In Or Out Of The Circle?

The Church Before the Watching World, by Francis A. Schaeffer (1971, Inter-Varsity, 105 pp., paperback, $1.25), is reviewed by Donald Tinder, assistant editor, CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

Of the many issues currently dividing evangelicals, none has been more acrimonious than the question of what to do when one’s denomination becomes influenced by those who advocate doctrinal error. A Christian may freely move from one denomination to another when he changes his own doctrinal views. But what does he do when his denomination changes its mind?

The four basic answers have been to leave regretfully, to leave bumptiously, to stay in quietly, and to stay in to contend for orthodoxy. Francis Schaeffer used to take the second position. (In the thirties he left the Northern Presbyterians with Machen and soon sided with McIntire in the disputes among the seceders.) But for some years now he has advocated the first (having sided with those opponents of McIntire who broke from him in the mid-fifties). Schaeffer well knows two of the attitudes that he now decries: failure to love apostates as persons, and failure to love fellow believers who do not agree with the timing or manner of seceding.

This latest book consists of four essentially sermonic essays. The first concludes that “historic Christianity and either the old or the new liberal theology are two separate religions with nothing in common except certain terms which they use with totally different meanings.” Data to support this conclusion can be found in Schaeffer’s other books.

The second essay effectively marshalls the biblical evidence demanding the harsh but true conclusion that the theology of our day that “is only humanism spoken in classical Protestant terms” is spiritual adultery, “worse, much worse, than physical adultery.” This essay has already appeared as an appendix of The Church at the End of the Twentieth Century.

In the same book the other appendix was “The Mark of the Christian,” which was also issued as a separate book. It is necessary reading because in it Schaeffer contends for observable love among true Christians who disagree among themselves. Indeed, many do disagree with Schaeffer’s contention in his third essay that Christians should not be in denominations where false teaching is too prevelant to be disciplined. I definitely agree with both contentions, but, regretfully, I don’t think Schaeffer has made a strong enough case to convince those who don’t agree. He tells what those who leave or have left should be like, and this is needed. But the United Methodists and Presbyterians, the state churchmen of northern Europe and Britain, and others who believe in opposing apostasy from within their historic denominations are not given biblical reasons to change. Perhaps Schaeffer will address himself to this task, guided especially by the arguments he has found have actually worked in convincing individuals and congregations to secede in the proper spirit.

Article continues below

There is one glaring inaccuracy in the chapter. It is not true that only three of the larger Protestant denominations in America failed to come under liberal control a generation ago. Even today, of the fifteen largest white denominations (theological evaluation of the black denominations must be along different lines), six are conservative and three more have large conservative minorities.

The final essay is an appendix that presents what Schaeffer considers to be irreducible essentials of the faith. He describes them by the boundaries that should not be crossed rather than by exact formulations, over which there are legitimate differences. “There is room for discussion within each circle, but we must not forget that there is a circle to be in.” This essay provides a good starting point for discussion. Although I agree with the proposition, I would add that the circles themselves, as Schaeffer has drawn them, are also open to discussion.

On the whole, this is another stimulating piece of work, yet one that calls for further and more substantial offerings from the author to increase the likelihood of convincing many others of both “the principle of the practice of the purity of the visible church” and “the principle of the practice of an observable love and oneness among all true Christians regardless of who and where they are.”

The Fabric Of Exposition

The Thought of Rudolf Bultmann, by André Malet (Doubleday, 1971, 440 pp., $8.95), is reviewed by Robert D. Knudsen, associate professor of apologetics, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Even though nearly everybody wants to go beyond him, Rudolf Bultmann is still one of the best for the theological student to read if he wants to grasp the tendencies of contemporary theology. The reader may differ sharply with him; yet he can only be amazed at the deftness of erudition with which Bultmann weaves his reinterpretation of the gospel message together with threads of thought to which modern man has been attached to form a complete theological system.

Article continues below

Bultmann himself gave enthusiastic endorsement to Malet’s book. The work must certainly rate among the best expositions of Bultmann’s thought. It is precisely that, an exposition; it offers almost no criticism of Bultmann. According to Malet, Bultmann has successfully carried out his task of liberating the true gospel message, of letting it be seen in its true proportions so that it can be efficacious for modern man. The evangelical will have to take issue with this conclusion; nevertheless, he will profit immensely if he takes this genial compendium in hand as a guide to the reading of Bultmann himself, and also as a stimulant to comparing Bultmann’s position with those of other contemporaries.

An important qualification Malet has as an expositor of Bultmann is his thorough acquaintance with the background (“ontological”) of Bultmann’s thought. A definite lack in this area vitiates most discussions of Bultmann, including those of the bulk of conservative theologians; the result is usually an exposition that skims the surface and a criticism that largely misses the point. If one is to believe Malet himself, this failure is one that even the most renowned theologians have not escaped. Note his excoriation of Karl Barth, whom he flays for his “clumsiness” of exposition. If the orthodox theological student is to take seriously the advice of such staunch predecessors as the divines of Old Princeton, he ought to acknowledge that understanding an opponent’s position and being able to expound it clearly should be prerequisites to the assumption that one has some right to criticize it.

Even in a much longer review, it would be impossible to recapitulate what Malet says about the background of Bultmann’s thought. What the reviewer can do, however, is to report that what Malet says is very exact. The serious student can use Malet’s book to check out his own interpretations as he begins to penetrate into Bultmann’s world of thought.

An important aspect of Malet’s exposition bears some comment here. His presentation, as every good one must, involves an incisive and well thought-out interpretation. He views Bultmann’s work as an attempt to discover a proper conceptual schematism (Begrifflichkeit) for getting at the true gospel message. This takes place in the context of a hermeneutic of the “objectified” and “mythological” writing of the New Testament, in which form this message comes to us from the confession of the early Church. It is especially Martin Heidegger, Bultmann feels, who has provided us with the conceptuality in which this message can be understood and made relevant, because he offers us a penetrating, uncommitted description of what man is, as one who is open to what is beyond him (to “being”). Grant that Christians, including Christian theologians, have as a matter of fact related themselves to Jesus Christ; it is of the utmost importance that they have available an adequate conceptuality in which to understand this encounter. Malet interprets Bultmann, as Bultmann himself wants to be interpreted, as being first of all a theologian, in the sense that he lays bare the gospel message in which the encounter with Jesus Christ is enshrined and in the medium of which it occurs even today. He will not admit that he has imposed a philosophy, even the philosophy of Heidegger, on this original, eschatological message. The conceptuality (Begrifflichkeit) is regarded to be simply a means of understanding and opening up the gospel message, which is intact and operative even apart from it.

Article continues below

Malet presents a sophisticated interpretation of what Bultmann intends and how he understands the relation of the Gospel to theology and to ontological analysis. However, it is my conviction that if one allows himself to be swept along with this interpretation, he does so at his own peril and at the risk of undermining the Gospel. This supposedly neutral conceptuality must be unmasked as not being neutral at all; it takes a stance toward the Gospel, and that a negative one. Far from explicating the Gospel, this stance in effect denies it. The conceptuality that Bultmann uses, in the line of Heidegger, must be subjected to a critique that lays bare its ultimate religious presuppositions. Such a critique would show, I believe, that this conceptuality capitulates to the spirit of the age and distorts the Gospel.

Let me cite one example. Bultmann’s position entails that there must be an opposition of the event of encounter in Jesus Christ to a supposed intellectualizing of the gospel message into doctrines that are to be believed, and the elevating of certain events in space-time into events whose occurrence one must accept if he is truly to believe the Gospel. This opposition plays such a role in the thinking of Bultmann and others that they reach even into the writings of the apostles themselves to criticize them for sometimes falling prey to the temptation of “objectifying” the gospel message. Far be it from us to say that the Gospel and our relation with Christ is an intellectual affair. It is a matter of living commitment, of response to what God has done in Christ. But at the same time this relation involves what God has done and accepting his own interpretation of what he has done. This requires an intellectual grasp, be it ever so simple.

Article continues below

The believer will not reject Paul’s admonition to Timothy, “Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine …” (1 Tim. 4:16). And if accepting this means the believer must worship God in a fashion that in the eyes of Bultmann and his enthusiastic expositors is contraband, then let him confess to it, as Paul did to Felix during one of his defenses of himself long ago, and confess also that he believes “all things which are written in the law and in the prophets” (Acts 24:14).

For Stimulating Reflection

Philosophy and Religious Belief, by George F. Thomas (Scribner, 1970, 363 pp., $10), is reviewed by Myron Miller, assistant professor of philosophy, Nyack Missionary College, Nyack, New York.

This survey of the problems in religious knowledge is readable, interesting, and stimulating, despite its length.

Its unifying viewpoint is a very philosophically contentious one: religious claims refer to objects that transcend human sensory knowledge, but they are knowledge claims nonetheless. Although these claims are partially substantiated in sense experience, evidence must be allowed from other sources as well. Moreover, the character of God does not prevent at least limited factual knowledge of him nor is the nature of man so limited that he cannot obtain factual knowledge.

The first section, “Grounds of Belief: Experience and Reason,” begins rather disappointingly by saying that neither phenomenological description nor linguistic analysis will achieve true statements about religious beliefs. The alternative for Thomas is the method of metaphysical thinking. It is not clear how this is a genuine third alternative, however, for both phenomenological description and linguistic analysis involve metaphysical thinking.

In general Thomas is clearer on phenomenology than on analytic philosophy. His criticisms deal with logical positivism or naturalism, as in A. J. Ayer and Gilbert Ryle, but he overlooks completely some very important work—of Alvin Plantinga, God and Other Minds; J. M. Bochenski, The Logic of Religion; and R. M. Martin, Logic, Language, and Metaphysics. Bochenski, especially, uses the tools of analysis to aid in a rational reconstruction of religious beliefs in much the same way that Rudolph Carnap argued for a “rational reconstruction of the world” for scientific explanation. Thomas is still somewhat frightened by an old boogyman, the notion that analytic methods are limited to purely scientific methods.

Article continues below

The next section, “God and the World,” presents a lucid discussion of pantheism with a good summary of the problem of evil for the theist. Yet Thomas again neglects to explain the methods of linguistic analysis. In refuting J. L. Mackie’s claim that the existence of evil precludes believing in a good God who is omnipotent, Thomas simply subsumes Mackie under the heading “determinist” and dismisses the argument. He sometimes gives the impression that identification of someone as “empiricist,” “analysist,” or “determinist” equals refutation of that thinker’s arguments.

Numerous turns of Thomas’s discussion would have been greatly strengthened by more awareness of the force of linguistic arguments. In the last section, “Man, Freedom, and Grace,” we turn to the nature of man. The discussion generally is clear, and the arguments in such problem areas as the relation of “soul” to “body” are neatly outlined.

There is an interesting obscurity, however, in Thomas’s treatment of Ryle’s behaviorism. After criticizing Ryle for failing to do justice to the distinctive nature of intellect and self-consciousness, Thomas offers as an alternative “the dynamic view of mind”—that mind is the subjective knowing, willing, and feeling activity of a unified person. But it is just Ryle’s point to analyze the terms knowing, willing, feeling, in order to determine their reference. Nowhere does Thomas explain how his alternative avoids a possible behavioristic interpretation after a Rylean fashion. We can and should avoid Ryle’s behaviorism, but not by baptizing the nest of problems with another name. A better analysis of Ryle’s difficulties can be found in Charles Taylor’s The Explanation of Behavior.

The book ends with a discussion of the relation of faith to reason; again Thomas gives a neat outline of the views of several philosophers and theologians.

The author’s systematic way of handling the material in each of the chapters makes this an excellent supplementary text for courses in the philosophy of religion as well as a stimulating guide for the reflective person interested in such problems. An added feature is that Thomas includes some discussion of the philosophical import of Eastern, specifically Hindu, beliefs. The book is highly recommended to the reader who is always ready to ask the author, “Why so?”

Article continues below
In The Journals

For those who want to find out what evangelicals are writing, a marvelous aid is the Christian Periodical Index (910 Union Road, Buffalo, N. Y. 14224; $15 a year), which is now appearing quarterly, cumulated annually and every five years. Currently thirty-two journals are indexed.

The Post-American (Box 132, Deerfield, Ill. 60015; $2 a year) is a quarterly tabloid for the expression of radical commitment both to Christ as personal Saviour and to the biblical call for social justice. It decries the captivity of the churches to an unbiblical Americanism.

Another attempt to launch a periodical for the charismatic movement of our times has produced the Logos Journal (185 North Ave., Plainfield, N. J.; $3 a year, bi-monthly). The September–October issue includes the articles “Why Tongues” and “Why Did God Baptize You in the Spirit.”

A twelve-page monthly tabloid of book reviews has just begun, The Review of Books and Religion (Box 2, Belmont, Vt. 05730; $3.50 a year). Reviewers are generally from the denominations in the ecumenical movement.

With all the talk about the philosophy of Whitehead and Hartshorne, a journal devoted to it is certainly in order. The first issue has appeared recently of the quarterly Process Studies (1325 N. College Ave., Claremont, Calif. 91711; $6 a year).

Newly Published

First and Second Corinthians, by F. F. Bruce (Oliphants, 262 pp., £ 3.5). Another commentary by Bruce is always welcome. Perhaps this volume in the “New Century” series will find an American publisher.

Atlas of the Biblical World, by Denis Baly and A. D. Tushingham (World, 208 pp., $12.95). Much, much more than a set of maps. Dozens of well-chosen illustrations and a well-written and -indexed text enhance the value of this work.

Commentary on the Gospel of John; by Leon Morris (Eerdmans, 936 pp., $12.50). Will probably be recognized as the best recent commentary by an evangelical. A volume of the “New International Commentary.”

Faith on Trial in Russia, by Michael Bourdeaux (Harper & Row, 192 pp., $5.95). One of the best writers on Soviet religion gives a good account of the evangelicals generally called “Baptists” in that land. Treats fairly the division among them over degree of cooperation with the state.

Governing Without Consensus, by Richard Rose (Beacon, 567 pp., $12.50). An American teaching in Scotland writes on Northern Ireland. Much of the study is based on intensive interviews.

Article continues below

Religious Institutions, by Joan Brothers (Humanities Press, 104 pp., paperback, $2.50). One of a series of books on the social structure of modern Britain. Includes chapters on social class, role of the minister, and kinds of participation.

Grace, Guts, and Goods, by C. S. Calian (Nelson, 161 pp., $4.95). A challenge to affluent Christians to get involved personally with the concerns of the world’s “have-nots.” It takes “guts” to risk frustration without reward to further justice and progress. The author says Christ is the only reliable guide for this task.

A Parsing Guide to the Greek New Testament, compiled by Nathan E. Han (Herald, $12.95). Verse by verse, in biblical order, each verb is fully parsed. Much more accurate and much easier to use than Bagster’s Analytical. Struggling students will rise up and call Han blessed!

Healing and Wholeness, edited by D. Wayne Montgomery (John Knox, 240 pp., $7.50). A collection of thirty-two articles originally published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Examples: “Physicians, Clergymen, and the Hospitalized Patient,” “Sex and Mental Health on Campus,” “Ethical Guidelines for Organ Transplantation,” “Religion and Psychiatry.”

Palestinian Parties and Politics that Shaped the Old Testament, by Morton Smith (Columbia, 348 pp., $9). A much revised Th.D. thesis seeking to determine by whom and why the documents we know as the Old Testament were assembled.

The Church of Our Fathers, by Roland H. Bainton (Scribner, 222 pp., paperback, $2.65). Reprinting of a work first published in 1941 by a renowned church historian. A survey of the Christian past ably written for younger readers.

What Theologians Do, edited by F. G. Healey (Eerdmans, 354 pp., paperback, $3.95). An introduction to the various branches of theological study. Thirteen British professors contribute a chapter each on such topics as Old Testament, philosophical theology, worship, and applied theology.

Samuel Davies: Apostle of Dissent in Colonial Virginia, by George William Pilcher (Tennessee, 229 pp., $9.75). He lived only thirty-seven years, but during the mid-eighteenth century Samuel Davies was one of the foremost evangelical leaders. This well-done, scholarly biography is long overdue.

Annointed to Serve: The Story of the Assemblies of God, by William W. Menzies (Gospel Publishing House, 436 pp., $7.95). A thorough account from the beginning before World War I to the present of the largest American Pentecostal denomination (some 8,700 congregations) by a qualified scholar and participant in the movement.

Article continues below

Broadman Bible Commentary: Volume 4, Esther-Psalms, Volume 11, II Corinthians-Philemon, edited by Clifton J. Allen (Broadman, 464 and 388 pp., $7.50 each). Latest additions to a major commentary series.

Ministries of Dialogue, by Henry Clark (Association, 224 pp., $6.95). Describes the efforts of various church organizations in cities across the country to make an impact on social problems of our day. Interesting and informative.

I Understand: A Handbook for Counseling in the Seventies, by Edmund J. Elbert (Sheed and Ward, 289 pp., $6.95). Attempts to help the counselor honestly say, “I understand.” The author includes specifics of certain problems as well as theory.

Jesus, by Eduard Schweizer (John Knox, 200 pp., $7.50). Though written for the educated general reader rather than the specialist, this book is probably best read only by those who are well grounded in the work of more evangelical scholars.

Der Markus-Stoff bei Lukas, by Tim Schramm (Cambridge, 207 pp., $13.50). An important new contribution to the monograph series of the Society for New Testament Studies. The author challenges the view of many recent scholars that Mark’s Gospel was Luke’s exclusive source for that part of the life and teaching of Jesus which is paralleled by Mark. The overall effect is to encourage a much more positive attitude to the trustworthy character of the Lucan writings than is current in some academic circles.

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

Our digital archives are a work in progress. Let us know if corrections need to be made.

Tags:
Issue: