“Theologically, the Church is in a mess.” The Rev. Leonard Evans of Toronto went on to say to those gathered for a prayer breakfast in Montreal that today’s existential theology confuses rather than enhances Christian proclamation.

At a laymen’s conference in Newfoundland last fall several men expressed the same view. The man in the pew is “genuinely confused” by what he hears from the pulpit these days, they said, “What should a man believe?”

Last week I listened to a Church of England clergyman who styled himself “avant-garde.” He was from the “Left Bank” of the Thames and was an avid follower of the Bishop of Woolwich. His remarks seem to reflect the “mess” and confusion of our times.

Confidently he exclaimed that “the Bible is rubbish” and “the institutional church is dead.” Clergymen in the Anglican church are frightened to leave the institution, he said, because they cannot compete in society for their livelihoods. He had not heard of the charismatic movement but was certain it must be either Pentecostal or Jehovah’s Witnessy. In any case, it surely wasn’t important and surely, like Billy Graham, was setting back God’s purpose by 100 years.

If the Bible is rubbish, the Church decadent, the clergy incompetent, the Holy Spirit non-existent, and the people unresponsive to the Christian message, what is left, I asked? “I am contemplating leaving the Church for secular work,” he replied. “I can be more Christian earning my living at a secular job than as a rector in a church.”

English theology has challenged the Church to be honest to God. Either Left-Bank honesty, London style, is right and everyone else is on a butterfly chase, or it is wrong and the apostolic faith stands. With scriptural authority in question, cut and thrust prevails. Every opinion-maker is right and the dissenters are wrong, and the noisy gong and clashing cymbals are all sounding simultaneously.

Certainly something is making the churchman edgy:

• Some denominations are in decline.

• Many churchmen are hunting for a new church home.

• Ministerial dropouts are at an all-time high.

• No one can satisfactorily define evangelism.

• Theological candidates are simply not coming forward.

Is English Left-Bank honesty accurately stating the case? Is it true that the Church can no longer meet the demands of the twentieth century? That the Church of today is an anachronism destined to oblivion?

Or is Left-Bank theology a way out for those who find the demands of the cross too heavy? Possibly it seems more respectable intellectually to debunk the sure foundation of the Cross than to admit that the price of being a Christian is too steep.

The patience of laymen has always astounded me. However, I sense that they are now becoming fed up with the way things are in the Church. And many ministers are joining the protest.

Has liberal theology provided mankind with the necessary equipment to do God’s purpose? Or has it merely succeeded in losing the Christian message? We will have to make up our minds about the Bible and the role of the Church in society. Either we have God’s message of reconciliation or we haven’t. Jesus Christ did not teach us confusion; he showed us the way and the truth. We must not forget this.

In my own denomination the spark of renewal is beginning to show itself. For the first time in the forty-three years of our church union, there is a vigorous movement afoot to protest a drift in the church to humanism and ultraliberal theology. This movement has been organized as the United Church Renewal Fellowship. Many in the church look upon the Renewal Fellowship as a kind of bubonic plague, and a step backward. But many others are hoping and praying that its emphasis will in time return the church to the fundamentals of the faith.

This should not be viewed as a split in the church. One characteristic of Canadians seems to be the ability to apply themselves to opposing points of view. Opposition in theology does not necessarily demand schism or breakdown in dialogue. There is no reason why vital and sharp points of view cannot make the whole church a more effective instrument of God.

The Renewal Fellowship appears to be the voice of the evangelicals in the church. It has spread from its starting place in the rural areas north of Toronto to Newfoundland on the Atlantic Ocean and to British Columbia on the Pacific coast.

A recent bulletin of the movement points to three facets of renewal:

First, we must be completely dedicated to Jesus Christ in glad sacrificial service.

Second, we must be faithful to the teaching of the New Testament.

Third, renewal to full Christian dedication and renewal to a consistent … Biblical theology could never take place unless Jesus Christ lives in the hearts of every member and adherent of our church.

The only lasting answer to the needs and problems of our world is a spiritual answer. The Church cannot serve Jesus Christ and meet the needs of man by turning itself into something secular. Certainly we may need to adapt the form of a church to meet the particular needs of its people; but we cannot do this by junking our spiritual and institutional foundations, or by declaring that all that is past is “rubbish.” As a bulletin from the United Church Renewal Fellowship put it: “We are renewed only by glad sacrificial service to Christ, by returning to sound Biblical doctrines, and by responding to the call of evangelism.”

The Church of Jesus Christ has at times throughout history found itself in doctrinal boxes. Church history is marked by struggles that led to new formulations such as the Nicene Creed, the Apostles’ Creed, the Helvetic Confessions, the Westminster Confession, and the Barmen Declaration. In each case the Church was struggling to clear the waters of theological debate, or to proclaim what the apostolic faith meant for those times.

I am quite certain that theologians and laymen were as confounded in those periods of struggle as they are today. But I do not recall that any of them claimed that God was dead. I do recall, however, that Voltaire predicted the demise of the Church by the end of the eighteenth century.

At the Easter season the events of the Cross are in sharp focus. A first look at the Cross points, of course, to the death of Christ. What a shattering experience this was for his disciples! How sorrowful and discouraged they must have been.

But God in his love and mercy raised Jesus from the dead. Renewal today may be measured against that which has already happened. Jesus is alive! And so is his Church.—The Rev. NEWTON C. STEACY, St. James United Church, Montreal, Canada.

February 29 is something extra, something special, something that doesn’t come along every year. So is jazz pianist Dave Brubeck’s first major composition, which premiered on that date in Cincinnati. He completed the oratorio on the teachings of Jesus, Light in the Wilderness, in January. A month before, he had ended his jazz quartet’s sensational sixteen-year history.

Both Brubeck and Duke Ellington—perhaps America’s two greatest living jazz musicians—have recently invested much of their talent in expressing the beliefs of the Bible through music. (See story of Ellington’s sacred concerts in January 21, 1966, issue.)

Brubeck’s religious background is eclectic: “reared as a Presbyterian by a Christian Scientist mother who attended a Methodist church.” He has read the Bible “all the time” for many years, despite a “nomadic existence” in which he once crammed 250 one-night stands into 365 days. During tours he has developed friendships with a couple dozen clergymen and has read such theologians as Tillich and Schweitzer. He got theological advice on the oratorio from Vedanta, Unitarian, Episcopal, and Jesuit leaders.

Although Brubeck has dabbled in religious efforts and once did several TV shows for the National Council of Churches, the idea of doing a serious composition began two years ago. His nephew Philip, 17, suddenly died of a brain tumor. In his grief, Brubeck wrote a choral number of considerable beauty on the text “Let not your heart be troubled. Ye believe in God, believe also in me.” It was months before he would even send this personal memorial to his brother Howard.

“I just jumped into it,” he says, but he found he could express himself in choral writing and began developing the oratorio.

“The struggle between good and evil is apparent in all of us,” Brubeck said in an interview. The problem has been bugging him ever since World War II years, when he went as a callow youth from a California farm to the front lines in Europe. He was “bewildered” by bloodshed, hypocrisy, and—in particular—racial prejudice. “I came to the realization that things you accept from your youth as Christian ethics are gladly skirted by everyone.” Even the Church was at fault.

Now, by writing music, he hopes to do something to “save our country” through a moral revolution both of individuals and of social processes. Mindful of impending racial disaster he says, “We don’t have the time to play around.”

To highlight the good-versus-evil theme, he begins the oratorio with the baptism and temptation of Christ. His program notes imply a struggle between God and Satan over the soul of Jesus the man, in contrast with the traditional view of recognition of Jesus as the Son of God and the subsequent struggle between the Son and Satan.

Brubeck is “not really set” on his view of Jesus. “I would certainly say he is divine,” he says. But “man at his best is divine.” He has been affected by the views of higher critics on some questions of historicity of the gospel accounts.

But with the teachings of Jesus, “I’m right there with every word. I’ll go along with the teachings and the miracles.” How about the Resurrection? “Why not? He probably did more fantastic things that aren’t even mentioned in the Bible. Anything and everything is possible with Jesus.”

The bulk of the libretto is drawn verbatim from Jesus’ teachings recorded in the Bible. In one case, “For I was hungry and ye gave me food,” the moral teachings are intact but the significant context of God’s final judgment upon men is missing.

Whatever its theological underpinnings, the work offers Scripture in a well-conceived, refreshing setting. Unlike Ellington’s patchwork quilt, Brubeck has woven together an organic whole. The cerebral construction Brubeck used when jazz went to college and concert hall is here expanded to major (sixty-minute) proportions.

There are suprises (not so much in the use of jazz and other modern idioms, which have been used in religious music before, though usually less expertly). Examples: (1) The morose, dutiful feeling we sometimes take into the Beatitudes (“Blessed are the poor in spirit”) is shattered by Brubeck’s up-tempo 6/8 tune that stresses the “blessed” as it bounces along. The Cincinnati Enquirer reviewer thinks this “banal” section should be cut, but others will find it charming. (2) One expects the final section to pull out all the stops for a rhythmic, rejoicing romp, because of the pulsations built into Psalm 148 by the ancient Jews who worshiped the living God. But Brubeck’s interpretation is majestic.

Since everyone will be looking for jazz, it should be stated that this is not a jazz work. Brubeck was on hand at the premiere to provide some improvised interludes, but these are optional. The work survives without them; in fact, it probably is better without them.

The “love your enemies” theme produces the most dissonant, wild section of the piece. All sorts of musical eras are pulled in to show the universality of the idea. (But really, “Turkey in the Straw”?) The music seems strangely complex for such a simple idea and the crashing dissonance that closes the section is almost menacing. The suggestion is that “do good to those who hate you” goes more against the grain of man than anything else Jesus said.

Many sections are in the 5/4 meter Brubeck’s quartet popularized. None of the modern techniques, none of the sounds from the percussion bank, are used for their own sake; they are used to impel the listener on through the themes. As Jesus announces that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” the mode of big-band brass seems to blow the dust off the Bible on the bookshelf. The music recaptures the intense excitement the longing Jews must have felt when the words were first spoken.

The same feeling carries into the scriptural potpourri “Where Is God,” early in the second half of the oratorio. The chorus, more twentieth than first century, chants, “This is the generation of them that seek him: Where is God? Or is God dead? Who is man? And who is God?” Here as elsewhere, the baritone soloist sings only the words of Jesus: “I was with God before the foundation of this world.” Under Jesus’ spell the chorus decides, “This is the generation—our generation. Only the fool says in his heart: there is no God!” No vague humanism here, despite the emphasis on teachings!

Performance notes: The Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra and Miami University Singers under Erich Kunzel performed capably. Baritone William Justus was excellent. Fortunately, the huge Ecumenical Chorus drawn from seventy-three local churches and synagogues was mainly for window-dressing. A few sopranos scurried into their wooden seats after the concert had begun! The occasional cicada-like rasp of a movie camera was disturbing. The audience was the kind one would expect—older church-pillar types, arty youths who didn’t look like regular darkeners of church doors, a good sprinkling of nuns. The site was Cincinnati’s grand old Music Hall, with its coffered ceiling and wooden-slat floor.

With such a beginning, it is good news that Brubeck is already toying with two more “very important themes,” though he’s keeping them to himself at this point.

Meanwhile, he’s appearing at Northwestern University’s annual church-music conference next month. A second performance of Light in the Wilderness is scheduled for the July convention of the American Guild of Organists in Colorado. Late this year he plans to take the oratorio on a European tour.

Brubeck is also weighing two offers to be a part-time composer-in-residence of religious music. One is from a Jesuit college in Detroit, the other from Washington (D. C). Episcopal Cathedral.

CHURCH PANORAMA

The United Presbyterian education board received $1.9 million in the will of Mrs. Ida Belle Ringling, widow of a founder of Ringling Brothers Circus.

The Church Journal, published by the Latter-day Saints (Mormons), condemned sex education in schools and related wearing of miniskirts to sex crimes.

The Worldwide Radio Church of God (of Herbert Armstrong’s Anglo-Israel cult and “The World Tomorrow” broadcasts) and its Akron pastor were ordered by an Ohio jury to pay an electrician $30,000 damages for alienating his wife’s affection by telling her the marriage was adulterous because the husband had been divorced.

United Church of Christ agencies began a national program of counseling youths on the military draft and “the demands of their conscience.” Another UCC agency issued a series of five-minute radio programs featuring comments of congressmen on Viet Nam. The Vermont Council of Churches staff ended two years of draft counseling, under pressure, and left the matter up to local clergymen.

A team backed by Myers Park Methodist Church, Charlotte, is providing three weeks of free medical care in the Congo, Liberia, and Sierra Leone.

Lutheran World Federation agencies shipped 73 million pounds of food, clothing, and relief supplies worth nearly $14 million during 1967.

There are now 29,817,707 Baptists in the world, an increase of 2.6 million over the year before, the Baptist World Alliance announced. North America’s total is 26,412,866.

The Salvation Army is setting up a new program in Hong Kong to rehabilitate refugees from Viet Nam.

PERSONALIA

William Miller, Jr., 41, was elected president of the higher-education board of the Christian Churches (Disciples), becoming youngest head of a major agency in the denomination.

Wittenberg University President John Stauffer will be the first lay president of Juniata College, and the first selected from outside the Church of the Brethren. He is a Lutheran.

Gordon College announced March 14 that President James Forrester, currently on leave, has resigned as of August 31. He has been offered a post with a university, as yet unnamed.

The Rev. Floyd Honey, mission-service secretary for the World Council of Churches in New York, was appointed chief executive of the Canadian Council of Churches. A United Church of Canada member, he was a missionary in China until the Communist takeover.

A church court in Athens deposed former Greek Orthodox Primate Iakovos Vavanatsos for “losing his good reputation.” Charges were not made public.

Alan Paton, South African author and critic of apartheid, was choked into unconsciousness and robbed by two Africans this month.

Archbishop of York Donald Coggan said U. S. renunciation of such “obscene” weapons as napalm bombs might be a first step toward peace in Viet Nam.

Anglican Bishop John Phillips of Portsmouth, England, quit as local head of the Family Planning Association, charging that recent laws assume pregnancy and contraception are the only choices for young people, and neglect a third possibility: chastity.

The Rev. John Byrnell of Shaugh Prior, England, refused to help his wife with the dishes because it “isn’t a man’s job.” Wifey won by quoting Second Kings 21:13 (from the King James Version).

MISCELLANY

An American Civil Liberties Union report charges that half of sixty New Jersey towns receiving federal school aid showed favoritism to Catholic students. A federal official replied that lower family income was the reason.

Continuation of tax exemptions for the Vatican is threatening Italy’s shaky coalition government. The finance ministry said Vatican holdings in the Italian stock market are $158.4 million. Income tax on this would be about $1.9 million per year.

The Roman Catholic Church ended its historic ban on entering Masonic lodges, except for groups in Italy and France, according to unconfirmed news reports.

Church World Service is rushing blankets, clothing, and tents to 70,000 Arab refugees who fled camps in the Jordan valley during recent Israeli and Jordanian fighting. Jordan Christian leaders protested the Israeli shelling, in which seventeen persons were killed.

The West Indies Mission radio station in Haiti, which has just quadrupled its power, was praised by Haitian educator George Marc for providing agricultural, medical, literacy, and hurricane-warning information as well as evangelistic programs.

Seattle area churches provided $8,689 for overseas welfare last year by getting members to save and turn in unusual stamps from their daily mail.

Both Protestant and Catholic groups are fighting a proposal to repeal anti-gambling laws in the Philippines in favor of state-controlled gambling.

The International Fellowship of Evangelical Students reports Ethiopia has banned an active group of 500 students in Addis Ababa, along with all other university religious groups, under pressure from the official Coptic Church.

A meeting of 800 pastors, missionaries, and laymen this month in Guatemala laid plans for a drive to get 100,000 evangelicals to seek 100,000 converts.

Inter-Church Evangelism teams led by evangelist-educator Myron Augsburger held one-day seminars on the theology and practice of evangelism last month in Denver, Salt Lake City, and Miami.

Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam sent a mailing to 230,000 voters to swell the “peace vote” in this month’s New Hampshire primary.

The American Friends Service Committee is suspending its day-care and rehabilitation centers in Viet Nam because of war disruption.

The Orthodox Church of Greece declared it would boycott the July World Council of Churches assembly in Uppsala, Sweden, because of blatant intervention in Greek domestic affairs by the WCC and Sweden, the New York Times reports.

THEY SAY

“There must be a reasonable subordination of religious faith” in the military service.—Major Roy Smith, Air Force prosecutor, explaining sentencing of humanist Captain Dale Noyd to a year at hard labor for refusing to train pilots for Viet Nam on religious grounds.

Deaths

JOHN W. BEHNKEN, 83, former Houston pastor who was president of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod from 1935 to 1962; in Hollywood, Florida.

REUBEN K. YOUNGDAHL, 56, pastor of the 10,000-member Mount Olivet Church, Minneapolis, largest U. S. Lutheran congregation; of lung failure; in Hawaii near the end of a Far East tour.

CECIL ALDERSON, 67, Anglican bishop in Rhodesia who denounced the 1965 breakaway from Britain and said Christians might have the duty to disobey unlawful laws; in South Africa, of a heart attack.

PHAM VAN QUI, 28, Vietnamese Buddhist monk who burned himself to death as “a holocaust unto Buddha” for peace during a national day of prayer.

ALOYSIUS P. MCGONIGAL, 46, who extended chaplain duty in Viet Nam a year, then joined a front-line Marine battalion that needed a Catholic priest; in the battle of Hue.

A classic game of buck-passing is being played by federal purveyors of education funds and state officials looking for the easy dollar to finance hard-hit school systems. While they play, “between them, the Constitution falls to the ground” and parochial schools pick up the forfeit.

This wry assessment of the fuss over church-state separation and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 came from attorney Leo Pfeffer of New York, the nation’s leading circuit fighter on church-state issues. Pfeffer represented one of more than a half-dozen litigants in the crucial Flast v. Gardner case argued before the U. S. Supreme Court this month.

If individual taxpayers are not allowed to initiate lawsuits contesting the spending of their tax dollars for religiously oriented purposes, “is there remedy elsewhere?” Pfeffer asked.

Practically speaking, the answer is an obvious no. As Pfeffer put it, the states have “a stake in maintaining the status quo,” and one will look out over the horizon a long time before he sees states initiating action that might eventually cut off federal dollars. State education officials can afford to look the other way in acceding to demands for funds from Catholic and other parochial interests so long as this keeps down the squeaks in the machinery that brings in federal money.

Democratic Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina, a frequent critic of the nation’s highest judicial body, said this time that “the Supreme Court is our only hope.” His appearance before the justices was seen to be in keeping with a now dormant tradition of the nineteenth century, when congressional figures argued regularly in the Supreme Court chamber.

Ervin has, without so much as one vote of opposition, taken a judicial-review bill through the U. S. Senate three times in the past two years. His bill asks that the courts be authorized to review not only the education act but half a dozen other laws of recent vintage that have circumvented church-state issues. But the judicial-review measure has never made it to the House floor.

United States Solicitor General Erwin Griswold, former dean of Harvard Law School, sought to counter the arguments of the church-state separationists. He said there needs to be “play in the joints” in applying constitutional provision against the establishment of religion to the need for good education for all. Griswold asked the court to withhold its hand in making a decision in the Flast case.

The National Council of Churches, which had supported enactment of the education act, also presented a brief, contending that application of the law has been too permissive. Under Titles I and II of the act, the federal education commissioner, who determines how the funds shall be distributed, has not made it any harder for extended parochial hands to get what they came for.

The outcome of the case will be the most significant church-state ruling since the celebrated school prayer cases. It could give encouragement to the strong Catholic education lobby, or it could prove to be the vehicle for testing the constitutionality of public support of church-related agencies. Actually, the court is deciding only whether it should lift a 1923 ban against taxpayer suits. To remove the curb would seem to require also some kind of control ruling to forestall the welter of potential cases on a myriad of subjects.

KEY BRIDGE III

Twenty-three churchmen exploring wider avenues of evangelical cooperation agreed to reinforce city-wide efforts for spiritual renewal in Newark, New Jersey, this summer. They urged and pledged support of the projected Newark crusade to be spearheaded by Negro evangelist Tom Skinner, and vowed to widen its potential impact with outside money and manpower.

Selection of Newark as an area for special attention was the first specific action of the churchmen’s group. It came during the third of the “Key Bridge Meetings,” which are aimed at bringing American theological conservatives in closer touch with one another.

The latest Key Bridge group, again meeting in Arlington, Virginia, March 9 and 10, also adopted a statement addressed to the earlier participants commenting on the possibility of a great national evangelistic thrust cresting in 1973.

The full text of the statement follows:

We have met to consider the possibility of a united evangelical outreach to the nation climaxing in the year 1973. We have listened to the voice of God, speaking to us through the Scriptures, illuminated by the urgency of the times in which we live. It is our conviction that the crisis of our times roots in a human problem, not confined to any one race, class, or culture; that if we seek the outpouring of God’s Spirit in our time, we must begin with full and open repentance within our own Christian communities.

1. We have not made clear the full implications of the love of God for all men.

2. We have been insensitive to the biblical concern for justice and mercy.

3. We have failed to present to many men the living reality of Jesus Christ, Saviour and Lord, as an alternative to the frustrations, despair, and spiritual death in which they exist.

4. The Church has not demonstrated before the world the oneness of the body of Christ across all boundaries of race and class.

5. Our personal contacts have often been limited to our own race and class, to the disregard of the body of Christ and the entire family of man.

We covenant ourselves to search our own hearts and lives to seek anew the meaning of the Lordship of Christ and what it means for us to be Christ’s servants to all men, and to take personal initiative in making friends across class and racial lines that we may more clearly discern the injustices of our time and the practical expression of the love of God for all men. We encourage all Christians everywhere to share in this initiative, and to seek to discover ways to give contemporary meaning to the full dimension of the Christian Gospel.

We will meet at a later time to seek to discern the leading of God’s Spirit.

Under The Southern Cross

This month and next, Australia hosts Billy Graham and his team in a series of evangelistic campaigns in major cities (see chart). The scope of the effort will be broadened by land-line relays from Brisbane and Sydney into outlying communities.

Graham was in Australia once before, in 1959, and attracted some of the largest crowds he has had anywhere. A great number of counselors for this year’s crusade are persons who were converted as a result of the 1959 meetings.

The latest campaign was to include services with Graham in Melbourne and in Auckland and Dunedin, New Zealand, but these were canceled when the evangelist was stricken with a lung ailment. He has recovered and is feeling fine.

Graham and his associates may arrange to go to Melbourne and New Zealand early in 1969.

RELIGION AT THE HEMISFAIR

Three religious groups will have exhibits at the Hemisfair, an international exposition that opens April 6 in San Antonio, Texas. Southern Baptists plan a pavilion—something of a first for America’s biggest denomination. Latter-day Saints will put on a show similar to their New York World’s Fair presentation. And an interdenominational group of evangelical laymen called Alive Inc. plans to show “Sermons from Science” movies. Also, Billy Graham will be speaking at Alamo Stadium June 13–16.

The Baptists will feature a ten-minute film presenting the viewpoint of an archeologist half a million years in the future trying to reconstruct twentieth-century civilization. It leads to man’s search for God, culminating in Jesus Christ and the biblical revelation. A “World Room” will picture Baptist ministries around the globe, and a third room will feature paintings of Baptist history. The exhibit will be located in the historic 101-year-old home of Sarah Eagar, first Anglo-American born in San Antonio.

The 5,000-square-foot Alive Inc. pavilion will seat 126 persons in the main auditorium. Two smaller theaters seating thirty-seven each will be used to show a second film for those interested in further discussion of the Christian message. As at Montreal’s Expo 67 (where the show will be repeated this summer), multilingual sound tracks will be used. Alive will also show seven Billy Graham films a day at the Little Church of La Villita near the downtown Hemisfair site.

A Mormon press release says the church exhibit will portray their belief in “the visit of the resurrected Christ to the Western Hemisphere, an act that ties South, Central, and North American Indians into the House of Israel.” Also shown are God’s “latter-day dealings” with Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. A short movie ends the presentation.

MAKING NOAH’S ARK CREDIBLE

The model of Noah’s Ark now on display in Solomon’s Palace in Jerusalem, seat of Israel’s Chief Rabbinate, is the culmination of fourteen years of work by Meir Ben Uri, 59, a leading Israeli religious artist and architect.

Ben Uri’s hobby is reconstructing Old Testament objects as they might have looked in fact—not fancy. He uses descriptions from the Bible, plus calculations from numerical values of the Hebrew words.

Earlier projects were the seven-branched candlestick and the Ark of the Covenant. Both holy objects, he scoffs, have been over-embellished by Byzantine influences.

Insisting that “every letter is correct and makes the Bible a holy source for research,” Ben Uri went to work on Genesis 6:14–16. He rid himself of current architectural ideas and projected his thoughts to an age along the Persian Gulf when bamboo and pitch served as construction materials.

“The ark couldn’t have been constructed as a tower, a house, or a temple,” he figured, but may have been similar in shape to the smaller ark used by Moses’ mother to conceal her son on the Nile.

In Ben Uri’s theory (see drawing) the ark rested on its side with “the door … set in the side thereof” during construction before the flood. Thus entering animals had to walk an incline of no more than thirty degrees. As the water rose, the ark righted itself and floated, raising the door well above the water. The entire top of the ark had continuous skylights for ventilation. Waste from the animals flowed down to the lowest point and provided ballast. With waste disposed of below, and light and air circulating to all levels, no sanitation problems developed.

He figures the ark weighed about 6,000 tons, with a load capacity of perhaps three times that weight—easily enough space for the animals, Noah’s family, and the food required.

Ben Uri uses a rhomboid design of two equal triangles joined along their bases. A rectangular shape would have required too many supports, allowing insufficient space for live cargo, he says, and would not have provided the buoyancy needed to float such a load.

The simple, functional design required little more than a number of equal-sized triangular templates fitted together, with the necessary internal wooden accommodations. He says that even if Noah was inexperienced he could easily have done such a building job.

Ben Uri, an energetic man who is one of the most respected members of his profession, is an Orthodox Jew living in the quiet religious suburb of Kiryat Samuel on Haifa Bay. His ideas crackle like sparks of electricity.

Qualified men could reconstruct Solomon’s Temple using his system of measurements, Ben Uri said, but he denies working on any such plans. He believes anything on the Temple must be done in relationship with the Tabernacle. “It is a matter of our destiny how our Temple will be built,” he adds. The rebuilt Temple will be reduced to “holy measurements,” he says, and will not be a Hollywood version or another Empire State Building. He dismisses Herod’s Temple as a sacrilege, built by a non-Jew and not according to divine specifications.

Ben Uri admits no more than that he is making a thorough study of the Tabernacle, for possible use if he someday undertakes a Temple design. He modestly claims he needs more study and preparation.

Asked to comment on rumors of an international movement to rebuild the Temple, Ben Uri agreed that some persons are interested but said they are not organized. He doubts whether many—if any—are qualified architects.

“It is not of the Lord. We have had no communication from the Lord and without this, all else is speculative.”

DWIGHT L. BAKER

CROSSING THE BAR

Britain’s new Immigration Act, passed March 1, is “a clear case of racial discrimination,” said a group of Anglican clergy headed by the Rev. R. Peter Johnston, chairman of the Islington Clerical Conference. A sign at a protest demonstration asked, “Is a British passport black or white?” But Home Secretary James Callaghan claimed the bill will help “achieve the ideal of a multiracial society” by limiting “colored” immigrants and thus limiting prejudice.

Presented as an economic necessity, the bill in effect severely restricts immigration of “colored” Asians who are British citizens living in Kenya. Britain has broken her promise to the descendants of the Indians and Pakistanis she brought to Kenya, charged Archbishop of Canterbury A. Michael Ramsey and Roman Catholic Cardinal John C. Heenan. When Kenya became independent in 1963, the Asians became citizens of Britain. Now they face job discrimination under Kenya’s Africanization policies.

The bill was “the last straw” for Bishop John (Honest to God) Robinson, who quit the Labor party and will join the Liberals.

CHICAGO: OPEN-HOUSING TRIALS

With a Senate-passed national open-housing bill before the House, the question of compulsory vs. voluntary approaches looms large. Perhaps no city represents voluntarism better than Chicago, where Martin Luther King and other churchmen hammered out an agreement in 1966.

There is so much talk about open housing in Chicago that one might assume there was a Negro family waiting to move into every block. But Negroes have to pay a steep financial and psychological price to move into an all-white neighborhood. Few have left their lower-class or middle-class ghettos.

The city human-relations commission says thirty-seven Negro families moved into white neighborhoods last year, three more so far in 1968. In the suburbs, eighty-seven Negro families rented or bought in white neighborhoods last year, making a total of 416 Negro move-ins since 1963. In suburb as well as city, the move-ins are concentrated in a handful of communities.

Among agencies encouraging fair-housing practices is the Leadership Council which developed out of the 1966 summit meeting between King and Mayor Richard Daley. There is no unified drive. Agencies advise interested Negro buyers about available housing, try to encourage white sellers to consider Negro buyers, and in some cases provide legal aid. “It’s all pretty much in the talk stage,” says one agency spokesman.

Among church groups making official appeals for fair-housing practices are the Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and United Church of Christ. But the practicing must be done locally. Many clergymen and laymen work on community fair-practice committees, usually without specific church backing. Examples: Missouri Synod Lutherans helped bring a Negro family into Deerfield, northern suburb that was the scene of nationally publicized segregationist activity a few years ago. And in Highland Park, a joint clergy letter was the key to passage of an open-housing ordinance last December.

The Chicago Conference on Religion and Race—coordinating agency for Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish groups—has filed a federal suit over a real-estate agreement in Hinsdale. The village and multiple-listing realtors say that home-sellers who are willing to consider Negro buyers must make a written stipulation in their sales contract. The suit charges that Hinsdale authorities thus consider racial discrimination the norm.

FRED PEARSON

CHURCH ATTENDANCE AND PREJUDICE

Church members who rarely attend worship tend to be high in prejudice, while those who attend frequently are low in prejudice, reports Research Director Merton Strommen of the Religious Education Association. Prejudice is so high among the nominal church members (whose commitment sociologist Strommen calls “religious tokenism”) that, on the average, people listed on church rolls have a higher degree of prejudice than non-members.

Strommen’s study reorients the rule of thumb in the Glock-Stark book, Christian Beliefs and Anti-Semitism, that “the more conservative the beliefs, the less humanitarian the outlook.” Strommen says prejudice actually relates to other factors: “The more educated the person, the more likely he is to question myths and stereotypes and to seek information that is accurate.”

He added, “Those whose understanding of the Christian faith is always black and white, doctrinaire and absolutist, tend also to be this way in their relationships with other people.” The strongest anti-Semitism appears among those who have the least contact with Jews and have no Jewish friends.

Strommen, who is a Lutheran, told members of the Minneapolis Ministerial Association that their congregations need information that will “counteract falsehoods and sensitize them to prejudice. They need teaching ministries which go beyond indoctrinating them in cognitive beliefs to showing them what the life in Christ means in everyday relationships.”

WILLMAR THORKELSON

PROTESTANT-CATHOLIC FILM HONORS

In the Heat of the Night, a commercial film about small-town Southern prejudice, and the documentary The Battle of Algiers won the second annual joint movie awards from the Roman Catholic and National Council of Churches film offices.

More controversial was the Catholics’ additional prize to Bonnie and Clyde, a film about a likable young bank-robbing, murdering couple, with graphic scenes of violence that shocked many critics. It was cited as the year’s best film for mature audiences. Other Catholic awards went to The Whisperers (educational values) and Elvira Madigan (foreign-language film).

The NCC also gave special awards to The War Game (for showing that in today’s world “the alternative to love could be total destruction”) and Up the Down Staircase (for showing burdens of teachers and students in urban ghettos). Last year’s joint Catholic-Protestant film award went to A Man for All Seasons, the story of Sir Thomas More, Roman Catholic intellectual who refused to sanction Henry VIII’s divorce and was beheaded.

POX ON PILL

After surveying the evidence, Child and Family magazine, edited by physicians, concludes in its current issue that the birth-control pill is “the most dangerous drug ever introduced for use by the healthy in respect to lethality and major complications.”

Many of the six million American women on the Pill, the report says, suffer such side effects as strokes, liver disease, migraine, depression, embolisms, and failing eyesight. It has been implicated in cases of sterility. Deaths attributed to its use exceed the death rate for polio during the years when it was considered a major health hazard.

Dr. Herbert Ratner, public-health director in Oak Park, Illinois, who recently became the magazine’s editor, is no champion of the Roman Catholic view of contraception. In fact, he charges that the net effect of the Pill has been that “the middle and upper classes of the United States were seduced away from well-established and safe means of birth control.”

Despite such data published within the medical profession, the Pill remains popular with patients, physicians, and drug companies. The magazine attributes this to scientific myths that dominate our culture, such as: Health can be bought. Children should be spaced several years apart. Overpopulation is the cause of social breakdown.

Although Child and Family has no religious affiliation, its board promotes a holistic concept of health that it believes agrees with historic Judaism and Christianity. Part of this is naturalism—in such areas as childbirth techniques and breast-feeding. Ratner seeks to defend “the stubborn social reality of the traditional concepts of human life” that stem from “the nature of things” and recur in many different cultures and eras. He adds that his scientific articles could “provide a lot of sermon material.”

FRED PEARSON

A reader of Billy Graham’s Peace with God sat down a few days ago to write the evangelist that she had “found the answer” in chapter nine. A Miami University student said his commitment had come as the result of listening to a radio broadcast. Another new believer, in a letter dated February 29, told of her experience and a subsequent desire to start a Bible class in her home.

In countless ways, men and women every day are finding new life in Christ. Some call it conversion, some regeneration, some commitment, some something else, and some don’t know what to call it. But the person who has it readily identifies it. And when it really happens, its all the same thing—the appropriation of God’s grace through saving faith in a way that imparts spiritual life.

Robert Harris is executive director of Choice ’68, an unofficial presidential primary among college students scheduled for April 24 and sponsored by Time magazine (he expects some 2,000000 votes to be cast on 1,200 campuses). Harris thought he had attained the ultimate when he was chosen student body president at Michigan State University in 1964. “I thought I was something special,” he says. “I got a Triumph convertible and went through the whole bit. Then there was nothing left.”

Out of his disillusionment with success, Harris attended a prayer breakfast sponsored by International Christian Leadership. Later he heard a Christian challenge from Mark Hatfield, then governor of Oregon, “and that probably decided it for me.” Harris made a commitment to Christ. Now 24, he looks ahead to a career in public service—undergirded with a Christian perspective.

Raymond Berry has been called pro football’s “living legend.” He’s retiring this year after more than a decade on the receiving end of passes thrown by the Baltimore Colts’ Johnny Unitas, surely one of the all-time greats of the gridiron. Despite poor eyesight and the need to wear a back brace, Berry makes seemingly impossible catches and holds the National Football League record for most pass receptions and most yards gained on pass receptions.

Berry came to the place of spiritual decision as the result of the counsel of a Christian teammate, Don Shinnick. Berry tells it this way:

“One evening we were talking about Christ and Don said, ‘Raymond, I don’t believe you have ever accepted Christ as your Saviour’ … I didn’t understand what he meant by ‘accept.’ I just assumed that believing Jesus was God’s Son made me a Christian. About a week later we talked about Christ again. I’m still not sure just why I prayed that night. Somehow I just felt that this was what God wanted me to do and at that stage in my life I wanted to do what He wanted. I asked Don to help me pray, then I told God I wanted to put my complete faith and trust in His Son as my Saviour. I asked Him to forgive my sins, and to help me understand what I was doing.”

Berry tells his story in Looking Ahead, a weekly of the David C. Cook Publishing Company. The changes were gradual after that prayer, but Berry now looks back upon it as the time of his salvation.

An impressive number of individuals have been touched by Graham’s ministry. For David Williams, a Florida motel operator, the “hour of decision” came in 1961 when he attended a Graham rally in Miami Beach. Williams, then 50 years old, said he had given his life to material things and had begun to realize the folly of it all. “I had started to try to improve myself by my own doing,” he says. “It didn’t do any good.” At the close of the service Graham invited those with spiritual needs to step forward. Williams was sitting in the back row. “It seemed like two hands pushed the back of my ribs,” he recalls. “The aisle seemed a mile long. But that experience changed everything.”

Varieties of religious experience abound. Occasionally a person’s spiritual victory will come in what seems to be an unprecedented way, and this may even cause the person to doubt its validity. But the Bible itself describes many ways in which human beings find faith; no two are just alike.

It was a quiet talk on the deity of Jesus Christ that persuaded George Bird to give his mind and heart to God. Dr. Bird was for seventeen years the graduate dean of the Syracuse University School of Journalism, and for most of his adult years his doubt of the deity of Christ was a major barrier to belief. A campus lecture by a clergyman cleared that up, and Bird afterward in a simple act of faith accepted Christ as Saviour. An important corollary factor was the faithful witness of evangelical students.

A much more unusual spiritual pilgrimage was that of Keith Miller, whose two recent autobiographical books, The Taste of New Wine and A Second Touch, have been the means of getting the message to hundreds of thousands. Miller was a rising oil executive in the Southwest when, beset by inner turmoil, he sought unsuccessfully to find fulfillment in life by enrolling in a seminary. He left after four terms, more disillusioned than ever, and took back his old job.

“One day it was so bad,” Miller recalls, “that I got in my company car and took off on a field trip alone. As I was driving through the tall pine woods country of East Texas I suddenly pulled up beside the road and stopped. I remember sitting there in complete despair.… I began to weep like a little boy, which I suddenly realized I was inside. I looked up toward the sky. There was nothing I wanted to do with my life. And I said, ‘God, if there’s anything you want in this stinking soul, take it.’ ”

An altogether different and much more complicated search—and perhaps the most newsworthy—has been that of Britain’s venerable Malcolm Muggeridge (see Eutychus, page 21). He is still on undetermined distance from orthodox Christianity, and the theological analyst might yet label him a syncretist and/or universalist. But Muggeridge has come a long way. His current reflections show remarkable Christian insight. He recently said in an interview in The Christian and Christianity Today of London:

“Since I was very young I have always thought that the world offered nothing. That no worldly solution would work. That no worldly Utopia would come to pass. But that, for the most part, induced in me a sort of satirical or anarchistic attitude of mind. It was only as I continued to think about the Christian message that I saw concretely that being born again was not merely seeing through this world, but also recognizing in Christ an alternative way of life.”

Muggeridge, 64, respected as one of the world’s foremost journalists and social critics, says Christianity “has crystallized much more clearly for me. I see that unless our civilization returns to where it began—which is with Christ—it will come to an end.”

“Man needs to be born again,” Muggeridge declares. “By that I mean he must understand what Christ stood for and follow His way of life. Not only His teaching but the very way he lived. Which includes, of course, the Cross. People try to leave the Cross out of the Gospel, but they can’t because it’s the heart of the whole thing.

The Choice

Harold Lindsell was best man at Carl F. H. Henry’s wedding, his classmate at Wheaton College, and his colleague at Northern Baptist and Fuller seminaries and CHRISTIANITY TODAY. NOW Lindsell has been chosen to succeed Henry as editor of the magazine, a post Henry has held since its 1956 founding.

Henry, who plans to begin a six-month study break in September, has been asked to become editor-at-large and write regularly for the magazine. In January he had announced he would return to full-time theological research.

Lindsell, 54-year-old Bible professor at Wheaton College, Illinois, is a tall, lean, energetic Southern Baptist. After high school in the Bronx, New York, he went into insurance and worked up from office boy to underwriter in four years, then went to Wheaton and graduated summa cum laude in three years.

He chose an academic career after being turned down by several mission boards because of allergies. He holds an M.A. from Berkeley and a Ph.D. from New York University, both in history, but through personal interest and effort he is also an expert in Bible and missions. Most of his dozen books are in these fields. He is editor of the Harper Study Bible and a contributor to Abingdon’s Protestant Cross-Currents in Mission, set for April release.

Before the seminary teaching, Lindsell spent two years on the faculty of Columbia (South Carolina) Bible College, where he married one of the students, the former Marion Bolinder. They have three daughters and one son.

After three years at Northern, Lindsell joined Henry and two others on the founding faculty of Fuller, where he taught for seventeen years, holding such posts as dean of the faculty, vice-president, and professor of missions. His travels all over the world have included visits to many of his 250 former students now serving on the mission field. Just before he comes to CHRISTIANITY TODAY, he is to lead a Holy Land tour that was postponed in 1967 because of the June war.

“We need to be remade. We need to be born again not of this world. For if we belong to this world we share all its hopes and desires, and these are disastrous.”

He adds: “We live in a world of scientific achievement and gross materialism, a world where men are told by those in authority that the purpose of living is to increase the gross national product,” while persuasion machinery says “the one satisfaction in life is to eat, drink, and to fornicate.”

As Muggeridge sees it, “the Christian message fails to have any meaning for the man in the street because he never has time to think about it.” So Muggeridge wants to use his remaining years to communicate the Gospel: “I really am not interested in anything any more except Christianity. I want to use what little influence I may have to speak the truth.”

FRIENDS ON BOTH SIDES

The outspoken president of the American Baptist Convention, Phoenix pastor L. Doward McBain, cast ecumenical nets toward both Roman Catholics and Southern Baptists recently. He chose the Nashville pulpit of Southern Baptist President H. Franklin Paschall to propose a union of all U. S. Baptists.

“Let’s unite. Let’s start it tonight,” rhymed the colorful Arizonian. “We’ve been apart too long—more than a century. We ought to be working together in one body.… The only time we Baptists seem to get together is over alcohol and Billy Graham.”

McBain used theology as a starting point with Roman Catholics in his Crusader column. Despite differences on the “how” and “why” of salvation, he said, Rome’s strong Christology “can only be good for contemporary Protestant theology, which frequently appears to be structureless and in need of recovering … classical Christianity.”

SPELLMAN’S SUCCESSOR

He was probably Cardinal Spellman’s choice as seventh archbishop of New York, but apparently only Pope Paul VI seriously considered the Most Rev. Terence James Cooke as most likely to succeed the “kind father” who had ordained and consecrated him.

Cooke, lifelong resident of New York, accepted responsibility for the nation’s wealthiest archdiocese “with the deepest feeling of humility.” At a press conference after the March 8 announcement of his appointment, the 47-year-old bishop styled himself a progressive who is “moving ahead,” and indicated his special interest in the anti-poverty program and civil rights. He declined to comment on abortion, birth control, divorce, and “such a complicated matter” as Viet Nam without studying the situations, seeking advice, and being “a very good listener.”

Those who know Cooke consider him warm, open, and diplomatic. His diplomacy won an immediate challenge, as a group of his priests issued a 2,500-word memo demanding, among other things, open financial records.

KANGAROO IN CANADA?

Mass resignations are expected from the 1,000-member, middle-class West Ellesmere United Church in suburban Toronto because the local presbytery refused to support the church’s call to the Rev. J. Berkley Reynolds, who has been serving as interim minister.

Presbytery officials cited division in the congregation as the reason for their action. “It’s a liberal congregation and he’s a fundamentalist,” explained presbytery Chairman Carman E. Armstrong.

The matter now goes before the Toronto Conference’s settlement committee, which is unlikely to meet until May 13. Settlement committee Chairman Norman Pick said that in his twenty-five years in the ministry he had never heard of a call refusal in the United Church of Canada.

Reynolds is a member of the United Church Renewal Fellowship, started eighteen months ago by clergy and laymen who said the denomination was losing members to fundamentalist groups because it was not providing a proper spiritual dimension. The fellowship has a mailing list of 1,000 across Canada, and this is expected to increase quickly from among the million-plus United Church membership. A denominational official not sympathetic to the group said a year ago that its activities could eventually lead to a split.

Reynolds, claiming unanimous support of the congregation’s pastoral committee and majority support of the congregation, called the presbytery meeting “a kangaroo court.” He said he was refused permission to speak to the meeting and was expelled before the vote (reported to have carried by a large majority).

The Rev. Harold Frid, chairman of the presbytery’s pastoral relations committee, said the congregation would have to call someone else. Armstrong said that only one-tenth of West Ellesmere’s membership was at the meeting that voted to call Reynolds, and the vote was 63 to 39. Presbytery stalled the call, held a congregational meeting attended by about 250 members, and passed out a questionnaire asking for opinions of Reynolds.

As for Reynolds’s future, Armstrong said, “He’ll be settled somewhere. Maybe in the north, if he wants it.” But Reynolds said, “No presbytery across Canada will touch me now. It virtually means that I am being forced to leave the United Church.” He considers it a test case on democracy and whether an evangelical has a place in the United Church.

William Kosawan, a founding layman of the fourteen-year-old congregation, was appalled by the presbytery decision. He said bitterly, “There should be freedom for every kind of expression in the United Church of Canada.”

Reynolds, 39, has been a clergyman for thirteen years and served one mission and two churches in his native Newfoundland. He holds the B.D. from the denomination’s Pine Hill seminary and the Th.M. from Fuller Theological Seminary. He spent Canada’s centennial year in Toronto as editorial representative for CHRISTIANITY TODAY. Since last fall he has been the contracted supply preacher at West Ellesmere, while working on a doctorate from Toronto’s ecumenical Graduate School of Theology.

AUBREY WICE

Outspoken Churchman Dies

The Rev. J. Ray Hord, 49, one of Canada’s most controversial church officials, died suddenly of a heart attack last month while waiting for a bus in Toronto.

Farm boy Hord hit the big time with his hardline pronouncements as head of the United Church of Canada’s Board of Evangelism and Social Service. He became the social conscience for liberal-minded members while incurring the ire of conservatives, who claimed evangelism was losing out to activism.

Hord supported U. S. draft-dodgers. Though a dove on Viet Nam, he was a hawk on inadequate housing and on restrictive divorce and abortion laws. He criticized the Canadian government for taking “blood money” from U. S. arms contracts, and called Prime Minister Lester Pearson “a puppydog on LBJ’s leash.” When church Moderator W. C. Lockhart apologized to Pearson and rebuked Hord, he repeated the remark a few days later.

Hord is survived by his wife and one daughter. His nine-year-old son drowned six years ago at a summer camp.

AUBREY WICE

A Scholar Speaks To Students

Stir-Change-Create: Poems and Essays in Contemporary Mood for Concerned Students, by Kenneth L. Pike (Eerdmans, 1967, 164 pp., $2.65), is reviewed by Elva McAllaster, professor of English, Greenville College, Greenville, Illinois.

To read Pike’s collection leaves me feeling a little as I felt after seeing a documentary film on Henry Moore at work on his sculptures, or after looking at a photo essay on Picasso in his studio. Here is a powerful mind engrossed in the processes of its own workshop. Professor Pike’s “studio” is of course that of linguistic analysis rather than of sculpture, but when a mind like his is willing to open the studio door, it is fascinating for the rest of us to look inside.

The name of Kenneth L. Pike is well known in his scholarly field; he is an eminent and respected professor at the University of Michigan. The name of Kenneth L. Pike is also well known in the missionary world, since he is a veteran in translation projects of the Wycliffe Bible Translators. In the poems and essays collected here, the reader meets and is inspired by both of these Pike selves. Professor Pike obviously delights in being the thoroughgoing linguistic scholar who pries open esoteric secrets of language analysis and conducts doctoral examinations over arduous research. He also delights in being the thoroughgoing Christian, who opens his own life to the grace of God and opens the Scriptures to university audiences or to primitive peoples. As scholar and as Christian, his mood is one of zest, of aliveness, of exuberance.

The subtitle suggests the scope and intentions of the book. There are brief articles written for His magazine, chapel talks now edited into essays, fragments of autobiography, and dozens of meditative poems. (I could wish that the “Acknowledgments” told where and to whom the chapel talks were first given; I assume they were presented to Wycliffe Translators’ study groups.)

Pike’s poems should stimulate lively discussions among “concerned students.” They are prickly with ideas and contain very clever word play. Many readers will find them useful both in private devotions and in the preparing of sermons and talks. I predict that “My Blue Refrigerator,” with its sardonic representation of American materialism and American lack of missionary vision, will become an often-cited composition.

Reading For Perspective

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

• Nine Roads to Renewal, by Walden Howard (Word, $3.50). The story of how nine Christian groups entered into deeper personal relationships with Christ and thereby recovered the experience of genuine Christian fellowship.

• The Social Conscience of the Evangelical, by Sherwood E. Wirt (Harper & Row, $4.95). Contending that true evangelical faith leads to sensitive social concern, Wirt offers sound biblical perspectives on vital social issues of our day.

• Adamant & Stone Chips, by Virginia Mollenkott (Word, $3.50). A state-college professor of English makes a passionate appeal for a genuine Christian humanism that will relate the Lordship of Christ and the message of the Bible to the full range of human knowledge and activity.

But I also venture a hope that “concerned students” will take other writers as their models when they turn to writing verse. In this collection, Pike’s poems tend to be rearranged prose rather than poetry. The effects are regrettably dependent on devices one wishes might have been pruned out: elision and inversion (“Why should I go/Beyond horizon mine,” “God sees/And values heart,” “As Image, His/Invent I”); archaic expressions (“Babe, clothes, man”); the overly colloquial (“Don’t talk wild./More I can’t stand”); the jargonesque (“Wheat seeks ground/For entropy to reverse”).

It is a pleasure to handle a book so attractive in typography, art work, and general format. Eerdmans should be commended on a production that is contemporary in its visual mood as well as in its content.

Balanced Look At Israel’S Religion

The Religion of Ancient Israel, by Th. C. Vriezen (Westminster, 1967, 328 pp., $7.50), is reviewed by Robert B. Laurin, professor of Old Testament, California Baptist Theological Seminary, Covina.

The last few years have seen a resurgence of interest in the religion of ancient Israel. At least six important recent volumes about the topic are now available. This burst of writing has come largely because of the growth both of archaeological discovery and of critical methodology. Scholars for a long time have wrestled with the attempt to clarify the religious situation in Israel before the period of the Monarchy (before 1000 B.C.). What did the patriarchs really understand about the character of God? When was the worship of Yahweh introduced, and what did it involve? What was the nature of Canaanite worship faced by the Hebrew settlers? The answering of these and similar questions has been hindered by two primary factors—the lack of clearly identifiable extra-biblical sources from the periods in question, and the fact that the historical materials in the Old Testament that do deal with these periods have finally reached us only after being edited from the polemical perspective of the priesthood of the second temple in Jerusalem (after 500 B.C.). But now archaeologists have turned up an increasing abundance of comparative materials from ancient times, and tradition critics have suggested many fruitful ways of penetrating through the present text to the early situations. Vriezen has taken advantage of these developments and has given us a clearer, more balanced look than we have had in the past.

The book deals with the whole period of “Israel’s” existence from patriarchs to Maccabees, but the most important material is concerned with the misty pre-Davidic era. After a very useful chapter on the character of the various ancient Semitic religions, showing the parallels and differences with Israel’s religion, and after another chapter summarizing Israel’s religious life at the time of David, the book proceeds to detail the beliefs and practices of the patriarchal, desert, and conquest periods. Here the thrust of Vriezen’s argument is both that Israel’s religion was always in process of change and adaptation in reaction to its theological environment, moving steadily toward the universal monotheism of post-Davidic days, and that the dominant element that enabled the tribes to persist in the face of the culturally superior Canaanites was their belief in Yahweh. The Israelites were convinced that Yahweh was an all-conquering “force,” one with whom they had personal and social relationships, one who was moving in history toward the goal of a new world, and this gave them the foundation for maintaining their vital identity even in darkest days.

Here is a book for those who want a cautious, highly informed guide to the intricacies of contemporary Old Testament research on the religion (not the theology) of Israel. Vriezen has already given us a fine theology of the Old Testament (1958). To a degree the book presupposes knowledge of debate on many topics, particularly on those that have centered around the work of von Rad and Noth. But detailed bibliographic notes give sure guidance to such areas. In general the author affirms a greater confidence in the historical memory of the Old Testament tradition, and admits a larger contribution by Moses, than has characterized scholarship in the past.

No City Of God

From Sacred to Profane America: The Role of Religion in American History, by William A. Clebsch (Harper & Row, 1968, 242 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by C. Gregg Singer, chairman, Department of History, Catawba College, Salisbury, North Carolina.

Many historians view American society as an aggregate of secular institutions that have severed every tie with Christianity, but Professor Clebsch disagrees. He holds that religion has a very special relation to American life—indeed, that it is the basis of the American dream, which he defines as the yearning to bring the holy hope to an earthly fruition. He finds the religious foundation of American society in six campaigns that have characterized our history: education, pluralism, welfare and morality, participation (that is, the participation of all people in an open society), novelty, and nationality. In all these areas Christianity has had a dominant influence, he says, especially during the colonial and early national years.

No one would deny that Christianity has played a great part in shaping the American tradition and guiding the American dream. Clebsch presents many generalities that have long been accepted by historians, even those who have broken with orthodox Christianity. But he fails to present convincing evidence for his own position. Nor does he deal adequately with the theological issues involved in this study. Puritanism suffers in his hands, as does conservative theology in general. Yet liberalism also comes out short, and the impact of the social gospel is never clearly described. Clebsch does less than justice to the relation between liberal theology and social, economic, and political liberalism in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

His basic contention is that pluralism in religion was a major factor in the development of the cultural pluralism we have today. This new culture allows no City of God to rule or to inspire its many cities of man. And Clebsch concludes that if in twentieth-century America religion can no longer be the City of God, its true role is to remain one of the many cities of man. Thus we have moved from a sacred to a profane America.

Church And State In Century 21

In the Service of Man, by J. V. Lang-mead Casserley (Regnery, 1967, 204 pp., $4.95), is reviewed by Carl F. H. Henry, editor,CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

Dr. Casserley’s legitimate concern is to place technology in the service of human values by setting public and private life in the context of theological and moral realities. In expounding this objective he offers trenchant criticisms of secular theology and Marxist materialism, and calls Western man to life on a higher plane in the new world of technological advance. The most valuable and readable sections of the book deal with spiritual possibilities in an age of leisure and the challenge to pessimists about an overpopulated world.

As a social critic Casserley labels himself a cultural conservative with a radical welcome for impending or proposed socio-political and economic changes. This becomes the more significant in view of his regard for Christian-Communist confrontation as “the most interesting and important area of dialogue,” one that at a later stage may involve “a renewed search for truth together.”

To be sure, he is highly critical of Marxism and of any advocacy of “a kind of Church and a species of faith quite compatible with totalitarian society” or state. But he is distressed that American conservatives do not share the English enthusiasm for socialism and the welfare state. “It seems quite obvious,” he contends, “that the coincidence of automation and population explosion definitely puts an end to any possibility whatsoever of continuing a form of social structure and economy that expects every man to keep his wife and family by performing some lucrative job made possible by the industrial, commercial and administrative system.”

What he hopes to conserve are the traditional Westem-Christian values: once welfare institutions are created, the conservative task is to infuse them with the spirit of reform to protect the initiative and relative freedom of the individual. In the new age the problem of incentive will be moral and cultural rather than economic. A world federal state will emerge, and with it will come sweeping social planning.

This well-known Episcopal author and philosophical theologian views the drift to one indivisible world church as the most important modern event. He criticizes pro-union propaganda for concealing the fact that reunion will eliminate the existing churches (and their “second rate” existence). This reunion of Christendom would destroy the basic presupposition of separation of church and state in the conventional understanding; in the twenty-first century, the new Church must directly influence the nations. “What the members of suoh a Church are agreed about will hardly consist of a thesis with which any great political party will care to disagree,” he says.

What Casserley does not establish is that the values he prizes can be nourished by a politico-economic schema within which they did not arise, and which in fact threatens if not subverts them. Are the solid theological traditions and values characteristic of Western civilization as compatible as he thinks with the socialist structures that he accepts, or does he in fact dilute those traditions and values in deference to what he views as a historical inevitability? Casserley writes of “almost providential” historical trends, but the realities of history are apparently such that political and economic nonconservatism have a place in God’s plan not accorded political and economic conservatism: “The political and economic types will tend inevitably to disappear as it becomes more and more lucidly clear that radical institutional changes are inevitable, and will indeed shortly have taken place quite irreversibly.”

Such irreversibility seems to the reviewer easier to reconcile with a view of unlimited governmental power than with the idea of divine providence or human freedom.

Theism In The Public Schools

Religious Values in Education, by John A. Stoops (Interstate Printers and Publishers, 1967, 161 pp., $4.95), is reviewed by Edwin H. Rian, educational consultant, Princeton, New Jersey.

This book is distinctive in at least three ways: (1) Its author is a prominent non-theological educator, (2) it presents a fresh approach to the problem of religion in public education created by the Supreme Court decision against Bible reading and prayer in public schools, and (3) it is written in a scintillating and penetrating literary style, with all major points made in dialogue and polemic as well as in discourse.

Dr. Stoops, dean of the School of Education at Lehigh University, has had years of experience in secondary and higher education as teacher, administrator, and consultant. He holds that every student is confronted with the choice of a God-idea. In public education today, he says, the God-ideas presented are in part pantheistic, in part atheistic; traditional theism is not presented effectively, partly because of the Supreme Court decision. He believes that all choices—atheism, pantheism, and theism—should have their place as educational options.

Stoops bases his argument on the Kantian doctrine that the idea of God is heuristic (learned by experience) and not ostensive (learned by presentation or argument). In other words, it is not effective to teach theism as a literary or history course in the cognate style of American education, because God is not simply an academic thought or object, such as a fact of history. To be a meaningful option, theism demands attachment, acceptance, faith. A large educational void exists when students are deprived of this kind of exposure.

Dean Stoops does not pretend to be a legal expert or attempt to say what constitutional steps must be taken to remedy this neglect of theism, this absence of meaningful religious options that should be a part of every student’s educational experience. He considers it his duty as an educator to describe the situation.

It is good to find a non-theological educator who ably points up the importance of presenting a value system for the student’s consideration. This book merits discussion by educators, religious leaders, politicians, parents—all who ought to be concerned about a serious weakness in our educational system.

Why Davis Left Catholicism

A Question of Conscience, by Charles Davis (Harper & Row, 1967, 278 pp., $6.95), is reviewed by James Forrester, president, Gordon College and Divinity School, Wenham, Massachusetts.

For twenty years Charles Davis served the Roman Catholic Church as a priest, theologian, and articulate proponent of his faith. During that period he also passed from tacit acceptance of all the claims of the Roman church to a rejection of the church as “a credible embodiment of Christian faith, hope and love.”

The radical decision was not sudden. Davis (who published the Maurice Lectures at King’s College, London, under the title God’s Grace in History while editor of the “Clergy Review”) describes his decision as “an assessment reached by a cumulative experience built up over many years.” So prominent had he been in ecumenical affairs that his departure from priesthood and church was a public event. A Question of Conscience is the vibrantly personal documentation of his pilgrimage of mind and spirit.

Davis discounts the desire to marry as a motivating factor. Consistently the crux of the matter is the invalidity of a fixed religio-social system with a divinely sanctioned hierarchy as over against the dynamic nature of the Christian faith and the “becoming” characteristic of man in his society. He sees his action as a total pattern of personal response to “the working of the Spirit.” To remain within the church was something he could not do “without surrendering my integrity and freedom.”

He brings to the surface the fundamental conflict within the Roman Catholic Church by skillfully assembling sources in the New Testament, church history, the declarations and encyclicals of the popes, and the struggles of the Second Vatican Council. The ecclesiastical accretions of dogma, governance, and practice he examines with irenic objectivity. His conclusion is that the Roman Catholic Church is “not credible as an embodiment in this world of the truth and love of Christ.”

Present evidences of reform within the church, Davis says, only show the impotence of the hierarchy to allow more than superficial adjustments. These are not spontaneous or interior; they are only reluctant concessions to the forces of change operative in secular society and in the consciousness of modern man. The inflexible obsolescences of a hierarchical system are in irreconcilable conflict with the liberating influence of God’s presence in Christ in the world. The dead language of the Mass, the subordination of truth to authority, secrecy as a weapon of power, the distortion of history, the indifference to the concept of man as a “freely constituting person,” the insupportable primacy of Peter, and the monopolistic salvation claims of the Roman church are some of the issues Davis raises.

The impulses here are reminiscent of those of the Reformation, but with significant differences. Biblical criteria for judgments are present, but so also are the prevailing psychosocial understandings of man. The Roman Catholic system, according to Davis, leaves the individual with a “distortion of personality” and the incapacity to make any “truly personal moral decision.”

Davis emerges with a personal faith in Christ and a trinitarian theology. He is suspicious of all church organizations and sees the Church as made up of all believers, who constitute “a Christian presence in the world.” He advocates, with Harvey Cox, “creative disaffiliation” but acknowledges nostalgia for the Eucharist.

Davis offers no formula for church union. Rather, he claims that the Christian community cannot be coterminous with traditional structures so “inimical to the self-understanding and freedom of man and to Christian truth and love.” Cannot he and the many others he describes as “disaffiliated” find any church of reformed faith and congenial fellowship? Perhaps the pilgrim is saying something to all of us who take our Reformation heritage so much for granted.

A Christian Novel To Cherish

The Master and Margarita, by Mikhail Bulgakov, translated by Michael Glenny (Harper & Row, 1967, 394 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by Edward E., Ericson Jr., assistant professor of English, Westmont College, Santa Barbara, California.

Particularly since so little serious modern literature reflects Christian values, a novel that presents parallels to Christian doctrines is of much interest to the Christian intellectual community. The Master and Margarita is thoroughly Christian in content and presents nearly all the basic doctrines: the creation of man in the image of God, human depravity, the moral universe, divine providence, a personal God who intervenes in human history, a personal devil who does likewise, the intimate relation between the supernatural realm and the natural realm, the centrality of the Incarnation, the death and resurrection of Christ, Christ’s intercession for man, the forgiveness of sins, the life everlasting, heaven and hell.

The author, Mikhail Bulgakov, was a Russian writer who published during the twenties, was suppressed during the thirties, and died in 1940 with the work of his last decade unpublished. More than a quarter century after his death, the Soviet government has allowed release of a censored version. Now available in English are this censored version (published by Grove) and an unabridged version (by Harper & Row in hard cover and Signet in paperback).

Bulgakov employs a mixture of comic realism and fantasy to convey his theme—that the supernatural and the natural are inextricably intertwined, that nature is not the whole of reality. Because of the fantasy, the plot is totally unpredictable. Meanings are not always easy to pin down.

There are three strands of plot, each of which contributes significantly to the theme of the novel. In one, Satan appears in contemporary Moscow. He becomes engaged in some ironically amusing conversations with Marxists in which they try to convince him that, on the basis of their naturalistic presuppositions, he cannot exist. In this “Satanic incarnation” Satan comes unto his own but his own know him not. In his aesthetic indirection, Bulgakov uses the self-evident existence of Satan to argue for the existence of God.

In the second strand of the plot, a novelist who is known only as the master and his mistress (at least in the fantasy), Margarita, find their existences wretched and hopeless and turn to God for aid. “Where else can such wrecks as you and I find help except from the supernatural? So let’s see what we can find in the other world.” This plot presents the theme of Christian redemption, a theme conspicuously absent from contemporary literature.

The third plot element concerns the confrontation between Christ and Pontius Pilate, the representative of mankind. It is the story that the master is telling in the novel he is writing. The whole story of man’s alienation from God and potential reconciliation appears in miniature in this plot.

Here is a novel that presents an orthodox Christian message and is already being taken seriously by the literary critics. It is a book for literate Christians to cherish.

Changes In Catholic Scholarship

Modern Biblical Studies, edited by Dennis J. McCarthy, S. J., and William B. Callen, S.J. (Bruce, 1967, 186 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by Clark H. Pinnock, associate professor of theology, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, New Orleans, Louisiana.

This work, an anthology of biblical studies by Catholic authors originally published in Theology Digest, gives the reader an excellent sampling of the new direction Catholic biblical scholarship has taken in the past two decades. Among the outstanding contributors are Cardinal Bea, R. A. F. Macenzie, Pierre Benoit, Rudolf Schnackenburg, and Jacques Dupont. All the writers are eager to return to the literal sense of the Bible and believe that Christian theology ought always to be based upon Scripture. For men weary of the tedious parade of mini-theologies hastily fashioned by Protestant faddists, this emphasis is most refreshing! All the writers are solidly trinitarian and do not shrink from concepts like biblical inerrancy and infallibility.

They frequently assert, however, that the Bible must be critically studied in accordance with accepted modern literary techniques. The two specifically mentioned in the introduction and practiced in the various essays are form criticism and Redaktionsgeschichte (an untranslatable term that describes the theological aims operative in the compilation of the biblical material). Where these techniques are actually applied in the book, the writers handle them with considerable moderation. Schnackenburg, for example, rejects the historical skepticism and pessimism of the Bultmann camp and uses form criticism to explain why facts were included in the gospel accounts, not why they were invented. None of the writers apparently feels any basic incompatibility between the doctrine of inspiration and certain alleged literary procedures. Surely inspiration cannot be compatible with a literary hypothesis that imputes deceit to the author (e.g., pseudepigraphy) or error in his assertions. But the authors feel no anxiety along these lines. Luis Alonso-Schökel, S.J., for example, feels free to call the fall of man an etiology, and Lucien Legrand to discuss the evidence for pagan cosmogonies in the Old Testament.

Can a circle have corners? The evangelical is set to wondering what inerrancy in the presence of errors might mean. The new-shape Catholic criticism uses the language of the historic doctrine of inspiration, but in a somewhat dishonest way. These scholars are being praised for saying basically the same things for which the older modernists were excommunicated, namely, that the Bible does not always tell the truth. This book reveals a growing tendency in Protestant and Catholic circles, including evangelical groups, to restrict the inerrancy of Scripture to “saving truth” (veritas salutaris) and deny it to other matters that it teaches. This decision means that the Bible is not necessarily free from error in matters not deemed “saving.” It is, however, the witness of history that when such a dichotomy is introduced, the area of inerrant revelation begins to shrink rapidly in accord with the shape of the interpreter’s own theology. Certainly the attitude of our Lord to Scripture was one of total trust and permits no such process of sifting.

In the articles dealing with the text of the Gospels there are many pleasant surprises. Benoit and Dupont, among others, reveal a sturdy belief in the messianic self-consciousness of Jesus against the pressures from radical criticism. Franz Mussner, in his article on the Paraclete, recognizes the special charisma of inspiration that Christ bestowed uniquely on his disciples and that lies beneath the divine truthfulness of the New Testament writings. We are surprised and disappointed, however, by Stanislas Lyonnet, who, writing on “expiation,” surrenders the idea of vicarious substitution. Denial of this feature of the Gospel has a disastrous effect on Christian theology, for which the finished work of Christ is foundational.

The shape of Roman Catholic biblical scholarship is changing. It has moved a long way from proof-texting. But if in its zeal to catch up with the twentieth century, it stumbles into the trap of nineteenth-century rationalism and gets hung up on negative criticism, evangelicals will have to wonder whether this is progress.

Book Briefs

Two Studies In The Theology of Bonhoeffer, by Jürgen Moltmann and Jürgen Weissbach (Scribners, 1967, 160 pp., $3.95). Two German scholars participate in the theological sport of pinning down the elusive theology of Bonhoeffer. Weissbach concludes that Bonhoeffer’s ethics teaches that “the dominion of Christ over all realms frees everything for its own proper concern for genuine worldliness,” so that “the world does not have to be Christianized.” The book helps one to recognize the German martyr’s significant influence on current secularized theology.

American Theology in the Liberal Tradition, by Lloyd J. Averill (Westminster, 1967, 173 pp., $4.50). A survey of the varieties of religious liberalism in the past century by an author who thinks that the American theological scene is heading toward the recovery of liberalism.

A Christian and His Money, by John R. Crawford (Abingdon, 1967, 176 pp., $3.75). Don’t read this unless you are prepared to take an honest look at your financial practices. The author’s probing, Bible-studded approach might lead some to say, “He’s stopped preachin’ and started meddlin’!”

A Functioning Faith, by Billy Simmons (Word, 1967, 144 pp., $3.50). Popular and practical expositions on the Book of James by the holder of a doctorate in New Testament from New Orleans Baptist Seminary.

The Sense of Absence, by Geddes MacGregor (Lippincott, 1968, 158 pp., $4.50). In line with new emphases in secular theology, MacGregor claims that a sense of the absence of God is necessary that we may perceive his presence. He should consider Psalm 139.

The Names of God in Holy Scripture, by Andrew Jukes (Kregel, 1967, 226 pp., $3.50), and Number in Scripture, by E. W. Bullinger (Kregel, 1967, 304 pp., $4.95). Reprints of widely read volumes from the late nineteenth century.

The First Person, by Lehman Strauss (Loizeaux, 1967, 256 pp., $3.75). Devotional studies on God the Father that consider the necessity for God, his nature, and his names in Scripture. Informative and inspiring.

Readings in Luther for Laymen, edited by Charles S. Anderson (Augsburg, 1967, 304 pp., $4.95). Laymen who know Luther only as a historical personage will meet him in these selections as a powerful reformer and a wise pastor.

Understanding and Counseling the Alcoholic, by Howard J. Clinebell, Jr. (Abingdon, 1968, 336 pp., $5.95). A revised and enlarged edition of an important work that includes an analysis of three religious approaches to helping alcoholics: those of The Salvation Army, the Emmanuel Movement, and Alcoholics Anonymous. Pastors should own this book.

Paperbacks

New Directions in Theology Today, Volume III: God and Secularity, by John Macquarrie (Westminster, 1967, 157 pp., $1.95). A Union Seminary (N. Y.) professor offers a clear exposition of the secular theology now in vogue among seminary firebrands.

Personal Ethics in an Impersonal World, by C. Eugene Conover (Westminster, 1967, 159 pp., $2.45). Conover reviews five perspectives in personal ethics. His own recommendation: We should “extend the range of open-ness and intercommunication in order to make the large cities and institutions of a technologically advanced society as human as possible, and to open our tribal moralities to the wider perspectives that offer hope for man’s continued existence.” Interesting but not very satisfying.

Theology in America, edited by Sydney E. Ahlstrom (Bobbs-Merrill, 1967, 512 pp., $7.50). A Yale professor’s extensive compilation of the writings of certain influential theologians shows the vitality of this field of study in American history. Well worth buying despite its over-representation of liberal thinkers.

The Work of The Clerk, by Zelotes Grenell and Agnes Grenell Goss (Judson, 1967, 63 pp., $1.50). Help for the valiant but ill-prepared servant who takes on the important job of church clerk.

From Religion to Grace, by John F. Crosby (Abingdon, 1967, 126 pp., $1.95). A Presbyterian pastor attempts to help laymen understand the doctrine of justification by faith.

The Mythology of Science, by Rousas John Rushdoony (Craig, 1967, 134 pp., $2.50). A well-read author levels some devastating criticisms against the myth of evolution that exerts unmerited influence on scientific thought.

Israel, Act III, by Richard Wolff (Tyndale, 1967, 94 pp., $1.25). Sketches the role of Israel in God’s universal purpose in relation to present-day developments in the Middle East.

Censorship, Obscenity, and Sex, by Alfred P. Klausler (Concordia, 1967, 104 pp., $1.25). A thoughtful discussion of a thorny problem in society to which the Church must intelligently address itself.

Contemporary Forms of Faith, by Paul R. Sponheim (Augsburg, 1967, 126 pp., $1.50). Sponheim offers an oversimplified comparison of fundamentalism, neo-orthodoxy, and neo-realism but lands nowhere himself, except to affirm a “Church of the Center” that “reads no one out.”

Eternal life is the gift of God to all who, through faith, have been redeemed by his Son. The resurrection is the transitional phase for the dead in Christ to eternal glory with him.

Faith in the bodily resurrection of our Lord and of all believers is one of the central doctrines of the Christian faith. The Apostle Paul makes it clear that it is essential to salvation: “If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9).

The resurrection hope is no theoretical doctrine. It is so deeply a part of the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ that faith in him and hope of the resurrection are inexorably bound together.

Jesus, called to the home of sorrowing friends where a beloved brother had been dead for four days, made a statement that has rung out through the ages, giving courage, hope, and assurance to his own: “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die” (John 11:25, 26).

In the work of regeneration there is given to every believer the imperishable assurance of eternal life. It is an inevitable part of salvation, a quality of life that exists now and will exist for all eternity.

In his defense before King Agrippa, the Apostle Paul asked, “Why is it thought incredible by any of you that God raises the dead?” (Acts 26:8). Unless one’s God is thought to have human limitations, the resurrection is seen as the right and natural hope for all who believe. The God of creation and redemption is also the God of the resurrection and the author of eternal life for all who believe.

Resurrection and life are bound together. God, the author of life, has made it a continuous process for the Christian. Jesus affirmed that he is “the way, the truth and the life,” and this life, of which the resurrection is a part, is given to all who in simple faith accept his work and his promises at face value.

In all this we are confronted with the deep mystery of spiritual truths made plain only by the work of the Holy Spirit, and with the mystery of life itself.

Arthur Brisbane caught the significance of God-given life in his lovely story of the funeral in the forest. In the story the little creatures of the forest find a dry cocoon on a branch and bemoan the fact that the caterpillar never had a decent burial. All the while they are conducting the funeral, a lovely butterfly flits over their heads—the creature they think they are burying.

Easter comes at the time of the year when the earth is wearing the garb of a new life that existed unseen during the cold, drab days of winter. How wonderful is this yearly renewal of life and beauty! And how much more wonderful is our Lord’s promise to “raise up” or “bring with him” all who have his life in them!

Unquestionably there are two phases of the resurrection life, the first lived here in this world by believers. The Apostle Paul says that “as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4b). This phase is preliminary to the eternal life of which we will be a part in glory. And the first should be a public witness to the certainty of the second.

Jesus spoke continually of eternal life. He said he came to take care of the sin problem so that all who believed could have this life. The Apostle Paul frequently refers to the present reality and future hope of eternal life. His letter to Titus, for instance, begins with this statement of purpose: “… To further the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth which accords with godliness, in hope of eternal life which God, who never lies, promised ages ago” (Tit. 1:1b, 2), and later he says, “He saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life (3:5–7).

Let the Christian beware when his love for and assurance of the resurrection hope become dim. Let him be sure, too, that proper concern for the world’s needy serves to sharpen concern for their spiritual plight.

The hope of the resurrection has a sobering, restraining, and impelling effect on believers. Even if this world should become a utopia—and it never will—that which God has prepared for those who love him is so wonderful that no mind will ever grasp its wonders before being ushered into his eternal presence. Jude admonishes us, “Keep yourselves in the love of God; wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life” (v. 21), and then adds these significant words, “And convince some who doubt.”

There is danger of letting familiarity with a truth dim its significance for our hearts. The aged John speaks to us today: “This is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son has not life” (1 John 5:11, 12).

The certainty of the resurrection hope lies in the resurrected Lord and in the new life he gives to all who believe. It is a hope greatly needed today, when so many see no further than material blessings or needs and secular movements. It is a hope that rests, not in man, but in the mercy, power, and promises of God himself. Much to be pitied are all who think no further than the horizons of this life, despite the evidences of decay and death on every hand. Only the spiritually dead center their lives and hopes in the present. How great to have a share in lifting their sights beyond what can be seen to the eternal verities revealed through faith in the person and work of the Son of God!

Nothing can give us the right perspective on this life and the next but faith in the reality of the resurrection, for, as Paul says, “If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.… If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied” (1 Cor. 15:13, 14, 19).

The substantiation of our faith rests in Christ, who arose from the dead and promised that all who sincerely love him will be with him for all eternity.

In a day when skepticism is rampant, when men’s hearts are full of fears, doubts, and uncertainties, it does us all good to reaffirm our faith in God’s provision for our eternal souls and to realize that there will come a day when we will be able to look back and marvel at our own stupidity and faithlessness.

God has promised us eternal life through faith in his Son. He raised him from the dead, and that same power will some day raise us up to behold and to bask in his eternal glory. Little wonder that the Apostle Paul longed to go on to be with his Lord!

Remember, “we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7), and this faith “is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).

Dear Iconoclastic but True Believers:

In this issue on rebirth, we gladly note that Britain’s Malcolm Muggeridge, the satirist we previously cited for his protest against students’ demands for pot and the pill, is moving closer to orthodox Christianity. Muggeridge, who was raised in a family of Fabian Society socialists, has come a long way in his search for the authentic in life. As a young socialist teaching in India, he urged his students to revolt against British rule. Later, after a trip to Russia, he discarded left-wing views and became a foe of Communism.

As a journalist, he has consistently raised his impudent voice against the high and mighty (even the British monarchy and the Anglican church) or anything slightly malodorous. He lampooned the sending of Bonny Prince Charles to a private boarding school. He described Churchill’s writings as “gaseous and overwritten.” He recently began an article, “Next to showing Jesus Christ around the Vatican, I should most like to be conducting officer to William Shakespeare returned to earth for his quatercentenary celebration.”

Last year MM poked fun at the way the social and political pace-setters, like writers of a Western, divide the scene into good guys and bad guys. According to them, observes MM, current good guys include strikers, homosexuals, JFK, Martin Luther King, Senator Fulbright, Bishop Pike, abortions, contraceptives, abstract art, psychiatry, ecumenism, and priests who leave the church and marry. Among bad guys are the Pentagon, Ian Smith, Billy Graham, LBJ, and traditional Christian beliefs. The bad guys, however, appeal to the common people and have a way of outlasting the good guys.

In May, 1966, Muggeridge stated: “I have never wanted a God, or feared a God, or felt under any necessity to invent one. Unfortunately I am driven to the conclusion that God wants me. God comes padding after me like a Hound of Heaven.” In March, 1967, he wrote, “As for the Gospels and Epistles I find them (especially St. John) irresistibly wonderful as they reduce the jostling egos of now—my own included—to the feeble crackling flicker of burning sticks against a majestic sunset.” This year he said, “I am more convinced than I am in my own existence that the view of life Christ came into the world to preach, and died to sanctify, remains as true and as valid as ever, and that all who care to … may live thereby, finding … an enlightenment and a serenity not otherwise attainable.”

EUTYCHUS III

Welcome to the Kingdom, Malcolm.

HITTING A COMING PROBLEM

I believe your article, “Where Is Modern Theology Going?” (March 1), is going to be most helpful to all of us here at the Board of Evangelism, and I shall certainly call it to the attention of … my staff. You have said it well, and have said it concisely.…

I like the way your “conclusion” hits and hits hard at a problem confronting all of us; namely, the problem of God. I agree that “the problem of God” does stand before us as the critical problem of the next decade, and it is fundamental for all mankind. This is why I believe so definitely that we must all work together rather than as a fragmented people. We are one in the family of God, and it is essential that we recognize our oneness.

KERMIT LONG

General Secretary

General Board of Evangelism

The Methodist Church

Nashville, Tenn.

Modern theology would not exist in any of its various emphases, were it not that traditional theology is basically and fundamentally missing the truth of life and from God, and actually obscuring the truth while professing to proclaim it. Do I accept any of the modern theological positions or digressions from traditional theology? The answer is a definite No, and just as definitely, I do not accept the traditions of purported theology that obscure and displace the Gospel.…

“Theology is now in a state of confusion” only for those who are obsessed with myopic views of their own understanding of traditionalism. Those whose minds are set on the truth of life from God, and responsive to the Spirit of God, are able to see the clarity of the issues.

THOMAS D. HERSEY

The Methodist Churches

Fairview, Wesley Chapel,

and Moravia, Iowa

I would like to tell you how enthused and delighted my classes and I have been with … “Where Is Modern Theology Going?” Dr. Henry has compressed so much reading and so much keen analysis into such a small compass, and graced it all with a clever journalistic style!… I congratulate you on wearing such heavy scholarship gracefully.…

The article stimulated so much interest that the copies you send here each issue were immediately snapped up, and a dozen students are looking for copies.

PAUL B. DENLINGER

Visiting Professor

The Episcopal Theological Seminary

Lexington, Ky.

PICTURE FROM VIET NAM

I want to express my appreciation for the excellent article, “Viet Nam: The Vulnerable Ones” (March 1). I have had a keen interest in Viet Nam since 1920, when two of my cousins went there as missionaries of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. One of them is now retired; the other, the Rev. Herbert A. Jackson, was stationed at Dalat, and went to Di Linh just before the missionaries at Dalat were evacuated. He was evacuated later by helicopter and is now at Nha Trang.

I felt that you gave an excellent picture of the situation, and trust that you will be able to keep Viet Nam before the attention of the Christian world.

MERRILL C. TENNEY

Dean

Graduate School

Wheaton College

Wheaton, Ill.

I have just read your editorial “Putting First Things Second” (March 1). I am deeply disturbed. Let me say first of all that I speak as a Christian, not as a “social activist”.…

CHRISTIANITY TODAY praises the martyrs at Ban Me Thuot—Mr. Ziemer, the Thompsons, the Griswolds, and Miss Wilting. And rightly so. Thank God for them. But will CHRISTIANITY TODAY dare to thank God for the martyrs at Boston—Rev. Coffin, Dr. Spock, et al.?

A loud, firm evangelical Christian voice is needed to speak out against this insane and dishonest war in Viet Nam. Will CHRISTIANITY TODAY dare to be that voice? Or will the editors of CHRISTIANITY TODAY continue to hide behind the myth that Communism is of the devil and endorse the slogan on the hippie button—“Kill a Commie for Christ?”

JAMES W. CROCKER

Urbana, Ill.

TRUTH THROUGH LAUGHTER

Agreed: Evangelicals ought to learn to laugh at themselves, as Calvin Seerveld suggests (“Comic Relief to Christian Art,” March 1). But they ought also to develop in serious art the now unhappily all but lost ability to satirize sin and sinner.…

In the warm climate of ecumenism and ethical theology, it may seem disturbing—and perhaps logically unfair—to reduce sin and sinners ad absurdum. However, true compassion is not exhibited by an encouraging pat on the back, a sympathetic chuckle, when forceful denunciation and a sardonic laugh are indicated. The Christian artist may, in fact, be able to suggest truth more effectively than the philosopher or Bible scholar through comic distortions and inversions.

ROBERT DUNN

Madison, Wis.

A SAMSONLIKE PIKE?

As one who is always happy to read or listen to what Dr. John Sutherland Bonnell has to say, I read “The Resurgence of Spiritism” (March 1) with great interest.” What surprises me is the rippling human alarm that has been activated among Christians by … Bishop James A. Pike’s … observations of his spiritual walk through this world.…

It should not frighten us that he openly questions old and cherished doctrines and traditions.… Are we so shaky of structure as to feel threatened by the observations, freely shared, of another Pilgrim’s walk?… Is it not possible that men such as our brother Bishop Pike are used … by our Lord to test our personal faith by shaking, Samsonlike, its structuring for evidence of spiritual smugness, spiritual slothfulness?… We shall by its shaking and swaying learn only where it is weak and in need of re-examination and repair. The chance to be made more weather-fast is blessing indeed. It is cause for praising God, not fearing.

HELEN E. BECKER

Union, N. J.

What do you think of a prayer crusade for the conversion or restoration of Bishop Pike? I know the Episcopalians are so straight-laced that they would never accept the idea of praying for the restoration of an unrepentant sinner, but I personally believe that the Baptists are more open to God and would pray for the conversion of an unrepentant sinner such as Bishop Pike.

J. D. STALLINGS

Grand Prairie, Tex.

IN THE BAG

Your recent editorial, “Is Ecumenism Running Out of Fuel?” (March 1), captured my thoughts along this line.

This movement never had any fuel (fire) in the first place. You could place a puppy dog, a snake, and a bunny rabbit in a sack, leave them for a few days, and get the same results.

God’s evangelistic body will shoulder this load of keeping the true Church intact; these ones will eat the Word, and be sincere in many prayers toward a living God, not a social leader in some far-off place.

TRAVIS ARMSTRONG

Dallas, Tex.

NOT SO FINGER-LICKIN’ GOOD

I am disappointed in you. By any standards the current Eutychus is not only third in succession but definitely third rate in quality. I haven’t the foggiest notion who this most regrettable Eutychus may be—but I wish he weren’t.…

I’ve read your publication regularly.… Never, until Eutychus III shambled sloppily onto the scene, thumbs hooked into his suspenders and toothpick hanging from his lips, have I felt that something or somebody was slipping badly.…

Certainly everyone with taste and some measure of regard for the dignity and sacredness of God’s Word must have felt very unhappy with the March 1 column on Dr. Jordan’s The Cotton Patch Version of Paul’s Epistles.…

I love and cherish the Word of God, and I don’t think any purported version, translation, or paraphrase of any portion of that sacred book is good (fingerlickin’ or otherwise) that uses vulgarity and profanity and that attempts to superimpose the writer’s own particular social and political biases on the work of the Holy Spirit. There is no excuse for condoning such writing.

BETTY WILSON

Paradise, Calif.

AFTER THE END

Your excellent editorial, “Are Heart Transplants Moral?” (Feb. 16), … raised the most interesting and thought-provoking question, “Who survives in a brain transplant, the donor or the recipient?” I do not think that in actual practice this is a question which we shall ever have to answer, as in my opinion transplantation of the whole human brain will never be possible.…

As you state correctly, the human body of fallen man cannot last forever, and at the very most the discoveries of modern medicine, including the techniques of organ transplantation, can only postpone physical death for a relatively short time. It remains true that the most important thing is not for man to hanker after a few more years of physical life on earth but to possess eternal life through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and … to be able to look forward confidently to the resurrection of the body.

WALTER C. JOHNSON, M.D.

Hanover, Mass.

MISPLACED BETHEL

It appears that a mistake was made (Miscellany, News, Dec. 8, 1967). The training which has been arranged between Bethel College and Youth for Christ International was between our Bethel College in Mishawaka rather than the Bethel College in Minneapolis.

RAY P. PANNABECKER

President

Bethel College

Mishawaka, Ind.

RARE AND WELCOME

A bombshell! Critics we always have with us. But such penetrating observations balanced with specific, sensible, and positive suggestions (“What’s Wrong with Campus Ministries?,” Feb. 16) are as rare as they are welcome.…

Who knows? Mr. Troutman’s bold suggestions might spawn a concrete, superior alternative to the status quo. Here’s hoping they do!

RAYMOND R. NEAL

Denver, Col.

HARSH AND HELPFUL

Orville S. Walter’s article, “Emotional Conflicts of University Students” (Feb. 16), speaks harshly but helpfully to the Church. It is an article which I would like very much to make available to students from our church.

JERRY BREAZEALE

First Baptist Church

Bogalusa, La.

Every leader today labors under a profound sense of guilt. The demands are so incessant and the uncertainties ahead so imponderable that he lives all the time with the crushing feeling that he is leaving many things undone and frittering away his energy in trivialities.

Parents are not sure how their children will turn out; university administrators cannot guarantee that a dark spirit will not suddenly sweep across the ranks of faculty and students alike; business leaders plan with confidence, but always with the debilitating feeling that something uncanny could suddenly turn up and upset all their planning; thinkers are bombarded from every side by a babel of tongues; scientists cannot keep up with what is happening in their narrowest fields, let alone in adjacent domains; statesmen, in a world shrunk into the closest neighborhood, can hardly adjust to the multiplicity of events and the suddenness with which they pop up everywhere. The result is the feeling that—as the psalmist put it—“all the foundations of the earth are out of course” (Ps. 82:5). There is a sense of helplessness, of inadequacy, of fatalism, of giving up.

The challenge is simply too great. Man was not made to face so much. There is no correspondence between man’s capacity and the magnitude of the challenge. We simply cannot do justice to everything. Man is weighed today and found utterly wanting. And when we make a selection, or when a selection is forced upon us, we smart at what we left out. It haunts us the rest of our lives. Since injustice is inevitable, since we cannot help disregarding many, many things, our conscience becomes stricken, and the soul wilts under the consciousness of guilt. We appear to assume responsibility for the entire world. But since this is impossible, we either become callous, closing our eyes and just forgetting, and using certain manipulations of our body and mind to help us forget and not see, looking upon our anxiety as something pathological and treating it accordingly; or we reach out for God.

Blessed is the man, then, who listens to this: “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matt. 11:28–30). I say, blessed is he who not only listens to this but who listens and acts and believes—and indeed persists in acting and believing, despite the devil and despite his sins.

There is a real living being above man. This is what Paul told the smug Athenians. This being oversees all. I can communicate with him on my knees. He deigns to listen to me and restore me and help me stand on my feet. He deigns to give meaning and certainty to my life in my utter loneliness and despair. When I go wrong—which, alas, I often do—there is such a thing as real repentance, even unto seven times a day. And so I often find myself shouting: “Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases; who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with loving kindness and tender mercies; who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is renewed like the eagle’s” (Ps. 103:1–5). What I cannot attend to because of my limitations I trustingly leave in his care. This is his world, not mine. Let him worry about it, then. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. I will do my best, but my very best taken ten times over is still miserably deficient.

Where is this God? Just there, so that all I have to do to tap him is to use the trick of praying on my knees? No, he is in the fellowship of his saints. He is in the Church. From within the Church, the suffering and struggling Church, the praying Church, the Church which is “earnestly [contending] for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3), the Church of our fathers and ancestors, the Church on the basis of whose hope our fathers slept in the Lord—from within the fellowship of the living, existing, struggling Church, with all that this fellowship entails in responsibility and discipline and participation and identification and hard work and perpetual persecution by the world, I obtain the necessary illumination and strength. Just as only from within the community of the faithful was David able to say what he said, so from within the Church I can repeat what David said with perfect understanding, and can say even more. God does not mock us, nor can we mock him. This given, struggling, hoping, continuing Church, out there in the world, right here in our midst, cannot be a joke. How much everything clears up in our confused minds as soon as we see this simple point.

This overseeing, forgiving, upholding, strengthening God would be a necessity today even if he had never revealed himself in the past. How can miserable man today cope with the immense complexities and burdens of his life without him? Impossible. We only deceive ourselves when we proudly think we can carry on alone. There are far worse wildernesses today than the wilderness of old. What about the wilderness of politics? What about the jungle of the international situation? What about the maze of the sciences? What about the infinite abundance of goods—all luring, beckoning, stimulating, exciting? What about those devastating forces unleashed of late in the dark recesses of the human heart? No, there is no dearth of jungles and wildernesses in the world today. The terror of them far exceeds the terror of the wilderness of old.

Therefore thank God that he exists! Thank God we are told: “I am the LORD thy God.… Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:2, 3). Thank God we are assured: “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid” (John 14:27). Thank God we are promised: “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matt. 28:20). We are delivered these things, we do not invent them; we are told them from the outside, we do not whisper them to ourselves in the dark. The living, independent church believes and confesses them, and those across the ages who heard them and believes them and understood them and therefore became themselves the people of God not only were granted victory over the devil and all his works, but were made to partake, each in his own way and each according to his own measure, of the creative life of God himself.

Shall He Find Faith?

The ultimate battle today is not in any worldly sphere—not economic and social justice, or political stability, or the progress of mankind, or international peace and concord or helping the underdeveloped to stand on their feet, or the vitalization of education, or the coordination of the sciences, or the proper guidance of youth. These are all highly important areas, but the ultimate battleground is in none of them. “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” (John 18:8). This is the ultimate question, today and always.

God works through those who have real living faith in him—he uses them mightily. People grumble and complain; scratch the surface and you will find it is because they have no faith. They are then afraid, dead scared, and that is why they grumble and complain. It is one thing to be dissatisfied with yourself or with the state of the world in faith; it is totally another to be dissatisfied without faith. He who knows Jesus Christ is dissatisfied with the world and with himself because he is profoundly satisfied in Christ. He knows why he is dissatisfied; the others don’t. From his satisfaction he obtains the living means, in humility, of understanding and overcoming—if such be the will of God—all dissatisfaction. And if he does not succeed, that is not going to ruin his faith; he will try to see in his failure some hidden wisdom that may be withheld from him for the time being. He knows that underneath the failure there is a higher justice. And so he will praise God all the same; he will continue to love him and trust him.

There is fear and there is a sense of shame. People are intimidated—they are simply afraid to witness. The climate, they say, is not “congenial.” But, pray tell me, when was it more “congenial”? Then people either are not sure of what they believe or for some reason are ashamed of it. One is afraid that in the end people really believe nothing, not even themselves—and here again we see that it is at bottom a question of faith. The unconvinced will never convince. This is the sad, sad tragedy today. There is no greater spiritual certainty than what is in fact available, and yet people have weakened their hold on it. It is one thing not to wait to offend, and another to have nothing to offend with. It is one thing not to want to cast your pearls before swine; it is another thing to have no pearls to cast. We need men who know, men who believe, men who love, men who are not afraid.

You in this country can provide such men. But you must rise above two besetting temptations—your political complexes and your creature comforts. Politics, in all its forms, is noble and necessary, but it could kill the soul, and if you win the whole world and lose your soul, you know you have won nothing. The lure of power and control that politics holds out could kill the soul. Rise up, then, to the level of the independent, free, creative, joyful, certain spirit. If need be, sacrifice everything for that. And as for these creature comforts, I beg you to use them without becoming their slaves. Teach us all how to use them without becoming their slaves. America must mean—America can mean—much more than the highest standard of material well-being.

There is no effective leadership without God, the real God, the living God, the non-sentimental God, the God of our fathers. Can we, bewildered and overwhelmed by the challenges facing us, achieve the ecstatic position of God? Can we see things—all things: ourselves, others, and the world—from that perspective? And, having seen them, can we then gain the power, according to our office and according to our capacity, to do the will of God for ourselves and the world? I believe we can, provided we believe and provided we repent. “Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:14, 15). Without repentance, nothing is possible; with repentance, nothing is impossible. Without repentance, we shall only move, in both our personal and our national lives, from one mess to another; with repentance, we shall advance towards a goal, both in our personal lives and in the lives of the nations. It is never too late to repent, even if we have fallen a million times, even if we have been captive to the evil one all our lives. And whatever repentance means, it does not mean that we have become angels, never again to be tempted, never again to fall—in fact, angels themselves are tempted and some have fallen. Repentance means that we are genuinely sorry for our sins, that we hate ourselves on account of them, that we acknowledge our utter dependence on God, and that we realize there is no health in us save what he graciously imparts. Repentance is the cry of Paul in Romans 7: “I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Man’s victory is only God’s victory; he can do nothing more than, in absolute fear and trembling, thank him for it.

Leaders want to make sure that everything is perfect. That is a form of pride. To be sure, we should always do our best; but having done that, we should still say, “We are unprofitable servants” (Luke 17:10). Leaders must therefore relax. If we are never happy until we have made sure the world is perfect, then I am afraid we shall never we happy. What a snare it is for leaders to want to go down in history as having achieved this and having achieved that! Leave all that to God. The whole point of true religion is to proclaim the possibility of happiness even amidst imperfection, to insist on the possibility of victory even in the teeth of defeat, to prove that where sin abounded, grace did much more abound, to impart real freedom even under the most impossible conditions, to teach men to take the world after all with a certain sense of humor; and having done that, to demonstrate that it is only from the point of view of this happiness, this victory, this grace, this freedom, this sense of humor, that real change can be brought about—change not just from one state to another, both states being more or less on the same plane, but change from one order of being to another. But, this is a happiness and a victory and a grace and a freedom and a sense of humor quite different from what the world knows or seeks or expects. It is under this mandate that the Church carries on its work in the world, quietly and unobtrusively.

Leaders need the quiet and certainty of God; they need his distance and his detachment. We are not going to live twice. We have only one chance—but what a chance to know and be in God! I doubt not that others have their own way of making sure of God, of securing his distance and detachment, his stillness, his victory, his truth. But to me the way is Jesus Christ, whom I see everywhere in history, before he came, when he came, and after he came, whom I know very well in the Church and in my own life, and who said of himself, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

It is presumptuous to tell a man in a position of responsibility what to do; he alone is responsible. And yet we are always advising our leaders what to do and what not to do. Often advisers change their minds completely when they become responsible leaders themselves; this is most instructive. History is the product of responsible decision and not of advice, and when we become deciders ourselves we see what we never saw and feel what we never felt when we only advised. Advice could well be at times the expression of envy—our secret craving to be leaders ourselves. It is clear, then, that a primary virtue in this whole question of leadership is to have the utmost respect for those in position of responsibility—not to judge them too severely, but to sympathize with and pray for them. This is the meaning of the apostolic maxim that all-authority ultimately derives from God.

The Need for Fellowship

And yet the leaders need fellowship; they need not be altogether lonely. Surely they alone finally come to a decision and take full responsibility for it, but it makes all the difference in the world for them whether they took their decisions from within the warmth of a loving and loyal and trusting fellowship. The confidence of friends is most important to a leader. The endless electronic and other devices are wonderful and necessary—to order the data, to master the profusion of factors and things, to save labor, to save time so one can keep abreast of the breathless acceleration of events. But they alone can never decide. There is nothing that replaces the quiet moment of loving fellowship in which the whole in its essential features is surveyed and considered and taken in. We are absolutely meant to be living members of one another. But there must be a transcendent principle of unity or else the fellowship will sooner or later break up: the fellows will develop such hardened egoisms that they will cease to be living and sustaining members of one another.

Leaders can lead magnificently through fellowship under a transcendent principle. Because the transcendent principle in this case of non-Christian fellowship is not itself living, that is, because it is always some idea—the interest of the nation, the interest of the party, the interest of the revolution, the interest of this or that leader—and because the essence of this idea, as Augustine would say, is self-love, non-Christian fellowship, and therefore non-Christian leadership, will always sooner or later disintegrate. And Christian leadership itself will disintegrate to the extent it has been dechristianized and is living away from living closeness to Jesus Christ and his living body, the Church. When that happens, there is no difference between Christian and non-Christian leadership.

In real Christian fellowship, the transcendent principle of the ecclesia is Jesus Christ, “which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive” (Acts 25:19), and the very essence of this principle is love. It is this living love, having overcome both death and self, that cements the Christian ecclesia into the most creative and enduring fellowship. For “charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (1 Cor. 13:8–10). And of course “that which is perfect” is always, by every count, in every respect, according to every measure, living love.

Milton D. Hunnex is professor and head of the department of philosophy at Willamette University, Salem, Oregon. He received the B.A. and M.A. degrees from the University of Redlands and the Ph.D. in the Inter-collegiate Program in Graduate Studies, Claremont, California. He is author of “Philosophies and Philosophers.”