One of the most tragic examples of contemporary liberal theology is provided by Bishop James Pike, whose theological deterioration has carried him farther and farther left since he entered Protestantism at the point of an unstable Barthian commitment. At the time his book What Is This Treasure was published in 1966, he had already come to display utter arbitrariness in accepting and rejecting biblical materials in accord with his personal religious preferences. In articles on his theology published that year in the Sunday School Times (April 30 and May 7), I remarked:

“If we can trust no revelation of God fully, then we ourselves become the only remaining standard of judgment. This is precisely the case with the Bishop of California, and the arbitrariness of his entire theology is the consequence. He picks and chooses Scripture according to his interests. Thus, as we have seen, he accepts the first clause of John 14:6 while rejecting the second, and uses the apocryphal book of Judith to argue for a loose sexual morality, while rejecting the absoluteness of the Ten Commandments found in canonical Scripture. In ‘How My Mind Has Changed,’ he insists on wine for Communion on the ground that ‘Jesus never drank grape juice,’ yet in What Is This Treasure he approvingly cites the non-Christian philosopher Porphyry (third century), who said of Jesus’ healing of the Gadarene demoniac, ‘probably fictitious, but if genuine then morally discreditable’ (p. 69). In A Time For Christian Candor he rejects Hebrews 12:5, 6 as ‘in direct contradiction to our Lord’s teaching’ (p. 136).

“The more one reads the Bishop, the more the conviction grows that in dispensing with all ‘earthen vessels,’ he has inevitably ended up with the earthen vessel of his own judgment.…”

Now, with the appearance of Pike’s If This Be Heresy and the reports of the Ford-Pike séances, the evident decline has proceeded even farther. In sublime disregard of the basic Christian affirmations concerning sin, hell, judgment, redemption, and resurrection, the bishop endeavors to provide “empirical” evidence for human survival after death by way of psychic phenomena and psi-research. As in the eighteenth century, when alongside a Voltaire stood a Cagliostro, rationalism has shown its other face, superstition.

By “superstition” we do not mean ESP investigations as such, for this is a legitimate field of inquiry; nor do we criticize the bishop’s laudable appreciation of empirical method. What is sad is the extent to which he, like the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century critics of the Bible, consistently confuse empirical investigation with unrecognized metaphysical and religious commitments.

The data collected by parapsychological experts over the years have been exceedingly impressive; only prejudicial blindness can ignore research compilations such as those by Sidgwick, Gurney, Myers, and Tyrrell, or the work carried on by Professor Rhine. But one cannot stress too emphatically that the specialists in this area have not been able to establish human survival or any other religious doctrine on the basis of their data.

Thus, after setting out the best evidence the ESP field offers, Gardner Murphy—by all odds one of the foremost American students in this field—gives this chilling personal testimony: “Trained as a psychologist, and now in my sixties, I do not actually anticipate finding myself in existence after physical death” (Challenge of Psychical Research [1961], p. 273). And in concluding a detailed examination of the entire parapsychological field, Castellan (La Métapsychique [2e éd., 1960]) quotes another French expert, Robert Amadou, and perceptively comments on his judgment:

“There is an immense lag between the exact knowledge that we have of paranormal phenomena and the interpretive suppositions implied by our hypotheses.… We are too ignorant of the circumstances surrounding the appearance of psi facts to be able to build a satisfactory theory of these phenomena—a theory immediately verifiable by experience.” The truth of this remark is confirmed at the end of our study as well. The genuine parapsychologists have been unable to provide any scientific explanatory scheme: every one of their conclusions manifestly bears the imprint of metaphysics.

This is the point: Pike’s own metaphysic—and, in light of the close connection established by Jung between psi phenomena and the unconscious, doubtless his personal drive toward wish-fulfillment as well—creates the “survival” interpretation he places on psychic data. Why not other contexts of interpretation? In the Christian worldview, there are other spiritual powers to be reckoned with besides God and the members of the Church Triumphant (cf. E. L. Mascall’s The Angels of Light and the Powers of Darkness [1954]. Wrote B. Vaughan in his foreword to a classic work by a noted British psychical investigator: “There is a great deal to say against Spiritism, but not much that I know of for it. But I shall be reminded that it has disproved the doctrine for materialism and proved the immortality of man. Not so; it may have only proved the immortality of demons” [The Menace of Spiritualism, by Elliot O’Donnell (1920)].

This sobering point is reinforced by the most important German theological work published on the subject in this century: Kurt Koch’s Seelsorge und Okkultismus (5. Aufl., mit Geleitworte von Adolf Koeberle [1959]), where the author scientifically tabulates the “frequency-ratio” of consequences connected with spiritualist activity on the part of practitioners (such as mediums) and followers; these include psychoses, horrible death-bed scenes, suicides, apoplexy, warping and distortion of character, compulsions and fear-delusions, indifference or positive hostility to Scripture and prayer, and obduracy (Verkrampfung) against Christ and God.

“Test the spirits” cautions the Christian revelation, but for Bishop Pike and the radical theology of the sixties, testing of theological judgments has become impossible. If the November 13, 1967, issue of Newsweek is right that “anything goes” in our “permissive society” today, then theology has become relevant beyond the wildest dreams of its current proponents: now “anything goes” religiously as well.

Can this devolution be halted? Only if the true standard of theological and ecclesiastical judgment is recovered—the standard by which all bishops and theologians, all clergy and laity, are to be judged. Luther well identified this criterion; may his prayer be ours: “Lord, keep us steadfast in Thy Word!”

The National Religious Broadcasters’ twenty-fifth convention last month killed a resolution against political “extremism” on the air that NRB’s board had proposed to protect the reputation of gospel broadcasting.

Despite such hang-ups, NRB membership has doubled to 250 organizations in its first year with a full-time executive, the Rev. Dr. Benjamin Armstrong. Most members are producers of syndicated programs, but nearly 100 are local stations, which became eligible to join three years ago. Many get considerable income from time purchased by preachers who promote conservative politics in their programs.

None of the major right-wing radio preachers belongs to NRB, which specifies that members must have gospel proclamation as their purpose.

Much chat at the Washington, D. C., meetings centered on the campaign of one of these, the Rev. Carl McIntire, against the Federal Communications Commission and its “fairness doctrine” curbing personal attacks. NRB has no official policy on the matter. Armstrong, 43, a United Presbyterian who used to be director of Trans World Radio, says “the principle of fairness is inherent in biblical truth, and is woven into the principles upon which this country was founded.” But he stops short of endorsing the FCC’s rules for applying its “fairness doctrine.” The rules are currently under review in the U. S. Supreme Court.

Last year the FCC said that if a station carries an attack on a person or organization, it must notify the victim of what was said and offer equal time to reply. If it doesn’t, it faces fines up to $10,000 or FCC refusal to renew its license.

General Director Clyde W. Taylor of the National Association of Evangelicals—who begins syndicating his own daily five-minute commentaries on current issues this month—said the NAE has found no evidence that the FCC has been “guilty of abuse” in enforcing fairness.

FCC Chairman Rosel Hyde told the convention that until 1949, the government had banned all opinion on the airwaves, and that “the right to freely express views depends on” fairness rules. He predicted the Supreme Court will support the FCC.

NRB is affiliated with the NAE and uses its doctrinal statement to screen members. NAE’s Taylor said the broadcast group began partly to upgrade ethics from the laissez-faire days when “much of the product brought little respect to the Gospel.” In a speech at the latest NRB convention, CHRISTIANITY TODAY Editor Carl F. H. Henry criticized “personal abuse and irresponsible indictments by radical extremists who abandon logic midway for exaggeration and misconstruction.”

The NRB board’s first policy resolution in years opposed the “extremism” of “entrenched leftist and rightist positions. Seeing their position as the only one, some broadcasters have brought the entire cause into ill-repute by their extreme views.” Convention approval was considered a formality, but David Lutzweiler of the American Mission to Greeks charged that the resolution was a “dishonest” and “cheap” political maneuver. Press and public would assume, he said, that “we mean the John Birchers and the Carl McIntires, and I don’t think it would be fair to them.” Another speaker feared divisiveness, and the resolution was tabled before anyone could speak in its favor.

Lutzweiler, a John Birch Society member who called himself a “right-wing extremist,” had circulated a paper earlier that day charging that convention speaker William Bundy, Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, was guilty of “left-wing extremism (to put it mildly).”

NRB’s efforts to win FCC respect and maintain freedom for broadcasting of the Gospel apparently have a foreign counterpart. John Norris, the McIntire ally whose domestic station is fighting “fairness” before the U. S. Supreme Court, also owns one of the three private short-wave licenses in the country. Insiders think his station’s line-up of right-wing political material beamed overseas made the FCC decide not to grant any more overseas licenses to independents.

The radio station owned by McIntire’s seminary near Philadelphia is currently involved in a lengthy set of FCC hearings. Nineteen ecumenical and civic groups are trying to get the FCC to refuse license renewal on the “fairness” issue. In reply to the charge that its religious and political material is one-sided, WXUR supporters say the other side is heard on the other area radio stations. A ruling by FCC Examiner H. Gifford Irion is expected soon.

With all the excitement on extremism, nobody said much about the strange fact that NRB remains aloof from its worldwide counterpart, International Christian Broadcasters. At the convention five years ago, ICB was hailed as a new body for “greater cohesion and closer cooperation among evangelical broadcasters.” It was supposed to incorporate NRB and the missionary radio federation. Today the Canadian and British groups of evangelical broadcasters belong to ICB, plus nearly fifty other organizations. In June the Rev. Abe Thiessen leaves station ELWA in Liberia to become ICB’s first full-time director. The headquarters will be moved to Minneapolis.

ICB elder statesman Clarence Jones of station HCJB in Ecuador said the “indirect approach to the field of gospel broadcasting” should be used, but broadcasters are afraid because their “supporters simply wouldn’t understand.” But the Southern Baptists’ radio-TV director, Paul Stevens, doesn’t have to depend on money from faithful listeners. He says, “Our aim is not to win men to Christ.… Radio and TV are not instruments for primary evangelistic use.” Rather, his programs “try to lead people to write to us.” Last year the office spent $500,000 processing sixty tons of mail and sending out biblical materials in response. Some 5,000 of the writers reported Christian decisions.

The Southern Baptist agency, second only to the National Council of Churches in Protestant programming on major networks, gets material on four-fifths of the nation’s radio stations. Its TV productions, strong on cultural content, have been carried on all three networks.

Even though their audiences are composed mostly of Christians, religious radio stations are also a growing force on the American scene, with great potential for evangelism. In Canada, such stations are not permitted.

Another possible gain for religious programming is use of cable TV systems. Former FCC Chairman Frederick Ford and Bell Telephone’s John Pierce, the “father of Telstar,” said many of the burgeoning cable systems need programs to fill up their channels. With distribution through wires rather than over the air, the limit on the number of broadcast frequencies is broken, and the only cost for religious groups would be program production.

It remains to be seen what use religion will make of the non-commercial educational stations, now buoyed by significant foundation support and a $47 million authorization from Congress last year. Henry cautioned NRB not to rely just on the educational stations to promote “facets of culture that preserve human meaning and worth, [or] to yield the major networks to what is indifferent to these values, and even jeopardizes them.”

MISCELLANY

The U. S. Supreme Court let stand a ruling that a school prayer in which God’s name was deleted in favor of “You” was still unconstitutional. It also outlawed Louisiana’s payments to parents sending their children to private, non-sectarian schools to circumvent public-school integration.

Toronto’s city council opposed advice from all three city dailies in using a technicality to kill the proposal of Avenue Road Church (Christian and Missionary Alliance) to build an $18 million apartment house complex for senior citizens with $2.2 million city support.

Pope Paul advised Catholics in Italy to vote for candidates who uphold church unity, an apparent reference to church stands against divorce and pornography.

Under an East German law passed last month churches are moved from public to private status, eliminating criminal punishment for blasphemy and disruption of worship; but the code says no one may be persecuted for his faith or prevented from attending services.

Americans United is challenging an Ohio appropriation of $15 million for supplemental education in the next eighteen months in which parochial schools will get the same benefits as public schools.

A dozen Protestant mission workers bound for Colombia have been awaiting visas to enter for more than a month, raising fears of a new intolerance like that prior to 1958.

The United Nations narcotics commission expressed deep concern at health dangers from “continuing abuse of LSD and similar substances” and urged nations to ban their use except for monitored medical and scientific purposes.

Released captive U. S. Marines Steven Nelson and Michael Roha reported that after capture by the Viet Cong they were offered a Gideon Bible, plus other gifts.

A U. S. circuit court ruled that the makers of Lucky Strike cigarettes are liable for the lung-cancer death of Edwin Green, Sr., of Miami. Damages are yet to be set.

Sermons from Science will reopen its pavilion at the Montreal Expo site for five months this summer, aided by free municipal electricity and maintenance.

In the first eight months under a new law, 120 legally approved abortions were performed in Colorado.

PERSONALIA

Yale University Chaplain William Sloane Coffin, Jr., and four others pleaded innocent January 29 to federal charges of conspiring to counsel draft-dodging. The defendants then marched to Boston’s Arlington Street Church for a service where twenty-one more draft cards were turned in.

Newly resigned Bishop Chandler Sterling plans to found “PARDON,” which will run halfway houses for what he estimates as 2,200 Episcopal priests who have suffered breakdowns under the strain of their work.

Latest person ordered to testify in the New Orleans probe of the Kennedy assassination was Thomas Edward Bekham, 27, described as an “entertainer-evangelist.”

Krister Stendahl, New Testament scholar who was a runner-up for Lutheran primate of Sweden last year, was nominated as dean of Harvard University’s Divinity School to succeed Samuel H. Miller, an American Baptist.

Major J. Jones, Methodist district superintendent in Chattanooga, was named president-director of predominantly Negro Gammon Theological Seminary, Atlanta.

Former Dean J. Bernhard Anderson and H. Gordon Harland became the fifth and sixth teachers to quit the Drew University seminary faculty to protest the ouster of Dean Charles Ranson.

Paul A. Hopkins, head of the American Bible Society’s Africa office, was named African secretary for the United Presbyterian mission board. He served thirteen years as executive of the Evangelical Foundation in Philadelphia.

Editor Melville Bell Grosvenor of National Geographic and William Wiseman of Tulsa, pastor of the second-largest United Presbyterian congregation, were named co-chairmen of a $3 million development drive for the National Presbyterian Church and Center.

Norman Nagel of the divinity faculty at Cambridge University, England, was appointed dean of the chapel at Valparaiso University (Missouri Synod Lutheran). He is vice-chairman of England’s Evangelical Lutheran Church.

William H. R. Willikens plans to retire as Christian education teacher at Crozer Theological Seminary (American Baptist) to direct student teaching at Slippery Rock (Pennsylvania) State College.

Donald R. Woodward, dean of the cathedral in Kansas City, Missouri, was named vicar of Trinity Episcopal Church, New York City, the Wall Street parish with perhaps the nation’s top clergy salary.

John Chapin, head publicist for Washington Cathedral (Episcopal), has spent much of his free time in recent months as organizer of District of Columbia Citizens for Romney.

Theodore F. Adams, 69, pastor of First Baptist Church, Richmond, for thirty-two years and former president of the Baptist World Alliance, plans to retire June 30. In a cover story, Time said most Southern Baptists considered him “the finest Baptist preacher in the world.”

Sociologist-priest Donald R. Campion, 46, was confirmed in Rome as editor-in-chief of the Jesuit weekly America (circulation 93,000).

Jesuit priest George H. Dunne, former assistant to the president of Georgetown University, was named by the Vatican and the World Council of Churches to set up their joint conference on world economics set for Lebanon, April 21–27.

In continuing Curia changes, Pope Paul named Francis Cardinal Brennan to the sacraments office as the first American to head a major Vatican agency. The appointment of a Dutch cardinal to head the office on Eastern churches means five of the twelve major offices are now led by non-Italians.

An Anglican tribunal in Melbourne, Australia, dismissed Neil Glover, 46, as a vicar for marrying a young Sunday-school teacher in his church while his divorced wife was still alive. He was not unfrocked and will seek a parish elsewhere.

Bob Finley, founder of International Students Inc. in 1953, will move into full-time speaking and evangelism and be replaced as president by Hal Guffey.

Top church leaders showed surprising new interest last month in coming to grips with the big theological cleavage in American Protestantism. In St. Louis, President Oliver Harms of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and four Synod vice-presidents conferred with officials of the State of the Church, a conservative group. In Atlanta, more than forty Southern Presbyterians assembled in a liberal-conservative confrontation arranged by Moderator Marshall C. Dendy.

At yet another meeting, an Episcopal group promoted diversion of local-church revenues—a sign of increasing lay efforts for a greater voice in how denominational funds are used.

A blanket of secrecy covered the St. Louis talks. Christian News,¹This journal also reported that the State of the Church executive board approved plans for a “Twentieth Century Formula of Concord” that will clearly seperate those who accept historic Christianity from those embracing today’s liberalism. A “prominent orthodox theologian” will be asked to draft the document. a conservative weekly, said the press was barred from the meetings and added that Missouri Synod officials asked State of the Church leaders “not to publicize any statement made by officials during the all-day session.”

The two-day Atlanta meeting reflected growing concern of many laymen and rising tension in the major denominations. Conservatives at the Hilton Inn sessions were represented by Concerned Presbyterians, who are eager to maintain the primary spiritual mission of the Church. Also on hand were members of the Fellowship of Concern, who like to call themselves the “progressive” element in the church and who stress social action as necessary for the Church to be relevant today.

The meeting was characterized by a Christian spirit, though neither side was willing to make any notable concessions. The background of both organizations was outlined, along with their present programs. Concerned Presbyterians is composed entirely of laymen, a fact deplored by many ministers attending the Atlanta meeting, but CP President Kenneth S. Keyes said this policy was adopted to protect ministers from “ecclesiastical reprisals.” The organization does get considerable advice and support from ministers who share the concern of the laymen. The Fellowship of Concern, originally founded to help ministers suffering pressures because of their stand against racism, has, with the lessening of that problem, shifted its emphasis to the question of church union, with United Presbyterians and also with the Consultation on Church Union, and to an activist approach to social problems.

The churchmen left Atlanta with a clearer understanding of conflicting viewpoints but showed no evidence of lessening their own emphasis within the denomination.

Dendy had called the meeting as a “consultation on reconciliation.” Personal reconciliation seemed not to be lacking, as participants recognized each other’s sincerity. But there was no reconciliation of viewpoints. One called for a return to forceful preaching of the Gospel of personal redemption, to be reflected in evangelism and missions, the other for involvement of the Church in secular issues.

Conservatives insisted that Christians, as individuals, could validate their faith only by showing love and compassion to the unfortunate, while liberals claimed they had not voided their ordination vows in favor of another gospel.

If any man in American Christendom feels the tensions that beset the major denominations, it is the 65-year-old Dendy. When he was elected moderator of the last General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. by a margin of just one vote, it was merely another demonstration of how divided the churches are.

As executive secretary of the denomination’s Board of Christian Education for fifteen years, Dendy already knew of the deep cleavage. His agency’s products, including the “Covenant Life Curriculum” and the “Layman’s Bible Commentary,” had sparked many a debate in the church courts. He also has been on the firing line as a member of the General Board of the National Council of Churches and a leader of its Division of Christian Education; in both these contexts he has often taken relatively conservative positions.

Dendy’s move to bring the conservative-liberal dispute into the open was believed to be a first. Not in recent memory, at least, has a major denominational official called such a meeting—simply to discuss differences within the church.

“There is a great deal of unhealthy unrest in the church,” Dendy said in his opening address. “This unrest grows in part out of the inevitable fact that there are individuals and groups in the denomination who hold to vastly different theological positions. We do not have the unanimous agreement as to what we mean by the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the nature of evangelism, the nature of the Church, of the demands the Gospel makes upon believers, and how the Church can bear her witness corporately as well as individually to a world that is lost in sin.”

Still another sign of denominational unrest last month was a three-day meeting of Episcopalians in Phoenix, Arizona. Episcopalian Barry Goldwater was the featured speaker. Addresses were also given by Dr. Carroll E. Simcox, editor of the Living Church, and Episcopal Bishop William R. Moody of Lexington, Kentucky.

The occasion was the second annual convention of the Foundation of Christian Theology, formed in 1966 to counteract trends in the church and in the National Council of Churches toward involvement and financial commitments in socio-political activity. Foundation president Paul H. Kratzig calls for “intensified stewardship—not for social engineering cloaked in the guise of activist Christianity.”

Some 150 persons from twenty-six states attended the Phoenix meeting, including twenty-five clergymen. A main activity of the foundation is now the setting up of alternative forms of giving. A number of reports now circulating say some church agencies are being deprived of funds because of the social-activist drain.

The big question facing conservatives troubled by church trends is whether to do battle within or to withdraw. Those who withdraw have traditionally had to yield their investments in property, but a Georgia case is causing some concern among top churchmen. The Georgia Supreme Court ruled unanimously last month that two congregations that withdrew from the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. are entitled to keep their property. The attorney for the denomination has indicated that the ruling will be appealed.

SKEPTICS IN CONCERT?

An “exploration team” from three top denominations hopes soon to begin work on a joint Christian-education curriculum. A tipoff on the content of the material came last month from Dr. Gerald H. Slusser, professor of theology and education at Eden Theological Seminary. Slusser, a United Presbyterian, was quoted as saying that the vast majority of church members in America today reject the Trinity as unimportant, the divinity of Christ as irrelevant, and the Virgin Birth as unbelievable. Religious News Service said Slusser is helping to devise new resource materials for the lay-education division of the United Presbyterian Church.

Church members must recognize, Slusser said, “that biblical materials are extensively mythological.” He also asserted that post-modern man rejects “other-worldliness, and mysterious, mystical, or contradictory theological statements,” as well as “intercessory prayer, intervening providence, and imperious predestination, as inadequate, or at least inaccurate, ideas.”

United Presbyterians and Episcopalians met with representatives of the United Church of Christ in January to plan for common Christian-education programs that could go into effect in the mid-1970s. The idea was unveiled after a week-long meeting in Cleveland of 242 denominational staff members.

LUTHERAN EYES ON C.O.C.U.

The Lutheran Council in the U.S.A., formed a year ago as a cooperative vehicle by the three major Lutheran denominations, voted January 30 to send observer-consultants to the Consultation on Church Union.

The recommendation was made by council executives after the issue was raised by the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, which in 1965 became the first Lutheran body to send observers to COCU. There was little discussion among the forty-three delegates at the council’s meeting in New York City, and informational aspects of the link with COCU were stressed.

General Secretary C. Thomas Spitz said he would have to contact COCU to see whether a Lutheran team could attend the March meeting in Dayton. One issue is that the council is an agency rather than a church as such. However, COCU welcomes observers, and last year the conference of Eastern Orthodox groups sent one.

TOWARD ONE CHURCH?

Methodist missions leaders say they will no longer honor traditional agreements among denominations that divide up the world for separate efforts. The new policy of the World Division of Methodism’s Board of Missions is that of “ecumenical mission.”

At a meeting in Denver last month, the World Division put its policy into effect by approving $100,000 for each of two mission projects in the Middle East. Methodists have not had mission work in these areas before.

The step was said to have been taken on the basis that The Methodist Church “has no intention of starting new overseas mission projects on a strictly denominational basis, and would therefore do its future planning on an ecumenical basis … with other denominations.”

The announcement of the action gave no further significant details, but evangelical observers sense that it falls in line with the ecumenical movement’s “Joint Action for Mission” concept, hopefully described in the International Review of Missions as a stimulus for one great church.

UNITY WEAK

The annual Christian unity week brought pulpit exchanges to uncounted U. S. congregations. In New York, Episcopal Bishop J. Stuart Wetmore became the first non-Catholic to speak in St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

In Britain, Archbishop of Canterbury A. Michael Ramsey passed an ecumenical milestone by giving the first address by an Anglican in the Roman Catholic cathedral at Westminster. His meeting with Cardinal Heenan brought a spontaneous burst of applause from the congregation of about 5,000.

When the archbishop arrived for the service, however, the reception was mixed. Across the narrow street from the entrance a group of diehard Protestants staged a protest, despite the cold weather. Some thirty banners were seen, with such slogans as “Jesus Saves, Rome Enslaves” and “Through Christ to Glory, Through Rome to Purgatory.” Their numbers had been reinforced earlier by the dramatic arrival of a vehicle clearly marked “Ambulance” from which emerged more protesters.

Cardinal Heenan said that when he was enthroned in 1963 he had spoken of a bishop as a bridge-builder—“and one of these bridges will span the River Thames to Lambeth where a dear friend resides.”

The friend from Lambeth exclaimed, “What a time to be alive in!” While acknowledging that “a long ecumenical journey lies ahead,” he saw a new era, especially in the “great emphasis” of Vatican II on baptism, through which “we share already in a brotherhood in Christ.” Ramsey also made references to “the blessed Sacrament” and “fellowship with Blessed Mary.”

The previous Sunday Ramsey had preached in Hinde Street Methodist Church and thanked God for John Wesley in the sermon. He said, “The Christians in England are meant to be one Church, the ecclesia of God in England in communion with the ecclesia of God in Uganda or Ceylon or New Zealand or where you will.” Some found it significant that he did not include South India, with which ecclesia no Anglicans are yet in communion.

The official press release said Ramsey then said the new united church “will be the Church of England in continuity with the Church of St. Augustine of Canterbury; it will be the Church into which John Wesley was born.” The words, staggering in their implication, were not uttered in the actual sermon. The church publicists offered what amounts to an admission that the archbishop had thought better of his original words and that a correction had been sent out.

Even more bedlam accompanied the appearance of Roman Catholic Archbishop James Scanlan at the Church of Scotland cathedral in Glasgow. As soon as he approached the lectern for a Scripture reading, demonstrators rose and started to shout things like, “You will go to Hell with the Pope.” Scuffles broke out between protesters and members of the congregation, the Scotsman reported, and the service was delayed for twenty minutes. There was even shouting during a prayer after the Scripture reading.

Afterwards, a minister from the Sovereign Grace Baptist Church in Glasgow identified himself as the protest leader and said: “I feel it was tremendously successful. We will keep up this sort of thing until the whole ecumenical movement is abandoned.”

RETREAT EAST OF SUEZ

The British government’s decision last month to withdraw all troops stationed east of Suez by 1971 is causing a revolution for Christian work among servicemen overseas. Societies are rethinking strategy, some are closing down foreign work completely, and some face considerable financial loss.

Besides this, it has never been so hard to find Christians willing to work overseas with servicemen, since the job would last only four years.

The head of the Soldiers’ and Airmen’s Scripture Readers Association, Lieutenant Colonel G. G. S. Clarke, said the work in Singapore will be closed, but he thinks there should be greater opportunity to reach the increasing number of servicemen in Britain.

He said the government move is a “great loss,” however, because “the soldier overseas is much easier to reach with the Gospel than the one at a home base. In Britain he is a soldier only from 8:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M., and then he goes into town for the evening. But overseas you will always find men hanging around the barracks. We also find that a man is more ready to consider the facts of life when he is away from home.”

Clarke also noted the loss of mission opportunities among native peoples where troops are stationed. In Aden, for instance, an Arab employed to work in an Army canteen was converted to Christ and is now training in Lebanon, planning to return as a missionary to his people. Clarke’s mission has had to scrap plans for a new work in the Persian Gulf area.

Lieutenant Commander F. M. Savage of the Royal Sailors Rest said his group’s seventy-two-room hotel at the Singapore navy base will close. It was the agency’s first overseas effort when it was opened four and one-half years ago. The hotel is on land leased from the British Admirality and cannot be sold, so financial loss is expected. A previous government decision to close the Royal Air Force station in Ballykelly, Northern Ireland, will close the mission’s fifty-room hotel nearby.

James Campbell, veteran secretary of the Mission to Mediterranean Garrisons, said a new operation opened in Iran just a few weeks ago must now be closed by 1971. But he added philosophically, “Four years’ work is all that any missionary can be sure of in any area these days.” His agency has had to close twenty-eight centers for political reasons since World War II.

J. ERIC MAYER

A CLERGYMAN VINDICATED

In the tatty, faded, and ill-lit courtroom in Chatham, Ontario (population 30,000), the atmosphere was bleak, but for 50-year-old Russell D. Horsburgh it was the stage for a personal triumph on January 18.

He was cleared of criminal charges that he encouraged sexual acts among teen-agers at the city’s largest church, Park Street United. He had been charged and convicted in 1964. The clergyman served about one-third of his one-year prison term while a high-priced lawyer fought appeals in the courts.

At first unsuccessful, the lawyer eventually won a 4–3 decision for a new trial from the Supreme Court of Canada. The judge at the latest trial ruled there was insufficient evidence.

Horsburgh angrily quit the United Church, claiming it deserted him, though the denomination’s social-service board voted $5,000 toward his legal expenses. While out of jail the preacher lived a hand-to-mouth existence that included work as a parking-lot attendant.

Horsburgh, claiming his faith is now stronger than ever, has decided to work in Toronto among teens who have had brushes with the law—the same activity that led to the trouble in Chatham. This time he may follow advice he gave a year ago to other ministers who want to work with teen-agers in trouble: “Never work alone with them. It’s suicide.”

AUBREY WICE

Christians in South Korea—like most of the population—reacted with shock but no fear to two Communist-planned hammer blows last month. The first provocation was infiltration of thirty-one guerrillas bent on assassinating President Chung Hee Park. Two days later, North Korea seized the U. S. surveillance ship “Pueblo.”

The United States said the ship was cruising in international waters, and the world waited anxiously to see whether a second front would open in the Asian war.

In the guerrilla attack, nighttime gunfire and grenades broke the silence on the streets of South Korea’s capital, Seoul. The first hero of the incident was Police Chief Choi, a Roman Catholic, who halted the raiders a half-mile from the president’s house. As he gave a warning, he was shot fatally in the stomach. He was later given a huge Catholic funeral in the municipal auditorium with a public procession of government officials.

Police swarmed through the Mormon mission headquarters near the capitol in pursuit of the fleeing Communist commandos. Tension mounted as the Army joined the chase, and the watchman at the Presbyterian seminary on the outskirts of Seoul took the precaution of arming himself with a shotgun. Eventually five of the infiltrators were killed and one was taken alive.

The subsequent seizure of the “Pueblo” added to the shock, but there was no panic in Korea. The 750 Protestant missionaries prudently planned what to include in their sixty pounds of standard evacuation baggage—just in case—but continued their normal routine.

As public confidence and calm returned, the South Koreans asked, “Why is the world so surprised? We know the Communists; this is how they act.”

A surge of hope arose that the new incidents would break the paralyzing deadlock that has cut Korea in half for twenty-two years. Pulpit prayers on the day of the “Pueblo” capture and the following Sunday included pleas for reunification of the country and for freedom. But the pastors also agonized over a possible new war and the suffering it would bring, and hoped for peace with honor.

Objective considerations after the first blush of emotion in the crisis included pride in the South Korean response and confusion about what America would—or should—do.

The Communists seriously miscalculated their popular support in the South. They theorized that the common people would protect the lives of the infiltrators as the sea protects fish. But the facts are otherwise. Four impoverished wood-cutters risked their lives to give the first alarm that foiled the Communist maneuver.

The Communists theorize that the new, young generation will be pro-Communist, but thousands of high schoolers—including refugees from Soongsil High School, a Christian institution in North Korea—demonstrated against the North’s aggression.

The Communists also theorize that capitalist South Korea is an exploited, underdeveloped, unhappy land. But captured guerrillas were shocked by Seoul’s bright lights, quality suits, leather shoes, and smiling faces.

Korea’S Christians

South Korea has the strongest Protestant community among the Asian nations, with nearly half a million members. About 1.9 million in a population of 27 million have some church connection. There are eighteen theological schools. The Korean denominations have 3,200 ordained nationals, plus several thousand other staff workers. Some 750 missionaries from overseas work in the twenty-five churches and mission groups listed in the 1968 World Christian Handbook. The majority of Korea’s Protestants belong to the several Presbyterian groups.

The Roman Catholic community numbers 638,546, with 671 priests, more than half of them native Koreans.

The Catholics estimate 40,000 members in North Korea, but there are no definite figures available on Protestant strength under the Communist regime there.

Most South Koreans felt some retaliatory action was necessary to halt terrorism and piracy, but there was no unity of advice.

North Korea is training a thousand combat units for infiltration similar to that aimed at assassinating Park. These Communist troops are superbly trained from two years of walking with ten-pound weights on their legs, sleeping bare on cold concrete, and hiking with heavy loads over rugged terrain twenty-three miles per day. Many wondered if the free world has self-discipline to match.

There was no cry for withdrawal of South Korean troops fighting with the United States in Viet Nam. The Church is proud that the chief of Korea’s troops in Viet Nam is a Christian. There is no peace movement in the Korean church to parallel that in the United States. Pacifism is greeted with polite incredulity, or laughter, in a nation that daily faces the threat of Communist arms.

OTHER CHURCH REACTIONS

Worldwide church response to the Korean crisis (story above) was moderate in tone. The Vatican newspaper feared that the Asian war situation might be complicated “beyond all control.” The paper blamed neither side and called for peaceful settlement through “honorable negotiations.”

In New York, the chief executives of four Protestant denominations sent a message to President Johnson praising his “restraint and patience” in handling the “Pueblo” crisis and his referral of the situation to the United Nations. They said they “believe this great nation should not and need not be provoked into the hasty use of armed force in response to brazen and immoral aggression, short of war, by her enemies.”

The four, representing the Methodist Church, United Presbyterian Church, United Church of Christ, and Christian Churches, said they did not question the “wisdom” of “Pueblo”-type spy missions, since Americans “should expect and receive the protection of their government …”

Later, officials of the National Council of Churches and a dozen other Protestant, Jewish, and secular groups sent a telegram to the President saying his mobilization of Reserve troops “is an alarming reaction encouraging further escalation and war hysteria,” and saying Americans “deserve public disclosure of full information” on the “Pueblo” location off Korea. Similar wires went to all members of the Senate and some U. S. Representatives.

PRAYER IN THE WHITE HOUSE

A week after the “Pueblo” crisis began, President Johnson and other national leaders assembled for International Christian Leadership’s annual prayer breakfast. “Man was given by his Creator the saving strength of faith,” the President said. “This is a season when America needs to draw upon the strength of our many faiths.”

He said it was not his privilege to tell people what, when, or where to worship, but “in these long nights, your President prays.”

He then quoted FDR’s 1942 prayer, asking “the God of the free” to grant men “a common faith,” and added, “America never stands taller than when her people go to their knees.”

Main speaker at the breakfast was General Harold K. Johnson, U.S. Army Chief of Staff. He said the nation is “troubled and uneasy.” But “there is a solution to the problems of individuals … of nations … of our cities and our streets … of our young—turn to God!”

The general said that “in the eyes of God all of us are brothers. We dare not be indifferent to our brother’s needs.” Then referring to God’s prior love as explained in John 15—which had been read earlier by Vice President Hubert Humphrey—the general said, “We can never hope to match his matchless love, but we grow in grace and glory every time we try.”

Breakfast emcee Senator Frank Carlson, who is retiring this year after forty years of public service, had this advice: “Do not take the God of your fathers lightly, or allow him to be squeezed out of our lives by our own selfish attitudes.”

In the invocation, Massachusetts Governor John Volpe said, “Make us aware of how helpless we are … without the God of men and nations.” The closing prayer was by ex-Texas Governor Price Daniel, director of the Office of Emergency Planning.

Greetings from the Senate weekly prayer group were brought by Mississippi’s John Stennis. The House group was represented by Ben Reifel of South Dakota.

HOW ARE THINGS IN LAMBARENE?

Two and one-half years after Albert Schweitzer’s death, the hospital mission work in Lambaréné, Gabon, still goes on. It suddenly got some publicity during new director Dr. Walter Munz’s recent fund-raising tours in Britain and the United States.

“Without massive and rapid support,” London’s Sunday Times reported, the hospital “may soon close to become the dusty shrine to one man’s ego.” The paper said budget problems forced postponement of plans to purify the water supply and offer pre-natal care and vaccinations. The story of financial trouble was later called an exaggeration.

Schweitzer’s famous “reverence for life” extended to animals, including vermin; but under the regime of Munz, a 34-year-old Swiss bachelor, they are kept away from the wards. Bedbug-ridden grass mats have been replaced with plastic-covered foam mattresses; paraffin lamps have given way to fluorescent lights.

Last year the hospital conducted 1,200 major operations. Its 500 beds are always full, while the European-style government hospital nearby is half-empty.

British leprosy expert Stanley Brown has charged that the famous leper colony built with Schweitzer’s 1954 Nobel Peace Prize money is “a mere nesting place for burnt-out cases.” But he plans to survey the work on behalf of the British Leprosy Mission this year to improve preventive techniques.

The Times said that at the hospital “Schweitzer’s spirit lies perpetually in state.” In fact, rumors have it that some natives actually expect a second coming of the mustachioed doctor.

One Schweitzer tradition remains intact: relatives of the patients cook free food over individual pots.

THE PLOTTING PADRES

“We began teaching the Indians that no one will defend their rights if they do not defend them themselves,” said Maryknoll priest Thomas R. Melville. “If the government and oligarchy are using arms to maintain them in their position of misery, then they have the obligation to take up arms and defend their God-given right to be men.”

The 37-year-old Melville and his brother, 35, along with another Maryknoll priest and a nun, have publicly identified themselves with leftist guerrillas in Guatemala. In December, superiors ordered them to return to New York. When the Melville brothers did not do so, they were suspended. The other priest returned home and was reassigned to Hawaii.

Witness At The Winter Olympics

The tenth Winter Olympics, now under way in Grenoble, France, pay homage to the world’s fastest-growing sport: skiing. In a broader sense, many Olympic participants worship implicitly at the shrine of athletic prowess, recalling the early Greek games, when a priestess was on hand (the only woman present). The Greek events began only after sacrifices of grain, wine, and lambs had been offered to the god Zeus.

Nonetheless, the modern Olympics have seen pagan influences yield somewhat to Christian enterprise. During recent games, evangelistic teams have worked quietly among the Olympic participants. Several top winners have been young people of firm Christian conviction.

For the current winter games in Grenoble, local churches asked the Commonwealth and Continental Church Society in London to help to set up an international Christian witness. The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in Europe gave prompt, enthusiastic support. At the 1966 World Congress on Evangelism in Berlin, a number of organizations got together on the project and eventually set up an agency called Action Chrétienne Olympique (Christian Olympic Action).

ACO recruited 180 Christian young people of various nationalities and gave them a correspondence course in lay evangelism. A Grenoble cinema was hired to show Billy Graham and Moody science films, and a lounge was rented to foster Christian friendships. Campus Crusade for Christ promised to send “The Forerunners” to communicate the Gospel in the folk-music idiom. ACO has also appointed official chaplains with entree to the Olympic Village to hold special services. Special literature has been prepared for distribution.

Ecumenical groups also are on hand in Grenoble with exhibitions and special events at two specially built centers. Among the speakers was Dr. W. A. Visser ’t Hooft, retired general secretary of the World Council of Churches.

The plot thickened still further when a Maryknoll spokesman confirmed reports that Thomas Melville had married the nun, Sister Marian Peter Bradford, 38; both were excommunicated.

At the end of January the Melville brothers were reported to be in Mexico near the border of Guatemala, where presumably they could perpetuate contacts with guerrilla forces. National Catholic Reporter, meanwhile, carried an article by Thomas Melville in which he made a detailed plea for downtrodden Guatemalans besides endorsing arms for the peasants. He denounced landowners and asserted that “misery is perhaps the biggest factor in preventing a true growth of Christianity in Latin America today.”

“I am a communist only if Christ was a communist,” Melville said. “I did what I did and will continue to do so because of the teachings of Christ and not because of Marx or Lenin.… When the fight breaks out more in the open, let the world know that we do it not for Russia, not for China, nor any other country, but for Guatemala. Our response to the present situation is not because we have read either Marx or Lenin, but because we have read the New Testament.”

DISTORTING THE POPE

The Vatican is concerned that Pope Paul, who sees wrong on both sides and is trying to be a neutral mediator on the Viet Nam war, is made by some to seem a foe of the U. S. policy. Religious News Service says “the pontiff is pictured as having already pronounced a moral judgment against the United States and to have called for unconditional cessation of bombing of North Viet Nam.”

An RNS dispatch from Rome noted that after the Pope expressed “keen and sorrowful apprehension” about the war in his talk with President Johnson, this was interpreted as a “moral rebuke.” RNS said the Pope rejects proposals for an unconditional bombing halt as a pre-condition to any negotiations, which puts him at odds with United Nations Secretary General U Thant.

RHODESIA: A WALL RISING?

Segregation in some parts of Southern Rhodesia is worse than in South Africa, Rhodesia’s Anglican Bishop K. J. F. Skelton said in a New York visit last month. He added that pressures are increasing on the Church, which tries to remain one institution where blacks and whites can sit down “together to speak the truth in love with one another.”

Skelton reported on new regulations he said have not been mentioned in the nation’s press: Mixed-blood persons can be evicted from their homes if 50 per cent of their neighbors request it. Some public parks are now designated for whites only. School sports matches that were once multi-racial have been segregated. Skelton also complained that Rhodesia is almost completely cut off from news of the outside world.

PLUS A HORSE FARM

A recent CBS-TV news clip showed Director Ralph Baney of the Holy Land Christian Approach Mission handing out Christmas food baskets to the poor in the Middle East, but the good image was short-lived. Days later the Internal Revenue Service ended a month-long investigation and announced that the mission’s tax-exempt status had been revoked, retroactive to four years ago. Baney, a 55-year-old Baptist minister, hopes for a hearing on his appeal to the district IRS office this month.

As to the reason, an IRS spokesman would refer only to the section of the tax code that says that a tax-exempt organization must operate exclusively for religious or charitable purpose and that no net earnings are to benefit any private individual.

If the ruling stands, the mission’s income ($1 million last year) will be taxed like that of a corporation, and contributors will no longer get tax credit.

The mission, which supports an orphanage and crippled children’s hospital in Bethlehem, is based at a $500,000 Kansas City building that also serves as Baney’s home. The building stands on a 236-acre farm where the mission raises and sells thoroughbred Tennessee walking horses. Baney says the horse farm is no different from the nearby Nazarene printing plant or Unity orchard operation.

ELDEN RAWLINGS

GEORGIA: FIRST AID

The Southern Baptist association in Atlanta reversed traditional policy in January and voted 487 to 370 to permit Atlanta Baptist College, being constructed for September opening, to apply for federal aid for buildings and equipment.

After the vote, the Rev. Dick H. Hall, Jr., former Georgia Baptist president, quit as development chief for the college. Hall, who has been an officer of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said that “to be of further use to the college I would be compelled to compromise very deep convictions. This I cannot do.” Several pastors said their churches might quit the association in protest.

Prominent Atlanta pastor Monroe Swilley, college board chairman, praised the vote but said the trustees “are not anxious to run to the federal treasury. We will scrutinize every program carefully.”

The Georgia convention has refused to let Mercer University in Macon seek federal aid for the last two years.

One To Disrupt The Status Quo

The Theology of Hope, by Jürgen Moltmann, translated by James W. Leitch, (Harper & Row, 1967, 342 pp., $8.50), is reviewed by David P. Scaer, assistant professor of systematic theology, Concordia Theological Seminary, Springfield, Illinois.

Only infrequently in a generation does a book appear that promises to disrupt the theological status quo and direct theology along a new course. In this case the “new” direction is a reaffirmation of the classical New Testament eschatological hope that the risen Christ will appear so that the dead may share in his resurrection. In these pages we find more than a simple biblicism. The author, professor of systematic theology at the University of Tübingen, was motivated to write by current theological thought that has reduced both history and eschatology to an eternal present. This idea, which is the mainspring of existential philosophy, is familiar to us through the works of Bultmann and to some extent Barth.

Far from being biblical, the depreciation of history, and also the future, with sole emphasis on the “now,” originates in the Hellenistic cyclical view of history and can be traced through Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, right into contemporary theology. It has also had a profound influence on the study of history, which has provided critical categories for studying the events of the New Testament and has laid down paths for plotting the future. This historical method, prominent in both this and the last centuries, follows the “whole” concept of the Greeks and does not allow for any new events that do not have parallels in earlier ones. Thus for Baur, miracles are a priori impossible and have no place in history. The existence principle of Heidegger, Bultmann’s mentor, is totally destructive of history, since the past functions primarily in understanding human existence.

With clear decisive strokes, Moltmann shows that for both Jews and Christians history is rooted in actual events and sets its sights on a real future in accordance with God’s promises. Christianity does not concentrate on the Hellenistic concept of God as an eternal presence but sees God going before his people, leading them to a goal. History is the framework for the promise that is the basis of hope. Hope is the other side of faith and more than anything else is the unique characteristic of Christianity. Although a cyclical view of history does not allow for a resurrection of Jesus, since it is not the repetition of a former event, Moltmann establishes it as the very basis of history. Past, present, and future are linked only when the crucified Jesus is identified with the risen Christ, who will complete all things with the final resurrection from the dead. Only a firm historical base surrounded by the promises of God secures a future marked by eschatological hope. This hope concerning God’s future in Christ lets the Christian live in a world full of possibilities. God’s future for the world can be found in his word but cannot be identified with it. This would be making the present eternal in the manner of Bultmann.

This work, a masterpiece both in theology and in language, has already become a milestone in European theology, providing a positive, corrective influence by showing that the Church’s real life lies not in the present but in the future, with the return of the resurrected Christ. Because of the past (the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus), the present (the preaching of the Gospel) is fraught with hope for the future (the return of Christ). Only Christianity can read history and understand the present in the light of an event that still lies in the future. This is the message of hope.

Doom Of Death-Of-God Theology

The Death of God Debate, edited by Jackson Lee Ice and John J. Carey (Westminster, 1967, 267 pp., $2.65 paper), is reviewed by J. Murray Marshall, pastor, First Presbyterian Church, Flushing, New York.

It was in the fall of 1965 that the “death of God” controversy erupted in both the secular and the religious press. Through what is called “a happy editorial accident,” articles appeared in close sequence in the New York Times, the Christian Scholar, Time, the Christian Century, and the New Yorker making the phrase “death of God” common and hurling the names of William Hamilton, Thomas J. J. Altizer, Gabriel Vahanian, and Paul van Buren into the thick of learned and not-so-learned controversy.

How goes the stir today, more than two years later? Some claim to see sure symptoms of decline and death; perhaps the smaller number of articles appearing in 1967 compared to 1966 bears this out. Others, among them the editors of this book, are sure that the death-of-God theology “is here to stay, whether we like it or not.” Hamilton himself sees that radical theology could go in any one of three directions: to the left, beyond “Christian atheism” to a “candid atheism without any of the Christian claims”; to the right, to the “birth or resurrection of God”; or on to a radical consideration of other items on the theological docket—Christology, the doctrines of man, the Church and the sacraments.

Meanwhile, Ice and Carey, both associate professors of religion at Florida State University, have brought us up to date on the debate. Primarily the book is a compilation of previously published articles representing various responses from the theological community and the public at large. Among new materials are excerpts from personal correspondence with Altizer and Hamilton that show the variety and intensity of reactions triggered in the debate, and a chapter by Altizer on the significance of the new theology. Of special interest is a series of thirty-two questions to Hamilton and his concise answers, which open up the specifics at issue.

Certain impressions emerge. First this can hardly be called a movement, a word that implies a degree of unity about ideas and goals. Clearly, there is no unanimity among the principals, even on basic definitions. Second, radical theologians offer a studied disavowal of traditional theology, yet still claim a right to be called “Christian” and profess allegiance to Jesus. They are “still strangely tied to the Christian tradition”; Hamilton even says, “I am not yet ready to give up sola scriptura.” Here is a mystery of the new theology.

What shows up with ever increasing clarity is that the new radical theology is the tragic end result of the modern theological method, which has discarded as invalid a revealed theology. With no revealed theology, there is no real knowledge of God. Altizer says, “Perhaps the greatest obstacle thus far confronting the theologian has been the almost innate conviction that the subject of theology is given.… Underlying this loyalty [to theological tradition] is the conviction that the Christian faith stands or falls with the eternal existence and continuing activity of God.”

Precisely! Without this, theology is meaningless. And take away a revealed theology and there is no longer a means of knowing the eternal God. The radical theologians of the mid-sixties are begotten of theological and philosophical ancestors who undermined the traditional idea of a revealed theology. Man has presumed to establish himself first as judge of the Scriptures, and now as the judge of God himself! Without a revealed theology, the debate (and the despair) will go on, and on, and on.

Is Belief In God Rational?

God and Other Minds: A Study of the Rational Justification of Belief in God, by Alvin Plantinga (Cornell University Press, 1967, 277 pp., $8.50), is reviewed by William Young, associate professor of philosophy, University of Rhode Island, Kingston.

This closely reasoned work investigates the cosmological, ontological, and teleological arguments for the existence of God, then proceeds to consider the problem of evil, verificationism, the paradox of omnipotence, and an ontological disproof of God’s existence, then finally explores the analogies and connections of the question of the existence of God with that of other minds. The conclusion is that “belief in other minds and belief in God are in the same epistemological boat; hence if either is rational, so is the other.”

Only one form of cosmological argument is discussed, the argument from contingency as developed in Aquinas’s third way. After an elaborate examination of the assumptions involved, the author pronounces the argument inconclusive. One assumption he accepts is that “if there is no necessary being, then it is possible that no contingent being exists.” If he also grants the necessity that some being, necessary or contingent, exists—an assumption no less plausible than the other—then it clearly follows that a necessary being exists. This, to be sure, would be not a cosmological but rather an ontological proof, of a type not considered in the two chapters on the ontological argument. Plantinga examines common objections to the ontological argument and finds they do not provide a general refutation. The argument itself, however, is also judged unsuccessful in the form in which it is presented. The teleological proof has some force in providing evidence for the claim that the universe was designed, but it fails to establish the existence of a single designer and creator.

In answering the objection raised by the natural atheologian from the problem of evil, Plantinga endorses the freewill defense, a position that appears to have unacceptable consequences for a believer in God’s sovereign and efficacious grace. If God cannot determine free creatures to do only what is right, then he could not have preserved the elect angels in their original integrity, nor can he preserve believers infallibly in a state of grace without infringing on their freedom. But if the doctrines of grace are accepted, it becomes clear that there can be no a priori limitation on God’s power to determine rational creatures to do only what is right.

The issues involved in the discussion of the problem of other minds are too intricate to be dealt with here. I am not convinced that a strong enough case is made for the argument from analogy to warrant the construction of even so modest an apologetic proposal as is made in this book. Yet it must be stressed that the book is a model of philosophical argument. It will attract philosophically trained readers, who are the intended audience for this presentation of theism.

Reading For Perspective

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

• Religion Across Cultures, by Eugene A. Nida (Harper & Row, $4.95). The American Bible Society’s noted linguist takes a fresh look at the psychological and dynamic factors related to effective communication in diverse cultures.

• A Second Touch, by Keith Miller (Word, $3.50). Those who profited from Miller’s The Taste of New Wine will like its sequel: an extremely personal and disturbingly candid approach to honest and creative Christian living.

• Baker’s Pictorial Introduction to the Bible, by William S. Deal (Baker, $7.95). This non-technical, high-school-level evangelical work will help students to understand the recipients, purpose, date, authorship, and important people and themes of every book of the Bible.

Wrong Assumptions On Vietnam

Vietnam: Crisis of Conscience, by Robert McAfee Brown, Abraham J. Heschel, and Michael Novak (Association, 1967, 127 pp., $.95 paper), and The Viet Nam War: Christian Perspectives, edited by Michael P. Hamilton (Eerdmans, 1967, 140 pp., $3.50 cloth, $1.65 paper), are reviewed by Edward L. R. Elson, minister, The National Presbyterian Church, Washington, D. C.; member of the team appointed by President Johnson to observe the elections in South Vietnam.

Vietnam: Crisis of Conscience contains position papers of the January 31-February 1, 1967, Washington conference sponsored by “Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam.” Essentially the book is an indictment of American guilt for the predicament of Vietnam and an urgent plea that the United States stop using force to carry out its political and social objectives there. The authors say the struggle is only a “civil war,” that what the United States government terms “Communist aggression” from the North is non-existent, and that the Vietcong have voluntary patriotic support (the United States government concludes there is no “voluntary popular support whatever”—only support derived from threat and terror). The serious concern in this book is focused on ending the fighting, not on how it is to be ended, or the post-bellum shape of things in the Pacific.

Michael Novak provides a historical synopsis and analysis based on the rejection of any idea of a world Communist threat to freedom or to the system of governments oriented toward United States leadership and strength. He says:

To attribute today to the various parties, regimes and factions that make up the world Communist movement any sort of a unified political personality … or single disciplined force … is to fly in the face of an overwhelming body of evidence, to move intellectually in the realm of patent absurdity, to deny by implication the relevance of external evidence to the considerations and decisions of foreign affairs.

Therefore, we are to consider “Communism and modified capitalism” as two rival strategies for dealing with this revolutionary age, where the real issues are hunger, poverty, economic and racial injustice.

Novak ignores the vast amount of information available to the United States government about the world Communist apparatus and its intentions in the Pacific. His presuppositions are at variance with the literature available from the State Department and the briefings held periodically by Foreign Service officers in Washington. The bibliography of this book is limited so that it only confirms the authors’ presuppositions; it conspicuously omits any reference to the factual publications of the United States government.

The authors of this book seem still to be living in the 1950s and over-reacting to McCarthyism. There remains yet, according to informed persons, a sane understanding of the present threat of Communism. True, the Communist thrust in the world is broken into nationalistic expressions and is less politically monolithic than it used to be. Yet whether monolithic or fragmented, the Communism emanating from both China and Russia clearly represents imperialistic perils as dangerous to a democratic society, as any that have appeared in recent history.

In his “Appeal to the Churches and Synagogues,” Robert McAfee Brown contends that both the individual Christian and the corporate church have the responsibility to be informed, to speak, and to act. “If ever there was ‘ecumenical’ issue, i.e., an issue affecting the whole of the oikoumene (the inhabited world), it is Vietnam. In the face of the immensity of that issue, individual speech alone is frivolous if not immoral.”

Brown properly suggests that Vietnam is a turning point in modern history, though many people will not agree with his idea of how history ought to turn at this point. He asserts that moral anguish arises out of the “immorality of the warfare”: (1) civilian casualties (though he does not point out that making soldiers look like civilians and shielding military units behind civilians is a tactic of the Vietcong), the kind of weapons, and the treatment of prisoners; (2) the inconsistency between our stated aims and their actual consequences; (3) the discrepancy between “what we are told by our Government and what we discover is actually taking place.”

The task of the Church, according to Brown, is to create a climate for a negotiated peace now rather than later and especially to encourage policy-makers not merely to give lip service to negotiation but to refashion policy. Brown does not seem to understand that, as Korea revealed, negotiation is for the Communists one of the methods of waging continued war and maneuvering for military advantage, while in our view negotiation is the method of establishing peaceful relations.

The second book, The Vietnam War: Christian Perspectives, contains sermons and addresses delivered in the Washington Episcopal Cathedral and two additional papers, one by Martin Luther King and the other by Eugene Carson Blake. A wide range of opinion, analysis, tourist observation, and sentimentalism, as well as hard substantive thinking, appears here. In my opinion, the statement by R. Paul Ramsey is the most tenable position in this composite volume.

These two books merit careful examination. Since each has several authors, the reader must for each paper assess the validity of the writer’s presuppositions before reaching his own conclusions.

A Freudian Breeze

The Church in the Way, by James E. Dittes (Scribner, 1967, 350 pp., $6.95), is reviewed by Stephen E. Smallman, pastor, McLean Presbyterian Church, McLean, Virginia.

There is a fresh breeze from New England. James E. Dittes, professor of psychology of religion at Yale Divinity School, is convinced of the validity and vitality of the institutional parish church. He has written this book to encourage established and prospective ministers faced with the frustrations of the parish ministry.

Answering the common criticisms that the Church is irrelevant, unreal, and preoccupied with administrative details to the detriment of its spiritual mission, Dittes finds a positive value in these seemingly negative aspects; he shows that the obstacles the Church faces may provide the occasion for a significant ministry. Rather than seek relevance by abandoning the Church as we now know it, we must learn that by participating in its struggle for meaning, we give guidance to a world that is struggling for meaning itself. Dittes emphasizes this thought in his first chapter, “The Relevance of Being Irrelevant.”

Parishioners’ “resistance” (in the Freudian sense of the term) should not frustrate the minister, the author says; on the contrary, he should take heart that his ministry is causing some reaction. Dittes recommends that the minister arm himself with insights provided by psychotherapy. To help him, Dittes has written what amounts to a textbook on resistance in psychotherapy, with illustrations from church life. He calls this an application of the psychology of religion to pastoral theology. This in itself is nothing new, but resistance has not been so carefully examined in this context before. In a day when the Church’s role is seen largely as sociological, the author feels a new word should be spoken for the psychological point of view.

But that is just the weakness of the book—the author sees the Church through the eyes of a Freudian psychologist rather than a theologian. Granted, he says that his purpose is to provide a psychological understanding of the Church’s role; but can there be any true understanding of that role without even a mention of the work of the Holy Spirit? Dittes also does not mention the mission of the Church: to preach the Gospel of God’s saving grace. It could be argued that he took these for granted; but it is more likely that he looked upon them as “religious symbols” of another age. Such symbols change in meaning and relevance, he says, but the modern minister should not abandon them since “they still betray the awesome and gripping power which religious symbols hold.” Resistance to such forms he calls “response to religiosity,” and he says this should be exploited for its psychotherapeutic value. Such a humanistic approach to the Church necessarily weakens any subsqeuent discussion.

Yet, bearing in mind this basic deficiency, the reader will find that The Church in the Way offers some valuable help for the parish ministry. No pastor should ignore the values of psychotherapy in his dealings with people, and this fresh treatment of the factor of resistance is welcome.

Sartre And The Absurd

Sartre: The Theology of the Absurd, by Régis Jolivet, translated from the French by Wesley C. Piersol (Newman Press, 1967, 111 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by James W. Sire, associate professor of English, Nebraska Wesleyan University, Lincoln.

Régis Jolivet, now honorary professor at the Catholic University of Lyons, has written over a dozen books on medieval philosophy and on extentialism. The present volume brings these two subjects together, for the analysis that Jolivet gives Sartre’s work is primarily informed by scholastic categories.

Although Jolivet examines Sartre’s ontology, atheism, ethics, and Marxism, his short book is not designed to be a rapid survey of Sartre’s thoughts. For, though he treats Sartre’s Marxism superficially, he focuses precisely on the ontology and atheism of Being and Nothingness. He likewise gives a skillful analysis of the problems inherent in Sartrian ethics. Jolivet is primarily concerned to illuminate (and to controvert) what he calls the “theology of the absurd.” Hence he examines Sartre’s arguments for the non-existence of God and the impossibility of creation, finding, in short, that Sartre is either inconsistent or begs the question. Concerning the paradox at the heart of Sartre’s system, Jolivet remarks:

If in effect, in the universal absurdity, no argument is ever valid, if we can always say what we wish, if the yes and the no are equally possible, equally gratuitous, equally absurd, then why is it that on every page of Being and Nothingness the problem of reason, the subtle and often profound investigation of explications and justification, is undertaken with such assurance and such vigor? [pp. 47, 48].

Unfortunately, W. C. Piersol’s English version of Jolivet’s work is seriously marred either by bad translation or by poor proofreading. Not only is the English rough and awkward; it is also inaccurate in important places. Where, for example, Jolivet has written, “Human-reality, as such, is therefore not explained by matter.…” (my translation, Piersol has, “Human-reality, as such, is explained by matter.…” Again, where Jolivet, in talking about Kant’s concept of being, has written “substance or noumenon” (my translation), Piersol’s version reads “substance of noumenon,’ thus totally confusing Kant’s idea.

It is easy to agree in general with Jolivet that there are serious inconsistencies in Sartre’s ontology and—more certainly—that Sartrian “theology” and ethics are incompatible with scholastic theology or Protestant thought. But unless one reads the French version, it is not so easy to be sure of the cogency of crucial aspects of Jolivet’s critique. The style of his English translator is not clear; the text of his publisher is not reliable. In any case, this work is not for the novice in philosophy.

The Continuing Morality Debate

Storm Over Ethics, by John C. Bennett et al. (United Church Press, 1967, 183 pp., $1.95), and The New Morality, edited by William Dunphy (Herder and Herder, 1967, 192 pp., $4.95), are reviewed by James A. Nelson, pastor, Trinity Baptist Church, Santa Barbara, California.

Each of these volumes takes part in the contemporary debate over situational ethics and in general is critical of this “new morality.”

Storm Over Ethics consists of papers by seven able and informed men who are at home in philosophy and theology and who present various points of disagreement with Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics. Theologically, they are men of liberal stripe. In the last chapter of the book, Fletcher states his case and briefly attempts to refute his critics.

Fletcher’s antagonists consider such matters as the relation of situation ethics to previous ethical systems, the place of personal responsibility within the framework of freedom, and the true nature of agape love, which is the touchstone of situation ethics. At times they become completely practical as they point to human frailty in a torrid emotional situation.

The New Morality is a series of essays by faculty members of St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto. Their writing is lucid, their observations and applications keen; but since they write chiefly from the perspective of the Roman Catholic fathers and theologians, this volume is less useful for Protestants.

Both volumes seem to lack a firm, authoritative foundation. In presenting their case for an ethical system that has norms and absolute values, the writers neglect some of the most important matters. The right of the sovereign God to establish absolutes is hardly acknowledged. Nor is much said about his knowledge of what is best for the man he created. The place of the Bible as the revealed Word of God is rarely mentioned. One senses the influence of humanism throughout the two volumes, and at times there are hints of universalism. The writers, with the possible exception of some in The New Morality, generally bypass the authority of Jesus Christ and his clear moral statements. Perhaps, then, the greatest disappointment in these volumes comes not from what is said but from what is left unsaid.

However, one who stands in the stream of historic, evangelical Christianity would undoubtedly do well to be acquainted with the case against situation ethics advanced by men who stand on the banks of that stream.

Lights And Shadows

Letters to an American Lady, by C. S. Lewis, edited and with a preface by Clyde S. Kilby (Eerdmans, 1967, 121 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by Joan Kerns Ostling, writer-editor, United States Information Agency, Washington, D. C.

Shadows account for half the beauty in the world, C. S. Lewis wrote, and it is the shadows that characterize the correspondence in this book. The reader will find here neither the erudite debater nor the brilliant satirist; he will discover, instead, unwitting testimony for the patient faith and generous life of the private man who was this century’s most famous Christian apologist.

The letters, written between 1950 and 1963 to an American woman Lewis never met, contain evidence of the famous Lewis style and wit (“I’ve been made a Professor at Cambridge, which will mean less work and therefore of course … more pay.”); the familiar Lewis impatience with journalism, bureaucracy, snobbery, and superficiality; the sharp Lewis mind threading into theology (“It is the actual presence, not the sensation of the presence, of the Holy Ghost which begets Christ in us”) and human psychology (“I loathe ‘sensitive’ people who are ‘easily hurt’ by the way, don’t you? They are a social pest. Vanity is the real trouble”).

But as Clyde S. Kilby points out in the preface, the obvious thrust of the letters is spiritual encouragement and guidance. Here is the Lewis who, without publicity, gave away two-thirds of his income; the Lewis who considered it his Christian responsibility to answer every letter the dreaded and heavily burdened postman brought to his door; the Lewis who sympathized with others’ physical ailments while struggling with his own. Here also is the poignancy of Lewis’s raw grief at the loss of his beloved wife, Joy, and then his own victory at the end when he faced death as “waiting to come up a flower in the Gardener’s good time,” ready to leave the world of “drowsy half-waking” to “come up into the real world, the real waking.”

Lewis readers will treasure these letters for the glimpse they offer into the personal witness of the man. The original letters now form part of the Lewis collection at Wheaton College.

Paperbacks

Nairobi to Berkeley, edited by Paul S. Rees (Word Books, 1968, 176 pp., $.95). Essays by Christian writers assessing critical sectors of the broken world to which the Church must minister. Paul Rees leads off with an appeal for an awakened Christian conscience that accepts involvement and responsibility.

A Case for Virginity, by Gary Garrett (R.I.D., 1967, 108 pp.). Arguments for virginity from a non-religious perspective.

Christian Nurture, by Horace Bushnell (Yale, 1967, 351 pp., $2.45). A reprint of the 1888 book in which Bushnell advances the thesis “that the child is to grow up a Christian, and never know himself as being otherwise.”

Hath God Said?, by Uuras Saarnivaara (Osterhus, 1967, 293 pp., $3.50). Second-rate make-up but useful content dealing with problems of criticism and “difficult passages” in the Bible—from an evangelical perspective.

How to Be a Christian Without Being Religious, edited by Fritz Ridenour (Gospel Light, 1967, 162 pp., $.69). A lively rendition of the message of the Book of Romans for teen-agers; its communicable style and clever cartoons make it as up to date as the boog-a-loo.

St. Thomas More: Selected Letters, edited by Elizabeth Frances Rogers (Yale University, 1967, 276 pp., $1.95). Well-chosen letters give the reader a personal glimpse into the heart and mind of the “man for all seasons.”

Heredity: A Study in Science and the Bible, by William J. Tinkle (St. Thomas, 1967, 180 pp.). A Ph.D. discusses discoveries in genetics, takes issue with the theory of evolution, and relates his observations to the biblical view of man.

They Dared to Be Different, by Anna Talbott McPherson (Moody, 1967, 192 pp., $.59). Inspiring tales from the lives of eighteen great churchmen and women, including Moody, Spurgeon, Knox, Wesley, Mueller, and Crosby.

Sunday Night at the Movies, by G. William Jones (John Knox, 1967, 127 pp., $1.95). An eloquent plea for the use of selected films as contemporary parables by which viewers may be led into discussion of basic issues of life. Although such an approach may help to make people aware of their problems and needs, it will serve little purpose unless it culminates in the proclamation of the revealed Gospel of Christ.

“You said I would be married someday and have a family of my own, but when you said it, I was very skeptical.” This was the comment of a young man who a few minutes earlier had entered my office holding his chubby two-year-old daughter and had proudly introduced me to his lovely wife.

I recalled a day four years before when this man, then a sophomore in college, had sat nervously in my office for the first time, talking about his guilt feelings, fears, and anxieties because of a homosexual encounter and a sexual fantasy life that was primarily homosexual. At that time he was greatly confused and worried that someone would find out about him. He believed that in some way his problem was the result of some misdeeds in his youth. Several comments he had heard from the pulpit had led him to think that this was God’s judgment on man’s sinful preoccupations. And so he had resolved to live with his dark secret and hope that no one would ever find out about the chaos within him. If ever he were to discuss his problem, he thought, it could not be with a fellow Christian, because somehow this all fell into the category “most sinful,” almost unspeakable. For some of his Christian friends, it appeared to be the ultimate form of human depravity.

This young man—let’s call him John—had generated enough courage to see me, a clinical psychologist and teacher in a Christian college, because he had read in a Christian periodical that homosexuals could be helped. During our initial interview he showed me a letter from a New York agency that had been overwhelmed with inquiries—in fact, was considering a mimeographed letter of response—because this article had mentioned it by name. The letter also expressed much understanding for him and his problem and suggested that he seek professional counsel near his home. This gave him enough courage to come to me.

The immediate, burning question that occupied John’s thoughts was: “Is there anything that can be done to help?” When I told him that there was, and that many persons had been able to resolve their problems to the point where they could live normal, heterosexual lives, an obvious sense of relief passed over him. He settled back in his chair, ready to begin what was to be an extended psychotherapeutic encounter lasting over a year.

John’s eagerness to change was, from a diagnostic point of view, a good indication of eventual success. His Christian world-life view heightened his sensitivity to the distortion in this way of life and kept him from passively accepting his “fate” and from becoming involved in one homosexual encounter after another. Without a strong, sustained motivation to change, the potential for help is poor.

My ability to empathize with this young man was based in part on my understanding of the causes of the problem and in part on the fact that we both were human. I could accept his humanness, recognizing that though his problems and mine were not the same, as human beings we both were searching for solutions to the problems of life. I had to empathize with the deep distress and guilt torturing him and to suffer with him as he disclosed his years of lonely struggle with his problem. Locking this secret inside a sensitive, developing adolescent had caused a myriad of frightening fantasies and constant self-renunciation.

In time we began to unravel and reweave the developmental fabric that had produced the problem. Most cases of homosexuality are the products of psychological developmental twists in which a child identifies with the parent of the opposite sex, causing confusion of sexual identity.

John told numerous stories about his mother and her continual efforts to alienate him from his father. She, not finding her husband the source of love and tenderness she had hoped for, found affection and vicarious satisfaction in her son. She frequently told him how earthy and cruel his father was and heaped praise on John for his interests in music, art, and domestic involvement. John also became an object to be used in the game of family politics. In the frequent arguments, he could be counted on to side with his mother against his father and younger brother.

In general, his mother’s world became his, and he had little support apart from her. When his sex drive began to develop, his role confusion became painfully obvious. Instead of normal heterosexual fantasies, his were about men and certain masculine objects.

As the therapy progressed, John began to see himself in relation to his mother and the unhappy marriage. He began to resist his mother’s control and to express some of the hostility he felt. And he began to talk to his father and realize that he wasn’t the “clod” his mother had pictured him to be. His father was pleased to have some contact with this son who had always been estranged from him.

One day John came to a session very excited and quickly told me about an incident that had occurred at the breakfast table. His mother and father were having an argument, and he for the first time supported his father. His mother, in the heat of battle, slapped him across the face. He recalled the experience with deep emotion and enthusiasm and said he felt the umbilical cord was broken. Although this was only one step in the tedious therapeutic encounter, it was a significant one.

The pastor usually does not have the training or time to be of therapeutic help to those suffering from sexual deviations. Still, he can be a source of understanding, both in the pulpit and in the study. He can be a good listener and can offer hope and support in the struggle for a sexual identity. The counselee needs to know that God understands all man’s human frailties and cares beyond measure. Often, guilt is an integral part of this neurosis, and the pastor should meet this with a spirit of understanding and forgiveness, symbolizing God’s grace on man’s behalf. One other task of the pastor is to direct the troubled person to a competent therapist. A professional psychiatrist, clinical psychologist, or social worker sensitive to the person’s Christian motivations should be a ready source of help.

—Dr. J. R. DOLBY, associate professor of psychology, Baylor University, Waco, Texas.

Living as a Christian involves a daily battle. At best, the work of sanctification is slow, and never perfected; but the more we grow in grace the more acutely aware we are of sinful failures.

Any military commander worthy of the name analyzes his victories and defeats. After a losing battle he seeks the cause and determines to remedy it before engaging the enemy again.

It is a somber fact that the good name of Christianity is repeatedly compromised by the behavior of Christians who live in the valley of spiritual defeat and have little in their lives to commend the Gospel they profess.

The Bible sets forth not only the causes of defeat but the remedy as well. Anyone willing to face up to the facts of the Christian life can learn in Scripture where and how the enemy works and why we suffer defeat when we should stand firm.

Satan attacks in many ways and at times when we are most vulnerable. Like the master adversary that he is, he works unceasingly to bring about our defeat.

How do we sin? It seems trite to say that we sin in thought, word, and deed but that is precisely right.

Because we can usually hide our thoughts from others, we can pose as saints while our thoughts flit hither and yon on the garbage described by our Lord: “Out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a man” (Matt. 15:19, 20a).

The Prophet Isaiah pleads: “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have mercy on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:7–9).

We see in the words of the Apostle Paul this same recognition of the need for a regeneration of our thoughts: “Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom. 12:2). And, “Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Phil. 4:8).

Let’s be honest. Who of us would be willing to have his secret thoughts disclosed to the world? But for the Christian there should be no reluctance. There is no step more important than determining that with God’s help we will shift our thoughts to those gracious and good things that the Apostle Paul speaks of.

Christians also frequently sin with their lips. Words are, of course, the expression of thoughts.

David recognized the danger of ill-advised words and prayed, “Set a guard over my mouth, O LORD, keep watch over the door of my lips!” (Ps. 141:3).

The Apostle James says “So the tongue is a little member and boasts of great things. How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire! And the tongue is a fire. The tongue is an unrighteous world among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the cycle of nature, and set on fire by hell” (Jas. 3:5,6).

No Christian can seriously contemplate these warnings without realizing how grievously he can and does sin against God and his fellowmen by some of the things he says.

As Satan incites us to evil thoughts and then tempts us to speak in ways that belie our Christian profession, so also he never ceases in his attempts to lead us into evil actions. The deeds of the flesh are open for all to see: “immorality, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissention, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like” (Gal. 5:19, 20, 21a). What a sorry catalogue of evil!

Does your behavior jibe with your profession as a Christian?

While one of the offices of the Bible is to show us our lives in the pure light of God’s holiness, it does not stop there. It also offers the remedy—making it clear that what God requires of man he will also supply to him. The way to victory for the Christian therefore is to appropriate divine resources.

Look to self for victory over the sins of thought, word, and deed and there is nothing but defeat. Look to the One who is the author and finisher of our faith and there is victory.

There are at least three steps to victory over these sins—sins we would like to gloss over or minimize—and they are wonderfully simple.

There must be faith. Out of that faith there will come spiritual perception. And then there must be obedience. Claiming all the faith in the world is not the answer, faith must be accompanied by obedience. It is at this point that most of us fail. Without obedience faith becomes an illusion.

The letters of the Apostle Paul reveal the weaknesses of the Christians of his day. Although they were redeemed by the blood of the Son of God and saved by faith in his name, they were nevertheless subject to the insidious and continuing attacks of Satan. Paul shows plainly that these attacks begin in the realm of thoughts and find expression in words and deeds.

Christianity is basically personal. It is a work of redemption in the heart of the sinner. The Church makes a great mistake when it tries to make non-Christians act like Christians. Its duty is to show non-Christians how to become Christians, and to teach Christians how to live as Christians should—“blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast the word of life” (Phil. 2:15, 16a).

Such a life and witness is impossible until there is victory over our thoughts, words, and deeds, and this victory is derived from the indwelling Christ. “Whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” (1 John 5:4, 5).

It is high time that we Christians stop fooling ourselves. Living behind a pious façade may fool men, but God searches our hearts. Before him we all stand naked and exposed.

Pure, holy, and charitable thoughts, words of love and compassion, deeds of kindness and mercy—all come from the life surrendered to and filled by the Spirit of the living God.

There is no substitute for a life like this, nor is there any short cut to it.