Eutychus and His Kin: August 25, 1972

2,000 YEARS BEHIND TIMES

Those of you who read this column every week will remember that I asked you to tell me in no more than 150 words what you would do if you were editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. (What you have apparently forgotten is that the magazine comes out every two weeks. See how much time I just saved you?)

It’s time now to share with you some of the results. Two things became almost immediately obvious. The first is that thousands of you were too busy with other things to respond. One reader commented that it might take a three-week vacation to read the letters, but actually two coffee breaks did it.

The second fact that became obvious is that some of you don’t know how many words make 150. A few letters ran to several pages.

One of the most surprising results was that over 40 per cent of the respondents were women. I guess I have more sex appeal than I realized.

Some frustrated writers suggested with an appropriate lack of humility that CHRISTIANITY TODAY would be improved by the inclusion of the products of their agile pens. Sorry, fellows, I can’t help you there. I have a hard enough time getting my own stuff by the editors.

One reader who apparently subscribed in response to the Living Bible offer suggested that we be consistent and have Ken Taylor paraphrase Carl F. H. Henry for the masses.

A number of you used the opportunity to push favored concerns such as anti-Communism, alcoholism, the charismatic movement, or fundamentalist abuse of grace.

A significant number suggested that we deal with more biblical topics. Several Would like the book section expanded and more non-theological works included. And there was a call for more controversy.

If there was any consensus, it was that CHRISTIANITY TODAY should say what it has to say more simply. One reader is still trying to find the meaning of monoglot. (Don’t let the editors know I told you but it means a person who speaks only one language. Who would be impressed with a writer’s deep erudition if he used straightforward phrases like that?)

One woman wrote that CHRISTIANITY TODAY is twenty years behind the times. That’s faint praise for a magazine that’s trying to be 2,000 years behind times.

MEASURES AND MEANS

The material you include in your report (News, “Company Policy,” June 23) is pertinent to one of the important mission issues of our time and very well written. However, I regret that in your roundup you have omitted reference to two or three of the most important exercises of this sort, with a positive outcome, in which this board has been directly involved.

We have just been through one round of a very constructive engagement with Mobil Oil Corporation.… We, of course, intend to carry the discussion forward and work with the corporation toward further improvement of its record with regard to racial justice in South Africa.

The current issue of the Gulf Oil Corporation magazine recounts the story of its annual meeting and carries a very useful article disclosing Gulfs activities in Angola, a matter on which our church has been much exercised. Here, again, we see a major corporation responding in a very positive spirit to approaches from the churches.

We believe that similar positive results can be hoped for from continuing conversations with General Motors, even though you indicate that the Episcopal-backed resolution brought into the stockholders’ meeting was overwhelmingly defeated. We are inclined to believe that stockholder resolutions may not always be the most positive means of inducing companies to examine their policies and to move toward socially constructive practices. Cordial and candid conversation with corporate leadership often seems more effective to this end. I must admit that in case of Honeywell this approach has so far been no more effective than that of the stockholder resolution. This board intends to continue an effort to enter into meaningful dialogue with Honeywell, but failing any positive result therefrom, we will then turn to other measures.

Executive Vice President

United Church Board For World Ministries

New York, N. Y.

DEMONSTRATION VS. JUSTIFICATION

Too bad the participants of the Strasbourg colloquy did not include Francis Schaeffer and Gordon Clark to set their reasoning straight (Current Religious Thought, “Technology and Eschatology,” June 23). When asked why one should choose the historic Christian theology, Ellul reportedly replied, “No justification of this choice is possible. You can’t find a point of reference which isn’t already in one system of commitment or the other.” He would have been on sounder ground if he had said demonstration instead of justification, for there is quite adequate justification for the Christian choice over all others. It lies in the excellent historical evidence of the New Testament and in the empirical evidence furnished by the intellectually and emotionally satisfying harmony of its Christian world and life view with basic realities. This harmony is particularly noticeable in accounting for the metaphysical nature of man, his social relationships, and his values.…

Although adequate justification of the Christian choice alone is possible, demonstration of it is not, but then this is true of all systems of thought, so Ellul’s second statement is correct. All arguments have first principles or a priori equipment which cannot be demonstrated; otherwise there would be infinite regress, demonstrations of demonstrations, and the argument could never get started. Therefore I disagree with John Warwick Montgomery, reporting on the conference, who seemed to favor a theology delivered from “a priorism.” Some a priorism is unavoidable. The reasonable thing to do is to choose the set of presuppositions which, as Professor Clark says, are consistent and provide plausible solutions to our most basic and important problems and give meaning to life. Choice of presuppositions is unavoidable and is an act of faith. But there is a vast difference between a credulous, ill-founded faith and one based on good evidence and sound reasoning.

Fairfax, Va.

FAITH PLUS HISTORY

I want to express my appreciation for Arlie J. Hoover’s defense, “Why History?” (July 28). It is a well conceived, well written, and noteworthy article, the point of which ought not to be missed by any serious Christian apologeticist. I call it to the attention especially of those who expend vain efforts trying to convert an unbeliever by arguing that history proves the existence of God, the Resurrection, etc. Without faith there is no proof (1 Cor. 1:18 ff.). And indeed with faith history is not so much a “proof” as a manifestation of what the believer believes already to be true.

Indiana University

Bloomington. Ind.

ADDING PROBLEMS?

I wish to thank you for the report by Dr. J. D. Douglas on the visit of Billy Graham to Belfast, “Billy Graham in Ireland: ‘He Put It Over With Love’ ” (July 7).

He quotes one statistic which requires some qualification. Presumably the biggest firm in Belfast reported to employ about 500 Roman Catholics out of a work force of 10,000 is the shipyard in East Belfast. This is a very predominantly Protestant area, whereas West Belfast has a very small proportion of Protestants. In certain trades and professions, Roman Catholics have a relatively high proportion of the personnel, as for example the hotel and catering business, wholesale and retail fish trade, shirt manufacture, and the nursing profession. It can hardly be suggested that in addition to the other problems Northern Ireland should be asked to adopt the practice of busing in its industry, as is being done for schools in the United States.

(REV.) W. J. MCILFATRICK

Newtownards

Northern Ireland

THROUGH THE GATE

As a Protestant, may I “protest” against Mary Anne Pekrone’s Humpty-Dumptyism in her news report in relationship to Leighton Ford’s Rochester crusade (June 9). The combination of the words “evangelical” and “Catholics” is self-negating, and is a form of doublethink. Christian Catholics, yes; evangelical Catholics, no.

If a historical-grammatical sense is to be retained, then I submit that to be evangelical is to know no higher authority than Scripture as illuminated by the Vicar of Christ (i.e., the Holy Spirit); whereas to be Catholic is to submit to the Roman pontiff as the Vicar of Christ.…

The greatest single weakness of the ecumenical movement is its failure to define words, thus giving the false impression that we are all climbing the same mountain to reach God, only traveling on different paths which all converge at the summit. I think John Bunyan explained this problem well in The Pilgrim’s Progress; some climbed the wall to get on the path, without passing through the Wicket Gate (John 14:6).

Greater Europe Mission

Sebastion, Spain

INVESTMENTS AND INTELLECT

Thank you so much for the excellent news story by Ed Plowman concerning Explo ’72 (“Explo ’72: ‘Godstock’ in Big D,” July 7). We are deeply grateful for it. However, there is one minor error which has been called to my attention by a number of staff members, which may cause embarrassment and misunderstanding to many delegates who were at Explo. All pledges made during Explo for the International Ministry of Campus Crusade for Christ will be used exclusively for that purpose—not for the television series, as stated in the article.… One other statement, which is minor to many but is one about which we are very sensitive, was, “Bright and other speakers pointedly stressed that faith must prevail over reason.” On the contrary, we feel that there is a superabundance of intellectual basis for our faith and that reason plays an important part in the Christian life.

President

Campus Crusade for Christ International

San Bernardino, Calif.

SUICIDE FOOTNOTE

Permit me to add a footnote to your excellent editorial “Up From Suicide” (June 9). The response you suggest (“be there with loving acceptance to give attention and dispel loneliness”) is certainly better than the threats, commands to grow up, and even encouragement to go through with it which well-meaning people say to suicidal people. I feel your advice, however, is too passive and ineffectual in the crisis of suicidal intent.

When the willpower of the weary suicidal person begins to weaken and he feels himself slipping into a death which both repels and fascinates him, we should arouse ourselves and actively respond to this suffering person. He is floundering in the surf and there is something we can do to help him from drifting out into the dark, deep waters.

1. When it is plain that we deeply care and do understand his feelings, we should explain that he is attempting to deal with his problem by means of human strength and that this approach cannot succeed. There is no doubt that he has made a sustained, heroic effort but no amount of willpower and self-restraint can hold him back from the suicidal act. He may be just bone weary enough to realize that he is defeated, that he is at the bottom of his life and that he will need to abandon his faith in himself as his highest power. To help such a person, one might say, “I don’t know—maybe you have had enough of doing things your way.” …

2. The most helpful thing we can do is invite the suicidal person to surrender his life to the highest power—God. This is the time to place his life under new management so that the impossible problems of his life can be God’s burden. This is the time to come into the kingdom of God and live under his control.…

3. If the suicidal person surrenders to God, it is important to follow this with a few specific suggestions. Perhaps you can go with him to apologize to a friend. Maybe he needs to write a letter of reconciliation to a loved one. Or you may suggest something as simple as meeting again with him tomorrow. Suggest actions because no one feels or thinks his way back to God.

I realize my suggestions violate most of what the pastoral theologians have taught me, but never mind. Walking with a person into the kingdom of God is the ultimate therapy and I can testify to the phenomenal success of this approach.

Chaplain

New Jersey Neuro-Psychiatric Institute

Princeton, N. J.

WORKING IN UPPER VOLTA …

I was … much surprised to find a serious reporting error in the July 28 issue that seems to reflect an amazing lack of research.… I refer to the short item in “World Scene” that reports entry of the Seventh-day Adventists into Upper Volta. The statement is made that there is only one other Protestant group working in this nation of 5.5 million, the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Even the most cursory check of missions statistics would reveal that five other evangelical missions have work of long standing in that country: the Assemblies of God, the Sudan Interior Mission, the World-Wide Evangelization Crusade, the Upper Volta Mission, and the Southern Baptists. The work of the three autonomous, government-recognized church associations and the six evangelical missions in Upper Volta is coordinated by the Federation of Evangelical Churches and Missions of Upper Volta. The Upper Volta Federation was among the first of all the evangelical fellowships to be formed in Africa.

Sudan Interior Mission

Fada N’Gourma

Upper Volta

GOD’S COMPASSION

I couldn’t agree more wholeheartedly than I do with your editorial in the July 28 issue, “Not Because They Are Gay.”

I am a latent homosexual. My twist of mind and interest I can trace back to some circumstances in my very early childhood. In my more youthful years I used to pray earnestly for deliverance from my peculiar temptations. Deliverance never came, but the Lord did, in large measure, grant me victory over them. Now I am happily married to a wonderful wife and have several darling children, with none of whom I have deemed it wise to disclose my problem, but who have given me a very happy and near-normal married and home life. Many, many times I have thanked and praised God for this. Had I, in my youth, been the object of what some are now calling “compassion,” I could now have been of all men most miserable. But instead, the Lord granted me his compassion—the compassion that enables one to recognize sin for what it is in his sight, but then grants him forgiveness and victory over it through the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit.

I have often wished that social conditions permitted latent homosexuals such as myself to reveal themselves so they could make more direct contact and be of more direct help to those who are caught up in the practice of this thing. This, for obvious reasons, I do not feel free to do. But those who think they can be acceptable Christians and at the same time practice their bent of mind need to face anew the Word of God on this subject, and also face the fact that God is willing and able to grant them victory, if only they will let him.

BODILESS BATTLEFIELD

Dr. Elzinga’s loveless cynicism was truly appalling (“The Demise of Capitalism and the Christian’s Response,” July 7). Perhaps as a market-system-demising intellectual he feels free to keep his distance from the relatively insignificant economic battlefield, happy that he need not tarry too long at the funeral of the loser. But how he can feel free, in the name of our Lord, to suggest that the paramount battle for souls has nothing to do with the labor of a shoe-repair man or a book-binder is beyond me. To state with such misleading objectivity that the shoe-repair man actually repairs shoes out of a narrow economic self-interest wipes out with one stroke every Christian shoe-repair man who has labored out of love for his Lord with great interest in his customer and in the quality of his work. Moreover, Dr. Elzinga implies that the souls which concern the Lord have little to do with this present creation which, in fact, belongs entirely to our Lord, soles and all.

After the funeral Dr. Elzinga will selfishly miss “the market’s benefits and accouterments,” but evidently he will feel no pain about the lack of visibility of Christ’s Lordship in human economic life. Nor, evidently, will he lose any sleep over the agony of his nonintellectual fellow Christians who spend their working days with shoes, books, and gas tanks. I am distressed with the author’s loveless vision of mystical battles fought by bodiless souls.

Durham, N. C.

The article by Kenneth Elzinga was most interesting. In general. I would agree with him. I think a person can be a Christian regardless of what kind of government exists. However, in one of his conclusions I could not agree. It certainly seems to me that as Christians we should make every effort to avoid having a socialistic or communistic, planned, controlled, centralized government, because we can see what happens in other countries in the world. It is very difficult to get Bibles in the eastern European countries and I suppose impossible in Communist China. Even those people who want them cannot get them. Paper is not made available. There are all kinds of restrictions that occur. The ability to build churches and to evangelize is restricted in various countries. Certainly we do not want to see that happen in our country. The further we go toward a controlled, non-capitalistic economy, the greater will be our difficulty in distributing the Bible and in having the freedom of evangelization.

Chairman of the Executive and Finance Committee

Genesco Apparel

Nashville, Tenn.

NOT IN ’72

Just this week a friend handed me a copy of your June 9 issue. I read with considerable interest the article on the Amish and their concerns re higher education and religious education (“Amish Education and Religious Freedom,” by Glenn D. Everett). However, I was profoundly disappointed in several of the observations made by the author.

I refer to the portion of the article which deals with the Beachy Amish and their founder. As a grandson of the founder Moses Beachy (not Noah, as reported in the article), I protest. I am fully aware that when one speaks of the Amish, one must often make generalizations because of variations within the sect from one location to another; however, some of Mr. Everett’s generalizations are entirely unfounded.… According to the story I got from my parents as I grew up, and according to unpublished and published materials in the Mennonite Historical Library, in Goshen, Indiana, the primary reason for schism was a difference in practice of meidung (shunning), which Mr. Beachy felt should not be carried out nearly to the extent that the Amish were carrying it.

Concerning higher education and the Beachy Amish, Everett observes that they are as reluctant to see their children attend public high school as the Old Order Amish. Not so! I have numerous cousins and friends who are teachers, nurses, and medical-school students who continue to be Beachy Amish. Ten years ago the statement made by the author may have been valid, but I cannot accept it in 1972.

Inter-American Missionary Society

Bogotá, Colombia

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