This is the second part of a two-part article. In the December 3 issue, definitions were given for “Fundamentalism” and “Evangelical.” In this part, “Liberalism” is from “Baker’s Dictionary of Theology,” Everett F. Harrison, editor-in-chief (Baker, 1960), and “Neoorthodoxy” is from “The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church,” J. D. Douglas, general editor (Zondervan, 1974).

LIBERALISM. Religious liberalism (sometimes called “modernism” but more appropriately “neo-Protestantism”) was a post-Enlightenment development in German theology which arose as a protest against the intense rationalism of the Enlightenment and to confessional orthodoxy; and on the positive side was an attempt to harmonize Christian theology with the divers elements of the so-called new learning. It is presumed to have commenced with Schleiermacher’s [On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers] (… 1799), and ended with the publication of Barth’s Epistle to the Romans (… 1919).

It spread to France, England, and America, and then to the mission churches throughout the world. In each country it took upon itself a peculiar national impress of that country. Coleridge’s Aids to Reflection (… 1825) was very influential in introducing neo-Protestantism into both England and America. It appeared in late nineteenth century Roman Catholicism as “modernism” and was efficiently stamped out by the papacy. In America it became virtually synonymous with the social gospel.

Liberalism had a fourfold rootage. First, philosophically it was grounded in some form of German philosophical idealism (e.g., Schleiermacher in Romanticism; Ritschl in neo-Kantianism; Biedermann in Hegelianism). Secondly, it placed unreserved trust in the new critical studies of the Scriptures which contained implicitly or explicitly a denial of the historic doctrines of revelation and inspiration. Thirdly, it believed that the developing science of the times antiquated much of the Scriptures. Fourthly, it was rooted in the new learning and believed in a harmony of Christianity with the new learning. In this sense it is modernistic (preference for the new over the traditional) and liberal (the right of free criticism of all theological claims).

Methodologically it first accepted one of the current philosophies for its conceptual framework and out of that philosophy developed a doctrine of religious experience. With this philosophy and this doctrine of religious experience in hand, it proceeded to Christianity, wherein it performed a double action: (1) it gave this philosophy and religious experience a concrete interpretation in terms of Christianity; and (2) it altered Christianity to suit this philosophy and this doctrine of religious experience. Following this it reinterpreted all the major Christian doctrines in the same fashion. For example, the traditional doctrine of the Trinity was rejected and replaced by some sort of functional Trinity; the transcendence and wrath of God were replaced by overemphasized doctrines of divine immanence and love. The incarnate Lord of Chalcedon was replaced by Jesus, the first Christian, whom God used in an unprecedented way for an example of unmatched piety. The kingdom of God was regarded as no longer founded upon the death and resurrection of a Saviour, but upon the spiritual and ethical quality of the life of Jesus. Salvation was seen no longer as freedom from wrath and sin, but from sensuousness or a materialistic or selfish ethic. The kingdom of God was shorn of its transcendental and eschatological elements and converted into a religious and ethical society.

In that the radical division of saved-or-lost was denied, and all men held to possess the same religious potentiality, all men formed the so-called brotherhood of man whose corollary was the Fatherhood of God. And in that the purpose of the church was to bring all men under the Christian ethic in every aspect of their lives, it preached the so-called social gospel.

With the coming of neo-orthodox and existential theology neo-Protestantism has lost its place of theological leadership, a trend more evident in Europe than America.

Schleiermacher’s The Christian Faith …, Ritschl’s The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation …, Harnack’s What Is Christianity?…, and Fosdick’s The Modern Use of the Bible … are regarded as classical expositions of neo-Protestantism.

BERNARD RAMM

NEOORTHODOXY. A loose term used to designate certain forms of twentieth-century Protestant theology which have sought to recover the distinctive insights and themes of the Reformation. The latter are seen as relevant to our modern predicament and as an essential part of the church’s witness. Nevertheless, they require some restatement in the light of modern knowledge. The term is generally used by those who would not identify themselves with such a theology, either because it seems to deviate too much from the orthodoxy of the Reformation theologians and the classical Protestant confessions of faith, or because it is too narrowly orthodox.

The term indicates a reaction against the liberalism of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, with its reduction of Christian faith to general human and religious truths and moral values, and its relativization of Christianity through historical criticism and theories of the history of religions. By contrast, Neoorthodoxy represents an attempt to recover biblical perspectives. Stress is laid (in varying degrees) on the transcendence of God, man’s responsibility as a creature, sin and guilt, the uniqueness of Christ as mediator of revelation and grace, and personal encounter with God in revelation.

These themes were sounded by the Dialectical Theology or Theology of Crises of the twenties and thirties. They were given almost classic expression in Barth’s commentary on Romans (1919). God is seen as the Wholly Other who is not to be identified with anything in the world. He breaks into our world like a vertical line intersecting a horizontal plane in the person of Jesus Christ. But even so He remains incognito, for to encounter Jesus on a merely human level is to know only the man. God is hidden in Him even in the act of revelation. Full revelation occurs only in the risen Christ. Its truth is not perceived on the level of historical investigation, but through encounter by faith. Christ’s coming is also the crisis of judgment of the world. It is both the revelation of God and the revelation of man’s sin. This act of judgment is also the means of grace.

A Catholic theologian described Barth’s work as a bomb falling on the happy playground of the theologians. The liberal historian Harnack regarded Barth’s teaching as unscientific theology. Nevertheless, Barth found himself at the head of a theological revival in Europe. He soon, however, modified his position and eventually abandoned Dialectical Theology. He spoke of the Kantian-Platonic crust which had encased his teaching. After various revisions, he felt his views of the 1920s were still too much influenced by Kierkegaard and existentialism. His stress on the difference between God and man was replaced by a doctrine of analogy, albeit one that could only be known by faith through revelation. At the same time Barth continued to distinguish his view of revelation from that of Protestant orthodoxy. He felt that the latter stressed revealed truth and the verbal inspiration of Scripture, whereas he wished to stress that revelation is esentially God revealing Himself in Christ, even though this is human only through the witness of the biblical writers. In his later teaching … Barth paid particular attention to the exegesis of Scripture and the great theologians of the church.

The teaching of Emil Brunner tended in a similar direction, though their latent differences came into the open through their dispute over natural theology in 1934. Brunner accused Barth of going too far in denying that man had no knowledge of God apart from that mediated by Christ. He urged that man must have some knowledge which would serve as a readymade point of contact for the Gospel. He saw grounds for this in the image of God in man and man’s awareness of such divine institutions as the state and marriage. Brunner pleaded for a new, reformed natural theology, but his case remained unconvincing in view of the concessions he was willing to make to Barth. Brunner’s teaching on revelation focused on the element of divine, personal encounter and attacked even more strongly than Barth the concept of objective, revealed truth.

Also associated with Dialectical Theology were Rudolf Bultmann and Friedrich Gogarten. But whereas Barth and Brunner developed theologies which had a framework of biblical theism, Bultmann and Gogarten sought to reinterpret biblical themes in terms of an existential philosophy. The former were primarily concerned with exegesis, the latter with a radical demythologizing hermeneutic. Paul Tillich has also been considered to be Neoorthodox. His sermons, in particular, are often concerned with biblical themes. But his Systematic Theology makes it clear that the basis of his thought is his existential ontology. In the USA, Reinhold Niebuhr has been regarded as Neoorthodox in view of his use of biblical categories in his moral philosophy and interpretation of history. But in their different ways both Tillich and Niebuhr are more concerned with what they conceive to be the underlying principles of Protestantism than with a modern restatement of a corpus of doctrine.

It appears that the 400-member St. Mary’s Episcopal Church in Denver is the first congregational casualty since the September vote of the triennial convention of the Episcopal Church to approve women’s ordination. St. Mary’s voted 197 to 79 last month to secede from the denomination. Declared rector James O. Mote who led the action: “I’m not leaving my church; it is leaving me.” Mote was suspended from his priestly functions by Bishop William Frey (who voted against women’s ordination at the convention), but the priest indicated earlier he no longer considers himself under Frey’s jurisdiction.

Frey, who was barred from the closed congregational meeting and had to listen to proceedings on a public-address system in the basement, said that St. Mary’s would continue as an Episcopal parish in his diocese. The Episcopal Church does not have congregational polity, he stated, so the status of a parish is not something only its members can decide.

A struggle was under way this month to settle the matter, but it appears to be headed for the courts.

More turmoil is ahead. Members of the Fellowship of Concerned Churchmen, a coalition of sixteen conservative organizations and magazines in Canada and the United States, in a meeting last month in Nashville called for a congress to present “spiritual principles and ecclesial structure of the continuing Episcopal Church.” Set for St. Louis next September, it is for “all faithful Episcopalians” and members of other Anglican communions opposed to liberal trends who wish “to unite themselves with this continuing church.”

Presiding bishop John M. Allin, another opponent to women’s ordination, said he will urge dissidents not to attend the congress. The coming year “will be a distressing time,” Allin acknowledged at the recent Episcopal Conference on Church Renewal, “but we have to show there is room for diversity.” He said also he forsees no major split in the denomination.

Another group, the Coalition for the Apostolic Ministry, called a meeting in Chicago this month for those who wish to remain in the denomination but who do not accept its decision to ordain female priests. One possibility for discussion: the establishment of an extra-geographical province that would observe traditional Episcopal teachings and policies.

Women’s ordination becomes effective January 1, and a number of women are expected to be ordained to the priesthood in the weeks just afterward. Among them will be deacons Elizabeth Wiesner and Carol Ann Crumley of Washington, D.C. (Six women were ordained to the priesthood of the Anglican Church of Canada last month in four Canadian cities, the first female priests of that denomination.)

A “celebration” to “complete” the ordination of Betty Bone Schiess will be held by Bishop Ned Cole in Syracuse, New York. She was one of fifteen women invalidly ordained in 1974. The bishops in September set up several ways by which the ordinations of these women could be “completed” or recognized. (Ms. Schiess announced she was dropping her lawsuit against Bishop Cole; she had charged him with discrimination for refusing to license her as a priest and thus depriving her of employment. Cole likewise dropped counter-charges against her.)

Alison Palmer, another of the fifteen “ordained” earlier, last month carried the women’s cause to England. She announced she would be the first woman to celebrate Anglican communion in Britain. No Anglican church opened its doors to her, however, and she instead led the communion service for 100 persons in a small Unitarian church on a Friday night. Ms. Palmer is a foreign service officer in the U. S. State Department.

Four of the fifteen women were “ordained” at St. Stephen and the Incarnation Church in Washington, D.C. Its rector, William A. Wendt, was subsequently rebuked in an ecclesiastical trial for permitting a woman to function as a priest in his church. Wendt landed in hot water again last month when newspapers announced he planned to join two homosexual members of the Church, Wayne Schwandt, 27, and John Fortunato, 29, in marriage. Bishop William F. Creighton threatened to cut off the diocese’s $7,000 subsidy to the church and to take other measures if the plans were carried out. Wendt backed off, and the two men exchanged vows in a service sponsored by the Metropolitan Community Church, a gay congregation that meets in the First Congregational Church in Washington.

Wendt argued that differences existed in the interpretation of the resolution on homosexuals adopted at the September convention. It said that homosexuals as well as heterosexuals are “children of God,” deserving the “love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the church.” Wendt insisted that the resolution could be interpreted to authorize marriage or “holy union” by gays.

One of the concerns in the homosexual community, said Wendt, is for the possibility of long-standing relationships, without promiscuity. He indicated that this is also a pastoral concern.

Schwandt, a graduate of Wesley Seminary, would like to be ordained an Episcopal priest. If a push is made in that direction there will be more uproar among Episcopalians.

Meanwhile, defections of another sort have occurred because of the women’s issue. The 35,000-member Polish National Catholic Church announced it was severing its 30-year-old eucharistic relationship with the Episcopal Church, and Greek Orthodox leaders hinted that there isn’t much use to continue official dialogue with them.

As Bishop Allin has said, the new year promises to be a distressing one for Episcopalians.

Honored

Dean Francis B. Sayre, Jr., of the Washington Cathedral (Episcopal) in the nation’s capital was named Clergyman of the Year in the annual national awards program of the Religious Heritage of America organization. General Secretary Claire Randall of the National Council of Churches was selected as Church-woman of the Year, and Democratic senator Jennings Randolph of West Virginia, a Seventh Day Baptist, was named Churchman of the Year. He has been active in church-and-state issues.

A celebration in honor of these and other awardees was held in Washington, D.C., this month. It had been delayed because of recent RHA financial difficulties. The organization, headed by financier W. Clement Stone, is renewing its efforts to preserve and promote America’s religious and ethical values. A fifteen-year project, “Rediscover America,” was launched at the Washington meeting.

It Is Written

There is much clamor for change these days in the Roman Catholic Church. Those voices came through loud and clear at the recent Call to Action conference in Detroit (see November 19 issue, page 57). Delegates at the conference, sponsored by the nation’s Catholic bishops and intended to give the faithful a say in the church’s social-action agenda, went on record favoring among other things a more open position on divorce and remarriage, artificial birth control, and attitudes toward homosexuals.

Within weeks the bishops convened their fall meeting in Washington, D.C., and adopted a thirty-six-page pastoral letter on morality that strongly reaffirms the church’s traditional teachings on sexual ethics. The letter—echoing views set forth in the Vatican’s “Declaration on Sexual Ethics” earlier this year—condemns sex outside of marriage, forbids artificial contraception, criticizes married couples who decide never to have children, rejects abortion, and condemns homosexual practice (it points out that homosexual orientation itself is not sinful, though).

Some bishops objected to the tone of the document, arguing that it lacked the spirit of compassion toward those who have difficulty living up to the letter of the law. A number wanted to postpone action on it until the Detroit proposals could be considered (the bishops are scheduled to discuss them at their May meeting). The vote to postpone failed 162 to 65. After a number of minor amendments were made, the bishops voted 172 to 24 to approve the letter.

Spokesmen for the bishops emphasized that their letter was not a response to the Detroit proposals (it was drafted over a two-year period). But it is safe to say that it is the handwriting on the wall against which the majority of bishops will model part of their reply.

Resigned, But Still Committed

Gregory Baum, Canada’s best-known Roman Catholic theologian, has resigned from the active priesthood and petitioned Pope Paul for laicization.

The 53-year-old professor at Toronto’s St. Michael’s College cited unresolved differences with his Augustinian order and failure to secure status as a secular priest.

The author of a dozen books and one of the experts chosen to prepare documents for the Second Vatican Council, he has been active in pressing for change in the church’s position on birth control, ordination of women, clerical celibacy, and political involvement.

In his letter of resignation, Baum expressed his total commitment to “Catholic theology and Catholic renewal.”

LESLIE K. TARR

Conflict in Poland

A few months ago, Polish Communist leader Edward Gierek during a move to unify the country after food riots told a workers’ rally, “There are no conflicts between church and state.” But last month Poland’s Roman Catholic bishops disputed that claim. In a pastoral letter read in all of Poland’s Catholic churches, the bishops listed areas of conflict between church and state. They charged that Catholic students are threatened and blackmailed under what they said is an official conspiracy to undermine faith and enforce atheism.

A large majority of Poles are believers, reminded the bishops, and when the state attacks religion it attacks them. “The Church is under attack,” the bishops warned the faithful. “Be sober, alert, vigilant.”

Brazil: The Bishops Attack

Brazil’s military government, installed nearly thirteen years ago with broad popular support, has come under unprecedented attack from the nation’s Roman Catholic hierarchy.

The National Conference of Brazilian Bishops last month published a seventeen-page letter attacking what the clerics called the “climate of fear and violence.” Numerous cases of “torture, violence, and oppression” were cited in the document, and the church officials charged the government with “reducing the people to silence.” Individual liberties, freedom of thought, and freedom of the press have been suppressed in the interest of state security, the bishops alleged.

Issuance of the letter marked an end to a sort of détente that had existed between the Catholic hierarchy and the military government. It came as a surprise to some leaders in the country since many of the bishops personally admire and trust President Ernesto Geisel. In office since 1974, he is considered more moderate than his predecessor, Emilio G. Medici. He is a Lutheran and the first Protestant president of Brazil. Medici had little use for church-state dialogue, but Geisel had tried to reopen talks.

The military took over during a 1964 counterrevolution that was backed by Catholics and Protestants who feared a Marxist takeover of the government. From time to time individual Catholic priests and bishops have been critical of the national leadership and of various local officials, but the November letter is the first strong criticism from the conference of bishops.

There was some speculation that the bishops were moved to action by a September incident in which one of their own, Bishop Adriano Hipolito of suburban Rio de Janeiro, was mistreated. He had spoken out repeatedly against “death squad” murders by suspected members of the police, and then he was kidnapped, beaten, stripped, and painted red. The gang that blew up his car and left him naked on a roadside said they were punishing him for his leftist leanings. No arrests have been made.

The bishops complained of the slayings of two priests this year, too. Their sweeping condemnation of the military government also touched on such matters as land reform, censorship, and treatment of Indians.

No official government response to the letter has been announced. Geisel, meanwhile, has continued his efforts to keep in touch with the Catholics. He recently made a surprise visit to Archbishop Geraldo de Morais Penido. They talked about human rights during their long conversation, and the archbishop raised the issue of torture. The president replied that he had given explicit orders to the armed forces to stop torturing political prisoners, but he added that there are still local policemen who resort to unnecessary violence. He paid them no compliment when he told the prelate that officers who use such tactics “act like stupid jackasses.”

Angola: Regulating Religion

The following update on the religious situation in Angola is based on reports filed by aCHRISTIANITY TODAYcorrespondent in Africa. Earlier coverage appeared in the November 7, 1975, issue, page 57, and the March 26, 1976, issue, page 39. Last month it became the 146th member of the United Nations.

Under the new Marxist-Leninist government of Angola, “religious phenomena” are recognized “as an objective reality in society.” Therefore, even though religion has no place in classic Communism, certain church and mission activities are being tolerated in the year-old regime of the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA).

When the MPLA central committee met just before the first anniversary of independence from Portugal, one of its first acts was approval of a “resolution regulating religion.” That document was the first of the committee’s decisions communicated to “the people.”

The preamble rules out any church activity that might be interpreted as “opposition to national transformation,” “lack of respect for the State and its symbols,” “ideological subversion,” or “opposition to socialism.” A section of the resolution specifies that all Angolan citizens “enjoy liberty of conscience, with the option to profess, or not to profess, any religion.” That profession, of course, must be “within the law.”

Under “the law,” as it is now being administered, some of the missionaries who left in 1975 are returning. One mission, the Swiss-based Evangelical Missionary Alliance, managed to keep its force on the field during the war between the three “liberation” parties contending for leadership, and it is now adding new recruits. Despite red tape and other obstacles, personnel of such evangelical groups as Christian Missions in Many Lands (Plymouth Brethren) and Africa Evangelical Fellowship are returning. Southern Baptist missionaries formerly assigned to Angola have been unable to reestablish their residences but have made short visits, according to mission sources.

Even though some foreign advocates of religion have been allowed to work in the West African nation, one group without foreign connections has been condemned by President Agostinho Neto. Tokoists, the followers of fifty-five-year-old prophet Simao Toko, an ex-Baptist, enjoyed a new era of popularity after the 1974 Portuguese revolution eased religious restrictions in Portugal’s African colonies. The group, known as The Church of Jesus Christ in the World (it has been described as a syncretistic people’s movement), has been declared obedient to one of the defeated political movements and thus disloyal to the MPLA. A government women’s organization asked that the estimated 30,000 Tokoists be sent to work camps for “political reeducation.” After the prime minister responded with a verbal warning that the Tokoists “do, in fact, pose a threat to the revolutionary process,” many of them went into hiding. Also condemned were the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

While some observers were surprised that the government came down so hard on Tokoism, others theorized that the indigenous group may pose the greatest ideological threat to Communist rule of Angola. At any given time all other churches could be closed because of their alleged foreign “imperialist” connections, they reasoned, but no such excuse could be cited in the case of the Tokoists. A simpler explanation was that Tokoism is strong in the BaKongo tribal area, while President Neto and his closest associates are from a rival tribe.

For the religious groups that are functioning openly, freedom is a sometime thing. Roman Catholics have been trying to work out an accommodation with the new rulers, most of whom come from Protestant backgrounds. During August the Angolan foreign minister visited Italy and was granted an audience with Pope Paul, but a Catholic radio station in Luanda, the capital city, was confiscated by the government.

Some educational and health-care institutions remain in the hands of religious groups, but others have been taken over by government personnel. A measure of the government’s control was seen when “organs of popular power” were elected last June. In Luanda, church services were delayed or postponed until after the polls were closed. While there was only the MPLA slate, everyone was expected to vote, and the decree went out, “No religious, social, cultural, recreational, or business activity will be permitted until after the electoral act.” The Methodists, whose Bishop Emilio de Carvalho is a friend of President Neto, dutifully announced that on that Sunday their services would be held at 2:30 P.M. instead of in the morning.

Italy: Loosening The Tie That Binds

In 1931, 99.6 per cent of the Italian population claimed to be Roman Catholic. Mussolini’s concordat with the Vatican, designating Catholicism the state religion, was just two years old.

That concordat is still in effect, but its days are numbered. The growing recognition that the church has little influence on many Italians led to the creation of a six-member commission that is proposing a streamlined new treaty. The document, which has just been sent to Italy’s Parliament, does not name Catholicism as the state religion.

Terms of the new treaty were hammered out over months of meetings. Three members of the commission represented the Vatican and three the Italian government. Their proposal reduces the number of provisions in the concordat from forty-five to fourteen. It may still be amended by Parliament, but the commission’s work has been hailed by church and state authorities.

In addition to abolishing the state-religion designation, the draft concordat eliminates the Italian recognition of Rome as a “sacred” city. It treats marriage differently, no longer calling it a sacrament. Even though the 1929 document prohibited divorce, Italian law now authorizes it. In other changes, religion would no longer be a required course in schools, and priests would not be forbidden to hold public office.

The new concordat was drafted against the backdrop of declining support for the church-backed Christian Democratic party. Socialist-Communist governments now run all of Italy’s major cities, and the leftists picked up seats in Parliament in national elections last June. If the Christian Democrats fail to get the streamlined concordat through Parliament soon, there may not be enough of them left after the next elections to get any concordat approved.

Colson: ‘Not Drunk’

Former White House aide Charles Colson, author of the bestseller Born Again, is getting a lot of flak over a reference to him in the November 28 issue of Parade, a national Sunday newspaper supplement. In an article on Watergate figure John Dean, Parade writer Lloyd Shearer told of a visit the Colsons paid to the Deans while Colson was in Los Angeles promoting his book and speaking at Christian gatherings. The account is based on what Taylor Branch, 29, Washington columnist for Esquire and collaborator-editor of Dean’s book Blind Ambition, allegedly told a friend. Shearer quotes Branch as saying the Colsons came to Dean’s house for dinner one night while Branch was there, “and Colson got very drunk.”

After the article appeared, Colson denied the allegation privately to friends. Moreover, Branch himself told CHRISTIANITY TODAY that he does not recall making the statement and that he was “mortified” by the reference. “Chuck was not drunk,” he asserted. He said he thinks Colson may have had a drink before dinner, however. Colson led in prayer before the meal, and late in the evening he conversed “with me about some religious problems I had as a young person,” said Branch.

Parade did not immediately reply to inquiries by CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

Colson is of Episcopal extraction, and Episcopalians have traditionally not held the tee-totaler position of most evangelicals, in whose circles he is working. But, said he, from now on he is swearing off even occasional social drinks.

EDWARD E. PLOWMAN

Religion in Transit

Entertainer Pat Boone’s Christian radio program, “The Light and Power Hour,” is being offered through February as one of the in-flight entertainment selections on American Airlines flights that have stereo-headset programming. The program features contemporary Christian music and interviews with the artists. It is also being made available by the Mutual Broadcasting System to its 800 affiliates.

The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that non-sectarian, non-profit hospitals may not refuse on moral or conscience grounds to allow abortions in their facilities. The ruling affects about eighty hospitals but not religious-affiliated ones.

Jewish leaders in New York charge that professional gamblers, possibly with ties to organized crime, have been pressuring synagogues to allow them to operate—and take most of the profit from—“Las Vegas Night” charity programs. Major Jewish organizations, like many churches, opposed the charity gambling proposal okayed by New York voters last month. It will take effect February 1.

The controversial hymn “It Was On a Friday Morning” will not be included in any future editions of the new U.S. military forces’ hymnal, according to a statement released jointly by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the chiefs of chaplains. The hymn has generated thousands of letters of protests.

Crowds ranging from 5,000 to 9,800 attended the four-day Leighton Ford “Reachout” evangelistic crusade in Vancouver, British Columbia. The crusade, which climaxed a two-year effort involving 200 churches in self-study and preparatory programs, emphasized Christian social concerns, and hundreds of persons volunteered to serve in social ministries (such as: meals for the elderly, hospital visitation, prison work). Ford appeared on several radio and TV call-in shows during the crusade.

The U.S. Supreme Court let stand a lower court’s ruling that called for continued Medicaid payments for voluntary abortions despite a congressional ban on them under the Hyde Amendment (see November 19 issue, page 54). The court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the amendment (it was declared unconstitutional by the lower court).

Of the nearly 10,000 children born in Washington, D.C., last year, more than half were born out of wedlock, according to city officials. It is the first major American city where this has happened. Nationwide, about 13 per cent of all children are born to unmarried women, a proportion increasing steadily since 1960. The latest statistics indicate that among blacks, 47.1 per cent of all children were born out of wedlock, while for whites the figure is 6.5 per cent. About 85 per cent of the Washington abortions were paid for by the government, say officials.

Police arrested Episcopal priest Claudius Ira (Bud) Vermilye, 47, of Winchester, Tennessee, charging that he used boys at his rehabilitation home known as Boys Farm in the production of obscene films. The films have been traced to at least three states, say police, and some of the home’s several hundred sponsors are “not legitimate.”

Fundamentalist minister Marvin Horan, convicted by a federal jury of conspiring to bomb two public schools during the West Virginia textbook controversy in 1974, lost an appeal and entered prison last month to begin a three-year sentence.

The average U. S. church member gave $137.09 last year, a slight increase over 1974 but not enough to keep pace with inflation, according to a survey of forty-two denominations by the National Council of Churches. The survey covered about 40 per cent of the giving to U.S. churches. Total giving to the groups surveyed amounted to $5.35 billion, and about eighty cents of each dollar stayed with the local congregation. Twenty-five Canadian denominations reported 1975 contributions of $255 million, an average of $118.68 per member.

The U. S. Supreme Court declined to review the case of New Jersey music teacher Paula (Paul) Grossman, who was dismissed after a sex-change operation in which Paul (father of three) became Paula. In explaining their action, school authorities cited the possible psychologically damaging effect on school children.

Some 16,000 persons are expected to attend Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship’s missions convention at Urbana, Illinois, after Christmas. Students will be able to earn academic credit in connection with the event, according to director David M. Howard.

World Scene

Memo to missionaries: The rush to the cities is likely to continue unabated in developing countries throughout the world, according to a recent Gallup survey of seventy nations. The migration is causing enormous problems, says Gallup, because the countries are “wholly unprepared” for the shift. Missions may also be unprepared. Generally, evangelical missionaries in the past have gone to the rural, the poor, the semi-literates. Comparitively few have gone to the urban dwellers, the middle and upper classes, the university campuses. That pattern, warn mission strategists, must change—and quickly.

The establishment of some 200 new local churches and a 60,000-member increase within a one-year period was reported at the recent sixty-first general assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Korea.

The All-Union Council of Evangelical Christians-Baptists in the Soviet Union has received permission to receive 20,000 hymnals of the 1968 Moscow edition in the Russian language, according to the European Baptist Federation, which will underwrite costs. The Soviet Baptists report opening forty-four new churches, baptizing 6,200 persons, and welcoming 14,589 members of the unregistered Baptist groups (the so-called “underground believers”) back to the fold last year.

Permission has been given to the Federation of Evangelical Churches (including Lutheran and Reformed bodies) in East Germany to build forty new churches, according to the Britain-based Keston College research center for the study of religion and Communism. No reason is given for the relaxation of policy by the government. It may involve image factors or hopes of gaining foreign currency (West German Christians will probably fund the costs of the new buildings).

Rosario, with a population of about one million (1.6 million in the metropolitan area), is Argentina’s second-largest city. Located 100 miles upstream from Buenos Aires along the Parana River, it has been a center of the terrorist activity and anti-subversive countermeasures that have upset the entire nation: kidnappings, bombings, murder in broad daylight.

The people of Rosario, like those of other urban areas throughout the land, are troubled by other problems, too. The economy is a shambles. Pessimism and apathy are dominant notes throughout society. Family life for many is a disaster zone (as is increasingly the case all over Latin America). The majority of the people profess Catholicism, but practice is something else. As elsewhere in the Latin world, the church is losing the pervasive influence it once had in the private lives of its adherents, and morality is more often than not up for grabs.

Spiritism is a growing phenomenon. More and more professing Catholics and Protestants alike are also practicing spiritists.

A year ago there were fewer than fifty evangelical churches in the city and surrounding countryside. They had a combined membership generously estimated at 4,000. Prodded by missionary Edgar Silvoso, pastors and mission personnel began putting their heads together well over a year ago to see what could be done to get things moving. A strong assist came from church-growth analyst Vergil Gerber of Wheaton, Illinois.

Out of their conferences came plans to sponsor a mass-evangelism crusade led by Argentine-born Luis Palau—but only in conjunction with efforts to establish in advance new churches to care for the new converts (see September 24 issue, page 66). The idea was to establish “house churches” or branch ministries that would take into account Rosario’s various social orders, economic pressures, and cultural idiosyncrasies, and to funnel converts into them accordingly. These new congregations were intended eventually to become full-fledged, reproducing churches themselves. Target areas were selected (high-rise apartments, low-cost housing projects), and an initial goal of seventy-five new congregations was adopted.

“The trouble with most mass-evangelism efforts is we just aren’t prepared for harvest,” explained Silvoso, who was named crusade coordinator.

By the time Palau arrived in October to begin a three-week campaign (the first week was spent capping off mini-crusades led by his associates in three satellite cities), twenty new churches had sprouted up, and twenty-six other congregations were at the house-church level. Additionally, some older but marginal churches were rejuvenated, said Gerber, and there were signs that some of the Bible-study groups organized during the crusade would evolve into churches.

The fifteen-day Rosario crusade itself got off to a dismal start. Heavy rains forced cancelation of a witness march through the city, and the opening meeting had to be transferred from the 11,000-seat polo stadium in the fairground to an indoor site. Crowds picked up, however, and 10,000 were on hand for the final meeting on November 14.

In all, more than 5,000 persons—many of them men and married couples—signed decision cards. Ninety per cent were first-time professions of faith in Christ, estimated crusade workers. Therefore, theoretically, the evangelical community in the Rosario region more than doubled in less than a month. (A similar number of decisions was recorded at a ten-day Palau crusade in September in Asunción, Paraguay, where attendance averaged between 10,000 and 17,000.)

The decision cards were distributed to more than seventy churches and branch congregations, and pastors had to arrange initial visits to the inquirers within forty-eight hours before they could obtain more cards.

The impact of the campaign extended far beyond those who came to the public meetings. The popular five-minute daily “Luis Palau Responds” radio program, often dealing with family-life topics, had prime-time listener ratings of up to 90 per cent. In the year leading up to the crusade, 22,000 letters requesting literature, prayer, and counsel were received in the Rosario crusade office in response to broadcasts. Half-hour TV programs featuring Palau and a call-in format were aired nightly during the crusade, and these touched multitudes throughout the area, affirmed Baptist minister Ruben Godoy, who headed the crusade’s volunteer counselors. Press coverage was extensive.

Each of the six services during the crusade’s three weekends was broadcast live over a four-state area. Five half-hour telecasts were simultaneously aired in Argentina’s eight major metropolitan areas, reaching potentially 85 per cent of the nation’s 25 million population.

During the crusade, five counseling centers were established in and around Rosario for persons seeking help with personal problems. More than 250 were counseled, and nearly 100 received Christ in these centers, according to crusade spokesmen.

Palau spoke at social functions downtown, and at a private school where he gave a talk nearly 100 students indicated that they wanted to become followers of Jesus. Follow-up work among these converts is being handled by Campus Crusade for Christ, says a Palau spokesman.

Correspondent William Conard, a Plymouth Brethren missionary visiting from Peru, took a close look at the church-expansion methods used by the Rosario evangelicals. He reports that three basic patterns were used.

In one approach, Nazarene pastor Bruno Radiszewski began discipling men of the church over refreshments in his kitchen. Their discussions ranged from doctrine to homiletics. He then sent them with two other persons to begin neighborhood prayer cells. One of the three wrote the neighbors’ prayer requests in a notebook, another prayed, the third read from Acts. As prayers were answered (and dutifully recorded as such in the notebook), word spread, and others sought to get in on the action. Prayer meetngs were instituted.

Scores of previously unreached people are now baptized members of the church, and others are candidates, reports Conard. Pastor Radziszewski teaches his men weekly, and they carry his lessons to five branches or annexes and eight prayer cells. One annex is regularly attended by fifty men and women, and the others average twenty each. Radziszewski impresses upon his men that they are the pastors of these groups, even to the extent of directing funerals.

Spirit Of 1976

The little Baptist congregation in Lodge, South Carolina, has a name that was a winner during the recent presidential election campaigns: Carter’s Ford Baptist Church.

Baptist pastor Hugo Ramirez represents a second method. He enlisted responsible couples in his church to open their homes for neighborhood Bible studies. Under this plan the couples invite a few friends to informal weekly “Bible encounters,” which they or other trained laypersons direct. There are no songs or opening prayers, and attendance by believers is kept to a minimum.

Eight to ten people meet weekly in the six Bible encounters that have been formed this year. Ramirez assembles encounter leaders every two weeks for discussion and prayer. He helps them prepare their lessons so that a uniform theme is presented. He says he plans to start additional groups soon among converts of the Palau crusade.

The third kind of expansion is more traditional. A pastor encourages some of his mature people to find a location to begin new meetings. Then several families in the congregation join them in establishing an annex or new ministry that is independent from the mother church.

Church-growth specialists are studying the Rosario experiment. It seems to prove a point—that church planting should be viewed as an essential part of evangelism and not merely as an aftermath.

The Bible Battle In Latin America

They are battling over the Bible in Latin America, but the fight is over notes and illustrations in a particular edition rather than over inerrancy.

At issue is a fat paperback first published in 1972 and officially known as the Pastoral Edition. It was the product of a team headed by a priest, Ramon Ricciardi, in the Roman Catholic diocese of Concepción, Chile, but it has gained notoriety in Argentina since a mass-circulation magazine there called it the work of Marxists. Sales have been booming in recent weeks.

Although the fight has been in the Catholic Church primarily, it was inevitable that when evangelist Luis Palau returned to his native Argentina he was questioned about it by newsmen. In Rosario for a crusade (see preceding story), Palau said some of the edition’s comment disqualified it as a true representation of the biblical message. He cited the notes on such subjects as evolution, syncretism, and inspiration.

Even if evangelicals such as Palau and some Catholic bishops found fault with the book, many Catholics were using it. More than 800,000 copies have been sold. James R. Brockman, associate editor of the North American Jesuit magazine, America, reported after an Argentine visit that it is “widely used for the readings at Mass and in popular missalettes” (seasonal booklets used in worship services). Brockman’s article suggested that one reason for the popularity of the “Latin American Bible” is that “it uses the language of the people of Latin America, which differs from that of Spain at least as much as our English differs from that of Britain.”

Chilean bishops have been the staunchest defenders of the book. Manuel Sanchez, bishop of the diocese where the original work was done, gave it his imprimatur. An endorsement was issued by the national conference of bishops. Cardinal Raul Silva of Santiago worked out a deal with Fidel Castro in 1972 to ship most of the first 20,000 to Cuba.

That first 20,000 contained a picture of a rally in Havana with Communist symbols and slogans visible. Its caption says, “The believer participates in political life and seeks, under any government, a society that gives dignity to all.” While not all subsequent versions contained the Havana picture and caption, enough copies were available elsewhere on the continent to spark criticism. There were also pictures of Martin Luther King, Jr., and the controversial Brazilian bishop, Dom Helder Camara.

One of the harshest attacks came from the bishop of San Juan, Argentina, Idelfonso Sansierra. He said: “If a person wants to become a man without a country, an atheist, a pervert, and a bloodsucker, he should follow the Marxist intention of the Latin American Bible, which is really a prostituted version of the real Bible.”

While many other bishops were critical of the edition, a majority of the Argentine hierarchy refused at a recent meeting to disown it. They adopted a resolution stating that despite some questionable points, the controversial Bible also contained “many positive aspects.” The photographs of Havana and another of Wall Street, they said, were “improper and inconvenient.” They ordered publication of a supplement to clear up “dubious elements.”

Evangelical Huddle

A much talked about Newsweek cover story in October ended on this sober note: “Just as the nation is at last taking notice of their strength, evangelicals find their house divided. The Presidential election has only exacerbated latent differences in doctrine and social attitudes. As a result, 1976 may yet turn out to be the year that the evangelicals won the White House but lost cohesiveness as a distinct force in American religion and culture.”

Some influential evangelicals feel that good leadership can keep discord from dulling the impact of the Gospel upon modern culture. With that in mind, evangelist Billy Graham and Wheaton College president Hudson T. Armerding have issued a call for a “Christian leadership conference on the future of evangelicalism.” The basic objective, an announcement last month said, will be to unite evangelicals in developing strategy to meet the needs and opportunities facing the church in the next two decades.

“Recent surveys have revealed the majority strength and popular support of the evangelical church in the United States today,” Graham said. “This carries with it a responsibility to examine and speak to the issues confronting our nation.…”

A steering committee is being named to plan the conference and prepare the invitation list, which will include lay and professional church leaders, and people in government, professions, and business.

Armerding, who is president of the World Evangelical Fellowship and past president of the National Association of Evangelicals, declared that “it is time for informed evangelicals to provide leadership on the social, moral, and spiritual issues facing the United States today. We believe that many evangelicals want to face these issues unitedly and speak to them from the biblical perspective.”

Armerding told CHRISTIANITY TODAY he expected that differences on the doctrine of scriptural inerrancy would be aired at the meeting, as well as issues relating to evangelical political involvement. He voiced the hope, however, that the conferees would concentrate on what can be done to seize cultural initiatives. “Evangelicals have been known for good tactics but poor strategy,” he said. “We need to look forward, not sideward.”

DAVID KUCHARSKY

Cocu: Another Starting Point

It has been seventeen years since United Presbyterian leader Eugene Carson Blake stood in Episcopal bishop James Pike’s San Francisco cathedral pulpit to urge the union of major American denominations with diverse doctrines and policies. He thought at the time that merger might be achieved within ten years. It may now be ten more years before churches are asked to vote for a merger plan.

The possibility of constitutional action seemed that far away last month to some observers of the Consultation on Church Union (COCU) plenary meeting in Dayton, Ohio. Representatives of the nine member denominations (joined during the sessions by a tenth group) could agree to identify a theological document only as an “emerging consensus” rather than as a part of the proposed plan of union. The seven-chapter, sixty-six-page report from an eighteen-member commission was supposed to have been the “common theological basis” of COCU. It has been sent to the member bodies for study and response.

The chief architect of the doctrinal document and chairman of the commission was John Deschner, professor of theology at Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University. He described the product at Dayton as a “movable, changeable starting point” that COCU denominations can use “to work with other churches to create a revised plan of union.”

He also suggested the report might be viewed as a trial balloon, asking delegates to “invite the churches to consider it officially and decide whether they are willing to gather around it.”

One of the seven chapters was so troublesome, however, that the delegates were not even willing to call it their consensus. The section on “ministry” drew so much fire that the delegates voted to send it to the denominations without a stamp of approval. Member churches were asked to give it special attention and to return suggested amendments by next November. The chapter was criticized by delegates from some denominations that do not have bishops. They were concerned that it not be read as a constitutional definition of ministerial arrangements.

The “ministry” chapter proposed three ordained ministries: deacons, presbyters (pastors), and bishops. Even through the office of bishop has been proposed within COCU since the first Blake proposal, it still generated the most debate at the Dayton meeting. The Deschner report describes bishops as “teachers of the apostolic faith … pastoral overseers … leaders in mission … responsible, in cooperation with other members … for the orderly transfer of authority in the ordained ministry … administrative leaders … servants of unity.”

Delegates defeated a motion that would have sent the “ministry” chapter back to the drafters for a clarification of its constitutional and theological aspects. They also turned down a suggestion that the whole chapter be dropped from the doctrinal paper.

While there was disagreement on the offices to be established in the proposed church, the delegates found consensus on a variety of other matters. The Bible is described in the document as “the unique and normative authority … the supreme rule of the church’s life, worship, teaching, and witness.” Then Tradition (spelled with a capital T) is outlined as “the process … by which the very reality of Christ is reflected, known, and handed on” from one generation to another.

“In the church,” says the paper, “Scripture and Tradition belong together.… Neither the New Testament canon nor the Old Testament canon is separate from, or opposed to, Christian Tradition.…”

The report proposes that the united body “value and esteem” all the formal confessional documents of the uniting denominations but that it not be bound by any one of them. It suggests use of the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds as “acts of praise and allegiance to the Triune God” and as ties to the church in other ages and other places.

On the sacraments, the paper speaks of the “central importance” of baptism and communion but also of respect for “different views as to whether there are other ordinances which merit to be called sacraments in the strict sense.…” The Lord’s Supper is called “the heart of the church’s worship.”

Appended to the theological document at Dayton was a series of “alerts” which said that the future of Christian unity in the United States is threatened by racism, sexism, bureaucratic institutionalism, and exclusiveness in local congregations.

Doing its bit to eliminate sexism, the COCU plenary session named its first woman president. Rachel Henderlite, retired Southern Presbyterian Christian-education specialist, is, in fact, COCU’s first president since the top elected officer’s former title was chairman. She is a veteran of ecumenical educational work and was chief architect of the Covenant Life Curriculum produced by her denomination in cooperation with several others. Immediately before her retirement she taught at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Texas. She was the first ordained woman in her church.

In another business matter delegates voted to admit as the tenth participant in the talks the National Council of Community Churches, a body of some 185 congregations and 125,000 members. Some of those congregations are already represented in COCU through dual denominational affiliation. The community-churches body is also applying for membership in the National Council of Churches. It is the smallest of the ten groups in COCU.

Terror at 8 P.M.

There will be more violence and more sexual themes in television programming during the early evening hours, according to TV industry people in the aftermath of a federal court ruling last month in Los Angeles. Judge Warren J. Ferguson in a 223-page opinion ruled that the thirteen-month-old “family hour” agreement of the TV networks is illegal because it violates constitutional rights of free speech (of writers, producers, and actors). The family-hour agreement is aimed at keeping the 7 P.M. to 9 P.M. period as free as possible from programs depicting violence and sexual activity.

Ferguson ruled that the family-hour policy was reached mainly because of pressure and threats of regulatory action from Chairman Richard E. Wiley of the Federal Communications Commission, and that his intervention amounted to federal censorship—charges denied by Wiley. The judge also said that the review board set up by the National Association of Broadcasters to police the industry’s television code could not be allowed to censor TV programs. He did say that each network has the right to decide its own policy and control its own programming. CBS and ABC issued statements saying their programming would remain unchanged, and NBC said it was studying the ruling. Industry sources, however, say it is only a matter of time before they cave in.

Among those leading the battle against the family-hour concept was producer Norman Lear (“All in the Family” and “Maude”), for whom the way is now clear to sue for loss of income as a result of the illegal programming restraints.

Wiley has asked the Justice Department to investigate whether an appeal is in order.

Convoy

It happened on an Interstate highway near Indianapolis. He (“Stanley Steamer” Palmer) was in the cab of a big tractor-trailer rig, she (“Little Lulu” Ray) was in her pickup, and the judge (Floyd “Marryin’ Sam” Smith) was tooling along in his Continental. As the National Observer tells it, the judge led the couple in an exchange of wedding vows over CB radio. Instead of saying “I do” the couple said “10–4,” and the judge didn’t declare them husband and wife; he said, “Put the hammer down.” Twenty or so CB listeners who heard the ceremony and formed a convoy behind the newlyweds were invited to a reception at a truck stop.

Because Palmer’s parents weren’t able to attend the ceremony, the couple planned to have another one at home in Arkansas—in a church, with a minister.

The Bible’S Teaching On Women

In Search of God’s Ideal Woman: A Personal Examination of the New Testament, by Dorothy Pape (InterVarsity, 1976, 370 pp., $4.95 pb), Up From Eden, by Kathryn Lindskoog (David C. Cook, 1976, 139 pp., $2.95 pb), A Woman’s Worth and Work: A Christian Perspective, by Karen Helder DeVos (Baker, 1976, 101 pp., $2.95 pb), and The Magna Charta of Woman, by Jessie Penn-Lewis (Bethany Fellowship, 1975, 103 pp., $1.50 pb), are reviewed by Ronald D. Worden, associate professor of Bible, and Barbara L. Worden, associate professor of communications, Friends Bible College, Haviland, Kansas.

These authors seek to justify equality for women in all areas including work and marriage with an appeal, in part or in full, to an appropriate understanding of biblical teaching about the role of women, especially a reinterpretation of disputed Pauline texts. Each rightly insists, in one way or another, that such texts should be understood according to their meaning in context and cultural setting. For example, Pape deplores the attitude of “some people” who “regard 1 Tim., 2 Cor. and so on merely as convenient tags for finding verses, giving no thought for the persons to whom the letters were addressed. They regard every instruction of Paul as binding on the church today, using the same logic as well-meaning persons who affirm these lines: ‘Every promise in the Book is mine; Every chapter, every verse, every line.’ But surely some thought must be given to context.”

We, the reviewers, are in hearty sympathy with these aims, and we concur in deploring the social prejudice and misery that these authors hope to rectify. On balance, however, we must conclude that their success in achieving these aims varies roughly in proportion to the length of their books—the longer the better.

None of these authors understands the Bible to give the husband a right to “lord it over” his wife or to disregard her interests and needs. None sees women as second-class Christians who are “saved [i.e. redeemed] through childbearing,” not merely by faith. Each would defend the right of women to exercise various kinds of public Christian ministries, rather than to remain “silent in the [public services of the] church.”

Pape’s work is more extensive than the others in its biblical foundations, its awareness of church history, and its scope. It would be suitable for an extended study, or in portions for something less ambitious, since the seventy-eight items in the bibliography are used informally and judiciously, without technical footnotes. The author refers to a variety of materials, though mainly from the fairly conservative end of the theological spectrum. There are recent biblical commentaries on her list, but a few of the best are missing. There are recent journal articles, but no references to several very fine articles on the subject that, though perhaps not as “conservative” as some, yet have something significant to say. More importantly, though, Pape’s work is based on a growing understanding of herself and a lifetime of public Christian ministry. It is a worthy “personal examination of the New Testament.”

One of the most valuable aspects of Lindskoog’s book is the way she points up modern applications or misapplications of biblical passages with humorous anecdotes from her own experience. Her tongue-in-check exposition of evangelical lip service to the eternal beauty of women and real service to the commercial worship of youthful qualities is alone worth the price of the book (e.g., “My friends are not yet at the face-lift stage, but as the years go by, I expect a preview of the Rapture; the faces will rise first”). The book is divided into seven chapters with convenient subheadings that would make it a good springboard for discussion groups.

Lindskoog’s use of the Bible is rather incidental in much of her book, although she gives fourteen pages to a discussion of relevant New Testament texts with three specific references to “Biblical scholars” (William Barclay, C. S. Lewis, Cruden’s Concordance). Yet on the whole her intuitive use of the Bible seems to the point and effective.

DeVos’s final chapter, “Where Does a Christian Stand?,” raises several timely issues—abortion, authority, child care, and others. Biblical interpretation as such appears in some twenty pages and aims only at removing the sting from several texts often used to support prejudice against women. DeVos rightly stresses the need to consider the circumstances in which Paul made some of his statements and the inconsistency of evangelical churches that take some texts literally (e.g., the verses on not allowing women to “speak in church,” First Corinthians 14:34, 35. understood as “address the meeting”) but disregard others (e.g., those on wearing veils, First Corinthians 11:4–6).

The work of Penn-Lewis leaves much to be desired, on the whole, considering certain errors of fact, some problematic and rather improbable exegesis, and a seemingly forced effort to prove more than is necessary. It is an attempt to popularize a 1919 work by Katharine Bushnell, M.D., entitled “The ‘Magna Charta’ of Women According to the Scriptures.” One could wish for the work of Bushnell, at first hand. There are some emphatic and provocative statements that give one cause for reflection, but an insufficient grasp of the principles of textual criticism and of Hebrew grammar is evident.

Three of the authors suggest that Genesis 3:16 presents a mere factual prediction of sin’s consequences for the woman rather than a divine intention or divinely ordained pattern (as one may take the English of the RSV; cf. KJV, NEB, NAS, and others): “I will greatly multiply … in pain you shall bring forth … your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” “God,” says Pape, “was explaining what would be the historical result of being the fallen wife of a fallen man.” Part of Penn-Lewis’s argument is to the point: “If no ‘shall’ rule is to be found in the Hebrew original, and ‘all the ancient versions testify that the verb is a simple future’ [cited from Katharine Bushnell], therefore no ‘rule’ was preordained by God.” There is something to be said in support of this view. In verses 14 through 19, which must be interpreted together, there are no Hebrew verbs in the shorter imperative or jussive forms; in most cases the forms would be identical anyway, but in one of the few instances where there would be a difference, the imperfect (i.e., future) indicative appears rather than the jussive: “thorns and thistles it shall/will bring forth (taslîah) to you” (v. 18). Yet the situation is not so simple, for one must consider the “curse” formulas, explicit for the serpent (v. 14) and the man, or rather the ground (v. 17), and the fact that the Hebrew imperfect form is sometimes used to express “will, whether it be a definite intention and arrangement, or a simple desire” (see Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, edited by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, Oxford, 1910, sec. 107n.); for example, Isaiah 18:3 (imperative) and Genesis 1:9; Genesis 41:34; Leviticus 19:2, 3, and Second Samuel 10:12 (all jussive).

All the authors discuss First Corinthians 14:34, 35, the verses instructing women to “keep silence” in the church. For Lindskoog, they (together with Ephesians 5:24 and First Timothy 2:12–15 are the bad-news part of a “good news-bad news” joke. The “good news” is Galatians 3:26–28. Following William Barclay, she adds that Paul’s instruction in First Corinthians 14:34, 35, with deference to the culture of the time, is intended to protect the reputation of the church in such circumstances. To similar reasoning DeVos adds: “In fact, if the church is concerned about its image among unbelievers, which was part of Paul’s concern in this chapter (see v. 22), it had much better allow women to speak, since it is shocking to most twentieth-century Americans that the church discriminates so blatantly against women.”

Pape notes an apparent contradiction with First Corinthians 11:5, which implies that a woman may prophesy in public meetings if she wears her veil, if 14:34, 35 is understood to forbid women to speak in public meetings. She offers several solutions to the dilemma but prefers the view that Paul refers to “extra-biblical Jewish tradition” as “law” and that, while in principle the distinctions between Jew and Gentile, male and female, and slave and free had been overcome (Gal. 3:28), they had not yet been overcome in practice. For the sake of the Gospel, Paul was accommodating himself to local thinking.

Pape here exposes the crux of the matter. How can we discriminate between principles of broad or general application in the Bible and principles applicable to particular situations? Is it possible that we must, with Lindskoog, “agree with Paul’s principle rather than his example”?

Briefly Noted

One of the best-known evangelical theologians and educators of our time is J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., who served as president of Wheaton and Shelton colleges and then taught until retirement at Covenant Seminary. The latter institution has honored him with eight articles about different aspects of his life (plus a ten-page list of his writings), issued as volume two of its journal, Presbuterion (Covenant Seminary [12330 Conway Rd., St. Louis, Mo. 63141], 157 pp., $4 pb).

One of the cardinal Christian doctrines is justification. A well-written, college-level introduction is provided by Robert Horn in Go Free! (InterVarsity, 128 pp., $2.25 pb). While focusing on justification, it treats virtually all aspects of man’s relationship to God.

Religious? Like to travel? Then take along America’s Religious Treasures by Marion Rawson Vuilleumeir (Harper & Row, 286 pp., $9.95, $4.95 pb). Arranged by regions and states are more than 800 sites of religious significance for a variety of faiths. (Bob Jones University is prominent, but there’s nary an entry for the whole town of Wheaton!) Worthwhile.

Lewis Drummond, the Billy Graham professor of evangelism at Southern Baptist Seminary, has compiled a very useful systematic presentation of doctrines entitled What the Bible Says (Abingdon, 201 pp., $5.95). There are fourteen major divisions (such as “God’s Divine Attitudes or Attributes” and “How Man Relates to God”) with dozens of subdivisions under them. Most important: each paragraph is laden with pertinent Scripture references; the volume is a very useful aid to Bible study. Denominational bias is minimal.

The way in which money can and should be used is the focus of three practical books from a Christian perspective: All the Money You Need by George L. Ford (Word, 97 pp., $2.95 pb), Giving and Living by Samuel Young (Baker, 94 pp., $1.95 pb), and You Can Be Financially Free by George Fooshee, Jr. (Revell, 126 pp., $4.95). No debt, a written budget, savings, and giving are emphasized. Biblical examples of stewardship are given, but the authors are very conscious of the particular traps and limitations in twentieth-century finances. Each in his own style offers practical formulas for experiencing the “abundant” life through scriptural stewardship. Your Finances in Changing Times by Larry Burkett (Campus Crusade for Christ, 201 pp., n.p., pb) could be entitled “The Late Great Dollar Bill.” The author traces the history of money from bartering to an inevitable cashless society. The political practices of our nation, especially since the New Deal, have supposedly put us on the path to totalitarian control through economic means. In order to be prepared for this time, says this author, we need to be obeying God’s financial laws. One way to participate in God’s design is to engage in healthful financial “breathing”: inhale God’s financial principles and exhale bad financial habits. Approximately forty pages of practical applications are offered at the end of the book.

Amid all the modern translations it is interesting to learn that one of the earliest English translations of The New Testament, a 712-page edition by William Tyndale, first published in 1526, is now available in facsimile reprint (David Paradine Developments, 32 Davies St., London W1Y 1LG, England). Tyndale’s translation is one of the few books that can accurately be called milestones.

What’S Fair In Broadcasting?

The Good Guys, the Bad Guys, and the First Amendment, by Fred W. Friendly (Random House, 1975, 236 pp., $10), is reviewed by John V. Lawing, Jr., national editor, “National Courier,” Plainfield, New Jersey.

At 1:12 P.M. on November 25, 1964, the announcer on duty, Bob Barry, threaded a tape recorder in the Christian Crusade’s Tulsa, Oklahoma, studio. At 1:14 he began reading a commercial for Mailman’s Department Store. Sixty seconds later he gave station identification, pushed the button on tape recorder one and raised the level of the audio pot in time for the opening fanfare of ‘The Battle Hymn of the Republic’; Billy James Hargis was on the air in Red Lion, York, Spry, Dallastown … but the button Barry pushed started more than a tape recorder.”

The other thing started by Barry’s button was an unlikely chain of events that began with a dispute between Fred J. Cook, a liberal political writer, and the Reverend John M. Norris, an obscure radio-station owner, and finally ended with a confrontation between the U.S. government and the major broadcast networks.

The final arena of the “Red Lion” case (so called because the station was in Red Lion, Pennsylvania) was the U. S. Supreme Court. The final result was the “Fairness Doctrine.” Fred Friendly, president of CBS News for more than twenty years and now Edward R. Murrow Professor of Journalism at the Columbia School of Journalism, has written an engaging history of that episode and its subsequent effect. He guides the reader knowledgeably through the maze of related FCC decisions.

Mr. Friendly’s heart is on the side of those who think broadcasting should have the same protection of the First Amendment that the press enjoys. He rejects the argument of “scarcity,” that is, the argument that while the number of available broadcast frequencies is limited by the medium’s nature, publishing outlets are theoretically unlimited. Pointing out that there are 7,807 radio outlets in the United States and only 1,768 daily newspapers, he concludes that “only in a legalistic sense is there a scarcity situation requiring a Fairness Doctrine for radio broadcasting.”

Nevertheless, Friendly recognizes that it is impossible to turn the clock back and have the Fairness Doctrine disappear. He also warns broadcasters that its disappearance would not remove political pressure from the industry: “Who can forget President Nixon’s remark that the Washington Post … was going to have a ‘damnable, damnable time’ getting its broadcast licenses renewed …?”

The professor calls on the FCC to institute a policy that will encourage stations to “invent formats for handling opposing viewpoints as a part of their regular programming,” a policy that will look at a station’s entire output and not one aspect. And he calls on broadcasters to provide a forum for dissent voluntarily as a part of their responsibility.

The book is fascinating reading for anyone and necessary reading for everyone in any way involved in broadcasting.

Waiting On God

The Genesee Diary: Report From a Trappist Monastery, by Henri M. Nouwen (Doubleday, 1976, 200 pp., $6.95), is reviewed by Noel Buchanan, religion writer, “The Lethbridge Herald,” Lethbridge, Alberta.

Standing on a quiet little beach in Waterton National Park, Alberta, recently, I was overwhelmed by the magnificent view of mountains and the lake. The familiar words of the hymn “How Great Thou Art” flooded my mind, and I very definitely felt, as I stood there physically alone, a strong arm reach across my back and hug me.

Henri Nouwen, a Dutch Jesuit, speaks of a similar awareness of God’s presence in his life in a personal diary published after he spent seven months at the Abbey of the Genesee in upstate New York.

“Just as a whole world of beauty can be discovered in one flower, so the great grace of God can be tasted in one small moment. Just as no great travels are necessary to see the beauty of creation, so no great ecstasies are needed to discover the love of God. But you have to be still and wait so that you realize that God is not in the earthquake, the storm, or the lightning, but in the gentle breeze with which He touches your back,” Father Nouwen writes. And throughout his diary, God touches every quiet soul that is listening for him.

Others have attempted to write about retreats, about meeting God and being rejuvenated in an outdoor setting. But the human element is often too present in such accounts, and they leave your heart focused on what someone else has “experienced” rather than on God himself. Father Nouwen’s book is different; it will draw any Christian’s heart toward God and his Son.

This is an excellent practical report on day-to-day life in a contemplative setting. Father Nouwen explains the difference between being a teaching priest (his usual role at Yale Divinity School) and a monk. He tells how he battled for acceptance in the monastery, shaving his head and dressing like the monks. He writes about prayer, about gathering rocks for a new chapel, about washing raisins in the bakery, about his reaction to world political news received during the retreat.

The Genesee Diary is far and away one of the most rewarding books I have read in years, because it so beautifully lifts the heart and mind to God and the Saviour.

Help For A Pastoral Problem

The Problem Clergymen Don’t Talk About, by Charles L. Rassieur (Westminster, 1976, 157pp., $3.95), is reviewed by Cecil B. Murphey, pastor, Riverdale Presbyterian Church, Riverdale, Georgia.

The problem is, as you might have guessed, sexual attraction—the kind male ministers sometimes face when they counsel women. Rassieur wants to help clergymen “cope more effectively, more confidently, and with a sounder theological understanding when they are sexually attracted to a female counselee or parishioner.” His material comes from his own practice in pastoral care and from research interviews with parish pastors.

Rassieur doesn’t waste the reader’s time pondering the question, Can a pastor find himself sexually attracted to women parishioners? He accepts that as the foundation of his book. And he limits his discussion to male, heterosexual clergy.

How does a married pastor get involved with another woman? Rassieur handles this beautifully, and concludes that a man allows himself to get involved. He can’t plead helplessness. Rassieur insists that ministers must first claim responsibility for giving in to their sexual responses. The section called “The pastor deals with himself” is in my opinion the best one in the book.

And how does the minister cope with the counselee who attracts him? Tell her? Ignore his feelings? The author offers common-sense suggestions and then leads into a chapter on how the minister should deal with his wife. The concluding chapter is by Rassieur’s own wife, Ginni, who offers practical advice to both husbands and wives.

New Periodical

The Journal of the Association of Evangelical Institutional Chaplains was launched in July as an occasional publication for those interested in ministering to prisoners and others involved with the criminal-justice system. The first issue, forty-three pages, offers several useful articles (such as “Discipleship Training in a Jail”) and also a ten-page list of organizations that either minister to offenders or else offer services especially useful to such a ministry. This issue costs $3; an annual subscription is $5 (1036 S. Highland St., Arlington, Va. 22204). For all theological libraries.

Which shall I do first, go upstairs and write that article that is due, or go out to the garden and pick lettuce and some roses before the frost spoils them?” I hesitated, wishing I could go in both directions at once. Just then the doorbell rang, and I chose a third direction, the steps down to the front door. “I’m sorry to bother you, but this is an emergency. Can we talk to you now?” My husband was talking to someone in the living room, so I led mother and daughter into the dining room to listen to the problem.

Weeping with those who weep takes time. Two hours later when my husband had come in to join us, I glanced at the clock and realized that everyone needed some food. Slipping out I put together the ingredients for an egg-nog milk shake and started it whizzing, then dipped out broth from bones on the stove and added chicken bouillon and chopped parsley to give more flavor, then cut pieces of homemade brown bread and topped them with cheese and bacon and tomato slices and slipped them into the oven. A nutritious meal was soon ready for me to carry in on individual trays, without breaking into the flow of the conversation. Not only was the food needed for energy by each of us, but the pleasantness was remembered afterwards, and the beauty of a simple meal treasured, even by someone whose mind was filled with recent disaster and whose eyes were blurred with tears.

What are the ingredients of hospitality? How can love and community come out of the realm of theory and become a part of our moment-by-moment lives? How can we in these areas begin to be “doers of the Word and not hearers only”?

In Romans 12 we are given specific notice of what things are to be a part of the Christian life. We are to share things we have with those in a variety of kinds of needs: “Distributing to the necessity of the saints; given to hospitality.… Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep” (vv. 13, 15). Hospitality is not just giving a party. Sometimes it is to be combined with weeping.

Nor is hospitality just praying with a person and forgetting the physical need of the moment. James 2:15 and 16 is like a dash of ice water in our faces when we are tempted to push aside the help that would take more time or trouble when someone comes to us in need. “If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?” There are times when we need to buy or make clothing for people, or share our own, and times when we need to provide food for a day or a week or a month for those who are without, before talking to them about spiritual things. Or a glass of orange juice, or a hot-water bottle and a blanket, may be needed before we pray with someone who is in need of comfort and counsel.

Galatians 6:2 cautions us to bear one another’s burdens. Third John 5 commends Gaius: “Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to the brethren, and to strangers; which have borne witness of thy love before the church.” The practical act of bearing the burdens of others includes hospitality, which can be recognized as an expression of love. “Love one another” is not a command to have nice warm feelings. Just as faith is meant to show forth in acts based on faith, so love is meant to be observable in acts based on love.

First Timothy 3:2 gives some of the requirements of an elder in the church: “An elder then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach” (italics added). Titus 1:7–9 adds to the teaching of what makes up a Christian life, and especially the life of a Christian leader: “For an elder must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate, holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught …” (italics added).

First Peter 4:9 broadens this admonition to elders to include all of us: “Use hospitality one to another without grudging.” As this has come right after the admonition to “be sober and watch unto prayer,” it is a reminder that we are not free never to invite lonely people home for dinner after church, just so that we can have the afternoon free to pray. We are not to begrudge the time, energy, and privacy used for hospitality, any more than we are to begrudge the things we give away when we are cautioned that “God loveth a cheerful giver.”

In Hebrews 13:1 and 2 we are shown that this love to others in the church is to include strangers. “Let brotherly love continue. Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares”—a beautiful possibility that can occur only when we open the door and set a place at the table for someone who is really a stranger. And in Luke 14:12 and 13 Jesus makes very clear the command to prepare special meals and not invite friends and neighbors at all: “But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind.” This gives some categories of strangers we are meant to invite at times. When are we going to do it? What feast will we soon be preparing for poor people, or blind or crippled people?

When Abraham in Genesis 18:2–5 saw three strangers who stood by him suddenly, his reaction was to have water brought for them to wash with, urge them to rest for a time under a tree, and bring bread for them to eat. Abraham’s hospitality was received by angels, and the Lord’s people since Abraham’s time have had that spontaneous hospitality as an example. We are given many ideas throughout the Bible as to what hospitality can include. We are to share our homes, our tents, our shady place under a tree, our food, our clothing, our time, our prayer, with others—those of our own family, the family of the church, brothers and sisters in Christ, strangers.

Come to Matthew 25:35–40 and find an underlying base for it all, a dimension that only God can add. “For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” May we indeed be doers of the Word, and not hearers only.