A challenging book about Galileo appeared in Germany that merits the attention of everyone concerned about faith and science. The writer, F. Dessauer, makes an attempt to draw significant lessons for our time from the Church’s condemnation of Galileo. Dessauer is particularly concerned with the turn-about that the Church had to make: once having condemned Galileo’s ideas, the Church later came to new understanding and had to confess implicitly that she had erred in the case of Galileo. Dessauer is a faithful Catholic and underscores his insistence that the infallibility of the Pope is not in question here at all. Nonetheless, he recognizes that the problem arises from the fact that the Church spoke out in condemnation of a scientific idea and found herself forced later by incontrovertible proofs to admit that her condemnation was unjust.

Dessauer describes the personal tragedy of Galileo very movingly. He lets us hear his judgment, see his arrest, watch him live his lonely life without contact with the world, and finally hear him recant what he had formerly taught as inescapable truth. Dessauer is rightly amazed that the Church could have treated so noble a man so badly. He also calls attention to the tragic estrangement that the case created between the officialdom of the Church and the new spirits rising within and outside of the Church of that day.

Dessauer is deeply impressed by the great responsibility that the Church carries when she speaks. He is impressed by the care with which the Church must exercise her responsibility in connection with the developments of science. He is aware that the Galileo affair was haunted by the fearful ghost of the Inquisition and he lets us know that the Pope had spoken judgmentally of Galileo to the Florentine ambassador. In short, Dessauer frankly exposes the entire tragedy, holding only one reserve in his judgment on the Church—the infallibility of the Pope.

The Galileo episode has implications for other people besides the Roman Catholics. The issue raised by Dessauer touches the whole Church and her relationship to the growth of modern science. It faces us with the religion and science conflict or, as it is better described, the relationship between Scripture and science. One is forced to acknowledge the enormous damage that can be done to the cause of the Church when the Church speaks presumptuously on matters belonging to science, and has to take back later what she said in judgment before. The Church’s tendency to err here is perhaps understandable in the light of past history. But when the Church has to recant dogmatic positions previously taken in the heat of controversy, she suffers undeniable loss of face and prestige. Worse than that, she loses respect.

In the Galileo affair, the Church repeatedly summoned the Word of God as witness to the truth of her stand. The motives of the Church were probably pure; the Church felt called upon to protect truth. But time proved that the Church’s appeal to the Word was conditioned by her own limited insights. And so the Church failed to proclaim the eternal truth that is above the shifting sands of opinion and fear.

When the Church errs by presumptuous attacks on new ideas of science, she always estranges people from herself. This has been especially true of the Church’s responses to the conclusions of natural science. Today, it is especially clear that the Church has a calling to avoid all quick and easy appeals to Scripture against science. We must take great care that we do not needlessly estrange young people who are reared in modern science. Christianity must never alienate people from Jesus Christ by theologians’ foolish arguments against authentic and scholarly science.

This does not mean that science presents no danger to the Church and her preaching of the Gospel. It does mean, however, that pious motives are not sufficient as defenses against these dangers. The Pope had pious motives in his attack on Galileo. He was afraid of the determinism which he thought was implicit in the new science of that day. But the Pope’s good intentions did not spare the Church from the serious damage done by the condemnation of Galileo. The youth and especially the men of science were shaken in their confidence in the Church. This example should teach us to reckon seriously with the relation between the Church and the world of science. It should also be a cogent warning against quick and simple judgments on natural science by the Church.

The Church always has a temptation to make pronouncements that have a superficial basis in the Bible whenever science poses a particular threat to faith. But it is just such temptations that lead to the embarrassment of having to take back in leisure what was pronounced in haste. Tension between faith and science can exist even when no scientist is being condemned and no official pronouncement is made by the Church. The Church must accept as her solemn responsibility the task of keeping the tensions within the sphere of truth; she must avoid making the tensions a matter of science versus obscurantism or fear. When science attacks the Christian faith, it is a tragedy. But when the Church, with an appeal to the Bible, creates a needless alienation between science and the Gospel, it is a worse tragedy.

There is no reason for the believer to fear science. If Christian faith is genuine faith, her disciples need not live in the fear that some discovery may one day be made that will render faith impossible. Indeed, believers must accept the scientific challenge in complete honesty and with a deep sense of responsibility. I do not want to underestimate the great problems that still exist within the relationship between Church and science. But it needs to be declared emphatically that the resistance of the world to the Gospel must be aroused only by the Gospel itself. Resistance to the Gospel and alienation from the Church must not be aroused by any foolish pronouncements against science. We should learn from the Church’s frequent embarrassments of the past. We must remember how certain the Church often was of her stand against scientific conclusions, and how deeply embarrassed she was when she had to swallow her own words.

May the Lord save us from casting away our power by presumptuous pronouncements on matters outside our ken. The Lord save us from creating a stumbling block by our own foolishness, and from the loss of influence that stems not from orthodox theology but from human pretension. The cross of Christ is the stumbling block; let the Church beware lest she create any other.

The Fate Of A Non-Conformist

The Crime of Galileo, by Giorgio de Santillana (Heinemann, London, 1955, 339 pp., 30s., University of Chicago Press, $5.75), is reviewed by Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Editor of The Churchman.

The Crime of Galileo is the title of a most interesting book on a fascinating subject from the pen of Giorgio de Santillana, who is Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dr. de Santillana’s writing is marked by intelligence, good humor, and objectivity, and he is always master of what is indeed a dramatic theme, touched with both pathos and tragedy. Who will deny that he is justified in seeing parallels between the persecution of Galileo and the hunting down of non-conforming suspects in our own generation? It is at all times a terrible indictment of humanity to see a great man crushed, humiliated, and silenced by the ignorant inhumanity of power politics.

Galileo’s crime consisted in his espousal of the view that the sun, not the earth, is the centre of our planetary system. But it is well to be quite clear that the facile affirmation, still too commonly accepted, that his condemnation is attributable to the enmity of religious obscurantism towards scientific enlightenment by no means answers to the full truth. For centuries the Ptolemaic doctrine of the earth as the unmoving centre of the world has been the unchallenged view of science. To it the Church had added its sanctifying sanction. It was the science no less than the theology of his day that stood up in anger against Galileo. Galileo was, of course, following in the footsteps of Copernicus, who had published his treatise on The Revolutions of the Celestial Orbs in 1543, 21 years before the birth of Galileo. It was Galileo, however, who first caused the Copernican system to be regarded with some seriousness, so much so that in 1616 the ecclesiastical authorities took the step of placing Copernicus’ work on the Index of forbidden literature.

Yet it must not be thought that the whole world of theology and science was united in its repudiation of Galileo’s doctrine. There were, in fact, numbers of theologians and philosophers who were convinced by the cogency of his reasoning, though not all could fully understand the system he expounded with such brilliance. Some of these friendly spirits were influential, and they did what they could to influence the authorities to Galileo’s advantage. But none were able to withstand a determined Pope or challenge the senseless inexorability of the all-powerful machine of the Inquisition. What could be more preposterous than the fact that Firenzuola, the Commissary-General of the Inquisition which tried and condemned Galileo, was in reality (though not in public) of the same opinion as Galileo concerning the solar system?

Professor de Santillana, himself a Roman by birth, says that “we should try to think of Rome of those times, … where true saints could be found, to be sure, but which otherwise was the most corrupt of administrative capitals … packed with fanatical and petulant monks, shrewd intriguers, postulants, paid and unpaid observers, diplomats, cynical secretaries, fulsome literati and inane versifiers living off the bounty of some prelate; lazy insolent nobles, curialist lawyers, stony-faced publicans rack-renting for the princes and the convents; spies, informers, go-betweens, men about town, unctuous priests and officials, careful hypocrites, suspicious hard old men, meeching young men on their way to preferments through oily conformism; all the parasitical, torpid, cunning and malevolent society that vegetated like a pestilent mushroom growth on the fringes of an imperial world bureaucracy and for whom the stability and prestige of that bureaucracy in matters spiritual meant their career and their income.” It was to this city that the papal messenger summoned Galileo from Florence in order to give an account of himself. “His was the tragedy of an excess of gifts,” comments Dr. de Santillana; “for, while the telescope was his key to success, his real social strength lay in his extraordinary literary capacity, his brilliant repartee, his eloquence and charm, which gave him rank in a culture founded exclusively on belles-lettres and humanistic accomplishments.” In potent Rome he was a voice crying in the wilderness.

As with others before him who had shown signs of moving against the powerful stream of ecclesiastical authoritarianism, Galileo had little option but to make formal submission to the judgment of Pope and Church, if he and his work were to stand any chance of not being submerged and smashed. Thus when called upon to make answer to the charge preferred against him he protested that he would never affirm the Copernican doctrine as true: “zeal for our religion and holy faith” prevented him from doing that, however great the probability of the doctrine on the grounds of human reason and experience. His tongue, however, was too obviously in his cheek. Indeed, the hollowness of his submission was such that, even in making it, he presumed to state that, “within the limits of natural and human considerations, the rightness of the Copernican system appears incontrovertible.” As Professor de Santillana remarks, the chuckle is almost audible when Galileo writes that, the more valid the proofs, “the clearer the beneficent conclusion that there is no trusting purely human reasoning and that we must rely implicitly on the higher knowledge which alone can bring light to the darkness of our mind.”

But Galileo’s adversaries were not willing to let him get away with things as easily as this. Matters moved on, tediously and frustratingly for Galileo, to the summons which was to arraign him before the Roman Inquisition. Increasingly he became a pathetic figure; his self-denunciations became more and more abject, in the hope that he might at least be permitted to pass his old age in some measure of peace and immunity from persecution. But the many self-important officials and dignitaries, whose pride was threatened by his theories, and the Pope himself, who was inflexible in his determination to uphold the decree of 1616 proscribing the teaching of Copernicus, were bent on his destruction. Well might the unfortunate Galileo exclaim that “of all hatreds there is none greater than that of ignorance against knowledge,” and complain bitterly: “The months and the years pass by, my life wastes away, and my work is condemned to rot.”

Brought before the Inquisition, he had to learn the further lesson that every attempt at self-defense was a foregone futility, that as Professor de Santillana observes, “the authorities were not interested in truth but only in authority.” The sum of the situation was this, that “in the Galileo trial the Inquisition was suborned into a command performance by an unscrupulous group of power politicians.” The authorities “could not very conveniently broadcast the real motives” for their persecution of this cultured man with the questing mind, “which were that Galileo had taken to writing in Italian and that he had made them look foolish, or that the political meaning of it was that the Jesuits had evened up a score with the Dominicans by way of the new game of cosmological football.” Father Grienberger in fact had told Galileo that, if only he had known “how to retain the favour of the Jesuits, he would have stood in renown before the world, he would have been spared all his misfortunes, and he could have written what he pleased about everything, even about the motion of the Earth.”

The sentence pronounced on June 22, 1633, against Galileo, then 70 years old, condemned him as “vehemently suspected of heresy, namely, of having believed and held the doctrine—which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures—that the Sun is the centre of the world and does not move from east to west and that the earth moves and is not the centre of the world; and that an opinion may be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to the contrary to Holy Scripture.” Galileo was required to sign a prescribed form of abjuration in which he professed to “abjure, curse, and detest the aforesaid errors and heresies and generally every other error, heresy, and sect whatsoever contrary to the Holy Church.” The Galilean cosmology is not, of course, contrary to Holy Scripture (though it is a strange fact that many modern theologians speak of the two as being incompatible, and therefore concur with the judgment of the Inquisition, but not with its verdict, since they now condemn Holy Scripture instead of Galileo). The point was that it was contrary to what ecclesiastical authority had declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture.

Though the physical penalties imposed on this old man may be said to have been slight—the repetition once a week for a period of three years of the seven penitential Psalms and, as things worked out, house arrest during the remaining eight years of his life—the spiritual damage inflicted was appalling: the violation of a personality, the steamrollering of a mind, the humiliation of a genius. The lessons of the Galileo case are plain enough for those who are willing to perceive them. Absolute authoritarianism, whether in church or state, whether in theology or science, is an evil thing, and must be withstood by those who value truth and freedom and the dignity of the individual. The moral is graphically pointed by Professor de Santillana: “Today, when juridical safeguards have been exterminated in one half of the world and are gravely threatened in the other, it might behoove us not to feel overly virtuous in reading of these ancient errors. The Curia of Urban VIII stand out as great gentlemen compared with their modern lay counterparts. Caccini rides again among us, and his name is legion. He is no longer an itinerant monk; his place is in the senates of the great nations. Electronic computers are slowly closing in on the citizen’s uncertain course. Deviations from what is considered the essential orthodoxy have never, of course, escaped punishment since the beginning of history; but, once search converges on the ‘thought crime’ in its double aspect of something theoretically intangible and concretely dangerous, the way of the inquirer is bound to become again and again that of the Inquisitor.”

PHILIP EDGCUMBE HUGHES

Discovery Of New Direction

Conversion, by E. Stanley Jones (Abingdon, 1959, 253 pp., $3.25), is reviewed by Robert O. Ferm, Author of The Psychology of Christian Conversion.

In his delightful and interesting style, Dr. E. Stanley Jones has produced another volume, this time on the subject of conversion. He leaves no doubt in the mind of his reader concerning the beneficial effects of conversion. Though he defends the policy of the church that includes in its membership those who are unconverted, he laments the fact that “two thirds of the membership of the churches know little or nothing about conversion as a personal, experimental fact.”

Dr. Jones correctly distinguishes between conversion and proselytism. He also calls attention to the unique character of Christian conversion; and when making comparison with what he calls the “vast universal process of conversion,” he speaks of Christian conversion as being “conversion at its highest point.” He says “Christian conversion is of a specific kind with a certain definite content and character leading to certain definite results in life.”

Having so well stated this proposition, he proceeds to say that there are three steps in conversion—the first being the discovery of a new direction. This, he says, means “to turn your back on the old life and face toward Christ.”

The second step is to have a fresh beginning. Here the person converted becomes as a little child.

The third step is to enter the Kingdom, and this gives “a new sphere of living.” The person may be called upon to live in two worlds at once, “The world of physical relationships and the world of the Kingdom of God.”

The unconverted man is not living in a natural state, Dr. Jones claims, and at this point he departs from the Pauline definition for “natural” and holds the popular one. But his point is well taken when he says “Conversion doesn’t dehumanize us by transplanting an alien life on the framework of the natural, thus setting up a tension between the natural and the supernatural.… The converted man is more natural because controlled by the supernatural, with natural joys, natural gaiety, natural spontaneity, natural freedom, natural fulfillment.” One must accept his total world view in order to grasp the significance of such a claim.

Having manifested a knowledge of the significant works on the psychology of conversion, Dr. Jones proceeds courageously to make his own definition and holds that “the area of the work of conversion is largely in the realm of wrong thinking, wrong attitudes, wrong emotions—of a mixed up, messed up self.” In making this declaration he obviously rejects the turpitude of all sin.

Most interesting is the longest chapter of the book which is devoted to particular conversion stories. In reading them, one wonders how clearly these “converts” grasped the essentials of redemption through Christ, for some of them appear to be psychological conversions more than theological ones. Dr. Jones also weakens the discussion by making the statement that he needs to be converted frequently.

Conversion, the author points out, comes through three movements: “Mental conflict, emotional crisis, and the resolution of the conflict.” This statement follows closely the findings of William James. Then he says that “the center of conversion is the conversion of the will.”

To the person desiring conversion, the following steps are suggested: review, repent, surrender, receive, make restitution, commit yourself, and finally rejoice. Having followed through these seven steps, the convert is exhorted to rejoice for “when you are with Christ, facing life together you are saved.”

The noticeable weakness of Dr. Jones’ study lies not so much in what has been said but in what has been omitted or obscured. His emphasis upon the psychological aspects of conversion causes certain uneasiness on the part of the critical reader whose orientation is biblical and theological. Important as the psychological aspect of conversion may be, the biblical emphasis upon the redemptive work of Christ, the power of the Holy Spirit, and the sufficiency of the revealed Word are of paramount importance.

Having noted the overemphasis of the psychological, I shall conclude that this interesting volume has a wealth of information for those whose concern is with the phenomenon of conversion.

ROBERT O. FERM

Significant Contribution

Christian Hymnody, by Ernest E. Ryden (Augustana Press, 1959, 670 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by F. R. Webber, of Mount Vernon, New York.

A spinster, frustrated and unhappy, is making her way to the river to drown herself. She hears a nightingale sing. Seizing the stub of a pencil and a torn scrap of paper she produces in half an hour a hymn that the whole world sings. Most books on church hymnody are full of such incidents. Dr. Ryden’s is not. He is not misled by the tear-jerking tales of the legend makers. In his 670 pages he discusses 1,166 hymns, very few of which were written on the back of an old envelope with a stubby pencil.

This does not mean that he has ignored the humbler type of hymn, nor has he overloaded his book with classics. A work of this scope must tell the entire story. Just as a truthful account of New York City’s religious life will include the shabby storefront missions no less than St. Thomas’, St. Bartholomew’s, and Fifth Avenue Presbyterian, so Dr. Ryden in all honesty discusses hymns that have brought joy to the lowly people of the Cremorne Mission as well as the classical hymns that once brought joy to such men as G. Edward Stubbs, T. Tertius Noble, and Percy Dearmer. He has a good word for them all.

Perhaps Dr. Ryden’s most important contribution to hymnal makers of the future is to be found in his 13 chapters on Scandinavian hymns and their writers. Denmark, Sweden, and Norway have produced many splendid hymns, most of which are unknown to the average American. Dr. Ryden discusses them in detail, together with excellent translations. His chapters on the hymns of Finland and Iceland are valuable.

In his book Britain heads the list with 41 chapters on English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish hymns. Hymns of American authorship are discussed in 33 chapters, German hymns are given 18 chapters, and hymns of the early Christian period nine chapters.

Dr. Ryden’s early newspaper training, and his 30 years as editor of a religious journal are evident in the graceful literary style of his book. There are a very few slips of the typewriter (hardly to be avoided in a first edition) and the typography is excellent; but one might wish that the initial letters were a bit smaller so that they would align with three lines of text.

A great work of the past is Hymns Ancient and Modern, Historical Edition (London, 1861, with several later editions). This is a huge volume, the size of two volumes of the Britannica. It contains the full text of every hymn, its original text, its musical setting (or settings), with critical and biographical notes, and often a facsimile of the original hymn in its author’s handwriting. This great work contains no twentieth century material, and much the same may be said of Julian’s well-known book. Dr. Ryden brings the story down to date, and his familiarity with the significant contributions of Scandinavian hymn writers is a real contribution.

F. R. WEBBER

History And Faith

A New Quest of the Historical Jesus, by James M. Robinson (Alec R. Allenson, 1959, 128 pp., $2.25), is reviewed by George Eldon Ladd, Professor of Biblical Theology, Fuller Theological Seminary.

Germany may well be called the laboratory for the study of scientific theology. Most of the movements in theological and Biblical studies, which have affected the American theological scene for good or ill, have had their origin in Germany.

This little book, written by a young professor who has spent some four years in study on the Continent, interprets accurately and lucidly (if at times in rather Germanic English) the contemporary state of research in the “historical” Jesus.

Rudolf Bultmann has been the dominating figure in recent years. The Christian world was shocked by the conclusion of this great historian: “I do indeed think that we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus …” (Jesus and the Word, Scribner’s, 1934, p. 8). Even Bultmann’s disciples were disturbed when he excluded the message of Jesus from New Testament theology and made it one of the presuppositions of this theology (Theology of the New Testament, Scribner’s, 1951, I, p. 3 ff.). In other words, the “historical” Jesus and his message are phenomena of Judaism and not the beginning of the New Testament Gospel. This extreme position has led Bultmann’s disciples to reopen “the quest of the historical Jesus” and to seek a new approach to the study of the history of the Gospels.

Nearly 20 years ago, the late C. C. McCown wrote, “The nineteenth century ended with the destruction of its characteristic ‘liberal’ portrait of Jesus. It would appear that after nearly 40 years, the twentieth century has discovered none at all of its own” (The Search for the Real Jesus, Scribner’s, 1940, p. 278). He went on to say that the basic problem was the understanding and interpretation of history. Professor Robinson shows how contemporary German scholarship, standing on the same presuppositions as those of Bultmann and McCown, is attempting a “break-through” of this impasse of skepticism to recover a “historical” Jesus. This attempt rests on a new understanding of history.

The old search for the “historical” Jesus was based on a positivistic approach to history. Historical study must be governed by certain “rules of the game,” and modern historiography pursued the method of objective scholarship governed by a scientific methodology freed from the limitations of dogma. In other words, the adjective “historical” did not mean “the Jesus who actually lived” but the Jesus capable of being recovered by a historiography governed by scientific presuppositions. In a word, “scientific” meant a naturalistic world-view which explained “historical” events by other known historical causes. Bultmann’s skepticism about the “historical Jesus” is really skepticism about the “historian’s Jesus,” not Jesus as he actually was.

The new quest is based on a new understanding of history which recognizes a dimension transcending the merely objective. “History is the act of intention, the commitment, the meaning for the participants, behind the external occurrence” (p. 67). History embodies meaning as well as fact. This has led to the conclusion that “Jesus intended to confront the hearers inescapably with the God who is near when he proclaimed ‘Repent, for God’s reign is near,’ i.e., that he intended a historical encounter with himself to be an eschatological encounter with God, and that he consequently understood his existence as that of bringer of eschatological salvation” (77).

This is refreshing and stimulating. The problem of the relationship between history and faith is the most important single question today in critical biblical studies. Liberalism tried to reconstruct a “historical” Jesus on the basis of a naturalistic historiography and failed. Certain types of recent theology may be accused of fleeing from history and attempting to establish a theology which is not dependent upon the relativities of history. Bultmann’s interpretation of the Gospel has often been criticized as not needing a historical Jesus of any sort. Now criticism is being driven back to the historical to seek something which has eluded it.

The heart of the Gospel is the redemptive acts of God in history. Here is history which modern historiography must critically examine; but here is also the work of God about which the historian qua historian can make no final judgment. Christ died; this is history. Christ died for our sins; this is theology. Christ rose from the dead; this is an event in history for which there can be no “historical” explanation, for the cause of the resurrection is not an antecedent historical event, but the unmediated act of God. Furthermore, the resurrection of Christ was not revivification, it is the appearance of a new order of life within history which nevertheless transcends all historical explanation and analogy. The Christian Gospel can never be brought altogether under control of historical science. Therein lies both the glory and the scandal of the Gospel.

GEORGE ELDON LADD

Sociological Theory

Trumpet Call of Reformation, by Oliver Read Whitley (Bethany Press, 1959, 252 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by James DeForest Murch.

There is a comparatively modern theory which suggests that all religious communions—Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Reformed—are the product of sociological pressures and processes. H. Richard Niebuhr develops this idea in his Social Sources of Denominationalism, by assuming that churches have their origin in social, economic, and cultural unrest, and then develop through successive stages from (1) movement to (2) sect, and eventually to (3) denominational status.

Dr. Whitley, who is a Disciple teaching in Methodist Iliff School of Theology, applies the theory to the Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ), and effectively cuts and fits their history into his preconceived pattern. If his premises are correct, he has made a very convincing case. The quality of Whitley’s work is attested by the fact that this manuscript received the Christian Board of Publication “First Award” in the 1958 “Bethany Book Contest.”

The book will probably be extensively used in the current effort of left wing Disciples to convert this 150-year-old “free church” movement into a centralized, closely-knit ecclesiastical structure which can easily be merged into the coming “ecumenical church.”

JAMES DEFOREST MURCH

Who Is The Real Niemöller?

Pastor Niemöller, by Dietmar Schmidt (Doubleday, 1959, 224 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by Harold B. Kuhn, Professor of the Philosophy of Religion, Asbury Theological Seminary.

It is ironical that the same traits of character which are praised in one connection may be condemned in another. Martin Niemöller commanded the admiration of the non-fascist world when he stood, a lone tree against the storm, in quiet defiance of the Nazis. Later, as he stood with equal firmness against the rearming of West Germany and against her participation in NATO, his former admirers were not so sure. One frequently hears the question, “Who is the real Martin Niemöller?” Dietmar Schmidt seeks to answer this question.

Our author finds a partial explanation for Niemöller’s character in his Westphalian extraction, together with his career as a U-Boat commander in World War I. Added to this was the highly significant feature of his call to the ministry. Yet one feels that all of these, taken together, scarcely account for the combined bravery and wisdom by which he endured nine years of imprisonment, chiefly at Sachsenhausen and Dachau. To him must have come a vision of a call to a unique task, a unique suffering.

Try as he will, Dietmar Schmidt cannot maintain the thesis that Martin Niemöller has trod with equally admirable step since 1945. Perhaps the issues of right and wrong have not been so clear since then. But the volume, taken as a whole, sketches for us a portrait which is unforgettable. After all, courage in the face of mortal danger outweighs what seems at times like Prussian and aristocratic stiffness.

H. B. KUHN

Clinical Education

An Introduction to Pastoral Counseling, edited by Wayne E. Oates (Broadman, 1959, 331 pp., $6), is reviewed by Theodore J. Jansma, Chaplain-Counselor of the Christian Sanatorium, Wyckoff, New Jersey.

This is a collection of papers by a group of seminary professors and hospital chaplains of the Southern Baptist Convention. It is intended as a textbook for classroom use, to help pastors in counseling work, and to encourage pastors to seek clinical training experience. The editor, Wayne E. Oates, is professor of Psychology and Religion at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and has distinguished himself as author of numerous articles and books on pastoral care.

Although it is the work of 10 authors, it is not a symposium or a loose collection of articles and opinions. The book was carefully planned so that each writer deals with a specific aspect of pastoral counseling and contributes to a progression of thought. There are five main divisions—Counseling in the Context of the Church, The Personhood of the Pastoral Counselor, The Process and Procedures of Pastoral Counseling, Pastoral Counseling and the Ministry of the Word of God in Christ, Pastoral Counseling and the Educational Intentions of the Church. Each of these divisions is introduced by a brief statement of the goals contemplated in the division and the specific contribution each author will make. In spite of such careful outlining and division of labor, there is nevertheless overlapping and repetition which could hardly be avoided in a product of several minds.

As an “Introduction” this book is strong on the method of counseling, and that has much practical merit. In this reviewer’s opinion there is need for a more radical kind of “Introduction,” one that goes further back to the biblical roots. While in this book, as in others on pastoral care, there are many allusions and references to biblical principles and examples, there is practically no exposition of biblical principles and objectives for the pastoral office. The opening chapter on “The Heritage of the Pastoral Counselor” has barely three pages on the “heritage” of the Bible. The book does set forward a growing movement of systematic study of the pastoral ministry to the sick and emotionally troubled. It includes an appendix on “Standards for Clinical Pastoral Education” set up by the Southern Baptist Association on Clinical Pastoral Education.

THEODORE J. JANSMA

Dynamic Missions

Religion and Faith in Latin America, by W. Stanley Rycroft (Westminster, 1958, 208 pp., $3.75), is reviewed by Horace L. Fenton, Jr., Associate Director, Latin America Mission.

Dr. Rycroft knows Latin America through long years of experience as a missionary in that area. Besides, he is well acquainted with the literature that has been written concerning this part of the world and its spiritual needs. Out of this background, he has written a thought-provoking book which should help many readers to understand in a new way that it is not religion in a formal, ecclesiastical sense but living faith in a living Saviour that is the only hope of the men and nations of Latin America.

The author’s basic thesis is that there is a world of difference between religion and faith. He shows clearly that there never has been any dearth of religion in Latin America, either in the days before the coming of the Roman Catholic church or in the four centuries since the conquistadores introduced the religion of Spain. But of vital faith in Jesus Christ, as he is revealed in the Scriptures, Latin America has known little, until the coming of Protestant missions in comparatively recent times.

Dr. Rycroft’s principal point is not established by any extended attack on Roman Catholicism. He lets the facts of history speak for themselves; and in so doing, he comes to the inevitable conclusion that Romanism has failed to meet the needs of the people, and has provided another illustration of the bankruptcy of all religions, as compared to the riches found in the gospel of Christ.

Dr. Rycroft has no doubt about the challenge that faces us today: “The opportunities for proclaiming the Gospel in Latin America are perhaps greater than in any other area of the world” (p. 166). Nor does he have any question as to the adequacy of that Gospel: “No religion, no matter how elaborate and aesthetic, and no ecclesiastical system, however powerful, can lead Latin America toward a new day of justice, righteousness, freedom, understanding, and love. The power of the living Christ alone, untrammeled and free to work in the hearts of men, can purify, inspire, energize, and enable. Christ must be in all and through all, the beginning and the end … without new men in Christ, with a dynamic faith and a moral and spiritual purpose, Latin America cannot solve its outstanding problems or fulfill its destiny in a new day of promise and opportunity” (pp. 176, 177).

The reader may find himself wishing on occasion that the author had stated some things differently. He may disagree, for example, with Dr. Rycroft’s statement that “the number of missionaries under independent groups has increased beyond that of the denominations or regular mission boards, probably because the latter have sought in every way possible to develop national leadership by diverting funds for this purpose and also by turning over responsibility to the national churches” (p. 164). But these are basically matters of opinion, and the important thing is that this book exalts Christ and summons his people to do something for lands that were too long neglected by the Protestant churches.

HORACE L. FENTON, JR.

Mildly Liberal

The Doctrine of the Prophets, by A. F. Kirkpatrick (Zondervan, 1958, 537 pp., $4.95), is reviewed by Edward J. Young, Professor of Old Testament, Westminster Theological Seminary.

This work is a reprint of lectures delivered during the years 1886–1890 in the Chapel of Lincoln’s Inn upon the Bishop Warburton foundation. Kirkpatrick was a competent biblical scholar who exhibited a great interest in the prophets. He is also known for a commentary on the Psalms.

Kirkpatrick was a mildly liberal critic who accepted most of the tenets of the then regnant hypotheses. As the publisher notes on the cover, Kirkpatrick “subscribed to the multiple authorship of Isaiah.” The publisher remarks that in Kirkpatrick’s day the Dead Sea Scrolls were not known, although we question whether this discovery would have had much effect upon Kirkpatrick’s views of the authorship of Isaiah. But we commend the publisher for the honesty of his advertising.

The lectures are quite useful, but they must be read with discrimination. In too many places, it seems, Kirkpatrick has simply followed the line of the dominant criticism without having sufficiently evaluated and weighed the arguments for the position that the Scriptures are infallible and completely authoritative. I fear too that in certain instances he simply has not gone into matters thoroughly. For example, he does not begin to do justice to the Messianic interpretation of Isaiah 4. And to say the least, the treatment of Isaiah 7 leaves much to be desired. On the other hand, Kirkpatrick is far above many of his contemporaries in his remarks on Isaiah 9. Serious students of prophecy will, of course, consult these lectures; but when a new day in prophetic study dawns, it will be characterized by an acceptance of what the Bible says all along the line.

EDWARD J. YOUNG

Interpreting Scripture

Shield Bible Study Series: The Epistle to the Ephesians, by John H. Gerstner (84 pp., $1.50); The Epistle to the Galatians, by Floyd E. Hamilton (66 pp., $1.25); The Epistle to the Romans, by Gleason L. Archer (103 pp., $1.50, Baker Book House, 1958–9), are reviewed by Walter W. Wessel, Professor of New Testament, North American Baptist Seminary, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

One does not have to read far in these study manuals to discover that they are anything but superficially done. This is not surprising since the authors are reputable scholars. Two of them (Archer and Gerstner) are professors in leading theological seminaries, and the third (Hamilton) has authored several well-written and significant books.

The purpose of the Shield Series, of which these three books are a part, is to provide inexpensive paper-bound manuals to serve as guides in the study of the Bible. They are geared for the use of any intelligent and inquiring student of the Bible. Each of the manuals listed above contains a brief introduction, selected bibliography, detailed outline, and brief but suggestive exposition of the book concerned.

Gerstner champions the Pauline authorship of Ephesians. His exposition is capably done with a generous assist from those two peerless expositors of Scripture, John Calvin of Geneva and Charles Hodge of Princeton.

Hamilton supports the North Galatian theory and curiously thinks that “advocates of the South Galatian theory date the epistle as early as A.D. 54” (p. 2), when in reality they date it as early as A.D. 48. A number of errors occur in his bibliography which should contain at least one recent definitive work on Galatians.

Archer’s exposition of Romans is carefully and competently accomplished with close attention given to the underlying Greek text. At times he startles his reader. For example, objecting on the basis of Romans 5:14 to the assumption that children dying in infancy merit heaven, he goes on to the amazing assertion that if the assumption were true, “a truly loving parent would be under obligation to commit infanticide in order to insure his child’s eternal welfare” (p. 31). This appears to be an unwarranted conclusion, since the basic obligation of any parent toward his children is not to insure their salvation (which only God can insure) but through them to glorify God, an obligation which is fulfilled by obedience (not disobedience—“Thou shalt not kill”) to God’s will.

The Bible is a book not only to be read but to be studied! The serious student will find much help in the Shield Bible Study Series.

WALTER W. WESSEL

An Exegetical Approach

The Holy Spirit and the Holy Life, by Chester K. Lehman (Herald Press, Scottdale, Pennsylvania, 1959, 220 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Stuart Cornelius Hackett, Professor of Philosophy, Louisiana College, Pineville, Louisiana.

“How does Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit transform sinful man into His own likeness?” With this question our author, who is professor of theology at Eastern Mennonite College, Harrisonburg, Virginia, sets the tone for his whole discussion. The answer to the question involves the analysis of the Holy Spirit’s encounters with man and of the character of the holy life in contrast to man’s sinful predicament, as these concepts are reflected in the successive strata of Old and New Testament literature and as they receive clarification in the history of Christian theology. Dr. Lehman’s discussion, reflecting his long experience as a teacher of biblical studies, is closely and intricately scriptural throughout: the whole presents the reader with a continuous citation and explanatory analysis of relevant biblical passages. While this close attention to Scripture sometimes involves a tendency toward extensive quotation without a correspondingly extensive systematic exegesis (p. 24 f., 109 f.), it nevertheless has the advantage of putting at the reader’s disposal a wealth of biblical material for further study, while at the same time the author uses this close concern with Scripture as a means of presenting a number of excellent exegetical interpretations of certain basic biblical terms such as righteousness, holiness, sanctification, and love (p. 12 f., 81 f.).

Although the approach is thus exegetical rather than theological, the author makes his opinions clear that God’s encounters with man through his Spirit are thoroughly ethical in nature (Chapter II); that the two Testaments present a unified, though progressively developing picture of God’s holiness, man’s sin, and human redemption through the transforming agency of the Spirit (pp. 20, 21, 26); that the New Testament doctrine of Baptism with the Spirit is characteristically the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and not a second crisis experience in the believer’s relation to Christ (p. 101); that sanctification involves both a formal aspect in which the believer is reckoned righteous through union with Christ by faith and a progressive aspect in which the believer’s moral nature is gradually transformed—although no believer ever actually achieves the standard of holiness in this life (pp. 113, 116, 120); and that repentance and faith, while made possible through God’s free and universal grace to all, are specifically conditions that man himself must meet through his own decision as prerequisites to regeneration by the Spirit (pp. 56–62, 152–153). Thus Dr. Lehman opposes, in the name of Scripture, the extreme dispensationalist contrast between the Old and New Covenants as related to the believer’s personal salvation, the doctrine of a “second definite work of grace,” the Wesleyan concept of entire personal sanctification (perfectionism), the Calvinistic doctrines of efficacious grace and unconditional election, and the Arminian concept of self-contained natural ability. On the other hand, few if any of these affirmations and denials are discussed in the critical atmosphere that would characterize an adequate systematic theology: and in general it is correct to say that the approach is primarily expository and devotional rather than theological and critical, though an exception to this point is approached in the discussions of Wesleyan perfectionism and Arminian natural ability.

This general absence of systematic theological orientation is doubtless the basis for whatever negative criticisms we might be disposed to offer. There is, for example, a rather conspicuous vagueness on certain theological points which should be clear in any such work: the essential relation of the Holy Spirit to Deity is hinted at (pp. 6, 7) but never clearly analyzed; that Adam’s sin had an effect on posterity is asserted (pp. 10, 78), but we look in vain for any precise definition of this effect or of its moral basis; that Christ’s anointing by the Holy Spirit was the basis, in some sense, of his redeeming power, is repeatedly asserted (pp. 34–44, 52), but the problem of the relation between the Holy Spirit’s function in Christ’s ministry and the divine nature of Christ himself is not even mentioned; and finally, in a work that continually emphasizes the theme of redemption through Christ, the lack of a discussion of Christ’s Deity, as related to his mediatorship, is keenly felt. In connection with the last point, this reviewer feels an even deeper inadequacy: while the author speaks much of the believer’s justification through union with Christ, his explanation of this union seems primarily concerned with the believer’s personal relationship of faith in Christ; at no point that I can find is there any clear explanation of Christ’s death as a vicarious satisfaction or of the believer’s justification as based on the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. But these criticisms, while they detract from the value of the discussion, may simply be the results of the lack of theological orientation previously mentioned; and they should not therefore prevent the reader from appreciating the spiritual warmth and intellectual stimulus which, in this work, urge every Christian believer to a more total commitment to Christ as Lord and as supreme Exemplar of the Spirit-filled life.

S. C. HACKETT

Evangelical Preaching

Evangelical Sermons of our Day, edited by Andrew W. Blackwood (Harper, 1959, 383 pp., $5.95) is reviewed by James DeForest Murch.

This volume contains 37 messages from men who “preach the Word.” A recent survey revealed that 75 percent of the ministers in the United States consider themselves evangelicals. Dr. Blackwood’s selection is a fair cross-section of this sector of Protestantism.

There are names like V. Raymond Edman, Peter Eldersveld, Billy Graham, Oswald C. J. Hoffman, Leslie R. Marston, Harold J. Ockenga, Alan Redpath, Paul S. Rees, Samuel M. Shoemaker, and Cary N. Weisiger, III. This is sufficient assurance of the quality and value of the sermons in the book. The editor makes no claim for their “greatness,” but gives them a higher commendation—“good and faithful.”

The sermons are grouped into six sections: (1) The Background of the Gospel, (2) With Christ Before Calvary, (3) With Christ Near His End, (4) With Christ After the Ascension, (5) With Christ in Later Epistles, and (6) With Christ in the Unknown Future. Evidently they were not prepared with such an outline in view but naturally tended to speak, as true evangelical sermons must, in terms of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. Despite the fact that some of the preachers are of Arminian persuasion, some of Calvinistic, and others of eclectic theology, they all reveal a love for the same Lord and declare the same basic Gospel.

Marks of good evangelical preaching may be seen in dependence on Holy Scripture in text and doctrine, stress on the saving Gospel, food for Christian nurture, practical application to life problems, and the message of Christian hope. Always there is the note of divine authority. These men speak not “as the scribes and the Pharisees” but with an inner conviction and confidence that inspires faith and brings decision for Christ.

Ministers who read the volume will thrill at Shoemaker’s sermon calling for decision for Christ in the Battell Chapel at Yale; at Kirkland’s bold dealing with the burden of the Seventh Commandment; at the “tone color” and heart appeal of Rees’ “The Service of Silence”; at Graham’s evangelistic entreaty in terms of God’s grace; at the high challenge of Ockenga’s “Jesus, the Christian’s Example,” and other great preaching.

As the book goes into the hands of young ministerial students, they will be inspired to measure up to the stature of “good and faithful” preaching. Ministers of long standing will find help and encouragement in maintaining superior pulpit standards. Even the “brethren in the pew” who enjoy good preaching will find here a feast of good things.

JAMES DEFOREST MURCH

Covenant Implications

The Biblical Basis for Infant Baptism, by Dwight Hervey Small (Revell, 1959, 191 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by John Murray, Professor of Systematic Theology, Westminster Theological Seminary.

When Mr. Small says in his Preface that it is “a conciliatory spirit that motivates” him in writing this book (p. 6), we must not think that there is any lack of forthright vigor in presenting the biblical evidence supporting his theses. This volume is polemic in the truest sense, and the author in admirable fashion marshals the arguments for infant baptism and for sprinkling as a scriptural mode of administration.

Those who may be disposed to recoil from a traditional formulation of Covenant Theology are hereby advised that what is found on pages 15–29 is not characteristic of the rest of the volume. The whole discussion from that point on is based directly on Scripture and there is nothing stiff or stereotyped. In reference to the question at issue, Mr. Small’s insistance upon the Abrahamic covenant as “normative for the understanding of God’s redemptive purposes” (p. 34) and upon the unity of the covenant of grace is supported by a thoroughly competent and refreshing treatment of the biblical data. Having established this basic thesis, his argument proceeds not only to draw out the implications but also to adduce from Scripture the many considerations which show the perpetuity of that covenant provision exemplified in the Abrahamic covenant by the circumcision of infants.

Small is well aware of the abuses so frequently associated with infant baptism. “It is an appalling thing,” he says, “that countless thousands participate in infant baptism in our churches who are never instructed in the promises or the obligations!… It is cause for deep repentance upon the part of ministers of Reformed Churches” (p. 48). And his plea for covenant nurture is worthy of letters in gold. “God establishes His covenant with parents not only for their assurance as to what He will do, but also for their strengthening for what they must do” (p. 53). “Parental faith in God’s promise will always be known by parental faithfulness to God’s will” (p. 54).

Small’s treatment of mode in Part II (pp. 119–191) excels in fairness and competence. Scarcely any relevant biblical usage or passage is overlooked. He leaves us in no doubt as to the propriety of sprinkling or pouring, and shows that these are the modes congruous with the symbolism intended.

There are indeed details to which this reviewer takes exception. Small’s endorsement, for example, of the “principle of presumption” (p. 80; cf. pp. 64, 87), though espoused by some of the greatest Reformed theologians, is not one that, in the reviewer’s esteem, can be validated. But apart from some incidentals, here is an eminently worthy addition to the library on baptism, and it is timely.

JOHN MURRAY

Temporary Or Permanent?

Persuaded to Life: Conversion Stories from the Billy Graham Crusades, by Robert O. Ferm (Revell, 1958, 192 pp., $2.50), is reviewed by Faris D. Whitesell, Professor of Practical Theology, Northern Baptist Seminary.

Does large scale mass evangelism produce permanent and worthwhile results? Professor Robert O. Ferm of Houghton College has written this book to prove that it does. He has collected and verified the conversion experiences of a large number of people who professed faith during the Billy Graham Crusades. These experiences are typical of countless others unknown to the general public.

Dr. Ferm’s material is interesting, varied, and conclusive. As one reads the accounts, largely in the words of the converts themselves, he cannot help but be impressed by their genuineness and sincerity. All walks of life and all ages are represented.

This book has created several profound impressions in the mind of the reviewer, and probably will do the same for any sympathetic reader.

1. The gospel of Christ has not lost its ancient power. It is still the power of God unto salvation to everyone who hears and believes (Rom. 1:16). The big problem is how to catch the ear and attention of the careless, Christless multitudes.

2. The Billy Graham Crusades have reached many who never would have been reached in any other way. The size and publicity of the Crusades aroused interest and drew attendances.

3. True conversion is sudden. All of these people made sudden and drastic breaks with the old life. Many experiences and much time may be necessary to prepare the way and to lead up to conversion, but when it comes it is abrupt.

4. The power of the Holy Spirit is in the Billy Graham meetings. The straightforward, clear gospel preaching came with tremendous impact to show sinners that they were lost and that they needed Jesus Christ. Elements of mystery, reverence, and supernaturalness surround the invitation. Many never expected to go forward, but harriers seemed to melt away, and they joined the hundreds of others streaming to the front. The convicting, wooing power of the Spirit alone accounts for it.

Pastors and Sunday School teachers will find many fine illustrations in this book, and students of psychology and evangelism will find it full of challenging material.

FARIS D. WHITESELL

New Version

The Christ of the Gospels, by William F. Beck (Concordia, 1959, 224 pp., $3), is reviewed by E. P. Schulze, Minister of the Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer, Peekskill, New York.

Luther’s endeavor in translating the Bible was to make the holy writers speak German. His translation was strongly idiomatic but in many cases a very free rendering of the originals. It is apparent that Dr. Beck is attempting with success to make the inspired scribes speak English. Beck, too, has taken pains with idiom, and in the present work he has produced a free and somewhat periphrastic translation of the four Gospels combined into one chronologically arranged account.

Dr. Beck has been working for years upon a translation of the entire Bible. A scholar, familiar with textual criticism, may often be deficient in popular appeal, but this book, along with specimen printings of his translation of Ruth and of Galatians, indicates that in his literary style he has the common touch. When pastors of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in the Detroit area were asked to compare 57 passages in the Revised Standard Version with the same verses in Beck’s translation, and then without being informed from which of the two the texts were taken, they were questioned, “Which is the language of the people?”—the vote was 3,558 to 162 in favor of Beck’s version.

As this volume was reviewed from the uncorrected proofs, I cannot evaluate details of the published work. The general effect is one of easy readability, though perhaps somewhat too colloquial in places to suit all tastes. It is to be hoped that this book will stimulate an appetite for Beck’s complete Bible.

E. P. SCHULZE

What are evangelical churches in Las Vegas doing to bring Christ to residents and hundreds of thousands of transients who flock there each year?

Weldon D. Woodson, Alhambra, California, writer has made a special study of Christian witness in Las Vegas. Here is his report:

To hosts who have frequented the Nevada city featuring high gambling, low taxation, easy marriage and painless, simple divorce, the thought that Las Vegas even has churches may be startling. The mainstay business is gambling with the evil yoked to it. Neon lights that glitter the highway from McCarran Airport to downtown Las Vegas herald this:

GAMBLING 24 HOURS A DAY … SLOT MACHINES … “THE SHOW THAT MADE AMERICA BLUSH” … SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS FOR DIVORCEES …

Nevadans voted gambling out in 1909 and it didn’t come back again for 22 years. The 1931 legislature, which also put through a six-week divorce law, legalized licensed gaming.

With this, Las Vegas mushroomed from a sleepy community of 5,000 in 1925 to a feverish, brassy city of more than 50,000 today. It has become a virtual “Broadway of the sagebrush” with plush night clubs operating along its famed “Strip” which now extends some six miles south of the center of the city.

Las Vegas unashamedly emblazons the fact that it is after the tourist and his dollar. Around the clock, seven days a week, the spinning roulette wheels, clicking dice, and swishing cards lure sight-seers. There is hardly a grocery store or a drugstore without its supply of shiny slot machines, waiting to consume the visitor’s quarters or half-dollars. In 1957, Clark County, which Las Vegas spotlights as the county seat, grossed a gambling revenue of $70,158,310.

To determine how evangelical churches succeed in letting their light shine in this abysmal darkness of degredation, the author queried their ministers and among those who responded, these give an insight to the spiritual side of Las Vegas:

Charles Swan, minister of the 120-member Church of Christ, said that to reach transients and tourists, the church has complete coverage of highways with easily read signs advertising it. It carries a weekly display ad with sermon subjects for both Sunday services in the local Review-Journal and the Sun, as well as display ads for special events such as Vacation Bible School and “revival meetings.” There are not many converts among transients, but a number are brought to Christ who have been residents of Las Vegas for short periods.

“Without exception, Las Vegas is the most difficult field that I have ever labored in during the 23 years I have been preaching the gospel,” Swan said. “However, its rewards have been rich. It is a field that presents a great challenge to every Christian. A true Christian can live a Christ-like life wherever he is. Daniel endured the lions’ den and the heroes of faith recorded in the 11th chapter of Hebrews “endured as seeing him who is invisible.”

Swan stated that five per cent or less of the members of the Church of Christ are affected by the gambling in Las Vegas. These are overcome by the fanfare and constant advertising of the gambling interests. “Satan lacks nothing here by the way of allurement,” said the minister, “and newcomers who are spiritually weak are sometimes overcome by it all.”

The Rev. W. H. Higgenbotham, pastor of Las Vegas Foursquare Church, said that many people of his church work in motels and some own motels, where they have opportunities to be of great influence in winning converts. They contact those sojourning in Las Vegas for the six-week period to qualify for a divorce, the majority of whom—stated Higgenbotham—are unhappy and dissatisfied with their way of life and will give attention when one tries to help them.

Besides encouraging his members to witness to such and to encourage them to confess Christ, Higgenbotham conducts a radio broadcast over station KRBO, “Country Chapel Time,” which invites listeners to write or call for counsel or prayer. “We feel that we have been able to reach more people with this program than by any other means,” he said.

He pointed out that Las Vegas is made up of three or more classes of people. “The vacationer or sight-seer, of which there are many,” he said, “does not come to Las Vegas to attend church, so we do not have much influence in that class.

“Then there are those who work in the gaming houses as gamblers, bartenders, and what have you, whose hours are very irregular, making it next to impossible to reach them in any way. Yet in spite of that, many of them do attend church.

“Then of course there is the class of people who are ordinary shopkeepers, construction workers, and all the other workers that go to make up a city of the size of Las Vegas. Many people in Las Vegas have no connection with the gambling or entertainment world in a direct way at all.”

Higgenbotham cited his own family—three boys, one girl—as to whether Las Vegas has a bad influence on the children. The oldest son, 20, took all of his high school training in Las Vegas and is now working as a draftsman and attending the University of Nevada.

“All of our children,” Higgenbotham said, “are attending schools here and are normal in every way, and I believe their attitude is the same toward gambling as it would be if we lived in another state. Perhaps that is because of what they were taught in the church and at home.”

The Rev. William C. Arbaugh, a tall young man with a blond crew cut, graduated from Northwestern Seminary, served a year in the Virgin Islands under the Board of American Missions of the United Lutheran Church, and arrived in Las Vegas in 1951, where he became pastor of the Lutheran Church of the Reformation. Actually, it was a church in name only, for it consisted of a group of only 14 people who met in a room in a private home.

Two years later, Arbaugh counted the attendance at a Sunday morning service. Total: 14. But slowly and humbly he and these few plodded along and today the membership comes to 130 and a $100,000 church building was dedicated in the summer of 1956.

Pastor Arbaugh pointed out that Church of the Reformation has a responsibility for serving those who come to Las Vegas from Lutheran areas. “But this is not the limit of our opportunity,” he said. “There are many people here who are not related to any church. Our job is to reach them.”

The Rev. H. L. Rippel, graduate of Northern Baptist Seminary in Chicago and a one-time student of Moody Bible Institute, who serves as pastor of the Las Vegas Bible Church, on an average each year passes out 50,000 gospel tracts. He and his members make four drives a year in homes and trailer parks, where they leave literature and invite those they call upon to attend church. House-to-house visits result in only one in a hundred attending a service, but canvassing the trailer parks results in one out of ten showing up at Las Vegas Bible Church on Sunday.

Among the many converted from visits to trailer parks, Rippel recalled a 14-year-old girl who yielded her soul to Christ five years ago. Now 19 and a high school graduate, she lives in California. “Neither her relatives nor any one from the family is saved,” said Rippel, “yet she has kept true to the Lord.”

Glenn L. Tudor, minister of First Christian Church, cited as means to attract transients to services newspaper advertising and sizable signs on the four major roads leading into Las Vegas—from Los Angeles, Arizona, Utah, and Reno. Plans call for a new building on five acres which the church purchased in a newer and growing section of the city. It is on a prominent drive, and a sign has been erected, facing both directions from which traffic approaches, stating it is the new site and that services are now being held at the present location.

“Although our church is small,” Tudor said, “we have guests each Sunday.”

The Rev. Walter Bishop, pastor of the First Baptist Church, said that his congregation—in addition to making itself known via newspaper and phone book advertising—has for more than 14 years broadcast its morning service. He stated that the church has two services in the morning, another at night, and that many visitors are in attendance. “Many good Christian people visit Las Vegas,” he said, “and of course countless local people have not ‘bowed the knee to Baal.’ ”

Walter W. Hanne, minister of First Presbyterian Church, stated that there was no Presbyterian church in Las Vegas until 1953 when he came there to organize one. Today First Presbyterian has a building valued at $350,000 and a membership of 800. “It has been a wonderful experience and the phenomenal development we have had has been most stimulating,” Hanne said.

He claimed that most people who live in Las Vegas are just normal people like any other community and are greatly interested in the churches. According to the local Chamber of Commerce, there are 70 denominational groups in greater Las Vegas.

‘Solomon and Sheba’

In the nation’s capital the Queen of Sheba came upon evil days during Christmas week. In two Washington theaters her visit to Solomon was acclaimed as virtually the greatest love story ever known. Handling the theme with some restraint was Inbal, touring Israeli dance theatre. But then there was the film—“Solomon and Sheba.”

The movie program carries a lewd picture of a fertility cult dance captioned by some of the beautiful love language of the Song of Solomon. Tastelessness and grossness pretty well characterize this “King Vidor Production.” Despite the laughable claim to “scrupulous fidelity to the biblical version”—so as to avoid “sacrilege”—and generous use of proof-texts, it is readily apparent that King Vidor reigns supreme over King Solomon in determining the film content. And Hollywood lordship over Scripture proves a fearful despotism indeed. Eastern legends are (in effect) rendered canonical, and the Queen of Sheba is set forth as “the most famous courtesan of all times.” If “the half was not told” the Queen, Hollywood is now determined to tell it to us.

Sheba turns out to be a grape-eating Italian firebrand named Gina Lollobrigida, who tries to make a perpetual sneer look attractive. Working with Egypt against Israel, her big problem is to get Solomon (Yul Brynner with hair) alone—thus to destroy him and his country, because the Hebrew religion with its teaching that “all men are equal” could mean the end of “absolute monarchs.” Unable to find a match for Sheba’s beauty in his harem, Solomon moves her into the palace and into an “adjoining chamber.” After a bathtub scene, seduction is achieved in a nauseous portrayal of an orgiastic dance “which alone cost more than $100,000 to film.” Solomon’s temple is destroyed by lightning. The Hollywood attitude these days seems to be that since DeMille used up the biblical miracles, “we’ll have to create our own.”

And here come Adonijah and Joash, to whom all sorts of unbiblical things happen (the film makers appear to have mislaid the biblical chronology), leading an Egyptian army which spectacularly accumulates at the bottom of a ravine. Sheba wonders how she can tell victorious Solomon “that I carry his child.” But the king, hearing of her conversion and awakened love for him, forgives all and apparently is comforted by Sheba’s parting assurance that their illegitimate child will one day rule over Sheba.

This is the stuff to which woefully misguided parents will send their hapless offspring to gain some Bible “knowledge.” Yet sadly enough, Hollywood’s most burning fidelity to Scripture appears to be in its meticulous—albeit expanded—depiction of sins narrated in the biblical account. But where the Bible speaks of these in terms of condemnation and judgment, Hollywood treats them with a delight born of box-office greed. And when it finally arrives at judgment, one cannot escape the feeling that not only should judgment be portrayed—it should also be shared.

F.F.

Is the Cross Adequate?

Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam, Methodism’s elder statesman, looking forward 175 years, sees the church in a space age confronted with “the thinking, the culture, the dreams, the problems, the limitations of the people who populate the great planets of the universe.”

Speaking in Baltimore at the concluding ceremony of a commemorative “Christmas Conference,” marking the official organization of American Methodism in 1784, Oxnam expressed doubt as to the adequacy of Christ’s death on the cross as a redemptive act for space folk throughout the universe. Among questions he posed: “What are these [space] creatures like? Did the Eternal reveal himself to them? Could he have sent his Son to each one of the planets?… Was the whole terrible enactment that we call ‘Calvary’ requisite for other human beings to learn the meaning of ‘love so amazing, so divine’?” He left his queries unanswered.

“The future will be at least a period of the stretched-mind, with fundamental readjustments in the realm of philosophy and of course theology,” said the aging sage. “As Methodism faces the future, we must ask once again, What are the priorities? Do we put first things first, and what do we mean by ‘first’? It is not simply a question of abundant power but a question also of power over ourselves. Natural limitations will no longer stand as barriers that keep us from reaching the Promised Land …”

“Methodism confronts a new world, but a new world that will be dependent upon the unchanging truths of the old world. It is a future in which there must be light, in which there will be leisure, in which love shall rule.”

Canadian ‘Heritage’

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is sponsoring a 10-week series of half-hour religious dramas and documentaries based on work of Christian churches.

The new program, called “Heritage,” is being produced in cooperation with the National Religious Advisory Council. Both Protestant and Catholic themes will be presented.

Religious Radio: Free Or Paid?

How to deal with commercial radio stations which refuse to sell time for religious broadcasts?

The question is expected to create considerable discussion this week at the annual meeting of the National Religious Broadcasters in Washington.

The NRB, affiliated with the National Association of Evangelicals, numbers in its membership most of the major paid-time religious radio broadcasters in America.

Another organization, the American Council of Christian Churches, noted before the Federal Communications Commission last month that an “increasing number of radio stations are refusing to sell time to religion.”

Its spokesman, Dr. Carl McIntire, called for an investigation “of all aspects of religious radio and television programming and practice.”

“Our survey of 368 stations revealed that 236 stations, or 64 per cent, do not sell time to religion; 86 stations, or 23 per cent, will sell on a limited basis; and 48 stations, or 13 per cent will sell time in a free competitive market,” he said.

Stations who refuse to sell to religious broadcasters are expected to donate time for church broadcasting. Allocation of such free time, however, often falls into the hands of church councils. The NRB has long expressed the fear that this policy discriminates against broadcasters not represented on church councils.

Non-paying religious programs received only 3.1 per cent of a week’s total radio and television time in the latest National Council of Churches survey.

The survey, conducted by the NCC Broadcasting and Film Commission, was based on programs aired last November 1–7. It included Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Jewish programs broadcast over 141 commercial stations in 11 major U. S. cities.

People: Words And Events

Deaths: Dr. Oscar O. Gustafson, 69, Augustana Lutheran Church leader, in Litchfield, Minnesota … the Rev. Jacob Van Ess, 82, former vice president of the General Synod of the Reformed Church in America, in Coxsackie, New York … Dr. Pierre Wilds DuBose, 67, founder and president of Hampden DuBose Academy in Zellwood, Florida, in Orlando.

Election: As president of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dr. Allan A. MacRae, president of Faith Theological Seminary.

Appointments: As program director of the Academy of Religion and Mental Health, Dr. Harry C. Meserve, a member of the executive staff of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and former minister of the First Unitarian Church of San Francisco … as assistant executive director of the National Council of Churches’ Department of Social Welfare, Arlette Pederson.

Dr. L. Nelson Bell, Executive Editor ofCHRISTIANITY TODAY, spent 12 days in Korea last month as an official representative of the Board of World Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. Dr. Bell, a member of the board, along with Dr. S. Hugh Bradley, its Far East secretary, was commissioned to make the trip at the urgent request of his church’s Korean Mission to try to effect a reconciliation between rival factions of the Presbyterian Church in Korea. Dr. Bell said upon his return that such a reconciliation may be in the making. Here is his report:

Presbyterian church circles in America have been distressed over the growing crisis which has been developing within the Korean Presbyterian Church during the past year or more and which culminated in the adjournment of the Taejon General Assembly September 26. After three days of hopeless wrangling, the assembly had split. One faction reconstituted an assembly the following day and the other met separately two months later. Each claimed to be the legal assembly.

The cause of this split has been widely publicized in some circles in America as a struggle between conservative and liberal theological forces resulting from a basic departure from the faith by some missionaries now working in Korea.

I do not believe the basic problem to be doctrinal.

There is probably no church in the world more conservative in theology than the Korean Presbyterian Church. Presbyterian missionaries in Korea, moreover, have for generations been as one in their allegiance to the historic evangelical faith. They have just reaffirmed their conservative theology on the basis of the doctrinal statement signed by the board and trustees at Pyengyang Theological Seminary in 1920.

To this statement, which conforms to the Westminster Confession of Faith, these missionaries have added the following statement:

“It is our deep concern that faith in these historic affirmations be translated into consistent Christian living, for Christianity is not only faith in the Person and Work of Christ, but also a way of life proceeding from this faith, in which Christ has the pre-eminence in our personal lives and our relationship with others.”

What then is the issue, and why this serious schism?

I have been a member of a special team sent to Korea to seek the answers and to see if issues could be resolved. I participated in a number of meetings with representatives of the rival factions.

After some days, representatives of both sides were brought together. They unanimously agreed that a reuniting of the divided assembly is imperative. They set up a committee to issue a joint statement and proceeded to arrange dates for subsequent meetings to carry out plans for restoring broken bonds.

Because of this much-prayed-for development, to now go into some of the personalities involved and into some of the internal issues having to do with honesty and truthfulness (or the lack of it) would at this stage contribute nothing to help the situation and could well hinder the mediatorial and remedial efforts now in effect.

At the same time, because a very small minority group saw fit to invite Dr. Carl McIntire and a few followers to Korea to fan the flames of unrest and uncertainty and in so doing to widen the breach in the church, it seems imperative that the record be set straight for those who wish to know the facts.

For years the Korean Presbyterian Church has been a member of the World Council of Churches. Beginning more than a year ago the Koreans were told that the council is pro-Communist, and that it is dedicated to the spread of liberal theology and to establishment of a world church. Membership in the WCC makes a church pro-Communist, they were told, and any individual who defends membership in the WCC becomes a part of the world conspiracy and a part of the modernist apparatus.

In a land which has suffered so bitterly at the hands of Communists, where hundreds of ministers and tens of thousands of Christians have been martyred for their faith, such allegations and attributing of guilt by association become matters of deepest concern, even of life and death itself.

Because of wild assertions by McIntire and his followers the Korean Presbyterian Church (bitterly anti-Communist in attitude) is right now being subjected to police scrutiny in some areas.

It seems that a small splinter of hardcore extremists will reject reunification. This can prove a blessing. But, if misguided friends in America contribute funds to enable them to carry on their work, it will be like pouring oil on flames. The recipients of this money may use it, not to “defend the faith,” but to further their personal plans.

In Korea the recommendation of the Cleveland Study Conference that Red China be admitted to the United Nations and that it be given diplomatic recognition by the United States was an infuriating suggestion. Many of us agree. But this action of the Cleveland group has been attributed to the World Council in Korea, with resulting confusion and deep resentment.

I left Korea greatly encouraged, however. Men of genuine Christian spirit and with a love for their church are joining those from both factions to bring them together. For the sake of unity, those who have favored the WCC have readily agreed that the church should withdraw from it. But they have insisted that untrue accusations against the WCC be refuted.

Leaders of the women’s work in the church, and of the youth and Sunday School departments, are eager to see a reconciliation. A growing number of “neutrals” are pressing for accord as well.

There is a great spirit of prayer abroad. There are individuals who must repent and some may find it necessary to submit to discipline, although in a reunited church true revival will bring its own disciplinary action. The seminary, at the very “heart” of the church, must be reunited also. Many difficult tasks need to be faced.

The Korean church was born in a revival. From 1903 until 1907 there was such a mighty work of the Holy Spirit in the land that the entire Christian world was stirred. Down through the years, moreover, the church has been known for spiritual fervor and evangelistic zeal. But no church has suffered so, from wars, oppression, and—in some ways the most difficult of all—the demoralization which has come with liberation in the South. There have been the postwar problems of love for money, lowered moral and spiritual standards, and a seemingly abnormal desire for ecclesiastical position and power on the part of some.

But evident today is a deep sense of need, of repentance, and of prayer which can bring this great church her greatest and most fruitful period of service.

Nothing can contribute more to this happy outcome than the prayers of God’s people in America. In some measure the outcome rests in the hands of Christians in the homeland who pray for these brothers in Christ, for a cleansing and empowering work of the Holy Spirit in Korea today.

Decade of Destiny

The turning point in the life of singer Bill Carle came in 1950 when he knelt at a chair in the Los Angeles office of Youth for Christ International. Soon after his conversion, Carle, whose show business background was climaxed with a Metropolitan Opera contract offer, was singing from sacred scores which appealed to Christian teen-agers from coast to coast.

“In school after school,” he observed, “I’ve noticed a lack of interest in the cause of freedom and a lack of concern for the great spiritual truths that the founding fathers wrote into our American way of life.”

The basso’s answer was to propose the gathering together in the nation’s capital of many thousands of Christian teen-agers. The idea would be not only to provide the cream of American youth with new inspiration and fresh challenge, but to dramatize for them their spiritual heritage and to demonstrate to the American public that the finest U. S. teen-agers are those who are dedicated Christians.

Last month Carle saw his dream come true before a capacity audience at the cavernous National Guard Armory in Washington. Stepping to the rostrum to welcome 9,300 registered delegates to the “Capital Teen Convention” was Dr. Roy McKeown, executive director of the convention and the man who as head of Los Angeles Youth for Christ had counseled Carle 10 years ago.

The three-day conclave, most ambitious undertaking in YFCI’s 15-year history, brought teen-agers from 48 states and 13 countries. For many the trip to Washington had been prefaced by long days and nights of car-washing, lawn-mowing, and baby-sitting as each raised his fare (those from the West Coast paid as much as $180 to attend).

Among registrants were 45 teen-agers from the hamlet of Wishram, Washington, which only has 300 young people in the entire town.

YFCI officials owed much local enthusiasm for the convention to directors of 400 Saturday night rallies held regularly not only on a small scale in hamlets like Wishram but before audiences of 1,500–2,000 and more in cities such as Los Angeles and Pittsburgh. The YFCI ministry which specializes in teen-age evangelism is currently active in 45 countries. (See “Has ‘Youth for Christ’ Grown Up” in the August 31, 1959, issue of CHRISTIANITY TODAY.)

YFCI President Ted Engstrom, Taylor University graduate in journalism and a layman, keynoted the convention by tabbing the sixties as a “decade of destiny.”

“The answer to the world’s needs,” he said, “lies with you teen-agers.”

Vice President and Mrs. Richard M. Nixon had been listed as official “host and hostess” for the convention, but neither appeared. Nixon instead called upon Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to pinch-hit for him. Flemming delivered a 20-minute address as part of the convention’s “You and Your Country” day observance. His participation ruffled some evangelical tempers, for Flemming is viewed as “furthest on the left” in the Eisenhower cabinet.

A speech by President Bob Pierce of World Vision climaxed the second day’s activities which revolved on “You and Your World.”

Billy Graham, who started his evangelistic career with Youth for Christ as its first full-time, paid employee in 1945, concluded the convention with a challenge pegged on the third-day theme, “You and Your Tomorrow.”

Gospel Films, a YFCI affiliate, premiered “Monkey Business,” a 50-minute color production which seeks dramatically to counter the teaching of atheistic evolution.

The convention, though plagued by rain, was a remarkable achievement in logistics. Caterers served 80,000 meals in the armory in two and a half days. The youthful delegates were transported in 200 buses to and from their 25 hotels and on carefully-planned tours of the capital area. Much of the behind-the-scenes preparation was attributable to U. S. Senator Frank Carlson of Kansas, convention chairman, rally director Chuck Harwood (a New England sales executive for Heinz food packers) whose Northern Virginia Youth for Christ was host; and Danny Thomas, Los Angeles area motel operator who assisted in planning.

Washington residents, accustomed to trouble when high school parties converge on the capital in the spring, were unable to link a single unpleasantry with the YFCI conclave.

Some evangelical observers were uneasy over the jazzy overtones which pervaded much of the convention music. They praised the quality of the performers, coordinated under the able young hand of Thurlow Spurr, but challenged the tendency toward chord arrangements which seemed more appropriate to a night club.

McKeown predicted in dismissing the convention that “right now we are on the threshold of a world-wide teen revival.”

Engstrom tentatively announced that another “Capital Teen Convention” would be held in four years to reach a new crop of Christian high school students.

‘Frontier Forums’

Some 3,000 students from more than 100 countries assembled in Athens, Ohio, December 27-January 2, under the banner of the National Student Christian Federation. Their chief concern was social issues.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., took the occasion to announce plans for enlisting youth in a new “non-violent movement across the South” to promote integration.

King said the movement will utilize boycotts and “other means of non-cooperation,” though “just where and when I can’t say.”

Churches should “teach a world view,” he declared, “so that men realize we are engaged in a world struggle to make men spiritually one,” and “make it clear that racial segregation is morally evil.”

The assembly was the 18th in a quadrennial series heretofore sponsored by the Student Volunteer Movement. The new sponsor, the National Student Christian Federation, is related administratively to the National Council of Churches’ Division of Christian Education and was formed last year out of a merger between the SVM, the United Student Christian Council and Inter-Seminary Movement.

Featured in the seven-day meeting were “frontier forums” dealing with such topics as “new patterns of obedience in mission,” militant non-Christian faiths, new nationalisms, racial tensions, technological upheaval, communism and modern secularism.

‘Today’ in Boston

The Christmas morning service at Boston’s Park Street Church reached into millions of American homes. The service at the church, which is observing its 150th anniversary, was picked up live for transmission coast-to-coast as part of Dave Garroway’s “Today” program.

“Christ’s perfect life and sacrificial death on the cross procured redemption for you,” said Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, pastor, “fulfilling what the angel declared, ‘Thou shalt call His name Jesus for He shall save His people from their sins.’

“This Christ will dwell in you when you believe on and receive him as your Saviour. Then the full experience of the Christmas message, ‘Peace on earth, good will to men.’ will be yours.”

A look at the recent pattern of Billy Graham’s evangelistic engagements reveals a marked trend toward shorter crusades.

For instance, Graham has included nine countries in his African campaign, just begun, but in no city is the crusade scheduled to extend beyond 11 days.

The reasoning behind this change of strategy is spelled out in this exclusive interview which the distinguished, 41-year-old evangelist granted toCHRISTIANITY TODAYon the eve of his departure to Africa.

Q: Is your health a factor in the decision to shorten crusades?

A: Yes. The longer crusades were taking too much out of us physically.

Q: Which crusades were the hardest?

A: Something went out of me in London and New York that will never be replaced. We were three months at Harringay Arena and four months at Madison Square Garden.

Q: What does a major crusade entail in addition to nightly addresses?

A: There are assorted other speaking engagements daily, plus ever-present pressures of writing articles, seeing people, and keeping a hand on organization.

Q: How long is your day?

A: In a major crusade, from about seven in the morning until midnight.

Q: How long can you keep this up?

A: I have reached the point that I am now almost exhausted after two weeks. Since passing 40, I find I must go at a much slower pace.

Q: What is the most exhausting aspect of a crusade?

A: The invitation. If there is no invitation, I can give an address and hardly know—physically speaking—that I have ever spoken. It is when you are driving toward a decision that the drainage takes place in preaching. Those who do not do evangelistic preaching have no idea of what is involved.

Q: Besides your health, what else has been considered in shortening crusades?

A: Well, we can only take about three extended crusades a year. If we cut them to one or two weeks each, we will be able to take six or eight.

Q: Are you still getting invitations to hold crusades?

A: Last year we received more invitations to hold crusades than we did in all previous years of my ministry combined.

Q: And with shorter crusades you hope to accept more invitations, is that it?

A: Yes. At the present rate, we could only touch comparatively few cities in the remaining years that in the providence of God may be left to us.

Q: Do you think that the impact of a shorter crusade can be as great?

A: Yes. We are finding that people will put everything they have into a shorter crusade more readily than in a longer one.

Q: What about sites?

A: We are hoping that all future crusades will be out-of-doors. We find we can reach the unchurched out-of-doors far better than by indoor meetings.

Q: Why?

A: I have tried to analyze many times the psychology of this, but as yet I do not have an answer.

Q: Are there not disadvantages to shorter crusades?

A: Definitely. I am convinced that many times it takes two to three weeks for the crusade to get a genuine grip on a city. Many pre-conceived ideas must be overcome. Also, people who responded to the invitation begin going out and getting their friends and bringing them back. The crusade becomes a popular topic of conversation. I am not sure that all of this can be done in a shorter crusade.

Q: Will you no longer hold any extended crusades?

A: No. But I imagine all future crusades will be limited to four weeks.

Q: Are any four-week crusades now planned?

A: Just two, in Philadelphia in 1961 and in Chicago in 1962.

Q: How about one-week campaigns?

A: We plan several of these this year. Following the meetings in Africa, we will hold one-week campaigns in Washington, Essen, Hamburg, Berlin, and among the Spanish-speaking people of New York City.

Q: Is not Washington the first city in which you have made plans for a second major crusade?

A: Yes. We held a crusade in the nation’s capital back in 1952.

Q: Why are you returning?

A: Because the population of Washington today is almost entirely different from what it was eight years ago. Also, we hope to make this second effort a national crusade with extensive use of radio and television.

Q: In what sense have changing times and readjustments of U. S. attitudes demanded shifts in evangelistic strategy?

A: I am not sure. I might cite, however, the greater church support I am finding in our crusades, the greater enthusiasm, larger crowds, and especially: much more interest among young people than there was 10 years ago.

Q: Where is—

A: And I might add that we are getting a tremendous number of invitations to hold crusades on college campuses. This could not have happened 10 years ago. There seems to me to be a definite shift in attitudes on the college campus.

Q: Where is the additional church support coming from?

A: I don’t think we are getting quite as much Presbyterian support, but we are getting more Lutheran, Episcopal, and Methodist support than we did as late as two years ago.

Q: Do you use different approaches in different places?

A: Only to the extent that in America my emphasis in preaching is a great deal on sin and judgment, whereas in foreign countries it is more on forgiveness and love.

Q: Why preach on sin and judgment in America?

A: In a recent poll, 94 per cent of Americans over 14 years of age claimed church identification. Thus, it is quite evident that the depth of commitment on the part of the average church member is very shallow. There seems to be little sensitivity to sin and its dire consequences.

John Wesley once said, “I must preach sin and judgment before I can preach grace and love.”

The professing Christians of America need to be reminded of God’s judgment in this life and the life to come, upon sin. When there is a sense of sin, people are driven to the cross for forgiveness. In most foreign countries outside of Europe there is already a sense of sinfulness and the people seem more ready for a message of love, mercy, forgiveness and reconciliation. They seem to be already aware of their need, much more than Americans and northern Europeans. Naturally there are exceptions to this everywhere.

Q: Have you any plans to alter your ministry?

A: I see little adjustment, unless it be that I will shift more and more to college and university campuses. This is where the leadership of tomorrow is being trained, and the Lord seemingly has opened the door and laid the burden on many people for me to spend more time on the campus. In fact, I am preparing myself at this moment for this type of ministry.

Q: What potential does television offer?

A: I am not sure it is a medium that we can use continually.

Q: Why?

A: It seems that we reach a saturation point if we go week after week. I think it is better to come on a few times a year rather than every week.

Q: But does not television present a vast scope of endeavor?

A: Yes, but I am not sure that television holds the interest of the country today as it did even two years ago. I find that people are not such slaves to their sets.

Television is a tremendous medium for reaching people with the gospel, but it also has its peculiar and unique disadvantages and saturation points that even people in the television industry do not quite understand.

New Approaches

New approaches in the scholarly study of the Old and New Testaments were stressed by speakers at the 50th anniversary meeting of the National Association of Biblical Instructors, held in Union Theological Seminary and attended by some 300 seminary, college and university instructors.

Professor George Ernest Wright of Harvard Divinity School said recent philosophical, theological and archaeological developments in the biblical field have changed the way in which the Old Testament is studied and taught.

“The new interest in biblical theology,” he stated, “has meant that we need no longer be defensive about attempts to teach the Old Testament as a religious document of primary importance in the history of civilization.”

In his presidential address, Professor Lauren E. Brubaker, Jr., of the University of South Carolina, evaluated the teaching of religion in colleges and universities. More than 13 per cent of students in a liberal arts program at these institutions of higher learning are enrolled in at least one course on religion, he said.

Professorial Plaques

The Evangelical Theological Society honored two of its first officers last month. At its 11th annual meeting in Wheaton, Illinois, the professorial group presented plaques to Dr. R. Laird Harris of Covenant College and Seminary and Dr. Merrill C. Tenney of Wheaton College.

Tenney was the first vice president of ETS and Harris was its first secretary. The society consists of some 500 members, associates, and student associates, all of whom have subscribed to the doctrinal basis: “The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and therefore inerrant in the autographs.”

Missionary Medicine

Some 770 doctors, medical students, missionaries and nurses from 39 states, 4 Canadian provinces and 25 other countries attended the first International Convention on Missionary Medicine in Chicago last month.

The convention was sponsored by the Christian Medical Society, which numbers more than 2,000 doctors, medical and dental students and missionaries of many Protestant denominations. Dr. P. Kenneth Gieser, an ophthalmologist, founded the group 12 years ago and now serves as its president.

Protestant Panorama

• Protestant candidates won two gubernatorial posts and two mayoralty seats in recent elections in the Philippines. Evangelicals viewed the results as highly significant in a country which is 98 per cent Roman Catholic.

• The Evangelical United Brethren Church is launching a world-wide $5,150,000 “Mission Advance Program.” Funds will be channeled into an expansion of the church’s ministry.

• Newly accredited by the American Association of Theological Schools: California Baptist Theological Seminary at Covina, California, and Mennonite Biblical Seminary at Elkhart, Indiana … Northwest Association of Secondary and Higher Schools accredited George Fox College of Newberg, Oregon.

• Methodists in Wales are conducting their first visitation evangelism mission this month, led by 11 U. S. ministers.

• The National Lutheran, “magazine for Lutheran cooperation,” begins monthly publication with its January number. Heretofore the publication, issued by the National Lutheran Council, has appeared five times a year.

• Christian Endeavor Week will be observed from January 31 through February 7. Theme: “Citizenship Unlimited!”

• An unofficial, independent “Episcopal Society for Cultural and Racial Unity” was organized by some 100 white and Negro clergymen and laymen from North and South at a three-day meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, last month. The group says it seeks to put into practice on a “grass roots” or diocesan level Episcopal racial policies (which oppose segregation).

• Stanford University is turning over a hospital to the San Francisco Presbytery. Stanford recently moved its medical school to new facilities.

• A giant cross will be fashioned out of the 70-foot Maine spruce which adorned the White House grounds during the Christmas season. The cross will be placed on the lawn of the Bethesda (Maryland) Congregational Church.

• The Methodist Board of Temperance says it is broadening its field of concern to include smoking, in light of mounting evidence that smoking is harmful to health.… “Stop Driving Us Crazy,” new 10-minute color cartoon film produced by the board, plugs traffic safety.

• Washington’s Central Union Mission, located virtually in the shadow of the U. S. Capitol, is observing its 75th anniversary.

• The National Council of Churches is promoting a year-long study of “key problems in the nation’s economic life.” The study is to be launched with observance of “Church and Economic Life Week,” January 17–23.

• American-born Colonel Muriel Booth-Tucker is giving up her charge as the Salvation Army’s Northern Ireland divisional commander to become territorial commander in Belgium. She is the youngest of the 27 grandchildren of General William Booth, who founded the Salvation Army in 1878.

• The Evangelical Free Church of America plans to open a medical missionary center in Hong Kong. In charge of the new center will be two Minneapolis physicians who plan to sail with their families in July, Dr. Robert Chapman and Dr. Gordon Addington.

• The United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. is opening an office of educational loans and scholarships in Philadelphia.

• In Davao City, third largest metropolis in the Philippines, a two-week youth crusade held under auspices of 12 of the city’s 15 Protestant churches produced 273 recorded decisions for Christ. Evangelist for the crusade, which closed last month, was the Rev. Bill McKee of Orient Crusades.

• The United Missionary Church is observing 1960 as a “Year of Evangelism” in its North American congregations and foreign mission posts.

Editorial Resignation

The Rev. J. Marcellus Kik, Associate Editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY since the magazine established editorial offices in Washington nearly four years ago, has resigned to devote his immediate future to writing books and to evangelistic preaching missions.

Author of five books, he is soon to issue a revised edition of his volume, Matthew Twenty-four. He is also working on expositions of Genesis and Revelation.

Accepting Reins

Dr. Edwin H. Rian will become president of Biblical Seminary in New York in May, succeeding Dr. Dean G. McKee, who will have served in the post 14 years.

Rian, now president of Jamestown (North Dakota) College, said in accepting the reins at the 60-year-old non-denominational graduate school (enrollment: 169):

“I am honored to be associated with Biblical Seminary, which is known for its ecumenical spirit and emphasis upon the Bible with its testimony to Jesus Christ and his Gospel for the whole man and the whole world.”

A graduate of the University of Minnesota, Rian holds the M. A. degree from Princeton University and the Th. B. from Princeton Theological Seminary. He authored The Presbyterian Conflict, A Free World, and Christianity and American Education.

McKee asked to be relieved of the presidency to return to full-time teaching following a year’s sabbatical leave.

An Invitation

Trustees of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, product of the merger of Pittsburgh-Xenia and Western theological seminaries, made public last month their choice for the new school’s president.

Their invitation went to Dr. Clifford Edward Barbour, one-time moderator of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. who has served as president of Western since 1951.

Barbour holds the B. A. degree from the University of Pittsburgh, the B. Th. from Western, and the Ph. D. from the University of Edinburgh.

Clergy Exemption

Ministers of music or religious education are now specifically eligible to exclude from their federal income tax housing allowances paid in lieu of a parsonage, if such ministers are ordained to perform sacerdotal duties customary to their denomination, according to the Internal Revenue Service. Tax returns filed within the last three years may be amended to claim the exemption, the IRS said.

Defining a Jew

Israeli children whose mothers are not Jewish will be required to go through rabbinic conversion if they are to be officially recognized as Jews in Israel.

New government directives state that under rabbinic law children follow the religion of their mothers.

Interior Minister Mose Shapiro subsequently ruled that no one can be officially recognized as a Jew who does not belong to the Jewish faith. He defined a Jew as “a person born of a Jewish mother who does not belong to another religion, or one who was converted in accordance with religious law.”

Gamblers’ Breakthrough

Governor David L. Lawrence signed into law last month a bill which permits betting at harness races in Pennsylvania, subject to county option.

The new law represents the first breakthrough in Pennsylvania’s long ban against legalized gambling.

What to Do?

Back from a world tour, Southern Baptist President Ramsay Pollard said he found Baptist pastors in Japan and Korea who failed to preach with “warmth and conviction.” Some of them, he added, “didn’t have the slightest idea of what to do” when people came forward to receive Christ at meetings he addressed.

Unfulfilled Call

On December 31 the Rev. Cecil R. Thomas wound up 16½ years of faithful service as Western states district superintendent of the Christian and Missionary Alliance.

During a trip to the Far East several years ago, Thomas had been impressed with the need for additional missionaries. He subsequently served notice that, at 57, he was giving up his U. S. post to go to the Philippines on his own in an evangelistic and Bible teaching ministry.

Thomas never reached the field. On January 2, while he and his wife were driving home after visiting relatives in Indiana, their car collided head-on with another vehicle on a highway outside Indianapolis. Both were killed.

Religious Giving

An estimated $3.9 billion was given to religious causes in the United States last year, compared with $3.6 billion in 1958, according to the American Association of Fund-Raising Counsel.

Refreshing Candor

Hailing 1959 as “a year of refreshing candor in the field of religion and politics,” Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State awarded “top citations” to Democratic Senator John F. Kennedy and U. S. Roman Catholic bishops.

The organization indicated approval of Kennedy’s “forthright statement of March, 1959, in which he characterized as unconstitutional the appropriation of public funds for parochial schools.”

Although disagreeing with the statement issued by the Catholic bishops on birth control, POAU cited it for “refreshing candor.”

Episcopal Bishop James A. Pike also was cited for a “fearless and analytical reply” to the bishops’ statement.

“When such controversial issues can be talked about publicly without charges and countercharges of bigotry, it shows that we have progressed since 1928,” said POAU.

A review of 1959 events in Church-State relations issued early this month observed that “America is becoming more mature in discussing controversial religious issues.”

POAU singled out for additional citations several groups which acted to preserve separation of Church and State.

“Our top citation goes to the Texas state convention of the Southern Baptist denomination which renounced a gift of $3,500,000 tax-financed hospital in Texarkana, Texas, on the grounds that acceptance of government funds by a sectarian institution would violate the spirit of the First Amendment,” POAU said.

Another citation went to the U. S. Department of Justice for “asserting the federal government’s tax claim against the Christian Brothers of California, manufacturers of brandy and wine, involving more than $1,000,000.”

The Christian Brothers, a Roman Catholic order, has claimed tax exemption on its business operations.

A third citation was given to the Rev. Earl MacIntyre and “the Protestants of Bremond, Texas” for their legal battle “to recapture the town’s public school from a sectarian religious order which has taken over the school and placed its members on the public payroll.”

CULTURE—RELIGION—CHRIST

Because culture, in the common use of the word, connotes the attractive and the desirable, it is often confused in people’s minds with Christianity.

Culture implies refinement of taste, social grace, and intellectual and aesthetic training.

We also call a particular stage in civilization, along with the social development and mores of a certain race as culture. The various stages run the gamut from crude paganism of early times to the sophistication in our day. And the influence of culture has, from time to time, been widely reflected in the creative arts and in the political and economic life of nations.

But culture should never be confused with Christianity. Let us take the Apostle Paul for illustration.

Paul was educated and steeped in the culture of his day. But after meeting the risen Christ on the Damascus road and completely surrendering to him, he came to see the clear distinction between those things which produce a cultured way of life and the one thing which reconciles a sinner to God.

Writing to the Christians in Corinth he says: “For look at your own calling as Christians, my brothers. You don’t see many of the wise (according to this world’s judgment) nor many of the ruling class, nor many from the noblest families.… When I came to proclaim to you God’s secret purpose, I did not come equipped with any brilliance of speech or intellect.… What I said and preached was a demonstration of the power of the Spirit of God! Plainly God’s purpose was that your faith should not rest on man’s cleverness but upon the power of God” (Phillips, 1 Cor. 1:26–2:5 in part).

Paul recognized the danger of confusing culture with Christ, of interposing human wisdom between the sinner and God’s revelation in his Son.

It is because culture is so satisfying to human pride, and intellectual attainments frequently become an end in themselves that the great educational institutions, which were founded for and once were bulwarks of the Christian faith, are now largely enemies of that faith. It is very easy for sophistication to take the place of spiritual perception and the adventures of the mind to lead into a morass of earthbound speculation when the Author of wisdom, the God of the universe, is not relied upon.

That the Christian should develop social graces, refinement in tastes, and intellectual power we do not argue. These things can be used for God’s glory and can certainly increase one’s usefulness as a steward of God’s love and grace.

The world owes a great debt to everything which has contributed to gracious living and to scientific and technological discoveries, the benefits of which we all enjoy.

The point at issue, therefore, is not the worthwhileness of such things, but that they must not be confused with Christianity or made a substitute for those spiritual values which come through faith in Christ alone.

Religion

An unredeemed culture is not the only enemy of Christ, however. Religion can be a deadly obstacle to a knowledge of God. There is a form of godliness which denies the power thereof, a religiosity that becomes a substitute for Christianity. We could even speak of it as a religion of culture. Here we find worshiped the best that contemporary civilization has to offer. Man and his magnificent accomplishments hold the center of the stage. The god of this world has captivated the hearts and minds of the devotees of this religion, and the eternal God of the universe, the One with whom all men must ultimately deal, receives lip service at best and is more often ignored or denied.

In past generations men spoke of “Gospel-hardened sinners,” men and women who repeatedly heard the Gospel message and became hardened through repeated rejection of the claims of Christ.

Today there is another subtle danger—that of being exposed to an attenuated form of Christianity. The result has been a generation that is effectively vaccinated against true Christianity.

Evidences of “religiosity” are all around us. Courses on “religion,” sermons which are ethical but not doctrinal, humanism portrayed as the acme of man’s goal—anything is exalted but the simple Gospel of Christ’s dying for our sins and being raised from the dead for our justification. These activities in the name of religion have all conspired to make many people religious who know nothing of the implications of the Cross.

Culture in its perfection can be utterly pagan. Religion can enlist the devotion and activity of man, but is able to lead a man no higher than his own attainments.

Christ

Only Christ makes Christians, and Christianity exists only as men and women come into a saving relationship with him. In a real sense Christianity is Christ living in the hearts of men.

The Apostle Paul said: “For me to live in Christ, and to die is gain.” And again: “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” Also he said: “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”

Christianity is a Person. It is also a way of life. But this way of life cannot be lived apart from Christ, for it proceeds from his indwelling us and is the outward manifestation of his presence within us.

Furthermore, there is but one Christ, the Christ of the Scriptures. From the Written Word we learn the historical facts about the Living Word, and through the Holy Spirit we come to an experimental knowledge of our Saviour.

The world desperately needs Christ, for the hope of the individual and of society rests not in culture and not in religion but in a personal and continuing experience with the Son of the living God.

Keenly aware of the person and work of Christ, Satan is unceasingly active among men to provide substitutes for the Cross which appeal to mankind and lead to destruction and to raise every possible stumbling block to Christ and his claim on us.

In pulpits today there is the ever-present temptation to preach ethical concepts without the root of spiritual fact; to equate social graces with Christian behavior; to pander to intellectual attainment rather than humble faith; to confuse the god of this world with the sovereign God of the universe.

Only Christ can give us peace in the midst of turmoil, rest where others are restless, courage when hearts are faint, hope where the world is hopeless, power where spiritual power is wanting and an eternity with him for all who are his own.

L. NELSON BELL

Though comparatively short, the epistle to the Galatians is, because of the significance of the doctrine it contains, one of the most important writings of the New Testament. All the evidence, both internal and external, confirms its authenticity as a product of the Apostle Paul’s pen. This evidence stands despite the attempts of certain radical continental scholars to discredit it and to relegate it to the spurious writings of the second century on the tendentious hypothesis that its history is incompatible with that of the Acts and its theology too advanced for that of the first century. Today, however, it is such scholars, and not the epistle, who stand discredited.

THE CONTENT

After the opening salutation (1:1–5) which, so far from being merely polite and perfunctory, is, as befits a Christian letter, warmly evangelical, Paul proceeds immediately to a matter of utmost seriousness: members of the Galatian churches had actually departed from allegiance to the Gospel which Paul had proclaimed to them, and had given heed to a different gospel, not that there was an alternative one (1:6 ff.). There is no passage in the whole of the New Testament which emphasizes more strongly the absolute uniqueness of the Christian Gospel, or more completely condemns those who seek to lead men into the Kingdom by some other way. So vital is this issue that Paul pronounces his anathema not only against the false teachers who had been deceiving the Galatians but also against himself, and even against any angels from heaven should they ever preach any gospel besides that which he had originally preached to them. It is here in this passage that the narrowness of the way which leads to life becomes most apparent. The innate perversity of man is constantly demonstrated in the fact that, generation after generation, he desires to multiply the ways of salvation, to invent easier roads, by-passes, alternative routes. But Paul insists that there is but one way which has neither rival nor variation.

This uncompromising attitude is not one of bigotry; it is the consequence, and the only possible consequence, of this Gospel that is no product of human invention or philosophy but is a revelation to Paul by Jesus Christ (1:11 f.). No wonder he is so confident about its uniqueness!

There follows an autobiographical section (1:13–2:2) which is in effect an explanation of the Apostle’s assertion that the Gospel he preached had been entrusted to him by God himself. Conscious as always (cf. 1 Cor. 15:9 f.; 1 Tim. 1:11 ff.) that it was due solely to God’s sovereign grace and predestined purpose that he, a persecutor and fierce enemy of the church of Christ, had been chosen, called, and commissioned, Paul describes how he sought solitude, conferring with no man, not even with the Apostles in Jerusalem. Indeed, it was only after an interval of three years that he went up to Jerusalem (cf. Acts 9:26 ff.) where he spent a fortnight with Peter and saw no other Apostle except James the Lord’s brother.

Then, 14 years later, Paul went up again to Jerusalem (2:1). By this we understand him to mean 14 years after his first visit mentioned in 1:18, and therefore some 17 years after his conversion. If this is correct, then in between these two visits was another, the purpose of which was to bring relief to the Christians of Judea who were enduring the rigors of poverty and famine. There may well be a covert reference to this intermediate visit in 2:10 where Paul remarks that he was zealous in remembering the poor. (It is the poverty-stricken members of the mother-church in Jerusalem who are intended. The important place which this charitable work had in Paul’s planning and ministry is indicated in passages such as 1 Cor. 16:1 ff.; 2 Cor. 8 and 9; Rom. 15:25 ff., and also Acts 24:17). The occasion of the visit referred to in 2:1 then will be the summoning of the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15), about 50 A.D.—an interpretation which seems to accord well with the subject matter of 2:3–10. On the problems involved in attempting to arrive at a chronology for Paul’s life from the data available, see Bishop Lightfoot’s essay on The Chronology of St. Paul’s Life and Epistles (in Biblical Essays, pp. 215 ff.), Kirsopp Lake’s excursus on The Chronology of Acts (in The Beginnings of Christianity, Vol. V, pp. 445 ff.), and the articles on the Chronology of the New Testament by C. H. Turner in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible and by W. P. Armstrong in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.

The concluding part of chapter two is concerned with one of the main questions discussed at the Council of Jerusalem, namely, whether Gentile converts should be compelled to live like Jews. This was a crucial question for the early Church, not only in Palestine but also, as this epistle shows, for Christians in places like Galatia into which Judaizers had infiltrated. So crucial indeed was it that Paul recounts how he had on one occasion found it necessary to withstand even the Apostle Peter to his face and in the presence of others (2:11 ff.). Yet, despite the decision of the Council of Jerusalem, and despite the teaching which Paul had given when he took the Gospel to the people of Galatia, the Galatian Christians had culpably permitted themselves to be misdirected into accepting a Judaizing perversion of the Gospel (3:1 ff.).

The central significance of chapter three lies in the fact that it gives, with clear and compelling argument, the Christian answer to this false teaching. It is true that God’s covenant with its attendant promises was enacted with Abraham, the great ancestor of the Jewish people, and to his seed, and that the seal of that covenant was the sacrament of circumcision; but the essential link with Abraham, for those who wish to participate in the blessings of that covenant, is not circumcision, but faith (3:7). Moreover, the Gospel conveyed in the covenant was always, from the very beginning, intended for the whole world and not just for those who were Jews or who conformed to the requirements of Jewish ceremonial law. God’s promise to Abraham was that in him all nations would be blessed (3:8, 14).

The Gospel is cosmic in its scope, not exclusive. Again, the seed of the promise is not the Jewish nation but the one person of Jesus Christ (3:16): in him alone the covenant has its fulfilment and its fruition. It is, therefore, all important to be united to Christ, for otherwise a man can have no part in the covenant; and this union with Christ is realized by faith—not by the Jewish law, which is not of faith but of works (3:11 f.). The law, indeed, shuts us off from Christ because it shuts us all up under sin, since all (Jews as well as Gentiles) are law-breakers (3:22 f.). Thus our justification cannot be by law (which we have all broken and under which accordingly we are all found guilty), but only by faith which appropriates for its own the perfect atoning work of Christ as our Law-Keeper and our Sin-Bearer (3:13). It is this faith which unites us to Christ, whatever our racial or social background may be, and thereby constitutes us “Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise” (3:24 ff.).

Besides the requirement of circumcision, the false teachers in Galatia were demanding the observance of “days, months, seasons, and years,” which in fact involved a retrogression to the “beggarly rudiments” of the ceremonial law which with the coming of Christ had been superseded and abrogated (4:9 f.). These “days” were doubtless Sabbath days, insisted on instead of the first day of the week which for the Apostolic Church had become consecrated as the Lord’s Day (cf. the Seventh-day Adventism of our time); the “months” would be the celebrations connected with the appearance of the new moon (cf. Col. 2:16); the “seasons” would refer to the Jewish festivals such as those of the passover, pentecost, and tabernacles; and the “years” should be understood in connection with the custom of observing sabbatical and jubilee years.

The Galatian Christians were in reality being robbed of the freedom which they had found in Christ and were being brought into an unevangelical bondage. This Paul illustrates by his famous allegory of Sarah, the freewoman, and Hagar, the bondmaid (4:22 ff.). It is plain that Paul does not resort to the use of allegory in the extravagant and artificial manner of his contemporary Philo and of a number of the early fathers of the Church (not to mention the penchant for “spiritualizing” Scripture which is characteristic of certain groups today) who thought they could discover esoteric meanings everywhere in the Old Testament without respect to the obvious sense of the words. This had the effect of making the Bible a repository of mystical teaching available only to those with ingenuity enough to unearth it. Paul’s allegory, however, follows naturally from the historical events relating to Sarah and Hagar: Isaac, the son of the freewoman, was in the line of promise; Ishmael, the son of the bondmaid, was cast out with his mother. Hagar he links with Sinai (where the Law was given) and with “Jerusalem which now is” (Judaism), and Sarah with “Jerusalem which is above” (the evangelical city of freed men). The parable is obvious: those who through faith are one with Christ “are not children of the bondmaid, but of the freewoman.” Verse 5:1 should be taken with chapter four and should read, as the conclusion to the argument that has gone before: “For freedom did Christ set us free; stand fast, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of bondage.”

But Paul finds it necessary to remind the Galatians that Christian liberty is something very different from license (5:13). Faith works through love (5:6—an assertion which shows that, so far from being at variance with James, he entirely concurs with his admonition that “faith without works is dead”), not through contention (5:15), nor through fleshly lust (5:16). There is, indeed, an implacable warfare waged between the flesh and the Spirit; for the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit are complete contraries (5:17 ff.). The Christian lives in the sphere of the Spirit and must conduct himself accordingly, knowing that he, together with the affections and lusts of his flesh, has been crucified with Christ (5:24 f.; 2:20; 6:14). And so the Apostle appeals for the manifestation of Christian kindness, humility, and helpfulness (5:26; 6:1 ff.), solemnly warning his readers of the irreversible truth that according as a man sows, either to his own flesh or to the Spirit, so he will unfailingly reap either corruption or life everlasting (6:7 f.).

The fact of the matter was that the Judaizers by whom the Galatian Christians were being misled were, because of their unwillingness to face persecution for Christ’s sake, seeking to avoid the offense of the Cross (6:12; 5:11). But not so Paul: the cross of Christ, with all its offense to the world, was his glory (6:14); and in his body he carried proudly the marks of the Lord Jesus (6:17) which plainly showed to whom he belonged—just as a slave was sometimes branded with the mark of his owner, or a soldier with that of his commander. Paul’s marks were the scars which testified to the severe afflictions and persecutions he had endured in the service of Christ.

FATHERLY CONCERN

The tone of this letter is, in the main, one of rebuke and disappointment because of the serious error into which the Galatian believers had been drawn away. But the impulse behind it is one of deep affection and fatherly concern for their spiritual well-being. They are his little children whom he has brought to the new birth, and for whom he longs that Christ may be formed in them (4:19). They had made such a good start (5:7): how could they have been so undiscerning as to allow themselves to be bewitched and turned aside (3:1)? The exclamation, “See with what large letters I write to you!” (6:11), vibrates with affection—Paul has taken his secretary’s pen and written some words with his own hand, in large characters, to assure the Galatians that it is he, their own Apostle and father in the faith, who is addressing them with loving solicitude. And, most touching of all, he gently reminds them of the remarkable affection with which they had received him when first he had preached the Gospel to them. So keen was their love that they would willingly have plucked out their eyes and given them to him had that been a means of alleviating the infirmity with which he was then beset (4:13–16). The precise nature of this incapacitating affliction is unknown, though many conjectures have been offered. But what little Paul says would seem to indicate that it was a humiliating and even repulsive complaint, and also that it had forced him to stop in his tracks and so had been the cause, humanly speaking, of the Galatians hearing the Gospel from his lips, preached though it was in physical weakness.

HELPS FOR STUDY

The commentaries by Chrysostom (fourth century), Luther and Calvin (15th century), Lightfoot (1865), and in our own day, Herman Ridderbos (1953) may be consulted with much profit. Bishop Lightfoot’s volume contains, apart from the matters dealt with in his Introduction, no less than 18 valuable excursuses and dissertations.

PHILIP EDGCUMBE HUGHES

Editor, The Churchman

London, England

INTROSPECTION

I love my problems,

hold them tight,

And I enjoy them every night:

Two hundred of them,

all acute,

And every one of them a beaut!

Through expert agonized reflection

I have selected my collection;

They all are free of imperfection.

All are hopelessly involved;

None can possibly be solved.

For those that I have most enjoyed

I owe a debt to Sigmund Freud;

It’s hard to beat the bitter bliss

Of utter self analysis.

No analyst at any fee

Could find more ambiguity

In conflicts that I have with me,

Or show permissive empathy

To such astonishing degree

As I can, existentially.

(Especially from one to three—

The wee small hours seem to be

Most suited psychologically

To contemplate my quandary.)

I love my problems,

and resist

Suggestions that they

don’t exist.

Of course their structure so refined

Projects the warped woof

of my mind

(For my repression never hid

The shape of my eccentric id),

And I would never take the view

That these concerns exist for you.

They are my problems,

is that clear?

Please curb your wish

to interfere.

Remove my problems that

I might

Go back to counting sheep

at night?

Now, if I were to share with you

A little glimpse of one or two …

You would be quick to take my view:

For though you could persuade me to

Accept the universe as such

My self-acceptance is too much!

EUTYCHUS

THE VIRGIN BIRTH

This is to thank you for the timely articles and your excellent editorial on the Virgin Birth of Christ (Dec. 7 issue). The reading of this issue brings a thought to focus. The attitude of Christian faith is not primarily to philosophize either that God had to act in this way in order to become incarnate, or that he could as well have acted in another way. The first of these propositions is to put in question the power of him with whom all things are possible; the second questions his infinite wisdom, as though, in some way, we know better than he does which method will best conserve all the interests involved.

Rather faith’s true attitude is to accept the reality of what God has done, and starting with the actuality of the Virgin Birth, to seek the manifold meanings God has in it for us. For one thing, the Virgin Birth calls us to anchor in the mighty acts of God for our salvation rather than to worship a human hero. With the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the Session and the Return, the days of his flesh are a temporal episode in the life of God, the Eternal Son. They open to us, in the Cross, the Father’s arms and the counsels of his peace. Without them we are left only with sympathy for a helpless babe and a pathetic sufferer. The Apostles’ Creed rests faith upon God in Christ; the naturalistic Jesus is an example which men subjectivize as they see fit.

WM. C. ROBINSON

Columbia Seminary

Decatur, Ga.

The issue … leaves me with mingled feelings. The one good article is the one on “Browning’s ‘Christmas Eve.’ ” That is a gem.… The remainder of the paper is just not good.… In reality you have four articles on the Virgin Birth. That does not appear to me to be good editorial policy unless you are hunting for a fight.… But does any one accept Christ at the end of an argument?…

KARL QUIMBY

Public Relations Asst.

American Bible Society

New York, N. Y.

In regard to Dr. Rule’s article, “Born of the Virgin Mary,” I don’t believe I have ever seen a more honest and forthright statement of the subject.… In regard to this idea that the Virgin Birth is not referred to in the Epistles, it is probably true that it is not set forth clearly enough to have apologetic value, but between us as Christians I don’t know how we can understand such passages as Philippians 2 or Hebrews 1 without believing that the Virgin Birth is in the belief of the author and the recipients of the letter.

JAMES CORRY

The Presbyterian Churches

Middlepoint, Ohio

If Luke had meant to give Mary’s genealogy, he would surely have said so.

I. N. BECKSTEAD

Ottawa, Ont.

What we properly call the Incarnation of the Son of God, without the fact of the Virgin Birth, becomes the Divine Entanglement in a fallen world. I do not like to say that a belief in the Virgin Birth is essential to salvation; for the word “salvation” is open to many interpretations. But I do say that an acceptance of the historicity of the Virgin Birth is essential to the integrity of the Christian faith.

F. HASTINGS SMYTH

Superior

Oratory of Saint Mary and Saint Michael

Society of the Catholic Commonwealth

Gloucester, Mass.

I would indeed, claim that the belief in the Virgin Birth is “essential” in the fullest meaning of the word, if one expects to enter into the eternal kingdom at last. The … fact is, the Bible declares that he was born of a virgin, and anyone who denies this, according to the Bible, is a liar—therefore, the Bible declares: “All liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).

H. W. CAVENDER

St. Paul’s Evangelical Church

North Tazewell, Va.

Both [Rule and Carnell] … are inclined to accept the doctrine for sentimental, traditional, or “for-righteousness-sake” reasons; but neither offers any assurance of some reasonable basis of the doctrine being essential for a positive support for spiritual experience.

THOMAS D. HERSEY

Popejoy, Iowa

Prof. Carnell … states that the mode of Christ’s birth forms no part of the “one act of righteousness” by which Christ reconciled God to the world. Luther states in a Christmas sermon on Luke 2:1–14: “Christ was our Savior not only on the cross at Calvary but even in the manger at Bethlehem.” Christ was the Savior from his very birth.

ROBERT E. BREGE

Concordia Lutheran Church

Springfield, Ill.

You are more interested in the sinlessness of Christ than Christ was. He was a man, born of woman, born of a sinful parent. Whatever we contract from our parents at birth, Christ contracted from his. He was … as prone to evil as any of us. Whether or not he yielded to it is another question.… Once you slip him out of our orbit, he is no longer worthy of our attention.… I think he did not [sin].

DONALD C. KUNTZ

The Presbyterian Church of Glenview

Glenview, Ill.

Is not the idea underlying the doctrine of the Virgin Birth the conviction that a true incarnation of God had to be as miraculous in the beginning (birth) as in the end (resurrection), and the one miracle (resurrection) necessarily implies the other (Virgin Birth)?

CLINTON M. CHERRY

First Methodist Church, Roxborough

Philadelphia, Pa.

It seems to me that in an effort to quieten the issue, we ministers have … [de-emphasized] the importance of the issue.… Being a member of the Disciples brotherhood (Christian Church) I can see the need … [for] such an article to get into the hands of all our ministers.

BOB MOOREHEAD

Waukomis, Okla.

To me the Virgin Birth is just as reasonable as the creation of Adam and … just as necessary.…

C. F. HUGHES

Union City, Ga.

METHODIST ANNIVERSARY

This … page about The Methodist Church’s 175th aniversary (Dec. 7 issue) … is indeed fine coverage and your treatment is excellent.

O. B. FANNING

Commission of Public Relations and Methodist Information

Washington, D. C.

The facts are proper but the concluding interpretive “whitewash” is purely presumptive. Anyone who knows anything at all knows the Methodists are the largest most liberal denomination in our country. Its schools, its literature, its missionary work and the vast majority of its pastors hold nothing resembling a biblical position.

VERNON C. LYONS

Ashburn Baptist Church

Chicago, Ill.

ECUMENISM OR EXCLUSIVISM

You imply that the organizational life of the ecumenical movement advocates a party line which excludes the National Sunday School Association (Editorials, Dec. 7 issue).… The NSSA and its local manifestations are advocates of a form of Christian orthodoxy which is propositional rather than creatively renewed.… The ecumenical movement accepts the creative action of God in history and in the tradition of the Christian Faith.… It cannot countenance a biblicism which rejects the living confrontation of God’s Truth in history.

RICHARD E. WENTZ

Mercersburg, Pa.

For two years I served as secretary of a council in a foreign land and often found their chief concern was that the “right bodies” hold the right to speak rather than that the Spirit is allowed to speak through his body, the church.

P. EDGAR WILLIAMS

First Church of God

Chicago, Ill.

I am a minister in the Friends Church.… I have discovered those who are always talking about peace are the less spiritual people. I believe in the peace that comes from the Prince of Peace.… Keep up the good work in your stand against evil even though it be in the Council of Churches.

LEWIS H. MAY

Carthage, Ind.

The WCC may not be God’s agent of redemption but I have seen no evidence that the IFCA is either. Redemption comes to individuals in many different churches wherever and whenever the good news of God is proclaimed. God seems to ignore the affiliation and goes about his work of seeking and saving lost men.

KENNETH HENNIX

Deer Creek-Goodfield Baptist Church

Deer Creek, Ill.

It is my firm opinion that the organization of … [councils] of churches, … which are primarily for the purpose of influencing legislation might be considered as a confession of failure on the part of individual churches and clergymen in the voluntary area in which the love of Christ is the predominant motivating vehicle, rather than force of government.

W. H. EVERETT

Houston, Tex.

PAPACY AND POLITICS

In your editorial entitled “President and Pope in Personal Diplomacy” (Dec. 7 issue), you quote frank statements from Protestant sources when we were purer and more virile in our convictions. These sources call the papacy, “Antichrist, the man of sin and the son of perdition”; “the very antichrist,” etc. But our brainwashed Protestantism of today would never dare to utter such phrases as did the clear thinking, courageous men who forged our faith for us. We are inclined to take American Catholicism as the norm of Catholicity, forgetting that it has been greatly influenced by the very Protestantism that it professes to scorn. It is in Spain and Colombia that Romanism is seen as it really is. In Mexico the priests call American Catholicism “una religion bastarda,” a phrase which needs no translation.

Apparently American Protestantism is being lulled to sleep by the peaceful purring of the American hierarchy. But listen to its statements: “The time is ripe for a momentous Catholic effort in the U.S.… Protestantism—especially American Protestantism—is so doctrinally decayed as to be incapable of offering any serious opposition.… Except for isolated ‘fundamentalists’—and these are pretty thoroughly discredited and without intellectual leadership—Catholicism would cut through Protestantism as through so much butter” (Theodore Maynard, The Story of American Catholicism, p. 613, Macmillan, 1941, with ecclesiastical sanctions).

HENRY F. BROWN

Watsonville, Calif.

In connection with editorial remarks on the President’s current personal diplomacy, while it is, alas, true that in past centuries the Vatican has not always been inhabited papally by a human being whose personal life has shown him to be a man of God, I submit that present and immediately past incumbents of the papal throne were and are men of such saintly lives and such palpable piety that it ill becomes us Protestants of lesser devotional caliber to drag out an ancient document like the Westminster Confession with the apparent object of fanning the fires of religious strife and denominational antagonism. There is far too much of this in the world already. Personally, although I am a life-time non-Catholic—as our Roman friends like to call us—I would find it a privilege and an honor to kiss the ring of John XXIII should he extend to me the courtesy of an interview, and if such were the act that protocol prescribed.

DOUGLAS B. CALDERWOOD

First Presbyterian Church

San Diego, Calif.

I think it would be altogether proper … that a magazine like CHRISTIANITY TODAY … warn the Protestant public what has happened where Catholicism has gone to work to brainwash the Protestants. Let us be on the alert before it is too late. We can become propaganda dopes. But on the other hand, we [can] certainly remain factual without becoming religious baiters.

FRED A. ELZE

Bethel Lutheran

Sutherland, Iowa

PORTRAIT OF A PROBLEM

Your brief editorial on Bible reading in the public schools (Oct. 26 issue) raises a most difficult problem.… May I raise a few questions.

1. When we speak of our traditions is it correct to assume that public Christian education is traditional in America? 2. Can you blame an unbeliever when he objects most strenuously to a book which says that he will be lost forever if he does not accept the Christ? 3. If this central truth is omitted from Bible reading what kind of a Bible have you left? Can you base a true morality upon such Bible reading? 4. If you are a believer, do you want the Bible read to your children by an unbeliever? 5. Can Christian parents be satisfied with anything less than a real Christian school which the state cannot and may not supply?

RALPH J. BOS

Willmar Christian Reformed Church

Willmar, Minn.

PREOCCUPIED PEDDLING

You have performed a splendid service in printing “Higher Critics and Forbidden Fruit” by Cyrus H. Gordon (Nov. 23 issue). That article brings out clearly and forcefully the fragility (nay, non-entity, since non-being is so in vogue these days as a conversation piece) of what has run current so many decades as the final word in biblical scholarship. It brings out not less clearly and forcefully the reason for the success and popularity of the critical views: namely, that so many who are spreading these views have never studied and known what they are peddling and will never be brought to do so.

JOHN LUDLUM

The Community Church on Hudson Avenue

Englewood, N.J.

I am surprised and shocked that today an outmoded modernism is taught in literature that comes from church publishing houses, from the pulpit and, sad to say, in church school periodicals. There ought to be a strong protest; but unfortunately many godly parents do not know what is offered to their children, throwing doubt on … the Scriptures.

WILLIAM A. REVIS

Charlottesville, Va.

ENLARGING THE CANON

Now that the language of the Bible has been brought up to date, when will some inspired man of God bring the Bible itself up to date? In addition to the Bible being God’s written revelation to man, it is also man’s search for God and truth and light and life. Therefore, is it not time that we have another Acts of the Apostles from the time the last book of the Bible was written up to the present? Surely man’s search did not end 1800 years ago.

G. H. EVERLY

Chelten Avenue Methodist Church

Philadelphia, Pa.

ADENAUER’S RELIGION

Concerning the report about Chancellor Konrad Adenauer’s message to the “Munich Kirchentag Rally” (News, Aug. 31 issue) …, my opinion is: … Protestants …, especially the Lutherans, [should not] pay attention to Adenauer’s words.… Adenauer … is a devout Roman Catholic.… Eastern Germany is a land with an absolute Lutheran majority. Adenauer refuses to discuss the reunification of divided Germany with the Russian government not because of political wisdom and principles as to the problem of Communism, but because of his attitude as a Roman Catholic against Lutheranism. He rather will wait until the persecution of the Lutherans by the Communists in Eastern Germany will decimate the spiritual strength of the people.… Adenauer’s intention is to make Germany a Catholic State.… Adenauer refuses to recognize … the right of West Berlin for representatives in the German Bundestag in Bonn … because this would increase the number of Lutheran representatives.… Berlin is a territory with an absolute Lutheran majority.… When after the last election he appointed the members of his new cabinet, twelve of the new ministers were Catholics, and only six were Lutherans, although the majority of Adenauer’s party are members of the Lutheran Church. The Lutherans rebelled against those appointments by Adenauer.…

According to an old law, the German government had to give a certain percentage of the collected federal taxes to the Lutheran Church in order to secure the salaries of its ministers. In lands where the Lutherans were in the majority, the State administration was the patron of each individual congregation. This meant that the administration was obliged to care for repair and maintaining of the church, the parsonage, and the school buildings. This made the Lutheran Church of Germany able to use the offerings of its members for support of churches and missions in other countries.… (The Lutheran Church in Austria—with a 93% Catholic population—would have diminished a long time ago without support from the German Lutheran Church.) … Hitler declared those old laws as not valid.… He also cancelled an agreement with Rome, which permitted the pope to get more money from Germany than the government usually allowed taken to foreign countries. When after World War II Adenauer became chancellor of West Germany, he declared that the cancellation of the agreement with Rome was illegal and must be restored. But he was not willing to restore the privileges of the Lutheran Churches. Dr. Heinemann, a Lutheran, was the first minister of interior affairs in Adenauer’s first cabinet. When he opposed Adenauer’s declaration and demanded equal rights for the Lutherans, he was ousted by Adenauer.…

Adenauer is Rome’s servant, willing to carry out certain tasks in connection with the continuing Counter Reformation.

RUDOLPH FLACHBARTH

St. Mark Lutheran Church

Duquesne, Pa.

PROPHECY OF LENIN

There is one thing our government and Russia is surely agreed on and that’s pushing for socialism. Looks like both are running a race on this and we are ahead. Russia still has to use force to make their people accept socialism while Americans beg for socialism. Lenin was right once. When he said that American capitalists would finance their own destruction, he must have known about what the big tax-exempt foundations would do.…

EWING E. CLEMONS

Tracy, Calif.