SAY IT WITH MUSIC

Thank you for your recent editorial about a prominent churchman who cannot recite the creed as prose affirmation, but is happy to sing it. Pastor Peterson was fascinated; at once he began an improvisation to a familiar tune:

Sing the creeds away;

Sing and smile and say,

“Since I’m low, and broad, and high,

I sing the creeds away!”

Chant the creeds away,

No matter what you say,

Music with the truth of myth,

Is perfectly okay!

Some questions remain, however. What about a singsong preacher’s tone? Does this permit unlimited indulgence in orthodox terminology? Could we have some discussion of demythologizing and singspiration? What do you suggest for a myth-minded monotone, like the chap in the picture? To borrow a term from a friend of mine, I am

Singcerely yours,

EUTYCHUS

A FATEFUL HINGE

“The Living Plus Sign” (Jan. 2 issue) … is a magnificent, moving, revelatory and biblical proclamation of the Christian message.…

We are very grateful for this welcome addition to an already outstanding Christian fortnightly.

T. R. SISK, JR.

First Baptist Church

Hogansville, Ga.

Above the confusion of many voices it is good to hear voices unashamedly affirming “the foolishness of God.” To what extent no one can determine, but it is an impelling conviction that unbelief must eventually feel the effects of CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

WILLIAM L. BORCH

Salem United Church of Christ

(Evangelical and Reformed)

Columbia, Pa.

“… The first transcontinental railway was completed” when a golden spike was driven in Utah, 1869.…

LOUIS HIEB

Long Beach, Calif.

Bible preaching is indeed the hinge on which our evangelical future swings.

HAROLD F. GREEN

Parkview Baptist

Lake City, Fla.

The only way it is at all possible for me to appear weekly in the pulpit without suffering from “overexposure” is to stick to the Script.

RONALD H. LIND

Mizpah Lutheran Church

St. Louis, Mo.

THE ANGUISHED CRY

I am sure that if Brother Hoffman will forgive Brother Schulze for writing “modal monarchianism,” Brother Schulze will forgive Brother Hoffman for the tautology involved in “indispensable sine qua non” (Eutychus, Jan. 2 issue). Ever since it became necessary to shorten the name of “The Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States,” all true Missourians have been in favor of shortening names wherever possible. Here it is Brother Schulze who is riding the wave of the future.

Your readers should know that we in the Missouri Synod are wrestling with the real problems which led to the anguished cry of Brother Schulze. However, it would be more God-pleasing, I am sure, if the time and energy which is used to cover and to hide the problems were used instead to confess them humbly, to face up to them courageously, and with God’s help to solve them. I hope and pray that those who have come to love and to respect the Missouri Synod for its staunch defense of Lutheran orthodoxy in the past will say a prayer or two for a church that needs the prayers and the sympathy of all those who love the Lord Jesus Christ.

SIEGBERT W. BECKER

Associate Professor of Religion

Concordia Teachers College

River Forest, Ill.

THE ART THAT’S ALIVE

If in the field of painting, a medium that is almost dead anyway (Editorials, Dec. 5 issue), you want to find significant painting—don’t look at the New York galleries or their shirt-tail riders out in the universities. Look rather in the very small galleries around the country. Here and there you will find painters who are trying and to some extent succeeding in relating God and their work. But because they do not fit into the neat categories of the museum of modern art, their work will not be celebrated in the national magazines or other national media. But really, to carry on about modern painting is to flog a dead horse. The art that is really alive and really helping to bring God before the people is architecture. There are, of course, exceptions—but we are living in a new day of church architecture. A change like this—as deep as this—hasn’t taken place since Gothic times.

JAMES SWIFT

St. Mark’s Episcopal Church

Crystal Falls, Mich.

INHERIT THE WIND

Thank you for your enlightening review of “Inherit the Wind” (Nov. 21 issue). It is a reflection upon the alertness and loyalty of evangelical Protestant folk that films such as this (as well as “Rain” and “Elmer Gantry”) are shown with almost no protest.

GEORGE WEISS, JR.

Sea Cliff, L. I., N. Y.

Contrary to Mr. P. E. H.’s opinion, the film follows very closely the factual account of what happened in Dayton, in 1925. “Purporting to reproduce the Scopes ‘monkey’ trial of 1925,” the film does exactly that, and does it well.

DAVID E. ENGDAHL

Mission, Kans.

CATHOLIC BUT NOT ROMAN

I feel I must draw your attention to an error in your article “Archbishop of Canterbury to Meet Pope John” (News, Nov. 21 issue).

There is no Roman Catholic Archbishop of London. He is Archbishop of Westminster, a quite different thing. The Archdiocese of Canterbury never was Roman Catholic. The Church in England was Catholic but not Roman.

WILLIAM DRAPER

St. Mary’s Rectory

Hillsborough, New Brunswick

It has always seemed to me that you were quite careful to check your statements of fact. But you assuredly let one get by you.… The simple fact is that Canterbury never was “Roman” Catholic. Beginning with the Norman conquest in 1066, indeed, the ancient British Church was forced to accept the jurisdiction of the Popes. But it was fought continually, and appeals to Rome were forbidden from time to time. In 1215 King John signed the Magna Carta, the great charter which guaranteed that “the Church of England shall be free, and have her rights entire and her liberties uninjured.” Under Henry, and again under Elizabeth, the English Church threw off the power and authority which the Popes had usurped so long: it did not secede from the unity of Catholic Christendom. Actually, the term “Roman Catholic” in English ecclesiastical history dates from the year 1570, when Pope Pius V deposed Queen Elizabeth and absolved her subjects from all allegiance. It was at this time that the recusants withdrew from the long-established Church, set up altar against altar, and organized into a mission on English soil to compete with the Church of England for the loyalty of Englishmen—all at the instigation of the Papacy. But it was the Roman Catholic Church which was the new body, not the catholic Church of England. To say that Canterbury was “formerly Roman Catholic” is not only to say what is not true: it is to misunderstand the whole history of English and Roman ecclesiastical relations.

FRED C. RUFLE

Wichita, Kans.

The “strong churchmanship” (Editorials Nov. 21 issue) which is supposed to be one of the blessings of liturgical worship as seen in the Church of England, is of dubious value as exemplified by either Dr. Fisher or the church which quietly permits him to open the door to unity without consideration of truth.…

ROBERT OVERGAARD

Immanuel Lutheran

Eugene, Ore.

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

In regard to Reinhold Niebuhr’s pronouncement of some time ago frowning upon the preaching of Christ to the Jews, … since Jesus Himself was a Jew, it was wrong for God to make Him the Christ. It was wrong for Christ to preach or proclaim Himself as Christ to the Jews.

MEYER MARCUS

Staten Island, N. Y.

RELIGION AT HARVARD

I fail to see any connection between the religious controversy at Harvard and the failure of Harvard to invite conservative American preachers to the Memorial Church pulpit (Editorials, Dec. 19 issue). I think it is rather the sincere thought on the part of the Board of Preachers that most conservative preachers either have little to offer an intellectual community or else would arouse much antagonism to the cause of Christ.

JAMES H. HORNSBY

Harvard College, ’61

Cambridge, Mass.

The regrettable thing about the situation at Harvard is that so much of what passes for Christianity bears little resemblance to the teaching of Christ and the preaching of the Apostles. Much effort is expended by professors, section men, et al. in demolishing what they take to be the Christian position. Students whose critical armament is insufficient to enable them to distinguish the true doctrine, on which the Christian faith must stand or fall, from fallacious or fanciful embellishments, often lose their footing in the deluge of witty but frequently irrelevant invective.

Unfortunately … only the exotic are welcome here. Even the Harvard Christian Fellowship went (Stott in 1957) and goes (Prior in 1961) abroad to find a preacher to bring the Gospel to Harvard.

The stumbling block for Christianity in Harvard’s religious revival is the widespread willingness to be interested in religion, opposed to a considerable fear of becoming personally involved. Since personal involvement is the heart of Christianity, no amount of “religious interest” will really further the cause of Christ. Memorial Church wants auditors, but not converts. Dr. Buttrick did convert several people during his tenure, and was rather at a loss as to what to do with them, since the Church really has no sacraments or fellowship life.

HAROLD O. J. BROWN

Second Congregational Church

North Beverly, Mass.

EXISTENTIALIST’S PRAYER

Source of all being, Who art the basis of reality, Hallowed be Thine objectification. Thy dominion enfold us. Thy will permeate existence, till existence realize its purest essence. Grant us daily sustenance. Accept us despite our essential distortions, as we accept those whose essential distortions tend to repel us. And lead us not into the objective-subjective dilemma, but deliver us from negation. For Thine is dominion, potential and actualization, forever. Amen.

PAUL B. BEATTY, JR.

St. Paul’s Evangelical Lutheran Church

Hamlet, N. C.

REPORT FROM TORONTO

Katherine Jansen says that nuns are teaching in public schools in some States “because the State has no schools in those communities” (Eutychus, Oct. 24 issue). This, surely, is strange reasoning. The schools in which the nuns’ teaching has been objected to are public schools paid for by the taxpayers. Since the R. C. church does not operate public schools, it must be that the schools operated “in those communities” are the state public school. What does she mean that the “State has no schools”?…

Beyond this queer argument is a more serious statement, which, for blind bigotry is hard to surpass. The same writer, in referring to orphanages, says: “Any knowing non-Catholic would know that they have no dedicated people to run orphanages.” In refutation of this undeserved insult, may we quote from a news report in The Toronto Globe and Mail of Oct. 3 covering a meeting of The Canadian Conference on Children. Five of nine provinces (Quebec did not report) had “an over-supply of Roman Catholic infants … and a shortage of Roman Catholic homes … an over-supply of Protestant homes willing to adopt children.” This reveals that there are more R. C. children (either illegitimate or from broken homes) and/or R. C. citizens prefer to have the State (including Protestant taxpayers) care for the products of Roman Catholic homes. This situation prevails in every large city, as in Toronto, where children’s aid work is twice as heavy for the R. C.’s as their proportion of the population would warrant; but how their church will exert legal and other influences to snatch a child of a mixed-marriage, while they have “an over-supply of their own infants and a shortage of homes for them.” Toronto, Ont.

LESLIE H. SAUNDERS

Rome’s real threat is religious, not political. While I fully agree with the many Protestants who continually point out the political threat of Rome and the danger of mixing Church and State, I believe that Rome’s false life and practices stem basically from false doctrine.

JAMES G. MANZ

Chicago, Ill.

In all the Protestant debate on the issue of a Catholic president, it seems to me that the most obvious point has been overlooked. That is, that the New Testament never suggests that the church of Jesus Christ can expect the political authority to show it any special favor.… The early church grew and flourished in spite of political hostility that often erupted into open violence.

ROBERT W. MEARS

Chicago, Ill.

Romans 1:21

The Preacher:

Howard G. Hageman was President in 1959 of the General Synod, Reformed Church in America. He was Lector at New Brunswick Seminary (Liturgics) from 1952–57, and Exchange Lecturer in Theology to the Union of South Africa in 1956. He holds the A.B. from Harvard University, B.D. from New Brunswick Seminary, and was awarded the honorary D.D. by Central College, Pella, Iowa, in 1957. He is author of two books, Lily Among the Thorns and We Call This Friday Good, published this year. Dr. Hageman is also an amateur organist. He has traveled twice to Europe, in the summers of 1950 and 1953.

The Text:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Heidelberg Catechism #86

Q. Since then we are redeemed from our misery by grace through Christ, without any merit of ours, why must we do good works?

A. Because Christ, after He hath redeemed us by His blood, also reneweth us by His Holy Spirit in His own likeness, that with our whole life we may show ourselves thankful to God for His blessing and that He may be praised by us; then also that we in ourselves may be assured of our faith from its fruits, and by our godly walk may win our neighbors to Christ.

Even the casual observer of the American scene is struck today by a strange fact. America seems to be on a religious boom and a moral bust! Pick up the daily paper and on one page you will read of crowded churches, bigger budgets, and new buildings. All the statistics will clearly indicate that never before in history has the American Church been so prosperous or commanded the allegiance of so large a percentage of the population. But turn to the next page in the same paper and you will read of mounting crime, increasing disrespect for law and order (and that often on the part of respectable people). Even the advertisements will tell you, if you did not know it already, that lust and obscenity no longer need to hide in our society. A religious boom and a moral bust … is this not a hard thing to account for?

Paul would not have thought so! Indeed, he would not have found this apparent contradiction nearly so strange as we do. For he had seen exactly the same situation in the society to which he sought to bring the Gospel. The Roman Empire of the first century was an extremely religious place. The number of cults and sects was almost impossible to determine. Yet there were always those who were anxious to try another when it came along. Every city was crowded with temples and shrines. Men of high degree and low sought to ease their troubled spirits by sharing in religious practices of an almost fantastic character. Could one of Dr. Gallup’s assistants have polled the man in the street in ancient Rome, he would have found that as large a percentage of them believed in God as in present day America. It was a very religious age.

But it was also a very immoral age. As one of its own observers said, it was a time that was eaten out at the heart. Responsibility, family loyalty and solidarity, integrity—these solid virtues which had once made the Roman republic feared and honored throughout the known world had all but disappeared, having been swept away in a vast flood of lust and lying, immorality and indulgence. The same fascination with obscenity, the same lack of reliable responsibility, the same selfish pursuit of comfort and convenience that we know today, Paul knew too. He was well acquainted with the phenomenon of a religious boom and a moral bust.

And in the opening words of his letter to the Christians in Rome, among whom he is soon to come, he seeks to analyze the reasons for the situation. How can you account for this strange paradox? How can religious intensity go hand in hand with the vain imagination and the darkened heart? How can men believe in God and produce such a moral mess? How? The flaw, as the Apostle clearly sees, is in their religion. Yes, it is their religion that has produced their immorality. “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful.”

Now certainly there is a word here for present-day America. For if ever there was a nation which kidded itself religiously, it is ours. Face to face with an opponent that scoffs at and derides all religion, we point with pride to our statistics (99 per cent of our people believe that there is a God!) and feel safety in them. Sweeping under the rug, as it were, our mounting moral failure, we pride ourselves on our religious boom, believing that it will guarantee us against any future. After all, can any other nation produce the same impressive religious statistics? After all, will not the good God look after his own?

But here is Paul to remind us that such reasoning is not only false but dangerous. Here is Paul to remind us that there is a kind of religion which can prove our undoing. Here is the Apostle to witness that religion of that kind can destroy a nation, a civilization. Here he says that it is not enough to believe in God. A nation can believe in God 100 per cent and still go to hell. After all the devils also believe that (which indicates they have better sense than some of us)—and what good does it do them? At least, when they believe, they tremble. Religion which believes in God but refuses to glorify him as God is not only foolish but fatal. And the time is here when we must ask ourselves whether in wide areas this is not the religion we have. “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful: but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”

There can be danger in religion, fatal danger. Whenever a man says, “I believe in God” and then proceeds calmly to order the affairs of his life, his business, as though there were no one but himself to consider, though he knows God, he is not glorifying him as God—and the result can only be disaster. Whenever a woman piously sings, “More love to Thee, O Christ, more love to Thee” and then shuts her heart against a neighbor or gossips maliciously, though she knows God, she is not glorifying him as God—and the result can only be disaster. Whenever anyone prays “Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors” and then rises from his knees, looks at the brother who has wronged him, and says, “But I cannot forget what you did to me,” though he knows God, he is not glorifying him as God—and the result can only be disaster. Multiply this kind of thing by the thousands and you will begin to understand the reason for our religious boom and our moral bust.

It would be easy to answer an inquiry into the reason behind this failure to practice to match profession by saying, “Hypocrisy.” That answer, so often flung at the Church by the world, does not go deep enough, however. Paul saw more deeply into the reason. The real reason men, though they know God, fail to glorify him as God is their lack of gratitude. Neither were they thankful.

Here is the Christian motivation for righteous and godly living—the only way in which God can be glorified: gratitude. We have lots of people who say, “I must be good because I am afraid”; lots of people who say, “I must be good because I want God to be good to me”; lots of people who say, “I must be good because I want my neighbors to think well of me.” We have all too few who say, “I must be good because I am grateful.” Yet when we stop to consider all that God has done, is doing, and is yet to do for us, what else can we say?

Who of us when he stops to consider the Manger in Bethlehem, the Cross of Calvary, the Empty Tomb in Joseph’s lovely garden; who of us when he feels the constant and abiding presence of the Spirit in his life; who of us when he hears again the trumpet sound of the promised final victory; who of us when he realizes that all this was for him can fail to be thankful? Who of us will not cry out with the Psalmist, “What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits to me?”

I have always been interested in the way in which the Heidelberg Catechism deals with the Ten Commandments. That Catechism, as you know, is divided into three parts; of man’s misery; of his redemption; and of thankfulness. What is striking is that the consideration of the Ten Commandments occurs in the third section under the heading “Of Thankfulness.” Think of it—those same commandments which have inspired men with fear and awe placed under the heading of thankfulness!

But where else could you put them? Since God has done all this for me, here is how I shall show my gratitude to him, by living all of my life, every moment of its existence, according to his will. What else can I do but offer myself as a living sacrifice which is my reasonable service? And how shall I make that living sacrifice except by walking gratefully in the way of his commandments? Before his grace touched my heart, the law was a terror, but now it is my delight. By the law I seek to glorify God, because I am grateful. That kind of religion will never know a moral bust.

It is all summed up in the question with which the Catechism introduces the topic of thankfulness. “Since then we are redeemed from our misery by grace through Christ,” it asks in its 86th question, “without any merit of ours, why must we do good works?” Notice the language of the answer. “Because Christ, after he hath redeemed us by his blood, also reneweth us by his Holy Spirit in his own likeness, that with our whole life we may show ourselves thankful to God for his blessing and that he may be praised by us.” That’s what it means to believe. Not merely to nod the head in assent and then pick up life where we left it, not merely to fasten upon a Creator as the most logical explanation for the mystery of the universe, not merely to guess that “Somebody up there likes me,” but to bring every thought, every deed, every act, every word into obedience to the mind and spirit of Christ. Faith is one part gratitude and one part obedience.

You will notice that the Apostle calls attention to at least two results of this false religion that knows God without glorifying him as God. “They became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.” When a man has only this selfish and cheap religion, he begins to imagine all sorts of things. He is terrified by all kinds of fears and questionings, haunted day and night by shadows. Life becomes strange and difficult. He becomes vain in his imagination.

Furthermore, his foolish heart is darkened. He can no longer think straight or see straight. The whole picture of life and the world is distorted, out of perspective. He no longer sees the Father above nor his brother man around. He sees only himself. That means that his decisions are crooked because his perspective is poor. Having banished God to the outermost margin, how could the picture be right? Small wonder that his foolish heart is darkened.

We could spend a good deal of time emphasizing that here is the real reason for much of the world’s mistaken outlook, its unreasoning panic. It is the natural and inevitable result of a false religion, a religion that knows God but rejects the necessity of glorifying him as God. Whenever a man toys with God in this way, saying “Yes, I believe, but I want to be let alone to enjoy my own life,” vain imaginations and a darkened heart are always the result.

But I cannot forbear pointing out the two results which the Catechism lists for the life that seeks to show itself thankful to God in every way. The first of them is assurance. “That we in ourselves may be assured of our faith from its fruits.” When a man is seeking to glorify God with his whole being, he does not have to ask himself nervously about God nor timorously wonder what God thinks of him. Walking in the way of gratitude, offering every action of his life to God’s glory, he has no time for vain imaginations. He has nothing to fear. Secure in his confidence in his Redeemer, he finds that love has cast out fear.

The second result is a life that attracts. “By our godly walk we win our neighbors to Christ.” The darkened heart sees nothing but itself. But the heart which is daily glorifying God sees the world as God means it to be. And that clear vision is compelling. That integrity of purpose, that steadfastness of mind, that purity of heart wins and attracts. Yes, it wins and attracts those same foolish and darkened hearts that are sick of the shadows and longing to find the light. With all due deference to the preacher in his pulpit, here is the sermon that really grips and holds—the sermon that is quietly preached by ordinary men and women whose daily living is an offering to the glory of God, swelling up from the gratitude which has filled their hearts.

You have all known people like that, I am sure. But why should the whole congregation of Christ’s people not be like that? Why indeed, unless even in our midst there are those who, though they know God, refuse to glorify him as God, those who hold back in a mistaken sense of their own importance. Foolish and darkened hearts, haunted by the vanity of your own imaginations, the assured and attractive life is yours! Christ came to give it to you. Why not stop fooling yourself about your religion? Unless not just in church on Sunday but tomorrow in the office, the school, the home, over the coffee cup, you are seeking to glorify Him, your religion is false and dangerous. It will not save you; it will destroy you.

For the faith of the nation we are not responsible. But we are responsible for the faith of the Church. If the Church is indeed the Church, a congregation of men and women whose faith is not only knowledge but gratitude and obedience, we need not fear for the faith of the nation. The compelling witness of such a Church will speak to the heart of the weary world around it. Do you believe enough to be grateful? Then show your gratitude not only with your lips but with your life! Amen.

Comment On The Sermon

The sermon “Our Religious Boom and Moral Bust” was nominated forCHRISTIANITY TODAY’SSelect Sermon Series by Dr. Henry Bast, Professor of Practical Theology at Western Theological Seminary in Holland, Michigan, and radio preacher since 1952 on the Temple Time broadcast supported by the Reformed Church in America. Dr. Bast’s overcomment follows:

We were in hearty agreement with CHRISTIANITY TODAY’s expressed desire that the sermon be “an authentic reflection of the denominational tradition from which the sermon is chosen.” Our denomination stems directly from the Reformation and has had a strong tradition in doctrinal preaching. A catechism sermon best reflects our distinctive tradition.

The constitution of the Reformed Church states: “Every minister must explain to his congregation at an ordinary service on the Lord’s Day the points of doctrine contained in the Heidelberg Catechism, so that the exposition may be completed within the term of four years.” This does not put the catechism on a level with the Bible, for the same constitution states that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice of the Church. But the Reformed Church is a confessional church and this constitutional provision is made so that the doctrines of the Church will be preached. This is a good thing. It keeps the preachers from riding hobbies. It means that the flock will be fed with the whole counsel of God. It means that both Law and Gospel will be preached. It also requires preaching on the meaning of the Sacraments, thus keeping the Word and the Sacraments together.

The sermon is introduced by a “life situation.” The preacher briefly discusses a serious fault in our national life and exposes a major weakness in the church. Then with true homiletical skill he moves from the problem to its only solution by bringing the text to bear on it. One of the sermon’s strong points is relevance. The preacher not only speaks in the language of the day but speaks to a problem of the day. In facing that problem, he does not speak in despair, or wring his hands, or merely lament that it exists. He looks at it as the Word of God does, realistically, and then points to the solution for all who are ready to hear.

Another homiletical point is the preacher’s use of the catechism in relation to the text. The text teaches us that gratitude is an essential mark of true religion. Now, at this point, a preacher could move in a number of directions. But this preacher with the Bible and the catechism before him moves in a true direction, in fact, in the ultimate direction that the letter to the Romans takes, for he expounds this gratitude or thankfulness in terms of obedience to the Word of God. This is the catechism exposition of the text and it is biblical.

My concluding observation concerns application, and the note on which the sermon ends. Spurgeon used to say that the sermon begins where the application begins. One real weakness in modern preaching is that there is little applicaton. This sermon creeps up on you; you feel the application coming the moment the text is applied to the situation, but in the end you are faced with a clear alternative. You are either for Christ or against him; and, if for Christ, you must walk in his way in true obedience. And there is something we can do: “We are responsible for the faith of the Church.” Finally, here is the note of hope which ought to be in every true Christian sermon. You cannot do this yourself; but in Christ, crucified and risen, you can do this now.

Samuel M. Shoemaker is the author of a number of popular books and the gifted Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He is known for his effective leadership of laymen and his deeply spiritual approach to all vital issues.

To appreciate the present situation in the field of Old Testament study in England one must go back to the beginning of the century, when the Graf-Wellhausen school was making so profound an impact upon Western thought. At that time, while British New Testament scholars, notably Lightfoot, were refuting the theories of the Tübingen scholars, their Old Testament counterparts looked with distinct favor upon German higher criticism.

They did not, however, espouse the precise forms in which the latest evolutionary doctrines were presented to the academic world. The British have a way of modifying anything of foreign origin which is to be incorporated into their pattern of living. Since they already had considerable experience of their own with evolutionary theory in the biological field, it was not too difficult for such leading scholars of the day as W. Robertson Smith in Scotland and S. R. Driver in England to modify German criticism to a point tolerably acceptable to British tastes.

This objective was accomplished most effectively by Driver’s Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament. A prolific writer, Driver’s Introduction was by far his most significant literary production. No other book of its kind has exercised anything like the influence which it has wielded in England up to the present time. Driver’s work established the “standard of orthodoxy” in Old Testament liberal circles. While minor variations were permitted, an individual’s academic respectability depended to a large extent upon the closeness with which he adhered to the pattern set forth by Driver. Thus there sprang up a curious liberal-conservatism which is still in evidence today in British scholarship, and which has been recognized by both Continental European and American scholars.

Some gifted individuals such as James Orr attacked the newer views vigorously and continued to maintain a conservative position on the Old Testament. But no actual conservative school arose in England, although many theological seminaries continued to espouse a somewhat modified conservative position. After Orr’s death the standard of conservative writing dropped abruptly. Lesser champions of the traditional position were quickly relegated to the ranks of “fundamentalists” and dismissed with unconcealed contempt.

PRESENT-DAY TRENDS

Today there is an increasing respect for the few who advance conservative views in scholarly circles in England, although there has been no noticeable move in a more conservative direction by the majority of Old Testament scholars. Despite the fact that the shortcomings of old-fashioned liberalism are being increasingly recognized, no scholarly “conversions” in the Old Testament field correspond to that of Professor R. V. G. Tasker in the area of New Testament studies.

Nevertheless the last two decades have seen a resurgence of conservative evangelical scholarship, led in the Old Testament field by such men as F. F. Bruce, H. L. Ellison, W. J. Martin, and D. J. Wiseman. This revival of literary activity on the part of evangelical scholars has been viewed with misgivings in some quarters, and described as a “resurgence of fundamentalism” in others. Those who are uneasy about this state of affairs need only examine the Bible commentaries and other literary productions of English evangelicals to realize that the workmanship compares favorably with the best anywhere in the world.

The majority of Old Testament scholars in England continue to be of liberal persuasion. In spite of the increasingly severe attacks from archaeological sources on the Graf-Wellhausen literary analysis of the Pentateuch and similar strongholds of the liberal position, they appear indifferent to the fact that the approach adopted by the liberal critic is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain satisfactorily. Part of the reason for this attitude may be that most British Old Testament scholars have had little or no first-hand experience of archaeology, being trained almost exclusively in literary analysis. They do not attach due importance to archaeological findings. A few years ago G. P. Driver disputed the dating assigned by Albright, Burrows, and others to the early Dead Sea manuscript discoveries. While he did not go to the extreme position adopted by Zeitlin, Driver dated the material several centuries after the beginning of the Christian era. If certain reports are to be believed, one of his principal reasons for rejecting the Maccabean era date of some of the scrolls was that his father’s eloquent demonstration of a Maccabean date for the Book of Daniel would thereby be gravely undermined. Driver is primarily a philologist, and from this standpoint he viewed the material from Qumran. He continued to discount the significance of the archaeological evidence despite the insistence of American and British scholars. Only when the cumulative weight of archaeological discoveries demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt the untenability of his position did he adopt a dating considerably nearer the beginning of the Christian period.

Apart from a very few individuals such as S. H. Hooke and H. H. Rowley, British Old Testament scholare have not been conspicuous for their originality of thought or presentation of subject matter. Rightly or wrongly, my countrymen are more influenced by ideologies than many of them care to admit, and this is particularly noticeable in the area of Old Testament studies. Consequently British writings in this field often reflect a close, frequently uncritical, adherence to trends of thought in circulation on the Continent. Where some of these might appear inimical to the conservatism of British liberal scholarship they are either repudiated as reactionary by the nervous, or modified to suit the local taste by the more resolute.

This harking back to the traditional delineation of the situation is a curious phenomenon to say the least. Its most recent manifestation occurred in a book by Professor G. W. Anderson of Durham titled A Critical Introduction to the Old Testament (Duckworth, 1959). This work is a careful and judicious survey of critical orthodoxy, and furnishes good summaries of the positions adopted by the Scandinavians as well as the views maintained by older scholars such as Welch, Kennet, and Volz. However, the author concluded his survey by finding recent theories deficient in one way or another, and expressed a decided preference for the views advanced by Driver in 1891, which, one would judge, he regarded as definitive.

Pertinent to this general situation is the fact that Driver’s Introduction has recently been issued in paperback form under a well-known imprint. My first reaction was one of pleasure in seeing the title of the book superimposed upon a fragment of a Qumran scroll. My delight was speedily dispelled, however, when I discovered that the contents were virtually unchanged from the 1897 edition. A preface contained the statement that archaeology had revealed nothing which was in conflict with the generally accepted conclusions of critical scholars. While this remark may have been true in 1897, the situation today is vastly different, and the person who picks up this classic document in its new cover may be beguiled, at least temporarily, into thinking that this comment represents the consensus of up-to-date opinion.

ENCOURAGING TURN

When Edward Robertson was Professor of Semitics in Manchester he took serious issue with the Graf-Wellhausen position, and wrote at some length on the subject. While his views differed somewhat from the conservative position, his standpoint was a welcome change from the dull, unimaginative productions of his contemporaries. Robertson’s views were reflected in part in a work by one of his students, R. Brinker, dealing with the influence of sanctuaries in early Israel.

This work broke new ground in showing that the testimony of the Samaritan Pentateuch was fatal to the Graf-Wellhausen theory. However, it was oriented strictly in terms of literary criticism, and failed to take any cognizance of contemporary archaeological discoveries. How anyone can discuss pre-exilic Israelite religious institutions without any reference to Ugaritic culture is beyond this writer’s understanding.

Brinker’s book was written in 1946, and it could be argued in charity that the war had prevented the author from drawing upon the work of European archaeologists to any extent. However, I had graduated three years before the book appeared in print, and I clearly remember reading extensively about the discoveries at Ras Shamra while I was a student. Quite obviously Brinker had no appreciation of the significance which archaeology has for modern discussions of the critical hypothesis. His select bibliography does not include the work of one modern archaeologist. Eclectic scholarship of this kind is just not good enough, however well-intentioned it may be.

The most attractive product of recent British scholarship is the N. H. Snaith edition of the Old Testament in Hebrew, published in 1958 by the British and Foreign Bible Society. Snaith began work in 1933 on a text to replace the Society’s Letteris edition of 1866, and he drew considerably on Spanish Hebrew manuscripts in an attempt to represent the true Masoretic text of Ben Asher. The resultant product agrees closely with the researches of Professor Paul Kahle, who edited the text of the third edition of the Kittel Bible, published in 1937. The Snaith text follows the Masoretic traditions as to spacing, notes, Sedarim and Haftaroth, the result of which has been to furnish the student with an attractive and serviceable Hebrew text which enshrines the diligence and application characteristic of British scholarship.

Samuel M. Shoemaker is the author of a number of popular books and the gifted Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He is known for his effective leadership of laymen and his deeply spiritual approach to all vital issues.

Let first place in this survey be given to the third volume of The Biblical Expositor (Holman), produced under the consulting editorship of Carl F. H. Henry—for this volume contains expository studies of all the books of the New Testament, with introductory essays on New Testament Backgrounds, the Gospels, and the Epistles. Twenty-four authors have contributed to the volume, which aims (like the two companion volumes devoted to the Old Testament) at bringing “the living theme of the great book” home to the general reader of the Bible.

NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES

A new series of “New Testament Tools and Studies,” edited by Bruce M. Metzger, has been inaugurated with an Index to Periodical Literature on the Apostle Paul by the editor of the series, followed by a Concordance to the Distinctive Greek Text of Codex Bezae, by James D. Yoder (Eerdmans).

A volume of New Testament Sidelights (Hartford) has been presented to A. C. Purdy on his seventieth birthday; it is introduced by a contribution from Rudolf Bultmann titled “A Chapter in the Problem of Demythologizing” and includes a discussion by H. K. McArthur (editor of the Festschrift) on the “Gospel according to Thomas.” A number of other studies deal with this “Gospel” and other Gnostic literature recently found along with it. Indeed, much of the public interest which was attracted by the Dead Sea Scrolls a few years ago has now been diverted to the Gnostic manuscripts from Upper Egypt, and we can only be thankful that most of the popular literature on these is free from the eccentricities that marked much of the popular literature on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Thus, despite the ambiguity of its title, The Secret Sayings of Jesus, by R. M. Grant and D. N. Freedman (Collins), is a splendid introduction for the general public, not least when it discusses the bearing of the “Gospel according to Thomas” and companion literature on the beginnings of Christianity. Wider issues are discussed by R. M. Grant in Gnosticism and Early Christianity (Oxford). The Egyptian finds as a whole are described by J. Doresse in The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics (Hollis and Carter); they are also described by W. C. van Unnik in Newly Discovered Gnostic Writings (SCM)—a more sober work, subtitled “A preliminary survey of the Nag Hammadi finds.” Another of these writings, the Velentinian Gospel of Truth (Black), is translated and annotated for English readers by Kendrick Grobel. These may not be New Testament studies, but they deal with matters closely related to early Christianity.

F. C. Grant has given us another background study in Ancient Judaism and the New Testament (Oliver and Boyd)—and not background study only, for it is full of wise and healthy observations on modern tendencies in the teaching and learning of the New Testament. E. A. Judge approaches our field from another angle in The Social Pattern of the Christian Groups in the First Century (Tyndale); as a classicist and ancient historian he has devoted this monograph to what he calls “prolegomena to the study of New Testament ideas of social obligation.” We can never have too many contributions to New Testament studies from classical scholars. Another classical scholar, E. M. Blaiklock, gives us a shorter monograph on Rome in the New Testament (Inter-Varsity); among other thought-provoking features, Paul is here described as “the first European.” With Archaeology and the New Testament (Eerdmans). J. A. Thompson completes a trilogy on biblical archaeology.

An important aspect of New Testament theology is treated at length in a scholarly volume by R. E. O. White, The Biblical Doctrine of Initiation (Eerdmans), which ought not to be ignored by any side of the baptismal and confirmation controversies.

When we come to Jesus and the Gospels, first mention must be claimed by two German translations: E. Stauffer’s Jesus and His Story (SCM) and G. Bornkamm’s Jesus of Nazareth (Hodder and Stoughton). While superficially Stauffer’s book may be hailed as much more conservative than the other, further reflection may suggest that Bornkamm shows greater insight into the heart of the Gospel. Bornkamm’s book is the first direct treatment of the historical Jesus by a member of Bultmann’s school since Bultmann’s own work Jesus appeared a generation ago. Bornkamm’s estimate of the historical evidence is less skeptical than his master’s, and he does not see such a hiatus as Bultmann does between the ministry of Jesus and the message of the primitive Church. Bornkamm is certainly more biblical in placing the shift from the old age to the new between John the Baptist and Jesus, and not (with Bultmann) between Jesus and Paul. Stauffer stands outside the main stream of German New Testament scholarship, but he brings to his subject the information he has acquired in his other fields of interest, notably numismatics, and gives us a fascinating study of our Lord’s life and times, viewed rather from the outside. Jesus in the Twentieth Century, by H. G. Wood (Lutterworth), brings together a number of papers written at various times by this veteran Quaker scholar who has devoted many years both to academic study of the Gospels and to their application in private and public life.

In 1957 an international congress on the Four Gospels was held in Oxford; many of the papers read there were published in the latest volume to appear thus far of the famous Berlin series Texte und Untersuchungen. In 1960 a shorter selection from these papers has been published under the title The Gospels Reconsidered (Blackwell). Among the other contents of this volume, special attention should be directed to Kurt Aland’s paper on “The Present Position of New Testament Textual Criticism” and to two papers on the Fourth Gospel by W. C. van Unnik and J. A. T. Robinson.

The historical nature of the Gospel record is examined by T. A. Roberts in History and Christian Apologetic (SPCK). Vincent Taylor’s little textbook, The Gospels: A Short Introduction (Epworth), has appeared in a ninth edition. R. H. Mounce presents a fresh study of the Kerygma in The Essential Nature of New Testament Preaching (Eerdmans), in which he subjects C. H. Dodd’s work to criticism at three points. G. E. Ladd in The Gospel of the Kingdom (Paternoster) utilizes his scholarly studies in this field to give fresh emphasis to the perennial missionary challenge of Christ. The second volume of D. M. Lloyd-Jones’s Studies in the Sermon on the Mount (Inter-Varsity) continues to provide a superb example of the best kind of expository preaching. R. S. Wallace, who gave us a preacher’s work on the Gospel parables five years ago, has now produced a companion work on The Gospel Miracles (Oliver and Boyd). Restricting himself to the miracles in the Synoptic records, he shows how each of them sets forth some essential aspect of the Gospel. A. M. Hunter has added to his series of works on New Testament interpretation a volume on Interpreting the Parables (SCM); while obviously indebted to Dodd and Jeremias, he maintains his independence of thought, and in particular does not feel bound by the dogma that no element of allegory should ever be admitted to the interpretation of the parables. This last point receives wise discussion from Matthew Black in The Parables as Allegory (Rylands), a reprint from the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library.

When we come to works on the individual Gospels, we welcome F. V. Filson’s volume on The Gospel according to St. Matthew (Black) in the New Testament Commentaries published by Harper; it leaves us, however, with the feeling that a really satisfying account of the origin, structure, and purpose of this Gospel has yet to be given. C. E. B. Cranfield’s volume, The Gospel according to Mark, in the Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary series admirably realizes the purpose of that series—“the elucidation of the theological and religious contents of the New Testament”—but at the same time pays due regard to textual, linguistic, and other critical questions. Cranfield makes his allegiance to the Reformed tradition plain. His commentary is mercifully free from the current devotion to “patternism.” This cannot be said of Archbishop P. Carrington’s According to Mark (Cambridge). This “running commentary” (as the subtitle calls it) contains many valuable insights, but we cannot see that the sections into which this Gospel was divided for lectionary purposes at an early date throw much light on the Evangelist’s own scheme. An important German work, Hans Conzelmann’s The Theology of St. Luke (Faber), has appeared in English dress.

On the Fourth Gospel the first place must be given to Aileen Guilding’s The Fourth Gospel and Jewish Worship (Clarendon), a first-rate piece of research which relates the sequence of events and discourses in this Gospel to the Old Testament readings prescribed in the triennial lectionary of the Palestinian synagogues. Time and again event and discourse are shown to constitute a commentary on one or more of the readings assigned to the relevant season of the year. Her thesis adds powerful support to the case for the Palestinian authorship of the Gospel. R. V. G. Tasker, general editor of the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, has contributed the volume The Gospel According to John (Tyndale) to the series; he takes the witness whose authority stands behind the Gospel to be John the son of Zebedee, but considers that the writer was a disciple of John’s who bore the same relation to him as Mark did to Peter. Walter Lüthi’s St. John’s Gospel (Oliver and Boyd) consists of expository sermons preached to his Basel congregation, “on the edge of the crater,” in the dark days between 1939 and 1942. M. F. Wiles in The Spiritual Gospel (Cambridge) has given us a study of the interpretation of the Fourth Gospel in the Early Church, especially in the commentaries by Theodore of Mopsuestia and Cyril of Alexandria. This study reminds us forcibly that no one can hope to comment adequately on this Gospel unless he is in sympathetic rapport with the mind of the Evangelist. This sympathy is evident in R. H. Lightfoot’s St. John’s Gospel: A Commentary (Oxford), first published in 1956 and now reissued in a new series of “Oxford Paperbacks.” A. J. B. Higgins reaches a high estimate of The Historicity of the Fourth Gospel (Lutterworth); he maintains its independence of the Synoptic tradition and its right to be regarded as a witness of at least equal authority. Leon Morris discusses The Dead Sea Scrolls and St. John’s Gospel (Westminster) in the twelfth Campbell Morgan Bible Lecture, and finds that a comparative study of the two leads to three conclusions: the uniqueness of Christianity, the Palestinian character of the Fourth Gospel, and the centrality of Christ. In a Tyndale monograph J. N. Birdsall examines The Bodmer Papyrus of the Gospel of John (Tyndale) and makes a notable contribution to textual criticism.

PAUL AND THE EPISTLES

Paul continues to attract the attention of Christian scholars. Paul: His Life and Work, by Walther von Loewenich (Oliver and Boyd), has been written in order to provide Christian readers with something which will help them to a better understanding of Paul; his approach is the classic Lutheran one. From the Roman Catholic side Alfred Wikenhauser has given us a study of Pauline Mysticism (Nelson), by which he means the experience of direct union between the believer and Christ. The reading of this book brings a fresh reminder of the increasing interaction between Protestant and Roman Catholic work in the field of biblical exegesis.

In last year’s survey it was noted that John Murray’s study of The Imputation of Adam’s Sin (Eerdmans) made one look forward all the more eagerly to the appearance of his commentary on Romans in the New International Commentary on the New Testament. The first volume of this commentary (covering Romans 1–8) has now been published, and our eager expectations are not disappointed. The Reformed school of Pauline exposition is worthily represented in our day by such a work as this. But we are brought to the very fountainhead of the Reformed School of Pauline exposition by the appearance in a new English translation of John Calvin’s commentary on First Corinthians. A series of expository addresses on I Corinthians has been made more widely available with the publication of The Royal Route to Heaven, by Alan Redpath (Pickering and Inglis).

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary on Philippians has been written by R. P. Martin. The same scholar pays more detailed attention to one passage in that Epistle in a Tyndale monograph titled An Early Christian Confession (Tyndale), a study of Philippians 2:5–11. He agrees with the common description of the passage as an early Christian hymn, but describes it further as an early Christian creed, characterized by an impressively high doctrine of the person and work of Christ, composed by Paul himself at an earlier date and incorporated by him in his letter to the Philippians. H. M. Carson has contributed the volume on Colossians and Philemon to the Tyndals series. He concludes that both Epistles were written from Rome, he deals satisfactorily with the problems of the Colossian heresy, and includes a useful section on the New Testament attitude to slavery.

In “The Authorship of the Pastorals” (The Evangelical Quarterly, July–September 1960) E. Earle Ellis gives a résumé and assessment of current trends. The “Torch” commentary on these Epistles, written by A. R. C. Leaney, continues to find in them genuine Pauline passages embedded in non-Pauline material.

The volume on Hebrews in the Tyndale series has been written by T. Hewitt. He acknowledges his indebtedness to William Manson’s work on this Epistle. On Hebrews 5:7 he has an unusual suggestion to make about our Lord’s prayer in Gethsemane, but it is not so new as he may think. The main lessons of the Epistle are lucidly and powerfully brought out. In Reading Through ‘Hebrews’ (Mowbrays) R. R. Williams, Bishop of Leicester, has published six lectures on the Epistle which he delivered from the episcopal throne in Leicester Cathedral during Lent 1959—a wholly admirable example of ex cathedra teaching.

Faith is the Victory, by E. M. Blaiklock (Paternoster) reproduces in book form a series of Bible readings in I John given at the Keswick Convention; the author’s classical scholarship is here put to good use in promoting the devotional application of the Epistle.

Lastly, we have two practical expositions of Revelation—The Apocalypse Today, by T. F. Torrance (Eerdmans), and Preaching from Revelation, by A. H. Baldinger (Zondervan). Both authors see clearly the Christocentric emphasis of the book, and communicate it to their public. Exposition like this, based on careful and scholarly exegesis, is a welcome change from the sensational nonsense that too often passes for exposition of Revelation.

Samuel M. Shoemaker is the author of a number of popular books and the gifted Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He is known for his effective leadership of laymen and his deeply spiritual approach to all vital issues.

The year 1960 saw a diversity of works dealing with the Old Testament. To examine all of them would, of course, be impossible; therefore we shall only look at a number of volumes which represent different types of study of the Old Testament.

THE ENTIRE OLD TESTAMENT

Two works covering the entirety of the Old Testament call for special mention:

In The Biblical Expositor (Holman) of which Carl F. H. Henry is Consulting Editor, we are dealing not with the product of one author but of many. Each writer seeks to bring out the message of the Old Testament book with which he is dealing. Each treatment begins with an outline which is followed by a development of the message of that particular book. To include so much material in two volumes is indeed an accomplishment, and what is pleasing is the high character and quality of most of the comments. The work is a good one to place in the hands of a person who does not know much about the Old Testament, for it really turns him to the sacred text itself. The writers are men who believe in the truthfulness of the Scriptures and their comments are in line with this basic conviction.

Explore the Book is the work of one man, J. Sidlow Baxter. In a series of six volumes (two devoted to the New Testament) Zondervan has issued this challenging study which is designed to introduce the reader to the Old Testament itself. The books contain many outlines, charts, and helps to aid the reader in his exploration. Dr. Baxter loves the Old Testament as the Word of God and there is no question as to his loyalty to the Scriptures. His work follows the lines of some of the great teachers among the Plymouth Brethren and leans toward a dispensational position.

One who wishes to become proficient in the study of the Old Testament must know the tools that are indispensable. These tools are books, but what books should one purchase? So much is written that one cannot keep up with it all and, indeed, much of it is of little genuine value for a student of the Old Testament. There are, however, certain necessary helps which one ought to have. A fine service has been rendered by Frederick W. Danker in his Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study (Concordia): he discusses in an interesting way the books which every serious student of the Old Testament must own, and also includes New Testament materials. Although he presents a remarkable amount of material, there are surprising omissions, and some of his comments are disappointing, as for example, the consideration of the pioneering grammar of G. Douglas Young. Dr. Danker discusses Young’s work but does not mention its uniqueness, which is its treatment of the Hebrew vowel system. In the discussion of commentaries, we wish that the theological presuppositions which underlie the volume in question had more frequently been pointed out. Too many works are listed as helps which do not regard the Scriptures as the inerrant Word of God. This section could have been strengthened by calling the reader’s attention to more genuinely conservative works. There is, however, much valuable and helpful material in the book, and it should prove of use to those for whom it was intended.

Another type of help is found in the Lists of Words Occurring Frequently in the Hebrew Bible, by John D. W. Watts (Eerdmans). This list has been taken from Harper’s Hebrew Vocabularies and revised in comparison with the Lexicon of Kohler-Baumgartner. It is an excellent piece of work. In the learning of a foreign language, the study of vocabulary is all important, and one of the quickest ways we may obtain a reading knowledge of a language is through constant learning of new words and repeating those we have already learned. Dr. Watts has provided an admirable manual for such a purpose and has made all students of the Hebrew language his debtors.

He who loves the Old Testament cannot help but have a deep and profound interest in those lands in which the wondrous events of redemption took place. There are many books written on Palestine itself, but those on Transjordan are not so numerous. Indeed, Transjordan is not so well known to the average Bible reader as Palestine proper. A real need is therefore fulfilled in G. Lankester Harding’s The Antiquities of Jordan (Crowell): it is one of the most interesting geographical studies the reviewer has had in some time. The book is well illustrated with photographs and maps and gives a clear and biblically related discussion of the land in question.

A distinct service has been rendered by G. P. Putnam’s Sons in making available in paperback edition (Capricorn Books) the Ancient Semitic Civilizations, by Sabatino Moscati. It is time that someone gave us a popular, readable account of the nations which surrounded the Israelites, such as, the Egyptians, Babylonians, Canaanites, and others. The discussions are clear and readable as well as extremely interesting. A consideration of the Hebrew nation is also included which, to the present writer, is the most disappointing part of the book, for it does not do full justice to the uniqueness of the Hebrew religion as a special revelation from God. For its treatment of the other peoples of antiquity, however, the work may be confidently recommended.

SERMONS AND COMMENTARIES

Good sermons on Old Testament subjects are always welcome, and when the preacher is Charles Haddon Spurgeon we may be sure that the sermons are good. Two volumes of his sermons, Men of the Old Testament and Sermons on the Psalms, have been issued by Zondervan.

The past year can hardly be said to be characterized by the appearance of many commentaries. Possibly this is significant, for it is a sad day for the Church when she is not engaged in deep exposition of God’s Word. Zondervan however, has reissued the Ellicott Commentaries on the Old Testament under the title Laymen’s Handy Commentary Series. Ellicott’s works are well known for their devotion to Scripture and their concise and lucid expositions. They are now in print in handy, pocket-size volumes, and can be recommended as good interpretative helps in the study of the Old Testament.

The Epworth Press has published a work of J. Yeoman Muckle, Isaiah 1–39 which embodies the fruits of modern scholarship. The comments are lucid, but a negative criticism characterizes the work. The Isaianic authorship of the entire prophecy is abandoned and some of the interpretations seem far removed from what Isaiah proclaimed. To take two examples, the treatment of Isaiah 7:14 is disappointing as is also that of 9:6. But in its study of historical and geographical detail, and as a faithful representative of a certain type of modern critical scholarship, the book may well receive commendation.

SPECIAL STUDIES

In much modern Old Testament study the question of myth is prominent. What is myth and to what extent does it appear in the Scriptures? The great impetus to modern considerations of the question stems in large part from writings of the late Hermann Gunkel. In a small work, Myth and Ritual in the Old Testament (Alenson), Brevard Childs deals with the question. His work shows the influence of modern writers such as Gerhard von Rad. Although he has many useful things to say, he is under the influence of a negative type of criticism which does not regard the Old Testament as the specially revealed Word of God. At times there appears to be too much reading into the text, as when, for example, the Helal of Isaiah 14:13 is said to be a Canaanite deity, the chief god of the pantheon (p. 69). And it is difficult to be satisfied with the following statement concerning our Lord: “Not just in his teachings or in particular actions, but in the total existence of the Jew, Jesus Christ, the entire Old Testament receives its proper perspective” (p. 104). Is Jesus Christ simply the Jew, or is he the eternal Son of God? Childs has included much valuable information, but the basic standpoint from which he writes would not be acceptable to an evangelical.

Of an entirely different nature is the little volume The Old Testament View of Revelation, by J. G. S. S. Thomson (Eerdmans). This work is written with full awareness of what modern scholarship has to say. Indeed many modern scholars are quoted, although for the most part they really adopt a viewpoint different from that of the author. But here is a serious consideration of the Word of God. And it is particularly refreshing to be told that Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6, for example, contain names given to the Messiah, and that these names are not distinguishing labels but expressions of nature, attribute, function, and office (p. 45). Thomson’s book will repay thoughtful reading.

For those who know little or nothing about the Old Testament, Howard Hanke’s From Eden to Eternity (Eerdmans) should prove helpful. As its title indicates, the author carries the reader through the pages of biblical history and explains various questions and matters as he proceeds. He writes so as to strengthen one’s faith in the trustworthiness of the Sacred Oracles, and his attitude toward the Bible is never open to question. This is altogether a useful book.

HISTORY AND PROPHECY

American scholarship may be truly proud of the achievement of John Bright, A History of Israel (Westminster). So far as scholarship goes, we would rate this work above that of Noth without question. Dr. Bright possesses many peculiar qualifications for writing a history of Israel. He has already distinguished himself by his treatment of the views of history of certain modern scholars, namely, Alt, Noth, and Kaufmann. He is fully aware of modern trends in Old Testament studies and is thoroughly at home for instance in the work of Alt. Some of the discussions in this volume show a remarkable grasp of the subject. For example, I have in mind the excursus which treats of the problem of Sennacherib’s campaigns in Palestine (pp. 282–287). In future studies of the problems of Old Testament history, Professor Bright’s opinions will have to receive a hearing.

At the same time, we regret that the author has alligned himself with those who have rejected the time-honored view of the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God. To adopt the documentary hypothesis of the Pentateuch (pp. 64–66), the view that there is a second and a third Isaiah, or the late date of Daniel is in reality to place oneself in a position where it is impossible to do justice to the Old Testament. His work, therefore, must be used with caution, and where it deviates from Scripture itself its views cannot be accepted.

Works on the prophets of Israel usually prove to be of interest, and the translation of Curt Kuhl’s The Prophets of Israel (John Knox) is no exception. It surveys the entire subject and discusses the nature of the prophetic phenomenon and the teaching of the individual prophets themselves. But does it really help us to understand the prophets? The views of a certain type of modern criticism abound throughout with the result that we are told, among other things, that Isaiah 7:14 probably has reference to the prophet’s own wife. If this is the case, why in 7:14 does the mother name the child, whereas in 8:3 the prophet gives the name? Throughout the book we have to listen to the views of modern criticism. Here again are second and third Isaiah. Daniel’s depiction of the future is said to be poor and jejune (p. 185). In painting a picture of the theophany of the Lord, Micah, through his lack of poetic power, is said to come to grief at the outset (p. 91). We cannot see that this book has made any genuine contribution to the understanding of the prophets. The appended bibliography is particularly one-sided in its omission of conservative works.

Perhaps mention should be made of the second volume (written in German) of Gerhard von Rad’s Theology of the Old Testament. The same cautious scholarship which characterized the first volume is found here also. Dr. von Rad has given a thorough treatment of the whole prophetic movement. Like the first volume, this one is filled with keen insights and exegetical suggestions, but it is based upon a view of the Old Testament which is out of accord with what the Bible teaches concerning itself. For our part we tire of hearing of a “deutero” Isaiah and of other “critical” axioms as though there were no question concerning their correctness. One of the weakest positions of the negative critical movement is its partition of the book of Isaiah into at least three works, written by different authors. We wish that modern scholarship would examine its foundations in the light of the Word of God and submit itself to that Word rather than seek to compel the Word to submit itself to what the minds of twentieth century men may happen to be thinking. Hence, we are disappointed with von Rad’s work as with all books which do not do full justice to the Bible as the Word of God.

THE OLD TESTAMENT MESSAGE

It is refreshing to turn from the often repeated shibboleths of negative scholarship and examine a book that does accept the Bible as the infallible Word of God. Samuel J. Schultz has written The Old Testament Speaks (Harper), and the best thing to be said about the book is that it is true to its title. Here it is the Old Testament which speaks and not a modern reconstruction and reshuffling of the Old Testament. For that reason we may heed what Dr. Schultz says.

The work is not an introduction as such, although it contains much material of introductory nature. It is not a history of Israel, although it contains much history. It is not a biblical theology of the Old Testament, although it contains biblical theology. It is what its name implies—a volume which seeks to present the message of the Old Testament. The book takes the reader through the pages of the Old Testament and permits him to hear what the Scriptures have to say. What is striking and so out of line with much modern writing on the subject, but what is at the same time so pleasing, is that one is brought face to face not with what the ancient Hebrews supposedly thought about their god but rather with the living God himself. In other words, his work leads one to God, the true God.

From a scholarly standpoint, the work can match anything that has appeared in the Old Testament field during the past year. It is a credit to conservative, Bible-believing scholarship, and should be hailed as such. It is written with full awareness of what the modern “critical” school has to say and yet with complete loyalty to the Scriptures.

Here then is a challenge to the evangelical: we need more scholarly writing on the Old Testament. Perhaps as never before, there is a need for a positive exposition of the depths and riches of this portion of God’s Word. In the deep study of the Sacred Scriptures there is great reward indeed.

Samuel M. Shoemaker is the author of a number of popular books and the gifted Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He is known for his effective leadership of laymen and his deeply spiritual approach to all vital issues.

It is in many ways a healthy sign that the past year has been especially fruitful in the historical and theological fields. In a survey it is inevitable that only a selection should be given out of the great number of titles, and even selection is difficult in view of the many significant works. Here, however, are some which seem to make a real contribution in the different areas.

CHURCH HISTORY

In church history, the 400th anniversary of the Scottish Reformation naturally produced some interesting work, and it was a particular pleasure that Principal J. H. S. Burleigh, Moderator of the Church of Scotland for the year, should publish his Church History of Scotland (O.U.P.). In addition, Gordon Donaldson, Reader in Scottish history at Edinburgh, made a twofold contribution from the Episcopalian angle with his valuable Scottish Reformation (CUP) and a more popular general history, Scotland: Church and Nation through 16 Centuries (SCM)

In the more general field, Professor Kenneth Latourette pursues his massive series on Christianity in a Revolutionary Age, and Volume III on The Nineteenth Century Outside Europe (Harper) is on the present winter list. Another valuable study in a complicated area is William R. Cannon’s History of Christianity in the Middle Ages (Abingdon). More specialized studies which deserve notice include Franklin Hamlin Littell’s The German Phoenix (Doubleday), in which an account is given of the results of the church struggle against Hitler, and a fresh account of the history of Bible translation into English in God’s Word Into English by Dewey M. Beegle (Harper). The latter is especially timely in view of the impending publication of the new British revision. Nor should we forget to mention Professor Herbert Butterfield’s International Conflict in the Twentieth Century (Harper) as an attempted Christian evaluation of modern history by a historian of real Christian conviction.

Various useful texts have been printed or reprinted during the past year, and although some of these are primarily for students or specialized readers, there are others of more general appeal. Thus, together with additions to larger series, we may take note of the Centuries by Thomas Traherne and Selected Letters of Francois de Sales (both Harper), as also of the Bridlington Dialogue, a twelfth century commentary on the rule of St. Augustine (Mowbray). The Latin text of Ambrose On the Sacraments (Mowbray) has also been edited, and a fine new addition to our knowledge of eighteenth century German thought is made in the strange but pregnant utterances of J. G. Hamann, the famous Magus of the North, as presented in the English Selections of Ronald Gregor Smith of Glasgow (Harper). Perhaps this is the point where we might also mention a new edition of the monumental Patrology of B. Allaner (Nelson).

CHRISTIAN MISSIONS

Two books of particular interest may be noted out of the growing literature on Christian missions. First, there is a new edition of the established Progress of World-wide Missions by Robert Glover (Harper). Second, the well-known English writer J. C. Pollock, a contributing editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY, has given us a vivid and informative account of a recent tour of mission fields in Earth’s Remotest End (Macmillan).

BIOGRAPHY

Larger biographies are not perhaps so popular as they ought to be, but some notable additions have been made in the biographical field which readers would be foolish to ignore. Students of church history in its earlier stages will be grateful for a fresh account of Eusebius of Caesarea by Wallace Hadrill (Mowbray). Anglican evangelicals in particular will welcome an account of that great stalwart Bishop Mowll (Hodder and Stoughton), the late archbishop of Sydney and primate of Australia; and indeed, evangelicals of other persuasions might profit from this story as unfolded by Marcus Loane. Mention of Australia reminds us that there is an informative story of Billy Graham’s Australian Crusade in Light Beneath the Cross by Stuart Babbage and Ian Siggins (Doubleday). The famous gloomy dean of a previous generation is depicted in the Dean Inge of Adam Fox (John Murray).

PRACTICAL THEOLOGY

Turning to practical theology, we may note that to the recent prison sermons of Karl Barth (Deliverance to the Captives) there have now been added sermons by Emil Brunner, I Believe in the Living God (Westminster), and Rudolf Bultmann, This World and the Beyond (Scribner’s). It is well that our theologians should be preachers as well as academic instructors, and, whatever we may deduce from it, the preaching is in general better than much of the instruction. Other notable sermons are found in the volume Our Heavenly Father by Helmut Thielicke (Harper) and Stand Up in Praise to God by another contributing editor, Paul Rees (Eerdmans). Essays in applied theology are to be found in The Providences of God by Georgia Harkness (Abingdon) and the present writer’s Christian Ministry in the useful Pathway Series of Eerdmans. Perhaps we should put in the same category the rather different and challenging new book of J. B. Phillips, God Our Contemporary (Macmillan).

SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY

More systematic theology has also added its quota. Continuing interest in the neglected doctrine of the Holy Spirit is reflected in Lindsay Dewar’s provoking study, The Holy Spirit and Modern Thought (Harper). Stephen Neill, who has also written engagingly on some great ecumenical leaders in Brothers of the Faith (Abingdon), has given us an interesting work on Christian Holiness (Harper). A warm welcome will be given to the new edition of Bishop Lesslie Newbigin’s Reunion of the Church (SCM). Another small but valuable work contains two reports of the Faith and Order Commission under the title One Lord, One Baptism (SCM). To those who know the ecumenical movement mostly at the Life and Work level, these reports will offer a new aspect of theological work at the deepest level which deserves the most careful study and assessment. Sacramental theology is represented by R. S. Paul’s The Atonement and the Sacraments (Abingdon), and the doctrine of predestination is the subject of lively discussion in a welcome translation of Pierre Maury’s Predestination and Other Papers (SCM)

More generally, we may note a new edition of L. Harold de Wolf’s Theology of the Living Church (Harper), though unfortunately the revision brings no beneficial shift in perspective. An attempted evaluation of the modern position is found in New Accents in Contemporary Theology by Roger Hazelton (Harper). A more basic note is sounded in the translation of the Dogmatics of Herman Diem of Tübingen (Westminster), and we again welcome an evangelical symposium in The Word for the Century: Evangelical Certainties (Oxford), to which many well-known evangelical scholars have contributed.

Rather strangely, there is little new from the pen of Karl Barth, who is now hard at work on the last part of Volume IV and on Volume V of his Church Dogmatics. In English, the volume on anthropology (III, 2) made its appearance during 1960 (T. & T. Clark), and the volume on providence, angels, and demons should be ready early in 1961 (III, 3). At long last, a rendering of Barth’s Anselm has now become available to the English-speaking world. Whatever its value as an exposition of Anselm, this is a critical work in Barth’s own turning from Kierkegaardian subjectivity to the attempted objectivity of the Dogmatics.

There remain the great Reformation and evangelical reprints and new editions, and in this area 1960 was a truly magnificent year. Addition was again made to the great Luther translation, this time in the form of the Lectures on Genesis. The Banner of Truth Trust and the Sovereign Grace Book Club have continued their excellent work in reproducing older classics, more particularly in the Puritan range. Above all, however, the new Calvin translations have now made their appearance. In two volumes of the Library of Christian Classics (XX and XXI, Westminster) we now have a completely new and far more scholarly rendering of the Institutes which no serious theologian can afford to ignore. In addition, we also have the first fruits of the revision of the Calvin Commentaries (Eerdmans) in which the obscurities, errors, and crudities of the original translation are finely corrected. In both these ventures there has been a brilliant deployment of scholarship to produce English texts which are both more accurate and more readable, and which should serve to introduce Calvin to a wider circle of readers who have not yet learned to appreciate his greatness.

Sometimes we take a gloomy view of the progress of the faith in our age. Certainly there is no cause for complacency. Even some of the books mentioned give grounds for uneasiness. On the other hand, there are obvious compensations in the growing works of true academic and evangelical worth, and we certainly need not be too pessimistic in relation to a year which can produce the scholars, the publishers, and, we hope, the readers for such great new editions as those of the Calvin Institutes and Commentaries.

Samuel M. Shoemaker is the author of a number of popular books and the gifted Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He is known for his effective leadership of laymen and his deeply spiritual approach to all vital issues.