WHERE THE SHEEP ARE
There is this friend of mine whose name is Charley, and who is very big in a great big company. This company sells electrical gadgets and electrical household equipment to millions of people, and it is up to my friend Charley to figure out how to advertise these wares on billboards and on radio and TV, not to mention magazines and newspapers.
He told me one day that he had made quite a discovery. He happened to notice that since they sold millions of items they must have been selling to some very ordinary people, and meanwhile he was spending all his time with very extraordinary people. He was beginning to lose his ear, or his touch, or his vocabulary, for the common man. In the morning he had breakfast with his ever-loving wife, a graduate of a very fine university, and we can hope that their table talk reflected some of this education. Then he joined a car pool made up entirely of nothing less than vice-presidents; and then he talked to upper-echelon men and women all morning about advertising; and then he went out to lunch at the club with nothing less than vice-presidents; and then he talked advertising all afternoon with the experts; and then he rode home again at night in the car pool with all the vice-presidents; and then he spent the evening in an exclusive community.
After his โenlightenmentโ he began riding into the city on a street car, standing up as often as he sat down and making it a point to engage someone in conversation. He took his coffee break at some hole-in-the-wall. He ate his lunch in a wide variety of diners. He began to subscribe to some magazines he had never seen before.
My boy Charley has had what one critic mentioned regarding D. H. Lawrenceโs writing: โshattering glimpses of the obvious.โ No company is very big, and indeed no company can stay big, that doesnโt discover ways of getting at that mass which serves as its base. Where are the people?
Depending upon where you are on the ecclesiastical ladder (letโs take another look at the fortune cookie) you might make a fresh assessment of the people you are supposed to be reaching. The Gospel is for the whole world, and we are constantly tempted to get clubby. Put the hay where the sheep are.
EUTYCHUS II
THE NEW PENETRATION
โOutburst of Tongues: The New Penetrationโ by Frank Farrell (Sept. 13 issue) was the clearest, fairest, most comprehensive presentation of the issue of speaking in tongues that I have read. I could sense no bias or prejudice. Such an article has been needed, and I thank you for printing it.
As one who left the ministry of the Assemblies of God many years ago, but remains sympathetic to the good work they are doing, I wondered why Mr. Farrell did not mention the rather large number of former ministers who have left their ranks. It seems to me quite significant in considering the over-all view of the subject of Pentecostalism that this movement has contributed many ministers to many other denominations, and they have found a satisfying ministry in the old-line churches.
Principal reasons for this exodus, I believe, are: first, the rigid, inflexible, unyielding doctrinal position regarding the work of the Holy Spirit which does not allow for any freedom of interpretation or personal convictions, and, second, such an over-emphasis on this one doctrine that a well-balanced ministry of the Word is difficult, if not impossible.
I hope evangelicals can move closer together in mutual respect, and in sharing โฆ ministries, for surely we have something of value to give one another. However, this is difficult so long as Pentecostals hold to their position that the only Spirit-filled ministers are their own. Having had several yearsโ experience in both camps, I would say that a great deal more tolerance and understanding and respect for a personโs personal beliefs and experiences is given to Pentecostal people by the historic denominational churches than is reciprocated.
My hope and prayer is that the doctrinal dogmatism of Pentecostal denominations, which serves to make all other Christians second-rate citizens in the Kingdom of God, will give way so that we can experience a fellowship of equals in Christ.
PAUL GASTON
Pacific Beach Congregational Church
San Diego, Calif.
REQUEST PERMISSION TO REPRINT CONDENSATION.โฆ
R. C. KLINE
Des Moines Tribune
Des Moines, Iowa
Very impressed with your marshaling of facts.โฆ The article is objective enough so as not to offend any serious Christian, and I think presents the evidence in such a way as to dispel the worst aspects of the problem.
WILLIAM KILMER
Montana State College
Bozeman, Mont.
I refer to Mr. Farrellโs reference: โA journal relates that in the entire state of Montana only one American Lutheran pastor has not received the experience of speaking in tongues.โ I donโt know what โjournalโ it is that printed this fabrication. Presumably it was some organ which devotes itself to promoting the phenomenon.โฆ
The truth is that there are approximately ten out of the 104 pastors in Montana in the American Lutheran Church who have at some time been enabled to speak in tongues. The majority of these are confining it to private devotion, as should be the case according to Scripture, if they are using it at all. As district president, I have tried to keep in close touch with the movement. I have not yet found one individual who came into โspeaking in tonguesโ entirely apart from some previous or preliminary instruction or promotion. I would not thereby rule out the Holy Spiritโs involvement, but it does raise serious questions whether it is a gift or an achievement. Where the user stays strictly by Paulโs advice to confine it to personal devotion it can help to deepen the individualโs spiritual life, unless it is not accompanied by a renewed hanger for the Word. Where it is plugged and promoted, openly or subtly, it is certain to be divisive and arouse trouble within the congregation.
R. A. DAEHLIN
President
Rocky Mountain District
The American Lutheran Church
Great Falls, Mont.
โข President Daehlinโs information is welcome. The journal cited is generally believed to have a record of reliability better than this instance would indicate.โED.
We believe that Jesus Christ instills new life in believers through the avenues of the Word and the Holy Sacraments and that baptismal regeneration is a lively wondrous fact of faith and abundant grace. We believe that super-exuberant manifestations of unintelligible tongues can never become normative for Christian experience and that such are neither necessary for Christian development nor necessarily even Christian.
KARL H. BREVIK
Bethlehem Lutheran Church
Kalispell, Mont.
Editor Frank Farrellโs article, which tried to be an objective review of the โnew penetrationโ in the main-line churches, actually marshaled the most powerful arguments against it.โฆ What we are witnessing is not โan outburst of tonguesโ but an outburst of spiritual power.โฆ The Scriptures plainly state (1 Cor. 12) that speaking in tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit.โฆ
JAMES W. BROWN
Mulino Community Baptist Church
Mulino, Ore.
One cannot adequately expound the Scriptures relating to salvation until he has obeyed the plain command to repent and believe in Christ. Neither can the Scriptures relating to the baptism of the Holy Spirit be adequately interpreted by commentators who have not entered into the realm of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit described by Paul.โฆ
With regard to the relative cessation of the gifts of tongues, helps, and governments alter the fourth century, it must be remembered that the early Church underwent marked degeneration in its purity and spiritual power during this same period.โฆ Is it not to be expected that with the increasing spread of the Word of God and its original teaching that the original purity and power typical of New Testament Christianity should reemerge, even with the Latter Rain of God outpouring his Spirit according to James 5:7, 8?
JAMES F. LA VALLEY
Pomona, Kan.
Although he took his editorial prerogative of leading the reader to accept his own opinions, his is the first such article I have read which did not assume that its author thoroughly understood this phenomenon without experiencing it, and [scoff] and [deride] the poor mental cases who had found this blessed experience. He reported the facts on both sides, and only then drew his conclusions.โฆ
He makes a distinction between tongues as in Acts 2:4 and โecstatic utterancesโ in the Epistle to the Corinthians. Pentecostal doctrine is that all such manifestations are languages. Some of course have been recognized as such, but as for the rest we term these languages also because we believe this is scriptural. A language of course appears gibberish to someone who does not understand that language.
JEAN NAVA
Springfield, Mo.
I would like to say I enjoyed reading this article very much. You see I have the baptism of the Holy Spirit, too. I received it way back in October of 1929. Brother! We were so persecuted in those days we had to have church out in the wide open spaces. But it is real and has been a blessing to my soul these many years.
JOHN BAVA
Davis, W. Va.
Thank you for what I consider to be the most objective article on tongues in a non-Pentecostal magazine. I think you have rightly pointed out the dangers and pitfalls, namely spiritual pride. I also think there is a danger of the movement taking on the proportions of a โspiritual fadโ.โฆ
There was no reference to the possible eschatological significance of the revival of tongues, namely the fulfillment of Joel 2:28โ32 before the second coming of Christ. Other facts still unknown to us: Is God preparing his Church for persecution and suffering such as the Huguenots and others endured? Is he unifying the true body of believers in the Spirit within the ecumenical church for a last great witness and ingathering?
โฆ I think there is danger in our categorizing the gifts, and saying some are inferior, some are superior. We must be careful not to deny the value of this very vivid New Testament experience in the life of believers. This downgrading attitude is what in my opinion has caused the Pentecostals to react with the unscriptural doctrine that no one is filled with the Spirit that has not spoken in tongues.
EUGENE L. MADEIRA
Allentown, Pa.
I would like to commend (with slight reservation) Frank Farrell for as objective a report as one could expect from a non-Pentecostal. This article was written maturely and fairly. Whatever may be said concerning the immaturity of much of the Pentecostal movement in the past fifty years, there have often been equally immature attacks made on the movement by well-meaning evangelicals. This was a refreshing deviation.
But โฆ the terms โbaptism in the Holy Spiritโ and โbaptism of the Holy Spiritโ are used interchangeably in the article. Most Pentecosals differentiate between these two experiences and, in fact, speak of three baptisms: into the body of Christ, in water, and in the Holy Spirit.โฆ
There is doubtless some tongue-talking that is satanic; surely there is also some that is merely psychologically produced. But these do not argue against the possibility that some speaking in tongues is a real work of God.โฆ
I feel it was unfair to categorically refer to the list of past and present evangelical greats as โnon-glossolalics.โ I would contend that several of these men experienced this work of the Holy Spirit, for some biographical material seems to substantiate this. Because they (and possibly wisely so) did not resound their experience, are we assured they did not have it?
JACK W. HAYFORD
National Youth Representative
International Church of the Foursquare Gospel
Los Angeles, Calif.
This is Christian journalism of the highest order.
The satirical reasoning of Dr. Farrellโs third from the last paragraph brings out in sharp focus both the arrogance and the fallaciousness of the Pentecostalsโ claim that only the alleged tongues speakers are Spirit-filled.โฆ In refutation of the โdoctrine,โ Dr. Farrell cites a number of outstanding servants of God who, as far as anyone knows, have not been tongues speakers: Calvin, Wesley, Moody, Graham, among others.
Now this sort of argument is of course a difficult one for the Pentecostals to answer, and in the past a profound silence has been all they could offer in reply. Lately, however, their strategy has changed: they are now beginning to claim that this or that Christian non-Pentecostal leader has spoken in tongues, among such being perhaps some of those mentioned by Dr. Farrell. They have not hesitated to affirm that Billy Graham has spoken in tongues.
MEYER MARCUS
Staten Island, N. Y.
โข To dispel what doubt may exist on the matter, it can be said here that Dr. Graham has not spoken in tongues nor in any way become involved in the tongues movement.โED.
You have packed into a short compass information which is most enlightening and helpful.โฆ I would like to order fifty copies.โฆ I have a strong interest in the subject of tongues.โฆ I have made some study in this area. For a time I felt that it was of God, but gradually came to feel otherwise.
D. R. LINDBERG
Puget Sound Chapel
Seattle, Wash.
Are reprints available?โฆ If so, what is the cost?
GEORGE R. WARNER
President
World Gospel Mission
Marion, Ind.
โข Reprints of the original article (โOutburst of Tongues: The New Penetrationโ) are available at 15ศผ each. For an order of ten or more the price is 10ศผ each. Write CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Reprint Department, Washington Building, Washington, D. C. 20005โED.
Frank Farrellโs summary of the new interest in the charismatic revival is commendable. It adds confirmation to my opinion that CHRISTIANITY TODAY gives superior unbiased study and dissemination to the new trends affecting our faith. The new-old phenomenon (speaking in tongues) hitting the mainline churches is, without doubt, one of these important trends.
The Christian Advocate of July 4, 1963, speaks to this trend in our Methodist Church in an article by Fred B. Morris concluding, โโฆ perhaps it is a real sign of hope.โ
In my first semester last January at Wesley Theological Seminary (Washington, D. C.) I heard that the student body president (1962โ1963, Elmer Frink), elected to this position by his fellow students because of his exemplary spiritual life, testifies to speaking in tongues.
I experienced speaking in tongues as a direct result of faith and prayer. I have always been interested in the increasing number finding this experience edifying, not only in the Methodist Church, but also in the other main-line churches.
CHRISTIANITY TODAY is my favorite, and I am continually made aware that my contemporary seminarians usually keep abreast with your penetrating commentaries on relevant issues in the Christian Church.
ALEXANDER BODA
Washington, D. C.
Serious โฆ is the implicit legalism that often develops among Pentecostal believers. Those who have not received this gift search their consciences in vain to find some reason why they have not been baptized with the Holy Spirit. Legalistic demands are sometimes laid upon seekers after the gift of tongues. What a tragedy, that a gift could ever be determined by human merit!โฆ
As Paul Tillich observes (in his lectures at Union Theological Seminary on the history of doctrine), the early Church drove the charismatic groups out of its fold when confronted with their doctrinal errors. Today the Church stands at a similar crossroads. Will it repeat this earlier mistake? Or will it receive this new outpouring of the Spirit as of God according to the Scriptures, at the same time correcting any errors and excesses by this same rule of faith and practice? The right decision of the Church now may herald a new age of spiritual blessing through an increased reception and exercise of the gifts of the Spirit.
GLENDON E. BRYCE
Calvary Baptist Church
Chicago, Ill.
Here in Oklahoma City are some people who are having similar experiences, and it seems to me there is a tendency on the part of such people to โseek the gifts of God rather than God, whom we see and know in Jesus.โ
DON SCHOOLER
District Superintendent
Oklahoma City District South
The Methodist Church
Oklahoma City, Okla.
I was โฆ surprised that he did not seem aware of the parallel between this kind of religious expression and so much of non-representational modern art. Most contemporary art is non-representational, impressionistic, non-literal, and not obviously even symbolic. It is an emotional expression of the experience of the artist in color and often lacks any sense of form. Contemporary artists stress the fact that it is not supposed to mean anything, but merely to cause one to respond meaningfully to it. It is authentic expression, and therefore capable of evoking authentic response.
Personally, I find it often dramatic, exciting, and stirring. I find myself searching for meaning in it, but often able to find none that is obvious enough so that I can have any assurance that I am not reading anything into it myself. I do not find it intellectually stirring, nor do I find in it any adequate guide to my own emotional development and expression.
DONALD SZANTHO HARRINGTON
The Community Church of New York
New York, N. Y.
I have been reading with much interest and profit your excellent survey of the new tongues movement. From the outset it has been my observation that for many there has come real dynamic and joy in the Lord, but always with little or no discernment (one gift of the Spirit is โdiscerning of spiritsโ) and very little understanding of the Scriptures.โฆ
Dr. Eugene Nida โฆ was here for our missionary emphasis week this spring and told of his effort to analyze the tongues made on tape recordings. [Dr. Nida] is one of the outstanding linguists of the world today, and he observed that the โlanguageโ was not a language since it had no grammar nor parts of speech but seemed to be only a repetition of sounds. A Midwest pastor who was converted among Pentecostalists, educated in their schools, and a pastor for a number of years was telling me the other day that he came to the persuasion that his experience of tongues was wholly a matter of flesh, a sort of โspiritual bingeโ which he could turn on or off according to his own desire. He then left the movement and has felt that he should not indulge in fleshly activities of this sort. All quite strange!
There is just one minor matter of correction of your article as relates to the brief reference to Wheaton. We have heard the report of โan awakening at Wheaton,โ but it has not been discernible to us who live here. A protagonist of tongues came to campus without the knowledge of the administration and held a small meeting. Later we learned that three students had received the โgift.โ Two of them came to Chaplain Welsh and me. Both were seniors and have graduated. They believed their gift to be of the Lord and that it should be used only in worship, never in public. The third person never did come to us.
A Pentecostalist pastor in whom I have great confidence telephoned me last spring to say that he felt he had to rebuke the person who had come here briefly and then was spreading abroad the word about โan awakeningโ because the report was wholly inaccurate. However, the substance of it has appeared here and there in the land, and one writer copies another apparently.
V. R. EDMAN
President
Wheaton College
Wheaton, Ill.
I want to thank you for โฆ this forthright and sane article on a rather touchy subject at this time.
IRA JAY MARTIN, 3RD
Berea College
Berea, Ky.
The contribution on tongues โฆ was magnificent.
JOHN BRATT
Calvin College
Grand Rapids, Mich.
