Responsible “Witch Hunters”
The editorial “Open Season” [Nov. 21] raises a number of appropriate points. It tended, however, to underemphasize a necessary awareness—relative to those purporting to elevate our spiritual perceptions—of a number of vulnerabilities attendant to such endeavors. For example, in The Healing of Memories, David Seamands creates an association between himself and his work with the much-longer established school, which views occultic Eastern mysticism, regressive hypnosis, etc., as legitimate adjuncts to the Christian faith. In such cases, the energetic “witch hunter” must bear responsibility for the lack of an adequate objectivity and his own lack of discretionary responsibility. It is then that a healthy skepticism becomes the last resort of stability in the pursuit of orthodoxy.
REV. BURL RATZSCH
First Baptist Church
Akron, Iowa
The editorial employed the very approach it decried. Of over 400 quotes used in The Seduction of Christianity, James Dobson was quoted only once. Why did your editorial identify that particular one as “typical”?
REV. TIMOTHY L. MUNYON
Big Spring, Neb.
I am impressed with the balanced and mature Christian approach to “heresy hunting” in the Christian community. I feel that everyone who has written on this subject lately has left out one pertinent issue: Authors of such best-selling Christian books are paid money for the books that are sold. I am almost afraid to say it, but perhaps the motivation behind such hurried publishing of current books is the financial factor.
REV. CHARLES FOWLER
Las Animas, Colo.
I honestly think your remarks about The Seduction of Christianity were vindictive and grossly unfair. The book gave me a better understanding of the cults and how those demon lies can influence our own faith.
WILLIAM GRADE
Midland Park, N.J.
Three cheers and an amen for your editorial. I have no illusions that you will call off the heresy hounds, but perhaps you will help some Christians to be less gullible in following both teachers and accusers.
REV. J. S. CARLETON
McFarland, Wis.
Thinking Christians had better rely on God’s Word instead of “new ideas” when seeking answers in today’s haystack of “Christian” teaching. That’s the real answer in safeguarding the church against heresy.
GARY SHINN
Broomfield, Colo.
Dear Pat: Run for Congress
Charles Colson’s half-baked endorsement of Pat Robertson’s candidacy is premature [“Dear Pat: Winning Isn’t Everything,” Nov. 7]. Robertson has no proven ability; therefore, let him first run for Congress. Then I might vote for him. In the meantime, I’ll back someone for President who, like Colson, is adept at political arm twisting.
DOUGLAS FOSTER
Missoula, Mont.
Human rights abuses are not new
Thank you for the insightful articles on South Africa [CT Institute, Nov. 21]. Finding a peaceful means to dismantle “apartheid” is clearly a crucial issue for the South African church and one all Christians should be concerned about. I am troubled, however, that many Christians appear to see human rights abuses in South Africa as unique. Denial of basic human rights is a way of life for governments throughout black Africa, the Soviet bloc, and other parts of the world. American evangelicals need not imitate the selective indignation characteristic of our media and politicians.
REV. DAN ERICKSON
Lakeside Baptist Church
Wentworth, Wis.
Spiking The Altar Candle
With pregame chapels and postgame prayers, there is plenty of religion in pro football. What we need is more football in religion. We’ve already borrowed the 60-minute time clock. But think of the momentum that could be established during a worship service if choir members would exchange high fives after the anthem. Or if the pastor would spike an altar candle after scoring a few points with the congregation.
And how much more interesting services would be if we booed when pastors fumbled an illustration or decided to punt on a tough text. We could liven up sermons by using slow-motion instant replay to highlight and diagram key pastoral gestures. The two-minute warning would stifle unnecessary elaboration on the final point in the sermon. And close theological calls could be reviewed instantly. A committee could decide either to let the ruling stand or penalize the pastor. In down times during the service, ushers could lead everyone in a congregational wave.
These changes certainly will make people less anxious to rush home and turn on their TV sets. And of course, we would always leave the service having rooted for the winning side.
Cross-cultural missions: Still needed
K. P. Yohannan, in advocating the infusion of foreign money to assist national believers in evangelism [“Americans Can’t Win the World for Christ,” Speaking Out, Nov. 7], nowhere recognizes—in the words of the Lausanne Covenant—that “a reduction of foreign missionaries and money [italics mine] … may sometimes be necessary to facilitate the national church’s growth in self-reliance.…” In presenting the advantages of national workers over missionaries, he overlooks the fact that the majority of the world’s unreached will only be evangelized by cross-cultural missions—no matter what their origin. Yohannan’s fallacious contrast is like affirming that a Boeing 747 is cheaper and more efficient than a spacecraft. It all depends on where you have to go and what it takes to get there.
JOHN GRATION
Wheaton College
Wheaton, Ill.
That the church has grown as much as it has in mainland China since 1949 verifies Yohannan’s theory regarding the effectiveness of indigenous evangelism.
REV. THOMAS D. SUTTER
Santa Rosa Baptist Church
Pattonsburg, Mo.
Yohannan is unclear about what he means by a native missionary. If the word “missionary” has any meaning unique from pastor, or evangelist, it is that a missionary carries the gospel across cultural and often linguistic lines. Does he mean, then, that native missionaries are going to carry on this kind of ministry? The question is not just semantic, because if this is not what he means, then he must mean that these native missionaries are really national leaders trained in evangelism and church planting who will go to their own people to evangelize and establish local congregations.
This is a thorny issue for which no simple answers exist. There must be circumstances under which support from America can be given to national ministers without creating problems. Yohannan is right. We’ve got to find new ways to get the job done. But what he suggests isn’t so simple as it sounds.
DAVID W. WRIGHT
Vancleve, Ky
This is not an either/or situation but both/and. Our North American missionaries are increasingly being joined by missionaries from other countries and are serving in the capacity of evangelists as well as trainers of national missionaries. To suggest this is new strategy is not entirely true; it is an old strategy that has been implemented for years.
REV. DENNIS L. GORTON
The Christian and Missionary Alliance
Nyack, N.Y.
There is growing evidence that a substantial percentage of Two-Thirds World missionaries are having great difficulties adjusting to cross-cultural challenges. Not a few are returning home heartbroken. And is it true that there are few American missionaries working in evangelism-discipleship-church planting-leadership training? Yohannan is partially right—Americans can’t win the world for Christ. But then they never were solely responsible in the first place. The world church is.
WILLIAM D. TAYLOR
World Evangelical Fellowship
Wheaton, Ill.
About Christian Voice …
As chairman and founder of Christian Voice, I read the featured news story in the November 17 issue of CT with dismay and disbelief. To be attacked by one’s enemy is one thing. To be attacked by one’s brethren is worse. As the article stated, I am an evangelical Christian out of the Fuller and Wheaton camp. I consider myself to be in the mainstream of evangelical Christianity. Alleged ties to the Unification Church are distortions and simply not true—but the mere raising of this issue leaves the impression of truth.
The article was slanted, biased, and factually incorrect. It was out of balance in its heavy focus on one of my consultants, Gary Jarmin. It struck me rather strange that even though I am the head of Christian Voice and its founder, the article focused on a consultant and, only in passing, on myself.
America is facing its most critical time in history. Now is the time for Christians to work together, not to continue divisiveness and sniping that only brings pleasure to Satan.
REV. ROBERT G. GRANT, PH.D.
Christian Voice
Washington, D.C.
Surely the body of Christ is so badly fragmented, our ability to cooperate in contending with evil so rare, and our self-righteous finger pointing so common that the last thing Christ’s church needs is more self-serving back stabbing as represented by this article. Those who wish to “stand in the gap” and combat Satan are more than welcome in Christian Voice’s ranks. For those misguided “brethren” critical of Christian Voice’s ministry, we ask only two favors: one, please stand aside and let us be about our Father’s business; and two, judge us by our fruit.
GARY L. JARMIN, PRESIDENT
Jar-Mon Consultants, Inc.
Washington, D.C.
The contention that Christian Voice is a lone ranger organization, and the implication that it is on the fringe of—or outside of—true Christian faith, is unfounded. The men and women at Christian Voice work indefatigably to promote Christian values. They deserve appreciation, not scorn.
DORE SCHUPACK
Fort Washington, Pa.
True union—as Christ intended
As a born-again Catholic Christian, I received the November 7 issue on the Catholic church with mixed emotions. On the one hand, it was extremely informative (and accurate). On the other hand, I had misgivings at being singled out as different from other evangelicals and referred to as a “neighbor.” I am a regular subscriber to CT, and I am not a neighbor. I am one of you—a Christian first, who happens to be Catholic.
It has always seemed incredible that the learned leaders of all denominations are fully committed to the Lord and faithful to all of his teachings but one—that we are to be one body in Christ. We worship the same Lord and Savior, live by the same Holy Scripture, have the same promise of salvation, and have been given the same commission to spread the gospel. These are the fundamental truths to which we are all committed. Why can we not, then, put aside all these other differences, which are so less significant, and unite as Christ intended?
JEANNETTE WILLIAMS
Vienna, Va.
Are there two Roman Catholic churches? Avery Dulles is certainly not speaking for the Roman church of history. If you think he does, you’ve been taken.
LOWELL SAUNDERS
Biola University
LaMirada, Calif.
Recent events further underline not only the diversity, but also the turbulence and division in Catholicism. The Second Vatican Council (1962–65) forged a new direction and a wide-ranging challenge to the traditional tenets and practices of the church and its followers. The implications for a strong and expanding ecumenical spirit were also expressed. Certainly this fresh spirit of renewal and hope is what is most needed in Christianity and the world.
JAY ALLAIN
Northampton, Mass.
Arguing about “faith” and “works” “does seem to me like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most necessary” (C. S. Lewis, in Mere Christianity), especially since “it is God who, in his good will toward you, begets in you any measure of desire or achievement” (Phil. 2:13).
DON SCHENK
Allentown, Pa.
Works are not enough
Kenneth Kantzer’s editorial “Church on the Move” [Nov. 7] was well done. However, there is one major misunderstanding. You say traditional Roman Catholics’ “understanding of salvation places works over faith.” This is not what the church teaches. Although some individual Catholics may think or act otherwise, the church teaches that you cannot buy your way into heaven with good works. Faith is necessary for salvation, faith is a gift from God, and God commanded us to do good works.
EDWARD C. FREILING
Fredericksburg, Va.
Recently, Theological Students Fellowship, OMSC, and Princeton Seminary jointly sponsored “Evangelical-Roman Catholic Dialogue on Missions.” I participated, as an evangelical, for the reasons so clearly articulated by Kantzer. The spirit of God is moving—ecumenically—in a fresh way today. It should not surprise us that the most exciting development is the combining of evangelical fervor with the richness of the liturgy. This is a movement of mutual exhortation and edification.
WILLIAM L. MANGRUM
Theological Students Fellowship
Madison, Wis.
Hurrah for certain certainty
As a former public school teacher who now works extensively with home and Christian school organizations in Iowa, I was intrigued by the review of Alan Peshkin’s book, God’s Choice: The Total World of a Fundamentalist Christian School [Books, Nov. 7]. The reviewer, Paul F. Parsons, like Peshkin and most Americans (Christian and non-Christian alike), has a severely mistaken notion about the nature of most public education. The only real difference between fundamentalist and public schools is the nature of absolute truth. The former advocates certain certainty, the latter certain uncertainty. The intolerance of relativism in fundamentalist schools is no greater than the intolerance of absolutism in public schools. The difference is the fundamentalist school is honest about its position.
GUY RODGERS
Shenandoah, Iowa
Schaeffer: He knew where the wind blew
In reference to “The Judgment of Francis A. Schaeffer” [Books, Nov. 7]: History may well come to show all of the things Schaeffer was not. He was not a historian, he was not an artist, nor was he a philosopher in the strictest sense of the word. But neither was he a weatherman, yet he certainly knew which way the wind was blowing.
LARRY PAVLICEK
Richfield, Minn.
What’s in … initials?
My reaction to Eutychus’s column on November 7 [“Initial Impressions”] initially was that the writer is obviously a man of letters. How ingenious to capitalize on the initials of some of our celebrated Christian leaders! Perhaps you could sponsor a contest in which readers identify the names the initials stand for. The prize would be to borrow those initials for a day. You could call the contest, “Name It and Claim It.”
ROGERT J. TAMASY
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Don’t show me Eutychus!
Through the years I’ve enjoyed, endured, been provoked—and perhaps another score of emotions—by the contribution of Eutychus. I have, however, been horrified to see that [artist John] Lawing has been portraying him. Ironic, isn’t it? I like Lawing’s work, but I detest his—or anyone’s—efforts at portraying what Eutychus looks like.
It should be apparent that everyone has his or her own image of that impish probing … whatever he is. He surely doesn’t, can’t, wouldn’t look the way Lawing depicts him.
GLENN MATHEWS
Charleston, W.V.
The church in action
Initially, I was pleased to find that Church in Action had done an article on [my home church] Fourth Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh [Oct. 17, “The Church that Gambled”]. However, my pleasure soon turned to disappointment as the article really was about the current pastor. The fact is, the people of Fourth Church had already made many and repeated conscious decisions in these areas; some even before James Stobaugh started seminary. Most of the ministries mentioned were going before he arrived. What Stobaugh has done is what the church hired him to do as their teaching elder. I am glad he is helping the congregation to progress in their chosen direction. I know of their struggles and commitments to serve God and his people, even though it means accepting lots of changes and working very hard together. Is this not what is meant by the “church in action” rather than implying that much is due primarily to (and is on the shoulders of) one man?
DEBRA T. DELIVUK
St. Louis, Mo.
Who said it first?
Much as I enjoy your Reflections page, one of its recent entries should not go uncorrected. The passage from C. John Weborg [Oct. 3] attributes a well-known quotation about the Jews to A. E. Housman. According to both The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations and Bergen Evans’s Dictionary of Quotations, the author is William Norman Ewer. The verse has often been attributed to Hilaire Belloc, but this is the first time I have seen it attributed to Housman.
WILLIAM WEISS
New York, N.Y.
Clarifying a position
Following the CT News story [“Gay Rights Resolution Divides Membership of Evangelical Women’s Caucus,” Oct. 3], I was asked to clarify my postion on Christianity and lesbianism. Though I did not vote for the three resolutions of the caucus, I believe in the civil rights of all persons regardless of race, color, creed, gender, or sexual preference. However, I cannot endorse any sexual activity outside of marriage as a biblically sanctioned lifestyle.
CATHERINE KROEGER
University of Minnesota
St. Paul, Minn.
