Termites in the House of God

True faith always rests on a foundation of true doctrine. It can never be based on false doctrine. True doctrine is no guarantee of true or saving faith, however; devils believe that Jesus Christ is God, but they are not saved.

Whoever denies the supernatural, for example, cannot have true faith. The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is a supernatural event. Paul says that if Christ did not rise from the dead, then our faith is vain and we are yet in our sins. Since the denial of the supernatural necessarily includes a denial of the resurrection, the man who denies the supernatural is devoid of true or saving faith.

A church is strong only when its doctrine is true. If it tolerates false doctrine, its foundation will crumble. If it does not root out the termites that destroy the foundation by false teaching, be they lay or clerical, it deserves to die. Moreover, if a church fails to exercise discipline and rid itself of false teachers, it in effect shows approval of them. Talk against error is not enough; the church must act decisively.

That termites have infiltrated the churches cannot be denied. That these false teachers occupy some of the most strategic posts and some of the highest offices, and have entrenched themselves in college, university, and seminary professorships, is also painfully plain. Survey after survey has been made of the theological convictions of the churches, and all of them have shown that false teaching exists in the major (and minor) denominations of our day. Some have more than others. But none is exempt. And the lesson of history is clear: termites breed more termites.

A good example of the growth of false teaching is seen in the apostasy of the Unitarian churches over the last century and a half. The literature of early nineteenth-century Unitarians shows their acceptance of theistic foundations. But to read the current literature is to see that the termites have destroyed any semblance of Christianity. In its place has come unadulterated humanism accompanied by agnosticism, atheism, and nihilism.

Paul says: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 4:3, 4). Fulfillment of this prophecy does not wait some distant future; it is upon us today. There are the fables of a demythologized Jesus propounded by Bultmann and his followers. There is the existential miasma of Heidegger, Jaspers, Tillich, Robinson, and Pike. There is a universalism that envisions the ultimate salvation of all men even as it negates hell, dissipates the holiness of God, and defies divine justice. There is a social gospel of socio-political involvement divorced from the blood atonement of Jesus Christ and the preaching of the Gospel of redemption. There is a psychology and sociology that teaches that men are what they are simply because of environmental factors, and that diagnoses society’s ailments as sickness rather than willful sinfulness. All this exists inside as well as outside the churches.

Who can deny that the churches are in deep trouble? No prophetic insight is needed to see that churches that emasculate the Gospel and trim their doctrine to suit the changing notions and comforts of men will eventually reduce themselves to meaninglessness. The churches will grow progressively weaker so long as their problem is not solved. And it cannot be solved if they continue to coddle false teachers and provide them with food and shelter. The churches cannot continue to be all things to all men without spreading further the condition that is sapping their strength and threatening their life.

Is there a solution? Surely we must believe that there is. What is it, then? First, there must be a revival of true religion among genuine believers. This will bring them spiritual power, drive them to their knees in fervent intercession for their churches, and give them the determination to do what must be done.

Secondly, there must be reformation within the churches, brought about and made possible by the efforts of concerned, regenerated people who will pay whatever price they must to attain this goal. This means that the termites must be eliminated. If they will not go of themselves, then they must be removed.

Only as discipline is returned to the churches and only as unbelief is cast out will the problem be checked. Reform must include a return to expository preaching in which the whole counsel of God is proclaimed and applied to the people of God. There must be catechetical instruction of the young. The Lord’s Table must be restricted to those who make a credible profession of faith in Jesus Christ. There must be a biblical base undergirding the churches that will be believed and enforced, one that will be broad enough to include all true believers and narrow enough to exclude those who are not. If this reformation does not come, then apostasy will be the end product. And apostate churches are no longer true churches.

It is late. Some think it is too late and that the churches are already beyond recovery. The termites have been hard at work, and the foundations are crumbling. “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?”

The Apollo 8 Stamp

The Post Office placed on sale this month the Apollo 8 stamp bearing the words “In the Beginning God …” It is a fitting official tribute to that memorable moment on Christmas Eve 1968 when the astronauts in lunar orbit read the first ten verses of Genesis to a world television audience.

Christians would do well to purchase the stamp in quantities and use it generously. For God to be given recognition on a postage stamp may not be the beginning of a national revival. But after all the setbacks the Judeo-Christian cause has suffered in recent years, such visibility in national affairs is a welcome change. It is a testimony God will honor.

Remembering When—And How

The generation that writes “Now” in psychedelic colors thinks its parents are overly fond of remembering when. And the generation that had to walk four miles to school (each way, in all kinds of weather) thinks its children are overly concerned with the “this” that memories are made of. Although memorializing the past cannot preempt acting in the present, remembering is not likely to be forgotten. In fact, when the younger generation becomes older, it will no doubt ply its children with tales of, “When I was your age.…”

But remembering cannot always be entrusted to unaided memories. When God instructed his people to remember his providence and his commandments, he jogged their memories with the Passover and other feasts, the ark, a pile of stones in Gilgal. And he reminded parents to keep the memories alive with answers to their children’s questions: “What do you mean by this service?” “What do these stones mean?”

Modern man still memorializes the past with stones—though modified now by sculptors and architects. This spring, thousands of visitors to the U. S. Capital’s monuments have recalled the valor and valuable contributions of early presidents Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln and of past protectors of peace represented at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Next week many more Americans will decorate less majestic graves of people who paid for their principles with their lives.

In addition to remembering their national heroes, Christians recall the courage and convictions of missionaries who pioneered in gentile Macedonia and heathen Africa, who were martyred in Ecuador and the Congo, who are captives in Chinese, Ukrainian, and Vietnamese prisons. Perhaps the finest memorial to them, suggested by Paul, is applicable to both sides of the generation gap: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.”

De Gaulle Steps Down

For all his eccentricity, General de Gaulle did a lot for France. Since World War II he has seemed to be the only man able to command the respect of a majority of Frenchmen for any appreciable period.

One wonders whether the issue of constitutional reform was so crucial that de Gaulle should have staked his future on it. But perhaps he realized that, even as the British turned Churchill out of office, so his people were weary of his leadership and wanted him to step down.

The France of de Gaulle is dead. We wish the general well in his retirement, and hope that whoever rises to lead France will seek to strengthen his country’s role in the free world.

Our Bulging ‘Barns’

One of the more interesting yardsticks of our national affluence is the constant shortage of storage space we face in our homes, schools, places of employment, and even our churches. We own so much that we don’t know where to put it. Our capacity for acquisition seems always to be one step ahead of our storage potential.

An important selling point for any home is whether it has enough closets. But we quickly use these up, along with trunks and lockers, and then we turn to buying more shelving and chests with lots of drawer space. In time we move outside and begin purchasing storage sheds and tarpaulins.

Next time you get to feeling blue about the minimal size of your income, and about all the things you think you still need and haven’t the money to buy, consider your storage space. But also take to heart what Jesus said in the parable of the rich man who had to build bigger barns to store his fruit but neglected spiritual treasure and in the end lost both.

On Political Candor

President Nixon changed his mind last month—and admitted it.

Moreover, he said flatly and publicly that he had been wrong earlier in April in refusing to appoint Dr. Franklin A. Long as director of the National Science Foundation because the Cornell scientist opposed the ABM system.

Quite aside from Dr. Long’s qualifications or lack of them, the incident shows a refreshing bit of candor that is all too rare in our sophisticated, image-conscious world. How often does a prominent figure confess that he was wrong? To be sure, politicians often change their minds. Usually what they offer the constituency, however, is not an admission of error but a rationalization or a complaint that they had been misunderstood.

Mr. Nixon is to be commended for this public mea culpa. We should not like to think that presidents habitually err, but they must be seen to be as fallible as anyone else. We hope the President’s candor sets a good example for others in public life.

The Appearance Of Impropriety

A judge’s official conduct is to be free from impropriety or “the appearance of impropriety.” So states one of the ethical canons of the American Bar Association. Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas, in receiving a $20,000 fee from convicted securities-manipulator Louis E. Wolfson, has at least been guilty of the appearance of impropriety.

Fortas has admitted that he received a fee from the Wolfson Foundation which he returned some time later. He said that the money was offered in the hopes that he would do some work for the foundation and that he returned it when he realized he would not be able to do so. This explanation leaves many unanswered questions.

At a time when the Supreme Court has been under severe criticism and the foundations of law and order seem to be crumbling, we cannot afford this blemish upon the integrity of our nation’s highest court. Although Fortas has strongly denied that the money was offered in exchange for his help in Wolfson’s problems with the government, his unfortunate conduct has created a situation in which, even if he is not guilty of lawbreaking, he has limited his usefulness. Under these circumstances the best thing he can do is to step down.

Whence Division In The Church?

The recent meeting of the 109th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States on several occasions evidenced concern that certain groups within the church were not promoting the peace, unity, and purity of the church (see News, page 32). One statement called upon Concerned Presbyterians, Incorporated, a conservative organization within the church, to “speak the truth in love.” Although the assembly took no official action, one overture came to the floor calling for an investigation of the conservative, independently published Presbyterian Journal, whose staff members were accused of continually striving to divide the church. Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi (a conservative institution controlled by Presbyterians but not officially under the jurisdiction of any church court) is to be the object of investigation by a committee appointed to investigate unrest in the church.

While the assembly was meeting, the Charleston, West Virginia, Gazette published a story based on an interview with Dr. William A. Benfield, Jr., pastor of that city’s First Presbyterian Church (PCUS) and chairman of a fifteen-member national commission drafting a plan of union for the Consultation on Church Union (COCU).

In the story Benfield is quoted as expressing a willingness to lead a division of his denomination into COCU if this becomes necessary. He said that he does not desire such a division, but that his commitment to COCU is so great that the unity of the PCUS is a secondary consideration. He spoke of the possible need of going through division in order to get union (you may need to run that one through several times).

In all fairness we must raise a question concerning the true source of divisiveness within this historic denomination. Neither conservatives nor liberals are eager to see their church divided. Division is a natural result of the fact that there are those within the church who are committed to move in different directions. To bring a charge of divisiveness against those who desire to maintain a commitment to the historic standards of the church is erroneous and unfair. Perhaps the real responsibility for division lies with those who would lead away from the traditional standards of the church into new or undefined concepts such as those embodied in COCU.

Dr. Benfield compared the “new Reformation” in the church with that of the sixteenth century, saying that both spring from the same two causes: “a sick situation in the church, and rapid changes in society.” He left out the major cause of the sixteenth-century Reformation—a return to the Scriptures as the sole and absolute authority in the Church. Those who embark on a path leading away from this authority will be responsible for destroying both the peace and purity of the Church.

Ulster Under New Leadership

Hopefully, the advent of a new prime minister in Northern Ireland will mean the beginning of better things for that land. Major James D. Chichester-Clark made a bold move for reconciliation by granting amnesty to those arrested in connection with recent turmoil. Protestants of Ulster should follow up this initiative with a great demonstration—of the fruit of the Spirit.

Church Invasions

The invasion of Riverside Church in New York City by James Forman and his revolution-bent allies brings a new dimension to America’s current unrest. It was not an altogether unexpected development. Indeed, one wonders if the seeds of the disruption we now face were not sown by some within the Church itself.

It is particularly significant that the campaign of the anti-church black militants (see News, page 29) should begin at such a citadel of liberalism as Riverside Church. This was where Harry Emerson Fosdick gained so much attention by denying the supernatural. Can it be that Fosdick’s modernism, his accommodation to the times, will now come back to haunt the church?

Even more relevant to the situation is the ideology that has been articulated by Fosdick’s heirs in the liberal ecclesiastical and theological establishment. They have been in the vanguard of those who seek to alter the structures of society, and some have even called for the use of force and violence to achieve their ends. More than once, assemblies of the World and National Councils of Churches have echoed with the summons to take up arms against oppressors on the right (but never on the left). A socialist bias to legislate redistribution of this world’s goods has brought encouragement to Mr. Forman and his kind. Now a specter of disruption hangs over the Church in America, and some of the liberal leadership is looking on in bewilderment.

Frankly, the social gospel has failed. An endless stream of resolutions has produced, not the ideal society, but rather a possible cataclysm that may engulf the Church and make it impotent for any good, social or spiritual. Would not the Church serve the world better by repudiating force and calling for the use of peaceful and spiritual means of change? Maybe the Church is increasingly irrelevant because it has neglected the teaching of Scripture that “the weapons of our warfare are not worldly.”

En Route To Tax Reform

A commendable policy statement on tax exemption has come from the General Board of the National Council of Churches. The board urges a revision of the tax laws so that churches will pay income taxes on business operations that have nothing to do with their churchly functions. It also asks that churches engaged in such commercial enterprises file full financial reports, and notes that it is good policy for churches to issue audited financial statements whether or not they are engaged in business activities. We agree.

Many church groups and other religious organizations are currently involved in intricate financial deals and, because of their tax-exempt status, enjoy unfair advantage over secular corporations. A number of Christian enterprises have seized upon the so-called Clay-Brown loophole, wherein debt financing is used to acquire commercial income property. The General Board policy statement proposes elimination of this loophole.

The gist of the document is contained in a joint statement submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee by the National Council of Churches and the United States Catholic Conference. It specifically asks, however, that “unrelated business” be defined so as to exclude income from royalties, dividends, interest, and so on. This is a more debatable question, and we wonder whether churches ought to be given continued protection of this sort. What, we ask, is the substantial difference between direct ownership of a business and ownership of its common stock?

J. C. Saves

Judy Collins saves experiences and emotions. She mulls them over, absorbs them, and, when she sings, draws on them to create moods and make the audience experience the moment along with her. But a thirty-two-word explanation of a musician’s artistry doesn’t make strikingly spare advertising copy, so her recent recording was heralded with a shockingly shortened grabber: “J. C. Saves!”

Slightly less startling is the Original Cinnamon-colored Maverick driven by a girl whose hair was reborn this morning and now stays in place with Super Natural hair spray. The fragrance of My Sin follows her into the market where she picks up a Miracle—salad dressing.

Christians claim no copyright on words like “saves,” “rebirth,” “supernatural,” “sin,” and “miracle”; we can’t restrict them to use by permission only. But we can mount our soapbox occasionally to say a few words in behalf of their biblical significance: Jesus, whose supernatural miracles marked him as the Christ, does indeed save men from sin and offer them rebirth into new life. Too long for an ad, maybe, but just about right for eternity.

The Blessed Hope

Prior to World War I many pulpits sounded forth the note of the possible imminent return of Jesus Christ to earth. At times this led to excess; in at least one book the claim was made that Mussolini was the antichrist of the Revelation. Since that time eschatology has taken a back seat, and as a pulpit topic in the Church the end time has given way to more mundane matters, such as feeding the hungry, preventing war, and binding up the wounds of the sick. Yet scholars have continued to write about the consummation of the age, when history will end. Unfortunately, much of the emphasis has centered on a consummation without a clear word about the physical return to earth of Jesus Christ.

Even a cursory search of Scripture will make two things clear. The first is that Jesus Christ is coming again visibly and in person. The second is that the Christian should live in anticipation of that coming, which will bring judgment in its wake.

Paul wrote to Titus about “awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity” (2:13, 14). Somehow the Church does not seem to be alight with this hope. Caught up in the crush of the problems of men, the Church fails to realize that while it may bring temporary relief, it will never fully succeed in solving these problems. The ultimate solution lies in the return of Jesus Christ, who will consummate history, correct every imbalance, and remove the cause—sin.

The Christian thus lives in a state of tension. Though he knows he can never finally solve man’s political, social, and economic problems, he also knows he is supposed to help in whatever way he can. Paul says that Christians are “to renounce irreligion and worldly passions, and to live sober, upright, godly lives in this world.” Such a life has both internal and external aspects. The Christian is called upon to be something in himself. He is also called upon to do something outside himself. What he is and what he does is inseparably related to his conviction that Jesus Christ is coming again.

Therefore let every Christian work diligently, for the night is coming when man can work no more. But let him also watch as he works in the assurance that his true hope lies in the return of the Lord of glory.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.