Designer Cult
The watchful folks at Jesus People USA are now warning of a new religious movement, founded by a Reverend Watson T. Yup, that is attracting thousands.
Reverend Yup’s “eat, drink, and be trendy” gospel has become a way of life for many who take up their credit cards and follow him.
The devotees—mostly young, upscale, and professional—can be seen worshiping their stomachs at five-star restaurants, wearing their distinctive apparel, which features other people’s names stitched onto hip pockets. They do their fund raising at well-appointed offices and studios in any major metropolitan area.
“Wats Yup has changed my life,” said one follower, looking up from his L. L. Bean catalog. “I’ve learned to seek the triune deity: Latest, Best, and Most.”
Little is known about Yup himself, although rumors indicate he lives in a resort condo and performs a daily spiritual discipline known as “brunch.”
Some parents of Yuppies are concerned, but none as yet have hired deprogrammers to kidnap their offspring from the health club and force them to think for themselves.
“I don’t know where we went wrong,” said one mother. “My son slaves his life away just to be recognized by a certain maître d’ named Henri.”
So far, the Yupification Church has avoided the wrath of conservative church groups, but if things continue onward and yupward, that situation could change.
EUTYCHUS
Latent Anti-Catholicism?
One gets the distinct taste of sour grapes in the jeremiad against the draft on Catholic social teaching [Editorial, March 1] and wonders if this is (a) latent anti-Catholicism or (b) envy at the fact that such a letter will be “read, marked, learned and inwardly digested” by the faithful whereas a similar epistle by the NAE or the NCC would be ignored, if not dropped down the memory hole completely.
MSGR. GORDON D. WIEBE, S.S.C., PH.D.
Catholic Apostolic Church of America
Hayward, Calif.
The strength of Kantzer’s critique came in his concluding remarks. But I object to the implication that the Catholic church’s position on birth control is a cause for embarrassment. As a Protestant, I am embarrassed that we have not understood this issue as completely as the Pope.
LEILA ZAFFINI
Columbus, Ohio
I have reread the pastoral: it does not call for unilateral disarmament. It does address the buildup of weapons to the point we have reached, where the U.S. and Russia can obliterate each other many, many times over.
REV. WARD MCCABE
St. Mark’s Church
Clara, Calif.
Kantzer must have been cut out of the fabric of Fackre’s work, The Religious Right & Christian Faith. A more suitable topic on which to write may be “Pastoral Letters and Realities of Faith.” Perhaps it is time God is treated as the deity people worship and not the nation in which we live.
REV. K. EDWARD BRANDT
Newport First Church of God
Newport, Pa.
Peck’s Poor Theology
Ben Patterson’s review of Scott Peck’s poor theology is well taken [“Is God a Psychotherapist?” Mar. 1]. Objective theology never has been and never will be the handmaiden of psychotherapy. In referring to Satan as an “it,” Peck declares that the Devil’s cleverest wile is still around. He does not exist.
JAMES SAXMAN
Tacoma, Wash.
Hesitant Evangelicals?
Your excellent report on the sanctuary movement [News, Mar. 1] will help all Americans to understand what is going on. Having been involved in helping refugees for several years before the movement began, I was surprised to learn that evangelicals have been hesitant to join. This is not our experience; at a recent national symposium, evangelicals were very much in evidence.
CHARLES TROUTMAN
Tucson, Ariz.
True Humanism
Robert Webber’s review [“Reason, Religion, and the Right to Disobey,” Mar. 1] of Packer and Howard’s Christianity:The True Humanism is itself humanistic (not that Webber would deny it). It centers ultimate value on man, not Christ, as though Christ created the world to fulfill man rather than to glorify Himself. It demonstrates the internal contradiction of the term “Christian humanism.” Webber unintentionally demonstrates the danger of defining humanism differently from secular humanism. Merely disagreeing with the Manifestos does not Christianize humanism—Webber, Packer, and Howard notwithstanding.
NEAL FRAY
Longview, Tex.
Shelton Before Mcintire
The News item, “Supreme Court Prevents Shelton College from Granting Degrees” [Feb. 15], gives an erroneous impression that the school is only now attempting “to become a degree-granting institution,” and was “founded by … Carl McIntire.” The school existed as Shelton College for five years before McIntire took it over; for 43 years before that it served several generations of day and evening school students as the National Bible Institute, a degree-granting institution in New York City under the presidencies of founder Don O. Shelton (1907–41) and J. Oliver Buswell, Jr. (1941–55).
It was William Whiting Borden who, appointed to the board of directors in 1910, helped to guide the fledgling school through its early years. Under Buswell the growing curriculum was approved and registered by the New York State Board of Regents in 1950, as the National Bible Institute became Shelton College, adding the B.A. to the Bible and Religious Education degrees.
JAMES O. BUSWELL III, PH.D.
William Carey International University
Pasadena, Calif.
Lincoln, Yes! Vidal, No!
Mark Noll marred his especially good article [“The Perplexing Faith of Abraham Lincoln,” Feb. 15] by mentioning Gore Vidal’s assessment of Lincoln’s religion. Vidal is not even worthy to be spoken of in the same breath with Abraham Lincoln.
ELIZABETH CORAMAN PAYNE
Bridgewater, Va.
What you ask on page 16 of the February 15 issue is remarkable. You say, respecting the death of Mr. Lincoln, that “five weeks after he delivered this address on March 4, 1965, Lincoln was dead—and American politics returned to ‘normal’ ”! Welcome to the club of those of us who are not perfect ourselves.
REV. HAROLD A. HARRIS
University Heights Cumberland
Presbyterian Church
Tampa, Fla.
Sheep In Wolves’ Clothing
The Bible is clear concerning how believers are to deal with wolves in sheep’s clothing, but how are we to deal with sheep in wolves’ clothing? Heavy metal rocker Michael Sweet made a comment [“A Christian ‘Heavy-Metal’ Band …” Feb. 15] which creates irreconcilable tension for the Christian mind: “We’re here to show people you can look this way … and you can let Jesus be the Lord of your life.” Sweet exposes his own error when he claims that “the problem with other religious rockers is that their theology is stronger than their music.”
KELLY KREPS
Stanfordville, N.Y.
James Hitchcock notes in What Is Secular Humanism that rock music assaults people at a deeper, unconscious level. Stryper’s heavy metal music (not lyrics) has the same effect on the unconscious level of young people.
There are right and wrong ways to present the gospel of Jesus Christ; rock music is perverting “the right ways of the Lord.”
DAVID A. NOEBEL
American Christian College
Tulsa, Okla.
As a young person I can understand the desire to want to be associated with the world. But this is contrary to the teachings of the Bible. The Christian world as a whole has forgotten what it is to please God. They just please themselves, then add Jesus in where he fits.
JEANETTE R. HUGHES
Miami, Okla.
Our missionaries bringing the gospel to the world do not dress as witch doctors to convert the natives. The rock trend in the church today is a “Trojan horse,” made of iron and clay, held together with neologism. This maverick horse is full of compromise and appeasement to the world, the flesh, and the Devil.
W. R. DUNN
Bellingham, Wash.
Please cancel my subscription. An article about a Christian heavy metal band is the same as writing about a “Christian” physician who performs abortions and says he makes an impact on the murderers of America who also perform abortions.
WILLIAM T. PRATT
Oconamowoc, Wis.
Inconsistent?
I just don’t understand! One minute you are condemning pornography [Editorial, Feb 15] and the next you are reviewing two films that are highly suspect for viewing by any Christian. My call to CT is not only for consistency, but for a standard of morality that reflects those of the Master.
ED FELTER
First Church of the Nazarene
Placentia, Calif.
Seminary Training For Whom?
I’ve been gripped by reading Ward Gasque’s “Must Ordinary People Know Theology?” [Feb. 1], I concur that theology must not be limited to the pastor or other leaders of the church. Yet I disagree with a major point: a seminary should not broaden its curriculum to accommodate all men and women. As a seminary student, I have come to a basic understanding of the reason for a seminary education: for the training and education needed to properly lead the church, an education should focus on languages, theology, and exposition.
Too often programs are expanded to include courses designed to attract people. This is not to say “laity” should be excluded. But seminary should remain for those going into full-time ministry.
JAMES A. LADD
Alhambra, Calif.
I wasn’t aware that ordinary people were executives of large corporations, business people, doctors, nurses, lawyers, educators, bankers, journalists, actors, and homemakers. I sort of thought they were more like farmers, fishermen, laborers, the unemployed, the silent sufferers.
REV. JOHN MERKS
Gander Baptist Church
Gander, Newfoundland, Canada
While the article discussed seminary training for “lay ministers,” which is a nonbiblical designation, it misses focusing on the proper arena for instruction: the local congregation. The encouragement to teach the Bible is missing at this level, yet practically speaking it is the best place for this instruction. The evidence of this abysmal failure is before all of us.
LEONARD WARREN
Escondido, Calif.
Is The Ats Out Of Date?
Mr. Frame [“Cheap Degrees: Are They Worth It?” Feb. 1] appears to take for granted the quite new ATS [Association of Theological Schools] standards and criteria. The ATS, as presently structured, is out of date, out of touch with the needs of churches, ministers, and seminary professors.
I have all of their “professional qualifications,” and more, from “top ten” institutions (Pomona College, Hartford Seminary, Boston University School of Theology, University of Edinburgh, Tübingen University), to which I pay high tribute. But what prepared me to answer God’s call was not my degrees. An effective minister or teacher in [any] denominational school must be called—of God, by a people of God. Dwight L. Moody and Charles G. Finney had no “ATS degrees.”
DR. HENRY DAVID GRAY
American Congregational Center
South Pasadena, Calif.
Crucial Added Information
We were pleased to read the item in North America Scene [Feb. 1] regarding the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a lower court’s ruling that a Schenectady, New York, church is not subject to jurisdiction of presbytery or the Presbyterian Church (USA). One crucial bit of information should have been included: the formation of the Schenectady congregation predated the establishment of both the presbytery and Presbyterian Church (USA). This would warn other congregations who might be considering a pullout.
HELEN E. ZECHER
Syracuse, N.Y.
Finding God In Physics
CT, if anyone, should be able to address the new physics with clarity, thought I. But Allen Emerson’s article [“A Disorienting View of God’s Creation,” Feb. 1] left me frustrated. I can’t be the only one who has come to faith and vision of the grandeur of God precisely through the pursuit of these concepts in physics. Not only that, but as I’ve discovered language and metaphors apprehensible by those without scientific training, I’ve seen others’ visions of the Creator God stretched.
KAREN COOPER
No address given
Allen Emerson’s final statement was well taken: we need to realize anew how majestic God is.
MARIAN BRAY
Santa Ana, Calif.
I must challenge some interpretations that need major revision due to an unfortunate mixture of quantum physics with Einstein’s Special Relativity. Extensive research in the worldwide professional literature since Einstein’s death in 1955 reveals denials or severe criticisms of Einstein’s Special Relativity by at least a 2/1 ratio.
Emerson should also define “instantly” more precisely. If really instantaneous, cause and effect would indeed be confused. However, with Einstein’s velocity of light exceeded, the quantum experiments do not necessarily violate cause-and-effect laws: this is because the nuclear velocities are still finite even at 75 times the velocity of light.
HENRY G. FOLLINGSTAD
Augsburg College
Minneapolis, Minn.
The grace of God and wrath of God sometimes seem to oppose one another. A tension exists between the concept of eternal security and the strong suggestion that the saved can be lost, which we also find in Scripture. These concepts seem to find a partial parallel in the ideas of new physics with light existing as a particle or a wave. These ideas seem mutually exclusive and yet both are true.
LILLA LANGFORD, M.D.
Hawthorne, N.J.
Instead of being disorienting, the “new physics” sheds some new light on orthodox Christian theology. The complementarity principle states that “two contradictory theories—that of waves and corpuscles [particles]”—must be held for light and electrons, as DeBroglie said. Their perceived nature depends on how we choose to detect them. In like manner, Christianity states that God is one and yet shows himself to us in three persons depending on how he chooses to reveal himself to us.
PAUL E. MOORE
Parsippany, N.J.
Erratum. We regret that the article by Eutychus, “Twelve Months of Sundays” (CT, Jan. 18, 1985, p. 9), infringed on the copyright of an article by LeRoy Koopman, “A New Proposal for the Church Year,” in the October–November 1982 issue of the Wittenburg Door. Our apologies to Mr. Koopman and to Mike Yaconelli, editor of the Wittenburg Door.
As Christians we have no necessary conflict with genuine science, nor genuine science with us.
WARD MCCABE
San Jose, Calif.
I certainly hope the author’s “theological acquaintance” spoke in jest when he said the validation of quantum mechanics would destroy his faith. Otherwise, he is laying himself open to unnecessary tragedy. For the life of me I can see quantum mechanics doing no harm to anybody’s faith in the God of the Christian faith, unless that faith involves a too-small concept of God.
JIM BRUNER
Wheeling, W.Va.
In order to more fully understand the relation of Christianity and physics, one must remember that, with few exceptions, the basis of physics was established by men of Christian faith: Newton, Gauss, Faraday, Lord Kelvin, Maxwell, and Rutherford, to name but a few.
MAX W. CALLEN
Minneapolis, Minn.
Emerson Responds To Critics
At the onset of the article, I mentioned several best-selling books by physicists on the new physics. I wrote that quantum theory has been plagued with controversy, haggling, and puzzlement. What I did was to present the views expressed not only in these books but in other places as well.
These views are visible and prominent, if not prevalent. [Some] professors do not agree with these views. I presented the situation the thoughtful Chrstian is most likely to encounter. I intended to help the layperson put things in perspective.
ALLEN EMERSON
Holland, Mich.
Letters are welcome; only a selection can be published. All are subject to condensation, and brevity is preferred. Write to Eutychus, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, 465 Gundersen Drive, Carol Stream, Illinois 60188.
