes at her office to say that I was nearby and to invite her to coffee. After a long pause which heightened my suspicions, she replied that she could meet me in an hour. I realized that this gave her time to arrange to have me followed, but I decided to risk the meeting anyway. As I suspected, two men appeared and trailed us, following even when I doubled back under pretense of finding a better coffee shop. Having proved beyond doubt my suspicion about Agnes, I had next to escape the trap. I knew that in the next block the tram slowed to turn a corner. Walking slowly, I timed our walking to arrive at the corner just as a tram did. Shaking Agnes from my arm so that she lost her balance, I leaped for the rear platform of the tram and rode it triumphantly around the corner while Agnes picked herself up and the two pursuers stopped openmouthed to watch the tram sweep me out of sight. That night I left Budapest on my way to Vienna.

Again it was the pastors who befriended me from town to town. They all helped except the last one, a pastor in Sopron, the old city at the Austrian border. I could not blame this man. He was not Hungarian and he did not know of me, but his refusal left me standing helpless in the street. It occurred to me that in this area where many Germans lived, someone might help because of his dislike for the Communists. I had to do something. In a restaurant I found two men speaking German. When I cautiously told them my predicament, Fritz, the blonde one, agreed to help. I offered him the 2,000 forints my Budapest friends had collected for me. They were worth about $500, but no price was too great for freedom. Fritz Friedl left to make arrangements and returned an hour before midnight. As we went out into the street together, I saw two policemen standing at the corner. When we came to them, Fritz stopped and said, “Here he is.” This time I had been betrayed by a stranger and I had paid him well for his double dealing.

The Sopron prison was full of anti-Communist demonstrators, so the police put me into the basement of their headquarters where 40 other people already were crowded into a room. We stood up all night, listening in stunned silence to the cries from another room where drunken gypsies had shut themselves in with nuns who had been among those arrested. The sounds of that night still haunt me.

The next morning, when it was my turn to be interrogated, I had my story ready. During the night I had dropped beneath 40 pair of feet in the basement the papers I was carrying in my briefcase. The local police chief looked up as I was brought into his office. His eyes widened in surprise, and he asked the attending officers to leave the room. “Sandor Ungvary, what are you doing here?” he said softly. It was my turn to be surprised. The man was the brother of an underground comrade of mine in Transylvania.

“If you are not carrying money,” he said after we had talked, “I can give you a pass to cross the border. But we have strict orders to detain anyone with money.” “I have no money at all,” I replied honestly. Fritz Friedl had done me some good after all.

Late that evening in August, 1949, I stood at the electrified barricade which separates Hungary from the free world. Two policemen opened the gate and locked it behind me. I stood there in the warm night air. All I possessed in the world was in my briefcase—one Hungarian sausage, an ounce of famous Hungarian paprika, and three books: the Bible, the book I had published against Hitler in 1939, and a book by my favorite professor. Nothing more.

It was not an auspicious beginning. But a beginning it was, the beginning of a new life in the free world. Part of me reached eagerly toward that new life. And part of me stood still, while in my ears the cries of the nuns in the night became the cries of all the captive people I was leaving behind.

Somewhere, faintly, a bell tolled midnight. I began walking toward Vienna.