BEHOLD THE DOLPHIN!

Our vacation plans are reversed. We are not going to the mountains, but to the seashore. Who ever chatted with a dolphin in the mountains? Since a Navy neurophysiologist has announced that dolphins have more brains than men, it is the duty of every patriotic citizen to be a good neighbor to the bottle-nosed dolphin. The Navy doctor has not quite cracked the dolphin language, which seems to be a pattern of whistles, but he assures us that the dolphin must be the smartest mammal afloat. His brain is 40 per cent larger than Navy regulation.

The marine existence of the dolphin indicates to Navy researchers the creature’s superior intelligence. Why mortgage the ranch to build a swimming pool in a world that is three-fourths ocean?

Of course the peril of our situation is evident. What if our researchers discover that the dolphins already speak Russian? Or that Russian linguists have dolphin language records? A network of dolphin intelligence, complete with sonar techniques, may already circle our coastline. Surely, after our experiences with Red eggheads, we cannot assume that dolphins are too intelligent for Communist propaganda. Life underseas may be particularly suited to brainwashing. The strong dolphin social organization noted by the researchers is ominous.

Even if dolphins are politically neutral, the dawn of the dolphin age is upon us. When these bottle-nosed high brows begin to take college entrance exams the Ivy League standards should make a dolphin school of Harvard.

This may be a little premature, since the dolphins are not yet speaking to the Doctor. There is an “if” in his reasoning too—“If brain size and complexity are the criteria of intelligence—and Dr, L. suspects this is the case—then …”

When the riddles of life were too much for Job, God summoned him to examine the animal creation. He marveled at God’s works, the hippopotamus and the crocodile, and his complaints were silenced before his Sovereign. Now we behold the dolphin. Yet we must bow with Job to know what man is. Even T. S. Eliot’s hippopotamus cannot know himself!

EUTYCHUS

THE POST-MODERN MIND

In view of Dr. Jellema’s comments on “New Faiths” (June 6 issue), it would be wise to remember the proverb, “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.” Since the so-called “post-modern mind,” which is very ancient indeed, has abandoned the objective reality of God and the universe, it also has abandoned the foundation of rationality; for according to both Aristotle and Leibnitz, the second absolute intuition is that the realities conveyed to the minds of men by their perceptions are as certainly true as the reality of the existence of their own minds. Therefore, to strip the mind of the certainty of its own knowledge is to surrender any certainty of its knowledge of itself; for perception is the basis in any case: that is to annihilate reason.

And to attempt to reason with such, on the basis of their own irrationality, is to become like them; for it accepts their folly as in itself reasonable!

ELBERT D. RIDDICK

Portland, Ore.

I believe the reasons for the revolt against the older “modes of thought” in both theology and Weltanschauungen are legitimate because they were unable to handle either the complexities or the spontaneities of the human and sub-human situation. It must be recognized, however, that none of those who are attempting to wrestle with the problems of the frontier, whether they be beatniks, physicists, depth psychologists or Existenz philosophers have yet come forward with a viewpoint which adequately handles the total range of our experience, including our knowledge.

Many in France and in our Washington-New York and West Coast areas are attempting to find a Weltanschauung in Zen Buddhism which certainly makes a place for spontaneity which the older orthodoxies in science and theology did not permit; but Buddhism merely affirms the Unpattern and denies the Self. Protestant Liberalism is surely even more inadequate than the older Orthodoxies, and Neo-orthodoxy, at least it seems to me, is like Camus, only a way of living with the Absurd.

Although I do not know where the answer is to be found, I am now fairly sure that no purely intellectual answer is possible and that when an answer is found it will involve some other than Western (either Protestant or Catholic) understanding both of the Church and of worship. I am fairly confident that there is an answer somewhere within the tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly Russian Orthodoxy.…

Unless we find an answer to the problem of the Unpattern I feel fairly sure that we will all be involved in the Dance of Shiva.

ROY E. LEMOINE

Columbus, Ga.

Comdr. ChC. USN (ret.)

“Conformity” is agreed by many of the young people I have discussed the matter with to be their taskmaster and their struggle is how to break with it. The Church, I am sure, holds the answer they seek, for only in Christ is one the full, free self God created him to be, and freedom comes only when one is what he is God-intended to be.

FOREST TRAYLOR, JR.

First Presbyterian Church

Bay Minnette, Ala.

THE FUTILE WAIT

Truly enjoyed Fred E. Luchs’ article … “Waiting for Godot” (June 6 issue). It certainly is refreshing to see a religious magazine take up such a thought-provoking subject as Beckett has produced for us. Mr. Luchs’ interpretation is mature and well-founded.

There is one basic difference between the play’s two acts. Several persons I know have failed to catch it. At the opening of the play the tree stands in the stage barren. At the opening of the second act, everything is exactly the same with the exception that anywhere from three to eleven leaves are strung along the still near-naked tree. Strange? Very. It does further Mr. Luchs’ point about futility, however. It reaches into untold stretches of time.

JOHN HUSAR

Church Editor

The Clovis News-Journal

Clovis, N. Mex.

THE CHESSMAN CASE

Your editorial on Chessman (May 23 issue) gave us Britishers a new and authentic slant which was sorely needed in view of our press which failed to bring out fully the man’s criminality.

FREDERICK S. LEAHY

Reformed Presbyterian Manse

Belfast, Northern Ireland

Would you be willing to act as the executioner of condemned men?… Your stand, and the stand of those who agree with you, is all that prevents us from doing away with this medieval, barbarous, and unchristian practice by which we are all made murderers.

JOHN A. BAXTER

Turn of River Church, Presbyterian

Stamford, Conn.

[This] is to congratulate you on the Chessman editorial (May 23 issue)—which came too late to use in my course in criminology. I am going to copy a part of it … and send it to our daily paper.

ROBERT L. WENDT

Salem College

Winston-Salem, N. C.

Those who are advocating abolition of the death penalty on the ground that it is no deterrent to crime need to be reminded that this is not even the main issue. The fact we dare not forget is that “retributive justice” … is divinely vested in human government. “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man” (Genesis 9:5–6).

When we here cast aside the revealed will of God as being too “cruel,” we are not only showing more concern for the criminal than for his victim but are also flying in the face of God’s principles of absolute justice without which the universe would be chaos.

P. W. SIMS

First Baptist Church

Helena, Ark.

MISSION NEGLECTED

May I confirm Mr. Conlon’s comments on the present-day importance of reaching African nationals while in this country (News, May 23 issue). However, I must say in addition that at the present time we are also losing out with the African students. They come to the United States with high expectations but are soon disillusioned. In both North and South they feel they are discriminated against. Reacting against actual or imagined affronts they tend to cloister together, brooding with others about their pathetic situation here and the inequalities in their homelands. Most Africans return home quite bitter, far the worse for their experience here. For the most part, this is not their fault. Very few Christians will open their homes and churches to minister in love without prejudice. The Lord Jesus ministered to persons of all backgrounds and nations.

The foreign students in this country, without doubt, represent one of the most significant missionary opportunities of our generation. But only relatively few Christians have thus far responded to this challenge.

R. MAX KERSHAW

Area Director

International Students, Inc.

Chicago, Ill.

PROBABILITIES AND PERILS

The hub of Brunner’s argument (April 25 issue), it appears, is that “the expansion of bolshevist control … is … an absolute certainty” while “the eruption of nuclear war … is pure possibility.” The argument may carry the force of a certain logic. But is it historically and, above all, theologically valid? If we are to argue on the level of historical probability, the evidence points at least as strongly in the opposite direction. Despotisms always come to end, by digging their own graves, or otherwise. Continued expansion is hardly an “absolute certainty.” On the other hand, a race of arms typically leads to a military explosion. Hence the likelihood of nuclear war at the end of the present contest is higher than a mere “pure possibility.” That is, if we are to argue in terms of historical probabilities, one can with more logic advance the conclusion opposite to the one drawn by Prof. Brunner.

The real issue, of course, is theological. Not to raise here the difference, ethically speaking, between “suffering evil” and “inflicting evil”—what I miss throughout the article is the dimension of grace.…

I consider highly injudicious the slogan that has been circulated in some pacifist quarters—better a communist occupation than a nuclear war. But let us keep our bearings when we evaluate historical alternatives. Nuclear holocaust is definitive in a way that communism is not. And if the former comes because of Christian unbelief and disobedience, that finality is infinitely greater.… Might it not be that the form of the antichrist in our time is not the blandishments of Moscow but rather the absolutization of the choice between East and West with which we are all constantly tempted? What would it mean if it suddenly were to become clear that Christianity, rather than being the spiritual rationale which undergirds the “defensive posture” of the West, flows from the redeeming, transforming power of God, accepting yet judging and seeking to redeem East and West alike?… Is it not, in the final analysis, a form of idolatry and unbelief to hold that despite the clear contradiction of all that the Gospel entails by the whole notion of nuclear war or deterrency, God loves the West so much and needs our help so badly to defend it, that we are entitled to destory the East to accomplish it?

PAUL PEACHEY

Mennonite Central Committee

Tokyo, Japan.

I knew Hromadka while he was here at Union Seminary, and on my visit in 1950 to Czechoslovakia I heard nothing but praises by our Congregational ministers about Hromadka and his humanitarian work for peace.…

The progressive pastor Martin Niemoeller is a personal friend of Dr. Hromadka. They both work for the peace and not for war among all nations. Yet when Dr. Niemoeller was in America, the American Presbyterians and other denominations welcomed him, except some of the Augustana Lutherans.

Listen to what the Cleveland capitalist Mr. Eaton says after his visit to Hungary not long ago, namely: “The Hungarian people are grateful that the Red Army is standing close by them because they are in terror of the German army which they feel the U. S. is building up.”

ANDREW J. MONCOL

Cleveland, Ohio.

With the exception of the fundamentalists and a few others, American Protestantism will not lift its hand to … oppose the rapid spread of communism-atheism.

LEE A. SOMERS

Champaign, Ill.

WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE

I spent a week at the White House Youth Conference (Apr. 25 issue) and could not help thinking the results would have been far more substantial if the same effort went into separate state conferences.

GEORGE C. WILSON

The Evening Star

Washington, D. C.

THE CAMPUS NEWSPAPER

Would you pass on to your pastors and Christian leaders the need to encourage able youth who are on secular campuses to try to serve on the staff of the campus newspaper.

This semester at the University of California, Berkeley, the writer submitted three letters on timely issues from the conservative viewpoint which were not published because liberally minded students controlled the editorial staff of The Daily Californian. Upon inquiry, a staff member stated, “One left-winger controls all that goes on the editorial page.”

Most of the letters which are printed are of extremist views, and many of the conservative letters printed are those with anemic arguments, making the conservative position look ridiculous. In one edition (May 16) ten of the seventeen non-sports articles had a strong anti-conservative bias.

WARD WILSON

Oakland, Calif.

WHICH RELIGION?

I was one of the 3,000 who accepted membership in the 5-year-old Academy of Religion and Mental Health, and have been asked to renew my membership. After reading Director George Christian Anderson’s New York City address of January 14, 1960, I see that when he uses the word religion, he does not mean the Christian religion, but something less definable, something sub-Christian.…

We desire to help the individual in need before he is sick mentally, emotionally, physically, and this is the noble aim of this Academy and the alert Church. But my question is this: Can we Christians truly help individuals without recognizing and stating the finality and uniqueness of Jesus as divine Savior and healer, and the Bible as our divine authority when we talk about religion? This may be implicit in Mr. Anderson’s thought, but is this too emotional or divisive to put into language? Is this too spiritual for the behavioral researcher and scientist?

ROBERT W. YOUNG

North Presbyterian Church

Pittsburgh, Pa.

THE PAGANS ARE RIGHT

Ever since you turned down and refused to print the article I wrote to you, about the basic, very foundation of Christianity, the Love Commandments that Jesus said were the greatest and first, I have felt you do not practice as you preach, and that the pagan and many people in other nations are right when they call us Americans hypocrites.

EDWIN BRUSH, SR.

San Francisco, Calif.

NEO-SOMETHING

Recently I came across a volume of contemporary theology with the arresting title, “Die Subjektive Wirklichkeitstheorie in der Christlichen Religion.” Its author is Prof. L. A. U. S. Indembart of the University of Entweder an der Oder. The colophon of the volume reads, “Verlag der Gesellschaft der Christlichen Religionskunde, Hameln, 1958.”

Prof. Indembart had hitherto been little known in this country and indeed in his own. His thesis, it may be assumed, will raise him from obscurity and make him the talk of the seminaries for several generations to come. In this book Prof. Indembart propounds an entirely new approach to the verities of the Christian faith, one which amounts to nothing less than a new philosophy.

The subjektive Wirklichkeitstheorie begins with the major premise that whatever is believed is subjectively true. Applying that principle to theology, the truths of the Christian religion have a validity insofar as they are apprehended and received as such by the individual. The Holy Scriptures, says Indembart, have essentially no objective reality. They exist only in the degree to which one is acquainted with them. When a person begins his acquaintance with the Word it is for him in a state which he denominates potentiale Wirklichkeit or seinwerdenmögen (potential reality or possibility of becoming). That state, through a transitional phase which he calls Wahrscheinlichkeit (probability), leads in certain cases to a state where particular doctrines have a subjektive Wirklichkeit (subjective reality) for the student.

So powerful was the impact of the volume that I felt the philosophy it contained deserved to be more widely known. Accordingly, in the summer of 1959 I flew to Germany with the purpose of interviewing its author.

As I sat in Indembart’s study, awaiting his appearance, I glanced at his library. I was somewhat astonished by the absence of the works of Kierkegaard and the existentialist philosophers generally. On his desk, however, lay an unopened volume of Kant; likewise an open copy of Berkeley’s “Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge,” heavily underscored and much annotated in red ink.

Heavy footfalls in the corridor apprised me of the Professor’s imminent arrival. Restraining further investigation of his reading habits, after mutual salutations and the usual small talk I proceeded to question him concerning his theological views.

My first query was, “Dr. Indembart, do you accept the Scriptures as the inspired Word of God?” Indembart puffed on his pipe, gazed out of the window overlooking the medieval city of Entweder and the placid Oder, coughed and slowly said, “The Bible has a subjective truth for me.”

“Are the Scriptures then in your opinion without error?” was my next question. He scratched his bearded chin reflectively, then said, “I am completely orthodox.”

“But, aside from my own case,” I continued, “don’t you think your theory will militate against evangelical Christianity?” “It needn’t,” said the Professor, peering searchingly at me through his thick glasses. “You see, the Scriptures have a subjective reality. They become true as they are believed.”

“Doesn’t that make man, not God, the ultimate authority?” I wanted to ask, but, thinking better of it, I inquired instead, “Do you believe in the Virgin Birth?” Just then, however, Indembart glanced at his watch. “Ach,” he said, “es ist ja schon beinah halb zehn. Entschuldigen Sie mich, bitte. Ich muss jetzt zum Katheder.”

Indembart departed for his lecture, and I had no opportunity to discuss matters any further with him. Later in the week, however, I picked up a copy of Der Theologische Nebenblick, published by the theological faculty of the University of Pinkeln, lauding Indembart’s thesis as a most significant contribution to the philosophy of conservative Christianity. At this writing, several months later, I have examined the periodical literature of numerous Protestant seminaries and find that, almost without exception, Indembart’s theory has been hailed as indicating the ultimate phase in neo-orthodox thought.

Perhaps the most candid appraisal of “Die Subjektive Wirklichkeitstheorie” comes from the pen of Prof. Esopus Apfelmus, of the department of dogmatics at the University of Trügen, which hitherto has been a stronghold of existentialism. Writing in the Trügenscher Rundschau (Bd. XCI, Heft 9), he says: “Indembart has made an excellent case for removing the neo-orthodoxy from its tottering existential foundations to a much firmer base of subjective idealism. His philosophy will outmode the work of Barth, Brunner and their concomitants and followers. It is the neo-orthodoxy to end all neo-orthodoxies. One need not be a prophet to predict a great future for Indembart.”

I was particularly struck by the last sentence. Knowing the acumen of a large segment of the personnel of today’s theological faculties I am convinced that the presage is true, that the man is right.

E. P. SCHULZE

Peekskill, N. Y.

My notice in the Sunday church bulletin had announced that I would be in my study for counseling every morning from 10 a.m. until 1 p.m. I straightened my desk, sat down, leaned back in my swivel chair, and after yawning took another look at my seminary diploma hanging there on the wall. The seminaries of this church have done a great job, I thought; I certainly can be grateful for the Pastoral Counseling I’ve received. Now I can help my people make an adjustment to life and enable them to feel accepted in the fellowship of the Christian Church.

This happened to be a Tuesday. Nobody had come. And because I was still exhausted from yesterday’s grind, I settled back in my chair to ponder over my work, and before I knew it I fell asleep.…

All of a sudden I awoke. I had heard a knock at the door.

“Come in,” I said. To my utter astonishment there stood the Apostle Paul! Now what on earth could he be doing here? Is it possible that he is seeking me out for counseling? I greeted him. Paul was looking exceedingly troubled, so I pointed to a chair opposite my desk and invited him to sit down and relax.

LO, A PERFECTIONIST!

He did not say anything at first. For a few moments I observed him quietly. He kept wringing his hands, I noticed, and rubbing them across his brow. Frequently he would swallow with great difficulty as if his mouth were dry from nervousness. And then I saw that he would grasp occasionally at his stomach. Apparently he was in severe pain—perhaps ulcers.

“May I have some water?” he asked.

“Why yes.” I left the room and came back, handing him a half-filled glass.

Before he drank, he slipped a little yellow pill into his mouth.

“Are you not feeling well?” I asked.

“No,” Paul replied. “I have been under Dr. Luke’s care for my nerves. Lately I’ve been upset, terribly upset. The condition of the Church is by no means what it should be! How the Church is ever going to accomplish her mission without drastic changes in both clerical and lay ministry I do not know. Luke tells me I am a perfectionist; he says I take life too seriously. So I do, but I cannot help it.”

He stopped talking for a moment, which gave me time to think.

Perfectionists are often neurotic, but I never thought Paul, the great Apostle, would become neurotic for this reason. Of course, he would have just cause for disturbance if he expected the Church today to fulfill the demands of his Epistles for faithfulness and obedience to Christ. But then …

THE STORM ABOUT THE CHURCH

“You feel there are gross weaknesses in the Church?” I asked.

No sooner had I said this than he began to talk up a storm.

“It’s this dire lack of clear-cut witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” he began. “This is what troubles me.

“You know, as one of the great ‘cloud of witnesses’ I am permitted to ‘attend’ many worship services. Some of the sermons I hear are out of your world. Ministers are preaching a language even I find difficult to understand. Some of those ideas they set forth—frankly, they leave me cold. Many ministers seem to be obsessed with concepts like ‘acceptance,’ ‘love,’ and koinonia. As I remember my Greek, that last word means something about fellowship. Yet I notice that these concepts are not always related to the sacrifice of Christ, that tremendous cost which made this ‘acceptance,’ ‘love,’ and ‘fellowship’ possible. Also, the responsibilities of the committed Christian are not stressed so much as the therapeutic value of Christianity, the attaining of peace of mind or security.”

“You feel, then, that the clergy are letting Christ down?” I asked.

“O yes … but in different ways,” he said quickly.

I was about to ask another question, but remembered that the counselee should do the talking. Paul, however, did not need any drawing out; he began talking immediately.

“There seem to be two types of ministers in the Church,” he said, “if you will permit a broad generalization. On the one hand, you have the ‘uneducated’ ministers who preach the Gospel as they understand it. They preach Christ crucified as the only means of salvation, but they confuse people by demanding abstinence from certain practices in order that they might stay saved. Mind you, I am not giving blanket endorsement to the practices they consider ‘worldly’—many of them are demoralizing—but people are led to believe that they earn or keep their salvation by abstinence from ‘things.’ You see, these ministers fail to bring their people to grips with the doctrine of God’s free grace.

“On the other hand, you have the ‘educated’ ministers. While many of them are faithful to their pastoral responsibility of preaching the Good News and nurturing the flock, there are many who are not positive in their proclamation of the Word. They are not dogmatic, except over the fact they are not dogmatic. There is no authority in their preaching because they do not believe the Bible is the authoritative Word of God to man. They submit to a kind of authority which is the ‘authority’ of the critics. But with the witness of the Word undercut, they are left to flounder among the changing theories of higher criticism. You know, it’s always easier to sit in judgment upon the Word than to let the Word judge us.

“Christians in many churches, therefore, fail to grasp the basic Christian message and, as a consequence, fail to understand their responsibility to God.

SEARCHING FOR FUNDAMENTALS

“The one thing on which this group is solidly convinced is that they are not “fundamentalist.” However, before they can be effective in any kind of ministry, they have to come to grips with the “fundamentals” of the faith. Commitment to Christ must be preached before they can expect their constituency to walk in his way. Before changes can take place, men must submit to the Word of God and its judgment. Christ must become, not an article in a creed, but a living, personal Saviour.”

“All this bothers you?” I asked.

He sighed and put his head in his hands. “Of course; doesn’t it bother you?”

‘Well …,” I began.

“I know times have changed,” he continued. “A long time has elapsed since the First Adam walked on earth, and we’ve made tremendous progress technologically. But spiritually, be assured that men have not changed. They are as rebellious as Adam was. They still turn to covetousness—idolatry. They continue to worship self and the gods it creates. But worse, many no longer acknowledge any kinship to their Creator. Professing Christians call to question God’s authority and reject Christ as their sovereign Lord.”

He paused, and we thought for a while in deep and serious silence.

“You feel, then,” I resumed at last, “that many of the clergy have failed God, and man, made in God’s image, is rebellious and self-willed. Is that correct? And you also feel that ‘Christians’ within the Church have rejected Christ’s lordship in their lives, and the Church herself has not been faithful in her ministry of the Gospel. Is this true?”

“Yes,” he replied, “I believe that to be true.”

GOD’S SUFFERING SERVANT

Paul appeared to be more relaxed now than when he first entered. The pain and much of the distress seemed to have died away. In an effort to enable the Apostle to gain further insight into his anxiety, I asked: “Is there anything else that is giving you undue anxiety?

“There are many things about the Church that cause me anxiety,” he said, “but let me mention this one other matter before I leave.”

“Go right ahead,” I replied.

“You know,” he continued, “theologians have been speaking much lately about the Church as God’s Suffering Servant Community. Their return to the Scriptures for an understanding of the mission of the Church is salutary. They call attention to the fact that Christ saved the world through his vicarious death, and they insist that the Church, the Body of Christ, must sacrifice herself also.

“Now recently I heard a minister speak on the theme ‘The Church as a Suffering Servant Community.’ The occasion was a discussion group, and some of the people there insisted that the Church is serving Christ today, without suffering. The minister justly took exception to the statement and raised the question: ‘Is the Christian Church really serving him, or is she merely creating an organization in which members can find “security in faith and fellowship” while adhering to a kind of heretical, non-biblical Christianity and avoiding any real attempt to do the will of God which leads inevitably to self-denial and sacrifice? If we stopped conforming to the world, and began conforming to the strict ethics of the New Testament, and if we began to practice Christian brotherhood and to demonstrate compassion for a world dying without Christ, then the Church would become a Suffering Servant Community.’ When he said this, a dead silence fell over the group and they turned to consider a more important matter—the relevance of the Dead Sea Scrolls to the idea of the Kingdom of God.

“Why isn’t the hub of the Christian wheel,” Paul continued, “commitment to Christ and his will? Why are so many churches organized according to social-likeness and economic-likeness, and not Christ-likeness? In the early Church it was a reckless abandon to Christ as ‘Lord of all’ that bound us together.

PROGRAM PREDOMINANT

“The American Church is too preoccupied with her ‘program’ and with having ‘fellowship.’ But she has forgotten that fellowship is a by-product of service to Christ. She has not begun to gird the towel and serve sacrificially, after her Lord’s example. She tries to be greater than her Lord, and fails to realize that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. Until she sees these things, denies herself, and reckons her vocation in terms of sacrificial service, she will never know the smile of God’s approval.

“The new concept of the Kingdom which Christ brought differed radically from the popular Jewish concept of my day,” he added. “The Jews thought of the Kingdom in terms of peace, prosperity, and privilege.

“Our Lord ushered in a universal, spiritual Kingdom. He called disciples not to be at ease in Zion but to die, rise, and suffer with and for him. It was this new idea of the Kingdom that the Jews found offensive, and which the disciples were slow in grasping. It is this idea which American Christianity also seems to find offensive.

TOO MUCH TO EXPECT

“I could go on,” he said, making a gesture with his hand, “but it would do no good. I have taken too much of your time already.”

“Oh, feel free to talk longer,” I said quickly as he rose to go.

“It is not necessary. You see, as I have been speaking with you, I have been listening too. I think I realize I have been too much of a perfectionist—I have expected too much from the American Church. The Church is still composed of sinful, frail men—men who live in the flesh. I suppose I have to learn how to accept reality, how to stop expecting anything better than the status quo.

“How strange. God has made perfect redemption for sin by the sacrifice of his Son; he has restored his image in those who have committed themselves to him in Christ; and the Holy Spirit indwells all believers to guide them through the Word. Yet it is too much to expect men, even though redeemed, to sacrifice themselves in obedience to God!”

With these words Paul disappeared. Somehow I felt I had succeeded with this counseling situation. Paul had at least accepted a realistic view of the American Church, I thought. I am confident he will have less anxiety now, and feel more at ease.

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

Let me confess in the very beginning, I think I’ve had it. I’m finished, through, done in. Let men of stronger faith and greater courage right the world’s wrongs; I must be content to sit in the house by the side of the road and be a friend to man.

I have served on boards and committees until they are running out of my ears. I have given speeches to PTAs and service clubs until my name (within a limited area) is a household word. I have opened every kind of meeting and contest extending from the Association of Commerce and Industry to the grade school swimming meet. I have prayed for baseball, football, wrestling, and junior high proms. But the Lord seems strangely distant to me right now. My nerves are jittery, butterflies are continuously in my stomach. And my church members, who used to love me dearly, now wonder what I do with all my time. They seldom see me in their homes, and of course I’m never at the church when they call.

Two weeks ago I preached a sermon, using as a text that glorious passage from Isaiah 61:

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn …

As I worked on the sermon, I hearkened back to my ordination vows. I remembered the charge to the minister as well as to the congregation, and the moisture in my eyes when the hands were laid upon me.

And as I read and re-read Isaiah, and recalled that Jesus quoted the very same words, it dawned upon me again: this is the true job of the minister. There are about twelve hundred members in my church. They have their joys and sorrows the same as people everywhere. Only so many times, instead of being with them in their hour of joy or sorrow, I am attending a committee meeting. Maybe I’ll get to them later in the week, but by then it is too late. To be sure, they can hear me on Sunday and gain a certain vicarious help, but it is nothing like having the minister in your front room when you want or need him.

I know what my job is. It is (1) to preach good tidings to the meek, (2) to bind up the broken-hearted, (3) to proclaim liberty to the captives, (4) to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, (5) the day of vengeance of our God, (6) to comfort all that mourn. And if that is not a full-time job, then someone does not know what his job is. These biblical goals represent a divine commission no minister can escape. Either he acknowledges Jesus Christ as Son of God, and lives and dies in accordance with these goals, or he is in the wrong profession and has not even the right to call himself Christian.

Such is my job and it is every minister’s job. We all are so busy attending meetings on how we can better do our job, however, we never get the job done. I think the original organization man was a minister with a heart of gold but who forgot somewhere along the line just what his job was.

Now there are certain advantages to being an organization man. You get your picture in the paper quite often, and are interviewed by the public press. People of other denominations know you; you are gazed upon with a certain admiration as you walk along the street. The denominational boards know you because you religiously attend all meetings. You are much more apt to be recommended to a larger church if you attend your denominational committee meetings regularly, than if you serve your church members faithfully. Some will emphatically deny this, but I have seen it happen too often.

So the organization man becomes a VIP. He is respected by the denomination, loved by the community. He is Known, and many people think that is quite important.

But what about the 1200 people who pay his salary, who look to him for spiritual guidance, or comfort in time of sorrow, guidance in time of confusion, solace in time of bereavement, or help in time of illness?

Here is a dear lady, 88 years old, who has brought a whole batch of children into the world, and now has a raft of grandchildren and great grandchildren. She is confined to her bed, and life is slipping away. Perhaps six more months, and she will be laid to rest.

All she has is her memories … many of them related to the church she loved and served for 60 years. Now she would like for her minister to see her, at least once a week and preferably more often. Admittedly she has become somewhat petulant. She scolds me when I am a day or even an hour late. And 60 minutes is all too short. She would like for me to spend the afternoon with her … reading the Bible, praying, and talking of the affairs of the church. But I have more than a hundred people in my church past 65 years of age. They have their rights also.

The thought comes to my mind as I pull away from the curb: Why should I waste my time on this old lady? She has lived her life and it will soon be over. Will either of my denominational boards praise me if I see her once a week, or scold me if I never see her? Will they ever notice—or care? Will they recommend me to a larger church simply because I am willing to spend an extra minute comforting the aged and dying? Or will they remember the last committee meeting I skipped, the board meeting at which I was supposed to bring a report?

Then one night, the old lady died. When the family tried to get in touch with me, I was in Park Forest delivering a talk on “Our Quest for Religious Certainty.” To be sure, I conducted a very lovely funeral for her a couple of days later, but my conscience hurt. I’m sure she would have liked for me to be by her bedside when she departed from this life.

So—after much soul searching, I have decided to cast my lot with that splendid group of people, unknown throughout the ages, unknown in the world today, whom I call Ministers Anonymous. They are mostly ministers of small churches, under-paid, overworked, and ofttimes not appreciated.

Ministers Anonymous take seriously the words of Isaiah that their sole job is to preach good tidings to the meek, bind up the broken-hearted, proclaim liberty to the captives, and comfort all that mourn. What was good enough for Jesus (Luke 4:18) is good enough for them. To them has been given a group of people to love and to cherish. They are the shepherds of the flock. The congregation may number a hundred; or a thousand … the job is the same.

Ministers Anonymous awaken in the morning with the thought: Who needs me most today? One who is ill … in sorrow … broken by failure? The confused, the distraught, the frustrated? The young, the old? Christianity has an answer to all problems. We go further and insist: Christianity has the answer to all problems. If the minister does not bring the solution, there will be no solution. To be sure, he needs help. He may call in a doctor, a lawyer, or a teacher. But the minister deals with the total personality, which is the area wherein the problem must be solved.

Ministers Anonymous are interested in civic affairs, but they never let this interest swerve them from their appointed rounds. If they have to choose between the United Fund and a Sunday School class, they will take the Sunday School class every time. They may not get their picture in the paper, but they are doing their job. Leading one small child along the straight and narrow way can in the long run be more important than raising a million dollar budget.

Ministers Anonymous try to meet their denominational obligations, which is an important phase of their work. But denominational leaders sometimes forget the purpose of a church. They get interested in raising budgets, increasing membership, and making a fine showing. Their only recourse is the local church, and their prime source of help is the local preacher. So of course they crack the whip over both preacher and church. “You must attend meetings,” they say, “serve on committees, help conduct surveys, give speeches where they are needed, ring bells, and make telephone calls. The Methodists are getting ahead of us, and we’ve got to make a better showing in 1960.”

Leaders may go even further, though unconsciously perhaps. “Do you want to get ahead in your profession? A bigger church, more salary, greater influence? Then raise more money for us; we need it, the denomination needs it.”

It is tragically true that a minister’s success is judged not by his ability to serve the sick and the dying but by his ability to increase his benevolence budget. For this is the money that flows into denominational tills and makes possible increased activity on a national level. He may be a veritable St. Francis of Assisi, loved by his people, faithful unto death; but if his people happen to be poor and unable to give huge sums to the higher boards, he will never be recognized beyond his parish. He may preach beautiful sermons, spend endless hours in effective counseling; yet, if his benevolence budget remains constant, he is a nobody.

Do you want to get ahead in your profession? Then serve on denominational committees, raise money, make speeches, ring doorbells, make telephone calls. Your sheep may not see you except for a few minutes on Sunday morning, but you are well on your way to success. That big church in the city will soon be yours because you know how to raise money and sound the tinkling cymbal.

Ministers Anonymous balk at the demands which are made upon them by outside interests; that is why they are anonymous. They seek only to serve their people; that is why they are anonymous. They continue to serve small churches, receive small salaries, and eventually die a pauper’s death. But their consciences are clear, and that is all that matters. I am throwing in my lot with Ministers Anonymous. I want to come to the end of the road with a clear conscience. I don’t want memories of dying ladies, untended by their minister, to haunt me.

No church should have over 500 members. Three hundred would be even better. It is simply impossible for one minister to serve adequately more than 300 to 500 members. He cannot know more than this number, their problems, ambitions, dreams, and fears. He may call in another minister to help him, but when people are in trouble they want their minister, the one who preaches to them on Sunday mornings and teaches a Sunday School class.

When a church gets over 500 members, then I believe members should make plans to start a new church further out. Denominational leaders can buy the land, hire a minister, and start the fledglings on their way to maturity. They can guide them through the trying days and be present on their day of graduation when eventually they are free and able to take care of themselves.

Such action would relieve the denominations of their constant need for more funds. One reason why more money is always needed is that more churches are always needed. Denominational leaders can and do go out and start new churches. However, I do not think that is their job, because it is an impersonal thing with them. They cannot possibly know the local situation, the problems or the needs, as well as a group next door. As parents give birth to children, local churches should give birth to little churches. Little churches grow into large churches, and in turn beget more churches. Each church will have a minister who has only one job to do: preach the gospel to the poor, heal the broken-hearted, preach deliverance to the captives, and comfort all who mourn.

There are a dozen books I would like to write, books which might bring me fame and fortune. Some ministers write books; some serve their people. You cannot do both.

I would like to make twice the money I am now receiving. I am sure I could do it if I played all the angles. Some ministers make lots of money; some serve their people. You cannot do both.

So I am a charter member of that group known to all as “the least and the lost.” I call them Ministers Anonymous. To me, it is a badge of honor. Some day I will meet my Master. I hope that when I do, I shall have a cup of cold water in my hand, ready to offer it to the thirsty. I am sure this will bring a smile of gladness upon his face.

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

In the midst of the search for unity among Christians, and for a meaningful concept of the Church, it might not be out of place to raise the question: “Is there room for a fundamentalist in the Church today?”

The question does not admit a ready answer for want of accurate terminology. Anyone may be categorized by others as a fundamentalist for any of several considerations. If, for example, one gives evidence that he regards the “Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him,” there are those who readily put the mark of fundamentalism upon him. If one regards divine redemption of man as a basic key for scriptural interpretation, there are others who will nod knowing heads. If a person would suggest that it is in order for us to take heed to our doctrine, he qualifies himself in the minds of many for the label “fundamentalist.” If one would speak of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, or insist upon His essential deity, “well … what need have we of further proof?”

THE OBVIOUS INTENT

Whatever may be the occasion for its use, the connotation of the term “fundamentalist” is fairly plain. The meaning may be loose, but the intent is obvious; it is a word used to designate something or someone offensive. For example, a fundamentalist is ignorant, hopelessly enamored of the past, and consequently opposed to everything that has appeared on the human scene since the steam engine. Or “fundamentalist” may be a term of pity to denote a poor fellow who has presumably never had the opportunity to know better. Yet again, the term may suggest one who lives in a world with systems of his own making, all or most of which have no relevance to the mess we are in today. The fundamentalist is a mean spirit, a pharisaical character. He is a cantankerous person who is ready to fight at the drop of a theological diphthong; therefore, he is suspect in that it may be assumed that “fundamentalists split churches.” A fundamentalist is one who is devoid of human warmth, and is callous to the need that lies about on every hand. He is habitually uncooperative so that we may describe some events by saying: “… and even the fundamentalists came in on it.”

If there is some difficulty in positive identification as to who is and who is not a fundamentalist, there is certainly little question as to the intended implication of the word. Indeed, it oftentimes seems to be accepted that a fundamentalist is of such dangerous persuasion and questionable character as to be sub-Christian, if not anti-Christian.

A LABEL AND A LIBEL

It goes without saying that anyone may be called a fundamentalist by any other person. However, professional gossip being what it is, once the label is affixed it remains, with probably no one ever having taken the time to inquire into the reason for the use of the term. Inasmuch as major Protestant denominations are dominated by what is called a liberal tradition, to be called a fundamentalist may well nigh be the end of a professional career. There is segregation by label as well as by skin. The only difference is that the latter is recognized and generally condemned, while the former is cherished and even encouraged as being essential for the good of the whole Church. In a day when prejudice is hardly regarded as sufficient ground for the forming of attitudes toward others, the tag with one word “fundamentalist” is sufficient to excite the bias of many young men for whom some excuse might be found, and to stir the undisciplined wrath of older men who ought to know and to be better. It makes little difference how, why, or by whom one may have acquired the designation; the possession of the label is enough to make him the object of suspicion, indifference, if not outright antipathy.

WHOLENESS OF DEDICATION

In most cases it would be impossible to find any connection with the fundamentalism of the early decades of this century. Simple inquiry would disclose that those who are called fundamentalists have come out of many backgrounds. Here are men and women who have sought a satisfying answer to the distress that is our day; they have found what they sought in Jesus Christ. The life and knowledge that they have received in him, have left them with no alternative but to commit themselves to him, his Cause, his Church, and his Kingdom. They have taken seriously the Word of God, believed its promises—and found God to be faithful; the authority of scriptural revelation is basic in their lives. They will not take lightly the One in whom, by whom and through whom are all things in their lives. They approach their tasks in a deep sense of obligation and ask only to be used of the Lord who loved them and gave himself for them. They feel themselves under an impelling divine constraint to serve him—somewhere, somehow.

Whether any individual’s position is characterized by one or more of these emphases, one may scarcely doubt that his personal dedication to the Lord Jesus Christ is a matter of deep conviction. Many such are giving evidence of the wholeness of their dedication by selfless service. To probe their inner compulsion to serve and bear witness is to discover that they have got hold of a truth, a power, a presence within New Testament revelation. They are committed to Jesus Christ without reservation; such commitment means more to them than human sanction, ecclesiastical preferment, or a popularity among the pious.

FRUITFUL LIVES

The obvious fact is that there are many such persons; they are to be found in every major denomination seeking to make their lives fruitful and their service profitable to the Lord. They are teaching; they are writing. They are witnessing; they are doing basic research. They are sustaining pastoral labors; they are praying. By any human standards that we might believe we could apply to such works, they are being blessed by God. To call them “fundamentalists” with the suggestion or open charge that they make up an enemy within, which is conspiring to take over the organization and financial assets of the churches, is to charge them with motives not suitable for the situation. To look upon them as a resurgent fundamentalism, meaning by this a lurking beast once driven to cover but which now prowls about seeking whom he may destroy—this simply is not true. What they believe, they hold as the end of a long course of intellectual persuasion. Their commitment does not rest in some theological standard, but is rather grounded in the conviction that they have been crucified with Christ and it is no longer they who live but Christ who lives in them.

Just plain honesty ought to dictate a recognition of the fact that there are those who are called “fundamentalists” who are a part of our present scene. They are not seeking to start new controversies; they are seeking to stand in the biblical and theological traditions of the churches to which they belong. “The Lordship of Christ” is a meaningful phrase and they have something to contribute for the understanding of the Church at this point. “Servant Lord and servant people” is a phrase which they can utter with lively appreciation of what God has done for them in Christ and of what their commitment now costs them.

CAST THEM OUT?

Does the concept of the Church and the nature of the unity being sought have room in doctrine and in spirit for those who are called fundamentalists?

The answers thus far are not very encouraging. In denominational life and now sometimes even in interdenominational movements, to call a man a fundamentalist is much the same as saying that the spirit and work of the Church would be improved by his removal. Perhaps it had better be stated clearly that fundamentalists—as indeed, any one else—will not be persuaded by ridicule. They are not going to be enlisted by unbridled accusations. They are not to be impressed by pictures of the Church which always depict them in caricature. A segregation imposed by bias will not elicit their joyful participation. They are not trying to be “fundamentalists” for they are at a loss to see why they should aspire to any other name than that of Christian. Their only ulterior motive is to see Jesus Christ as Lord of all. It ought not to be hard to understand their bewilderment when even within their own communions they find their proffered comradeship in the Cross of Christ brushed aside in favor of closer ties with others who openly and unashamedly deny the Son of God.

REASONABLE CHRISTIANS

Those who are called fundamentalists are not sustained by a martyr complex. Their comfort is that in both body and soul they belong to their faithful Saviour, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for them. They have no alternative but to give themselves for him; they want to do so within the churches that have been their spiritual homes. At one point they would be emphatically clear: they will bear witness to their Lord. They are certainly entitled to ask the question whether the nature of the unity being sought—and so far as possible, imposed—is such that even one who would accept the label “fundamentalist” may be welcomed as a responsible Christian, whose faith and dedication are not to be continually singled out for suspicion and disparagement. In denominational life and program, in the concept of the Church, in the nature of the unity we are seeking for Christians, is there room for a fundamentalist?

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

The small group of religious teachers who prepare pastors for some 60 million Protestant church members in the United States—and similar institutions for millions elsewhere—hold in their hands the spiritual future of the world, humanly speaking.

The total impact of these faculty members upon the crucial years of pastoral preparation determines in turn the pastor’s impact upon the Church. In a predominantly Protestant United States, whose present world leadership is the prevailing hope of mankind’s peace and freedom, the cause and effect relationship of faculty determinants, pastoral thought and conduct, faith and preaching, dedication and church instruction is demonstrably clear. Over these faculty heads hangs the sword of Damocles.

If any group of Christians ever needed to live in individual and collective conformity to Jesus Christ, these faculty leaders do. Their private lives and public instruction, individually and collectively, mark for life the pastors they teach, as clearly and irrevocably as a hot iron bums a permanent brand into the flank of a steer. Thereby they shape world Protestant thought and conduct and are, momentarily at least, the key to world destiny. Many years ago, while in training for the pastorate, I recall hearing a wise and deeply-loved faculty leader say, “If a student does not come to us with a personal, living Christian experience, we cannot give it to him.” Today, I am still troubled by that statement. There is something unhealthy about receiving into training a student for the pastorate who lacks the foundation upon which every premise of his future life rests: a personal experience of the saviourhood of Jesus Christ. My question therefore remains: If a theological seminary or a training center for pastors cannot lead an aspirant to the ministry, who has never had a personal encounter with Jesus Christ, into such a living relationship, how can it prepare pastors to lead others into a living fellowship with Jesus?

Consider the plight of a student who becomes a pastor, and whose primary function is now to preside at the birth of souls into the kingdom of God, and to nurture spiritual infants to maturity. How is he to proceed? From what spiritual plane is he expected to lead others—and to what plane?

The burden of responsibility in this matter cannot be shucked off by the Christian teachers who prepare pastors for our pulpits and churches. They are undoubtedly the ones who are shaping world Protestant thought, and they are the ones who must in turn reexamine the methods of pastoral instruction used by our Lord. The blueprint he left in his relationship with the apostles consisted of a trinity of disciplines: private prayer, public worship, and small group fellowship.

Curiously, modern Protestant church life would indicate that the major emphasis in pastoral training centers has been chiefly upon one of these three: public worship. Christian teachers assume the adequacy of the personal devotional life of their students, and the spiritual power of the small group fellowship has been lost by default. When the theological seminaries and Bible colleges recover some of the New Testament disciplines in their fullness, we can expect a corresponding increase in the power of the trained pastorate. The Church, as the Body of Christ, will then become irresistible.

The new decade upon which we are entered could be a decade of world-wide redemptive grace, flowing out of training centers for pastors from the faculty fountainhead. Therefore the thesis is that there should be a radical re-examination of the method and substance of pastoral instruction, until it is solidly based upon the pattern Jesus Christ provided for his twelve disciples. It has been available for nearly two thousand years. We need simply to dust it off and begin to build again on the only foundation that God promises to undergird. Either we accept without reservation the authenticity of the New Testament blueprint, or we discard New Testament revelation in behalf of a naked, bold, self-sufficient human reason. A religious house divided against itself cannot permanently stand. Either an aggressive rationalism will destroy revelation, or reason must become the humble and obedient servant of biblical revelation.

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

Suicide is taking place across America at the rate of 60 deaths per day, with a toll of more than 20,000 last year alone. Attempted suicide, according to current estimates, is occurring every four minutes and possibly oftener. Another classification known as “hidden suicides” may reach the startling estimate of 100,000 this year. Obviously suicide is a mental health problem of the first magnitude, yet no concerted effort to reduce the mounting rate has ever been undertaken by any reputable agency.

The happiness and well being of the individual is evidently not determined by the superficial appearances of his life, but rather, as Beulah Bosselman has suggested, “by the struggles that go on deep within his mind, hidden from the world, hidden often from himself.” Hence, victims represent all social strata, and the I.Q. ranges from the lowest to the highest. Suicide occurs frequently among those who have everything to live with, but apparently little to live for. Even church affiliation seems to be no real deterrent.

CAUSES AND TECHNIQUES

Causes of self-destruction are usually bracketed as unhappy love affairs, emotional maladjustment, chronic illness, and economic problems. Norman L. Farberow, Ph.D., of the Los Angeles Suicide Prevention Center, says that “psychologists have long since learned to look beyond the superficial overt reasons given in newspapers.” The causes they finally select, he suggests, “will depend upon the theories entertained, ranging from intensive psychiatric theories (e.g., psychoanalytic) to sociological (e.g., Durkheim).”

The techniques of self-destruction are as labyrinthine as the human mind, yet they can be grouped into standard methods: firearms, poison (barbiturates), gas, drowning, hanging, and jumping. The ratio of attempts to successful suicides in Los Angeles County, Dr. Farberow reports, is eight to one. The reason for the high ratio is sardonically expressed in a well-known verse of Dorothy Parker:

Razors pain you;

Rivers are damp;

Acids stain you;

And drugs cause cramp.

Guns aren’t lawful;

Nooses give;

Gas smells awful;

You might as well live.

(from The Portable Dorothy Parker, reprinted by permission of The Viking Press, Inc.)

Although the Bible covers thousands of years of history and records the lives and deaths of hundreds of descendants of Abraham, it tells of only five suicides. King Saul, after vainly trying to get his armor bearer to dispatch him in the midst of defeat, fell on his own sword. The armor bearer, sensing the tragedy of the occasion, destroyed himself in like manner. Ahithophel, whose speech had once had the authority of the divine oracle, turned against King David and when faced with a lost cause, hanged himself. Zimri, the fifth king of Israel, usurped the throne of Elah and reigned seven days. Fleeing into the palace from Omri, he set the building afire and perished in the ruins. Judas Iscariot, following the betrayal of Christ and his rejection by those who had bribed him, hanged himself.

Two others who might be included in the list are Samson and Abimelech. Samson dislodged the pillars of the Philistine palace at the climax of an adventurous, foolhardy, and sensual life, and destroyed himself and 3,000 Philistines. Abimelech, mortally wounded by a woman’s blow, ordered his armor bearer to draw his sword and finish him off, “that men say not of me. A woman slew him” (Judges 9:54).

Vernon Grounds writes in Baker’s Dictionary of Theology that “widely varying and sharply conflicting attitudes” have been entertained towards suicide in different times and cultures. The Stoics (Zeno, Cleanthes, Epictetus, Seneca) embraced it. Socrates and Cicero disapproved of it. While the Bible does not expressly prohibit it, prohibitory implications have been drawn from Romans 14:7–9; 1 Corinthians 6:19 and Ephesians 5:29. Both Judaism and Christianity have strongly opposed the practice; so likewise have other faiths, including Buddhism, Hinduism, Mohammedanism, and even the Dyak headhunters.

Many “hidden suicides” are never listed as such, although the motive can be clearly, if indirectly, traced. Psychologists speak of an “unconscious death wish” which, they say, accounts for many deaths, notably in wartime. According to Dr. Bosselman, self-destruction does not necessarily express itself in suicide. “Chronic physical illness and disability, neurosis in its manifold forms, drug and alcohol addictions, ‘martyrdom,’ life patterns of repetitious failure, accident proneness, are all to variable degrees motivated by the tendency of the human being to turn his aggressive drives upon himself, to act in more or less overt ways as his own executioner” (Self-Destruction, Chas. C. Thomas Publishers, Springfield, Ill.).

Those who wish to die but are unable to take the step themselves, trip and fall in front of trains, starve themselves, or like King Saul and Brutus, ask someone else to slay them. Dr. Karl A. Menninger in Man Against Himself points out that the components of suicide are (1) murder of self, (2) murder by self and (3) the wish to die. One could speculate that perhaps the reason for the popularity of death-defying acts of the Houdini type is that so many project their self-destructive views into the act. Even accident proneness can be a form of partial suicide.

Doctors Shneidman and Farberow of the Los Angeles General Hospital believe that only a small portion of the annual suicide toll is actually psychotic. They state further that depressed persons represent only 30 per cent of the self-destructions. A study of the family histories of a completed-suicide group showed that 33 per cent of the families had members who had been in mental hospitals at some time, compared with the average of about six per cent. Another study of potential suicides who had been adjudged by professional opinion to be on the way to recovery showed that 69 per cent of the discharged “well” or “recovering” people successfully destroyed themselves within one year.

The recent evidence of suicidal intent in airplane disasters heightens the seriousness of suicide as a social problem. Danger signals that pastors could well consider are, as Dr. Farberow suggests, the overt communication of intention; depression accompanied by restlessness or agitation; insomnia; marked changes in the habits of living; severe emotional trauma; feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and uselessness.

From the scriptural viewpoint suicide is seen as unwillingness to trust God to care for us and our needs. Jesus during his temptation was taken to the pinnacle of the temple and challenged by Satan to cast himself down and permit the angels to bear him up. His answer was, “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” Paul brought out the fact that deliberately to choose death is to ignore life and its opportunities to help our fellow man: “For me to live is Christ … to die is gain … nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you” (Phil. 1:21, 24). (Augustine also condemned suicide under any circumstances because it precluded the possibility of repentence and therefore became murder, violating the sixth commandment.)

The Bible is clear in its teaching of the sacredness of life and the meaning of stewardship. According to the commandment we have no right to take life, even our own, for to do so is to usurp the place of God. Suicide betrays an impatience with God and man, and hastens men unprepared into the Divine presence.

Perhaps our churches are to blame for the sense of futility that seems to possess some of our communicants. If our preaching is truly spiritual it will lift men to the maturity and strength of godly faith. However, if our preaching is on such a level that it causes men to regress to immature supports, we leave them in the posture of frustration, a sort of adolescence in which they waver between adulthood and infancy. The churches’ ministry needs to be positive and uplifting in establishing a mature faith, overcoming the futile and hopeless outlook of the potential suicide.

As pastors and religious leaders we face a responsibility to our people. Our ministry must direct men to the real source of hope, Jesus Christ. When men tell us, “I might as well be dead,” a way must be found to help them to talk out their problems, and then to look to God in prayer for the power that will make them “free indeed.” We can show them the social implications of every man’s life—and death. Each of us must be a guardian of those who are losing their grip on reality, whose hope and courage are being shattered in the experiences of life. Our own bright, hopeful faith will inspire others, as we point to him who as the fountain of our faith is also the foundation of our reason: Jesus Christ, who said, “I am the way, the truth and the life.”

Creator of All Things

Now earth grows cramped, and restless man

Would venture high and far,

Would brave illimitable space

And board the nearest star.

Yet what though star and moon be gained

And distant planets trod,

Still would he merely glimpse a fringe

Of the magnitude of God.

LESLIE SAVAGE CLARK

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

The 400th anniversary of the Scottish Confession was celebrated in May at a commemoration held in Edinburgh. While attending the event, I recalled Barth’s 1938 Gifford Lectures on the Scottish Confession. The lectures were certain from beforehand to create a stir in the theological world. For Lord Gifford had endowed the Gifford series with the stipulation that the lectures be on the subject of natural theology and that they should serve the advancement of natural theology. Thus, when Barth was invited to give the lectures in 1938, he stood before a rather unique situation. He was already famous for his zealous opposition to all natural theology, for he had often declared that no theology apart from special, supernatural revelation was possible. The teaching of the Vatican Council, in which natural theology had been defined as Roman Catholic teaching, was in Barth’s view the great error which Reformed theology could only oppose. Barth wrote to the officials of the University of Aberdeen, where the lectures are held, and said that though he was against natural theology, he was willing to speak of another theology. Perhaps, he suggested, he would arouse such opposition to his own views that he would win supporters for natural theology by reaction and thus serve the purpose of the lectureship, though not in a way intended by the founder.

Since Barth’s Gifford Lectures, the question of natural theology has been the constant center of theological attention. Roman as well as Protestant writers have been busy with the subject. The new tendency in Roman theology has brought natural theology in general, and the proofs for the existence of God in particular, into intense discussion. The suggestion has been made in Roman circles that theology must be approached more Christocentrically; the Vatican statements need not be rejected, it is said, but the same matter should be approached with a different slant on the relationship between nature and grace. Thus, it is not only Protestants who have been raising questions about natural theology.

Proofs for the existence of God, apart from the Revelation of God in Christ, have unquestionably less authority now than at any time since Thomas Aquinas. One cannot challenge modern man effectually with a reasoned proof that the world has an “origin,” a first cause. Even should one feel that the argument itself has some inner cogency, he would not be a step closer toward faith than he would have been had he not heard the argument. In our day, the abstract character of the God proven to exist by natural theology is not convincing. Such a God does not sound like the God of Jesus Christ. When Roman Catholic theologians put forward proofs they insist that they are not pleading for an irrationalism that has no respect for human reason. Theirs is not, they say, a plea for truth from feeling or intuition. Outside of Roman Catholicism, the attack on natural theology stems more from the biblical-theological conclusion that the objective proofs are not really serviceable because they never come to men who are neutral to revelation. Natural man is always in reaction to the revelation that comes to him from nature in the world about him.

In Romans 1, Paul says that God has revealed himself, but that man has resisted his revelation, has held the truth down in unrighteousness. Man is not a neutral observer of God’s revelation. He is active with his entire life in reaction against it. Paul’s statement points out to us that there is no neutral position, and that this explains why there is so little convincing power in the neutral proofs for God’s existence. It is also the lack of power in the proofs which many modern Roman Catholic theologians have noticed.

From the very limited influence that the proofs have had on human thought, we see what a hopeless ambition it is to distinguish between a natural and a supernatural theology, and how it is futile to try to bring men to a real though limited knowledge of God outside of Jesus Christ. Natural theology has never been convincing to atheists for the simple reason that its arguments fail to reach the person at the point where his inclinations really lie. No person, as we have said, is ever a neutral observer of nature but is already in reaction to the revelation of God around him. Natural theology fails to reckon with the fact that man’s response to revelation is defined, not simply by objective thoughts but by the heart from which come the issues of life.

The Church of Christ must not attempt to make God appealing to natural reason. Nor should she preach that there is every “reason” to believe in God. There are many people who believe that there is a first cause, that there is something that got everything in creation going, something to which they are even willing to give the name “God.” But this kind of “faith” is that of a stranger to the actual revelation of God which is in Jesus Christ.

The Church must witness in the world to the only real God, the One revealed in Jesus Christ. She must witness, not with proofs, but with word and act. We need always to be aware that coming to living faith is not a matter of reasoned argument but of conversion, of a change of heart. In the secularization of life in our times, we can expect nothing of the power of reason but everything of the power of the Word and of the Spirit.

Natural theology has nothing to say about guilt and atonement, grace and judgment, or about God’s future. It is a secularized theology that will only lead men away from the Gospel. A person who believes in a first cause may well think that he believes in and is confident of his religion, but actually he has missed the real message if this is all he believes. The effect of natural theology has always been soporific rather than awakening. The prophets of the Old and New Testament came with a message to awaken, to disturb, and to call men to conversion.

Science, Reason And Conversion

The Psychology of Christian Conversion, by Robert O. Ferm (Revell, 1959, 231 pp., $4), is reviewed by Wallace L. Emerson, Professor of Psychology, Bible Institute of Los Angeles.

It is remarkable that one of the best, indeed one of the few recent psychologies of Christian experience should have been written not by a specialist in the field but by a professor of history. Even more unusual is the fact that his psychological insights avoid the pitfalls common to a man presumably more familiar with another field. Psychology in general and psychology in particular have largely been neglected by evangelicals, with the result that in America today there are few evangelicals who are psychologists. And when a book appears from the pen of one who has experienced evangelical conversion, who possesses familiarity with the field of religious psychology from William James to Gordon Allport, and who in addition possesses real psychological discernment, there should be much cause for rejoicing among those who are convinced that the Christian Church should not abandon an important field of human thought.

Dr. Ferm’s Psychology of Christian Conversion is apparently not intended to be definitive if indeed any work on the psychology of religion could be definitive; but in the compass of 231 pages, he manages to set forth clearly, simply, and without excessive technical verbiage, many basic problems, and to give answers that command respect and acceptance in areas where data and interpretation frequently lead to confusion. Readers will discover no reckless dogmatism; there are no asperities for those who disagree; there is a courteous consideration of points of view antagonistic to the evangelical thesis. If the book has a fault it is that of understatement and a failure to capitalize on all the logical conclusions implied in the evidence. Dr. Ferm seems to realize quite fully the difficulties involved in carrying on a contest when the field has already been chosen by opponents; but he does not on that account take evasive action or fight a defensive battle.

The book opens with a roll call of the outstanding psychologists who have written in the field of religion. Following this is a discussion of man’s capacity for religious experience of the crisis type. The reader is at first inclined to feel that Dr. Ferm is unaware of the scope of the problem when only the crisis types are presented. However, he defines crisis as a point of commitment to an ideal or to a person with or without intense emotional experience, that is, it involves a point of decision. He makes it clear that in childhood such emotional accompaniments are not at all likely because the point of decision is not so complete a reversal of the whole pattern of life.

Dr. Ferm does not fall into the error of assessing a religion in terms of its emotional content, nor does he confuse pagan or Christian mysticism with evangelical conversion. His whole discussion of spurious conversion is very clear. The fact that all men have the same psychological components will inevitably result in psychological similarities in all types of religious experience. But he points out that Christianity is unique with respect to (1) its content (differing from mysticism which has no content) (2) the extreme consciousness of sin which it promotes and for which it provides (relief not found in non-Christian religions) and (3) the moral regeneration that follows it. He quotes Underwood with reference to the latter: “There is no moral malady that conversion has not been able to cure”; and again: “of the many Hindu conversions he did not find one instance of moral metamorphosis.” As to the problem of sin, he quotes Pratt as follows: “in the biographies of Ramakrishna, for example, and in the autobiography of Tagore are to be found vivid accounts of the religious storm and stress of adolescence full of dissatisfactions, longings, and other experiences common to the adolescent of Protestant Christendom; but in spite of the sensitive conscience of these truly saintly men there is no evidence of sin.” Dr. Ferm goes on to say that “the non-Christian religions offer no adequate definition for sin and no cure, because they have no Holy Spirit who convicts of sin and applies the Word for healing; likewise in nominally Christian religions, which lack the essentials of true gospel, the sense of sin is dull.” A retreat from the concept of sin is a retreat from the most obvious reality.

The selection of cases which he gives of evangelical conversion are the classical examples (Luther, Wesley, and Finney), and rightly so, because they are biographies and autobiographical case histories that has frequently been misinterpreted.

In a chapter on theological and philosophical thought regarding the crisis, he gives a brief but clear evaluation of crisis conversion and subjectivism à la Kierkegaard, Barth, and Brunner. And while he does not labor the point, he does make it very clear that Christian conversion is imbedded in the historical medium without which it cannot be shared, explained, or retained.

One could wish that Dr. Ferm had amplified his evaluation of the modern psychiatric trends and perhaps spent more time throwing light upon the new religion of psychiatry which expresses the doctrine that criminals are merely sick minds and guilt is merely oversensitiveness to social convention and so forth. Nonetheless, this book is wholeheartedly recommended to pastors, evangelists, youth workers, and to every Christian who has to give a reason for the faith that is in him, who needs to discern the true from the false in a world where there are as many sick souls as sick minds.

WALLACE L. EMERSON

Ecumenical Proposal

The Quest for Church Unity, by Matthew Spinka (Macmillan, 1960, 85 pp., $2.50), is reviewed by Edward J. Caldwell, Pastor, First Presbyterian Church of North Hollywood, California.

Here is a timely book that is profitable reading for all who take the Church seriously and are concerned with the scandal of her divisions. The book is characterized by practical realism and integrity in a field where many have sacrificed realism for an ideal unattainable in the foreseeable future. As the title implies the book is concerned with the exciting quest for unity in the church of Christ. One of its great values is the tracing of the history of the quest primarily in the first half of the twentieth century (but including also the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1886–8) yet without the detail of some of the larger volumes such as Bishop Stephen C. Neill’s standard work A History of the Ecumenical Movement, with which, along with other elaborate works, the author shows familiarity. His historical summary is admirable for setting the stage. He shows clearly that the World Council of Churches knows itself to be a council rather than a superchurch or a step toward that end. But the council idea, he recognizes, is a disappointment to a second party within the ecumenical movement that looks toward the “Great Church” or Una Sancta most seriously. The latter party he calls the “ecumenicists” in contrast with the “Federalists.”

The author then shows what considerable problems must be confronted and overcome by the maximal ecumenical party, both in the area of theological synthesis and in church polity. He shows that the unifying of the Church would sacrifice too much, either of the Reformation freedoms (if the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches were to be included) or in the search for a least common denominator in pan-Protestantism.

He makes his proposal for a “realistic” approach in the last chapter. Here he discusses certain plans for union that have already been tried, namely, the Greenwich Plan and the Union of the Church of South India. He gives reasons for feeling that neither will serve as an ultimate model. Then he describes his own proposal so that his book will not only “be a critique of extant proposals … but will offer constructive suggestions as well.”

He proposes areas of essential theological agreement for experiencing oneness, which would avoid bibliolatry on the one hand and a disregard of scriptural authority on the other. The divine-human person of Christ and the essentials of Christian faith are proposed. He insists that the Church must have freedom, but a “freedom limited by love.” He finds a present unity in the “invisible” as distinct from the “visible” Church. He may be criticized as not having an original idea or conclusion here, yet he sets forth the belief with new forcefulness. Also he avoids an escapist mentality by showing a close relationship between them which he summarizes as follows: “… of the relation of the invisible and visible Church, we now conclude that any absolute separation between them is not possible, and hence that when we ascribe unity in Christ to the Church invisible, this unity is shared by the Church visible to the degree to which that body is dominated by the mind of Christ. It is in this sense that the federalists and ecumenicists alike are right in striving for the outward unity of the Church … this latter kind of unity must necessarily be relative, because the mind of Christ is not fully dominant in the Church visible” (p. 81). The author feels that the World Council of Churches is worthy so long as it strives to federate the existing Christian communions. He sympathizes with the federalists rather than the ecumenicists whom he would define as looking and striving toward the future great structure of a United Church. Some ecumenicists will resent his defining the term in this way. The present reviewer feels indebted to the book for its clarification of issues and its realistic proposal toward fulfillment of our Lord’s prayer “that they might all be one” (John 17:21).

EDWARD J. CALDWELL

Catechisms And Theology

The School of Faith, by Thomas F. Torrance (Harper, 1959, 298 pp., $6), is reviewed by Gordon H. Clark, Professor of Philosophy, Butler University.

Catechetical instruction, so despised by modern educators, finds here a staunch defender. For one thing, education always requires the impartation of information. “Unless the mind is given material to think about, it can only turn in upon itself, and this is the mark of mental disease” (p. 27). This is all the more true of Christian education because Christianity is an historical religion. Catechisms supply the necessary information.

Doctrinal as well as historical information must be given to the pupil. The common objection to catechetical instruction, namely, that the material is beyond the experience of a child, Professor Torrance turns into an advantage by saying that catechism gives more than a child can grasp and so stretches his powers. Then, too, in any subject one must learn to ask the right questions. Catechisms teach us what questions to ask. We might not have thought of them had we been left to ourselves. Thus “the Catechisms set forth Christian doctrine at its closest to the mission, life, and growth of the Church” (p. 11).

Professor Torrance has therefore reproduced the texts of 10 catechisms, including Calvin’s Geneva Catechism, the Heidelberg Catechism, Craig’s two catechisms, the Latin Catechism, and the Westminster catechisms. He obviously prefers the earlier catechisms. The later ones are too scholastic and rationalistic.

Toward the end of the Introduction, the author sketches a view of Christ’s ontological union with all men. It is incorrect to think that Christ’s relation to mankind was merely a generic relation in that he too was man. Therefore all men are involved in Christ’s death, not only on judicial grounds but also by the constitution of His person as Mediator. The author claims to find these ideas in the earlier catechisms. God is the source of all being, he says; and therefore if Christ had not come, man would have disappeared into nothing. Christ’s work explains why men still exist (p. 113).

Professor Torrance rejects the universalism to which this type of argument leads. Earlier he had said that correct sequences of thought must never be allowed to cramp the expression of truth (p. 62). So here the author, with a complete reliance on free will, asserts that man can reject God’s grace. But how this is possible, he cannot understand: it is a bottomless mystery, words and thoughts fail him (pp. 113–116).

Would not this illogical outcome suggest that one should re-examine the premises on which it is based, return to the Westminster catechisms and to the Reformers, and unite federalism and the Covenant with the irresistible grace of God?

GORDON H. CLARK

Fresh Look At Wesley

John Wesley’s Theology Today, by Colin W. Williams (Abingdon, 1960, 252 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by C. Philip Hinerman, Pastor of Park Avenue Methodist Church. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

A modern Wesley scholar has declared that John Wesley was an obsessive compulsive neurotic, with his whole life based on a rigid self-discipline and self-control. It was true both before his conversion, while still a student at Oxford, and after his transforming Aldersgate experience. Until the time of his death after his 88th year, Wesley was still the driving, disciplined, dedicated individual.

How then could such a man as Wesley declare that salvation was by grace, and that justification came through faith alone? This proved to be one of the big issues of theological debate in Wesley’s life, and Colin Williams, young native of Australia, now Professor of Systematic Theology at Queens College, Melbourne, seeks in his first book to delineate the various phases of emphasis that Wesley made at this very point.

Franz Hildebrandt reminds us that “Methodism by its very name is open to the suspicion that it gives to means or works an undue importance and an unorthodox content, and therefore must rank with the many other forms of ‘enthusiasm’ which were so frequently rejected by Martin Luther.”

Hildebrandt goes on to quote Wesley’s own admission that there was a time when “I of means have made my boast, of means an idol made.”

But Williams is quick to remind us that if Wesley ever made an idol out of works or means, it was long before his conversion. Even prior to his salvation experience, John Wesley as a priest in the Church of England, was increasingly persuaded that Martin Luther’s doctrine of justification by faith alone was the only valid Gospel for a believing Christian.

Dr. Williams makes mention in almost every chapter of the ecumenical spirit that characterized the life and thinking of Methodism’s founder. He obviously had no intentions of breaking with the Church of England in forming his Methodist classes and societies. Always his intention was to keep these groups within the organized body of Christ, as he knew it in that day, that is, in the Church of England. However, Wesley with his strong debt to Luther and to Calvin (“coming within a hair’s breadth of Calvinism” as Wesley once said of himself) nonetheless constantly felt that within his own thinking there was a “bridge” relationship between Calvinism on the one hand and classic Roman theology on the other.

His nearness to Roman Catholicism is evidenced in the fact that Wesley held a doctrine of “double justification.” This is evidenced in his sermon titled “On The Wedding Garment,” in which Wesley speaks of sanctification being a condition of the final (not the present) justification. Yet Williams continues, “He is careful to avoid turning this holiness into a moral achievement requiring purgatory for the completion of the process by which final justification is merited. Holiness comes not by achievement but through the door of faith in accordance with our readiness to receive the promises. This holiness can be given at any time after justification, but in most it is given at the moment before death.”

Dr. Williams forcefully points out in his book that when faced with the Calvinistic dilemma of a doctrine of double predestination, Wesley did not hesitate to reject this as a possible alternative. As is well known, Wesley also fought Fletcher’s battle vigorously on the front against any type of antinomianism in the Christian life.

Today in modern Methodist circles there is a great resurgence of interest in things Wesleyan. Across America so-called Wesley Societies are springing up in Methodist conferences for a fresh look at the theology of their founder. As Wesley himself possessed the spirit of ecumenicity, so the entire holy catholic church may well be grateful for the many books of this nature that are appearing on this little man from Epworth, and for the revival of interest in the theology that “helped to save England from terrible revolution.”

C. PHILIP HINERMAN

A Great Unitarian

The Mind and Faith of A. Powell Davies, edited by William O. Douglas (Doubleday, 1959, 334 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by Lloyd F. Dean, Minister of the East Glenville Church, Scotia, New York.

Dr. Davies was probably the most gifted and distinguished Unitarian minister of the last two decades. His publishers describe him as an unrepentant liberal. That he was, but without rancor. He began his religious pilgrimage as a Methodist minister, but almost from the beginning he was dissatisfied with the demands of orthodoxy or even conventional liberalism. In the latter instance the unusual clarity of his mind is manifest. He was unable to rest in the confusion of a liberalism in orthodox dress. Following the basic logic of what is rational in liberalism, he could not stop short of an honest and forthright Unitarianism.

Davies avoided the pitfalls of a superficial liberalism on the one hand and a doctrinaire orthodoxy on the other, and yet managed to enunciate a position on the most difficult personal and social issues that would do the most earnest Bible believer great credit.

In a sermon on “The Right to Privacy” (and this book is in great part a collection of his sermons and addresses), he strikes certain notes that are pre-eminently biblical, but quite uncharacteristic of much that passes for biblical religion today. He points out that to approve in general a system of governmental investigation exhaustive enough to make public the greater part of an individual’s private life is to go far beyond that which bears on an individual’s reliability to the United States. Davies asks how many of us are eager to have our minds read or are not just a bit apprehensive when we learn we have talked in our sleep. Too many of us have forgotten that some things are between a man and his God alone and that liberty and privacy of conscience are a sacred Christian and American right. The Christian who rejoices not in evil will never use the invasion of privacy as “the occasion of demeaning and humiliating those who want to live down their mistakes.” Or as he says a little later, “the right of privacy is a right to seek one’s own redemption.” Have not certain of our evangelists forgotten this when they de facto mediate between the soul and its God until no decision can be made unless it is at once shared with the preacher? Davies puts it beautifully when he says, “It is always tyranny … which is afraid of people’s privacy. What are they thinking—these people who may not be saying what they think?… and it is only a step … to seeking ways of controlling what people think, through the media of communication, through mind-deadening repetition, through constant streams of falsehood, through censorship—and, at the extreme, through brainwashing!” Can we as conservative Christians plead complete guiltlessness in this?

Every minister should read this book for the sake of his own soul and those in his congregation. However, one must also be wary. For all the good it contains, Davies’ basic orientation is to non-Christian theism. What is wrong with this? Basically, that after treating almost every other subject in the most rational realistic way, when he comes to belief in God, he makes a leap of faith.

Let us give thanks that one can make an objective appeal to the historically validated revelation of the Scriptures. Without imposing a humanistic fantasy upon them, they stand as the Word of God. All else is superstition.

LLOYD F. DEAN

Women Of The Church

Great Women of the Christian Faith, by Edith Deen (Harper, 1959, 428 pp., $4.95), is reviewed by Norma R. Ellis, wife and mother in a Presbyterian Manse.

Such was the success that greeted her book, All the Women of the Bible, that Edith Deen, prominent newspaperwoman and lecturer, was asked by Harper and Brothers to write a companion volume on women important in the history of the church. With the same intensity of enthusiasm and thoroughness of research which she demonstrated in her other book, she attacked the task of writing this one. The result is a valuable book of reference and inspiration.

Mrs. Deen presents her subjects sympathetically and objectively. There is no Judgment passed upon the lives, beliefs, or actions of these women. There is no questioning of them either, in the light of Scripture—whether they be Mrs. Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, or Bernadette of Lourdes! Are women like these, one cannot but ask, “great women of the Christian faith” along with Ann Judson and the mother of Augustine?

Reading this book is something like taking an illuminating course in Church History, taught not by a discriminating conservative theologian, it is true, but by a most enthusiastic laywoman.

NORMA R. ELLIS

A Liberal Evangelical

The Greatest Sermons of George H. Morrison, selected and introduced by George H. Docherty (Harper, 1959, 252 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Andrew W. Blackwood, Professor of Homiletics, Emeritus, Princeton Seminary.

Here are 40 of the best (not “greatest”) published sermons from a popular liberal evangelical of yesterday in Glasgow. They are wisely selected and introduced by the able successor of Peter Marshall of the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, D. C. The freshness and variety of Dr. Morrison’s topics are seen in titles such as, “The Message of the Rainbow,” “The Return of the Angels,” and “The Perils of the Middle-Aged.” Any reader will see how unfamiliar Bible truths can be presented clearly and kindly, simply and suggestively, with constant appeal to “eye-gate.” Morrison seems not to have published many of his morning sermons, which may have been more after the manner of “teaching-preaching.”

ANDREW W. BLACKWOOD

Exhaustive Research

The Truth About Seventh-Day Adventism, by Walter R. Martin (Zondervan, 1960, 248 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Frank A. Lawrence, Pastor of Graystone United Presbyterian Church, Indiana, Pennsylvania.

Evangelical Christians are no longer members of the “false church” or “tyrants”; those who observe the first day are not now “marked by the beast” and “guilty of the unpardonable sin,” says Walter R. Martin, Baptist minister, contributing editor of Eternity magazine, and current authority on modern cults. The author of this volume has also written Jehovah of the Watchtower, The Christian Science Myth, The Maze of Mormonism, Unity, Spiritualism, and other books and pamphlets in this field.

Martin, joined by Donald Grey Barn-house who writes the preface to the volume, interviewed present leaders of Seventh-day Adventism and closely scrutinized the official volumes now being written and distributed to Adventists. As a result he maintains that Adventist doctrine has changed and that the time has come to consider them true members of the Body of Christ.

That this is true may be gathered by contrasting the derogatory earlier statements of Elder James White, Ellen G. White, Father Bates, and Evangelist D. E. Venden with the new Seventh-day Adventist volume, Questions on Doctrine. “We believe the majority of God’s children are still scattered throughout the world, and of course the majority of those in Christian churches still conscientiously observe Sunday. We ourselves cannot do so, for we believe that God is calling for reformation in this matter. But we respect and love those of our fellow Christians who do not interpret God’s Word as we do. Finally, we would repudiate any implication that we alone are beloved of God. We recognize that a host of true followers of Christ are scattered all through the various churches of Christendom, including the Roman Catholic communion.” Martin reports that this attitude also claims much space in leading Adventist periodicals such as The Ministry and Signs of the Times.

Martin has not attempted to whitewash the differences or difficulties between Adventists and evangelicals. “They must realize their position fosters schism in the Body of Christ. Dogmatic adherence to speculative interpretation has constituted a massive barrier to understanding and fellowship. As long as Adventists maintain inflexibility where the ‘remnant church’ and other ‘special truths’ are concerned, they must expect Christians of other denominations will be cautious in according fellowship on an unlimited, unrestricted basis.”

He does maintain, on the basis of exhaustive research, that they have abandoned the concepts of the sinful nature of Christ, the “Mark of the Beast” for Sunday keepers, the infallibility of Ellen G. White, the vicarious nature of the scapegoat transaction, the law as necessary to salvation, and Satan carrying away the guilt of our sins.

In his effort to be sympathetic to the Adventists, Martin does make one misjudgment. He says that early Adventists were scorned by the evangelicals for two reasons: (1) because they were premillenarian, and (2) because of the “great disappointment”—the failure of Jesus to return to earth in 1844. The second point is true, and he follows Van Baalen and others in pointing out the falseness of the ascension robe stories and other slanderous myths. But the first is questionable. Evangelicals veered from the Adventists because Ellen G. White attacked them as false churches, false shepherds, and followers of the Pope in Sunday observance. Premillenarians have always been within the fold of the Church (e.g., Tertullian, Bengel, Alford, Bonar, Moorehead, Kellogg and so forth); but even J. N. Darby, who broke the generally accepted pattern of historic premillenarianism, never introduced “visions,” “revelations” and “halos of light” around Revelation chapter 20.

Not only is this book the result of exhaustive research in its study of the Adventist movement, but it also offers a full bibliography to the student who wishes to delve further into the subject.

Martin, aware that his volume will cause consternation and bitterness, nevertheless offers the right hand of fellowship on his studied conviction that evangelicals and Adventists are one in accepting the basic doctrines of the Trinity, salvation through the grace of God and the blood of Christ, the absolute deity of Jesus Christ, and the inspiration of the Scriptures. This is a book which will be “kicked around” in evangelical and Adventist circles until the Southern Baptists appoint an envoy to the Vatican.

FRANK A. LAWRENCE

Gnostic Writings

The Secret Sayings of Jesus, by Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman (Doubleday, 1960, 206 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Julius Robert Mantey, Professor of New Testament, Northern Baptist Theological Seminary.

In this volume we have an excellent scholarly presentation of the papyri discoveries of Gnostic writings which came to a climax in the unearthing of a Gnostic library consisting of 13 volumes in the Coptic language, found in Egypt in 1945, most of which are still unpublished.

So-called sayings of Jesus, which have been found from time to time among papyri in the sands of Egypt, are discussed and extensive quotations are given from the noncanonical “gospels” of Peter, of Hebrews, and of The Egyptians. But most of the book deals with The Gospel of Thomas, “written in Coptic during the fourth century of our era” (p. 18).

The following are a few pertinent quotations: “The canonical gospels are more original” (p. 46). “What we find in this Gnostic system is a complete spiritualization of the Christian Gospel” (p. 89). “Enough evidence has been given to show that as a whole The Gospel of Thomas must be considered a Gnostic gospel” (p. 89).

Robert M. Grant is Professor of New Testament at the University of Chicago, and David Noel Freedman is Professor of Old Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary.

JULIUS ROBERT MANTEY

Light On The Obsolete

The Bible Word Book, by Ronald Bridges and Luther A. Weigle (Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1960, 422 pp., $5), is reviewed by Everett F. Harrison, Professor of New Testament, Fuller Theological Seminary.

It is safe to say that most readers of the English Bible have paid little attention to the history of the words which their version contains. They usually ask only to be able to make out the meaning with tolerable certainty. This volume shows how difficult it is to understand the idiom of the King James Bible without a knowledge of the English of the period out of which it sprang.

A double purpose underlies this book. One is to show what meaning the King James translators had in mind when they used words that are now obsolete or archaic. For the realization of this task, heavy reliance is put upon the help of the great Oxford English Dictionary. Shakespeare’s works are also cited with frequency as providing parallels to our common version. A case in point is Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 4:4, “I know nothing by myself.” To the modern reader this sounds as though the apostle is disclaiming any self-acquired knowledge. This seems strange, and it does not fit the context. However, when it is discovered that Shakespeare used “by” in the sense of “against,” it becomes clear that the King James translators did the same. As an interesting sidelight, the authors note an occasional instance in which modern English dictionaries, in accepting the guidance of the King James as to the meaning of words and reading present-day nuances into terms that have changed their force, have actually given meanings to words which the original text of Scripture will not support (p. 15).

The present volume performs a helpful service in pointing out from time to time the influence of earlier English versions, especially that of Tyndale, upon the King James.

A second announced purpose of this work is to indicate what terms modern versions have used to render the obsolete or archaic words found in the King James, and what terms have shifted their meanings. Out of a total of 827 words and phrases treated in alphabetical order, a large majority lend themselves to both approaches—the disclosure of obsolescence and the statement of the modern substitute.

No one who is studying the Bible as literature can afford to ignore this volume.

EVERETT F. HARRISON

Crusade In New Zealand

Let the People Rejoice, by Warner Hutchinson and Cliff Wilson (Crusader Bookroom Society, Ltd., Wellington, 1959, 151 pp., 10s. 6d.), is reviewed by Robert O. Ferm Visiting Professor and Lecturer at Houghton College.

In addition to an ever-growing library of books about Billy Graham, there are volumes intended to provide a record of particular crusades. A most informative and interestingly written addition to this library is the documentary volume by co-authors Hutchinson and Wilson, titled Let the People Rejoice. The co-authors have amassed a surprising bulk of statistical information and present the week-long crusade in New Zealand as a typical Billy Graham crusade.

One might expect to find a documentary volume on such a topic as evangelism overweighted with little more than a numerical measurement. Happily, the writers have relegated much of the statistical information and name lists to a valuable appendix. By this device, the writers have retained for the body of the volume a warm and inspiring account of how a Billy Graham crusade happens—from start to finish.

Pastors who seriously give themselves to the work of evangelism will be greatly aided in the summary on counselor training in the appendix.

For the mind that responds with accurate and factual reporting, this volume will prove to be most rewarding. For the soul that desires refreshing, the detailed accounts of particular instances of conversion will abundantly satisfy.

ROBERT O. FERM

Mental Health

Religion, Science and Mental Health, by the Academy of Religion and Mental Health (New York University Press, 1959, 107 pp., $3); The Psychology of Jesus and Mental Health, by Raymond L. Cramer (Cowman Publications, 1959, 262 pp., $3.95); and Man’s Right to be Human, by George Christian Anderson (William Morrow & Co., 1959, 191 pp., $3.50), are reviewed by Dr. Lars I. Granberg, Professor of Pastoral Counseling and Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary.

Since the days of Freud’s pronouncements on religion, the debate between religion and science has focused a good deal upon the challenges leveled at Christianity by the psychological disciplines. In recent years the tone of the discussion has moderated. Vigorous efforts toward rapprochement have arisen. Among the most influential of these is the Academy of Religion and Mental Health, an association of clergymen, psychiatrists, and psychologists. Its purpose is to develop a climate in which fruitful conversation can be held between psychologists, psychiatrists, and “specialists in religion.”

The first book is a product of the Academy’s efforts. Its subtitle is “Proceedings of the First Academy Symposium on Inter-discipline Responsibility for Mental Health—A Religious and Scientific Concern.” Section I discusses the contributions of the behavioral sciences, emphasizing psychology, sociology, and cultural anthropology; Section II emphasizes the contribution of psychiatry; and Section III the joint role of religion, the behavioral sciences, and medicine. The participants are men who have distinguished themselves in their special fields.

The views expressed provide the reader with a cross section of the current discussion. As such, this small book is useful as an introduction to the thinking going on today. It is well written and employs a minimum of technical jargon. Pastors who have had little opportunity to familiarize themselves with the issues will find the book helpful in this respect. Those for whom this is familiar ground will find no lack of intellectual fodder. A guide for further reading would have added greatly to the book’s usefulness.

The author of The Psychology of Jesus and Mental Health serves as the Fresno County (California) School System’s Counselor in Mental Hygiene. The book is an attempt to derive mental health principles from those sayings of our Lord known as “the beatitudes.”

The book considers common mental health problems including fear, hostility, obsessive-compulsiveness, and hysteria. The value of mercy, forgiveness, and love in the achievement of personal maturity are set forth. These topics are treated by (l) a paraphrase of the beatitude, (2) an examination of the mental health principles implied in the author’s paraphrase, and (3) an examination of the contribution of the Christian faith toward the achievement of maturity.

The mental health principles discussed are sound. The author has handled them simply and clearly. The counsel he derives from biblical teaching is generally commendable. To my mind, however, the book shares the weakness of many psychology and religion books: it moves from mental health principles to Christian resources too quickly and too simply. The actual intermediate steps bridging these are left obscure, and biblical scholars are likely to be mystified about the connection between the beatitudes as actually expressed in the New Testament, and as paraphrased by the author.

Ministers who are theologically conservative may find the book useful to pass along to parishioners who suffer from chronic emotional upset. A word of caution, however, on the self-rating chart the author included in the appendix. Emotionally troubled persons tend to come to such charts with their perspective distorted by their inner tensions and find such guides more troubling than helpful.

Man’s Plight to be Human is a kind of statement of faith by the Episcopal clergyman who is presently serving as director of the Academy of Religion and Mental Health. His thesis is that “man has a right to be human, to live with himself and with others free from emotional instability and fear” (p. 10). The book seems to represent a report on the author’s spiritual pilgrimage. From his present vantage point he discusses such things as false concepts of God, unhealthy religion, facing death, and immortality. As a personal viewpoint, vigorously presented, it could well be read in conjunction with the Cramer book as a kind of counter-irritant. Theologically conservative ministers mature enough to profit from “seeing ourselves as others see us” will find in this book a challenge to examine their convictions more deeply. However, some psychological evidence advanced seems to have been too uncritically examined.

LARS I. GRANBERG

Light For The Laity

God Is Inescapable, by David Wesley Soper (Westminster, 1959, 128 pp., $2.95); You Shall be My People: The Books of Covenant and Law, by Edwin M. Good (1959, 96 pp., $1.50); and In His Service: The Servant Lord and His Servant People, by Lewis S. Mudge (1959, 176 pp., $3), are reviewed by Andrew K. Rule, Professor of Church History and Apologetics, Louisville Presbyterian Seminary.

These three books are intended to inform lay members of the Protestant Church of the more active role being recognized for them, and to inspire them to be the more fruitful. Earlier the Westminster Press published a series on theology for the same purpose. Dr. Good’s book is one of a projected series to deal with the Bible, and he himself is general editor of the series. Although such efforts are to be commended, they can be harmful or at least of doubtful value if not characterized by adequate scholarship, fidelity to the faith, and a simple dignity of style.

Dr. Soper seeks to instruct the layman about God our Father, God the Son, and God in and among us. He therefore has something worth saying, but he is not orthodox by any stretch of the imagination. All too often, he uses methods which, while they may appeal to some, certainly offends others. His style is flippant, and he often calls on a riotous imagination in the absence of facts. Noteworthy in this instance is his treatment of Abraham (p. 16).

Dr. Good’s book is successful in expressing the deep religious significance of Old Testament law. He shows that that law was not simply queer social legislation, produced in an unscientific age, to which no attention need now he paid. However, he does write from a point of view that is more humanistic than the Bible. We read constantly of Israel discovering, Israel remembering, rather than of God revealing. If, as he writes, “the Pentateuch is the confession of a people’s faith,” then was that people Israel or was it rather certain chosen ones from among the people of Israel? The whole book expresses an historical reconstruction which the author admits to rest on supposition and hypothesis (p. 23). These incidentally are not the only ones current among scholars and seem indeed to be out of date. Among scholars endless debate of such matters and accompanying search for evidence might seem to be in order, but whether they should take up space in a popular book is another question.

Lewis Mudge’s book may be commended without qualifications. He takes the theme of the servant Lord and works it out with enlightenment and conviction. From the standpoint of service, he discusses the Lord and his people, theology, the Christian, the Church, and the State. The author’s purpose in further discussing the theme of the recent convocation in Brazil is to persuade Christians that their role is to serve the spiritual and other welfare of all mankind.

ANDREW K. RULE

Meditations On Luke

Peace, Poise, Power, by Edythe J. Johnson (Augustana Press, 1959, 424 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Eric Edwin Paulson, Minister of Lutheran Free Church.

Although announced as “Meditations for Women Based on the Gospel of Luke,” entire families would find profit and blessing in the daily use of this volume. The author has served with her husband as a missionary in Africa and in several American pastorates, and the writings are clearly the fruit of a life dedicated to study, prayer, meditation, and service in the kingdom of God. As the tide implies, true peace, poise, and power can be acquired by study of the Word and daily fellowship with the living Christ. Unique in that it attempts to cover every verse of Luke’s Gospel, the volume’s primary purpose is inspirational rather than expository. Yet it might appropriately find a place in many pastors’ studies since it furnishes fresh insights and suggestions for sermons.

Ever since the days of the Apostle Paul, who wrote appreciatively of godly women who labored with him in the Gospel, devout and gifted women like Priscilla have expounded the way of God more perfectly sometimes to an eloquent but insufficiently instructed Apollos. Every sincere preacher thanks God for help from such consecrated women, although it has often been unsolicited and not adequately recognized by the church at large.

The present meditations vary somewhat in quality, but the style is always clear and the ideas freshly expressed. Especially to be commended is the author’s constant effort to point out the practical meaning of Christ’s teaching. A brief prayer at the close of each meditation enhances the value of the book.

ERIC EDWIN PAULSON

Book Briefs

The Voice of Authority, by George W. Marston (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1960, 110 pp., $2)—Dealing with the living question of ultimate authority the author finds it in the God revealed in nature and the Holy Scriptures. He sees the will of God mediated by Christ and revealed in Scripture under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, by Frederick W. Danker (Concordia, 1960, 289 pp., $3.75)—Introduces theological students, pastors and lay leaders to the principal aids for competent and rewarding Bible study.

The Lutheran Church Among Norwegian Americans, by E. Clifford Nelson and Eugene L. Fevold (Augsburg, 1960, 2 vols., 736 pp., $12.50)—A carefully documented comprehensive history of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Attractively packaged. A scholarly contribution to the record of Lutheran growth and development in America.

Life in the Son, by Robert Shank (Westcott, 1960, 380 pp., $4.95)—A critical and scholarly examination of the popular doctrine of “eternal (unconditional) security.”

The Human Problems of the Minister, by Daniel D. Walker (Harper, 1960, 203 pp., $3.95)—Helpful to the minister as a human being. An aid in recognizing and overcoming perplexing personal problems.

With My Own Eyes, by Bo Giertz (Macmillan, 1960, 237 pp., $4.50)—The Bishop of Gothenburg recreates in a most convincing novel the story of the four Gospels.

Elementary Patrology, by Aloys Dirksen, C.PP.S (B. Herder Book Co., 1959, 314 pp., $4)—An introduction to the literary beauty and theological wealth of the writings of the early Church Fathers.

The Gospel We Preach, by 68 Lutheran pastors (Augustana, 1960, 374 pp., $3.75)—Sermons with ecumenical outreach appropriate to the church year, based on the ancient series of Gospel lessons.

Mover of Men and Mountains (Prentice-Hall, 1960, 282 pp., $3.95)—The autobiography of R. G. Le Tourneau, one of America’s most remarkable inventors and industrialists, who built his career around a unique partnership with God.

What God Hath Wrought, edited by Gilbert L. Guffin (Judson, 1960, 179 pp., $3.50)—Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary’s 35 years of history as seen by seven men closely associated in the institution’s growth and achievements.

The Story of Southern Presbyterians, by T. Watson Street (John Knox Press, 1960, 134 pp., $1.50)—A brief definitive history officially authorized by the Centennial Committee of the Presbyterian Church U. S. and issued in commemoration of its one hundredth anniversary.

In ecclesiastical circles, the late spring is synonymous with church conventions—in North America and abroad. Here are reports from this year’s meetings (others will follow in subsequent issues ofCHRISTIANITY TODAY):

At Rock Island, Illinois—Delegates to the centennial (101st) synod of the 600,000-member Augustana Lutheran Church voted approval of a merger with three other Lutheran bodies. They asked the Joint Commission on Lutheran Unity, meanwhile, to consider changes in the consolidated constitution which would (1) record belief in the Bible as “the Word of God,” and (2) provide wider synod representation on the new church’s executive council.

A tentative plan calls for a constituting convention in June, 1962, to bring together the Augustana group with the United Lutheran Church in America, the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church (Suomi Synod), and the American Evangelical Lutheran Church. The merged group is to be known as the Lutheran Church in America. Its three million members will make it the largest Lutheran denomination in North America.

The Augustana church is the first of the four merging bodies to give the unity plan a vote of approval. After consideration by the separate church conferences, the merger plan must then be ratified by a two-thirds vote of next year’s synod.

Delegates also adopted a resolution declaring that “ideological beliefs and affiliations or the lack of them are, among other criteria, valid grounds for judging the fitness of candidates for public office.”

“It is a misuse of the concept of tolerance to exclude such criteria from consideration,” the resolution said. “The Church reminds its members of their individual responsibilities as voting citizens and urges a conscientious and prayerful study of these factors before voting for any candidate for public office.”

The resolution was approved after delegates heard a report by the denomination’s commission on social action which raised serious questions relative to the fitness of a Roman Catholic to hold the office of U. S. President.

Unlike the Protestant, “who appropriates pronouncements of his church … in the light of his own conscience,” the Roman Catholic “can assert no broad right of conscientious testing except under the threat of very grave sin in the eyes of his church,” the commission’s report declared.

A candidate’s claim that he will defend the Constitution, the report added, is “hardly an answer” to the question of a Catholic’s fitness for the President’s office, since the Constitution is “subject to change as well as interpretation.”

Another resolution adopted by the delegates stoutly defended the National Council of Churches against charges of Communist infiltration. Still another called for special, thorough instruction of all converts from the Mormon faith.

Warning of the danger of the secularization of the church college, a Lutheran editor told the synod that many American colleges established by Christian communities have lost their original character and can “in no sense be recognized as different from state-supported schools.”

“The fate of these institutions,” said Dr. E. E. Ryden, editor of the Lutheran Companion and chairman of the board of directors of Augustana College, “brings home to us a lesson that we do well to heed with all soberness of spirit as we celebrate our centennial as a church and college.” He added:

“A primary requisite is to make sure that the church never loses ownership and control of its institutions of higher learning. This matter assumes all the more importance in the light of the impending merger with other Lutheran bodies where the relationship between the church and its various institutions has not been as clearly defined as in the Augustana Lutheran Church.”

The seven-day centennial meeting ended with the ordination of 42 young men. Officiating at the ordination service was Dr. Malvin H. Lundeen, Augustana president, assisted by a noted synod guest, Archbishop Gunnar Hultgren of Uppsala, Sweden.

In recognition of the centennial observance this year, the annual synod was designated a “general” convention, which permits each congregation to send its pastor and a lay delegate. As a result, more than 2,000 delegates were on hand as compared with the 600 usually present at an annual synod.

The Augustana church was organized June 5, 1860, at Jefferson Prairie, near Clinton, Wisconsin, as the “Scandinavian Evangelical Lutheran Augustana Synod in North America.”

A prelude to the convention was a memorial service in a secluded cemetery at Jefferson Prairie, where church officials assembled to pay tribute to the founders. A massive granite monument marks the site of the first chapel.

At Buck Hill Falls, Pennsylvania—The 154th annual General Synod of the Reformed Church in America turned down an invitation to merge with the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. The Presbyterian body’s 1959 General Assembly had extended a merger overture to other denominations of the Reformed tradition.

Also rejected was a proposal by the church’s Christian Action Commission to endorse a ban on “all nuclear tests for military purposes by international agreement, together with all chemical, biological and radiological weapons of mass destruction.” Opponents maintained that the proposal would put the synod in the position of “advising the military what weapons to use.” Instead, a resolution was adopted which expressed “approval of all the efforts” of President Eisenhower in “search for adequate controls and the ultimate abandonment of such weapons of mass destruction.”

The synod tabled a recommendation from its overtures committee to “record its disagreement and disassociate” itself from the 1958 World Order Study Conference which proposed U. S. and U. N. recognition of Communist China.

A resolution calling upon classes (local governing bodies) to open their churches’ “worship and fellowship” to all “irrespective of race” followed unanimous endorsement of a letter written by Dr. Howard G. Hageman, retiring president, to the Dutch Reformed Churches in South Africa. Hageman asked for a declaration “that in Jesus Christ there is neither Afrikaner, Colored or Bantu.”

“We cannot justify this situation in our country,” he said, “nor, we believe, would you seek to justify it in yours.”

Dr. Henry Bast, former Reformed Church vice president and speaker on the denomination’s weekly “Temple Time” radio broadcast since 1952, was elected to succeed Hageman as president. Bast is a professor at Western Theological Seminary in Holland, Michigan.

Delegates representative of the 223,000-member communion approved a theological commission report affirming the historicity of the book of Genesis.

But “we must be clear as to the nature of this history,” the report said. “The faith of the Bible is inseparably tied to historical events. We protest against all attempts to divorce faith from history, and to reduce the word which God would speak to us to abstract information about his nature and/or universal principles of moral behavior.”

The synod also proposed a study on the feasibility of adopting for the Lord’s Prayer the uniform sentence, “Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.” The World and National Councils of Churches were asked to consider the change to replace the present use in that sentence of the word “debts” by some groups, and “trespasses” by others.

Another development was the creation of a permanent “committee on the professorate” in lieu of a special standing committee to deal with ministerial candidates. The new committee was given responsibility to conduct studies concerning establishment of “minimum standards” of academic requirement and institutional accreditation for candidates from other than Reformed Church colleges and seminaries. It was also asked to define “proper credentials” for a minister ordained by another ecclesiastical body or religious group” for his reception into the Reformed Church ministry.

The committee was requested, moreover, to consider establishment of a “possible order of lay workers or lay ordination for specific purposes” as a means of helping to meet the “immediate shortage” of personnel in the “expanding program of the church.”

In the president’s annual report, Hageman called upon congregations to place a new emphasis on Christian witness and evangelism in their local communities.

“Too many of our congregations in metropolitan areas,” he said, “are steadily losing ground because they do not know how to minister to changing populations.”

He also challenged his constituents to “delineate much more carefully our ideas, our concepts, our doctrines, our point of view about the church.”

In suggesting a celebration in 1963 of the 400th anniversary of the writing of the Heidelberg Catechism, Hageman proposed particularly an international theological congress.

The catechism, a significant confessional statement, was written in Heidelberg, Germany, in 1563.

Hageman also recommended a meeting of all Reformed Church in America theological professors at the 1961 General Synod.

At Fargo, North Dakota—The 64th annual conference of the Lutheran Free Church heard a call from its president, Dr. John M. Stensvaag, to return to Sunday evening services.

“It is not comfortable to see our Lutheran churches dark and empty while others are open on Sunday evening,” he said. “Lively singing, strong expository preaching, rich in food for the believer and with a clear evangelistic tone, can make these services contribute greatly to the life of the church.”

Stensvaag also urged greater emphasis on adult education and wider participation by children in week-day released time classes.

Participating in the conference were 315 voting lay delegates, 155 pastors and 90 advisory delegates, plus visitors.

At Boston—Seven thousand delegates were on hand for the annual meeting of The Mother Church, The First Church of Christ Scientist. Arthur W. Eckman, a Cambridge, Massachusetts, lawyer who has been general counsel of the legal department of The Mother Church since 1944, was named president.

At Guelph, Ontario—Chief development of the 86th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada was establishment of an administrative council charged with ensuring that the work of the church is carried on efficiently and effectively.

Dr. Leslie King, retired physician, was named chairman of the council, which must coordinate the efforts of all church agencies and recommend policy (including budgetary aspects). To avoid “an entrenched bureaucracy,” executive secretaries will serve as non-voting members. Voting members will be appointed by the assembly and will be limited to six consecutive years in office.

Korean Violence

Club-swinging demonstrators broke into a compound where missionaries of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. were holding their annual mission meeting last month. Several American missionaries suffered minor injuries.

Police arrested IB demonstrators, said to be students representing a small, extremist anti-ecumenical element in Korean Presbyterianism. They waved a banner saying, “Unalterably Oppose WCC Ecumenicity,” and sang “Onward Christian Soldiers” as they invaded the compound and tried to break into houses where the missionaries had barricaded themselves.

The violence followed the mission’s reaffirmation of allegiance to the reunited General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Korea.

Inflammatory agitation by the International Council of Christian Churches is blamed in part for continuing incidents involving the extremists.

Korean missionaries are urging U. S. Christians to “pray for us and for the terrific spiritual low that has settled down on a good segment of the Korean church.”

The assembly accepted an invitation from the Anglican Church of Canada to enter into “conversations” regarding common theological, administrative, and parochial concerns.

A proposed revision of the Book of Common Order was sent to presbyteries for study following a debate centered on alleged “high church” tendencies in the book and criticism of the lack of prayers which reflect contemporary concerns and which are expressed in modern language.

The assembly also (1) gave Montreal’s Presbyterian College permission to sell its property to McGill University and to relocate near the campus; (2) elected the Rev. Robert Lennox, principal of the college, as moderator; (3) approved a “programme of advance, emphasizing evangelism” with a view to doubling the present communicant membership of 198,000 by 1975, when the church will mark its 100th anniversary; (4) commended the Canadian government for admitting 200 European refugee families, each having one tubercular member, noting that tuberculosis hospitals in Canada have many empty beds while people in other lands are unable to be treated; and (5) referred back to the presbyteries a proposal to ordain women (the assembly refused to hear from Shirley McLeod, 19-year-old coed who aspires to be the church’s first woman minister).

At Hamilton, Ontario—The Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec voted to explore the possibility of some control over its 450 traditionally-autonomous churches. An investigating committee was named after the Rev. Harold Stibbards said that conditions in congregations sometimes become “so bad” that the reputation of the Baptist communion is endangered. Stibbards argued that churches in the same association should be given authority to move in and say: “Either you fellows act like Christians or we’ll be forced to take over your affairs.”

The Rev. A. S. McGrath, general secretary-treasurer of the Lord’s Day Alliance of Canada, told the Baptist assembly that some change in the Lord’s Day Act “is inevitable.” McGrath’s remarks were widely interpreted as indicative of a somewhat easing attitude toward Sunday offenders.

At Belfast—The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland voted against the use of “financial pressure” to influence a merger proposal between the United Church of North India and the Indian Presbytery of Gujarat. The Irish church, which sends about $280,000 annually to India, decided by a vote of 386–106 to continue support regardless of the outcome of the merger plan.

At Edinburgh—Delegates to the 400th annual General Assembly of the Church of Scotland approved, by a vote of 165 to 164, the principle that women should be eligible for the office of elder. The 1,000 clergy and lay delegates also: (1) decided to resume unity talks with the Church of England (previous negotiations broke down with the assembly’s rejection last year of the “bishops-in-presbytery” concept); (2) sanctioned family planning but condemned use of contraceptives from motives of indulgence or luxury; and (3) rejected a committee report, by a vote of 220 to 208, which said in effect that after the duty of worship there should be a place for physical recreation and that a negative attitude to the problems of the present generation should be avoided.

In a message to the assembly, Queen Elizabeth II stated her intention of attending the Scottish church’s special 400th anniversary celebrations in October. According to religious historians, no sovereign has been present at a Church of Scotland General Assembly since 1603.

At Edinburgh—By a majority of 44 to 40, commissioners to the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland expressed the denomination’s “dissatisfaction at the attitude of the Royal Family towards the Lord’s Day.” The rebuke was added to the church’s traditional loyal address to Queen Elizabeth II after the message had been read to delegates.

Korean Ecumenism

The election of a Presbyterian minister as the new general secretary of the Korean National Council of Churches last month ended a debate over whether the individual filling the post must belong to a member church of the World Council of Churches.

The new secretary, the Rev. Simeon (Shin Myung) Kang, is a member of the Presbyterian Church in Korea which reluctantly withdrew from the WCC in February in a move to restore peace and unity after an anti-ecumenical minority had split the church. This left the Methodist Church in Korea as the only Korean denomination in the WCC.

It had been argued that since the Korean NCC is a member of the International Missionary Council which is in turn related to the WCC, its executive official must be elected from a WCC-related church. This would have excluded candidates from other churches in the Korean NCC.

The election of the 51-year-old Presbyterian pastor was closely followed by a significant endorsement of the Korean NCC by the Holiness Church which resisted strong pressures to leave the NCC and in a close vote chose to retain its historic ties with the interdenominational council, which represents about 75 per cent of Korea’s Protestants.

S.M.

[See also “Korean Violence” on page 29—ED.]

Campus Expansion

Ground was broken last month for a $1,000,000 library on the campus of Hope College in Holland, Michigan.

The library will be named after G. J. Van Zoeren, retired Holland industrialist and a Hope alumnus who advanced $525,000 toward its construction as a memorial to his late wife.

Scheduled completion date is September, 1961. The new library is part of a $3,000,000 campus development program which will also include a new academic building and an athletic field. Officials are hoping that the expansion will be complete by 1966, when the college marks its 100th anniversary.

Hope, founded by a group of religious immigrants from The Netherlands, is governed by a 56-member board of trustees 50 of whom are chosen by synods of the Reformed Church in America. Two-thirds of its 1311 students this year were members of the Reformed Church in America. The remainder represent 19 other denominations, led by the Christian Reformed Church.

A Study of Freedom

The National Council of Churches is launching a year-long, nationwide “study of religious freedom” among its member communions. It will be conducted by the council’s Department of Religious Liberty under a newly-appointed executive director, the Rev. Dean M. Kelley, former pastor of Crawford Memorial Methodist Church in New York City.

Dr. Roy G. Ross, NCC general secretary, says the study program will place emphasis on local discussion of questions such as: Should Christians be concerned about freedom and how should that concern be expressed? Should there be any religious tests for public office? How does “free speech” affect the broadcasting of derogatory statements about religious groups?

Other questions include: What about the use of tax money for denominational hospitals and schools? How does one arouse a church to witness to its social responsibility? What should be done when a Congressional investigation violates religious and human rights?

The religious freedom inquiry comes on the heels of a year-long “peace program” conducted by the council.

African Documentary

The day following the climax of the capital crusade, “Africa on the Bridge,” had its world premiere in Washington’s National Guard Armory. A feature-length documentary, the new film treats the viewer to a first-hand account of Graham’s 17,000-mile “safari for souls” earlier this year. Photographed in authentic sound and natural color in 17 cities across Africa, it depicts the continent as being in a period of transition—on a bridge—between ancient tribalism and the shining goal of independence from colonial rule.

Following the Washington premiere, “Africa on the Bridge” will be shown in churches throughout the United States and Canada. The film was produced by World Wide Pictures and directed by Dick Ross. Scheduled for October release by World Wide Pictures is “Shadow of the Boomerang,” dramatic film built around Graham’s Australian crusade.

Manchester: How Broad The Way?

When the Billy Graham team first indicated that the evangelist was contemplating a crusade in Manchester, England, next spring, certain church council officials of the area apparently felt that time was ripe for a new deal in evangelism.

Their initial overture came in a letter early this year from Canon Eric Saxon of the Manchester, Salford and District Council of Churches. The Graham team was in Jos, Nigeria, at the time.

“My Council represents the denominations in Manchester and … is a cross section of all churches and opinion in the area,” wrote Saxon. He indicated that many council members are reluctant to commit their churches to a campaign of one particular emphasis, and inquired whether Graham would widen his platform to reflect the views of all supporting churches.

Graham’s representatives replied by outlining the nature and procedures of the evangelist’s mission in previous crusades.

In Nairobi, Kenya, the team received another letter from Saxon. Indicating that the Council of Churches had discussed the proposed crusade at length, he offered the possibility of “official support of the denominations, rather than only of individual clergy and ministers.” The council’s condition was that Graham “share his Campaign with men of great standing in the Church, whose outlook may be a little different but who would bring into the Crusade the Churches they represent. For instance if Father Trevor Huddleston, Dr. George F. MacLeod of the Iona community, and Dr. Donald Soper, and the Bishop of Middleton … could be brought into the Crusade … I am authorized to say that the Council of Churches would give its wholehearted support to the proposed Crusade … by a unanimous resolution of the Council.…”

If not possible, Saxon said, the council feared a serious difference of opinion in Manchester which would make it difficult for Graham to receive an invitation from the churches of the city.

All four of the assistant missioners suggested by Saxon are known to be to the theological left of Graham. MacLeod, for instance, is a Pacifist who majors in social concern; he op posed Graham’s coming to Scotland in 1955 on the floor of the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly.

An inquiry among Manchester churches by Christian businessmen, meanwhile, showed 850 of the first 1,000 responses favorably inclined toward the Graham crusade.

Yet the council of churches, as late as April 1, still insisted that Graham share his pulpit for 20 minutes each night with Huddleston, Soper, MacLeod, or the Bishop of Middleton as a condition of their cooperation. Jerry Beavan, one of Graham’s top aides, then declined the offer.

Subsequently, 600 of the ministers who had responded favorably to an inquiry about a Manchester crusade assembled to hear Beavan and two other team members.

This favorable response was augmented by a resolution adopted unanimously by the Anglican Ministers Evangelical Fellowship to invite Graham to come to Manchester next year.

The council continues to stand aloof, insisting on a “broadened platform” but giving no definitive interpretation other than the use of the missioners indicated. The council minimizes present support of the crusade, saying that the major denominations are as yet uncommitted. But many affirmative replies have come from Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians, as well as from Plymouth Brethren and Nazarene groups. The Church of England Newspaper spurred interest in the crusade with a front-page report.

Plans call for formation of a Manchester crusade executive committee in September. The council must then decide whether to support it.

Married Priests

A 54-year-old former Lutheran pastor, married and a father, was ordained a Roman Catholic priest in Copenhagen, Denmark, last month.

Father Olav Roerdam Bonnevie was given special permission from the Holy See to receive “holy orders” while remaining in the married state.

Pastor of a Lutheran parish in North Jutland for 12 years, Bonnevie was received into the Catholic church in 1945. His wife and only daughter were converted two years later.

The permission for ordination parallels several recent cases in Germany. Since World War II, about half dozen married Lutheran ministers are said to have been ordained.

Controversial Prelate

Archbishop Yegishe Derderian, 50-year-old native of Turkey, was elected last month as Patriarch of the Armenian Apostolic (Orthodox) Church. He thus filled a vacancy created by the death of Cyril Israelian in October, 1949.

The new patriarch was elected by a vote of 18 to 5 of the General Assembly of the Brotherhood of St. James, supreme governing body of the patriarchate, in a dramatic climax to one of the most bitter and disturbing chapters in the history of the church whose adherents include nearly 1,000,000 Armenians living in Asia, the Americas, and the Middle East.

His election in Jerusalem came less than a week after he had been forcibly installed as locum tenens of the patriarchate by Jordanian Military Governor Hassan el Khatib, backed by a detachment of army officials and police, despite the fact that he had been expelled from the St. James community three years ago and placed under ecclesiastical interdiction by Catholicos Vazgen I, supreme head of the Church, whose seat is at Etchmiadzin in Soviet Armenia.

Archbishop Derderian had originally been appointed locum tenens at the death of Patriarch Cyril, but was expelled from the brotherhood after being found guilty by the General Assembly on nine counts of “misdemeanors and abuse of office.” He is now reported to have been granted a spiritual pardon.

The Golden Years

Professor and Mrs. Andrew W. Blackwood are marking the 50th anniversary of their marriage by renewing wedding vows in a public service to be held in the Presbyterian Church of Ardmore, Pennsylvania, on July 14. Blackwood is professor emeritus of Princeton Theological Seminary and a well-known authority in homiletics. The Rev. Andrew W. Blackwood, Jr., will conduct the service.

Celebrating their 60th anniversary are Dr. and Mrs. Nathan Wood, beloved for their work with Gordon College and Divinity School and now retired. Gordon’s commencement this spring came on the 50th anniversary of Wood’s arrival at the school. He subsequently served a term as president and his wife as a dean.

People: Words And Events

Elections: As bishops of The Methodist Church, Dr. Fred Garrigus Holloway, president of Drew University; Dr. William Vernon Middleton, general secretary of the Methodist Division of National Missions, Dr. William Ralph Ward, Jr., minister of Mt. Lebanon (Pennsylvania) Methodist Church; and Dr. James K. Mathews, associate general secretary of the Methodist Division of World Missions … as first African president of the Lutheran Church of Christ in the Sudan, the Rev. Akila Todi.

Appointments: As president of Meadville Theological School, the Rev. Malcolm R. Sutherland … as professor of systematic theology at New Brunswick Theological Seminary, Dr. Gerrit T. Vander Lugt … as executive director of the proposed National Presbyterian Center in Washington, D. C., Dr. Ralph Cooper Hutchison.

Resignation: As general secretary of the Methodist Board of World Peace, soon to be integrated into the broader Board of Christian Social Concerns, the Rev. Daniel E. Taylor (to accept the pastorate of the 2,000-member Rose City Park Church in Portland, Oregon).

Quotes: “One of our serious troubles in the Church today is that it has become legitimate to be emotional in anything but religion. The need is for something that will summon one’s whole enthusiasm.”—Dr. John A. Mackay, Presbyterian “elder statesman” to the Cumberland Presbyterian General Assembly.

Billy Graham’s return engagement in Washington deposited a clear-cut challenge upon a community which is aware, perhaps more acutely than any other, of tomorrow’s perils.

His message offered little worldly comfort about the future. He said he has talked with 47 heads of state and that virtually all are privately pessimistic.

“Christ did not come into the world to bring peace, but a sword!” he told some 7,000 military and civilian employees assembled in the park-like inner courtyard of the Pentagon.

In a 20-minute address delivered from a stairway platform framed by two towering magnolias in full bloom, Graham said sin was behind all world strife and, indeed, was the reason for the Pentagon’s (Defense Department’s) very existence. He quoted the Bible, moreover, as predicting no real peace until Christ is enthroned on earth. Tensions would persist, he said, amidst unregeneracy.

The Task

Billy Graham, in an address prepared for delivery this week at a World Council of Churches “Consultation for Evangelists” in Geneva, says his definition of evangelism is one adopted in 1918 by an archbishops’ committee of the Church of England:

“To evangelize is so to present Christ Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit that men shall come to put their trust in God through Him, to accept Him as their Savior and serve Him as their King in the fellowship of His Church.”

The Geneva consultation is bringing together evangelists from all over the world for “an exchange of views on the evangelistic task of the churches in our time.” Chairman is the Rev. Tom Allan, well-known Scottish evangelist.

Hundreds from the world’s largest office building raised their hands at the close of the noon-hour rally as a token of their commitment to Christ.

Focal point of the eight-day crusade was Griffith Stadium, Washington Senators’ ball park, which provided a seating potential much greater than that of the National Guard Armory, where the evangelist’s campaign in the winter of 1952 was centered.

The larger arena proved a good investment. Every stadium turnout surpassed what the armory could have accommodated (10,000).

The choir of more than 1,000 volunteer voices was divided into two sections: Most sopranos and altos were situated between first and second base. The rest were seated with tenors and bases between second and third.

From a pulpit 12 feet above the playing field came the message, commandingly delivered and highly comprehendible.

Graham’s sermon themes: “The Answer to the Present World Dilemma,” “What’s Wrong With the World?,” “The Handwriting on the Wall,” “Problems of the Home,” “A Challenge for Youth,” “The Wickedest Man That Ever Lived,” “The Foolishness of God,” and, at the closing Sunday service on June 26, “The End of the World.”

An unusually sobering aspect of the crusade was the disclosure by Graham one evening that he had talked with the late Congressman Douglas H. Elliott only three days before his death.

“I want tickets for every night next week,” Graham quoted Elliott as having said at a pre-crusade breakfast for members of the House.

Elliott’s body was found at his summer cabin near Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, on the day the crusade opened in Washington. A coroner ruled that he died of “carbon monoxide poisoning self-administered.” Elliott has been in office less than two months.

At the outset of the crusade an air of indifference was noticeable despite wide church support. Newspapers gave a minimum of attention and radio and television stations virtually none. Committee meeting attendance was poor for such important planning phases as counseling and follow-up. Budgetary problems loomed large. Reserved seat requests were disappointing.

Once the crusade began, however, enthusiasm snowballed. At the heart of the zeal was a nucleus of dedicated lay Christians who had worked and prayed for weeks for those climactic moments at each service when inquirers streamed onto the infield by the hundreds.

The great spirit of Christian fellowship which became identified with the crusade was demonstrated remarkably one evening when it started to drizzle soon after the service began. Song leader Cliff Barrows gave choir members the option of waiting it out or seeking shelter in the stands.

“Stay here,” they chorused.

They stayed and the rain stopped until after they had sung their number.

Pre-Crusade Contacts

Groundwork for the national capital crusade included a series of important, specialized-audience meetings in addition to counsellor training classes, prayer meetings, and planning sessions. Billy Graham declared that he considered his pre-crusade engagements in Washington as important, in a sense, as the public meetings themselves. For a full week before the stadium meetings began he was addressing assemblages in his honor.

A black tie dinner in the Mayflower Hotel drew several hundred key Defense Department personnel hosted by Secretary of the Army Wilber M. Brucker and Judge Boyd Leedom, chairman of the National Labor Relations Board and head of the crusade executive committee. Another in the Statler Hilton attracted administration officials as well as civic leaders. A luncheon in the Mayflower packed out the ballroom as Washington area service clubs joined hands to welcome the evangelist. His biggest reception came at the Sheraton Park late in the week when he spoke to 3,000 delegates gathered for the 67th annual convention of the General Federation of Women’s Clubs.

At the Capitol, Graham addressed prayer groups of both chambers at special arranged meetings in the old Supreme Court room. More than 100 members of the House turned out for a special breakfast session and more than 50 senators attended a luncheon the same day (including Lyndon B. Johnson, Everett M. Dirksen, Theodore Green, George A. Smathers, and Frank Carlson).

Graham seized every opportunity to warn his hearers of the plight of the undedicated. His was a call to patriotism as well as to spiritual regeneration (he embarrassed several hundred luncheon guests June 14 by asking how many of them remembered it was Flag Day).

“We seem to be unaware that there is a meaning and purpose to life beyond the immediate problem of survival,” Graham told the military leaders. “I do not believe that the human race will end up ‘on the beach.’ The Bible teaches me otherwise. Yet I am equally convinced that unless we heed the warning, unless we bring Americans back to awareness of God’s moral laws, unless the spiritual fibre of character is put back into the structure of our nation, we are headed for national disaster.”

Protestant Panorama

• An 11-program summer series of the “Lutheran Hour” will be devoted to Christian viewpoints on key election year topics. The program, sponsored by the Lutheran Laymen’s League, is carried by the NBC and Mutual networks and by independent stations around the world.

• Eva Anita Johansson, 18-year-old sister of former heavyweight champion Ingemar Johansson, is enrolled in the liberal arts curriculum of Concordia Collegiate Institute for the fall term. Concordia is a Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod school in Bronxville, New York.

• Some 150,000 Sunday School pupils from 450 Protestant churches participated in the 131st annual parade of the Brooklyn (New York) Sunday School Union last month. Governor and Mrs. Nelson A. Rockefeller were among honored guests in the reviewing stand. The parade drew an estimated 1,500,000 spectators.

• A 31-year-old Alsatian minister was fatally injured last month when he and three other Europeans were attacked by African terrorists in Douala, Cameroun. The Rev. Bernard Kopp had recently been named director of the Theological Seminary of the Evangelical Church of Cameroun.

• The Church of Sweden plans to manufacture prefabricated church buildings, complete with bell towers, to be set up in summer resort areas.

• Michael Markogamvrakis, evangelist of the Greek Free Evangelical Church, is appealing a five months imprisonment sentence imposed on charges of proselytising among Greek Orthodox people.

• The East Asian Christian Conference plans to produce a hymn book of Asian tunes for use by international church gatherings.

• Taylor University plans to relocate its Upland, Indiana, campus on a yet-to-be-determined site. The 67-year-old school will remain somewhere in Indiana, according to an announcement from trustees, and will seek to retain traditional Methodist ties.

• More than 1,000 youth are participating in ecumenical work camps in 31 countries this summer. The camps are sponsored by the youth department of the World Council of Churches.

• The Lutheran Church of Norway plans to place women theological graduates into a number of newly-created parish responsibilities. The women, legally eligible for ordination, will be given duties in visitation, Sunday School and youth work, and in Bible study groups.

• The Rev. J. Wesley Neal, newly-appointed executive director for the Methodist Agricultural Aids Foundation, has as his first task the establishment of a technical training school in the Congo. Neal has been pastor of the First Methodist Church in Chatsworth, California.

• The first English-speaking Lutheran church in Durban, South Africa, marked its first anniversary by dedicating a new chapel. The church was established with the aid of the Lutheran World Federation.

• The World Presbyterian Alliance is sending a “fraternal delegate” to Cuba to confer with church leaders on religious liberty under the government of Premier Fidel Castro.

• The Massachusetts Council of Churches is sponsoring the distribution of Christian literature to 1,500 migrant workers in the Connecticut Valley area this summer.

• Nineteen missionaries were commissioned for overseas service last month by the United Presbyterian Commission on Ecumenical Mission and Relations at a chapel service in New York’s Interchurch Center. Most of the 19 will serve as “fraternal workers” under independent national churches.

• The South Georgia Methodist Conference dedicated a $250,000 building in honor of Bishop Arthur J. Moore last month. The two-story structure, located at Epworth-by-the-Sea, Methodist conference center at St. Simons Island, Georgia, houses offices, guest rooms, and a library.

Vanderbilt Compromise

The Vanderbilt University administration reached a compromise with dissident faculty members in its Divinity School last month.

Eleven professors who had resigned in protest of a Negro student’s dismissal were given the chance to reconsider in the light of an offer made to the student, the Rev. James M. Lawson.

Lawson, expelled for his “commitment to an active program of civil disobedience” in connection with sit-in demonstrations, may apply for a Vanderbilt bachelor of divinity degree either by taking written examinations or by transferring credits he is expected to earn at Boston University School of Theology this summer.

Ten faculty resignations were subsequently withdrawn (the eleventh professor had already accepted a position elsewhere). Dean J. Robert Nelson’s resignation will become officially effective August 31, although he has already been relieved of duties.

Freedom and Tenure

A norm for academic freedom and tenure in seminaries was established at the 22nd biennial meeting of the American Association of Theological Schools, held last month in Richmond, Virginia.

During the meeting, it was announced that Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky, had again been granted full accreditation. Asbury was an associate member of the AATS for the past five years.

While not intended as a criterion for accreditation, the newly-established norm is expected to influence seminary administrations in resolving faculty disputes. It came in the form of a report from the AATS Commission on Research and Counsel, which delegates approved virtually intact.

In spelling out principles of academic freedom, the report declares that “the theological teacher and his students have the inquiry for truth central to their vocation and they are free to pursue this inquiry.”

But the report also states that “an institution which has a confessional or doctrinal standard may expect that its faculty subscribe to that standard and the requirement for such subscription should be mutually understood at the time of their affiliation with the institution.”

“The question of a faculty member’s adherence to the standard may be opened according to specified procedures.”

A professor may be dismissed, the report says, if he fails to live up to his contract with the school. Doctrinal variance is understood to be a legitimate ground for dismissal if subscription to a doctrinal standard is required at appointment.

More than 250 delegates were on hand for the AATS meeting and associated related assemblies (a member seminary of the AATS may send as many delegates as it wishes, but only one can vote), held on the campus of Union Theological Seminary.

The report on academic freedom and tenure gained special interest through recent faculty-administration differences at Vanderbilt University Divinity School. It has been in preparation for many months, long before the Vanderbilt controversy began.

The report asserts that “after the expiration of a probationary period of appointment, teachers should have appointments on indefinite tenure” and that “such appointments should be terminated only for adequate cause and only after fulfillment of clearly stated procedures for hearing and judgment.”

The Vanderbilt situation did not come up for discussion, and AATS officials have not yet indicated whether they will investigate. Such an inquiry could assume the nature of an earlier investigation conducted at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, after 13 professors were fired in an administrative dispute during the spring of 1958. Southern’s accreditation was in jeopardy for a time following the dismissals.

Dr. J. Robert Nelson, outgoing dean of the Vanderbilt seminary, was among the delegates to the Richmond meeting. Delegate opinion leaned in his favor.

In other action, membership fees were raised by 60 per cent and Dr. James A. Jones, president of Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, was elected president.

Also approved was a report from the Commission on Research and Counsel which explored “institutional procedures with respect to faculty resignations, leaves and retirements.”

“A sabbatical leave should be provided for each member of the faculty who is on indefinite tenure at least after each six years of service in a school,” the report said.

“The minimum length of such leave with full salary should be one quarter or semester plus a summer; but where a longer leave seems desirable salary adjustments should be arrived at through conference.”

The Security Treaty

Japanese Christians have been among the most outspoken critics of their country’s Security Treaty with the United States.

The National Council of Churches in Japan took a neutral stand, but many influential individuals in the Kyodan (United Church of Christ in Japan) firmly opposed ratification of the treaty. They were supported by public declarations from such organizations as the YMCA, the WCTU, and the Christian Society for Peace. Several other organizations were formed especially to rally Christians against ratification. Fifteen professors of the International Christian University published a letter protesting the Diet’s handling of the treaty.

State Aiding Church?

A second round of fellowships in religion were announced last month by the U. S. Office of Education. Because of protests against last year’s grants, made under provisions of the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the government did not include new awards to seminaries. Instead, annual stipends of nearly $5,000 per student will be channelled into 20 doctorate programs in religion at such schools as Claremont (California) College, originally Congregational Christian but now independent; Brown University, founded by Baptists but also independent now; Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning, Jewish institution in Philadelphia; the Eastman School of Music at the University of Rochester (New York); and New York University.

Spiritual Shallowness

The shallowness of American spiritual life was cited in a discussion by 50 students from 40 countries attending an international assembly in Williamsburg, Virginia, last month.

Dr. Harvie Branscomb, chancellor of Vanderbilt University and speaker for the occasion, agreed with most of the students’ conclusions.

A Korean student asked whether “the excessive sexual exposition and display” in the United States has not hampered American spiritual life.

The sexual reputation of Americans is such, she said, that “when a Korean girl goes back home after living in the United States she finds it difficult to get married.”

“People no longer trust her,” she added.

In addition, four priests, two brothers, and four nuns won grants for doctorate studies at various Catholic and non-Catholic schools around the country.

Last year, Union Theological Seminary of New York and Emory University of Atlanta received similar three-year grants, made under Title Four of the defense act and designed to assist students in securing doctorates for college teaching careers. The federal aid program has been widely criticized on grounds that it provides direct government subsidy for sectarian purposes and that it thereby violates the constitutional principle of Church-State separation. Under the law, students selected by the schools to receive the fellowships can draw up to $2,500 annually while the schools themselves are awarded as much as $2,500 per student provided they can establish that their faculty is being strengthened and their curriculum expanded by virtue of the subsidy.

All priests and nuns selected under this year’s program will pursue secular studies. The others seek degrees in such areas as theology, sacred music, history of religion, and biblical archeology.

The Title Four program, unlike other sections of the act, does not concentrate on science, mathematics, and languages, but includes fellowships in the humanities, ranging from folklore at the University of Indiana to medieval literature at St. Louis University. Some opponents of the federal aid program are seeking a way to test its constitutionality in court.

A Catholic Bloc

If the Democratic National Convention fails to nominate Senator John F. Kennedy for president, Catholics may take revenge by voting against the party as a bloc, according to the retiring Democratic National Chairman, Paul Butler.

Butler, who feels that Kennedy’s nomination is a “cinch,” told the National Press Club last month that many Catholics would either vote Republican or not vote at all if they felt that Kennedy was denied the nomination because of his religion.

“Other Catholics, like myself, would vote anyway for the Democratic nominee, whoever he might be,” Butler added.

Protestants and Other Americans United promptly asked Kennedy to repudiate Butler’s “threat” of bloc voting and appealed to the Fair Campaign Practices Committee to condemn his statement.