Religious leaders are worried about the impact President Kennedy’s tax reform would have upon charitable contributions.

A number have already expressed concern over the new rules proposed for itemizing tax deductions.

As set forth in Kennedy’s tax message to Congress last month, all deductions—including those claimed for church and other charitable contributions—would be subject to an overall 5 per cent “floor.” This means, in effect, that itemized deductions would be limited to those in excess of 5 per cent of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income.

In filling out his return, therefore, the taxpayer would add up all his deductions (charitable contributions, medical expenses, interest payments, and so forth), then reduce that total by 5 per cent of his adjusted gross income.

At present, the average taxpayer may deduct all charitable contributions up to 20 per cent of his gross income, and up to 30 per cent in the case of donations to churches, educational institutions, and hospitals. If he chooses not to itemize deductions, he may claim a “standard deduction” which amounts to about 10 per cent of his income.

Kennedy’s proposal would extend the 30 per cent limit to “all organizations eligible for the charitable contributions deductions which are publicly supported and controlled.”

The President asserted that “present law permits a handful of high income taxpayers to take an unlimited deduction for charitable contributions, instead of the 20 to 30 per cent of income normally allowable.… They should be limited to the same 30 per cent deduction for charitable contributions as everyone else.”

It is estimated that more than 40 per cent of all individual income-tax returns are filed by people who itemize deductions. Kennedy said that under the proposed tax reform 6,500,000 taxpayers would no longer itemize deductions. He observed that the “broadening of the tax base which permits a greater reduction in individual income tax rates has an accompanying advantage of real simplification.”

He intimated that he did not foresee an adverse effect on charitable giving.

“This 5 per cent floor will make $2.3 billion of revenue available for reduction in individual tax rates. At the same time incentives to home ownership or charitable contributions will remain. In fact, this tax program as a whole, providing as it does substantial reductions in Federal tax liabilities for virtually all families and individuals, will make it easier for people to meet their personal and civic obligations.”

NEWS / A fortnightly report of developments in religion

‘CONCESSIONS’ SEEN IN EDUCATION PROGRAM

President Kennedy’s 1963 program for federal aid to education includes some “concessions” to parochial and other private schools and to private colleges, including those that are church-related, according to Religious News Service.

While the major part of the omnibus program would be restricted, as in previous proposals, to public schools only, the President has asked Congress to remove discriminations against teachers in parochial schools that were incorporated in the National Defense Education Act.

He urged that the forgiveness of student loans be extended to those who teach in private schools, as well as public schools, and in private colleges.

Kennedy also asked Congress to provide stipends up to $75 a week for teachers in private schools who attend summer institutes sponsored under the NDEA, RNS reported. At present, teachers in non-public schools may attend such institutes but do not receive the financial support which is given public school teachers.

In his message transmitting the program to Congress, the President made no direct reference to the religious issue which has been at the heart of the debate over federal aid, saving only:

“We can no longer afford the luxury of endless debate over all the complicated and sensitive questions raised by each new proposal on federal participation in education.”

A Roman Catholic priest in Pittsburgh stated that if a member of his congregation saves $100 through the Kennedy-proposed cuts in income tax rates, “maybe he will give $30 to $40 of that to the church.”

The consensus, however, seems to be otherwise. The Rev. T. K. Thompson, director of the Department of Stewardship and Benevolences of the National Council of Churches, declared:

“This proposal would undoubtedly make it harder for churches and charities to raise funds. And it’s already hard enough.”

Thompson said he had discussed the proposal with about a dozen philanthropic leaders at a meeting in New York and “most of them were of the opinion that the change would have a negative, although not a catastrophic, effect on giving.”

The Rev. Arthur Joyce of the United Presbyterian Department of Stewardship and Promotion told United Press International that tax deductibility “has unquestionably served as an extremely important incentive to giving.”

A legal official of the National Catholic Welfare Conference agreed that “the proposed change certainly wouldn’t make things any easier.”

The Wall Street Journal quoted a Baptist church official as saying that “without the deduction feature, I’m afraid there would be many people who wouldn’t give at all.”

A charity administrator whose institution depends largely on a large number of small gifts from people in the $5,000 to $10,000 income bracket said he did not think there would be any effect.

But concern was voiced particularly by administrators of institutions that depend on gifts from middle- and higher-income brackets.

An opposing viewpoint was registered by the treasurer of the Baptist State Convention of Texas, Dr. R. A. Springer:

“We like to think people give to the church on principle, regardless of the tax situation.”

One current provision which would not be affected by tax reform encourages individuals to give stock to charities. Stock donations are deductible at current market value, even if the taxpayer bought the stock at a fraction of that value. If he sells the stock instead of giving it to charity, he must pay a capital gains tax.

A factor which keeps the deduction plan from becoming even more of an issue is the doubt that it will ever be enacted by Congress. Observers give the tax reform proposal little change of passage without major modifications.

Needed: More Vigor

Although White House encouragement was conspicuously lacking, a strong move was afoot in Congress to deal with the problem of obscene and pornographic materials.

A bipartisan group of 16 Senators introduced a bill last month to create a special federal commission to study the problem. Identical measures were introduced in the House.

A similar bill passed the Senate last year, but was not reported by the House Committee on Government Expenditures, headed by Democratic Representative William A. Dawson of Illinois.

The proposed 15-member commission would be empowered to investigate all types of indecent material circulating in interstate commerce, and would be directed to recommend legislation to Congress, as well as programs for more effective enforcement of existing laws.

As of the end of January, President Kennedy had not offered any recommendations on legislation to protect the public from indecent materials. In fact, he has had very little to say on the subject since he took office more than two years ago. His only specific action has been a “pocket veto” of a bill approved by Congress to strengthen the laws against obscene publications in the District of Columbia.

THE GOSPEL IN ORBIT

Alert communicators who hope to tap the potential of communications satellites for the cause of Christ got encouragement from the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee last month.

Democratic Senator Warren G. Magnuson of Washington challenged delegates to the 20th annual convention of National Religious Broadcasters to carry God’s message “throughout the materialistic world.”

“The scientific and technical means of communicating this message have reached capabilities undreamed of a few years ago,” Magnuson observed, “but I strongly question if their use for religious purposes has increased proportionately with this growth.” (An NRB survey showed that during 1961 its members had spent a total of $1,880,163.98 for the purchase of television time. That amount buys less than 15 hours of prime time on the NBC television network.)

He said that “our task is to increase the quantity of religious broadcasts and telecasts without diminution of the present high quality of many fine religious programs.”

Referring specifically to the missionary potential of communications satellites like Telstar, he declared: “What a weapon for the Christian and the free world if it is used right!” The Senator said the problems were “whether the content transmitted by communications satellites will include religious messages of significance and whether, once transmitted, the governments of certain countries will permit their peoples to receive them.”

His committee, Magnuson said, “will look to you for guidance and suggestions as to how best to achieve this objective.”

The Senate Commerce Committee has charge of legislation regulating radio and television. Magnuson and the committee have in years past fallen into disfavor with some religious leaders because of the committee’s perennial refusal to report out—favorably or unfavorably—a bill to regulate the advertising of alcoholic beverages on radio and television.

Another convention speaker, William J. Roberts of the Far East Broadcasting Company, disclosed that the U. S. government had taken over a missionary radio station during the Cuban crisis. The station, KGEI, which regularly beams Gospel broadcasts to Latin America from a transmitter near San Francisco, was on the air with President Kennedy’s crisis speech on 40 minutes’ notice. The government used the facilities of KGEI and nine other stations for another 23 days, until the crisis had subsided.

The Washington convention was also the occasion for the birth of a new federation which seeks “greater cohesion and closer cooperation among evangelical broadcasters.” The federation, to be known as International Christian Broadcasters, will embrace National Religious Broadcasters and the World Conference on Missionary Communications, both of which will continue to function as separate organizations as well. NRB’s field is primarily domestic, while WCMC is largely involved in missionary radio stations.

His veto after Congress had adjourned last fall killed the measure sponsored by Democratic Representative John Dowdy of Texas. At that time the President said:

“Although I am in complete accord with the Congress that the people of the District of Columbia should adequately be protected against the dissemination of indecent and obscene publications and articles, there are grave constitutional and other considerations which compel me to withhold approval.”

He suggested then that the 88th Congress consider the subject. There was no word from the White House as to whether Kennedy would favor the establishment of a federal commission on obscenity.

Amish Dilemma

An Amish farmer whose horses were seized because of his refusal to pay Social Security taxes apparently is not willing to pursue court action against the federal government.

The farmer, Valentine Y. Byler of New Wilmington, Pennsylvania, dropped a U. S. District Court suit after being caught in a religious dilemma. The Old Order Amish community to which he belongs does not believe in any form of insurance, but it also does not believe in court actions.

In view of the withdrawal of the suit, John Bingler, district director of Internal Revenue in Pittsburgh, said his department has no alternative but to attempt to collect back Social Security taxes from 76 other Amishmen who also have refused to pay.

The only hope for the Amish apparently lies with Congress, where bills have again been introduced to exempt from Social Security those who have religious objections against it. A similar bill was passed by the Senate last year, but was killed by a joint House-Senate conference committee.

Tax Appeal

The American Baptist Convention is appealing a local tax board ruling which places a $2.2 million assessment upon its new national offices and printing plant at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

Under an agreement between ABC officials and local authorities, the convention has placed some $130,000 in escrow in lieu of a tax payment to Upper Merion Township. The money was placed in escrow pending the outcome of an appeal by the ABC to the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court. The convention maintains that the property should be tax-exempt.

Threatening Overture

A majority of Southern Presbyterian General Assembly moderators feel that inclusion of United Presbyterians in talks now going on with the Reformed Church in America would seriously threaten those conversations.

Eleven of the last seventeen moderators of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. responded to a survey conducted by the Presbyterian Journal, an independent weekly with editorial offices in Asheville, North Carolina. Nine indicated opposition to the inclusion of the United Presbyterians at this time. Another said he was not opposed but questioned whether the move was timely. The eleventh moderator favored inclusion because it would “keep the matter before the church.”

A Florida presbytery has already prepared an overture to the 1963 General Assembly asking that United Presbyterians be included in the talks. At the same assembly, to be held April 25–29 in Huntington, West Virginia, the first report will be presented from Southern Presbyterian members of a joint Presbyterian-Reformed committee exploring possibilities of common witness and service.

A Theological Gulf

Protestant denominations that participate in the ecumenical movement were urged last month to establish closer relations with evangelical groups that remain outside the movement.

The gulf that exists between these two groups in the United States is being exported around the world and is hurting the missionary effort, Dr. Eugene L. Smith told the Methodist Board of Missions’ annual meeting in Cincinnati.

Smith, general secretary of the board’s Division of World Missions, warned that any such approaches to evangelicals must be made in a spirit of humility and on a person-to-person basis.

He said the ecumenical denominations should recognize that “the evangelicals have something to teach us in the traditional churches in several areas of church life: missionary zeal, the invasive power of the Holy Spirit, Christian stewardship, the practice of expectant evangelism, and communal prayers.”

Calling for personal contacts with evangelical bodies, Smith said “distrust of the conciliar movement is so keen among many of the conservative evangelicals that organizational approaches only intensify the problem.”

He also declared that the “guiding concern of our approach to the conservative evangelicals must be Christian truth, even more than unity.” Many of the evangelicals feel that the ecumenical movement emphasizes unity at the expense of truth, and this objection must be dealt with, he added.

Evangelicals “feel deeply that they are not approached by ‘ecumenicals’ as brothers in Christ but as people to be used for organizational purposes,” Smith said.

In view of this, he cautioned that ecumenical denominations must make sure their motives are “entirely free from even a hidden desire that in the name of unity we should seek to bring them into our organizational structure.”

A Merger Stalled

A membership vote of the Missionary Church Association fell 42 votes short of a two-thirds majority necessary to effect a merger with the Christian and Missionary Alliance.

The referendum was the last major obstacle standing in the way of a union of the two groups, which together would have a membership of about 80,000 with an overseas missionary task force approaching 1,000.

Although the General Conference of the MCA approved the merger last August, it stipulated a membership vote with a two-thirds majority of those voting necessary to carry. The referendum was conducted in the 120 MCA churches on Sunday, January 6. Final tally showed 3,405 voting in favor of the merger and 1,765 against. A total of 3,447 was necessary for passage. The MCA has a total membership of about 8,000, but only those over 16 were eligible to vote.

The General Council of the CMA, whose polity is not so autonomous as the MCA’s, approved the merger last May and was expected to have ratified it this year. No referendum was involved.

Dr. Nathan Bailey, CMA president, observed that “the original conversations and the merger negotiations were conducted in a most cordial atmosphere. We know these cordial relations will continue in the future in our close cooperation and fellowship in the major task of world evangelization.”

There is some speculation that a new merger attempt will be initiated at the next General Conference of the MCA in August, 1964.

Both denominations had their beginnings about 75 years ago. They are similar in theology, principles, and practices. Until 1945 most of the missionaries sent out by the MCA worked in CMA fields. Cooperative efforts will continue.

Ethics In The Social Dimension

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville opened its doors to the fourth annual meeting of the American Society for Christian Social Ethics last month. Unlike some such conferences which approach ethical problems from the circumference of concrete issues, the two-day gathering moved from the center outward: that is, the papers were ordered in such a manner that the ethical norm was the primary object of search, while the day-by-day applications were made in the light of the central and the normative.

Three questions engaged the meeting: What is the source of the ethical norm? What are its sanctions? How may it be applied in a complex world?

Consideration of the first question began with another query: What does natural law reveal about central ethical requirements? Careful thought was directed to the relation between the universal and absolute deliverances which some students find in natural law on the one hand, and the relational and the individual conclusions established by pragmatic and positive law.

Attention was given to the manner in which natural law seems at times to contradict divine law, with the conclusion that the classical Greek understanding of the “law of the gods” as subject to the claims of man’s interpretation of nature has passed with many other antique notions. It was noted that the Christian faith is intimately bound to a historical understanding of reality, which frequently brings it into conflict with the permanent structures which natural law presupposes. The conclusion upon which the discussions proceeded seemed to be that the ethical norm is not derived from some supposed analysis of the nature either of “natural law” or of man, but is derived from divine demands which focus attention, not upon rational investigation of the structures of creation, but upon God’s right to expect total obedience. This was regarded as providing two requisites: first, the fixity upon which man may seek to ground his moral action; and second, the flexibilities by which today’s man may meet the unpredictable facts arising from his involvement in social change.

This structuring of the moral norm guided discussion of the sanction(s) upon which Christian ethics must rest. Significant emphasis was laid upon the contribution which H. Richard Niebuhr made to the study of social ethics in his value-theory and in his view that God is primarily good in an intrinsic sense, the expression of His goodness in an instrumental sense being distinctly secondary. This view was set over against that of Charles Hartshorne, who held that to be love, God must have creatures to love and to love him. Obviously one does not solve all ethical problems by asserting that in God supreme power and supreme love are united. What was stressed was that belief in a self-sufficient God affords the best possible basis for derivation of a relational ethic.

The application of the revealed norm engaged the meeting at a number of levels. Granting that the Christian ethic is one of duty, of commitment, of obedience to authority, it remains true that there are variables involved in understanding the content of that ethic for the concrete situation. First of all, there must be a recognition of individual differences and of contingent events. These “contingent events” offer the tantalizing possibility of an ethical breakthrough by which a tangible norm of love can or should be made concrete. Those noted especially were the questions of race, automation, juvenile delinquency, and of licit and effective means for exerting Christian influence upon public policy.

The question of minorities, particularly racial minorities, found careful analysis in a paper entitled “New Configurations in Minority Group Social Action”; the differing attitudes of several groups within our society were brought to focus. On the one hand, the melioristic attitudes and programs to which Christian ethicists are generally committed were confronted with minorities’ more radical demands for prompt, activistic solutions to the problems of manifest inequities. “Tokenism” was seen as less satisfactory to aspiring members of minority groups than to hopeful members of majority groups. Significantly, the mentality of the minority groups was given prominence in the discussion; to the minorities the urgent demands for justice take priority, at this moment, at least, over efforts to “build love” in the hearts of men.

Genuine, searching effort was made to grapple with the problems inherent in automation of industry, particularly those touching public justice. Clearly, there exists to date no simple panacea, for such measures as retraining fail to meet the basic problems involved in high school drop-outs, in the relative abundance of unskilled labor, and in the lack of prior background by which unskilled labor might be brought to the level of skills at which they could be placed in the scheme of our complex society. The intimate relationship between automated industry and juvenile delinquency was noted; proposed solutions prompted the conclusion that the social ethicist faces a complex of problems and problematic situations which will engage and challenge him for a long time to come.

The question of the exertion of Christian influence upon public policy involved several related problems, notably the structuring of “publics” in our public life, and the mode of government’s response to these sometimes-diverse power groups. The discussion involved, of course, the so-called “radical right”—the denotation was changed at the outset to “resurgent right”—and accepted the view that those thus designated have at least some right on their side. On the whole, the treatment of those to the right of center was fair, with due recognition that while these persons may at times be confused in their ideology, they feel that they contend for action by principle in a world in which relativism underlies most of public policy. There was no downgrading of the right ad hominem, not any “condemnation by cliché,” but a serious quest for a re-relating of empirical ethics to the application of principle in public life.

The meeting was characterized by a degree of self-criticism which is not always easy for a new group engaged in a relatively new task. Particularly noteworthy was the emphasis upon the need for reinstatement, in the midst of the problematic and the pragmatic, of the claims of an ethical norm from a Source outside and above man, a norm grounded in One who is both intrinsically and instrumentally good.

H. B. K.

The Happy Confession

The Heidelberg Catechism, one of Protestantism’s most basic documents which is attracting new attention as a doctrinal median, was honored on its 400th birthday last month with ceremonies at Lancaster (Pennsylvania) Theological Seminary. The four-day observance embraced a seminary convocation and an annual meeting of the North American Area Council of the World Presbyterian Alliance.

Dr. Hendrikus Berkhof, a Dutch theologian, lyrically described the catechism as a “wonderful, radical, catholic, serious and yet happy confession.” Hailed as the “climax of the confessional literature of all Christian ages,” it was described by Dr. James I. McCord, president of Princeton Theological Seminary, as “the most ecumenical confession of the Reformation Period.” Dr. James E. Wagner, vice president of the alliance, recalled that “when Dr. Eugene Carson Blake made his now famous proposal for church union in an address in San Francisco in December, 1960, he … suggested that the Heidelberg Catechism might offer a good doctrinal basis on which the four denominations … could find satisfactory agreement.”

It was pointed out that when the Reformation came to the Palatinate of Germany, the region became enflamed over differences between Lutherans and Calvinists. Elector Frederick III, assuming the role of a peacemaker, appointed Ursinus, a Heidelberg professor, and Olevianus, a gifted preacher at court, to compose a confession of faith marked by biblical simplicity and free from scholastic subtleties. The product of these two men still in their twenties was a confession which has widely been hailed as the most sweet-tempered, the most devotional, and the most ecumenical of any of the confessions coming out of the Reformation—qualities doubtless interrelated.

The Heidelberg Catechism is still used today by Reformed churches in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Russia, Romania, Yugoslavia, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the United States.

Dr. Howard G. Hageman of the Reformed Church in America pleaded that the catechism be salvaged from its “colossal neglect” and be used again as an “instrument of Christian nurture.” In view of its large disuse, he asked whether the anniversary was really “a birthday or a funeral?” Hageman described the Heidelberg Catechism as a “spiritual biography,” free from the more “speculative theology” of the Westminster Catechism, and said the Heidelberg, unlike later catechisms, retained the thousand-year-old traditional schema of contents. He spotlighted the warm devotional character of the Heidelberg by demonstrating that with slight changes in language the catechism could be uttered as a prayer upon one’s knees.

The church in America which most honors the catechism in practice is the Christian Reformed Church. Among other things, it uses the catechism as a basis for one sermon each Sunday. It is not, however, a member of the alliance.

Additional celebrations are scheduled in Denver in July and in Heidelberg, Germany. The West German government plans to issue a stamp commemorating the anniversary.

J. D.

An Island Experiment

In 1930 a 35-year-old baronet and minister of the Church of Scotland left fashionable St. Cuthbert’s, in the shadow of Edinburgh Castle, to become minister of a thickly populated area in industrial Clydeside. There during the depression years George MacLeod (he does not use his title) came face to face with unemployment, hunger, and human need, and the older generation in Govan still remember his sacrificial work on their behalf. His services were well attended, but he sensed a missing dimension: “the urgent and imperative necessity for the Ministry of the Church to meet the clamant needs of men if ever it was again to re-establish that active relevance to the whole of life which formerly commanded the allegiance of their fathers.”

A fresh experiment was called for, which would bring together two groups of men: the worker and the minister. So in 1938 George MacLeod suddenly resigned his charge, and with a group of eight, craftsmen and young ministers, set off for the Hebridean island of Iona. Here in a place fairly inaccessible and offering few distractions was a worthy task and a spiritual challenge. Together, as they toiled to rebuild the abbey precincts, sharing the fellowship of work and of worship, ministers and laymen would seek to carry out what they regarded as the task of the Church: “to find a new community for men in the world today.” This year, with 150 regular members, 600 associate members, and more than 5,000 “friends” throughout the world, The Iona Community is celebrating its 25th birthday.

The task of rebuilding is virtually complete, and the present aim is “to prevent the decay of the fabric and to ensure an innkeeper winter and summer in all time coming.” The mainland center at Community House in Glasgow’s dockland is used as a place of fellowship and training, and is available also to groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous with whose aims the community is in sympathy. Formerly autonomous, the community is now under the jurisdiction of the Church of Scotland.

Four things are stressed: the constant commitment of the Church is to mission; parishioners must be trained to take responsible political action; the Church must recover the ministry of healing; worship must be related to daily life. The “political responsibility” injunction is coupled with a pronounced left-wing alignment and a pacifism which is no mere wartime profession: a large number of the 70 ministers who staged a ban-the-bomb parade in Glasgow are Iona men. MacLeod himself (winner of the Military Cross in World War I) remains a controversial figure. Known as “the Leader,” he is the only man in modern times whose election as moderator was challenged in the General Assembly.

The focal point of his theology is the Incarnation, which he aims to express in social terms. “Jesus was not crucified in a cathedral between two candles, but on a cross between two thieves.” (At every stage of His life he was identified with mankind.) This “comprehensive” view, reminiscent of F. D. Maurice’s Christian Socialism, which flourished briefly a century ago, is reflected in a typical day’s program on the island: worship, study, work, a service of spiritual healing, a talk on Eastern Europe, and a dance.

Of evangelicals MacLeod says: “They are forever arranging the next revival campaign, so that more can ‘get Christ’ and so become involved, while they themselves who have ‘got Christ’ continue to escape involvement!” His voice was raised against the Kirk’s invitation to Billy Graham some years ago, in which cause his magnificent oratory was as unavailing as it is annually in the General Assembly when he seeks condemnation of the bomb. His pacifism and his politics, combined with a certain arrogance of manner, cause periodic eruptions in the correspondence columns of the Scottish national press, and ensure that his experiment does not lack publicity.

J.D.D.

Twtwtw

“I object to presenting religion as a joke and believers as being mentally deficient,” said a past president of the Catholic Stage Guild. Though lacking grammatical clarity, the message came through, along with 182 other complaints made by the normally phlegmatic British against BBC-TV’s satirical program “That Was The Week That Was.”

On this particular Saturday evening the producers presented a consumer report on comparative religions: Judaism, Roman Catholicism, Church of England, Islam, Buddhism—and Communism. The emcee, 23-year-old Cambridge graduate David Frost, who is also a Methodist local preacher, reviewed what the consumer had put into each religion, what he could expect out of it, and what it cost him. In advance, however, he slyly extracted some potentially critical teeth by pointing out that if in publicity and advertising the churches “used the values and methods of the world,” then they could expect to be judged by such values.

Roman Catholicism was examined as “a cradle-to-grave service from a priesthood unimpeded by family ties,” characterized by the slogan “confess your sins quickly before you do it again.” Communism came off worst under investigation, and the Church of England was recommended as the best buy (“you must believe that the Queen is the head of the Church, that the Prime Minister should appoint the Archbishop of Canterbury, and in God”). A London Roman Catholic newspaper, giving it front-page space, didn’t like the program at all and sought to drum up opposition from the more famous faithful. At the top of the list was the curious comment by comedienne Bebe Daniels: “I think it’s disgraceful. It’s the first time I’ve walked out of my own living room.” Another comedian is quoted as having said: “The only consolation I derived was that the program will be lucky if it lasts two years, whereas the thing it was taking the mickey out of has already lasted 2,000 years.” It may be that the newspaper had not forgiven a previous program which allegedly featured a group of cardinals at the end of the Vatican Council singing “Arrivederci, Roma!”

TWTWTW was also the subject of a question in the House of Commons last month, after the program disclosed the results of research into Members who had seldom if ever said a word in Parliament during the past three years. One of them broke silence long enough to ask if this was not a breach of privilege. The Speaker took until the following day to decide that That Was No Breach That Was.

J.D.D.

A Reunion Plan?

As of late January, there was talk aplenty in Great Britain about the possibility of an Anglican-Methodist merger. A reunion committee was due to present findings of a detailed study report on February 26. One member described the report as “encouraging.”

Problems In The Sudan

The government of the Sudan found itself the target of many an angry accusation last month in the wake of missionary expulsions and alleged anti-Christian persecution. A high ranking Roman Catholic prelate met violent death under ambiguous circumstances so sketchily reported that any assessment of motivations seemed premature.

Twelve more American Protestant missionaries were forced out of the northeast African republic. Eleven of them were United Presbyterian and Reformed missionaries who had previously seen six of their colleagues banished. The other was a woman missionary of the Sudan Interior Mission, an interdenominational body which has more than 30 other missionaries still at work in the Sudan.

Most of the charges of anti-Christian persecution, however, have come from Roman Catholic sources. Vatican Radio asserted that about 100 Roman Catholic missionaries were expelled within two months.

Spokesmen for the government of the Sudan, however, insist that policies are not motivated by anti-Christian sentiment.

The Sudan embassy in Washington issued a statement challenging the accuracy of reports of anti-Christian persecution. The statement declared that “the policy of the Republic of the Sudan has always been, and shall always be, to guarantee and protect freedom of religion and worship for all citizens and all foreign residents without discrimination of any kind.”

The statement implied that missionaries had been expelled only because of “improper and illegal political activity.”

Other sources defending the government of the Sudan pointed to the fact that a number of Christians occupy influential posts whereby they can influence and implement national policies.

Avoiding A Test

Observers in Athens say that in “indefinitely postponing” its civil suit against a Greek Orthodox prelate, the national government may have avoided a politically embarrassing test of strength against the Orthodox Church in Greece.

Members of the Holy Synod, in a meeting just prior to the trial’s postponement, had gone on record as stating that the civil suit was, in effect, an attack upon the church and its prelates.

Metropolitan Ambrosius of Eleftherupolis—and five newsmen who printed his statements before the Holy Synod in November—was to have been brought to trial for “abuse” or libel of the government. The metropolitan, in discussing the government’s proposed clergy pay plan, had said the “Greek state behaves like a robber toward the Church.”

His comments were made during a Holy Synod session which had rejected the state’s recommendation, which, it charged, would have absorbed two church agencies within an organization that could be dominated by the state.

“Postponement” of the trial was interpreted in Athens by observers to mean that it would never be called and in time will be dropped.

It was revealed that at a session of the synod held five days before the scheduled date for the trial, Archbishop Chrysostomos of Athens and All Greece charged that the civil suit was actually a persecution of the synod. He noted that if carried out it would mark the first trial of a bishop before a civil court since the establishment of the Greek state.

Archbishop Chrysostomos subsequently proposed a $6,130,000 pay increase to be distributed among some 8,000 priests. Based on education training, the recommended pay scale would provide 67½ per cent increases at the highest level and 70 per cent at the lowest. The highest class now receives $684 a year; the lowest, $360.

Now To The Vatican

A United Press International dispatch from Madrid reported last month that the Spanish Catholic hierarchy had agreed to a government bill that would grant Protestants equal rights with Catholics.

UPI quoted “reliable sources” which said that the Spanish bishops at their recent annual conference had decided to drop objections to a “bill of Protestant emancipation” prepared by Foreign Minister Fernando Maria Castiela.

The decision was to be reported to Rome by the Archbishop of Saragoss. No agreement will be published officially until it has received Vatican approval, the report added.

The bill would permit Protestants to have their own schools and distribute Bibles, and would give them certain other rights such as those relating to marriage laws.

Meanwhile, in Buffalo, New York, the executive committee of the National Association of Evangelicals adopted a resolution commending Spanish government efforts to ease restrictions. The resolution called for “full religious freedom” and “not just … religious tolerance.”

In 1919 a group of English undergraduates met in Trinity College, Cambridge, to discuss the possibility of merging the Student Christian Movement with the 42-year-old Cambridge Inter-Collegiate Christian Union. Eventually the vital question was put: “Does the SCM consider the atoning blood of Jesus Christ as the central point of its message?” The answer given was: “No, not as central, although it is given a place in our teaching.” Commented Norman P. Grubb, one of the CICCU men present: “That answer settled the matter, for we explained to them at once that the atoning blood was so much the heart of our message that we could never join with a movement which gave it any lesser place.” This was the real beginning of the Inter-Varsity Fellowship of Evangelical Unions.

In the inter-war years, despite predominantly liberal influences in British academic circles, the fellowship established itself in all the universities of the United Kingdom, and was signally blessed of God in conversions and in the production of mature and able younger leaders in church and secular affairs. After World War II its influence rapidly increased. Liberalism was no longer the force it had been; a generation of older students arose whose Christian faith had been tested in the armed services, and student leaders of the pre-war generation were emerging as notable preachers and teachers. The work extended to technical and training colleges, and was consolidated in theological colleges where the age and maturity of students helped them stand up to liberal professors. IVF literature was gathering momentum, and filled a long-standing need for scholarly, up-to-date, evangelical works. Few of the books currently on the fellowship’s lists existed, or had any adequate counterpart, before 1945. Many of the new writers were young men, and they made an immense contribution also to the IVF’s New Bible Dictionary, which major project, with its largely British authorship, could not possibly have been produced two decades ago.

An increasing number of students entered full-time Christian service—for example, about one-third of the graduates now offering themselves for the Church of England ministry have IVF associations, in marked contrast to pre-war days. Moreover, this factor has given the lie to the charge that such interdenominational work cannot develop a proper church-consciousness. Ecclesiastical leaders of the larger denominations have even expressed horror at the prospect of what they usually call “a fundamentalist theology” returning on any extensive scale to British pulpits. At present IVF members, who sign a short declaration of faith on joining the local union, constitute about three per cent of the student population. (It is understood, of course, that in many cases evangelicals have a wider base than the IVF.)

From the start there has been a strong missionary spirit. The chief aim in creating the Christian Unions was usually to witness to fellow students. It is also true that many have gone abroad as missionaries, and in the last few years nearly ten per cent have gone overseas to less-developed countries as missionaries or in secular occupations. Another notable feature is that the work has always been strongest in the medical and science faculties. The fruits of this are now appearing in a number of prominent young professors and specialists in these fields who are definite evangelical Christians.

A new complicating factor has lately arisen. With the marked decline of the SCM, denominations are taking a hand and appointing more and more full-time chaplains, and establishing student centers. An unhappy corollary of this is that most chaplains fail to appreciate the value of student leadership, and smother the student with kindness and unnecessary facilities. The IVF practice of meeting in classrooms and residence halls reaches the unchurched much more effectively, by means of Bible study and informal opportunities for evangelism. A conflict of loyalties is deliberately encouraged by a few chaplains who say that one cannot be both a good church member and an IVF supporter, even though IVF specifically advocates support of a local church where students meet people of all classes. (Student church-going is now estimated at between one-quarter and one-half of the total—i.e., considerably above the national average.) The “denominational society,” if it isolates its adherents from normal church life, can be an even more damaging preparation for church membership than an interdenominational Christian Union which no one mistakes for the church. Some British denominations are dissatisfied with their own provision for work in the universities, but are unwilling to encourage the IVF. All too often their answer is to pile on staff and facilities, and so increasingly kill student responsibility.

That such a danger is by no means confined to Britain is acknowledged by Denis Baly in his book Academic Illusion (Seabury Press, 1961). He suggests that patronage by well-meaning people and churches in America is doing considerable harm. The effectiveness of the IVF type of work depends precisely on the fact that local groups are student-led and that it is essential to their well-being that members make their contribution. Many who are now doughty warriors for Christ were in their time given such tasks. Often there was no one locally to advise, IVF was small and only rarely available for more than correspondence, and a terrific spiritual load had to be borne by those barely out of their teens. Against liberal professors and chaplains they learned to stand up for their convictions, to appeal to Scripture rather than to human authorities, and to rely on the Lord for wisdom and grace to deal with tasks and situations far beyond their natural aptitude and experience. Where older people have tried to give too much help it has frequently resulted in a stifling of the groups and a limiting of their outreach to non-Christians.

In Britain the experience of years suggests that it is exceedingly doubtful whether problems inherent in the student world can ever be completely and effectively tackled by a task force from without. Even those missioners whose evangelistic campaigns have seen many won for Christ agree that in the last analysis it is Christian students who must bear the burden of witness toward their fellows. They and we, each in his vocation, may recall with profit the prayer of F. D. Coggan, a former editor of the IVF magazine and now Archbishop of York. He said 30 years ago in the book Christ and the Colleges: “May God grant that this present generation may strain every nerve to complete the task and evangelise to a finish to bring back the King.”

British Editorial Director

The infant of today is the young man or woman of tomorrow, leaving home to enter life with the equipment largely provided by parents.

You, fathers and mothers—what have they seen in your house? Have you prepared them to face life, or have you robbed them of those things which they should have seen and experienced?

Has your example been such that they might profit by it? Have your concerns been centered on time or on eternity? on material or on spiritual values?

Has your son been conditioned to regard the making of a living, a “success” in life, of primary importance, or do the kingdom of God and his righteousness come first?

Has your daughter learned the social graces at the expense of spiritual truth? Does she know the source of true beauty? Has she the built-in safeguards to purity, or are her standards those of the world?

Christian parents have the future of the world in their hands. The children of today are the leaders of tomorrow. Character developed in the home can be the safeguard of tomorrow. The compromises of parents can become the weakness of their children. The folly of parents can develop into the undoing of their children. The flaws of training develop into the weaknesses of mature life.

The responsibility of parents is such that only God can give the wisdom, firmness, and love which must characterize the Christian home. Nor can this responsibility be shifted to other shoulders. Teachers, whether in church or public schools, have their own responsibilities, but they must be supplemental to those of the home, not the sole source of child training.

Basic to child training are the disciplines which center in God and his Word. That we live in a time of undisciplined lives—lives of adults and children alike—is a frightening thing. “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child,” we are told in the Book of Proverbs; we also know this by experience. Christian parents must exercise the wisdom of reproof, of restraint as well as of guidance, if their children are to learn the lesson of true discipline.

What do your children see in your home?

Is yours a home where prayer is given its rightful place? Do your children see you turning to God, praying for guidance and help? Do they sense that there is a divine power available to those who look to God for specific needs? Do you pray with and for the little ones God has given you? Do your children know that God is near and that he can be talked to as a loving Heavenly Father? Is prayer incidental, reserved for emergencies, or a way of life in your home?

What place has the Bible in your own daily living, and in the training of your children? Is it a pious ornament on your table, or the Book of reference and inspiration to which you turn daily?

No child has been properly trained until he knows that the Bible is God’s Word and that it speaks to the deepest needs of the human heart. What attitude toward the Scriptures are your children learning from you?

Do you have a family altar, a place of prayer, praise, and the hearing of God’s truth to which all resort each day?

Again we ask: What have they seen in your house? What have your children experienced at your hand?

Have they had the blessing of discipline? Have they learned that you can say “Yes” in love, and “No” with equal love and firmness? Have they learned the meaning of honoring their parents? Is your example such that they should respect you?

What are the basic concerns in your home? Do things have first place, or do spiritual and moral values come first?

What place has the Church for you and yours? Is it incidental or vital?

Is the cause of world missions kept before the boys and girls under your roof? Do they sense the prime importance of world evangelism, of the needs of those who do not know Christ?

Are the needy turned away from your door? Do the disasters, sorrows, and privations of others bring tangible reactions from your home? Do your children know the joy of helping others?

What have they seen in your house? What have they heard in your house? Bickering and strife? conversations taken up with trivialities? the standards of Hollywood and its latest movies—or the standards of Christ?

Is there a spirit critical of neighbors, pastor, or friends? What is the impression—of love or of carping criticism?

Do your children see compromise with wrong? Do they sense that your words and actions do not jibe, that there is some basic compromise with sin?

This is written primarily to you parents because your responsibilities are great, the privileges and opportunities of molding young lives for eternity.

Moses expressed this responsibility to the children of Israel, the passing on of a godly heritage: “And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up” (Deut. 6:7).

Such responsibilities carry over from one generation to another. Parents bear a priestly relationship to their children. Like Job of old they must pray for those God has given them. Like Joshua they must make the decision, “But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” (Josh. 24:15b).

Your children will only too soon pass out into the world. With them will go the impressions and training of youth. They will go either equipped for life or unprepared to meet the temptations and buffetings which are inevitable. Their future is being determined today.

What have they seen in your house?

Ruleg

Education, that serious world of retention and detention, of stimuli and alumni, now offers Ruleg. Ruleg is a system of programmed learning. It presents the learner with a concept, or rule, followed by a number of examples, or egs. (If your Latin is up to Vatican standards, you will surmise that an eg is an e.g., which is short for exempli gratia.) Programmers are now counting responses to see which should come first, the concept or the eg.

If statistics show that we should begin by adding egs, a new recipe will be necessary. What this inductive approach should be called, I’m not sure. Since examples may lead a learner to formulate an abstraction, something like Extraction or Egnition might serve. Gelur is a possibility—Ruleg in reverse.

Pastor Peterson has long been practicing both Ruleg and Gelur in his sermons. Either way the egs abound. He insists that E.G. would be a better degree than D.D. to keep the practicing preacher down to earth. For every egghead who follows abstractions there are a dozen eg-heads who need an example.

But the Pastor regards the Ruleg-Gelur controversy as a case of Big and Little Endianism. Swift was satirizing theological disputes when he described the Lilliputian controversy as to which end of the egg ought to be broken. Today more people seem dead serious about education than about religion. Big and Little Endian movements rise where they are taken seriously.

“The Bible,” says the pastor, “is concrete and abstract at once. What statement could be more concrete or more abstract than ‘God is love’? Or, for example, take the parables.… By the way, do you know the Negro spiritual, ‘Set Down Servant’?”

“Certainly—‘my soul’s so happy dat I cain’ set down!’ ”

“What Scripture does it refer to?”

Since I wasn’t sure, the pastor read Luke 12:37: “Blessed are those servants whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them.”

“There’s abstract concreteness for you; spend half an hour thinking about it. Read Luke 17:7–10, too.”

I did. I don’t know what to call the process, but those parables brought together project a rainbow of grace.

Pentecost

The article, “Plea For the Pentecostalists” by T. F. Zimmerman (Jan. 4 issue), left a great many questions in my mind about the biblical foundation of key Pentecostalist beliefs.…

Out of the list of passages quoted in support of the author’s position, not one will do. Surely it is unfair to quote statements from the Gospels about the future reception of the Holy Spirit as evidence for the author’s position, for these statements were made before there had been any outpouring of the Spirit (John 7:39), and any statement about the Spirit’s permanent work must be spoken of as yet in the future. Perhaps the most ironic point in the article is that the verse the author quotes as his climactic point proves exactly the opposite of what he intends. The verse (Eph. 1:13) is quoted from the KJV, which says, “in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit.” The Greek has no suggestion of a time interval between the “believing” and the “sealing,” but would be literally translated, “in whom also believing you were sealed.” The construction clearly indicates that the sealing was at the time of believing or as Abbott (I.C.C.) renders the phrase, “in whom when ye also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit.”

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was a permanent fulfillment of God’s promises. It is only through the present work of this same Holy Spirit that any response can be made to the Gospel, as Paul so clearly indicates when he says, “No one can say ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit.” We may respect the Pentecostalists for their enthusiastic evangelism and their concern for the reality of the Spirit’s work, but surely we cannot accept any notion about the Spirit’s person or work which lacks scriptural support.

First Reformed Church

Rocky Hill, N. J.

Acts 2:4 certainly tells us that all were filled with the Spirit, but can we be so certain that all spoke with tongues? They spoke as they “were given utterance”—but does this necessarily mean that all were given utterance?…

Further, the article states “that the initial physical evidence of speaking in tongues signals the infilling of the Holy Ghost.” Today then … speaking in tongues is considered to be an end in itself. On the day of Pentecost, however, it was a means to an end! Why has the pattern changed? Why do not people today, when enpowered to speak in tongues, go forth and preach the Gospel in that language …? If this is not done, do people really have the right to call themselves “Pentecostal”?

Vice Pres.

Nyack Missionary College

Nyack, N. Y.

I have found Pentecostalists choosing to disassociate themselves from the major orthodox denominations, not so much because they have “faced opposition from the community and established churches” as because they claim to offer the Holy Ghost (pronounced HO-lyghost) as a bonus to people already “saved.” A Christian aristocracy?…

Also, we question the accuracy of the author who reports Martin Luther’s having “spoken in tongues.” Next we will hear that Augustine, Calvin, the Wesleys, Jonathan Edwards, and Moody “spoke in tongues”.…

The Methodist Church

Walker, La.

I read with keen interest the Rev. Mr. Zimmerman’s excellent article.…

I have been a Pentecostal for a number of years and can say no experience on earth is comparable to it.… This Pentecostal experience can certainly be had for the asking—regardless of your denomination.…

New Haven, Conn.

The article by James Daane ought to be given wide circulation. It is excellent. In these days when there are reports of people within various evangelical churches who meet together with the express purpose to “conjure” up the Holy Spirit, an article such as “The Christ-centered Spirit” needs to be considered.…

Dept. of Sociology and Economics

Salem College

Winston-Salem, N. C.

It was somewhat paradoxical to find … Zimmerman’s [article] in an edition of CHRISTIANITY TODAY being so wholly devoted to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit, like the wind which bloweth where it listeth, manifests himself in spite of, even contrary to man’s will.

Former Pentecostalists everywhere rejoice at being released from prerequisite sanctimoniousnesses, which derive from carnal and soulish self-appeasement, into that objective spiritual peace which none can describe. And there are many spirits with which we may be filled; yet only one Holy Spirit of the Living God, which not only comforts, instructs, and edifies, but also reproves, rebukes, and convicts Christians.

Paul’s testimony, that he “spake with tongues more than ye all” (1 Cor. 14:18), immediately qualifies itself in verse 19: “… in the congregation I would rather speak five intelligible words, for the benefit of others as well as myself, than thousands of words in the language of ecstasy” (NEB).

Vancouver, B. C.

Surplus

As a reporter for a daily newspaper who covered a few Roman Catholic parochial school Christmas programs this past Yuletide season, I think the following subtitle would have been appropriate for such productions: Mary christmas.

One of them had two “Marys” on the stage at once.

Austin, Tex.

While the Bible quiz may have caught the attention of the people, Israel’s favorite game has been incorrectly identified (Nov. 23 issue). Israel’s favorite game is justifying her existence. For this she and her friends spend millions of dollars every year, while America subsidizes her. The names of the holy places said to be everyday places to the Israelis have been evervday places for most of them for only the last 14 to 20 years at the most. The people for whom they were everyday places for many years before that were forced out of their homes to make room for the new immigrants.… Many of these who had to leave their homes and all they owed are among our finest Christian and Muslim friends.

Many evangelicals seem to be playing this justifying game with the Israelis either because they view Israel as a fulfillment of prophecy or because they feel sorry for the Jews on account of the persecution they suffered in Europe. Neither is a correct foundation for justifying what has taken place in Palestine. The evangelical is called to stand for righteousness. For the Jewish Zionist terrorists to have been able to take over Palestine and set up a Jewish state in a multi-religious area was not righteous. To continue support of this state and to justify its existence is not righteous.

I am sure that Mr. Kent misspoke himself when he referred to Jericho as the name of “a bus stop, the address of a friend, a picnic area” for Israelis. However he is sort of ironically correct about the “address of a friend” for he could be referring to the hundreds of refugees living in the two huge camps near Jericho who used to be neighbors of the Palestinian Jews. Palestinian Muslims, Christians and Jews were and are rightly entitled to set up a free state in the land that is theirs. Zionism has called and is calling Jews from all over the world to come occupy the homes and the land from which they have evicted the rightful inhabitants. This is quite a game!

Instructor in Religion and Philosophy

Beirut College for Women

Beirut, Lebanon

Up, Ireland!

It was with a great deal of interest that I read “Review of Current Religious Thought” (Nov. 23 issue) by J. D. Douglas.…

It is the irony of our times that brilliant men, honest men, diligent men, men who have received vast blessings from the Reformation, should at such a trying time in the history of men and nations attempt to go back to that from which, by the grace of God, they through their ancestors were set free.…

You eliminate the Irish from Romanism and what have you left? Nothing else but the entire fall of Rome.…

Philadelphia, Pa.

Up, Scotland!

Ivan Bennett (“The Best There Is in the World,” Nov. 23 issue) is wrong in saying the Archbishop of Canterbury gave the Bible to Queen Elizabeth—it was the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

London, England

In introducing Billy Graham to a gathering of 1,800 students at the University of Chicago last April, Dean Warner A. Wick remarked, “Dr. Graham brings something to this university which it may not or cannot give to you.”

The founders of American colleges and universities would have considered such a tribute most unusual; to exclude any area of life—the religious especially—from the university would have seemed strange to them. Today, however, either by general consent or neglect, the Saviour is considered out of place on campus. Experiential Christianity is often regarded as out of bounds for the university mind. It is this barricaded territory that evangelical student groups are attempting to open up once more on the American campus.

Statistics that purport to register growing religious interest and engagement among students are misleading. The average student is quite indifferent to the thought currents, religious or otherwise, that ebb and flow in his academic environment. And by and large he tends to ignore those individuals who either seek change or protest it. The liberals who refuse to accept present status symbols pursue their ideals with determination. The new conservatives show equal zeal for their particular goals. It is these students of one extreme or the other, rather than the 95 per cent uncommitted or mildly committed, who have the power to determine the future. The four American students responsible for the now famous Haystack Meeting of 1806 influenced the spread of Christianity far more significantly than did all their remaining fellows.

Last February students at Northwestern University held a three-day conference on “Personal Commitment in an Age of Anxiety.” While it was not what one would call a religious conference, it seemed to augur a new vitality for the American scene. These students were trying to discover how they as students could participate effectively in this world. The silent generation seems to have roused from its passivity.

The usual subjects such as Communism versus capitalism and individualism versus conformity that characterized discussions of the 1950s were absent at this and similar conferences. Student concerns have changed radically. Attention now centers on problems of race, hunger, injustice, ignorance, poverty, the struggle for freedom, and so on.

The present generation of students is the first to have been born and to live solely under the threat of total nuclear destruction. No other factors have made so great an impact on their conscious lives as the Supreme Court decision on integration and the launching of Sputnik. For older generations this time of ferment may seem incomprehensible, dangerous, and chaotic; for those who have known nothing else it may represent a fertile current of life. These young people, with their potential for creative achievement, are the ones we must strive to reach for God.

Where do students of the space age stand spiritually? In general, although they know little about either Jesus Christ or the Bible, they hold both in fairly high regard. This admiration they fail to transfer to Christ’s followers or his Church, however. For most students Christianity is an irrelevant heritage from the past rather than a valid way of life for today. One professor recommended quite matter-of-factly that his history students become acquainted with a local Inter-Varsity group; its members, he said, were the only persons he knew who indulged in the medieval practice of an all-pervading God-consciousness.

Ten years ago a fraternity bull session on Christianity involved questions on evolution and Genesis, the reliability of the manuscripts, theories of inspiration, the place of reason, and so on. Today this is not the case. Now students concern themselves with the relationship of science to religion, the validity of Scripture for life, God’s judgment of the heathen, and the psychology of conversion. For the most part, the religious solution to personal and international problems is not an acceptable option. While students do not equate Christians with medicine men, they consider Christianity inadequate for our troubles. After a three-hour discussion on the Gospel and the reality of the Saviour, one international student told me: “You think Christianity is big enough for the problems of my country. It will take more than Christ.” Like many others, he stumbled at the evangel’s fundamental insistence on personal and individual reconciliation to God. Because, unfortunately, they have seen so little demonstration of the Lord’s power to meet people’s needs, these students look elsewhere for help and hope.

Indifference to Christianity and assumption of its irrelevancy to man’s actual problems in modern society are only part of the story. Beneath the surface of campus life, affecting the left, right, and vast middle groups alike, and both Christian and non-Christian, is an emptiness which is difficult to define to those who have never experienced it. What is the meaning of life? is the major though perhaps unvoiced question. Many students simply assume life has no meaning. This meaninglessness, moreover, is something quite normal for young people; they have come to terms with it, and the absence of ultimate significance does not distress them at all. The frightening predominance of this concept and attitude is a definite barrier to communicating the Gospel.

There are not a few, however, who never seem to adjust to this sense of meaninglessness. They suffer from what Christians call the “hungry heart” and others call “angst” or anxiety. Tillich refers to the horror of nonbeing. Psychoanalyst Victor E. Frankl describes it as “existential vacuum” against which conventional psychoanalysis is helpless. Many people experience this absence of purpose, responsibility, and meaning as a misery to be endured, perhaps, but scarcely to be accepted as normal. Youth reacts in a mass move toward cynicism.

This inner dissatisfaction, which for some is the “quiet desperation” of daily life and for others a vague uneasiness, may erupt under the stresses of modern academic pressures. The strain of qualifying examinations and of competition for which high school has left them unprepared takes its toll. Lack of certainty as to life’s meaning, coupled with fear of failure, suggests the short way out. One eastern university had more than 60 attempted suicides last semester. Suicide seems logical and unusually attractive when life has no purpose.

Christian students are not immune to this mood of anxiety. In fact, especially on secular campuses, they must fight against the whole tenor of undergraduate life to maintain faith in God’s goodness and design. Often Christian friends fail to support each other at this point. There may be an insinuating suspicion of one who departs temporarily from “the Christian line,” or the doubt that Christ can or will meet a problem of any real magnitude—particularly in moral or emotional areas. Often their spiritual background is such that students do not know that Saviour whose greatness is sufficient for every problem. They judge the adequacy of Christ by their own limited experience.

One Christian student asked an Inter-Varsity staff member, “Can Jesus Christ help me from wanting to commit suicide?” To the answer, “Yes,” he replied, “How?” In the conversation that followed he showed neither unbelief nor doubt. But he simply could not see how Christ was sufficient for his present crisis. At first it did not help to point him to the Lord of the New Testament, because he thought he held the biblical image of Christ. The fact is that his sense of spiritual reality lagged behind the reality of his own developing maturity, a gap that required several months to bridge.

It is difficult for campus Christian organizations to cope with students’ fears and anxieties. This spirit of disillusionment handicaps the organized Church as well. Church leaders, say the students, have “let us down. They never have anything to say.” While this report is not necessarily valid, it does point the finger at student pastors, chaplains, and other professional student workers, Inter-Varsity staff not excepted. Yet it is just here, at the place of personal contact between Christians and non-Christians, that God is working. For convinced believers, be they students, faculty, or Christian workers, the campus offers opportunities for evangelism unknown for 45 years.

The wistful longing for commitment combined with the sense of lostness is what gives this new openness to the Gospel—provided, however, that students are convinced of its pertinence for their own lives. Usually it is the life of a Christian student or faculty member that provides the opening wedge to communication.

Whatever the current “student mind” may be, the content of the Gospel and the way into fellowship with God remain unchanged. Four major thrusts characterize the present campus approach to students:

1. The message which we proclaim is the message of the Bible. As a consequence, it carries unmistakable authority.

2. The person we preach is Jesus Christ, very God of very God.

3. The core of the Gospel is Christ’s sacrificial and atoning death for us. It expresses God’s love in response to human need by his free provision of his Son, the Redeemer.

4. The demand of Christ is commitment to total personal relationship with the triune God through the abiding presence and reality of the Holy Spirit.

The danger of college and university Christian witness is either to ignore academic-intellectual issues or to allow them to dominate. Although the final issue is moral and spiritual, the Christian student or faculty member who bypasses the intellectual issues of his campus not only abdicates a great part of his personal responsibility but also misses a most fruitful source of pre-evangelism. On the other hand, one who succumbs to the temptation to place all the issues within intellectual bounds frequently misses a seeker’s deepest needs. An evangelical Christian has responsibilities not only as a believer, but also as a scholar and friend.

Hundreds of students each year accept the Gospel, not just to “make a decision,” but to commit themselves to life in Jesus Christ and to the fellowship of his Church. Staff members of several student organizations, chaplains, student pastors, and Christian faculty who proclaim this message and who demonstrate its power are seeing what God can do. In recent months 5,000 students gave up their Christmas holidays for a conference to face God’s call to world evangelism. At a Colorado college last fall, half the entire student body heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Even the beaches of Fort Lauderdale were the scene of Christian witness and response. While this response may be relatively small in view of the extensive opportunities, in God’s goodness it could become a floodtide of spiritual power. If the Gospel is to penetrate the campus significantly, all students, student workers, and faculty members committed to Jesus Christ and his Word must dedicate their love and talent and lives as never before.

General Director

Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship

Chicago, Illinois,

A Student’s Prayer

Written by Professor Moeller of Concordia Theological Seminary, Springfield, Illinois, at the close of the first session of summer school on July 13, 1962.

Psalm 19:14

O God of book and printer’s ink,

Of pen and paper, scholar’s toil,

Of clause and phrase and substantive,

Of term paper and midnight oil,

Thou who alone canst give to learn,

Help me to learn!

O God of Truth, O God of Grace,

O Word Made Flesh, O Holy Dove,

Thou Wisdom, Glory, Righteousness,

Peace, Mercy, Patience, Hope, and Love,

Thou who alone canst give to know,

Help me to know!

O God of Moses, Samuel,

Of Jeremiah, Daniel,

Of Peter, James, and John, and Paul,

Of Michael and of Gabriel,

Thou dost for Thy work servants choose;

Do Thou me choose!

For sloth and petty prejudice,

For pride and willful ignorance,

For lack of zeal and will, and prayer,

For self-imposed incompetence,

For shirking at Thy work, O Lord,

Thy mercy, Lord!

My brain and hands dare bring to Thee,

Because Thy blood pays all my guilt,

This votive offering of my work,

Small thanks for precious ransom spilt.

Accept my thoughts and words, O Lord,

Accept, O Lord!

ELMER J. MOELLER

There are many safeguards to protect the life and property of human beings but very little protection in the realm of ideas. It is much easier to exploit the thinking of a man without suffering any penalty than it is to swindle him out of his goods. Congress can enact laws to defend the citizen against physical harm, but legislation can do little to protect him against erroneous ideas.

Error makes its way by appearing reasonable and by concealing its specious character. We apply the term “plausible” to ideas or situations that seem to be reasonable and proper but are deceptive in appearance and false underneath. One of the best ways to defend against such deception is to encourage alertness against “the peril of the plausible.”

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus sounded such a warning when he spoke these words: “Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” This admonition of Jesus, like many of his figures of speech, is objectively simple in its language but, like those which follow it, is profound and far reaching in its application. Jesus’ words might be paraphrased to say, “Beware of false principles which come to you in a guise of plausibility, but underneath are fallacious.” Jesus cites a number of these fallacies in the discourse which follows, using simple metaphors from common life.

One such fallacy underlies the hearty affirmation that “anything the majority of the people want is good enough for me.” This has a ring of plausibility and seems to be a vote of confidence in democracy. The processes of democracy do operate on the majority principle; hence this seems like a sound basis for making individual decisions. Majority opinion is commonly equated with correctness.

The shortcomings of such a method for determining truth may be illustrated by imagining a party of persons lost in a forest at midnight. Is it possible to ascertain the correct direction by taking a vote and following the majority? It depends upon who is voting. Only if the voter’s opinion is based upon sound premises, logical thinking, and some assimilation of accumulated wisdom will it have any real value. Without these, even a democracy may lose its way. The opinion of one person with adequate knowledge and clear thinking might well outweigh the collective opinion of a dozen or a hundred that has no such basis.

Jesus’ words, “Enter by the narrow gate,” proclaim the fallacy of the majority. Not only might the majority be wrong, but, in matters of moral choice, Jesus asserts that the majority is likely to be wrong. “The wide gate has a broad road that leads to disaster,” he said, “and there are many people going that way. The narrow gate and the hard road lead out into life, and only a few are finding it” (Matt. 7:13, 14, Phillips).

The course of history many times has vindicated minorities that stood courageously for unpopular causes against the opposition of powerful majorities.

Another counterfeit catchword of our time is “Live it up—it’s later than you think.” This is the modern version of an ancient philosophy that focuses upon immediate gratification to the neglect of ultimate consequences. For this fallacy of the immediate Jesus also had an answer: “Ye shall know them by their fruit.” Using a metaphor from everyday life, Jesus was saying, “Take the long look. Judge any course of action not by its proximate effects but by its ultimate consequences. The flower may be sweet, but it may bear a bitter fruit.”

The ability to deprive oneself of present pleasures in the interest of a distant but larger satisfaction has been called “tension capacity” or frustration tolerance. Children have little of such endurance, but as understanding grows, young people become able to visualize distant goals and to accept immediate deprivation in anticipation of more important long-range objectives. The development of frustration tolerance is a mark of maturity. By this criterion our culture is moving steadily away from, rather than toward, greater maturity. The fallacy of the immediate needs to be exposed for a generation that is ignoring long-range consequences in its emphasis upon immediate pleasure. Those who work with the ills of personality see at close range the bitter fruit of hedonism.

Another spurious presumption is commonly introduced by some such comment as, “Ordinarily we wouldn’t do it, but circumstances being what they are …” or, “I know it’s usually considered wrong, but this is for a good cause,” or “We’ll do it only this once.” These prologues to a course of expediency imply that one can somehow circumvent the usual consequence of a questionable choice and come out ahead.

Jesus had an answer for the fallacy of the expedient: “A bad tree cannot bear good fruit.” This simple metaphor emphasizes the inescapable principle that the means determines the end. The nature of the tree determines the kind of fruit it will produce. If wrong is inherent in the character of an act, evil will be present in its consequences.

The fact that a good end is sought will not make a good means out of a bad one. And if a bad means is used, the result will be a bad end, for the means determines the end.

In travel, one may select a certain destination on the map, but he cannot get there without traveling the right road. When he chooses the road first, he limits his choice of destination to the places on that road, and no amount of earnest intention will bring some other desired destination into that route. As the nature of the tree determines the fruit, the route chosen determines the destination and the means selected determines the end. The principle is far ranging in its applicability, and stands in judgment upon dishonest and shoddy practices in economic and political as well as in personal life.

The most demoralizing fallacy of all is the conclusion that Christianity is bound to fail. In a civilization dominated by force and power politics, the law of love is said to be anachronistic and naïve. As Freud put it, the Christian idea of love is absurd and unpsychological. Christians are by no means immune from assault by this plausible doctrine. Faith is buffeted unmercifully in the marketplace and at the podium. Truth seems to be forever on the scaffold and wrong forever on the throne.

Jesus confronts the fallacy of failure with a confident assertion of ultimate triumph: “A good tree cannot bear evil fruit.”

This confidence cannot be substantiated without defining success and failure in ultimate rather than proximate terms. We incline to judge failure in its proximate aspects. By these criteria, the cause of Christianity failed with Jesus’ death on the cross. Through the centuries since then the verdict of failure has been pronounced repeatedly upon Christianity as its leaders have fallen or as the temper of the times has run against it.

This measurement of success and failure by proximate criteria has infected all our culture. Ultimate values and goals have been eclipsed by the importance given to material objects. As never before in human history, “things are in the saddle and ride men.” The label “post-Christian” applied to our time is an acknowledgment that the proximate has outrun the ultimate in our prevailing value systems.

But the ultimate verdict is the one that counts. Peter Marshall was contrasting these two when he said, “I would rather fail in a cause that is bound to succeed than to succeed in a cause that is bound to fail.” Through the contemporary blare of materialism the quiet voice of Jesus can scarcely be discerned. But those who are listening hear in the words “a good tree cannot bear evil fruit” the steady assurance that right principles cannot fail, but will ultimately triumph.—Remarks by DR. ORVILLE S. WALTERS, Director of Health Services, University of Illinois, in the series “The Faculty Speaks on Religion” on radio station WILL.

WE QUOTE:

REVOLUTION IN EDUCATION—Our world cries pitiably for the fruits of Christian Faith, especially in today’s youth who must drive a way through tomorrow’s hazards and uncertainties—“firmer and stronger character, higher integrity, larger spiritual vision, unimpeachable and unshakable fidelity, what one of our foremost American statesmen keeps pleading for, ‘a righteous and dynamic faith.’ ” The desired fruits can be had; but only from roots capable of producing them. What is required—what alone might prove adequate—is revolution, conversion, an about-face, in both the assumptions and the goals of our living; and likewise, of the training of our youth. Not the curriculum only, but every aspect of the philosophy and structure and spirit of education, cries for radical remaking.—Dr. HENRY P. VAN DUSEN, professor of systematic theology, Union Theological Seminary, God in Education (1951).

Trying to explore the “best access” of the Gospel to the collegians on secular campuses may seem a rather cryptic pursuit. CHRISTIANITY TODAY’S findings are based on the comments of Christian professors stationed on such campuses from coast to coast.—ED.

Freshmen arrive at the campus with “whatever pattern of religious conviction or code of morals was nurtured in the home church or high school” (Dr. Harold L. Alden, emeritus professor of astronomy, University of Virginia). “Young people mature early these days; I am pretty sure that most of them have already decided whether or not they are interested in any form of religion, and possibly just which form, before they reach college. Hence the importance of high-school programs like Young Life” (Dr. John R. Brobeck, professor and chairman of the department of physiology, School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania). Most students will profess to be religious on entering, says Dr. Elbert H. Hadley, professor of chemistry at Southern Illinois University, “but the great majority leave their religion at home when they come. By the time they graduate, only a minority attend church.” Professor Hadley thinks the pressures contrary to Christianity are overwhelming: “During 15 years of teaching I haven’t seen a dozen students acknowledge Christ as their Saviour. I feel we must get the students before they come to college.” Granting that more students than we realize begin higher education with an “all settled” frame of mind, notes Dr. Arlan L. Edgar, associate professor of biology at Alma College, Alma, Michigan, nonetheless even an incoming student with a Christian background is “in for a rocky freshman year as far as his faith is concerned.” The early fall of a freshman’s career comes when he is faced with the most serious misgivings about his previous positions; it is then, Professor Edgar thinks, that Christians can help him develop a mature, considered faith. When an upperclassman, an instructor, or someone else with campus status earnestly says he does not believe in God, believing students may become frustrated, while the uncommitted may become assured of their doubts. Reflective students who view college as an adventure of the mind either maintain their reservations or uncover new threads of doubt. To some extent responses are conditioned by promotions, friendship, and prestige. Certain naïve leaders who condemn the Church and slam Billy Graham may at the same time label as biased anyone who speaks of Christ or invites students to attend a crusade. In such an atmosphere there can be no effective authoritarian presentation of religion. Since the anchorless student has rejected the appeal to former voices of authority (Bible or Church), he depends more than his forebears on “lives that seem to speak authoritatively of some unifying belief or ruling passion,” or on evidence of a faith that works.

The average evangelical church, says Professor Youngberg of Oregon State, “is not reaching the university student—they do not understand each other.” He suggests personal contact or informal “bull sessions.” Even here it is important to call conversations to their true center in the redemptive work of Christ, and to avoid special pleading. Professor Davies of Thiel College declares that “on the intellectual level the theory of evolution has constituted a massive assault on the Christian faith, and any bona fide evangelical weakening of some unproved biological assumptions could be a valuable academic contribution to the Gospel.” Some teachers feel that local churches could do more by way of adding student pastors and sponsoring group activities aimed at the welfare of students. A simple, straightforward presentation of the Bible in the churches and in small study groups, says an Indiana professor, is the best approach. “A pseudo-intellectual approach is often more harmful than helpful,” he adds. “Sincerity and personal interest on the part of the Christian are very important. A positive stand and a kind, loving tolerance are both needed, and they are not mutually exclusive.” The influence of an individual who has received some previous notice of professional success or of his Christian life and witness may be specially felt, as in the case of Christian athletes. But, remarks a Pennsylvania professor of humanities, “individuals or organizations representing institutionalized Christianity” (the “professional Christians” whose salary and livelihood come from the organized Church) have no very noticeable impact on the college community in casual contacts because of “the institutional veneer through which they are distortedly seen by the cynical non-Christian.”

The Gospel’s best access to the student is to be found, thinks Rochester Institute of Technology Professor Dane R. Gordon, in his sense of moral concern and in “the obvious fact that he is a young human being.” And he adds, the student’s best access to the Gospel is “through the example set him by Christians whom he meets.” Professor Joseph E. Grimes, whose doctoral field at Cornell University was linguistics, argues for a direct thrust: “Jesus Christ makes it possible for life to make sense and to have a worthwhile goal.”

Professor Hadley of Southern Illinois University thinks evangelical, campus-based religious foundations that contact students in their dormitories might exercise a worthwhile spiritual influence. A West Coast professor notes that “much Christian apologetics and potent philosophical writing is presently available, and these works are of help. But the best access is personal contact as ‘born again’ students tell their colleagues of the reality of Christ in their lives. Student-led dormitory or fraternity Bible study, with the simple presentation of the Gospel, and backed by dedicated prayer and a Christ-centered life, is still God’s most potent arm on the American campus.” But the Christian student must be respected also for his bona fide scholarship and his deep interest in other students as persons. Dr. D. W. Tieszen, dean of instruction at Central Missouri State College, notes that the secular campus offers dedicated Christian students multiple opportunities to nourish their faith; moreover, a decisive role is often played by campus religious groups and by the continued interest (or lack of it) of home churches in following young people in their campus careers.

But the most important relationship of all on the university campus, Dr. Thomas D. Parks points out, remains that “between professor and student.” Dr. Parks, associate director of Proctor and Gamble’s Product Development Division, stresses his point as follows: “Because the professor is at the university to teach and the student is there to learn, the professor exerts a greater than normal influence either for good or for evil.” Dr. Alden of the University of Virginia notes the influence of Christian professors who take an active part in the religious life of the community. “Somehow a medium and a mechanism must be found,” remarks Professor Boutwell of Temple University School of Medicine, “for Christian professors to witness effectively both to their students and to their colleagues, since the witness of convinced and devoted Christian professors offers the most promising possibilities of challenging the secular student to a consideration of Christ.”

Dr. Stanford W. Reid of McGill University, Montreal, considers two things essential for reaching university students on behalf of Christ: “friendship and an intellectually respectable Christianity which faces the problems and deals with them; sentimentalism, legalism, and high pressure provide no avenue.” Professor Cook of Valparaiso University stresses that “the intellectual side” is the “most open point of access. A clear explanation of the Gospel, avoiding side issues, is the best approach to students.” Professor Carnell of the University of Florida thinks the geographical barriers to communication might be overcome by having coffee houses that sponsor free discussion and Christian witness. He thinks that after being strengthened by a two-year collegium-type residence, evangelical students could be thrust wholly into the secular campus environment for an effective witness. He also urges weekly seminars, led by Christian professors, to discuss the relationship of evangelical faith to issues raised in academic work and to explore the hidden secularist assumptions underlying various courses. Another contributor strikes a similar note: the slowly growing number of committed professors who reflect their Christian concern for students both in and outside of the classroom represent the greatest thrust on campus today. Student groups like Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship and Campus Crusade do their most effective work on campuses where dedicated professors give strong, continuing support.

END

Miss Sybil Stallings is a Dean’s List student at the University of Georgia. She is chapter president of Alpha Omicron Pi, one of the 14 national social sororities. She serves the Sociology Club as parliamentarian, Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship as missions secretary, and is a member of Westminster Fellowship and of Panhellenic Council, the governing board of national social sororities. On a campus of 9,200 students, she was voted one of 15 best-dressed coeds during the 1961–62 academic year, and was nominated for the national title of “Girl of Alpha Omicron Pi.” Her special interest is an enlarging book of inspirational poetry titled “Prisms.”

The greatest truth which I have gradually learned during three years at the University of Georgia has been the ultimate realization that Jesus Christ lives today—this very day—and that he lives and cares for me. How do I know this? Because I have learned that he knows us, as students, much more intimately than we know ourselves. He perceives our anticipations concerning our tomorrows; he understands our sinful nature and forgives us even at the moment we part our lips; and he waits patiently when we find ourselves involved in intellectual discussions of the Bible, and leads us to his truths. He is the same person who cares for the sparrow. How much more then will he care for you … and for me? Yes, I trust Jesus Christ because he is all of these things to me today and is through and in all the future which lies ahead. He is the author and finisher of my faith.

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY—Not until college years did I become aware that to me church attendance meant nothing more than a social engagement. I was told that I needed a personal experience with Christ, one of complete surrender, relinquishing the throne of my life to him. I began to evaluate my life and I did this. Since then I have felt a great sense of satisfaction and peace of mind which he has imparted.—KARL DENNISON, 1960–61 student body president.

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY—After setting up goals during high school and college and always finding them empty and meaningless, once I had obtained them, I found reality in Christ. My life has changed a great deal since then, and football is no longer my god. My greatest desire is to serve Christ.—NOLAN JONES, varsity halfback.

UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA—I heard the cry “be an individual” and “think for yourself.” But few chose to be different and to stand up for their convictions; most preferred to conform to the crowd. I felt there must be more in life. Sensing the void, I decided to discard my prejudices toward God and to examine the claims of Christ. He said that man could live an abundant life and have fellowship with God. He said, “I am the Way.” Finally, I asked Christ to come into my life. He has changed my values, goals, and total outlook. I now know the transforming power of Christ and Christianity.—JACK LEMAN, graduate student in clinical psychology.

BROWN UNIVERSITY—In Jesus Christ, God has shown me the only absolute in a world of many values and attractions. My understanding of this world, my attempt to live, and my value as a person are meaningful only as God in Christ stimulates, directs, and fulfills the life he has given me.—RONALD HARDY, a junior, elected 1961–62 president of Brown-Pembroke Christian Fellowship.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (Berkeley)—What is a life without Christ? What is a cell without a nucleus?… Just as the nucleus is biologically essential for life in a cell, Jesus Christ is spiritually essential for life. Since I have become a Christian, I realize that everyone needs God and the love he offers through Christ, whether one will admit it to himself or not.—LINDA MONTANELLI, psychology major.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA (Los Angeles)—My personal trust in the Christ of the Bible has been the most rewarding aspect of life. My relationship with him provides freedom from guilt, loneliness, and anxiety, as well as a stable perspective of the crises of our times. This perspective is centered in God’s revelation through his Son, Jesus Christ, of his redemptive purpose for mankind. Knowing him personally is the greatest thrill of my life!—MARK BIEDEBACH, graduate fellow in the department of biophysics.

CARNEGIE TECH—I am utterly convinced that Jesus Christ is God’s perfect revelation of himself. I place unhesitating trust in him for my personal reconciliation to God and to men, and for the resetting of the direction of my life and character. I am further persuaded that God’s written revelation in Scripture is totally relevant to the deepest problems and experiences of life.—JOHN M. DISHMAN, graduate student in physics; selected as outstanding senior at Georgia Tech.

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO—After weighing the evidences, I realized I would have to either accept or reject God’s gift. I accepted by inviting Jesus Christ to come into my heart and become my Saviour and Lord, and he did. As I gave myself completely to him, he began to live out his life through me. I began to experience real joy, a solid peace, specific answers to specific prayers, and his overwhelming adequacy in every situation.—SWEDE ANDERSON, 1959–60 student body president.

Carrying the flag of the United States in the 1960 Olympiad in Rome was a tall, dignified American Negro named Rafer Johnson, UCLA’s track and field Hercules, who set a new world record of 8,303 points in the decathlon—ten special events constituting a whole trackmeet in miniature. In 1958 he had traveled to Russia to compete in the U.S.-U.S.S.R. trackmeet just weeks after Kuznetsov of Russia had set a new world’s record; in one of the most spirited athletic duels of modern times, in Moscow, Johnson beat Kuznetsov and set a new world mark. At UCLA Johnson was a leader both off and on the cinder track, taking active part in Youth for Christ and serving as student body president in his senior year. Recently signed for the leading role in the historical film The Fiercest Heart, he maintains a devout life.

All the trophies and championships received from men will pass away. I would rather strive to be the greatest Christian than the greatest athlete because when the lights go out it will be the Christian team, coached by Christ the Saviour, that will finally win. Since that night I took Jesus Christ into my life, every phase of my life has been so much fuller and richer, socially, academically, athletically, and spiritually.

UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO—Several years ago I began a search for God. I turned to science, nature, and philosophy. Though these convinced me there is a God, they didn’t help me find him. Then a man showed me that I could not find God but God must find me through Jesus Christ, his Son.… When I finally let Christ rule my life, I began to experience the true joy of Christian living.—JOE ROMIG, who gained 1960 Big Eight Conference football honors.

DARTMOUTH COLLEGE—Through the eyes of a personal faith in Jesus Christ I see what life really is and what I, as a man, must do to live this life to its fullest. Presently, I do not know all of the answers, but I am confident that through His revelation he will make the way clear.—DARYL R. ERICKSON, president of the Dartmouth College bands.

UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA—After trying to discipline my life to Christian standards and realizing the inner frustration of failure, I put my complete trust in Jesus Christ to discipline my life. My personal experience of God’s power as promised to man in the Bible has assured me that the personal relationship to God revealed in the New Testament is the only answer to man’s problem today!—MACK CRENSHAW, varsity basketball player and returning letterman on the tennis team.

HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL—I thank Almighty God for his revelation of divine justice and love contained in the Bible and in the person of Jesus Christ. I have discovered, and continue to find, that a personal commitment to Christ as Saviour and Redeemer brings forgiveness and fellowship with God, and provides motivation, direction, and challenge for my life.—ROGER G. MARK, presently in a combined educational program leading to an M.D. from Harvard Medical School and a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from M.I.T.; past president of M.I.T.’s chapter of Eta Kappa Nu (electrical engineering honor society).

HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL—Jesus said: “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” My entire Christian experience has been one of a growing understanding of the meaning and relevance of this claim. My life’s goal is to make known this stupendous truth to those who have not yet realized its significance.—SEPPO E. RAPO, third-year medical student.

JULLIARD SCHOOL OF MUSIC—Christianity is more to me than material for intellectual games. It is Christ’s influence in making me like himself, replacing the urge to push myself ahead without consideration of others. Through absorbing God’s Word daily I become a “partaker of the divine nature,” which leads me even higher than my own ambition.—STEPHEN CLAPP, Candidate for Diploma in 1963 and member of this year’s Student Council.

KUTZTOWN STATE COLLEGE—Since I’ve been in college Jesus Christ has become more than my Saviour. He is relevant to everyday life—tests, gab sessions, activities, and even the Cuban crisis; to be able to leave such practical things to his guidance and concern gives me confidence and peace. Freedom cannot come with democracy, education, and the like. Man is captive within himself. We can only experience true freedom when we realize our need of complete dependence on Christ.—GAIL MANNHERZ, major in secondary education in the area of foreign languages; recently pledged to Kappa Delta Pi (national honorary society in education).

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY—Although I had gone to church and Sunday school all my life, I did not experience a real, living relationship with God until I invited Jesus Christ into my heart. Since then my trust in God has increased as I have studied the Bible and pursued scientific studies and research. I am now fully convinced both in my heart and in my mind that a personal trust in Jesus Christ as the only Saviour from sin and the Giver of a new life which begins in this world and continues in the next is the only hope for individuals and for the world today. I have found that science students are looking for something which is not only reasonable, but which works—that is, can be tested and proven in the laboratory of life. I recommend a careful consideration of the claims and promises of Christ to any student of science.—A. JAMES WAGNER, doctoral studies in meteorology; B.A. honors graduate in physics from Wesleyan University.

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY—I have given Jesus Christ complete control of my life. A personal relationship with him has filled me with peace, power, and purpose. The Bible has come alive with relevant passages that guide all of life. How could I ever distrust the One whose love and grace give me such an abundant life?—BOB ANDRINGA, president of the Interfraternity Council and of his sophomore class, and recipient of outstanding junior award.

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY—The difference between triviality and true value is often subtle. I recognized a need for a strong foundation, something true and absolute but relevant to every area of life. I discovered that Christ is the answer to that need. The Bible taught me, “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”—BOB CAMPBELL, communications arts major.

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA—Godly parents in a Christian home showed to me my need of Jesus Christ as personal Saviour, and I put my trust in him while yet a child. This early faith continues and helps me to meet the tests of a college student—both the intellectual and the spiritual ones. Indeed as we see the search of students for direction, for truth and knowledge, for an objective in life, the words of Christ saying, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” find their application.—GAIL COTTRELL, Dean’s List student and vice president of the Arts College Board.

NORTH DAKOTA STATE—I have surrendered to Christ’s claims on my life, and have discovered that I am now on talking terms with God, and that he meets every need I have as a student.—KEN NELSON, Blue Key award for religious leadership and president of his freshman class; now a junior.

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY—A student’s religion, or lack of it, affects every area of his life on campus. For life begins when a man receives Jesus Christ as Saviour; it continues as he abides in Him through faith. A personal relationship with Christ provides life with purpose, direction, peace, and the greatest joy that can be known.—DAVID A. LARSON, awarded research assistantship as a graduate student after graduation from Purdue University “with highest distinction.”

UNIVERSITY OF OREGON—After talking with my roommate about the person of Christ, I made the most important choice of my life—that of inviting Him into my heart. Now that I know him, I have a new sense of direction that I had never known. The actual presence of Christ in my life is thrilling.—STEVE BARNETT, tackle on the varsity football team.

PORTLAND STATE COLLEGE—Throughout history man has been unable to live a peaceful, satisfying life without God, and it is no different today. I know I will be spending eternity with God, because Christ died for my sins and was resurrected bodily. Knowing this removes fears and gives purpose to my life. I owe everything to Christ.—JIM YOUNG, president of the 1963 graduating class and member of the forensics team.

SMITH COLLEGE—I had tried a lot of solutions to the riddle “where am I going? and why am I here?” Good grades, accumulated social activities, and beaux were insufficient. In the last two years I have found that the claims and promises of Jesus Christ to his followers are the only answer to life. Instead of that war inside between what I knew I should do and what I did, there is new unity and harmony at the center of my life. Instead of running away from or falling under those daily problems that arise, I have a new strength that enables me to meet and go through any obstacles. Jesus said he came to bring us each an abundant life, and he does just that.—VIRGINIA GROSE, Senior, house officer.

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA—When I first came to USC, I found myself searching for happiness and true purpose in life which college did not seem to offer.… I found something which has utterly changed my life. It is a personal relationship with Christ.—GINNI MCKOON, music major.

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS—I can say that the excitement and adventure of the true Christian life is greater than winning a thousand races.—JOHNNY COTTEN, quarter-miler for the Texas “Longhorns.”

Miss Carole D. Reinhart is a senior at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Florida. In 1960 she was honored as “National College Queen” and in 1962 as Miami’s Homecoming Senior Princess. She served as Associated Women Students Orientation Chairman in 1962–63. She is attending on a symphony scholarship (first student trumpet). She has been treasurer of Sigma Alpha Iota (Women’s Professional Music Fraternity), and has made guest cornet and trumpet appearances in Europe and Great Britain. She is a member of Phi Kappa Phi, vice president of Delta Theta Mu, and secretary of Nu Kappa Tau.

Music has always been a major part of my life, and it was through music that I found Christ as a personal Friend and Saviour. Through music I’m trying to serve him.

And what could be more fitting in this time of fear and uncertainty than to use the “universal language”—music—to tell others of the peace and harmony found only in Christian living!

It isn’t always easy, especially as a college student, but then it’s reassuring to have His promise, “I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matt. 28:20).

I love Christ, and want to go on praising him “with the sound of the trumpet.”

CHRISTIANITY TODAY asked scores of professors on secular campuses from California to Connecticut about the mood and mentality of the United States collegian: What are his ambitions and high hopes, his fears and frustrations, his commitments and conpromises? And to these same professors, in all instances faculty members of devout evangelical persuasion, CHRISTIANITY TODAY addressed a second question: What approach constitutes the best means of confronting the college student with the Gospel?—ED.

Today’s students are more serious than their counterparts of a decade ago—less interested in football and other “collegiate jazz.” Yet they are still game to “try anything once, if it’s not too much effort,” and not a few would “rather make a record piling people into a telephone booth or drinking large amounts,” reports a director of women’s counseling at a midwestern campus, “than make A’s or keep virginity or run a mile.” The liberals are “trying desperately” to shake off all authoritarianism—and to test requirements just for the sake of testing, comments an Ohio educator; they despise as antiquated such ideas as respect for parents, classroom decorum, and politeness among themselves. The conservative students, on the other hand, are willing to listen, somewhat eager to learn, and not in rebellion against society. On one Florida campus several thousand students turned out for a television personality, while a dozen or so attended a lecture by an outstanding theologian.

THEY ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS

Students differ from each other in almost every conceivable manner, for they are all individuals. Yet a few types seem to predominate. There is: (1) the confident, aggressive follower of Karl Marx who holds rigidly to materialistic determinism; he believes he has all the answers; (2) the somewhat sentimental “arty” student who, consciously or unconsciously, imitates Bunthorn in Gilbert and Sullivan’s Patience; (3) the usual type—most numerous—that lives and acts like other Americans. He comes to the university from a nominally Christian home. But nearly always he soon finds himself at sea religiously, since so many of his subjects and instructors seem completely indifferent to religion. This type often quickly adopts a strongly rationalistic and “scientific” attitude, and rejects all beliefs, conventions, and morals that are not “scientifically” validated.—W. STANFORD REID, director of men’s residences, McGill University, Montreal.

The secular collegian is an “experience-oriented” person, and combines his uncertain hopes for the future with a cynical approach to authority. He is “a chronic middle-of-the-roader cautious about committing himself and suspicious of absolutes” (Dr. Corbin Carnell, assistant professor of English, University of Florida). Orthodoxy loses appeal because of its inflexible theology, and also because of its separatist taboos; moreover, pietistic Christianity seems irrelevant if not unreal. The serious student is immersed in the day-after-day course requirements. He can gain acceptance by being pro-evolutionary and anti-missionary, pro-Bertrand Russell and anti-House Un-American Activities Committee; Dr. Ivan J. Fahs, assistant professor of sociology at Bethel College, calls this “the rites of passage necessary to professional status.”

On campus these students are confronted by divergent convictions and codes that at first sight seem to have the same validity as their own. One of the more commonly held beliefs is that “all world religions—if they are of any use at all” are, in the words of a Pennsylvania college professor, “about equally insightful and spiritually valid.” The collegians are “highly and sincerely tolerant of various religious views and persuasions,” and, adds Dr. Robert B. Fischer, professor of chemistry and director of laboratories, Indiana University, they consider religion and church “a good thing for those who want it.” Dean W. Robert Holmes of the Junior College of Albany, New York, reports that the secular collegian is “uninformed on religion, including his own; if Catholic, deeply emotional about it nonetheless.”

The pursuit of pleasure and material gain—along with knowledge—is uppermost in his mind, but such pleasure-seeking and sex-saturation already exist elsewhere in our society. The social pressures of his own peer groups keep him emptied. Only a minority of students seek “knowledge for knowledge’s sake”; the majority look for utilitarian education, and view their degrees in terms of larger salary, bourgeois comforts, and greater financial security. Yet a broad humanitarian benevolence receives much lip service, and enters still into many occupational decisions.

The fact that our age is concerned with values leaves its stamp upon the student, but, notes Dr. Dane R. Gordon, assistant professor in philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology, “he is not at all influenced or attracted toward religious activities.” He has little or no interest in Christianity, although he is more disinterested than antagonistic. He has broken with formal religion and has only vague and confused impressions of the Christian religion—observe the Golden Rule and all will be well (Dr. C. T. Youngberg, professor of soils, Oregon State University). “Many of the less thoughtful,” adds a Florida professor, “easily abandon a faith that has been equated with moralism, or continue with a loose ‘Christianity of culture.’ ” They consider Christianity to be “little more than an agency of social good works and a medium of psychological uplift and are, in fact, quite illiterate of the claims and content of historic Christianity” (Dr. Robert B. Fischer, Indiana University). “Usually their thinking is hazy concerning true Christianity,” an Indiana professor notes, “not only because of misinformation, but also due to muddled explanations or sermons with an overemphasis on minor points.” They have been confused further by neoorthodoxy, which has preempted orthodox vocabulary while destroying the older beliefs (Dr. Robert M. Davies, chairman of the Division of the Humanities, Thiel College). The “typical collegian,” thinks Dr. Virginia Lowell Grabill, director of women’s counseling at Evansville College, Evansville, Indiana, “believes Christianity concerns ‘being good,’ which to him means having a good reputation (even though he loudly declares he will live his own life and doesn’t care what people think). He reports illegalities only when he himself is affected; he thinks it cute to flout the law. He does not believe in a standard of morality.” His concept of knowledge, suggests Dr. Calvin Huber, assistant professor of chemistry at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, is so influenced by recent scientific technology that all knowledge is assumed to be objective (outside the self and perceivable by self-effort only), and the Gospel is easily assumed to be subject to rejection on the authority of self-decision.

Although preparing for “life in a corporation-oriented society,” he looks beyond mere conformity and is searching for “something that will make life meaningful” (Dr. Joseph E. Grimes, Summer Institute of Linguistics, Wycliffe Bible Translators). Dr. A. Gilbert Cook, assistant professor of chemistry at Valparaiso University, finds him “usually an agnostic with an open mind.” Yet he gives the appearance of wishing to be “intellectually perceptive, just in his social relationships, and broadly tolerant on moral issues.” But “only a minority,” remarks an East Coast professor, are “interested in giving their attention to anything which demands commitment,” although the more thoughtful are open to “a hearing for Christian theology.” Alongside the willingness to discuss religion, reports a midwestern professor, exists an attitude of skepticism toward any deep religious experience.

The reflective student who is aware of the limitations of the scientific method, particularly in respect to moral and religious questions, will probably “test the warmhearted Christian” to discover whether a believer can also be a “hardheaded scientist,” and whether Christians know where the scientific method fits and where it doesn’t. He will expect Christians—thinks sociologist Ivan Fahs of Bethel College—to be fluent with the secular community’s “scientific language,” including such terms as “independent and dependent variables, units of analyses, correlation, probabilities, causation, a priori considerations, ex post facto judgments, ad hoc decisions,” and similar jargon, while he himself despises “the fundamentalist’s language.” But the secular collegian really wants “personal involvement” with others, despite a surface mien of brusqueness and unfriendliness. “He will respond to personal friendship,” adds Professor Fahs, “on a personal level over a glass of beer—and for the evangelical Christian this is the end of what could be a beautiful friendship.” Yet the dean of a New York college adds that some students are “idealistic and interested if challenged.” The university student is “willing to discuss Christianity—and sometimes is eager to do so—as a philosophy of life,” reports a professor in the Pacific Northwest. “In moments of thoughtfulness—when he cannot drown the mood in beer—he knows that having enough to eat and two cars is not enough, that he is more important than merely a tool to build material security,” comments Professor Grabill, and that is where Christianity can challenge him. His thinking is “geared to the future,” remarks Professor Cook, and “a discussion of purposes and goals in life immediately draws his interest.” He knows there was a day when men had a religion expressive of their faith and not of their doubts, and he wants a firm place to stand when all the world seems in motion.

END

“I found Christ as a freshman forty years ago. To my Christian faith I owe the major joys of life, a philosophy, a code, a confidence, and insights which would otherwise elude me. Youth in this stormy age need such blessings. I find no more urgent task than the endeavor to tell them so in language they understand, avoiding none of their problems, and giving a reason for faith in forms that reason will accept.”—Dr. E. M. Blaiklock, professor of classics, University of Auckland.