Special Report

While Christians planned to observe the centennial of Christian missions in Japan—where Protestant effort has enlisted only one-third of one per cent of the population—the Osaka crusade launched by Dr. Bob Pierce and World Vision emerged as the nation’s spectacular evangelistic development of the year. A July 4 converts’ rally in Festival Hall, a month after the three-week campaign, not only drew hundreds of young converts for additional instruction, but resulted in hundreds of conversions of their friends escorted to the meeting.

Pierce, who had travelled 15,000 miles in preaching missions in the intervening weeks, was greeted by a capacity 4,300 persons and an overflow of 2,500 lining the Dojima River. Almost one in three had not attended a meeting previously. A call for Christian commitment drew 300 seekers indoors and 284 outdoors. “Find a Bible-preaching church,” Pierce urged the converts, “and get to work there.”

The events in Osaka gained drama from the fact that, after a century of missions, Christian results are meager. Of Japan’s 91 million people, crowded into a land area the size of Montana, less than 400,000 are members of Protestant churches. The total membership of all Christian communions is 550,000. Population is growing by one million a year, so that the annual birth rate is virtually double the present Christian population. Thus the Christian percentage dwindles.

The Protestant missionary complement numbers about 1,700. Almost 400 are identified with the United Church of Japan (Kyodan) and the National Christian Council, with a constituency of about 300,000, but the remainder, the great majority, are unaffiliated evangelical missionaries representing more than 100,000 believers. Perhaps as nowhere else these missionaries are concentrated in the two metropolitan areas of Tokyo, where a population now of more than 8,500,000 presumably constitutes the world’s largest city, and Osaka, with about five million inhabitants.

Why Witness Withered

During the past generation, some of the large denominations were prone to turn conservative missionaries to Korea and liberal missionaries to Japan. Many Japanese pulpits were given over to scholarly addresses with little vital contact with the people and life; visitation lagged, and the role of the laity in the churches minimized. Evangelical missionaries, by contrast, were concerned for soul-winning but usually lacked impressive academic credentials. “Japanese missionaries are either educated liberals or uneducated holiness evangelists” ran one cliché, which survives because it mingled overstatement with a certain measure of truth. The evangelicals, moreover, were sadly fragmented; more than 200 shades of evangelical effort compete for Japanese converts.

Buddhism holds some 42,500,000 followers through its 170 sects, with 90,210 temples and 128,763 priests. Shintoism’s two major expressions (Shrine and Sect) have 142 sects, 192,000 priests, 116,000 shrines and 89,250,000 believers. The post-war period has seen the rise of 120 new religions or cults, many being an amalgam of Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism, and Christianity. During General MacArthur’s occupation, large masses responded emotionally to some missionary appeals, but the lasting fruits were meager, and a spiritual vacuum remains in Japanese life. The Japan Bible Society has distributed more than 20 million Bible portions since the war, and estimates that one in five Japanese has read some segment of the Scriptures.

A Frustrating Field

Although evangelical Christianity is the one message that cuts squarely across the inherited religions, missionaries have found Japan a frustrating and discouraging field. The largest congregation in the nation numbers 400; the average is 40 members. The writer drove across Tokyo three times without detecting a single church. Visitors can tour the city for an entire week and never see a church building. The missionary casualty list is high. Atmospheric conditions take a physical toll; the rainy seasons and sudden shift from winter to summer leave many workers suffering from “Japan head.” Strain and overexertion compound physical with mental pressures, and there are ten mental breakdowns to one physical, with dedicated wives not unfrequently suffering nervous and physical disorders. One of the frustrations is the difficulty of language learning. Some missionaries have come and returned, unable to learn the language. Some of these problems doubtless could be met by more adequate screening of candidates in the evangelical acceptance process. The remoteness of the Japanese to foreigners is another factor, worsened by the indifference of many young missionaries to guidance from older missionaries in matters of Japanese life and culture. Conditions of immorality, including long years of licensed vice, shape a distressing social climate. In these circumstances the missionary’s devotional life sags easily, especially in the face of evangelical divisions and intramural criticism. And amid such adversity, evangelism has lacked the vitality to keep pace with the population increase.

Encouraging Signs

The Osaka crusade lent a new surge of evangelistic hope to the Christian cause in Japan. Ironically, mass evangelism was almost blockaded by the divisions among evangelical missionaries in Tokyo, who had asked Billy Graham to delay a visit to that city. Distressed national workers then implored Bob Pierce to come to Japan’s second city for the Osaka crusade. From the north to the south of Japan 1800 prayer meetings turned the eyes of the Christian remnant to Osaka, and many of these meetings still carry on. Saturday night telecasts presented Christianity to the nation at a constructive evangelistic level. The remarkable response by hundreds of seekers—a total of 3,175 actually professed salvation—quickened the passion for the lost. National pastors visited more than half of the 7,502 seekers within three weeks. By the end of the crusade 1,867 had attended church services in 435 churches. One church received so many new members it is already engaged in a building program. Pastors’ conferences led by Dr. Paul Rees sharpened evangelistic concern, and encouraged new boldness in witness and visitation employing lay workers.

Conflict Sharpened

The Osaka thrust has set evangelism in new focus in the church life of Japan. The most responsive group falls into the 15–21 age bracket. It should be recalled, however, that 55 per cent of the Japanese population is under 25 years of age. Most of those attracted to the Osaka meetings were clerks, high school and college students and businessmen. All were reminded, in Dr. Pierce’s words, “you cannot put Jesus Christ on your ‘god shelf’ alongside the other idols. He is the one Saviour and Lord, the only Mediator between man and God.” In these dimensions the conflict between Christianity and the non-biblical religions is being sharpened with new depth and urgency in the life of modern Japan.

C.F.H.H.

NEWS

CHRISTIANITY TODAY

The thunderstorm swept across the flat Ohio countryside and enveloped a college field house. The church folk inside sang, “Speak through the earthquake, wind, and fire,” and recited a new statement of faith. As flashes of lightning seemed even to dart their way into the building, one observer murmured jocularly, “I don’t think the Lord likes that statement.” Then amidst the crash of thunder, and through a crackling microphone, Dr. Edwin T. Dahlberg, president of the National Council of Churches, portrayed the horrors of the atomic age.

Such was the apocalyptic setting provided the second General Synod of the United Church of Christ for the convocation of its four-day meeting at Oberlin College. Two years before in neighboring Cleveland, the organization was begun with acceptance of a plan for union by the General Council of the 1,401,565-member Congregational Christian Churches and the 807,280-member Evangelical and Reformed Church. The traveler often finds it hard to get from Cleveland to Oberlin but this trip had been more difficult than most.

Behind the 700 delegates (and apparently ahead as well) was a road strewn with bitter recriminations and even lawsuits, as many Congregationalists had reaffirmed faithfulness to historic autonomous polity and shied away from compromise with presbyterian or pyramidal government of the E & R Church.

But now the delegates felt history was walking beside them. And if history faltered somewhat at this convention and delegates went away disappointed at the slackening of momentum of this “most daring leap of faith into the ecumenical church in our modern times,” it had to be conceded their task was difficult despite assured absence of merger opponents.

Meeting in Finney Chapel, named for the nineteenth-century evangelist, this synod was expected to approve a constitution and a statement of faith. As if in partial vindication of the European portrayal of the activist United States as rather a theologically barren land, the synod bogged down before the constitutional barrier but vaulted easily into theological agreement. In fact, delegates were called upon in their convocation to recite the new confession of their supposed convictions on the deepest things in life, even before the Commission to Prepare a Statement of Faith had presented it to them for discussion, possible revision, and adoption. But as it turned out, most suggested changes were more editorial than theological, and the statement passed unanimously with only minor revision.

The commission had been given no easy assignment, though it did not aim at a substitute for older confessions and explicitly designated its work a “testimony” and not a “test.” No congregation is required to subscribe to the statement and whether it will be used to any great extent is unknown.

Attractive in its poetic form, the statement makes some admirable declarations. But it seems to favor a doctrine of continuous creation over preservation, and historically the former doctrine has tended to veer toward pantheism. But here nothing more serious may be involved than desire to maintain consistency in use of the present tense. The past tense was used only when describing the work of Christ, witnessing to its uniqueness.

But here was the point of greatest criticism. And it dealt more with omissions in the statement than with what was actually said. A commission member had named nationalism and racialism as dangerous heresies of our time in contrast to the Arianism of old. But some delegates were troubled at the lack of a clear-cut declaration of the deity of Christ. One feared negative impact upon the mission work of the church, although another was heard whispering approval of the statement because it “doesn’t make Christ equal with God.”

Indeed, the statement does not rise to the level of the World Council of Churches’ proclamation that Jesus is God, let alone come near to the unambiguous phrases of Nicaea.

But then the commission members represented a wide variety of theological views. Among them: Chairman Elmer J. F. Arndt, John C. Bennett, Walter M. Horton, Bela Vassady, Roger L. Shinn, Richard R. Niebuhr, Douglas Horton, Daniel D. Williams, Roger Hazelton, and Nels F. S. Ferré.

Famed theologian Ferré’s highly unorthodox Christological views are well known (they have been described as halfway between a dynamic monarchianism and a dynamic adoptionism). But by that curious twentieth-century phenomenon of modernist diluting and spiritualizing of theological language (some have called it counterfeiting), even an unreconstructed liberal could approve this statement of faith.

One delegate felt the Incarnation had been glided over lightly and wanted to know how God had come in Christ. The Virgin Birth appears not to have been a live issue with the commission. Dr. Arndt felt that mention of it would mitigate against proper emphasis upon Jesus’ manhood, a rather unique fear as one studies historic creeds and reads the exposition of the statement of faith by theologian Vassady, who sees the Virgin Birth as an indication of Christ’s “true manhood.”

Other objections voiced from the floor criticized these omissions: any mention of the Scriptures, reference to the Fall, a definitive view of the atonement, a radical treatment of Christ’s resurrection and of any future resurrection, and any reference to Christ’s return. One asked for less reaction against the old liberalism and thus more ethical content, while another pleaded for room for modern prophets and apostles like Kagawa and Schweitzer alongside biblical prophets and apostles.

Commission members boasted of a more extensive treatment of the Christian life than found in most creeds (though in an “existential age” there is always danger of Christian-centered, rather than Christ-centered, affirmations). One could wish there had been affirmation of the mystical union, so basic to Christian life.

To a suggestion that the statement sided with Eastern Orthodoxy on the filioque controversy, chairman Arndt replied that it does not take a position one way or the other on the matter and that the committee did not desire a “definition of doctrinal positions in the document.” If this policy gives little encouragement to theology, it does offer a bright prospect to those committed to a doctrinally undefined ecumenism.

Not all ecumenically-minded persons are enthused about merging of churches of unlike doctrine and polity, for the ultimate goal of many such folk is cooperation rather than organic union. Perhaps a curiosity of modern ecclesiastical history will be the E & R move toward unity with Congregationalists rather than with one of the many Presbyterian groups. Twentieth-century lessening of interest in historic Christian doctrine will possibly be adduced as a prime cause.

Congregationalist roots are found in sixteenth and seventeenth-century England and then in colonial New England, the churches later uniting with some Disciples of Christ churches. The E & R Church, its greatest strength in Pennsylvania, itself results from a merger of a Reformed church originating in Zwingli’s Zurich and the Rhineland and the Evangelical Church, which was an American transplanting of the effort of the Emperor of Prussia in 1817 to bring together for political reasons Lutheran and Reformed churches.

As for the current merger, leaders seem unsure of its present exact legal status, but they do boast about its oneness in fellowship. A New York federal court case against the merging bodies contains no request for injunction, and delegates to this year’s General Synod came expecting to approve the proposed constitution. Then if two-thirds of the E & R synods and two-thirds of the local Congregational churches (of those voting) approved, the way would be clear for the biennial General Syond of 1961 to put it in force. But delegates had only received copies of the constitution three weeks before synod began, hardly time for proper study. Some expressed shock and disappointment at leaders’ recommendations for delay (which would amount to two years) to avoid possible embarrassments resulting from hasty action. So the synod decided to buy a year’s time (maximum estimate: $75,000) by reconvening in special session in 1960 to vote on the constitution, thus leaving a year for local church and synod ratification.

Perhaps to blunt charges that this year’s synod was a “do-nothing body” in respect to the constitution, a resolution proposed by Yale Divinity School’s Liston Pope approving the proposed constitution as “an excellent working document” was passed. And considerable time was given for discussion of the draft.

It represents an ambitious attempt to synthesize Presbyterian and Congregational polities. Described as Presbyterian at the top and Congregational at the local level, it has been attacked by Congregationalists as promising local autonomy only to see it denied in the by-laws, where, for example, conferences and associations are given controls over clergy. Local Congregational churches, once in the United Church, will have no vote on future constitutional amendments or future church mergers. The latter point was raised on the floor but excited no discussion.

But no sooner had church leaders predicted smooth sailing through the entire convention, than an undercurrent of Congregationalist dissatisfaction erupted on the last evening. Speakers rose and asked an honest airing of issues which had been troubling delegates. After some veiled efforts toward this end, it developed that Congregationalists were unhappy over the constitutional provision for what they look upon as fragmented or compartmentalized boards which report directly to General Synod, as distinguished from the old inclusive Congregational boards. Part of the agitation was said to have been caused by the constitutional disposition under the Board for Home Missions of an association concerned with the denomination’s Negro colleges, a move which seemed to some a rigid perpetuation of a case of segregation with which they are uncomfortable. But it is a difficult situation complicated by legal necessities in regard to college financial arrangements.

In any case leaders confess to some deep differences of opinion in this area along denominational lines. These may never be fully resolved. But apparently there had been a gentlemen’s agreement to confine discussion of such matters to committees, and E & R President James E. Wagner (also co-president of the United Church with Congregationalist Fred Hoskins, both being reelected at this synod) was deeply cut. With a grim smile he spoke of this “unfortunate sequence of events” which had violated the hope that such matters would be wrestled with “in smaller meetings.” “The E & R Church” (very few of whose delegates had spoken on the constitution) “has been deeply affronted by the advantage taken here tonight,” but would not “return like for like.”

Up popped eminent Congregationalist Helen Kenyon to deny there had been any “affronts or unseemly events.” Another rose to say that extended debate had improved morale, but it was agreed any further arguments be put in writing.

Dr. Stephen Szabo, president of the E & R Magyar Synod, asked that the constitution be changed to allow the continued identity of his synod as heretofore. Others objected to the provisions for the practice of social pronouncements being made by a council in the name of the entire church.

But the general feeling of the leaders seems to be that of obedience to an overpowering concept of union—that any alternative could not conceivably be the will of God—that merger opponents are largely to be explained in terms of timidity of spirit or perhaps captiousness.

For this is not only a “united” church but a “uniting” church, and subsequent mergers are hopefully anticipated with this constitution as a guide. With a synthesis which may have given Hegel trouble, leaders have at times found it difficult to sound statesmanlike as they have sought to define the resulting polity. One E & R leader differentiated it from Presbyterianism by identifying the latter with an “unwonted and arbitrary exercise of authority.” Many ask, “Can a true Congregationalism come out of such synthesis, and what of those who still desire true Congregationalism?”

As one observes the merging body, he may find himself musing over the variety of important names to be found in the grand heritage of the components: Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, Calvin, Oecolampadius, Bullinger, Thomas Goodwin, John Owen, John Cotton, Thomas Hooker, Thomas and Alexander Campbell, and so on. Among these were giants who changed the face of Europe and mightily influenced the history of America. For the serious student of church history who does not believe that twentieth century insights have cancelled those of the previous 1,900 years, the question will not down whether the issues which divided these luminaries have been fairly met. Some may ask whether we have bred a latter-day race of giants who have resolved the differences of the earlier ones. Or were those old issues relatively unimportant?

A high official in the United Church of Canada has warned united churches of the need to preserve for the present “their historical confessional roots as one means of averting any easy inclination toward a watered-down, syncretistic form of the great Christian tradition.” When insights of past church titans are trimmed to match those of others, the trimmer’s criteria for cutting are vital. Will he cut so deeply as to deny himself in the end the depth of Christian fellowship he so earnestly desires?

‘Let Freedom Ring’

The National Association of Congregational Christian Churches held its sixth annual meeting in Los Angeles June 30-July 2 and elected as its moderator Gordon W. Kingsbury, associate professor emeritus from Wayne State University.

Some 400 ministers and laymen attended the meeting, representing 67 churches and 23 states.

The association, which seeks to preserve local church autonomy in Congregationalism, took as its convention theme the slogan, “Let Freedom Ring.” NACCC leaders are opposed to the United Church of Christ plan to require constituent churches to submit to a constitution.

The NACCC missionary society voted $100,000 in aid for Jordan, to be administered through the Near East Foundation of New York.

E & R Synod

Both parties to the United Church of Christ merger are continuing some functions separately during the transition period. Though the United Church has now held its second consolidated synod, both the General Council of Congregational Christian Churches and the Evangelical and Reformed Church still continue separate conventions as well. The latest E & R meeting, the church’s 11th triennial General Synod, was held at Oberlin during the five days immediately preceding the United Church synod.

One of the actions of the E & R synod was to approve a constitutional amendment to hold biennial instead of triennial sessions in order to conform with the biennial meetings of the United Church. A record $5,625,300 budget for the next two years was adopted by the synod, an amount which was $525,300 higher than expenditures during the last three years.

In other actions, delegates adopted resolutions opposing “right-to-work” laws, which bar compulsory unionism; called for recognition of Communist China by the United States and the United Nations; and hailed the investigation work of the Senate rackets committee.

Also approved were plans to launch a $2,000,000 fund campaign for three E & R seminaries: Lancaster Theological Seminary, Eden Theological Seminary and Mission House Seminary.

People: Words And Events

Deaths: Dr. J. S. Ladd Thomas, 84, dean emeritus of the Temple University School of Theology, in Philadelphia … the Rev. Ernest C. Pye, 77, author and Congregational Christian educator, in Winter Park, Florida.

Elections: As president of the International Society of Christian Endeavor, Dr. Clyde Meadows … as president of the Methodist Conference of Great Britain, Dr. Eric Baker … as president of the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec, the Rev. H. W. Lang … as president of Grand Canyon College, Dr. Eugene N. Patterson … as dean of the Theological Seminary of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Dr. Fred C. Kuehner … as president of North Park College and Theological Seminary, Dr. Karl A. Olsson … as moderator of the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, the Rev. Murray W. Griffith … as bishop of the Anglican Church of Canada’s Caledonia, B. C., diocese, Archdeacon Eric Munn.

Appointments: By the National Council of Churches: as director of faith and order studies (an office which parallels on a national scale the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches), the Rev. William A. Norgren; as secretary of promotion of the Committee on World Literacy and Christian Literature, Dr. Leslie C. Sayre; as director of program promotion and station relations of the Broadcasting and Film Commission, Carl Cannon … as chairman of the division of fine arts at Taylor University, Dr. Marvin G. Dean … as professor of canon law and pastoral theology at the University of Thessaloniki School of Theology, Archimandrite Jerome Kotsonis, chaplain at the Greek Royal Palace … as co-director of Christ’s Mission, the Rev. Stuart P. Garver.

Statement Of Faith

Here is the amended “Statement of Faith” approved by last month’s United Church of Christ General Synod. (For earlier version, see April 13, 1959, issue of CHRISTIANITY TODAY):

We believe in God, the Eternal Spirit, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and our Father, and to his deeds we testify:

He calls the worlds into being, creates man in his own image and sets before him the ways of life and death.

He seeks in holy love to save all people from aimlessness and sin.

He judges men and nations by his righteous will declared through prophets and apostles.

In Jesus Christ, the man of Nazareth, our crucified and risen Lord, he has come to us and shared our common lot, conquering sin and death and reconciling the world to himself.

He bestows upon us his Holy Spirit, creating and renewing the Church of Jesus Christ, binding in covenant faithful people of all ages, tongues, and races.

He calls us into his Church to accept the cost and joy of discipleship, to be his servants in the service of men, to proclaim the gospel to all the world and resist the powers of evil, to share in Christ’s baptism and eat at his table, to join him in his passion and victory.

He promises to all who trust him forgiveness of sins and fullness of grace, courage in the struggle for justice and peace, his presence in trial and rejoicing, and eternal life in his kingdom which has no end.

Blessing and honor, glory and power be unto him. Amen.

“Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7).

“The quality of mercy is not strained:

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven

Upon the place beneath: it is twice blessed—

It blesses him that gives, and him that takes.

’Tis mightiest in the mightiest. It becomes

The throned monarch better than his crown.…

It is an attribute to God himself.

How shall thou hope for mercy, rendering none?”

Mercy is in complete harmony with justice, if not identical with that attribute. It is true there may be instances when the human mind will be perplexed, and the human heart distressed, by an apparent discrepancy,—pity drawing one way, and a strong sense of duty urging the other. In such cases, however, there need be no irreparable breach, if the mercy be true mercy, and the justice pure justice. Still, these qualities may become so alloyed in conventional forms, and so confused to our conceptions, that there will be a seeming conflict. But, essentially, absolutely, they are at one, and become antagonistic only when this or that parts with something of its true character. We may be assured that unmerciful justice is unjust, and unjust mercy unmerciful.

Mercy In Action

Some have to labor hard with their niggardliness in order to be kind; but the blessing lies not only in doing a merciful act, but in being merciful in disposition. Followers of Jesus must be men of mercy; for they have found mercy; and mercy has found them.

CHARLES SPURGEON

The mere passive quality of mercy, inactive and inoperative, does not reach the full meaning of the passage. The translation might well be, the actively benevolent, not exclusively in alms-giving, although that is embraced in the sense, but generally in doing all in their power to promote the happiness and welfare of others. The highest type of Christian virtue is found in that spirit of self-consecration which surrenders all to the cause of the Redeemer, and labors with unremitted zeal for the spiritual welfare of immortal souls. Such shall obtain mercy. They cared for the happiness of others, their own happiness shall be cared for by their heavenly Father.

JOHN J. OWEN

That the end why God shows mercy to you more than others, it is that you might do good to others; why would God have some poor, some rich, but that he might crown patience in others, and mercy in another.

JEREMIAH BURROUGHS

They must be not only well-disposed towards their enemies, but must be merciful to them just as their heavenly Father is merciful—and must take pity on all people.… As a further expression of mercy, we must give to everyone who is needy, and we must do so in conformity with the highest demands of love, so that it may be to the honor of God and profitable to the one who is in need. To the generous giver will be liberally given—in full in eternity, but even in measure in this life, as God so ordains it. All the blessings which a person receives here and will receive hereafter are gifts of grace from God, not founded upon man’s merits. But nevertheless, the Lord also teaches that there will be conformity between the measure of “reward” and the faithfulness of the person concerned (cf. Matt. 25:31–46).

NORVAL GELDENHUYS

Mercy’S Reward

The mercies of God are dispensed out of the treasury of his goodness, wrought by the art of his wisdom, effected by the arm of his power.

STEPHEN CHARNOCK

The most successful and distinguished in the kingdoms of this world are too often the revengeful and implacable, the clement and forgiving being, as it were, disqualified for such distinction by this very disposition. But in my kingdom it shall not be so. Happy, already, in the prospect of its prompt erection, are the merciful, the very class so shamefully neglected in all other kingdoms, but in mine to be treated according to their nature.

J. A. ALEXANDER

Thou art sought, and thou seekest. As thou dealest with thy seeker, even so will God deal with his. Thou art both empty and full. Fill thou the empty out of thy fulness, that out of the fulness of God thine emptiness may be filled.

ST. AUGUSTINE

All mercies have their duration and perpetuity from Christ; all christless persons hold their mercies upon the great contingencies and terms of uncertainty; if they be continued during this life, that is all: there is not one drop of mercy after death. But the mercies of the saints are continued to eternity; the end of their mercies on earth, is the beginning of their better mercies in heaven. There is a twofold end of mercies, one perfective, another destructive; the death of the saints perfects and completes their mercies; the death of the wicked destroys and cuts off their mercies.

JOHN FLAVEL

Now it is believed, and rightly so, that all mankind will be presented before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive the things according as he has done in the body, whether good or bad. Therefore I may perhaps say something bold: if what is ineffable and invisible be capable of being apprehended by thought, then one can even now perceive the blessed reward of the merciful. For the gratitude of souls who have received kindness towards those who have shown them mercy surely remains beyond this life in life eternal. What then is likely to happen in the hour of reckoning, when those who have received kindness will recognize their benefactor? What will his soul feel when grateful voices joyfully reclaim him before the God of all creation? Will he need any other beatitude added, who in so great a theatre is applauded for all that is best?

ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA

Divine mercy is free sovereign mercy; it is not purchased at all; not purchased even by Christ’s work, far less by our own. Christ’s mediation is not the price of mercy: it is the channel through which mercy finds its way to the sinner in consistency with justice. And faith is not the price of mercy either; it is the appointed way in which the sinner enters on the enjoyment of mercy.

JOHN BROWN

To put it bluntly: too few of us who profess to be Christians live and act consistently with our profession.

That there is so often a wide gap between a knowledge of doctrine and the outworking of it reflects badly on us who ought to be living epistles, “known and read of men.”

To many of us Christian doctrine is a matter of greatest importance, for doctrine consists of those things we believe about Christ—who he is and what he has done for us.

But unless that which we believe is translated into a life consistent with our beliefs, the depth and reality of our professed faith necessarily becomes suspect.

This is not to imply that genuine faith in Christ eventuates in perfection in this life—far from it. But our desires, aspirations and most important of all, our love centers in Christ, and as “new creatures” in him we should live in a way which honors not dishonors him.

Many years ago a small Negro boy was brought into court in Richmond under the charge of theft. It was judge Crutchfield who asked the boy, “Son, did you steal that box?” “No sir, Judge, that would be sin,” the boy replied.

“What is sin”? asked the judge. Earnestly the boy said: “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of the law of God.” He had learned this at the 17th Street mission and it was implanted in his heart.

The judge immediately dismissed the case and the boy went free.

Here was doctrine in the heart and honesty in action. Such behavior should characterize every Christian, but how often it does not!

In the realm of God’s moral law what effect has Christ’s fulfilling that law had on our behavior?

We might ask ourselves these questions: Owing God primary and final allegiance, do I have any other gods before him?

Is God first in my life? Do I honestly try to put the interests of God and his Kingdom before everything else?

Knowing that God abhors idols, do I worship money, position, attainments, sex, anything? Even in our worship are not some of us in danger of transgressing his holy command with pictures, candles, music and the like?

Although we know that God will not hold the offender guiltless, do we nonetheless take his name in vain, or, stand mutely by while others profane that name?

From the very beginning of time God set aside one day in seven as a day of rest. How often we make it a holiday instead of a day dedicated to worship and Christian service!

Concern and making provision for our parents is a divine injunction. While we may give them material things, are they conscious of our love and appreciation of that which they have done for us through the years?

We may not kill those with whom we disagree, but how often is there hatred in our hearts—sin in God’s sight?

We may not commit the overt act of adultery, but who would be willing to have the innermost thoughts of his heart made public? In these days how often do we look with complacency on the moral debauchery all about us and in so many phases of American life?

Some wag has said that income tax laws have made thieves of us all. This may not be true, but unless we are careful there is an unending tendency to try to get the best of others in our business dealings.

Bearing false witness against our neighbors is now so common, even in Christian circles, that some individuals and institutions seem to think they are honoring the Lord when they lie about someone with whom they do not agree. In fact some do this in “defending the faith.” May God have mercy on such zealots!

An old priest is reported to have said that in all the confessions he had ever heard, not a person had confessed to covetousness. Yet the desire to possess that which is not our own is too prevalent in Christian circles.

We who name the name of Christ, and then dishonor him in the most flagrant ways, reveal our disgraceful irreverence for the moral code that God has ordained.

The Apostle James warned the early Christians, “Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.”

One of the besetting sins of Christians is backbiting and criticism. It is embarrassing to read: “If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain.”

Knowing the sinfulness of the human heart and the deception for which we are all subject, Christ said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father in heaven.”

James’ succinct statement, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also,” is a truth the unbelieving world grasps readily. It is when we Christians translate the things we believe into the things we do that our Christian profession becomes a reality to those around us.

As profession without action is a sham, so are good deeds without concern for the spiritual welfare either of ourselves or others. Our Lord made it plain that our lives are to show forth righteousness unto the glory of our heavenly Father. How often we try to steal God’s glory to take it for ourselves.

What is the arbiter of Christian living? Where can we find those precepts by which we know God’s will for our lives? How can we understand the meaning of righteous conduct towards God and our fellow man? Strange as it may seem to those of the world and even to the nominal Christian, we find these answers in the Bible.

Not only is the Bible the source of doctrine, and of those things we are to know and believe about God and his Son, but it is the chart for daily living.

Centuries before our Lord came to this earth, his people Israel had sinned and departed from his commandments. A copy of the law was discovered and brought to King Josiah and read before him. He listened in astonishment and then with consternation. “And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes.” This was an act caused by deep conviction of sin. He exclaimed: “… great is the wrath of the Lord … because our fathers have not kept the word of the Lord, to do after all that is written in this book.”

Here we see the terror of the law, but in Christ we see the mercy and grace of a loving God.

If Christians are to live like Christians, their feet must walk firmly up on the truths which have to do with Christ—his person and his work. Their faith must show the reality of his transforming graces which proceed from the Spirit of the living Christ. Then only will we show Christianity as faith in action.

IFD

Our neighbors in Cloverleaf Vista are back from vacation. They were having a post-mortem at our barbecue. Everything went wrong again this year: it rained, the fish didn’t bite, the flies did, the twins had the mumps, the car side-swiped a frozen custard truck when the trailer hitch broke.

Peter Peiper, who will be a junior at Mortarford College, ventured to explain that this was just a case of IFD. General semantics, he said, shows that we escape from reality by symbolic thinking. The American vacation is an example of idealization. All winter we dream of vacation bliss. Comes the vacation reality and the discrepancy fills us with frustration. The cycle is Idealization, Frustration, Disintegration. Unrealistic ideals always end in despair.

About half way through these observations it began to rain; in the regrouping on the porch, only Mrs. Peiper, Pastor Peterson, and I remained in Peter’s seminar.

The pastor remarked that we suffer from a bankruptcy of ideals rather than an overstock. He took issue with the view that ideals were only carrots to be dangled at a calculated distance from the donkey’s nose. The cynical philosophy that makes all ideals adjustable is disillusionment made permanent. If the way out of despair were the reduction of our hopes, Buddhism would hold the key to mental health; kill off desire and find bliss in unconsciousness!

Peter protested that semantics recognizes the usefulness of realistic ideals, but Pastor Peterson was now in full sermonic form. “Usefulness of ideals!” he snorted. “An ideal isn’t a technique, it’s a standard. We need to know that we must be holy, in the image of God. That drives us to total despair, but there is the gate of repentance and faith.”

It developed that the pastor had heard of IFD before, when a university lecturer had charged Billy Graham with offering escape from reality in religious symbols. The pastor promptly began to crusade for DRF: Despair, Repentance, Faith. The Gospel begins with real despair and leads to real bliss. Instead of counseling adjustment to a scaled down reduction of the broken hopes of a sinner, it lifts up his eyes to the heights of Zion, and then lifts him there too, in Christ’s triumph.

VACUUM ONLY APPARENT

John H. Gerstner’s June 8 column reflects a degree of appreciation and understanding of pacifist thought which is rare for your journal. If Mr. Gerstner is interested, he will find that the vacuum of pacifist literature is only apparent. The Church Peace Mission at 1133 Broadway, Room 1601, New York 10, can furnish bibliography and study papers.

I must comment on the uncritical assumption of so many conservative Christians that Christian pacifism means “peace at any price” or, in present-day terms, selling out to the Russians. We pacifists underline Gerstner’s words: “If Christianity be true and God be a fact, then obedience to His truth at the cost of extinction is a cheap price to pay.” This is the testimony of pre-Constantinian Christians and of the Anabaptist martyrs, among others.

But does obedience to God’s truth mean that we exterminate our national enemies? The irony of our international situation is that, barring divine intervention or an unparalleled movement of genuine faith, both East and West will be equipped for automatic mutual annihilation in just a few years, thus forcing a choice between co-existence or extinction. Pacifists agree that survival may not be the ultimate good, but by what twist can the Christian gospel be made to support the vengeful assertion that “if we’ve got to die, they’ll all die, too”?

Second Mennonite

Philadelphia, Pa.

While I would expect … popular, sensational magazines to glorify war and the god of American nationalism, I thought that CHRISTIANITY TODAY would extol the pacifism exemplified by Christ more than it has.

Mt. Union, Pa.

I am continuing to read and enjoy CHRISTIANITY TODAY. I am glad to see that logic has not been thrown to the winds or left to die in a philosophy class. Just as in his classroom, Dr. Gerstner’s logic and keen perception makes pacifism look sick with only untried emotionalism to undergird its precepts.

My disgust with the church’s over-emphasis on the diplomatic problem concerning Red China and the forgetfulness concerning the spiritual needs of the Chinese of the Orient and our lands led me to “scratch out” the following lines:

Old Fourth Church did not sit at ease

Concerning the fate of the Red Chinese,

For at its socials and frequent teas

The congregation lamented the diplomatic squeeze.

“It isn’t fair,” boomed Deacon Brown,

Wearing that usual committee frown,

“To keep away official recognition

From such a large significant nation,

For it has grown from the wreck

Left by dictatorial Chiang Kai-shek.”

Yet strange as life itself can be

A block away lived poor Chun Lee,

But he never heard anyone tell

The story of Jesus and the gospel.

His boys, hungry and unusually small,

Played at war along Old Fourth’s wall:

But no one ever was heard to say,

“What would be Jesus’ main interest today?”

London, Ont.

I see no choice but to recognize a government that is ruling the lives of over 500 million people, no matter what our opinions be on the philosophy and the aims under which this government operates.… Let me ask of the bitter critics of such a move, “Where were you when the government leaders of Iraq were killed and dragged in the streets, and within 48 hours our government recognized the rebel government?” It would appear to me that the big difference in this case is that Iraq has many oil wells involving substantial American interests while no such comparable economic tie exists in Red China.

Associate Pastor

First Presbyterian Church

San Fernando, Calif.

My summer holiday has afforded me time to reread one of the significant books by the late Secretary Dulles who was a friend and colleague of mine.… I would respectfully suggest that you publish the following from Mr. Dulles’ book War or Peace (page 190):

I have now come to believe that the United Nations will best serve the cause of peace if its Assembly is representative of what the world actually is, and not merely representative of the parts we like. Therefore, we ought to be willing that all nations should be members without attempting to appraise closely those which are ‘good’ and those which are ‘bad.’ Already that distinction is obliterated by the present membership of the United Nations.

He added:

If the Communist government of China in fact proves its ability to govern China without serious domestic resistance, then it, too, should be admitted to the United Nations. However, a regime that claims to have become the government of a country through civil war should not be recognized until it has been tested over a reasonable period of time”.…

Why assume that those who continue to think now what he thought nine years ago (even though he changed his mind about it afterwards when Secretary of State) are “leftish”?

South Strafford, Vt.

In the April 13 issue (Eutychus), Paul A. Remick states: “Not to recognize Red China is like refusing to recognize a change of administration in our own country.” … Diplomatic recognition is far more than calling a spade a spade.… If my memory serves me well, there was but one time in the history of our nation that a change of administration was not recognized—namely the secession of the Confederacy. The Union did not recognize it, did not approve. Rather, it fought what is often termed the bloodiest war in history to force the “rebels” back into the Union. We today are faced with the same issue: “Can any person be allowed to trample another underfoot?” Communist brand slavery is a far worse terror than that seen in our country so many years ago. It cannot, it must not be recognized by those who name the Name of Christ!

Reformed Episcopal

Ventnor, N. J.

THE OLD AND THE NEW BARTH

What possibly could be of less importance than whether or not the old Barth is a ‘New Barth,’ or the differences between Barthianism vs. Bultmannism? I read, and re-read, Prof. Van Til’s article (June 8 issue) and couldn’t make sense of it.… This type of contribution … is hard for the ordinary layman to digest and also … 99.44 per cent of the clergy. The world is steeped in sin and there is a simple remedy, which needs neither a Barth nor a Bultmann to explain or explain away.

Toronto, Ont.

Van Til’s critique of “the New Barth” … is typical of a certain ultra-Calvinistic crowd who think that they are doing God a favour by trampling on his ‘enemies.’ What a shock it will be to them when they discover who the enemies of God really are!

United Church of Canada

Cedar Springs, Ont.

Writing of Karl Barth, Dr. Van Til touches the two important points that Barth still maintains biblical errancy and seems not to relate the Resurrection adequately to the objective accomplishment of Atonement. Development of these could have given a valuable article. But instead we then move on to several misconceptions.… Thus, no serious student would find a new Barth in 1952, but none could dispute the critical change culminating in 1931–2. As regards the useful German distinction between history as what happens (Geschichte) and as the record of what happens (Historie), Barth emphatically and rightly will not say what he is virtually made to say, namely, that because an event is not or cannot be recorded, it did not really happen. In miracles, he sees an element which is historisch, i.e., can be recorded in scientific terms, but for him the real happening, e.g., God’s actual raising of Jesus, is beyond the terms of reference of scientific depiction. Yet this neither negates nor reduces its factuality. Why should it? Only subjective rationalism could think so. The context of most of Dr. Van Til’s quotations (in IV, 1) demands notice, namely, Barth’s relating of the Resurrection to the prophetic work of Christ, Himself present to proclaim and apply the message of Atonement by the Holy Spirit (cf. Matt. 28:20; John 14:16–18; Heb. 13:8 and Rev. 1:18). In this setting, the statements presume a factual Resurrection and bear no conceivable relation to the subjectivizing of Bultmann. The final tour de force which makes Barth the exact opposite of his own intention … hampers the serious and fruitful criticism demanded of evangelicals by the Dogmatics.

Fuller Theological Seminary

Pasadena, Calif.

UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST

I have read your article on the United Church of Christ and think that you have correctly analyzed the situation. Communications from all over the United States come to my desk revealing an uneasiness with the merger, or definite hostility to it. Many are determined to maintain a truly Congregational association of churches.

I think you are right in surmising that the framework of the United Church of Christ has been set up contrary to the desires of a large segment of the Congregational churches in order to make the framework for the merger of many Protestant denominations. You are doing a great service in thus analyzing these aspects of the ecumenical movement.

Park Street Church

Boston, Mass.

DISAPPEARING DILEMMA

Pastor McCrae’s dilemma (Eutychus, May 25 issue) resolves itself in his fine expression: “entire relinquishment of the sick one to God.” If he will do so and teach others, he will be in no danger of turning about and telling God precisely what He should do, which seems to be implied by those “positive and expectant prayers.” In sickness I look to Him who is powerful to heal me, who loves me as His own dear child in Christ, and I ask Him to heal me (and others) “if it be Thy will.” My prayer is both positive and expectant. I know He hears and will answer in His own way and at His own time. What more could His child want than this? If we but let God be God and refrain from every temptation to instruct Him, the dilemma disappears.

The Lutheran Church of Our Redeemer

Sheboygan, Wisc.

My faith in the love and rightness of God’s will in every matter gives me all the confidence I need to ask him for his highest and best gifts for both myself and others. Then I serenely and eagerly trust his holy, healing will to reveal himself in the yielded human mind, body and spirit.

… How I am comforted by the adoring thought, “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away; Blessed be the Name of the Lord!”

North Presbyterian Church

Pittsburgh, Pa.

FAILURE OF MISSIONS

Carlsen’s article on missions should be put into the hands—and hearts—of every evangelical missionary and mission board executive in our country. He has pointed up the basic reason for the obvious failure of Christian missions to evangelize effectively the world. And, as a former missionary, I know that what he describes is all too true.

Clymer, N. Y.

BACK INTO SERVICE

May I ask your readers in many parts of the world … if there is any person who could assist one who is struggling to master a new language. There are no doubt many amongst your readers who were missionaries in China and who used the Hokkien Dialect. My wife and I want to obtain a copy of “Chinese-English Dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy” by the Reverend Carstairs Douglas and the supplement by the Reverend Thomas Barclay. These have been out of print for many years but there are doubtless many copies still extant and these could be brought back into service for the Lord and could also make our study considerably simpler. If several copies are thus found it will also assist several friends who are also searching for these dictionaries.

Overseas Missionary Fellowship

B 100, Tapah Road

Perak, Malaya

A FLAME AND A BRIDGEHEAD

We here have just had the privilege of a “Billy Graham” Crusade, and it has unquestionably lit a very real “spiritual flame” in this land, such as could finally transform the face of the whole nation. I witnessed the “London Crusade” also, but Sydney has far surpassed it. Whilst “decisions” are an indication, they do not really measure the magnitude of the impact, in changed attitudes and the many unseen conversions. I feel a real bridgehead has been made, and it will be our own fault if it is not secured and expanded.

Royal Australian Air Force

Richmond, N.S.W., Australia

PREACHING THE BIBLE

The answer to Maurice Mahler (Eutychus, May 25 issue) and his hosts of friends who find that many of our seminaries do not instruct young seminarians how to preach the Bible and its passages to our people with emphasis upon what the real meaning of the text is, I believe, is found in the Bible Institute.

The three years, thought by many of my friends to be “wasted,” were the most fruitful of my theological training from the standpoint of preaching the Word with emphasis upon the context.

Baptist Missionary Church

La Porte, Ind.

MAJESTIC VIEW

“Relativity” (L. Nelson Bell, Sept. 15 issue) … brings out a … majestic … viewpoint! It should be particularly useful in college and Unitarian communities.

Boston, Mass.

Too long I have thought of Jesus the Christ as having begun with his birth by the Virgin Mary. You made it clear to me that creation was in the hands of Christ, the eternal Son of God.…

Boston, Mass.

THE WIDE GULF

Thanks for your brief news report (April 13 issue, p. 30) about the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas.… Many of the new logia are obviously late or of little interest to any but specialists in Gnosticism. But those sayings that parallel synoptic sayings may throw real light upon the working of oral tradition. Perhaps one of the greatest values of the discovery of the Gnostic library is that it clearly demonstrates the wide gulf between the thought of the New Testament and that of the Gnostics. These writings show that although some of the terminology may have coincided, Gnostic influence could never have found any place in the minds of the New Testament writers.

St. Mary’s College

St. Andrews, Scotland

PRE-PUBLICATION NOTICE

The writer wishes to announce the imminent appearance of the Reviled-Slandered Perversion of the Bible, a boon to that clergyman who rejoices in the progress of Christianity from its Humble Beginnings to its Present-Role-and-Status.

Embarrassed for years by claims of authority benighted dodderers have advanced on behalf of the Bible, yet a bit timid about replacing the old tome with a culling from Rousseau, Paine, Hegel, the Tübingen School, Schweitzer, Fosdick, and Wieman, the modern Marcion has felt somewhat sheepish about marching under a cellophane banner. Yet a real moral issue is involved. It would be a sacrifice of honor to expediency if one claimed to have faith in the Scriptures when one did not—something no honest liberal would do; therefore the happy solution suggests itself that the Scripture can be changed, in such a way that they may become a Manifesto of the Liberal Faith. After all, “if the patient isn’t doing well, change the medicine” seems considerably more sensible than “if the medicine isn’t doing well, change the patient.” Our experience is that such patients seldom can be changed.

One example may suggest our approach. Where RSV has for John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” R-SP reads the same verse (PPE 1:1—PPE—Probably Presbyter of Ephesus), “The archetypal logos originates from and participates in the summum bonum.” This is especially nice for showing the harmony between or, on a sunny day, the identity of Jungian analysis and Christian theology.

Other features of our Bible include these: 1. all miracles printed in italics to signify they are “faith events” rather than historical happenings; 2. all dogmatic statements introduced by the phrase, “It seems to me that …,” except when made by Christ: in such cases introduced by the phrase, “The second and third generation of the early Church thought that Christ said that …”; 3. all attributions of authorship followed by a question mark, sic: The Book of Hosea (?); 4. all statements reflecting mercy printed in red and all statements reflecting judgment printed in light grey.

Your cooperation is requested concerning one factor before the final galley proofs are sent to the printer. We are conducting a public opinion survey to see which three books of the Bible we should leave out altogether. Please send in your suggestions.

We are hoping for a big sale of R-SP. It should do even better than some of our earlier publications, such as Where Liberal Protestants Stand (a study of the architecture of a Unitarian Church with no pews); Building a Vital Theology (a do-it-yourself kit); and Authority in Liberalism Today (an exposition of non-directive counselling techniques).

If you wish to place an advance order for R-SP, just make out a check for ten dollars and send it on to us. Our address can be found in any standard study of witchcraft.

Lake Forest, Ill.

For the first time in many decades, evangelism has become respectable. While some still view it with suspicion and even with disdain, many now regard evangelism with enthusiasm because of its popularity among large segments of the visible church. Renewed interest in biblical theology, success of the Billy Graham crusades, extensive coverage by the secular press, and the upsurge of evangelical publications have all created a favorable climate for evangelism. Surely this is the opportune time for evangelicals in the twentieth century to pass from rearguard defensive action to an aggressive leadership. By bold action and strategic planning, the evangelical Church may penetrate and conquer territory lost in past years. The revival and increasing acceptance of historic Christianity gives hope and encouragement for the future.

These many evidences of resurgent evangelism in our day are heartening. Nonetheless, we must candidly acknowledge that the movement appears strong only in comparison to its recent weakness. When the foundation of the second temple was laid, according to the prophet Ezra, the people shouted with a great shout and praised the Lord. But those who had seen the first temple wept with a loud voice, for the glory of Zerubbabel’s temple could not compare with the glory of Solomon’s. One need not be a tottering octogenarian to remember the time when many more churches, colleges and seminaries, institutions, and missions were under the sway of a vital and strong evangelism. In light of the corruption and secularism of this generation, no one can claim that resurgent evangelism has as yet made an appreciable impact for righteousness upon American life and society.

Source Of Vital Evangelism

Although its former glory and strength has not been fully restored, evangelism has manifested sufficient power to merit a grudging respect. Impressed with the awakened and resilient strength of historic Christianity, inclusive ecumenism has indicated a willingness to be even more inclusive in order to embrace it. Ecclesiastical activists have volunteered to give direction to it. Alluring Delilahs assure evangelicals that they will not shave all seven locks of hair as they did in previous years. Some may concede to retain the six locks that formerly were objectionable: the Lord’s virgin birth, deity, bodily resurrection, second coming, judgment, and vicarious atonement. But almost in unison they insist that the seventh lock—the doctrine of the infallible and verbally inspired Word of God—be shorn. Signs are not lacking that this has attracted people within the evangelistic camp who feel that the strength and glory of evangelism can be retained with the omission of that particular “obnoxious” doctrine. And to wield that one lock of hair, they feel, is a small price to pay for the prestige of having ecclesiastical acceptance. Church history, however, gives evidence that all strong revival and reformation movements in the past have been associated with emphasis on the Scriptures as the authoritative Word. Luther, Calvin, Knox, Wesley, and Spurgeon were not ashamed to acknowledge the Bible as the infallible Word. From there they drew forth the vital doctrines of the sovereignty of God, the Trinity, the divine and human natures of Christ, the priesthood of all believers, justification by faith, vicarious atonement, and others. Through the Written Word they came to a knowledge and acceptance of the Living Word. If resurgent evangelism is going to have authority, permanence, and an impact in our day for righteousness, it must grasp and view productively the same fundamental doctrines that come out of the same authoritative source.

The Pulpit

Our greatest concern has been over the matter of denominational spiritual life which often rises no higher than denominational theological seminaries. As ministers are trained and taught, so will the people be instructed. Knowing of the confusion that exists in many theological schools, one cannot but become frustrated and pessimistic over a desperate situation. Seminaries may be the last to become sensitive to resurgent evangelism. They are now extremely sensitive to neo-orthodoxy in its various forms, and so continually adjust their sails to the changing winds of theology that a Roman Catholic writer stated recently, and with some justice: “Protestantism is in a constant flux, so that a polemic of 20 years ago is today no longer to the point.” If, therefore, evangelism finds a closed door to many theological schools, where will the dynamic doctrines of the Word of God find entrance? The answer is in the preaching of consecrated men.

Evangelicals, while having little influence over ecclesiastical machinery and denominational seminaries, and being scarcely heard in ecumenical counsels, do have access to the pulpits across the nation. God has ordained the medium of preaching to the salvation of souls, and to the sustaining of the salt of the community and the light of the world. In the first chapter of I Corinthians Paul announces the amazing fact that “it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” The preaching of Christ crucified is as foolish in the twentieth century as it was in the first, but “the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” Not many wise, mighty, and noble are among the evangelicals; nevertheless, as Paul states: “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty.” Preaching takes precedence over all other means to reaching the nation with the gospel of the Saviour. The strengthening and spiritual reinvigoration that can issue from the pulpit should cause evangelicals to give priority to preaching for strategic planning. We must confess that the evangelical pulpit is by no means as distinguished as it should be; it leaves much to be desired.

Lack Of Depth In The Pulpit

A candid and realistic appraisal of the preaching of those who stand behind the sacred desk reveals distressing weaknesses that explain why evangelism has failed to make an impact for righteousness upon the nation. Perhaps the most glaring is that of shallowness, or lack of scriptural depth in so many sermons. The sheep within evangelical churches remain hungry and thirsty because the Bread of Life is not imparted nor the Fountain of Life opened. The task of the preacher is to set the Word before the people. He is to expound it, interpret it, and bear witness to its power. He is to sow the seed with the heartening knowledge that under the providence of God that Word shall not return unto him void. To preach the Word is an exacting, painstaking, and time-consuming task. And he who regards his responsibility lightly, regards the Word lightly.

Many feel that inclusion and repetition of certain biblical phrases automatically constitutes an evangelical and scriptural message. Frequently they will repeat, “Ye must be born again,” “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,” and “Be cleansed by the blood of the Lamb.” But a mere reiteration of biblical phrases is not expounding and interpreting the Word. Jesus spent an evening with Nicodemus in order to explain the nature and necessity of the New Birth; and he who would expound the doctrine of regeneration must master much of the third chapter of the Gospel of John. Paul and Silas took considerable time to expound the meaning of faith in Christ to the family of the Philippian jailer. Is it not reasonable that he, who would explain the phrase “cleansed by the blood of the Lamb,” should know the structure of the Temple, the significance of its sacrifices, and have a mastery over the epistle to the Hebrews? In other words, an effective preacher ought to be a theologian. James Denny said: “If evangelists were our theologians or theologians our evangelists, we should at least be nearer the ideal Church.”

Evangelical ministers are apt to forget that the saints’ edification, sanctification, and consolation, and not only the conversion of sinners, are God-given tasks. It is true that many congregations seek only a milk diet and abhor strong meat, but this immature condition can be overcome if there is consistent preaching of the whole Counsel of God. A systematic instruction in the great doctrines of the Word of God cannot be overstressed nor carried on at a superficial level. This naturally requires intense study and sermon preparation on the part of the preacher—a painful procedure most likely, to the activist minister. Yet this quality of conscientiousness is necessary for establishing a powerful pulpit. It means the elimination of dozens of church organizational meetings and semi-social functions. It means that the minister will not become occupied with church routine at the expense of study in the Scriptures. Only as he grows in the knowledge and wisdom of the Lord will there be a richer infusion of His Word in the messages from the pulpit.

Salvation Of Souls

One of the major tasks of the pulpit is to bring men and women into a saving relationship with Christ. Keen observers of church life have noted that in spite of the signal success of the Graham crusades, the trend is away from great mass evangelistic campaigns. There is a wholesome movement toward mobilizing all forces of the local church in consistent evangelism as over against the sporadic effort of special campaigns. Here the pulpit must take leadership by stressing the primacy of the Word as over against methodology, and by inculcating a deep and lasting passion rather than temporary zeal for lost souls. Some preachers and churches are only impressed by numbers and are unwilling or impatient to labor for weeks and months in order to lead one soul to Christ. They forget that God sent an earthquake to cause just one soul to cry out for salvation, and that all heaven rejoices over the repentance of one soul. We can learn something from the scribes and Pharisees who compassed sea and land to make proselytes. Of course, the pulpit must reach out for numbers, but, at the same time, the salvation of one individual is worth the effort of an entire ministry.

There is a poverty reflected in many of the messages intended to reach for lost souls. A minimum of the Word and a maximum of entertaining anecdotes are often regarded as the most effective way to encourage “decisions.” But superficial sermons produce superficial results. Wesley, Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Christmas Evans (the Welsh revivalist), and Spurgeon all steeped and saturated their sermons with Scripture. They not only made the text possess their message, but used other parts of Scripture to shed light about it. They were ministers of the Word in the true sense, and God honored his Word by sending times of revival and refreshing. It is the foolishness of preaching Christ and him crucified that God blesses in the salvation of souls, and not the foolish preaching of personal experiences or human wisdom.

Social Problems And Culture

Constant criticism is heard from numerous sources that the evangelical pulpit lacks proper concern for the social problems that confront the world. Some of that criticism is justified. Actually that situation could be corrected were preachers to expound all of the Word of God. Six of the Ten Commandments concern themselves with social relationships. The Fifth Commandment concerns itself with care for the aged; the Sixth, with race hatred, murder, and wars; the Seventh, with sexual perversion, lusts, and divorce; the Eighth, with gambling, communism, dishonest capitalism, and labor rackets; the Ninth, with truth in all phases of life; and the Tenth with materialism and secularism. The Sermon on the Mount is deeply concerned with social problems. Every Epistle has its practical application to the situation in which a Christian finds himself. If voices from the evangelical pulpit are mute on the pressing social problems of this generation, it is that evangelism has suppressed a goodly portion of the Word. Evangelicals have a great responsibility for the calloused and indifferent conscience of contemporary society, and they have failed to lash the public’s conscience with the Word of God. Men must not forget that it is by creating a sensitive and tender conscience that the proper climate is provided to call sinners to repentance and salvation.

Another woeful weakness on the part of evangelism, so it is claimed, is its negligence of culture. This may be true, but it should not be the major concern of the pulpit. Eventually regenerated men, if there are sufficient number, will influence culture. Great periods in the history of the evangelical church have produced great art, architecture, music, and the inauguration of educational institutions. A dominant and persuasive religion will create a new and more enjoyable way of life. But the first task is to extend the boundaries of the kingdom of God. Then culture will be cleansed and uplifted.

The Strength Of The Pulpit

Some of the weaknesses of the evangelical pulpit have been reviewed and undoubtedly more could be said, but we must never forget that its strength is as mighty and powerful as the promises of God. When Joshua went forth to drive the seven pagan tribes out of the Land of Promise, God said to him, “Only be thou strong and very courageous, that thou mayest observe to do according to all the law, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper withersoever thou goest. This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written herein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shall have good success, … for the Lord thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.” Joshua was successful in his mission because he did not turn to the left or to the right from the law of God. The same God gave a similar command to his Church to make disciples of all nations and reinforced this command with an identical promise given to Joshua: “And, lo, I am with thee alway, even unto the end of the world.” As the strength of Joshua was the presence of the Lord, so the strength of the evangelical pulpit is the Lord who has all power in heaven and upon earth. As the Lord was present with Joshua in the conquering of Canaan so the Lord is present with the Church in the fulfillment of her mission.

Until the end of time the evangelical pulpit will remain the great means for the sinner’s conversion and the saint’s edification. In this particular period of tension, uncertainty, and theological transition it can stand as a rock of strength and a source of inspiration to the entire Church and nation. From the tenth chapter of Romans this may be paraphrased: “Say not in thine heart, who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) or, who shall descend into the existential theological chaos? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead). But what saith it? The Word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thine heart, and in thy pulpit: that is, the Word of faith, which we preach.” It is only as the preacher behind the sacred desk preaches the whole Counsel and remains in communion with Christ himself that the pulpit will manifest a mighty power and influence to the glory of the Triune God.

END

Associate Editor J. Marcellus Kik’s address was delivered at the Ministers’ Workshop on Evangelism of the Fellowship of Conservative Congregational Christians of New England.

Few questions continue to perplex the thoughtful believer of present-day Christendom as much as the age-old inquiry into the relationship between faith and works. This perplexity seems to be augmented by the tendency of one segment of Christendom to divorce the Christian life from the “fundamentals” of salvation, and by the inclination of another to become so preoccupied in the search for the ethical implications of the Christian faith that its proclamation of the Gospel has often degenerated to the extreme minimum of a bland humanitarianism. Both tendencies are highly unfortunate departures from the historic Christian faith and both betray a misconception of the relationship between the divine and human aspects of the Christian life. The former position does not sufficiently take into account the spiritual character of the horizontal Christian fellowship and the value of Christian actions in witnessing to divine truth. The latter tends to lose sight of the vertical divine fellowship and the foundational truths upon which ethical experience is based.

A theological study and interpretation of the biblical Greek term koinonia offers a corrective for the erroneous tendencies already cited; for this word, by definition and usage, has both divine and human implications. The term koinonia in the various New Testament versions and translations is rendered primarily as fellowship, communion, and participation. A brief review of the koinonia concept will help us gain greater clarity on the issues involved in the relationship between the divine and human aspects of the life in Christ.

The Divine Aspect

Koinonia is the God-initiated and God-effected participation of the Christian believer in the divine nature, through his sharing in Christ’s life, death, and resurrecton by the power of the Holy Spirit. The koinonia concept assumes a highly significant role in New Testament doctrine because it is one of the ways used by the Spirit of God to express the relationship between the believer and God. This interrelationship is possible because of the historical participation of the divine in the human: God sent his Son to earth to take part in all things human, sin excepted.

The koinonia concept includes a certain unique emphasis upon the identification of the participant with the object of participation. The Christian believes, trusts, and obeys God from “without,” from a sphere external to God, as it were. However, when the Christian experiences koinonia with God, or participates in God, the relationship takes place “within” the divine sphere itself. In the koinonia concept, the divine is both the object and the sphere of the Christian’s koinonia. The Christian participates in the divine nature only because, and only when he is located “in” God, “in” the Son, and “in” the Spirit.

This emphasis upon identification is seen most clearly where the koinonia terminology is associated with the doctrines of the suffering and death of Christ, and where the believer actually shares his suffering and death. In apostolic teaching such topics as the Body of Christ, baptism, and the Lord’s supper are relevant to the koinonia concept because of their “identification” symbolism. However, let us not conclude that the koinonia idea is purely symbolic. The Christian’s participation in the divine nature is a fact of experience; it is not an unenlightened mystical adventure. Koinonia is the result of an act of God, introducing man to the realm of spiritual truth and reality. This fellowship is personalistic, because only God’s attitude toward the individual person can make possible the koinonia experience. True Christian fellowship is of God’s creation and not of man’s initiation.

The Human Aspect

In 1 John 1:3 the human aspect of koinonia is expressed in the terms “fellowship with us”—fellowship with the apostolic witnesses, represented by John. Notice however that the human aspect of koinonia is significant only when the Christian takes into account its divine aspect, which the remainer of 1 John 1:3 proceeds to explain: “and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.”

Albert Schweitzer believes that koinonia is based upon a work of divine energy which man has within himself. Human beings already have something in common. They learn about this common possession, respond to it, and thus create koinonia. Aristotle taught that two persons naturally have some things in common; therefore, friendship is based on those things held in common. Such friendship might be thought of as koinonia. L. S. Thornton, however, interprets differently the koinonia experience among Christians:

All human forms of partnership presuppose in the first place the sharing of a common human nature. This, in turn, provides a basis for the sharing of other things, material or spiritual, or both together. But what differentiates the common life of the Church is neither human nature as such, nor things ordinarily shared on the basis of our common humanity. Christians are specifically united neither by material goods, nor by cultural interest nor even by rational ideas. All of these forms of sharing enter into the common life of the Church. But none of them determines its special character.

We have to consider, therefore, what are the objects shared in the common life of the Church, the objects which make that life to be distinctively what it is (The Common Life In the Body of Christ, Dacre Press, 1942, p. 31).

These objects of participation are the divine life of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. We dare not lose sight of the fact that the fellowship of men with one another is based upon their individual fellowship with the divine.

In the opening chapters of Acts we note that something new has come to pass, something which has affected even the external order of things: “And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need” (Acts 2:44, 45, ASV). This community of goods (a voluntary movement, cf. Acts 4:34–5:11), which was probably practiced for a time, is represented as the result of the experience of “one heart and soul” (Acts 4:32). A new unity pervaded the community, and of this new unity community of goods was but a symbol. In the Christian Body, the outward order of life always indicates the inner unity (or lack of it). A sharing of earthly goods may or may not symbolize a sharing in divine things. It may be prompted only by human sympathy or by studied reasoning. In such instances, sharing of earthly goods loses its symbolic character and becomes no more than a social gesture.

Koinonia in the divine always results in a transformation of the whole of life, including our relationship with those about us who are in need. Menno Simons wrote:

The whole Scripture speaks of mercifulness and love, and it is the only sign whereby a true Christian may be known. As the Lord says, “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples [that is, that ye are Christians], if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35).

Beloved reader, it is not customary that an intelligent person clothes and cares for one part of his body and leaves the rest destitute and naked. Oh, no. The intelligent person is solicitous for all his members. Thus it should be with those who are the Lord’s church and body. All those who are born of God, who are gifted with the Spirit of the Lord, who are, according to the Scriptures, called into one body and love in Christ Jesus, are prepared by such love to serve their neighbors, not only with money and goods, but also after the example of their Lord and Head, Jesus Christ, in an evangelical manner, with life and blood (The Complete Writings of Menno Simons, translated from the Dutch by Leonard Verduin and edited by John Christian Wenger, Herald Press, 1956, p. 558).

The great needs of the hour are Christian faith and expression which are relevant to practical life situations—faith-and-life harmony. Would not part of the answer lie in a renewed and vigorous application of the koinonia concept—the human-divine participation and the resulting human-human interaction? Would not this add depth and meaning both to the Christian’s inner experience and his outward expression of the new life in Christ, and would it not provide the new dimension which modern Christians need—real fellowship with God and with one another?

END

After serving from 1953–59 as President of Hesston College, Kansas, Roy D. Roth has gone to the pastorate of Logsden Mennonite Church, a rural mission in an Oregon community where many are Siletz Indians. He holds the B.A. and B.D. from Goshen College, and Th.M. from Princeton Seminary. He has been Secretary of the Mennonite Board of Education.

One of the problems constantly confronting the Christian Church is how it ought to defend its true faith in the presence of heresy and false interpretations. The problem is as keen and sharp today as it has ever been in history. The theological confusion of the twentieth century is beyond description. Many old divisions of Christendom are still with us, but so are the many cults that have subsequently emerged and grown into sizable memberships. The inroads that religious liberalism has made into the very heart of the great denominations is still a grim fact. Existential philosophies are being taught by some clever and learned men who have been making an impact upon Christendom. And neo-orthodoxy, no longer a single movement, has divided into a cluster of related theologies. In view of such confusion and interplay in church and denominational life, the question of strategy faces every Christian who wishes to maintain the orthodox interpretation of the Christian faith.

Among orthodox people themselves there is no common agreement as to what this strategy should be. Views vary from those who think evangelism and an evangelistic emphasis is the solution to those who demand a rigorous doctrinal or ecclesiastical purism. However, in view of the present doctrinal and ecclesiastical distress, it would be good to remind ourselves that in the final analysis it is God himself who maintains his people in faith and not they themselves. “For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed” (Mal. 3:6). If any nation should have perished (spiritually, politically, or physically) it should have been Israel. Yet Israel survived through centuries and through impossible conditions. The reason she survived is that the eternal God was her stay and her support. Equally instructive are Christ’s words to Peter (Matt. 16:18) that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. Whatever is the meaning of the expression “the gates of hell” the intent is the same: The Christian Church shall prevail in spite of the strongest opposition. The Lord of the Church defends her and maintains her. Not for a minute must Christians believe that the existence of the Church and her orthodoxy rests solely upon Christians; it is the responsibility of the God of the sons of Jacob, and the Lord of the Church. No anxious neurotic behavior over protecting the Church and her orthodoxy is in keeping with a sound view of the Church and her destiny in the care of God.

But in its creaturely existence, the Church is called upon to speak to the issue of strategy. As a matter of common Christian concern and discussion we suggest that the center point in rallying Christian people, the point of offense and defense, and the point of leverage and assault is the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Christ And Scripture

In the days of Calvin the religious fanatics were claiming revelations independent of sacred Scripture. Calvin replied to these men that there was an image of the Holy Spirit in Scripture, and any claim to the work of the Spirit must correspond to this image (Institutes, Book I, Chap. 9). In that the revelations of the fanatics did not conform to the image of the Spirit, they were not prompted by the Holy Spirit but by a devilish spirit.

The same relationship holds between Jesus Christ and sacred Scripture. In fact, there is a unique relationship between Scripture and Jesus Christ for Scripture is the summation of revelation as word and Jesus Christ is the summation of revelation as person. But these are not two revelations. The sum of the revelation as person is the subject matter supreme of the sum of revelation as word; and the sum of revelation as word is the divine instrument for introducing men to the revelation as person.

Therefore, we draw two important conclusions. The cultist who has a formal faith in Scripture as the Word of God does not hold this faith in orthodoxy for he holds it without its supreme content, Jesus Christ. And conversely, Churches and Councils that believe in Jesus Christ as divine Lord and Savior and who are not bound to the Scriptural picture of Jesus Christ also have no claim to orthodoxy for they allow men to have a doctrine of Christ not bound to sacred Scripture.

The Faith And The Lord

A most important passage in this connection is Hebrews 13:8: “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.” Most exegetes believe that in this verse “Jesus Christ” stands for the entire Christian faith. Thus the auctor of Hebrews is affirming the finality of the Christian faith. Its truth is the same in the past, present, and future. And how remarkable it is that he sums up the content of the Christian religion with these two words: Jesus Christ! As the mutual combination of the person and work of Christ is understood in this verse, let Jesus then be the hallmark of orthodoxy, its center, its essence, the point where all Christians converge and all heresies diverge. This Christ is not of men’s speculation but the One who corresponds to the image painted of him in the New Testament.

The hallmark was the official stamp of the Goldsmith’s Company of London. Its mark upon silver and gold wares attested to their purity. By the same manner, the eternal Father has stamped upon the Christian faith, according to Hebrews 13:8, the sign of divine purity: Jesus Christ.

It is very clear that the piety of the New Testament is a Christ-centered piety. Galatians 2:20 (“I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith [fulness] of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me”), and Philippians 3:10 (“That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death”) are at the very center of New Testament personal piety. And there is that remarkable verse at the end of I Corinthians: “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha” (16:22). These verses call for a complete personal dedication to Jesus Christ by every Christian. No faithfulness to a moral code or dedication to a Christian institution can substitute for personal, loyal devotion to Jesus Christ. To defend the person and work of Christ, without a genuine personal dedication to him, is an evil thing. Theology without personal religion is devilish; and therefore, he who would be a defender of the faith must first be in daily personal communion with his Lord.

It is not a difficult matter to show that the biblical revelation finds its center in Jesus Christ. Our Lord, speaking of Moses said, “he wrote of me” (John 5:46); and when He gave his marvelous postresurrection lesson in the Scriptures he began with Moses and all the prophets and “expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Peter states that the Holy Spirit which inspired the apostles is the same Spirit of Christ which inspired the prophets (1 Pet. 1:11–12). The auctor of Hebrews sums up the content of the New Testament as God speaking by his Son (Heb. 1:2). He who reads Scripture without coming to Jesus Christ has not stepped into the inner side of sacred Scripture (2 Tim. 3:15).

The Pneumatology of the New Testament is a Christ-centered doctrine. The Holy Spirit is readily called the Spirit of Christ, the other helper (John 14:16) who thus stands side by side with Jesus Christ. He shall not speak of himself, but he shall speak of Christ and glorify the Savior (John 16:13–14). And when the Holy Spirit prompts the human heart with a profound inspiration, the heart says, “Jesus is Lord” (1 Cor. 12:3).

When we turn to the doctrine of God in the New Testament we discover it too is centered in Christ our Lord. No man knows the Father unless he is introduced to Him by the Son (Matt. 11:27). When the Father illumines the human heart, it is with a knowledge of Jesus as the Son of God (Matt. 16:17; Gal. 1:16). He who sees Christ sees the Father (John 12:45) for He is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4), and in Jesus Christ are hid all the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge of God (Col. 2:2–3). He is the brightness of God’s glory and the express image of his person (Heb. 1:3). Therefore, we have the remarkable expression in the New Testament—the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. No belief-in-God-in-general is tolerable within the boundaries of the New Testament doctrine of God.

The doctrine of the Church is equally a Christ-centered doctrine. Christ is the founder and builder of the Church (Matt. 16:16 f.). He is the Good Shepherd who gathers the flock of God and leads it (John 10:1 ff.); he is the Rock upon which the Church is built (1 Pet. 2:6), the head of the body which is the Church (Col. 1:18), and the husband and head of the Church (Eph. 5:23). The Church is not a religious society, nor ethical society, nor simply the moral conscience of the state. It is a supernatural society summoned into existence by the call of God and in the name of Jesus Christ.

Paradoxical as it may appear, the New Testament doctrine of sin has a Christological orientation (John 16:7–11). The Divine Barrister (as it is permissible to translate parakletos; in Kittel’s Wörterbuch we have Fürsprecher) shall convict (another legal term) the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. The cardinal sin is not to believe in the Saviour. Proof of the lack of human righteousness as contrasted with the perfection of Christ’s righteousness is that Christ could go directly to the presence of God; and the prince of this world, who rules the unregenerate, is judged and condemned in the cross of Christ.

The Great Divide

It is highly instructive to note that when the apostle wishes to set out the final dividing line between the spirit of God and the spirit of antichrist, between the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error (plane, wandering), he locates it in the Incarnation (1 John 4:1–7). The prophet who affirms that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh speaks from the Spirit of God; and the prophet who denies the Incarnation speaks from the spirit of error and antichrist. This is a remarkable passage for it is one of those places in Scripture where a line is decisively drawn, and we do well to note carefully when Scripture does draw such a line.

Jesus Christ, of the prophetic anticipation of the prophets and their Old Testament, and of the direct witness of the apostles and their New Testament, is the essence of the Christian faith, and therefore the hallmark of orthodoxy. The basic test for purity of theological metal is whether there is devotion to his wonderful Person, loyalty to the apostolic doctrines summed up by his Name, spiritual and heartfelt desire to “follow his steps” (1 Pet. 2:21), and constancy in the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9).

END

Bernard Ramm is Director of Graduate Studies in Religion at Baylor University. He holds the A.B. from University of Washington, B.D. from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Ph.D. from University of Southern California, and has studied at University of Basel. This fall he moves to his new position at California Baptist Theological Seminary.