In England and later in New York City Jowett became the most popular evangelical preacher. By study of master sermons, and by ceaseless toil he mastered “the fine art of making a little go a long way.” A few critics called his preaching thin, but common people heard him gladly. So did countless divines. As many as 300 Episcopal clergy attended his Vesper Services at Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church. They learned to value skill in the choice of words, and repetition of things memorable. “He being dead, yet speaketh.”

“Rejoicing in hope” (Rom. 12:12).

This is a characteristic expression of the optimism of the Apostle Paul. He is a child of light, wearing an armor of light, walking in the light, as Christ is in the light. This apostolic optimism is not a thin, fleeting sentiment begotten of a cloudless summer day; not born of shallow thinking. What then is the secret of this energetic optimism?

I. The Reality of Christ’s Redemptive Work. In all the spacious reaches of the Apostle’s life the redemptive work of his Master is present as an atmosphere in which all his thoughts and purposes and labors find their sustaining and enriching breath. In this Epistle to the Romans the early stages are devoted to a massive and stately presentation of the doctrine of redemption. When the majestic argument is concluded, the doctrine appears as the determining factor in the solution of practical problems. No one can be five minutes in the companionship of the Apostle Paul without discovering how wealthy is his sense of God’s redeeming ministry.

II. The Reality of the Believer’s Present Resources. “By Christ redeemed!” Yes, but that is only the Alpha and not the Omega of the work of grace. “In Christ restored!” With these dynamics of restoration Paul’s epistles are wondrously abounding. “Christ liveth in me!” He works within me “to will and to do of his good pleasure.” This is the primary faith of the hopeful life. The Holy Spirit worketh! So sensitive is the Apostle to the wealthy resources of God that amid all the world’s evil he remains a sunny optimist, “rejoicing in hope.”

III. The Reality of Future Glory. Paul gave himself time to think of heaven. He looked for “the blessed hope and appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ.” This contemplation is largely absent from modern religious life. We have built on the erroneous assumption that the contemplation of future glory unfits us for the service of men. Richard Baxter’s labors were not impoverished by his contemplation of “the saints’ everlasting rest.” Neither are we impoverished by contemplations such as these. They take no strength out of the hand; they put much buoyancy into the heart. Contemplation of coming glory is one of the secrets of the apostle’s optimism, enabling him to labor and endure in the spirit of rejoicing hope.

Apostolic Optimism and Other Sermons, by John Henry Jowett, London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1904. Sermon, “Apostolic Optimism” (pp. 1–18).

SERMONS ABRIDGED BY DR. ANDREW W. BLACKWOOD

JOHN A. BROADUS, “Let Us Have Peace with God.”

JOHN HENRY JOWETT,“Apostolic Optimism.”

CHARLES H. SPURGEON,“Love’s Commendation.”

Therefore being justified by faith let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:1, from the Greek).

More than four centuries ago a young professor went from Germany to Rome. He was in trouble because of his sins. He could find no peace. While climbing up a stairway on his knees, pausing to pray at every step, he seemed to hear a voice: “The just shall live by faith.” With such an experience Martin Luther lived to set the world on fire with the thought of justification by faith.

I. The Meaning of Justification. The Greek word means, not to make just, but to regard as just, to treat as just. How would the Lord treat you if you were a righteous man, if all your days you had faithfully performed all your duty? He would bless you as long as you lived here and then delight to take you home. This is how the Gospel proposes to treat men who are not (yet) just, and do not deserve such treatment—if only they believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

II. The Need of Faith in Christ. God not only proposes to deal with us now as if we were just, but in the end to make us just. This Gospel proposes to be the means by which to make men holy. It delivers us not only from the consequences of sin, but also from its power. But the Gospel can have no such effect unless we believe in Christ. What is faith? You know what faith is. Everyone knows: Let us cherish all that tends to strengthen faith in the Gospel. Let us read the Word of God, praying that we may be able to believe. Let us ask from day to day, “Lord, increase our faith.”

III. The Call for Peace with God, notwithstanding our unworthiness. We cannot have peace with him as long as we think we deserve it. Many cling to the thought that they must become worthy, and then be reconciled to God. They need to see that coming to God and being reconciled, they will be made good and become worthy, through Christ.

Peace with God, though we are still sinful and unholy. We ought to be dissatisfied with ourselves, but satisfied with our Saviour, and through him be at peace with God. Our sanctification is still sadly imperfect, but if we believe in Christ, our justification is perfect.

Peace with God, though we have perpetual conflict with sin. What a singular idea! In this conflict the Lord is on our side, and we are on the Lord’s side. And so, though we must wage battle against every form of sin, let us have peace with God.

Peace with God, though he lets us suffer a thousand forms of distress and trial. None of these things can separate us from God’s love. When we are in trouble let us take hold of this great thought. God’s peace can conquer trouble, and as in a fortress guard us against all its assaults (Phil. 4:6–7). [In the same volume, Sermons and Addresses, the next one deals with “How the Gospel Makes Men Holy” (Rom. 7:24, 25).]

Idem. Sermon, “Let Us Have Peace with God” (pp. 85–96).

Dedicated to assisting the clergy in the preparation of sermons, the feature titled The Minister’s Workshop will appear in the first issue of each month. The section’s introductory essay will be contributed alternately by Dr. Andrew W. Blackwood and by Dr. Paul S. Rees. In addition, the feature will include Dr. Blackwood’s abridgements of expository-topical sermons, outlines of significant messages by great preachers of the past, or of messages by expository preachers of our own time.—ED.

An address (here abridged) before the International YMCA.

The main support of all individual Christian life, of all high Christian work, must be the truth of God. Truth is the lifeblood of piety. Truth is always more precious and more potent when we draw it ourselves out of the Bible. The Christian work we have today in the world will be wise and strong and mighty just in proportion, other things being equal, as it is directed and controlled and inspired out of the Word of God.

The Bible is one Book, but the Bible is many books. Each of them must be read as a whole life if we would understand it well. You cannot understand any book if you read it by fragments. Take an epistle of Paul as you would take any other letter. Sit down and read an epistle from beginning to end, and see what it is about. Then take it afterwards in parts, and see what each part says about the subject.

[Here Broadus tells how in college he had heard a professor advise reading the Bible by books. Before Broadus became a professor at 32, he delivered a series of evening sermons on the Epistles of Paul, treating each in a sermon and as a whole. Thus he crowded the aisles, and led in building a new church.]

Take the Epistle to the Romans. Some people think the epistle tremendously hard to understand. I remember a time when I found it hard to believe; certain portions were the most difficult writing I knew. It seems to me now [age 54] that there never would have been any great difficulty in seeing what the Apostle meant to say if I had only let him alone, and let him say what he wanted to say. But I had my own notions as to what ought to be said, and not said, on the subject. The plainer he was in saying what he wanted, and I did not, the harder I found it to make him say something else.

As you read the epistle rapidly you find that it breaks into two parts. Eleven chapters contain doctrinal arguments and instruction. Then five chapters treat practical matters slightly connected with the doctrinal. The first eleven treat justification by faith. The first three give the whole substance of this doctrine. They show that the Gospel reveals the righteousness of God, which is by grace. Then they show that men need justification by faith, as they can not find justification in any other way. Their works will condemn them. If they find justification at all, it must be by faith.

This takes up the first two chapters, with part of the third. The remainder of the third tells about the provision God has made for justification by faith. His provision takes out of repentant souls all pride and humbles them into receiving the great salvation that God gives. The next two chapters give further illustrations of justification by faith. One whole chapter shows that Abraham was justified by faith. This whole matter of cur being justified through the effect of Christ’s salvation is paralleled by the effect of Adam’s sin on his posterity. This takes a large part of chapter five. These are merely illustrations of our being justified through faith in the Redeemer.

Chapters six, seven, and eight treat justification by faith from another point: in its bearing on sanctification, or the work of making men holy. Then the next three chapters are on the privileges of the Jews and the Gentiles. So the epistle divides into different sections about the same topic. After you have read it through a number of times, have tried to find out the line of thought, and have been willing to let the Apostle mean what he wants to mean, you will find that the subjects considered are not so very difficult. Of course, there are questions we can ask about them, questions that nobody can answer, but we must content ourselves with what is taught us.

So let us read the Bible by books, first taking each book as a whole, then seeing how it is divided up, and so coming down to details. In that way we shall learn for ourselves how to interpret the various parts of Scripture with reference to their connection. Everybody will agree that you ought to look at the connection of a Scripture passage. One day my father said that he did not like to find fault with ministers, but he wished some of them would pay more attention to the connection of a text, as the preacher of the morning had not done. I suppose that preachers have since grown wiser, and now do always pay attention to the connection.

Each of the sacred books has its special aim and practical value, and we ought to get at the practical impression that each of them is designed to make. It is easier to eulogize the Bible than to love it. I have spoken with the hope that by God’s blessing I may awaken an increased desire to read the Bible attentively, by books. I pray that we may all turn away with an earnest desire in our souls, before Him who knows the heart, that in the remainder of our lives we shall strive to know his Word more, to read it more wisely, and to live more fully according to its blessed teachings.

Sermons and Addresses, by John A. Broadus (ed. by Archibald T. Robertson), George H. Doran Co., New York, 1896, “On Reading the Bible by Books” (pp. 167–197). Address, International Convention of YMCA, Cleveland, Ohio, May 25, 1881.

Every pastor wishes the layman to read his Bible, both in private and at the family altar. From the pulpit why not show him how? There can be no bad way of reading the Bible, but from the pulpit show the best way. The Bible was written by books. Within each book the paragraph, or poetic strophe, serves as the literary unit. In college a layman learns to enjoy Shakespeare by living with one play, and within the play, one act, and one scene. Such a method works even better with the Bible.

Many a layman has never read a Bible book as a whole, and by paragraphs. In private and family devotions he uses a devotional manual, with a Bible verse a day, and little continuity. In church the sermons may follow a similar pattern. How long must a man attend church before he learns to enjoy such a difficult book as Romans? Today the Lord calls on every pastor to serve as a pulpit guide.

In a sermon about any book, tell the layman what to seek for. In successive messages, morning or evening, deal with chosen parts (too many for a special series). Every Lord’s Day the bulletin will give next Sunday’s topic (not the text), with a chapter or two for home reading. The list below runs too long, but it is easier to omit some parts than to add others on the same high level.

Broadus used as an example the Epistle to the Romans. He had found it difficult, but “there never would have been any great difficulty in seeing what the Apostle meant to say if I had only been willing to let him alone and let him say what he wanted to say.” Today any such pulpit explainer would delight lay hearers, and increase their number.

Before a minister starts preaching this way he should study Romans in the spirit of prayer. The stress ought to fall on reading the book as a whole, and then by paragraphs. Starting with the Greek, a man ought to use various versions. On points of difficulty he should consult a standard exegetical commentary such as that of Sanday and Headlam; also, a devotional one, as by Griffith Thomas. If the minister still does not understand a part, or see its relevance now, he may recall an old proverb: “If you can’t lift a stone, leave it alone.”

Gradually a number of golden texts will call for sermons. As R. W. Dale once learned about preaching on Christ our Contemporary, a man can keep on in the same field as long as each truth makes his own heart burn. So will the heart of the layman glow while gradually he learns to read the Bible as it was written, keeping the eye fixed on Christ, ever in meeting the heart needs of persons like us now (John 4:42).

In eight or ten years a pastor can guide a growing number of laymen in enjoying almost every major book of the Bible, and some “minor” ones. By such “cooperative preaching” from the Bible, he can present God’s way of solving every spiritual problem, and meeting every heart need of the hearers. As for the harvest, both he and the hearers will claim the promise of God about his Book (Isa. 55:10, 11).

“It is not an accident, brethren, that in this age, in which infidelity has anew become blatant and arrogant, the Bible is more studied than ever it was before. It is not an accident that there is a new demand, throughout the Christian world, springing up for Biblical, expository preaching.… People don’t know about believing the preacher nowadays, and a great many people don’t know about acknowledging the authority of a church as they once did; but the people who come to hear the gospel, if you bring them something right out of the Bible, not a broken, dead fragment, but a part of the living whole, full of the true, divine life, and show them its meaning as God has taught it, and lay that meaning, explained, upon their hearts and their lives, the people everywhere respond to that.…”—JOHN A. BROADUS, Sermons and Addresses (1886).

Under God the effectiveness of the course will depend largely on the opening sermon. Here one does not dangle the skeleton of a corpse, but introduces a living book. First, the Meaning of the Gospel as the Super-Atomic Power of God. Second, the Practical Use of this Power Today. At best, atomic energy can change only the form and the place of things. The Gospel alone can transform a sinner into a saint, a cannibal tribe into a redeemed family of God. Super-atomic power enough to transform our world!

In a message about Repentance, one could deal first with the Gospel Meaning of metanoia, a complete “change of mind” about God and one’s own sin. Then with the Gospel Reason: because the Christ of Calvary is here. Last of all, the Christian Issue. Not merely “turning a new leaf,” but starting a new life, full of joyous service and lasting hope.

So each of the messages will bring the unsaved hearer face to face with the Christ of the Cross, moving him to accept the Redeemer and King, and then to bring others, one by one, to the foot of the Cross, there to lay down the burden of sin and shame, to receive pardon, cleansing, peace, and joy, with endless hope. Hallelujah!

Because of such preaching by a pastor whom I know, a mature young man and his wife accepted the Lord. Four years later they had to move away. In bidding farewell, they thanked him for showing from the pulpit how to read and enjoy 20 Bible books, none of which they had previously read. Who can imagine the lasting impact of such pulpit work where many laymen read the Bible setting before they hear each sermon?

The Super-Atomic Power of God—1:16

The Christian Reason for Repentance—2:4b

The Bible Teaching about Sin—3:23

The Bible Teaching about Salvation—4:3

The Christian Gospel of Peace—5:1

The Gospel Gift of Salvation—6:23

The Daily Struggle in the Soul—7:15 (RSV)

The Holy Spirit as Our Guide—8:14

The Christian Basis of Optimism—8:28

The Christian Promise for Missions—10:13

The Christian Doxology about God—11:33

The Christian Treatment of the Body—12:1

The Christian Attitude toward Government—13:1

The Practical Meaning of the Kingdom—14:17

The Christian Gospel of Hope—15:13

A Look At American Preaching

Best Sermons: 1962 Protestant Edition, by G. Paul Butler (Van Nostrand, 1962, 318 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by James Daane, Editorial Associate, CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

The craftsmanship of these sermons runs from acceptable to excellent. None is poorly wrought; none made late of a Saturday evening.

Evaluated in terms of evangelical content, some sound the Good News of what God had done in Christ in tones clean and clear. Many, if not most, proclaim the Gospel, but the articulation is more or less muffled. Some of these are open to objection, not for what they say, but for what they fail to say, or assert merely as undertones. Some echo no Gospel at all, a judgment that must fall on more than the productions of two Unitarians.

In general it may be said that these sermons do not reflect the old liberal optimism about man, but the situation of man in crisis. The crisis is not the perennial crisis of the individual caught in the anguish of deliverance from sin and death. It is rather that of the twentieth-century man caught in those narrows of history where the past overtakes the present in judgment. Not a single sermon is devoted specifically to sin; none to that moment in which each man dies alone—even though others die at the same time. While most acknowledge that it is God alone who can save us, none explicitly rings the bells on the theme of salvation by grace alone in the grand style of the Reformation. Some few, not yet perceiving the signs of the times, urge that while God had done his work the rest is up to man, since further action on the part of God would violate man’s freedom (assumedly to be lost!) Happily it may be said that there is more Gospel in these 42 sermons than would have been the case in such a collection 25 years ago.

It could be urged that a sermon by definition is the proclamation of the Word of God through human personality in such a fashion that the seeking soul can find wherein to take his rest and the believing soul be lifted up into an act of worship. By this definition many of these could not be classified as sermons. They are rather religious lectures on noble themes, without the sound of divine judgment on human sin, and without sounds of the divine grace of forgiveness. Yet such classification would not be fair since many were preached to special audiences, by men not engaged in the congregational ministry, and under special circumstances calling for special religious objectives. These sermons, therefore, cannot be taken as representative of what is heard on Sunday mornings in American pulpits. That so many religious lectures should be presented as sermons is, I think, indicative of the status of the American pulpit.

If, however, what claims to be a sermon is subject to the criteria of the sermon, the following observations are to the point. Most of these sermons have no text. By generous estimate a few might be called expository sermons, i.e., a proclamation of the meaning of a given text of Scripture and of its bearing on man and his life. Many are more evangelical than anything else, but even of these, few carry the design of the Cross clearly in their fabric. The best on this score is from the pen of the chaplain of Princeton University. Many evangelicals reveal no essential relationship between the theme of their sermon and the Christ they in fact want to proclaim. They choose a biblical theme but fail to relate it in meaningful fashion to the theme of the Bible: Jesus Christ and him crucified. Many evangelicals would be embarrassed if they attempted to evaluate their production in the light of Paul’s “I am determined to know nothing among you save …”

It is these considerations which give substance to Bishop Kennedy’s remark, “The messages coming from our pulpits are little, squeaking words of cheer.”

These weaknesses characterizing many of these sermons when judged by strict homiletical criteria, flow chiefly from the failure to preach expository sermons.

Constructing sermons without specific texts on large biblical themes, which call for a “cover to cover” type of exposition, should be left to the genius of the pulpit, or attempted only after considerable experience in the simpler forms of expository preaching, lest men hear the Word of God without recognizing it.

God can indeed break through our formally Crossless sermons and make the word of the Cross to be heard, but we ought not tempt the Lord our God, least of all in the pulpit.

This book is better than its sermons. Even so, almost everyone of its sermons can be read, especially by men of the pulpit, with large and lasting profit. These sermons sparkle with ideas, illustrations, factual material, biblical insights, and literary allusions. This reviewer has read them, not always with approbation, but usually with profit.

One final comment in which various men will see different orders of significance. Few sermons reveal the denominational affiliation, or the theological tradition of their makers.

JAMES DAANE

From Plato To Hegel

Divine Perfection: Possible Ideas of God, by Frederick Sontag (Harper, 1962, 158 pp., $3.75), is reviewed by Gordon H. Clark, Professor of Philosophy, Butler University, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Part I is a well-written history of some major ideas on divine perfection entertained by the great philosophers from Plato to Hegel. Part II is a cross classification of these ideas with the aim of seeing how each affects the others. Some of these chapters seem to add very little to what was said in Part I.

The entire discussion presupposes the possibility of natural theology, and no account is given of those who deny this possibility. In fact, revealed theology is apparently regarded as impossible: “Since God has no lips, he cannot speak … This means that we have much indirect but no direct word about God and by God. Were it otherwise, we would have but one religion and one doctrine of the nature of God.” Both inferences are logically invalid, are they not? The author also rules out verbal revelation by asserting “the natural incommensurability between our language and such a Being.”

Although the author wishes to avoid endorsing any one theory of the nature of God, he does not succeed in refraining from unsupported assertions. “Metaphysic is never born in Ethics”—Nietzsche said it always is—and “Being good himself, God was bound to recognize some but not all value standards in creation,” are two that are stated oracularly.

The main conclusion, however, is well supported, viz. that twelve concepts, infinity and unity, form and transcendence, actuality and self-sufficiency, power and motion, simplicity and division, freedom and volition, are not all consistent when defined in certain ways, but may, most of them at any rate, be made consistent by changing their meanings.

GORDON H. CLARK

Laymen Arise!

The Church and Its Laity, by Georgia Harkness (Abingdon, 1961, 208 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Leslie Hunt, Principal of Wycliffe College, Toronto, Canada.

Few people will dispute the contention that one of the weaknesses of the church has been the inadequate role of the laity and the layman’s unawareness of what his real role is. Any effort to deal with this problem and clarify the issues is welcome. Indeed one of the themes much under study in recent times is this very matter: “What is the church?” and “What is the true role of the laity?” The new consciousness that these questions should be faced and answered may be found in all denominational groups. This growing interest is in evidence by the many requests for bibliographical guides. To meet this demand, a bibliography on the subject has been published by the Department on the Laity. It is illuminating to me how much work has been done recently on the theme.

“The Church and Its Laity” is another volume to be added to the list. The author, with a real concern for ecumenical issues, is disturbed by the fact that the movement towards ecumenicity, so important in these days, cannot really function at its best until it gets into the blood of not only the people in high places, but also of the clergy and the laity at the local level. The contention is that this will not take place until there is a real understanding of the meaning of the church, and the true place of the laity in it. The author claims that the book is not designed to be a handbook on lay activities or vocations but to help the laymen to a better understanding of the church, and through this knowledge to a better grasp of his own place in it.

Accordingly, the author is prompted to devote the first half of the book to the matter of the nature of the church—what it is, how its principal divisions came to be as they are, and what its true functions are. The second and third chapters present an historical survey of the changes that have taken place from New Testament times to the emergence of the major Protestant denominations. Chapter IV relates more specifically to the current scene, with the fifth and sixth chapters exposing some of the secular standards and practices which have made their way into the life of the church. The author elaborates on some of the channels by which the church can be a constructive force in remaking society. Chapters VII and VIII point up some hopeful projects and signs, such as the ecumenical movement, laymen’s institutes in Europe, lay centers in America. Behind all this the book presents a strong appeal for more effective action by laymen as they endeavor to be the church within the world.

Reading for Perspective

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

* The Council, Reform and Reunion, by Hans Küng (Sheed & Ward, $3.95). With charity, humility, and ruthless honesty, a Roman Catholic professor urges that reunion of Catholicism and Protestantism requires a renewal and reform of the church. Superbly written.

* Women Who Made Bible History, by Harold J. Ockenga (Zondervan, $3.50). Literary portraits of saintly and some not-so-saintly women of the Bible. Rich in biblical wisdom.

* Martin Buber and Christianity, by Hans Urs Von Balthasar (Macmillan, $3). In penetrating Christian-Jewish dialogue, a Swiss Roman Catholic urges that the faith of Abraham and that of Paul appear irreconcilable only because Jews reject Christ, and Christians reject Jews.

The author has written simply so that any lay reader can grasp the meaning. With clarity and some forcefulness, she has sought to clear away confused thinking on a number of relevant issues. Some may not agree with some of her definitions but there would, I am sure, be general agreement in her analysis of the factors which are preventing the church from making a greater impact upon the world. If this volume can help laymen to catch a new vision of the true function of themselves as the church, and fire them to a greater participation and service, it will be well worthwhile.

LESLIE HUNT

No Ghettos

Poems of the East and West, by Merrell Vories Hitotsuyanagi, ed. by Frederica Mead Hiltner (The Omi Brotherhood, Omi-Hachiman, Japan, 1960, 169 pp., $2.95), is reviewed by Gordon K. Chapman, Missionary to Japan, United Presbyterian Church.

One of the most romantic stories of the modern missionary movement is that of the Omi Brotherhood, founded in 1905 by the missionary-teacher and architect, Merrell Vories. From the beginning he was fully convinced that “the ghetto mentality where Christians separate themselves from those among whom they live and work, and from the culture and life of the nation,” was contrary to the mind of Christ. Thus the 400 workers of this indigenous mission have been engaged in industry, architecture, and evangelistic, educational and social activities as active Christian witnesses. Vories’ marriage to Maki Hitotsuyanagi, daughter of an ancient noble family, and his subsequent naturalization, were the natural outcome of the application of indigenous principles.

His poems are the spontaneous expression of one who has found complete fulfillment in Jesus Christ and reflect the spirit of a very consistent Christian whom God used to accomplish a unique work in a virgin field of Japan. This hook is a significant supplement to the story of the Omi Brotherhood, A Mustard Seed in japan, which should he required reading for all modern missionaries.

GORDON K. CHAPMAN

Crossed Up

The Many-Sided Cross of Jesus, by Alan Walker (Abingdon, 1962, III pp., $2), is reviewed by J. Kenneth Grider, Associate Professor of Theology, Nazarene Theological Seminary, Kansas City, Missouri.

This little book presents what an evangelically-interested (pp. 7, 89 ff.) liberal sees in the cross of Jesus.

The author might be mistaken on occasion, as when he says that the Apostles’ Creed “came out of” “the great councils” (p. 14). He might seem to switch horses, too, on the question whether the atonement does anything for God himself. To Charles Wesley’s line, “ ’My God is reconciled’ ” (p. 18), he takes exception saying this is an “error,” for “God is not reconciled by the actions of his Son.…” (p. 18). Yet he later upbraids the Abelardians for giving “a far too subjective” view, “putting emphasis on the response given to the Cross,” and thereby “transposing the center of God’s saving act from God himself to ourselves” (p. 39).

Nor may the reader look for scholarly treatment. Often, quotes are not footnoted. Scripture passages are not exegeted: he usually simply quotes, as though the meaning were obvious.

Bible-respecting Christians would take hearty exception with the author on whether the Cross was planned. According to Walker, the Father “did not intend” “the Crucifixion,” “but once it happened, … God seized upon the Cross and … made it the occasion of salvation” (p. 75). Nor did Jesus come to earth in order to “give his life a ransom” (Matt. 20:28). Instead, “As he came nearer the end of his life he believed he could do something by dying …” (p. 18).

With all this on the negative side, the book does give the laymen a general treatment of atonement views. It could be useful to the minister because of its illustrative materials and its analogies of the Cross, as, for example, the sustained comparison between Christ’s death and the suffering of a scientist on behalf of others (pp. 50–59).

J. KENNETH GRIDER

The Shape Of The Gospel

Kerygma or Gospel Tradition—Which Came First?, by Robert A. Bartels (Augsburg, 1961, 126 pp., $1.95), is reviewed by Glenn W. Barker, Professor of New Testament, Gordon Divinity School, Beverly Farms, Massachusetts.

One of the fundamental tenets in the modern study of Gospel origins is that the kerygma, the preaching of the earlier church, determined the nature and shape of the Gospel tradition. With this conclusion Professor Bartels, of Northwestern Lutheran Theological Seminary, takes issue. He proposes instead that Jesus “is not only responsible for most of the contents of the tradition, but also for the basic and general shape into which the tradition has been cast by the synoptic writers” (p. 62), and that this tradition, “largely in the shape in which we now have it,” is responsible for the form of the kerygma.

The position taken by Professor Bartels strongly fortifies the authority of the tradition, sounding a note that is sadly missing in much of the modern discussion. However, does the author prove too much? If Jesus is made responsible for both the shape as well as the content of the tradition, is it likely that the differences between the Gospels can he explained as “editorial liberties,” as Bartels seeks to do?

For its involvement with contemporary discussion the book is to be commended. The criticism raised against Bultmann is particularly effective.

GLENN W. BARKER

Into The Stream

The Layman’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 21: Romans, I & II Corinthians by Kenneth J. Foreman; Vol. 16: Matthew, by Suzanne de Dietrich; Vol. 6: Judges, Ruth, I & II Samuel, by Eric C. Rust; Vol. 13: Ezekiel, Daniel, by Carl G. Howie (John Knox Press, 1961, about 135 pp., ea. $2.00 ea., $1.75 in quantities of four or more), are reviewed by G. Aiken Taylor, Editor, The Presbyterian Journal, Asheville, North Carolina.

The Layman’s Bible Commentary represents the major effort to date to launch the Presbyterian Church, US (one of the last holdouts against neoorthodoxy and the effects of “biblical” theology among the larger denominations), into the main stream of contemporary theological thought.

Only one of the present four volumes was written by a member of the denomination publishing the Commentary.

Romans, I & II Corinthians. Here is theology indeed brought to the level of the layman’s understanding. Concisely and attractively written the weakness of this volume is the weakness of the Commentary as a whole: “positive” Christian doctrines effectively affirmed; “negative” or “hard” doctrines ignored or denied.

Thus laymen will find helpful treatments of justification and propitiation (expressed as expiation). But predestination is denied any negative application. There is no doctrine of reprobation; or of imputation; or of condemnation. The elusive shadow of a tacit universalism flits throughout.

Dealing with the “Jewish problem” of Romans 9, Dr. Foreman says that Paul is not here revealing truth, he is thinking out loud, so to speak, turning over in his mind various possibilities respecting the fate of the Jews and rejecting each possibility until he reaches the final answer upon which he settles, namely that all Israel shall be saved.

Matthew. Essentially the same theological position is reflected in this volume. There is one of the most interesting paradoxes of reverence for, and at the same time disbelief in, the supernatural that this reviewer has seen.

Not the slightest shadow of doubt is cast over the Virgin Birth. The miracles are treated respectfully. The Passion is faithfully told. The Resurrection shines forth in all its splendor. Matthew’s repeated references to judgment, rejection, casting away, are not evaded.

But in the story of Christ walking on water the author cannot refrain from suggesting that post-Resurrection traditions may have woven themselves about the story of Jesus. And certain prophecies on the lips of Jesus (as about his Passion) were “fixed in the tradition after the event.”

Miss de Dietrich’s universalism appears this way: “If the sin against the Holy Spirit is not pardoned either in this age or in the age to come, the opposite is true also—there is hope in this age and in the age to come for those who will not have been acquainted with or recognized the Son of Man here below.”

Judges, Ruth, I & II Samuel. If the major fault of the New Testament volumes in the Commentary is a tacit universalism, the major fault of the Old Testament volumes is a slavish acceptance of the findings of higher criticism.

History is only an original peg, now almost wholly obscured, about which the stories have been woven. Natural events, such as plagues, come to be embellished with theological meaning after being handed down for generations. Thus a pestilence which struck Beth-shemesh is later assigned a theological cause, namely that the people had looked into the Ark.

Ezekiel, Daniel. Surprisingly enough, Ezekiel is said to have been a historical figure, actually living among the captives, seeing in his visions the circumstances of Jerusalem back home. The book is interpreted with a fine appreciation of the theological issues of sin and redemption.

Daniel, on the other hand, is not considered a historical figure at all. The “hero” of this epic story, which is compared to the “Joseph saga,” (the “Daniel image”) was created to represent the truest and best in Israel.

The story of the fiery furnace celebrates (for the encouragement of the persecuted Jews of the Maccabean period) the historical event when “Israel was rescued from the fiery furnace of Chaldean captivity when the people were set free by the hand of Cyrus the Persian.” The story of Nebuchadnezzar’s madness is explained by reference to extra-biblical stories of Nabonidus, who ruled after Nebuchadnezzar, and who spent so much time at Tema, a resort in the desert, that he “was probably considered a ‘nature boy.’ ”

To this reviewer the marvelous thing about this sort of approach to the Bible is how the commentators can speak appreciatively of material they characterize as a deliberate lie. Scripture is said to be historically inaccurate, the stories garbled, the dates fabricated, the characters unidentifiable. Yet this is to be taken as “containing” the Word of God from which we can learn much!

One hopes that this Commentary is not designed to form the theological perspective from which the new curriculum of the Presbyterian Church, US, will be published in 1964.

G. AIKEN TAYLOR

Semantic Dilemma

The Language of Faith, by Samuel Laeuchli (Abingdon Press, 1962, 272 pp., $5.50), is reviewed by Robert H. Mounce, Associate Professor of Biblical Literature, Bethel College, St. Paul, Minnesota.

The basic dilemma of Christian language is pointed up by Irenaeus’ comparison of the Gnostics’ use of words to the disassembling and rearranging of a mosaic: the gems are the same but the two images are quite different. Dr. Laeuchli’s fascinating study introduces the reader to this semantic dilemma of the early Church. To speak meaningfully to the second century the Christian faith had to employ two languages simultaneously the canonical and the contemporary. Whether it could accomplish this without such distortion as would obscure the essential message was the crucial question of that formative period.

Two dangers lurked close by: Gnosticism (ch. I) with its imaginative language and metaphysical subtlety, and post-apostolic Christianity (ch. II) with its moralizing and legalistic distortion of the canonical language of affirmation. Of pivotal importance in this period of theological striving and semantic failure was the contribution of Irenaeus of Lyons (ch. III)—the presentation of a theological language of Christian proclamation.

This is a rewarding book. The temptation, upon finishing the last page, is to return immediately to the first and begin again. In this dialogue with the second century one cannot escape the feeling that there is a strange contemporaneity about it all. The problems of Irenaeus are still with us. To take a hard look at his course of action is to pain direction in the current discussion of religious symbolism. As Gnosticism rearranged the canonical mosaic into an image more philosophically intriging, so also is there the continuing lure to transform the kerygmatic core of revelation into whatever the current philosophy might be. As post-apostolic Christianity used the language of faith as a “handy whip for theologians who have to assert authority,” so also is there the constant danger of allowing the joyful news of New Testament proclamation to become rigid creed and the tool of ecclesiastical conformity.

Dr. Lauechli, who teaches at Garrett Biblical Institute in the field of the history of Christianity, has done us a real service. In the course of his book certain major emphases find repeated expression: that the Christian stands in the clash of two languages; that Christian communication is affirmation, not cosmic speculation or moralizing; that canonical language places man in confrontation with God. The author’s extensive knowledge of the German literature in the field has made available many valuable insights that English readers may have missed. The epilogue, “The Language of Faith,” points up a major conclusion—that relevant proclamation can take place “only when we put ourselves into both the speech of the canon and the idiom of our age.”

ROBERT H. MOUNCE

Mystery Of Life

The Meaning and Message of Lent, by Eugene R. Fairweather (Harper, 1962, 159 pp., $3), is reviewed by James D. Robertson, Professor of Preaching, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.

A provocative little book on how an understanding of Lent can deepen the life of the Church and of the individual Christian. Lent is seen as a time of intensive training in Christianity, calling forth serious reflection on such themes as Baptism, the Eucharist, Sunday worship, Christian instruction, penitence, and fasting. The book successfuly bodies forth three things: God’s solution of the mystery of life and death lies at the heart of the Gospel; the great observances of Christianity are designed to set it forth; and the faithful keeping of Lent and Easter can help the believer make God’s answer his own victory

JAMES D. ROBERTSON

Salvation Of Infants

From Limbo to Heaven, by Vincent Wilkin, S. J., (Sheed & Ward, 1961, 145 pp., $3), is reviewed by R. Allan Killen, Professor of Systematic Theology, Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri.

The author, chaplain of Liverpool University for 12 years, who wrote his book during the last four months of his life, discusses the problem of the salvation of unbaptized children who die in infancy. A staunch Roman Catholic who believes in the infallibility of the pope and the supreme authority of his church, the immaculate conception of Mary, etc., he maintains that his church has never made any authoritative declaration on this subject, beyond saying that they go to “limbo,” and sets himself the task of solving this problem in the light of Rome’s view of baptismal regeneration.

Wilkin teaches that there are three kinds of baptism: (1) baptism of water or regular baptism “at the font”; (2) baptism with blood, namely the baptism Rome teaches which saved those Christian martyrs, and the “Holy Innocents” at Bethlehem, who died before they could receive regular baptism; (3) baptism of the Spirit which occurs to all at the second coming of Christ and coincides with the resurrection (pp. 98, 99). Wilkin’s case stands or falls with Rome’s doctrine of baptismal regeneration. He ends by declaring all the heathen and all children who die unbaptized in infancy to be saved by this “baptism of the Spirit,” and only those who willfully and knowingly reject Christ to be lost.

R. ALLAN KILLEN

Bridge Builder

Foundations for a Philosophy of Christian Education, by Lawrence C. Little (Abingdon, 1962, 256 pp., $4), is reviewed by J. Marion Snapper, Professor of Education, Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Professor Little presents us with a sourcebook of the raw materials out of which he believes an adequate philosophy of Christian education must be formulated. The raw materials are the behavioral sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, anthropology) and theology, “the discipline by which man seeks to organize his religious beliefs into coherent and ordered form.” The method proposed is a “synthesis of the knowledge about human beings and the ways they learn that comes from ‘secular’ sources and that which comes specifically from the Christian heritage.”

Standing quite clearly in the theological tradition of Schleiermacher and Harnack, and impressed by Tillich and Bultmann, the author does not make theological distinctions between general and special revelation. He notes only that the different sciences deal with different aspects of reality. Nowhere is there any clear indication of which sciences are normative and which are descriptive. In fact, it may be inferred from his approach that he wants to be rid of such distinctions.

In his chapter on “The Scientific Image of Man” he includes a discussion of the worth of the individual and makes value judgments such as, “the tensions should be resolved in a spirit of compromise so that the fullest possible good for the whole may be realized.” Certainly no scientist qua scientist made these value judgments.

For theology he proposes “a reconstruction” of Christian doctrine through an intensification of Christian experience and a more realistic interpretation of this experience in terms of contemporary thought through the pooled insights of thinkers who are specialists in a variety of disciplines.”

Evidently Professor Little’s norm is human reason which first identifies Jesus as “the master student of human nature and the world’s best exemplar of high religion”; and secondly demands that the systematized insights (doctrine) derived from the historical Jesus be rescued by science (e.g., philology, archaeology) from Pauline and subsequent interpretation; and finally calls for such a reconstruction as described above.

A theology thus derived must then be synthesized with the findings of the behavioral sciences. Professor Little demonstrates a breadth of scholarship in that field as he presents us with thumbnail sketches of the more prominent theories of learning and personality. They are included to create an awareness of the broad range of insights which are afforded by the behavioral sciences and to whet the reader’s appetite for more. He is encouraged by such eclectics as Gardner Murphy, and Henry A. Murray, and by O. H. Mowrer, Gordon Allport, and others who are recognizing the spiritual dimensions of existence.

This is a consistent book. The author himself contributes to the bridge he is trying to build. He avoids using traditional theological terms; instead the reader will find that the author is continually restating his understanding of those concepts in the language of the behavioral sciences. He tries to give us the psychological concomitants of his theological constructs. It may make us uncomfortable to have the teachings of the Bible psychologized. But it also makes the psychologist uncomfortable to have his work spiritualized. Our author is trying to build a bridge and his effort deserves careful study.

It may be hoped that this book will stimulate some evangelical scholar to deal with this same problem with the sophistication and honesty which characterize Professor Little’s attempt—but without a price tag which bankrupts conservative theology.

J. MARION SNAPPER

Leading To Membership

Light from Above, Christian Doctrine Explained and Applied, by Alfred W. Koehler (Concordia, 1960, 165 pp., $1.50), is reviewed by Robert Preus, Professor of Systematic Theology, Concordia Theological Seminary, St. Louis.

This book is written as an introduction to the Christian faith. It is designed to be a help or textbook in adult classes leading to membership in the church. In this purpose it is notably successful. It is comprehensive, touching all the chief points of Christian doctrine; its style is plain and readable—and original; and its theology is eminently conservative. It is to be hoped, however, that the book will have a wider distribution than merely as a textbook. For it commends itself to any serious Christian reader. Herein the great articles of our faith are not only set forth with clarity and conviction, but the biblical basis in all cases is brought to bear to convince and strengthen the reader.

A more usable introduction to the Christian faith will be difficult to find.

ROBERT PREUS

Book Briefs

Prayer Pilgrimage Through the Psalms, by John Calvin Reid (Abingdon, 1962, 128 pp., $2.50). Written in belief many people need help in praying, Reid has written 118 short, expressive prayers, each based on a verse in the Psalms.

In the Presence of God, by O.W. Toelke (Concordia, 1962, 72 pp., $1.50). Devotions specifically intended for the newly married; relevant and recommended.

Unity in Marriage, by W. J. Fields (Concordia, 1962, 156 pp., $3). A fine, evangelical, realistic and perceptive discussion on how to achieve unity in marriage. Recommended to engaged and to most married people.

The Gospel According to St. Mark, by Alan Cole (Eerdmans, 1961, 263 pp., $3). A good substantial evangelical commentary which is neither unduly technical nor unhelpfully brief. Recommended to pastors and laymen.

The World: Its Creation and Consummation, by Karl Heim (Muhlenberg, 1962, 159 pp., $3). A substantial and scholarly consideration of the counterclaims of the scientific and biblical interpretations of the origin and destiny of the universe. For those who think.

They Came to a Place, by Robert L. Otterstad (Augsburg, 1962, 47 pp., $1.25). Lenten reflections, written on edge of personal total blindness, in which “deep answers to deep.”

Hope In Action, by Hans Jochen Margull (Muhlenberg, 1962, 298 pp., $5). The first full historical account of the ecumenical movement’s concern with evangelism in our century. Competently done by former faculty member of the university of Hamburg.

Devotional Selections from George Matheson, ed. by Andrew Kosten (Abingdon, 1962, 95 pp., $2). Forty brief devotional messages from the late nineteenth-century Scotch poet and preacher.

Suddenly from Heaven, by Carl Brumback (Gospel Publishing House, 1961, 380 pp., $3.95). A history of the Assemblies of God and of the phenomenal growth of Pentecostalism in the twentieth century.

The Ministers Manual 1962, ed. by M. K. W. Heicher (Harper, 1961, 333 pp., $3.50). Brought to date each year with entirely fresh new material.

Paperbacks

To the Golden Shore, by Courtney Anderson (Doubleday, 1961, 520 pp., $1.45). A great story of the life of Adoniram Judson, Man of Mission. (First printing 1956).

From State Church to Pluralism, by Franklin Hamlin Littell (Doubleday, 1962, 178 pp., $.95). Author explodes the categories that have shaped our vision of American church history. Early American religious unity is declared a lie to be cut down. In colonial times, America, like Europe, was officially religious, but this was in fact a “baptized heathenism.”

George Macdonald, ed. by C. S. Lewis (Doubleday, 1962, 160 pp., $.95). Lewis gleans the best from a nineteenth-century Scottish cleric he highly regards.

The Doctrine of Evolution and the Antiquity of Man, by J. D. Thomas (Biblical Research Press, Abilene, Texas, 1961, 64 pp., $.95). Christian thinker looks squarely at the theory of biological evolution and the problems involved.

A History of Biblical Literature, by Hugh J. Schonfield (New American Library of World Literature, 1962, 224 pp., $.75). An examination of the origins, authorship, and authenticity of the Bible in the light of historical events, literature, and recent documentary discoveries. An original.

According to the Scriptures, by Theodore S. Liefeld (Augsburg, 1962, 70 pp., $1.50). Brief, biblical Lenten devotions.

Next Sunday morning will find seven-year-old Johnny with a new teacher—she is a Methodist. Johnny’s last Sunday School teacher, who has just been transferred, was a Presbyterian. The department head is a Baptist. At a previous base where he lived, Johnny was taught the lesson by a Lutheran lady.

Somehow Johnny just doesn’t understand things like communion and baptism (his parents send him to Sunday School), for his is the lot of a military dependent, the child of a career serviceman. For years the Protestant military chaplains have battled inadequacies in their 180,000-member Sunday School systems. The inadequacies stemmed from these factors: (1) Protestants lumped together; (2) rapid turnover of teachers and scholars; and (3) lack of continuity in the curriculum.

In a bold effort to cope with the peculiarities of military Sunday Schools, ranking chaplains have been quietly promoting a unified curriculum which may raise more problems than it solves. The plan was worked out by the Armed Forces Chaplains Board, which invited the Protestant Church-Owned Publishers Association to administer it.

The program works this way: Each year a team of chaplains and denominational consultants meet and preview Sunday School materials planned by PCPA members. From these materials they select those which they feel are best suited to use in the armed services. The unified curriculum is therefore merely a composite subject to annual change. Only one selection is made in each category of need. The materials are the same as those used within the denominations that produce them. Cover imprints identify the materials as belonging to the “Unified Protestant Sunday School Curriculum for Armed Forces.”

The unified curriculum was first made available in the fall of 1954 as a distinct option for chaplains who at that time were purchasing supplies of their own choosing. Subsequently the PCPA set up an office in Nashville to distribute the unified curriculum.

The first big showdown came in the Air Force. A new regulation issued last summer ordered that “ ‘The Unified Protestant Sunday School Curriculum,’ ‘The Catholic Family Program of Religious Education,’ and the ‘Religious School Curriculum for Jews of the Armed Services,’ will be put into operation in the Air Force.”

Provision was made that “the curricula may be augmented with religious literature, art, symbols, maps, films, and visual aids.”

How Program Is Administered

The “Unified Protestant Sunday School Curriculum for Armed Forces” is sponsored by the Armed Forces Chaplains Board and administered by the Protestant Church-Owned Publishers Association.

The PCPA maintains an office in the Methodist Publishing House in Nashville through which orders for materials are channeled. The office is responsible for stocking and supplying materials prescribed by the Armed Forces Chaplains Board. Order blanks bear the PCPA letterhead and checks are payable to the PCPA, which reimburses member publishing houses according to material supplied.

The PCPA was organized as a trade association about 10 years ago. John C. Ribble, associate general manager of the United Presbyterian publishing house, has been coordinator of the unified curriculum. Ribble, who was elected president of PCPA in February, calls it “the most representative group in Protestantism.”¹Denominational groups with member representation in the PCPA include the following: Pentecostal Holiness Church, American Baptist, Assemblies of God, Augustana Lutheran, Southern Presbyterian, Reformed Church in America, Church of the Brethren, Churches of God in North America, Christian Churches (Disciples), Missouri Lutheran, Evangelical Covenant Church of America, Cumberland Presbyterian, Evangelical United Brethren, Free Methodist, The General Baptist Press, Church of God, Reorganized Latter-day Saints, Mennonite, Methodist, United Lutheran, Nazarene, United Church of Christ, Protestant Episcopal, Southern Baptist, United Church of Canada, American Lutheran, Wesleyan Methodist, and United Presbyterian.

A number of religious leaders, including representatives of the PCPA, criticized the mandatory clause. Two months later, at a meeting in Washington between command chaplains and denominational representatives the clause was supposedly revoked by Major General Terence P. Finnegan, a Roman Catholic who is chief of Air Force chaplains.

No further word was issued, however, until November 22, when Brigadier General Robert P. Taylor, deputy chief of Air Force chaplains and a Baptist, sent an official letter to all commands saying, “The status of the Unified Protestant Sunday School Curriculum has not been changed. The Unified Protestant Sunday School Curriculum is the official Air Force curriculum.”

A regulation change dated December 27, 1961, affirmed that the curricula were now “official.”

The clause “will be put into operation in the Air Force” was deleted. A spokesman said, however, that chaplains are expected to use the material unless they give a written reason for refusing.

As for augmenting the curricula, the term “appropriate” was inserted before “religious literature.” Some observers have pointed to this passage as an escape clause for the mandatory order. Others say financial considerations rule it out.

A practical effect of the Air Force curriculum policy has been to eliminate evangelical literature. Chaplains no longer use materials from such independent publishers as Scripture Press, Gospel Light, Standard, David C. Cook, and Union Gospel Press.

A key official of the National Association of Evangelicals has denounced the unified curricula as “doctrinally and theologically unscriptural and pedagogically inferior.” He also questioned the right of the service to impose the material on chaplains. Army and Navy chaplains are not yet required to use it.

Another issue revolves on the fiscal aspect of the cooperative PCPA operation: Is the noncompetitive makeup of the arrangement a form of price-rigging?

Neither the Armed Forces Chaplains Board nor the PCPA office in Nashville have disclosed sales figures. Independent estimates, however, put total annual receipts as high as $500,000.

PCPA spokesmen vigorously deny monopolistic intent and stress that the operation is being carried out at the request of the Air Force. Military spokesmen say it is the most democratic arrangement possible, inasmuch as the PCPA is representative of virtually all denominations which supply chaplains. They point out that no contracts are involved.

Religious Issues

Two books with significant reflections of the American religiopolitical scene made their debut last month:

Richard M. Nixon, in Six Crises, accuses key associates of John F. Kennedy of contributing to and capitalizing on the religious issue in the 1960 presidential campaign.

The Rev. Robert I. Gannon, in The Cardinal Spellman Story, devotes an entire chapter to relations between the United States and the Vatican and discloses that Spellman was the first priest ever to say Mass in the White House.

Says Nixon:

“At every possible juncture and on every possible occasion, Kennedy’s key associates were pushing the religious issue, seeing to it that it stayed squarely in the center of the campaign, and even accusing me of deliberate religious bigotry.”

“They were, in short, contributing all they could to make religion an issue while piously insisting that to do so was evidence of bigotry,” he adds.

“I felt a responsibility to keep the lid on the boiling cauldron of embittered anti-Catholicism,” he says, adding that advisors had urged him to answer the attacks of Kennedy supporters.

Nixon refers to the much-publicized Citizens for Religious Freedom meeting in Washington September 7, 1960, as a “disastrous political development … over which I had no control.” However, he excuses the participation of Peale, whose church he had attended at one time while living in New York: “I know that he was heartbroken over the incident and I felt that while his judgment had been bad, his motives were above question.”

Nixon discloses that evangelist Billy Graham had been asked to write an article for Life magazine endorsing Nixon “largely on grounds of my experience in world affairs and foreign policy. He had mentioned the religious issue in the article only in order to deny explicitly that it either was or ought to be an issue at all.”

“My staff felt that a Billy Graham public statement might be very helpful in the closing days of the campaign,” Nixon says. “But I ended up vetoing the proposal because of my fear that, even though he was basing his support on other than religious grounds, our opponents would seize on his endorsement as evidence of religious bigotry, his own forthright denial notwithstanding.”

But sources close to Graham say that it was the evangelist himself, not Nixon, who made the decision to withhold the article because of the evangelist’s conviction that his is a spiritual and not a political responsibility. Both Nixon and Kennedy are reported to have said following the election that, had Graham’s article appeared, it would have swung the election.

Nixon’s book does not mention the fact that Francis Cardinal Spellman had stated publicly that he planned to vote for Nixon.

The book about Spellman makes no reference to the endorsement of Nixon either. It does contain a lengthy account of Spellman’s relations with the White House during the administrations of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman.

The book by Father Gannon, a Jesuit priest and former president of Fordham University, recalls that in 1937 Spellman was invited for an overnight stay at the White House. A portion of Spellman’s diary is quoted:

“Said Mass in the Monroe Room of the White House. It was the first time Mass was ever said in the White House. Miss LeHand, Miss Tully, Miss Eben and Miss Hackmeister present. Breakfast afterwards with them. The coffee cups were as large as bowls.

“Said good-bye to the President in bed. He said he had intended to get up for Mass.”

Turning The Corner?

A definite evangelical emphasis enlivened six annual area meetings of the National Council of United Presbyterian Men, a denominational laymen’s organization which has experienced rapid growth in recent years.

Paul Moser, executive secretary, cited two reasons for re-emphasis on Christian fundamentals.

“We know as never before that we don’t make a better world,” he said. “Only the Lord does.”

Secondly, he believes that some of the featured speakers were “more able to speak on this emphasis than those in the past.”

“In the past, we’ve discussed everything from automation to the image of the church,” he continued. “Now we’ve turned the corner, and are putting more stress on the important thing—faith.”

Moser stressed, “Strength of men can count through a laymen’s movement-men with a social conscience but solid evangelical emphasis and faith in Christ.”

Area meetings were held between mid-February and early April in New York, Sacramento, Wichita, Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Evanston, each averaging more than 1,500 attendance.

Among the well-known ministers and laymen who addressed the area meetings on the theme “Show Me Your Faith,” were Drs. Charles Malik, Addison H. Leitch, Louis H. Evans, T. Christie Innes, Ralph D. Evans, and Federal District Judge Luther W. Youngdahl.

Dr. Louis H. Evans told the laymen, “Religion used to be what a layman did with his spare time—and he had very little of it,” he said. “But now it is very often what he does with his vocation. This can be a new day. I see thousands of men in all walks of life trying to weave their faith into their jobs.”

B. B.

The Big Problem

A church architecture jury aimed some well-chosen words at religious educators last month at the National Conference of Church Architecture in Cleveland.

The three-man panel said “the big problem, as yet unsolved in an enlightened and economic manner, is the 200 to 400-student educational unit, whose average occupancy is for one hour, one day a week.”

Confusion over the nature and function of the educational units, the jury declared, “might well indicate the necessity of a complete reanalysis of religious education by our churches.”

The comments were made as awards were given eight churches for the “realistic contemporary religious affirmation” of their architecture.

In giving the awards the Church Architectural Guild of America and the National Council of Churches’ Department of Church Building and Architecture said they attempted to “define some of the problems confronting church builders and architects and some of the means by which solutions might be achieved.”

Recipients of the awards, which had no order of rank, were:

University Reformed Church in Ann Arbor, Michigan; Westminster Presbyterian Church, Eugene, Oregon; Scottsdale Congregational Church (United Church of Christ), Scottsdale, Arizona; St. Anselm Roman Catholic Church, Chesterland, Ohio; Bethany Lutheran Church, Columbus, Ohio; Community Church, Chesterland, Ohio; St. Francis Cabrini Roman Catholic Church, New Orleans, Louisiana; and the Immaculate Conception Roman Catholic Church, Marrero, Louisiana.

Of the 152 churches which were entered in the contest, the jury said the majority “suffered from both the indecision of the statement of the problem and the lack of an honest interpretation and use of forms and materials by the architects.”

“The complete disregard for simplicity and obvious quest for the sensational was most apparent,” the report said.

Members of the jury were Robert Inglehart, chairman of the University of Michigan’s Department of Art; the Rev. Hugh T. Kerr, Jr., professor at Princeton Theological Seminary; and Paul Hayden Kirk, Seattle architect.

Philip A. Wills, Jr., president of the American Institute of Architects, told some 1,200 persons attending the conference that “no church, however poor in worldly goods, should settle for less than greatness.”

He said client and architect must share a mutual understanding.

“The client, however, cannot expect us to be theologians as well as architects,” he added.

Wills chided church building committees for ignoring artistic considerations.

No Review

The U. S. Supreme Court refused last month to review a Florida state court decision in a property rights dispute at the First Presbyterian Church of Miami Beach. The action climaxes an eight-year legal battle which began when the majority of the congregation withdrew in 1954 and formed the Miami Beach Independent Presbyterian Church.

The group objected to Southern Presbyterian participation in ecumenical organizations.

The case is thus decided in favor of the minority element which maintained affiliation with the Presbyterian Church in the U. S.

The local presbytery was a partner in the case, but never claimed ownership. Under denominational law, the property of a church belongs to the congregation.

The ‘Acts Of God’

So-called “acts of God” may no longer be a defense in damages arising out of storms, heavy rains, or other natural disasters, according to a decision handed down last month by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Justice Michael A. Musmanno, who sat as a jurist in the post-World War II trials at Nuremberg, wrote the majority opinion of the court. He said:

“There is something shocking in attributing any tragedy or holocaust to God. The ways of the Deity so surpass the understanding of man that it is not in the province of man to pass judgment.

“There are many manifestations of nature which science has not yet been able to analyze, much less cope with.”

The decision was made in favor of a man injured by a falling telephone pole during a heavy snow. The man sued the telephone company, which argued that it was without liability because the pole fell through “an act of God.”

The courts decided otherwise, noting that the company had not inspected the pole for 15 years before it toppled.

Last month’s decision affirmed a county court award of $10,820 damages.

Aid For Religious Tv?

Should religious agencies be eligible for federal aid aimed at developing educational television? Both houses of Congress have passed bills providing for educational television grants. The House version rules out church colleges and other private agencies, but the Senate measure makes church-related agencies eligible for funds to the extent permissible by state constitutions.

If federal aid to educational television is to be forthcoming, the differences will have to be resolved by a conference committee.

The Senate bill authorizes $51,000,000 in grants to the states for distribution to nonprofit organizations concerned with educational television. The House bill authorizes $25,520,000 in matching grants to the states for organizations composed of state-supported school officials or state educational television agencies.

A Time Problem

Religious leaders in Chicago issued severe criticisms last month of the city’s absentee-owned network television stations. They charged in hearings conducted by the Federal Communications Commission that the stations failed to give adequate time to religious programs.

Among those who presented statements at the hearings were representatives of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago, the Chicago board of Rabbis, the Protestant Church Federation of Chicago, and the Protestant Episcopal diocese.

They said that the local stations were more cooperative and responsive to the need for live, local programs. Absentee-owned network stations were charged with indifference to religious programs and of giving the smallest and most inadequate facilities at the “worst possible time.”

‘Shared Time’ Views

In Kansas City, Missouri, a Roman Catholic newspaper announced last month the results of a spot survey conducted in behalf of the “shared time” school proposal. Both Catholic and public school educators were said to have reservations about the idea but believe it deserves serious consideration.

Two Catholic educators stressed that a completely Catholic education was the ideal from their point of view. They acknowledged, however, that shared time might be an acceptable compromise if the ideal cannot he achieved.

The shared time plan provides that children may attend public schools for some subjects and religious schools for others (see CHRISTIANITY TODAY, March 30, 1962, page 29).

James A. Hazlett, Kansas City superintendent of schools, said that shared time would help the financial situation of parochial schools, improve the quality of religious education in Protestant churches, and encourage unified community support for public school bond programs or tax increases.

Hazlett said, however, that with the public school curriculum already straining at the seams, the addition of religious instruction might mean that the three-month summer vacation would be shortened.

The Last Lecture

Dr Karl Barth delivered his last lecture at the University of Basel on the subject of love. The famed Swiss theologian, now 76, is retiring after more than 27 years as professor of theology at Basel. He is due to make his first visit to the United States later this month, with lecture series scheduled at the University of Chicago and at Princeton Theological Seminary.

In his concluding lecture at Basel last month, Barth told his class that theological work is certain only where it is carried out in love, but that it is no mere chance that the Apostle Paul used the word agape, not eros.

“In both uses of the word,” he said, “love means seeking someone else with one’s whole heart, but love in the agape sense can also mean being free for that other person, because one has oneself received freedom. This love is sovereign, long-suffering and patient.”

To compare agape and eros, he added, is “like comparing Mozart and Beethoven. In theology eros cannot be the dominating principle; it can only be the servant of theology.”

Barth’s successor at Basel has not yet been named. The university board is known to have favored Dr. Helmut Gollwitzer of Berlin, but his name was withdrawn after the Basel city council of education protested the selection because of Gollwitzer’s alleged pro-Communist leanings.

Chatterley In Canada

By a five-to-four vote, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled last month that the controversial novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover is not obscene.

The decision reversed two lower court rulings which had banned the book as obscene literature because it exploited sex unduly.

The case dates back to June, 1960, when copies of the book were seized by police from three Montreal bookstands. Judge T. A. Fontaine declared the book obscene and ordered all copies in circulation confiscated.

An appeal by the three dealers was rejected by the Quebec appeal court, but Canada’s highest tribunal ordered charges against the dealers dismissed.

Dual Synods

For the first time last month, the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg held two synods, one in East Berlin and the other in West Berlin. It was a forced move resulting from the Communist sealing of the Berlin border, a move which contributed to Red determination to split the church. Results of the synods indicated, however, that the church leaders were not about to allow their organizational unity to be destroyed.

The East synod expressed “fraternal solidarity” with Bishop Otto Dibelius of Berlin and Dr. Kurt Scharf, chairman of the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKID). In reply, the West synod deplored the circumstances which made separate synods necessary. Dibelius declared that the EKID was determined not to permit its unity to be destroyed by the Communist seal-off measures.

He stressed that the political borders “are not those of the church.”

The East synod adopted a resolution deploring the expulsion of Scharf and urging Soviet Zone authorities to permit him to return to East Berlin and maintain his office there.

At the same time, the synod spoke out against appointing a successor for Scharf in his capacity of administrator of the Berlin-Brandenburg church’s bishop’s office for East Berlin and the Soviet Zone portion of the church. As an East Berlin resident, Scharf had been appointed to the post when the Communists barred Dibelius from East Berlin subsequent to the seal-off last August 13.

Another resolution adopted by the East synod stressed the church’s determination to stand up for conscientious objectors and for those refusing to take the soviet Zone army’s conscription oath in its prescribed form.

The resolution said Christians could take the oath demanded of recruits only on the understanding that its wording would not be interpreted as obliging a soldier to fight for the victory of socialism (communism) or any other ideological objectives, because this would be irreconcilable with the Christian faith.

It said the oath should be interpreted only as “a very serious promise” by a soldier to risk his life in defense of the state in the event of military aggression.

Declaring that this understanding of the oath was the “utmost compromise the church was able to make,” the synod said that “if the state contradicts this interpretation, the church might be compelled to make a different decision.”

The conscription oath has been denounced by Roman Catholic and Protestant authorities as exceeding what was morally and ethically permissible. They criticized in particular its insistence on unconditional obedience to superiors and support of the socialist ideology.

In the West synod, a draft statement asserted that Christians have a right to resist the state if it demands anything that violates God’s commandments.

The draft was prepared by a committee set up in 1960 to find a solution to the question of “supreme authority” which had been raised that year because of a controversial booklet published by Bishop Otto Dibelius, head of the church. The draft is being sent to the church management for further consideration.

In his booklet, the bishop declared that neither the East German regime nor any other totalitarian government has a claim to the status of “supreme authority” in the biblical sense of the term.

The draft statement said that, according to the Bible, Christians are authorized willingly to submit themselves to the existing state order, since, in the Christian belief, God also governs men through the secular state power.

The obedience toward the state, the statement declared, is independent of the state’s ideology, or of the ways and means through which a state power came into existence. Christians are co-responsible, however, to see that the state makes proper use of its authority and, if necessary, must witness to the rulers that their government is wrong and warn them against passing laws and decrees seducing or coercing men to act against God’s commandments.

Protestant Panorama

• The Executive Council of the United Church of Christ urges preservation of sufficient military power “to deter Communist governments from further expansion of communism by force” in a letter issued last month to the denomination’s 6,659 churches. The letter also called for continued East-West negotiations to maintain peace. The essence of the plea was that the West maintain a position whereby it could negotiate from strength, a concept now rarely espoused in organized Protestantism.

• Only 14 new congregations were started by the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) during 1961, according to a report made at a March meeting of the denomination’s Board of Church Extension. In January the denomination reported slight membership declines.

• Some 100 Methodist ministers in Ohio will leave their pulpits this summer to preach at county fairs, at state parks, on street corners, on church and courthouse steps, and in drive-ins and shopping centers.

• “Breakthru,” a new Methodist-produced children’s television series which utilizes a unique drama-discussion format, was unveiled last month. It is a project of the Television, Radio and Film Commission of The Methodist Church in collaboration with the Methodist General Board of Education, and the United Church of Canada. Distribution is being handled by the Broadcasting and Film Commission of the National Council of Churches. The premiere episode stars Broadway actress Patty Duke.

• The Presbyterian Church in the U. S. is curtailing missionary activities in several countries because of financial pressures. Budgetary problems are being felt most keenly in Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Brazil, and the Congo.

• Pacific Christian College is the new name of the undergraduate college previously known as Pacific Bible Seminary. The new name for the school, located in Long Beach, California, was adopted to fulfill requirements of accrediting associations. The school does not offer graduate study, with which the term “seminary” is usually associated.

• “Question Seven,” Lutheran film drama which depicts Communist pressures in East Germany, is now available as a novel in book form. The book, published by Wm. B. Eerdmans Co., includes 25 photographs from the film.

• NBC Television plans a half-hour color presentation of art masterpieces connected with Christ’s last days on earth. The program, “He Is Risen,” is an Easter sequel to a presentation of Christmas art which has been telecast for the last two years. The Easter program will be aired on Sunday, April 15.

• Among nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize are Methodist evangelist E. Stanley Jones and Bishop Rajah B. Maikam of the Tamil Church in India.

• The latest in gimmicks: The First Church of the Nazarene in Long Beach, California, offered free helicopter rides to all who bring a visitor to Sunday School. The Bellflower Community Church of Los Angeles is rewarding each family attending Sunday services with 100 trading stamps.

• The New Jersey Council of Churches voiced strong opposition last month to a proposal to extend the state racing season to help pay for rebuilding storm-devastated coastal areas.

• A confirmation service in the Lutheran Cathedral of Our Lady in Copenhagen was disrupted last month when church officials scuffled with 30 Danish students who invaded the building to stage a demonstration against nuclear testing.

• A new “floating hospital” was launched by Seventh-day Adventists in Brazil last month. The mobile clinic will provide medical care along a 300-mile stretch of the São Francisco River. The Adventists have 10 other such craft plying Brazilian rivers.

400 Years Later

“Our man in the Vatican,” said the headline in a Scottish newspaper.

What occasioned the blurb was the visit with Pope John XXIII of Dr. Archibald C. Craig, moderator of the Church of Scotland.

To a country which rebuffed Anglican overtures in 1958 and celebrated its Reformation Quatercentenary in 1960, the development in the Vatican represented a topic worthy of much discussion.

Craig arrived in Rome after a tour of the Holy Land, where he presented Israel’s national library with a 45-volume set of Calvin’s commentaries.

Referring to the presentation in a letter to The Scotsman, the Rev. Donald Mackay, a Free Church minister, said:

“If Dr. Craig’s … visit to the Pope were for the purpose of making a similar presentation … we might almost view with equanimity the moderator’s visit, instead of the intense apprehension with which we so far have been able to regard it.”

In a sermon on the eve of his audience with the pontiff, Craig declared that “the ecumenical effort must be made at a deeper level than the merely intellectual.”

Preaching at a thanksgiving service in the Scots Kirk in Rome on the occasion of its centenary, the moderator said separated churches “must learn to live in love of each other, laying aside things conflicting with love.”

“It is true,” he said, “that the ecumenical movement bristles with complexities and abounds in problems which tax the most learned thinkers and theologians. On that level, a long, laborious process of discussion must go forward between the churches in order that the issues on which they are divided may be clarified, patiently cleared of misunderstandings and prejudice, and resolved in the light of God’s Word. But meanwhile, there must be a spirit of love and mutual respect.”

A 200-member congregation attending the service included the British, Dutch and South African ambassadors to Italy, the wife of U. S. Ambassador G. Frederick Reinhardt, and leaders of the Waldensian Church and of the Methodist and Baptist churches in Italy.

Craig said the centenary of the Scots Kirk “has a special importance for us Christians, because it teaches us to forget the things which are behind and to reach for the things which are before.”

Recalling what he called the “difficult beginnings” of the church, he stressed that its congregation “adheres to the sixteenth century Reformation and to the theological and ethical tradition deriving from Calvin and Knox.”

At this point an interruption in the form of a stentorian “Amen” came from the Rev. M. A. Perkins, leading member of the National Union of Protestants in Great Britain, which took a strongly critical view of Craig’s plans to visit Pope John. Perkins had come to Rome with the professed aim of persuading Craig not to see the Pope.

Ignoring the interruption, Craig declared that “in the name of the General Assembly (of the Church of Scotland), I voice the prayer that in the future, this congregation will be more than ever illustrious and successful, both evangelcally and ecumenically.”

Following his audience with the Pope, the 73-year-old moderator disclosed that Christian unity was a major topic of discussion.

“The Pope,” said Craig, “talked about unity among the brethren of Christ. This expression recurred frequently and was enlarged at considerable length. What he said corresponded closely to what I had previously said at services in the Scots Kirk in Rome.”

Craig arrived for his audience with the Pope dressed in pulpit robes. The party accompanying him included Dr. R. S. Louden, head of the Church of Scotland’s Department of Overseas Churches, and the Rev. Alexander Maclean, chaplain of Scots Kirk.

The 80-year-old pontiff smilingly welcomed Craig at the door of his private library and escorted him inside. They were closeted together for more than a half hour while Craig’s companions waited outside. Acting as interpreter was Monsignor Igina Cardinale of the Vatican Secretariat of State.

One key layman at the Scots Kirk in Rome was so angered by Craig’s Vatican visit that he resigned his post as treasurer of the church and said he may also withdraw his membership.

John Herbison, a member of the Church of Scotland who is currently employed in Rome, said he had no quarrel with the church or its minister.

“My quarrel is with the General Assembly for permitting this visit,” he said. “I am completely against it.”

The 50-year-old Herbison has been in Rome since 1956 and has been church treasurer for three years.

He emphasized that he had many Roman Catholic friends. “It is not Catholics I dislike,” he said. “It is Catholicism.”

The Muslim View

Christian leaders in India are strongly criticizing the recent Pakistan constitution promulgated by President Ayub Khan because it states that the chief of state must be a Muslim, according to Religious News Service.

The constitution’s provision has been assailed by the New Leader, official organ of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Madras, as “a glaring violation of the basic principles of democracy.”

Some 80 per cent of Pakistan’s population of 90 million is Muslim. In a nationwide broadcast on the eve of Pakistan Day (March 23), President Ayub Khan said that the realization of the ideology of Islam was “the first national objective before Pakistan.”

According to Indian sources, the views of Christian leaders in Pakistan have not been published in that country because of government controls imposed on the press.

The New Leader’s editorial stated: “Under this constitution, the President, who will be the head of the executive government, should be a Muslim. A democratic government, which is among other things ‘a government by the people,’ involves the active and equal participation of all in its life and activities. The avenues of a political action should be equally free for use by all. Political equality implies that all the citizens, irrespective of their language or religion, should have an equal right to offer themselves for election to any political office, subject to the necessary minimum qualifications.

“The denial of this right to the non-Muslim citizens is a glaring violation of the basic principles of democracy.”

Netded by the criticism, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Mazur Quadir stated in Karachi that it would have been “anomalous, even hypocritical” to have allowed a non-Muslim to hold the office of President of Pakistan in the new constitution.

At a press conference, he was asked why a non-Muslim should be barred from holding the office of President when the constitution provided “equal rights to all citizens.” He replied that Pakistan was created on the ideology of Islam and on the express wishes of the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent to “carve out a homeland for themselves and fashion their lives according to the tenets of Islam.”

It would be “anomalous, even hypocritical, to have a head of state who does not subscribe to that ideology,” he concluded.

The doctrine with which we are concerned is both the divine heart of the Gospel and the Gospel for the human heart. To seek an answer to the question, How can a man be just before God? is to be launched out into the profundities of our faith and to be occupied with the deep things of the Spirit. Virtually every great truth of the Gospel is grounded upon and linked up with this. Justification by faith—the answer of God to the needs of man—is the one unchanging message and method by which God receives sinful men.

But men readily forget, as William Temple has said, that “The only thing of my very own which I can contribute to my redemption is the sin from which I need to be redeemed” (Nature, Man and God, p. 401).

Justification is that judicial act of God’s free mercy whereby he pronounces guiltless those sinners condemned under the law, and constitutes them as actually righteous, once and for all, in the imputed righteousness of Christ—on the grounds of his atoning work, by grace, through faith alone apart from works—and assures them of a full pardon, acceptance in his sight, adoption as sons, and heirs of eternal life, and the present gift of the Holy Spirit; and such as are brought into this new relation and standing are by the power of this same Spirit, enabled to perform good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk therein; yet such works performed, as well as the faith out of which they spring, make no contribution to the soul’s justification, but they are to be regarded as declarative evidences of a man’s acceptance in the sight of God.

A number of very important points present themselves in this comprehensive definition.

The Nature of Justification. The Hebrew term tsadek and its Greek equivalent dikaioō must be understood, in the context of our discussion, in a legal as distinguished from a moral sense. It is of course true that in every instance the forensic connotation cannot be insisted upon; there are passages in which it could with as much assurance be read “to make righteous” as “to declare righteous.” It is on the strength of this that Roman Catholic and some “Protestant” writers seek to establish their view that man is justified by his own righteousness as infused and inherent rather than by a divine righteousness vicarious and imputed.

To remain good Protestants and “Paulinists,” however, it is not necessary to prove that the term in every instance means “to declare righteous” and nothing else. The fact is that “all parties must be held to admit that, when a sinner is justified, he is, in some sense, both made and accounted righteous; and the real difference between them becomes apparent only when they proceed to explain in what way he is made righteous, and adjudged so to be” (J. Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification, p. 228).

Yet it is important to observe that in those passages of Scripture which deal specifically with the question of man’s acceptance before God the forensic sense of the term is clearly in mind, and for a correct exegesis must be so understood. When, for example, an antithetical expression, such as the word “condemnation,” is used, the forensic meaning is certainly present (see, e.g., Deut. 25:1; Prov. 17:15; Isa. 5:23; Matt. 12:37; and especially in reference to God, Rom. 5:16; 8:33, 34). A forensic idea is essential in those passages where correlative expressions appear (see, e.g., Gen. 18:25; Ps. 32:1; 143:2, Rom. 2:2, 15; 8:33; 14:10; Col. 2:14; 1 John 2:1). There are also passages in which a synonym for justification is used which make it evident that the justified man is brought into a changed judicial relation to God and that the word does not relate to a change in his moral and spiritual character (see, e.g., Rom. 4:3, 6–8; 2 Cor. 5:19, 20).

The doctrine of justification has often been stated in such a way as to leave the impression that it is a “legal fiction.” This idea of a fictio juris arises when it is taught that God merely declares a man righteous when he is not. The truth is that God sees the believing man as constituted righteous in Christ, and accepting him “in the Beloved” he pronounces him to be what he is—in Christ. Here is the paradox of the Gospel—a man is a sinner yet perfect. Yet it is only a “righteous” man who can be declared righteous. The vital question then is: Whose is the righteousness on account of which God gives his verdict, “Not Guilty” and “Acceptable”?

The Grounds of Justification. Two issues may be distinguished here, referred to as the ultimate and immediate grounds of God’s act of justifying the sinner. The ultimate ground lies in the will and the mercy of God (cf. John 1:13; James 1:18; Titus 3:5–7; Rom. 9, especially v. 16, “So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on the mercy of God” [Goodspeed]). Upon these great facts our justification is ultimately based. Here might be considered, in the light of the Scriptures, the disclosures of the eternal covenant between the Persons in the Triune Godhead by whom and through whom the plan and purpose of salvation for sinful men were forever made sure (cf. Eph. 1:3 f.; 3:2; etc.). In that eternal covenant of grace salvation was rendered certain.

More particularly, however, it need only be stated here that our justification is based solely and squarely upon the objective mediatorial work of Christ for us. It is with our Lord’s deed on the Cross that it is connected. This means that our justification is something external to ourselves. It is not something done either by us or in us. It is what was done—once and for all—for us. We are justified, it is declared, “by the blood of Christ” (Rom. 5:9), by his “righteousness” (5:18), by his “obedience” (5:19), “in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 6:11).

The more immediate grounds, however, of the sinner’s justification is the imputed righteousness of Christ. Some have erroneously made the sinner’s justification to be a consequence of a grace infused and a righteousness inherent. It is the fundamental error of the Roman church to substitute the inherent righteousness of the regenerate (in baptism, of course) for the imputed Righteousness of the Redeemer. The result is that the forensic nature of justification is lost and it becomes equated with sanctification.

But there are those, not of Rome, who evade the full implications of the doctrine of justification by making room for the righteousness of man.

Against every attempt to give man a part in his justification, the Epistle to the Romans utters an emphatic denial. It is the righteousness of Christ which is imputed to the believer: the whole righteousness of the whole Christ. Christ is not divided nor can his righteousness be finally distributed. Romans 5:17 speaks of the “gift of righteousness”—the righteousness of “the obedience of one” (5:19). “It is, therefore, the righteousness of Christ, His perfect obedience in doing and suffering the will of God, which is imputed to the believer, and on the ground of which the believer, although in himself ungodly, is pronounced righteous, and therefore free from the curse of the law, and entitled to eternal life” (C. Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. III, p. 151).

This doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness cannot be rejected as being either impossible or artificial. With regard to the first, the passage 2 Corinthians 5:21 is of decisive significance. Most surely Christ was not made sin in any moral sense. Nor in our justification are we made righteous in a moral sense. He was made sin by bearing our sins, so we are made righteous by bearing his righteousness. Our sins are imputed to him and thus become the judicial grounds of his humiliation and suffering, and his righteousness is imputed to us and thus becomes the judicial ground of our justification.

On the other hand, the imputation of Christ’s righteousness can only give the appearance of artificiality if divorced from the complementary doctrine of union with Christ. “Justification is not an arbitrary transfer to us of legal fictions in the divine government” (cf. A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology, p. 479).

The Channel of Justification. Roman Catholicism virtually makes the Church’s sacraments, working ex opero operato, produce and maintain the status by which a man is being made acceptable with God. But the Scriptures declare justification to be “by faith” (see, e.g., Rom. 3:22, 27 f.; 4:16; 5:1; etc.). This faith is “fiduciary.” It is a living and personal trust in a perfect redemption and a present Redeemer.

“Faith is not a human notion or a dream as some take it to be. Faith is a divine work in us, which changes us and causes us to be born anew from God” (John 1:13; M. Luther, Preface to Epistle to the Romans). James Arminius boldly says that the “author of faith is the Holy Spirit” (The Works of James Arminius, trans. by J. Nichols and W. Bagnall, 1853, Vol. II, p. 110). It is “a gracious and gratuitous gift of God” (p. 500).

In this connection two facts must be stressed. First, faith is only the channel of our justification. It is, as Arminius says, the “instrumental” not the “formal” cause. Some have taken the position that our pardon is based sure enough on Christ’s atoning work, but justification rests upon faith which God accepts in place of that perfect obedience due from us to the absolute demands of the law (cf. Rom. 4:3; cf. Gen. 15:6). It would be fatal to the full truth of the Gospel thus to turn faith itself into a “work.” Abraham’s faith was by no means a substitute for obedience (cf. Heb. 11:8). It was, in fact, a faith to (eis) righteousness, not instead of (anti) righteousness. The position is not made any more acceptable by talking of “evangelical obedience.” Faith has no place for any kind of help.

To make faith, then, the only channel of justification means quite literally that all works are excluded (cf. Rom. 3:28; Rom. 4; Gal. 2:16; Gal. 3; Eph. 2:8; etc.). It will stand without emphasizing that the works done by the ungenerate man have no place in his justification. But it should be underlined that if our salvation is to remain a matter of grace alone, by faith alone, this prohibition extends no less to what are called post-regeneration works. The discussion by James about the necessity of works turns not upon their meritorious value, but their evidential value. James is condemning a faith merely intellectual, while Paul is rejecting works as having saving merit. James says an inactive faith cannot justify; Paul says meritorious works do not justify. Paul requires a saving faith, therefore apart from works, and James a living faith, therefore a faith which works. And neither contradicts the other.

From the beginning of its rediscovery at the Reformation the biblical principle of sola fides has been compromised. Some have maintained that repentance and love and the new obedience are all to be included in the faith by which a man is justified. Here again effort is made to share the work between the benefits of Christ and the acts of men, and in this way to give some of the glory to man. Such an idea makes grace no longer grace.

The faith by which a sinner is justified is not, then, itself a work of obedience. “That faith and works concur together in justification, is a thing impossible” (J. Arminius, op. cit., p. 119). But neither is faith an equivalent for obedience; it is rather the germ out of which obedience springs. Faith is the medium or the instrument by which Christ is received and by which we are united to him. In Scripture we are never said to be justified dia pistin—on account of faith, but only dia pisteōs—through faith, or ek pisteōs—by faith.

Today some tend to associate ecumenical love, moral rearmament, and even prayer therapy, with faith as the means of justification. Indeed in some statements one or other of these seems to be made a substitute for that faith by which the sinner is justified in the sight of God.

The Results of Justification. It certainly includes pardon. Justification relates to the sinner’s established and unchanging position coram Deo; once established it remains. But pardon may be renewed. The justified man is certainly accepted “in the Beloved”; not only is he a “child of God” by birth, but he is also a son by adoption. He is huiothesia, brought into the enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the family (cf. Gal. 5:5; Rom. 8:23; Eph. 1:5). “Adoption is a term involving the dignity of the relationship of the believers as ‘sons’: it is not a putting into the family by spiritual birth, but a putting into the position of sons.” Such believers possess eternal life as a present possession (cf. John 3:15–18; 1 John 5:10–12; etc.). Such, too, have the Holy Spirit, not only as an earnest of our purchased possession (Eph. 1:14), but as the one by whom our sanctification is effected and assured (1 Pet. 1:2; Eph. 3:16).

The Evidences of Justification. Good works have a declarative value with regard to a man’s justification. Since a man has been taken into union with Christ, righteous though still a sinner, he must work out his own salvation as Gods works in him (Phil. 2:12, 13). Luther puts the matter in a nutshell: “Oh, it is a living, creative, active, mighty thing, this faith! So it is impossible for it to fail to produce good works steadily. It does not ask whether there is good to do, but before the question is raised, it has already done it, and goes on doing it. Whoever does not do such works is a faithless man” (op. cit.).

Bibliography: J. Arminius, Works, Vol. II; A. A. Hodge, Outlines of Theology; C. Hodge, Systematic Theology; J. Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification; A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology; L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology; J. S. Stewart, A Man in Christ.

Vice-Principal

London Bible College

London, England

Smiles of assent swept across the Upperville, Va., Baptist Church on an August morning in 1846. The visiting speaker was rapidly winning the full sympathy of his audience. No preacher had ever before so fully justified the toil and sacrifices by which these farmers were growing rich. It was right, he declared, for the Christian to gather property and provide well for his family.

Just as he had his audience in his hand, Dr. A. M. Poindexter suddenly and dramatically appealed for them to “consecrate their wealth to the highest ends of existence, to the good of mankind, and the glory of Christ.” It was a torrent, a tornado that swept everything before it. Then with no lesser power, he urged his hearers to dedicate their mental gifts and possible attainments to the work of the ministry.

One young man was so powerfully moved by the Spirit of God that immediately after the service he sought his pastor and choked out, “Brother Grimsley, the question is decided; I must try to be a preacher.”

Dr. Poindexter’s sermon, and a preceding one, had just changed the life course of John A. Broadus. In the providence of God, Broadus’ preaching, teaching, and writing were in turn destined to influence and change countless lives, far beyond his own lifetime. It has been said of his text Preparation and Delivery of Sermons that “No other work in the field of homiletics has had so wide and extended use in the history of theological education.”

None of this could have been foreseen that morning in the Blue Ridge Mountains. No one could have imagined that Broadus was destined to be chosen someday to deliver the Lyman Beecher lectures on preaching at Yale University. At Broadus’ death, Dr. William Rainey Harper, president of the University of Chicago, declared, “No man ever heard him preach but understood every sentence; no one heard him preach who did not feel the truth of God sink deep into his heart. As a teacher of the New Testament as well as of homiletics, it is perhaps not too much to say that he had no superior in this country.”

John Albert Broadus was born January 24, 1827, in Culpepper County, Va., in the country where, he observed, “everybody ought to be born.” Following his conversion during a protracted (evangelistic) meeting, he was baptized “in Mountain Run just above where the bridge crosses the stream.”

After teaching school about two years, he quit in 1846 to enter the University of Virginia, planning to become a doctor. But he had not been able to dismiss the haunting appeal of the ministry. Finally, Dr. Poindexter’s powerful messages settled the issue for him; he enrolled in the university, but with a ministerial career in view. There he became active in Sunday school work, students’ prayer meetings, and a debating society, meanwhile drinking in learning,

After graduation, Broadus accepted the pastorate of the Charlottesville Baptist Church, where he preached to congregations ranging from slaves to university professors. At the same time, Broadus served as assistant professor of classics, at the University of Virginia, and for a time as university chaplain. He was gaining stature in Latin and Greek, the latter particularly, a most invaluable asset for his life work.

Outbreak of the Civil War

In 1859, Broadus and three others joined the original faculty of the newly established Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in Greenville, S. C. Before he was fairly launched on his new career, the Civil War broke out, forcing the infant school to close for the duration.

But if one door closed, others swung open, with unprecedented opportunities. Broadus ministered in small country churches, and preached in many military bases, meanwhile working on his commentary on Matthew and keeping up a steady stream of correspondence with friends and relatives.

Dr. J. William Jones, who carried on a remarkable ministry himself, had appointments for Dr. Broadus “three times every day, and occasionally four times. He drew large crowds, and as he looked into the eyes of those bronzed heroes of many a battle, and realized that they might be summoned at any hour into another battle, and into eternity, his very soul was stirred within him, and I never heard him preach with such beautiful simplicity and thrilling power the old gospel which he loved so well.” Once General Gordon sent special couriers with notice that Dr. Broadus would preach, and an immense crowd of probably 5,000 attended, Generals Lee, Hill, Ewell, Early, and a number of others among them. “The wreaths and stars and bars of rank mingled with the rude garb of the private … as the men sat on the bare ground. After a stirring song service, Broadus led in fervent, melting prayer, then announced his text: “Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace” (Prov. 3:17). Hundreds came forward to ask for prayer, or profess a new-found faith.

The pulpit was not Dr. Broadus’ only ministry. At Winchester, Va., he helped hand out slices of buttered bread, coffee, and buttermilk to wounded soldiers retreating after Gettysburg. Seeking opportunities for witness, he also would distribute tracts in hospitals.

Amid the overwhelming difficuties of a prostrate economy, the seminary bravely reopened November 1, 1865—with seven students. Dr. Broadus had just one in homiletics—and he was blind! Added to the other burdens was that of health, which finally forced Broadus to spend a year abroad. He returned refreshed and enriched.

It was uphill work, seeking to enlist support and raise funds for the struggling seminary during the difficult days of reconstruction. There was no Marshall plan, no government grant. Once he wrote an associate that students were constantly inquiring whether seminary classes would be suspended or continue another session. “I don’t know how we are going to manage—but I hope and pray,” he added, “that God will put it into the hearts of the brethren to help manfully and immediately.”

During this time, renowned institutions actively sought Broadus as president, and many influential churches, both north and south, would have welcomed him as pastor. But he never wavered in his devotion to the seminary.

Although South Carolinian Baptists loved the seminary wholeheartedly, it was simply not possible to obtain necessary support for it there. After much prayer, thought, and work, it was decided to move in 1877 to Louisville, Kentucky. Immediately the student enrollment increased. And demands for Broadus to speak in churches of all evangelical denominations multiplied. In 1889, he was named seminary president.

Preaching with a Purpose

Dr. Broadus, who had a high conception of the preacher’s office, preached with a purpose. He always sought to lead his hearers to some spiritual decision: conversion, commitment, decisive Christian living. A. T. Robertson, who had heard Beecher, Spurgeon, D. L. Moody, and David Lloyd George, said, “Broadus was the equal of any man I have ever heard.”

Broadus believed that the Word of God is true, “but it does not follow that our interpretations are infallible.” He believed in progressive orthodoxy, pointing out that while the truth does not change, we progress in our understanding of that truth. Findings of archaeology, for example, have “prepared us to interpret the Bible more wisely.”

In the classroom, he was exacting, compelling, fascinating. His successor as seminary president paid tribute to him as possessing “a sort of faculty of divination; an extraordinary scientific and historical imagination. Of all the teachers I have encountered on this side of the water, Broadus laid the most distinguished emphasis upon the duty of original research.”

One of Dr. Broadus’ daughters recalled, “When we heard him preach, what he said never seemed in different character from his home self, but only something more from the same source.” Coming home from school one day, one of his children asked whether it was right to try to get ahead of others so as to be best in a class. He answered, “It is right to try to do better than they, but it would be wrong to keep them from doing well, or to begrudge their success.”

While Dr. Broadus wrote many books and tracts, perhaps his crowning achievement was his textbook Preparation and Delivery of Sermons, which stemmed from careful preparation of full lectures for his blind student. In it he wanted to help both “young ministers who have no course of instruction in homiletics and give some useful hints to older ministers.” Thousands of students and ministers over the years can testify to the extent of his success. First published in 1870, the book has since been completely revised, and has reached a circulation of nearly 60,000. John Albert Broadus was indeed a teacher of preachers.

BERNARD R. DEREMER

Chicago, Illinois

There are Christian truths which are a vital part of our faith, truths which are revealed, affirmed and confirmed and there is neither profit nor blessing in trying to explain them away.

During the past year the wife of one of America’s most prominent men died and he found himself in deep distress, not only because of his bereavement but also because he had no sustaining Christian faith and no assurance or understanding about the future.

In his desperation this individual (and this incident is confirmed by his own testimony) went to one of America’s leading clergymen, a man who has preached and written on Christianity from the extreme liberal position for many decades.

What did he get? For an hour he heard a dissertation on why Christ’s resurrection was not a physical one, only “spiritual.” Needless to say he received neither comfort nor hope.

Through God’s overruling providence this man had a chance (?) contact with another minister, strong in faith, possessing a personality warm with love and the ability to explain Christian truth with deep conviction.

The upshot has been that this bereaved man has turned to the Bible and to the hope to be found there through faith in the risen Christ.

The Resurrection is a cardinal doctrine having to do with the person and work of Christ. It, along with the doctrine of the Cross, is an essential of the Christian faith. The Apostle Paul says in the beginning of 1 Corinthians 15, that great chapter on the Resurrection: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures” (15:3–4).

In Romans 10:9 Paul gives the basis of salvation in these words: “If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”

To “spiritualize” the Resurrection is—and we speak bluntly—to say that it did not occur.

To “spiritualize” the Resurrection is to do violence to all rules of evidence, not only biblically but also historically.

To “spiritualize” the Resurrection is to deny statements of the Bible which are so clear that they cannot possibly lend themselves to any other than a literal interpretation.

In other words, to “spiritualize” the Resurrection is to rob Christ, and his written Word, of truthfulness and meaning.

To his troubled and doubting disciples our Lord said: “See my hands and my feet” (in which there were wounds), “that it is I myself, handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see that I have,” and to give yet further convincing proof that his was a physical body which had arisen he asked for food. Then we are told: “He took it and ate it before them.”

From a historical standpoint the Resurrection is one of the best attested of all events. The course of history was changed, the Gospel was now complete. Belief in the Resurrection, because of “many infallible proofs,” became the cornerstone of the disciples’ preaching. Again and again they bore testimony to the Resurrection in these words, “of which we are witnesses.”

Indirect proof of the actual Resurrection of Christ is found in the changed attitude of the apostles. Once fearful and scattered, these ordinary men, unlearned and lacking in all personal influence, went out to face the Jewish and Roman leaders without fear, bearing testimony to the one they knew to be alive because they had seen, talked with and listened to him. And this knowledge made of these simple fishermen, and their likewise unremarkable associates, flaming evangels who went out to preach Christ crucified, dead and risen, regardless of the cost.

Were these disciples deluded and misguided? Were they preaching about a dream, an apparition, a “spiritual” experience divorced from physical fact or actual observation? The evidence is so overwhelmingly against any spiritualization of their observations and subsequent actions that we must conclude that Christ rose from the dead with an actual body which could speak, walk, talk, eat and be touched.

Some have sought support for rejection of a physical Resurrection by taking Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:37 where he says: “And what you sow is not the body which is to be.” However, the entire thrust of this chapter is to show the actual Resurrection of our Lord and our hope of eventual resurrection to be with him.

That the body of our Lord seems to have possessed qualities not noted during his earthly ministry appears evident. After the Resurrection he passed through locked doors and appeared and vanished at will. Furthermore, his disciples did not at first recognize him. These aspects of his resurrection body, rather than confuse us should make us realize how little we understand of that which God has in store for us. But of this one thing we can be assured, Christ showed himself to his disciples—up to 500 of them at once—with a body which had physical characteristics of identification, and of action, which were incontrovertible.

It is not necessary to argue that the body in which our Lord appeared to his disciples is the glorified body in which he will again appear, but the witness borne at his Ascension is that “that same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.”

The Apostle Paul saw the risen Lord on the Damascus road. It was an overwhelming experience and he claims it as a seal of his apostleship: “Have I not seen the Lord?” he says to the Corinthian Christians. Later he speaks of the fact of the Resurrection and adds, “Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.”

The Cross is the determinative point of man’s redemption from sin while the Resurrection is the crowning and visible evidence of the efficacy of that redemption. One cannot “spiritualize” Christ’s death at Calvary in terms merely of a loving example, nor can one “spiritualize” his Resurrection in terms of an ethereal apparition by which credulous and frightened men were led to believe that they had seen the Lord.

Not only is the physical Resurrection of the Lord a glorious fact but in it lies our own hope of glorified bodies with which we shall appear in his presence. “For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.… And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:14–17).

How shall we react to this? “Therefore comfort one another with these words” (4:18).