Labor Needs a Conscience

Labor has become a burly figure on the American scene. No one can fail to be impressed by this striding giant. But the impression left by the behavior of unions and their leaders at this point is that the labor movement in America has grown big and strong without “growing up.”

There are two things one notices particularly in connection with labor’s bigness. One is the huge appetite of the big, strong body. The other is the vast power with which the body stands its own ground or pushes others around at will.

Throughout its struggling years the labor movement endeavored to obtain for the workingman a larger share of the world’s goods. The endeavor, often very costly, has succeeded in improving greatly the workingman’s material circumstances. Shorter hours, better working conditions, more leisure, larger pay and other benefits have brought the laboring man into possession of a large share of the good things of life. These gains, however, have not resulted in a larger measure of contentment, nor in a happy and satisfying sense of significant achievement. They have merely whetted the appetite for more. Labor’s success at getting has sharpened a technique and shaped a spirit concerned almost always and predominantly with getting and getting more.

The overwhelming concern for getting has not been accompanied, meanwhile, by adequate concern for being and doing. The worker has been taught to think not in terms of the glory of work, the meaning of service to society, or dignity of the worker as creative and productive individual. Instead, the worker has been taught to think in terms of what he can wrest from the man who needs his skill.

This, when it is an almost exclusive way of looking at one’s job and predominant in the spirit of one’s approach to it, can do very little else than promote the spirit of thoroughgoing cupidity. The quality or measure of one’s work and sense of responsibility to one’s employer or to the society in which he lives are matters of little consequence. It is the getting that counts, and because of the preoccupation with getting, work itself loses meaning, dignity and interest.

This kind of thing lies at the bottom of the moral corruption that has become manifest in so much of labor union activities today. Dave Beck has been exercising labor’s fierce passion for getting, the more successfully because of his more favored position. Most of us are too angered at what we have learned to pity him, but it is a fact that Dave Beck is a sort of victim of the kind of cupidity the whole labor movement has been cultivating. He is in a sense the reflection of the mores of our times and our materialistic culture, and none of us can escape a measure of responsibility with him and for him.

This is part of labor’s great temptation. The very thing for which it was forced to fight, a share in the goods it produces, can, if this becomes an all-consuming objective, make of this giant a monstrosity—a big body with all appetite and no soul.

Labor’S Use Of Power

Labor has grown not only big, but strong. It had to be strong in order to maintain itself and to counterbalance the great pressures from management to which workingmen were subject. Labor has spent itself in courageous effort and has survived some tremendous battles. This struggle had in it something of the law of the jungle which permits survival of only the fittest. The labor movement has come out fit and strong and stands today as one of the major social and political forces in American society.

The possession of such vast power places the labor movement in a position of grave peril or of great opportunity. Power is peril if abused and misdirected. It is opportunity if put to the service of the community in a responsible way. Power is peril if there is no soul to govern, no conscience to set limits to it and give direction. Power has become peril to the whole movement of American labor because, grown strong, it has exercised its tremendous power selfishly and irresponsibly.

The power that labor holds over American industry and all of American life is sometimes awesome. In an industry-wide strike in crucial materials and services, labor unions may hold the health and life of masses of people in their hands. They have a strategic hold on the whole of our economy. The greater the power, the more urgent the need for a responsible conscience in the use of it. It is a pity that labor unions have often shown a total unconcern for the health of society and have been quite ready to destroy not only monetary but human values in order to achieve their ends. The right to strike has often been exercised with sheer arbitrariness and without reference to equally urgent rights existing within the life of the community.

Power thus used for achievement of the ends of a specific group is nothing other than fomenting of class struggle. Labor’s earlier complaints against class-conscious capitalists are hollow-sounding now, because labor shows itself ready, with ruthlessness that matches earlier power interests, to disregard the common good for the sake of its own class-interest.

The Need Of A Conscience

All of this increases the suspicion that while the labor movement in America has grown big and strong it has not grown up. What American labor needs is something other than a huge and devouring appetite, more than the hulking strength of a new giant. American labor needs a conscience that will place limits upon its concern for getting, and set its wants in the context of larger and abiding social values—a conscience that will make possible a responsible use and direction of the great power it wields.

Without attempting to offer a blueprint for labor’s refromation, it would appear that at least three things are basic to the moral character of so significant a social entitiy as the labor movement.

First of all, there is needed a sense of dignity of the worker and a sense of calling that is involved in the work he performs. A labor union professes to be concerned with a definition of the genius of the workingman as member of our common society. It is part of the fearful perversion of the whole labor movement that the genius of the American worker has been interpreted in sheer materialistic terms. The worker has been represented as an individual who works in order to get certain material gains, and he has been assured that for all his efforts he has a right to get as much as he can out of his labor.

Emptiness Of Perpetual Discontent

This is a horrible basis from which to start and a most unprofitable principle for understanding the meaning and value of work. One who is taught that work has meaning only for what he gets is being schooled in the spirit of perpetual discontent, and is left with a feeling of emptiness with reference to something that stands close to the center of his living. The first thing needed for the laborer’s conscience is sound conviction that man is essentially worker, that the fulfilment of life’s function and purpose is to be found in work, and that work itself is the crucial area for the most significant kind of achievement and service.

When he is taught that it is good to trim the measure and quality of his work in order to secure a set of by-ends in leisure, shorter hours and higher pay for the whole laboring fraternity, he is being taught to sell his birthright for a mess of pottage. An honest job ought not to be sacrificed for the sake of the dollar, nor pride of workmanship for weeks of leisure, nor responsible duty to his employer for loyalty to the gang.

Second, a requirement for any responsible labor movement is high sense of social responsibility. This needs no explication but it needs constant emphasis. Lip service to the interests of society is no substitute for real service rendered at cost of willing sacrifice. It is easy enough to return to the law of the jungle, because it is in the character of human nature to live for self with complete disregard of the interests of others. When men of such mind join together the tendency to selfishness is accentuated. And selfishness can achieve both demonic character and demonic proportions in group organization. A labor movement that becomes the agency for group interests and that rides roughshod over interests and needs of other members of society in the attempt to achieve its own ends, is corruptive of the meaning of labor itself and a curse to the society it is called upon to serve.

Third, involved in a responsible labor movement must be recognition of accountability to a law higher than the individual, higher than the group of which one is a member, and higher than the society in which one is placed. This means recognition of accountability to God, the Sovereign Lord of all, and to his law of love for his world and all his creatures. This is ultimately the basis for all morality in individual and social life and the only effective sanction for securing decency, justice and respectability in human relations. The American labor movement will come to responsible character, and be in position to serve its own members and all of society, if there is remembrance of the God whom all men must fear and to whose law and judgment all men are subject.

It is precisely on the score of these basic requirements that American labor unions have been in serious default. On this account they have corrupted American workingmen while endeavoring to secure for them materialistic bonanzas, and they have increased and intensified the problems of our society.

The Christian’S Responsibility

All of this raises the question concerning the Christian’s responsibility as a member of the laboring class. Corruptions have come into existing labor unions because the members have only too readily surrendered their sovereignty to the “labor leaders,” abdicating their rights and duties of active participation in union affairs. This is a confession that must be made not only of the mass of workers, but of the Christians in our labor unions. If Jesus made his followers the salt of the earth, where is the salting power? It seems profoundly weak in American labor unions. Perhaps there are two reasons for this weakness. One is the prodigious failure of the Christian churches in conditioning their members for vigorous exercise of a living Christian witness in common areas of daily life and work. The second is the related factor of a quietism that puts a profound apathy upon the social conscience of even Christian men, and which looks upon social evils as something from which to withdraw rather than to confront.

One doesn’t meet the labor problem by withdrawal. He merely bypasses it. And when it is the Christian who does this, no ground for complaint against the evils of the labor unions is left to him. He is, rather, coresponsible for them. There is tremendous opportunity for good and righteous men, including Christians of every kind, to perform real service for decency and respectability in labor unions. But the task is tremendous, too. Nor is there promise of easy achievement. The progress of goodness against evil in this evil world is never conveniently traceable. Men must live for goodness by faith. And the Christian’s role here, as in so many aspects of contemporary life, will be the struggle to keep his soul and to carry on the fight as the situation allows and demands against what is more than flesh and blood.

Separate Organization?

There is another possible way for exercise of the Christian’s social responsibility. That is the way of separate Christian organization. This kind of effort is, indeed, embodied in a small way in an already existing movement—that of the Christian Labor Association, with headquarters in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

The Christian Labor Association had its origin some 25 years ago among a group of consecrated members of the Christian Reformed Church. These Christian laymen recognized the need of organization for achievement of social justice but considered existing labor unions unsatisfactory agencies for attainment of these ends. The movement is based upon Christian principles enunciated in the Scriptures and committed to the belief that the recognition of Christ the King and his Sovereign Word is necessary for resolution of problems of our sinful society. The movement has grown with painful slowness. It is concentrated largely in Western Michigan, and locals have been established also in other places where members of the Christian Reformed Church are concentrated—Chicago, Minnesota, California, among others.

Though it has won some notable victories over existing unions in courts of the land, the general effect of the CLA on existing major unions has been that of a nuisance value in certain areas. For the rest, the significance of this small labor movement is that it stands as a protest against the moral and spiritual failures of existing labor unions, and is an attempt to give witness by embodiment to the Christian social ideal.

The Christian Labor Association is bound to arouse the admiration of all who have taken notice of this movement led by men of strong commitment and great integrity. The movement has its limitations, however. It has been too closely associated with a specific church group and has sought undue support from ecclesiastical legislation concerning conditions of church membership. It has tended to the character of a religious society, committed to certain carefully defined theological tenets. And it has been governed in too large degree by the psychology of shelter from and against our present evil world.

The possibilities in the Christian Labor Association are significant, however. It could become a very large hope for Christians in America if its character were not only that of protest and witness against the secularization and corruption of existing unions, but that of a competitive labor movement seeking to embody for a large mass of American workers the concerns and ideals of a responsible laboring group within our society.

The germ of a competitive labor movement exists in this Christian Labor Association. It addresses itself to the basic labor situation, is concerned with social justice based on fundamental Christian principles, and is recognized by the National Labor Relations Board as a bona fide bargaining agency. Could this association, with a broader base, a wider appeal, less concern for confessional commitments and a less separatistic definition of the social task, be the hope for America to purge labor of some of its besetting perversions?

Renwick Harper Martin has served as Instructor in Political Science and then as President of Geneva College and now is Editor emeritus of The Christian Statesman. He has been Moderator of the Reformed Presbyterian Church and is author of Our Public Schools: Christian or Secular?

Preacher In The Red

“The movements of the Home Mission director are not without humorous touches. I was scheduled to appear in a small Alberta Church located about twelve miles from the nearest town on the main line.

Arrangements had been made whereby a car would meet me at the bus when I reached this town. However, upon getting off the bus I discovered that no one seemed to be the least interested in my arrival.

As the situation remained unchanged for at least fifteen minutes, I decided to take the initiative. Seeing a small panel delivery across the street and deducing that the young man behind the wheel was probably too shy to seek me out, I approached with the query, “Say, are you looking for a preacher?”

Upon coming a little closer I noticed that the interior of the cab had taken on quite a brilliant hue and I realized then that the transformation was accounted for by the presence of a young lady by his side.

Apparently my approach had been interpreted as the blustering attempt of a travelling ecclesiastic to drum up a little curb service business.

I made an apologetic and hasty retreat, to discover, gratefully, that my driver had arrived. The REV. GERALD M. WARD, First Baptist Church, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.

- More from George Stob

Theology

Form in Religion

Clyde S. Kilby

Selden Rodman’s The Eye of Man, which Time magazine calls one of the most provocative books in its field in recent years, is pivotal because of its pronouncements on art in our day, but it has, I think, some interesting implications for Christianity as well. On the art side this book boldly raises the question whether the artist is obliged to weigh human values and communicate spiritual truth. Conversely, it asks whether the artist’s refusal to acknowledge such responsibilities denies to him on the one hand the driving force which has motivated the great arts of the past and on the other hand the audience without which the artist is doomed to exclusive communication with himself alone. Many people will rejoice to know that Rodman, whose critical acumen and insight are well known, gives no uncertain answer to these questions. The artist, says he, is a man among men and cannot abdicate his position as a responsible member of the human race. He has not the right to retire into a world of esoteric inner experience and thus separate himself from his fellow men. Rodman examines the history of Western painting and attempts to show that in times of cynicism or retreat from positive values in life, art has tended to move away from subject and toward form, but, says he, only in our day has this movement away from content suffered a total eclipse.

Rodman’s book is devoted to a minute description of the relation of subject and form. Form he defines as “the appropriate shape an artist discovers in the process of saying what he has to say.” To make form an end in itself is to fall back upon the old and sterile doctrine of art for art’s sake. If form in art simply calls attention to itself, it thereby falls into a trap as clearly obvious as is the trap of didacticism. He goes so far as to declare that form is mere decoration unless it is integrally connected with subject. These doctrines enunciated by Rodman are entirely at odds with both the theory and the practice of many prominent artists of our time—beliefs which reach their extreme expression in Mallarme’s statement, “A beautiful line without meaning is more beautiful than a less beautiful one with meaning,” and Flaubert’s notion of writing a book without any subject at all. Rodman feels that it is only when artists have lost every social and spiritual conviction that the frivolous notion prevails that art’s function is “to define forms and arrange them in space.” There are signs, thinks this critic, of a return to content, to responsibility, and to communication.

It is important, however, to point out that Rodman feels many artists have been forced into the nonobjective world because of the public’s insensitivity to genuine works of art. He is fully opposed to an aesthetic norm which loves sterile copying of natural objects, such as manifested at its worst in so-called calendar art, and opposed also to easy Hollywoodish symbolism that plays up to this same unworthy aesthetic norm and produces people devoid of all true humanity. He describes the Hollywood “star” as having “a face untroubled by thought which smiles blandly at the citizen in a thousand disguises from birth to death.” Thus there are two distinct sides to Rodman’s position: At one extreme he opposes the nonobjectivity and noncommunication of much modern art; at the other he is equally opposed to the unthinking cliches of popular art and the level of public taste in general. His entire book is rather well summed up in his remark that “content without supreme conviction never achieves convincing form.”

It may be profitable to discuss some ideas not explicitly put forth in Rodman’s excellent book but applicable to Christianity by implication.

The Form And The Spirit

One is that form does not mean simply the method of doing something. It is much more deep-seated than that and more nearly related to being than doing. Rodman believes that in a genuine work of art, form and content are indistinguishable from one another and that form by itself is nothing but decoration. The implication for Christianity is that form is the shape discovered and manifested in the living of a Spirit-filled life. It is not simply the outward actions of a life but the essential shape of a life at its roots whence all its motives take their beginning and their genuine nature. Form is never obvious and sterile but always dynamic and potent. Form is the eternal shape of truth making its impact upon the Christian. It is the thrusting power which molds his reborn “content” into convincing reality. Of course form will finally manifest itself in outward actions, but if it is genuine it will first of all be effectually and uniquely inner. Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith. meekness, temperance—all these have infinite possibilities of manifestation in the Christian. An easy and outward definition of such Christian virtues may eventuate in a static, limited, and sometimes even unbiblical, notion of them. There are no “ten easy steps” to any of these virtues, and their manifestation in the Christian will be most telling when their “appropriate shape” has been hammered out in the unique depth of individual experience with God.

The literal translation of Ephesians 2:10 is “… we are his poems.” A poem, like any other work of art, is, above everything else, unique. There is only one of its kind in existence. God is a God of variety, whether it be in the making of snowflakes, the leaves of trees, or men. An identical twin recently said to me, “My sister and I don’t think we are alike at all.” God is a God of variety also in the re-creation of men into Christians. Phillips translated 1 Peter 4:10 as “the magnificently varied grace of God.” Form is the dynamic by which that varied grace is shaped into the unique “poem” which God wants to make out of each of his children.

Divine Poetry In Our Flesh

It is most unusual when a minister alludes to the self in us other than to denounce it. I think we might be nearer the truth if we distinguished two kinds of self. There is the self whose manifestation is selfish—the self which is everywhere condemned in the Bible. But there is also the self which God uniquely created and which he uniquely re-creates in the Christian. Nowhere in Scripture are we taught to be a zero for its own sake but only to withdraw from the selfish self so that God can mold the inner man after his own fashion; “… he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” George Macdonald says that God’s wrath will consume what men call themselves so that the selves God made shall appear. It seems to me that this distinction is almost totally neglected in pulpits. The implication of much preaching on the theme of denial of self is that God is seeking to produce not poems but robots. The totally yielded Christian is a man much more “himself” than is the natural man, and his new freedom is as unique and varied as heaven itself. He is genuinely God’s handiwork, God’s craftsmanship, God’s poem. D. E. Harding has well said that of necessity God’s love “individuates its objects.” Form is the eternal shape of the truth which God is manifesting in his twice-unique creatures.

Cliches Move No Mountains

Since the Reformation orthodox Christianity has very properly laid great emphasis on the fundamental doctrines of the faith. It has made the repetition of the Apostolic Creed a part of its worship and has written innumerable platforms and declarations with the intent that the faith once delivered should not be allowed to deteriorate. Orthodoxy will continue to be vitally concerned to promulgate the purity of the faith. At the same time it must avoid implying that language itself is sufficient to corral Deity. The genuine danger that men may think there are many ways to Christ must not lead to another extreme in which the recitation of a cliche becomes the only language which is thought to be good theological specie. We have concluded too often that accepting Christ and “accepting Christ” are identical, where the latter phrase means going to the front during an evangelistic campaign, getting on one’s knees, saying certain words, standing up and shaking hands, and afterward giving one’s testimony. Too often we are not willing to leave the work of the Holy Spirit to the Holy Spirit himself. God’s purpose to form the new man in Christ is fully as vital as what Rodman would call the subject matter, i.e., the doctrines of Christianity. Without denying the Bible as our rule of faith and practice and as the perspective for every part of life, we may say also that the Bible was never intended as a yardstick by which the orthodox should pharisaically measure their fellows and then attempt to whip them into line. God will not form a new man any different from the standard indicated in Scripture, but he may form that man different from our own redaction of Scripture into case-hardened language.

The calling of a Christian is to lead “naturally” a supernatural life. His conduct is expected to proceed from the deepest Spirit-stirred motives. He is expected to be, paradoxically, himself in the completest fashion and at the same time nothing at all. If the right sort of result is to prevail, God must be allowed to shape his materials after a unique pattern. The Christian will be involved in never-ending growth based on experience with the master artist. Instead of this we often place the accent on outward manifestation alone. The loudness or even jazziness of our singing is assumed to be the measure of its spiritual vitality. We listen to sermons and seldom come to any deep movement of soul. Bodily presence is substituted for communication and communion with God. In such ways superficial outward form replaces that genuine sort of form which Rodman claims for art. Every such act tends to seal over or sear the point of our spiritual sensitivity until, as C. S. Lewis has so aptly declared, “The more often [man] feels without acting, the less he will ever be able to act, and, in the long run, the less he will be able to feel”; or, as Rodman says, the religious images become “cold, intellectually self-contained, erudite and completely out of contact” with reality. The orthodox thus may be no better off in actuality than those who, again to cite Rodman, see religion so completely as history that it becomes remote and static and picturesque, “something to be endured passively Sundays as … a Tournament of Roses on New Year’s Day.” It is possible for a Christian to denounce every implication of the word form while at the same time manifesting a formalism of his own that leads to almost complete spiritual sterility. He becomes a practicing “materialist” who can never understand that God is more than the sum of his attributes.

The Gospel’s Strange Power

We must not teach the Christian, directly or indirectly, that he is to fear and denounce his own personality. Rather he is to yield it to God for the creation of a product—an artistic product if you will—after God’s own ends, in which none of the man’s God-given uniqueness is lost. Such a man is one who is at once completely himself and completely God’s, a man in whom Christian experience is daily being shaped into a product worthy of a high and holy Omnipotence. We need to feel the terrible reality of Christianity. Too often we manage to tame it. In our intensity of desire to preserve it uncontaminated, we turn it into a groove, or perhaps we should say a rut. Christianity is really a dangerous enterprise.

William Still is a native of Aberdeen, Scotland, who turned from a career as musician and teacher of music to the ministry. Formerly assistant minister to Dr. W. Fitch at Springburnhill Church in Glasgow, he has served since 1945 as minister of Gilconston South Church, Aberdeen.

- More from Clyde S. Kilby

Cover Story

Oneness with Christ

John Henry Strong

He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit (1 Cor. 6:17).

How close does Jesus Christ come to the lives of those who have trusted in him? Is he spectator solely, or is he an active participant in the lives which believers live? If a participant, does he help only at points and at moments, with intervals and absences between, or is his influence continuous? And if continuous, how close does he come? Is there some inner life connection? Are our lives somehow so related to his that, could we scan the inner foundations where the two join, we should find ourselves in some manner actual sharers of what he is?

Men may hesitate before such questions, but there is no hesitation in the New Testament Scriptures. Whatever the mystery involved, there is no fact which the New Testament sets before us more variously or plainly than our vital union with Christ. The Spirit of the Lord is represented as so interpenetrating and energizing the spirit of the believer that the two are—oh, the marvel of it!—“one spirit” (1 Cor. 6:17). This is not metaphor, but fact. Not a figurative “oneness,” a harmony of spirit, an identity of aim, but a literal oneness of life. Union with Christ is represented not as loving Christ, following his precepts, sympathizing with his aims. In this sense I might be one with Martin Luther or George Washington. The believer is one with Christ in a sense far deeper than that in which he is one with patriots, fellow Christians, or friends. He has become a participant in Christ’s life. The believer lives in Christ as truly as he lives in the atmosphere about him. Christ lives in the believer as truly as the air fills his lungs with the breath of life. For the believer has become “one spirit” with his Lord.

The Reality Of Oneness

How much we lose by taking substance to be shadow, by allegorizing the great truths of the Bible, by treating as mere orientalisms statements that otherwise

would startle us with their grandeur and open miraculous vistas of Christian living to the hopeless and despondent. The traveler in the desert sometimes sees upon the horizon waving palms and sparkling pools of water that lure him on and on, only to fade into thin air. But how much more tragic if he mistakes reality for mirage, and when he might press forward and be saved, sinks fainthearted upon the sand!

Oneness with Christ is a truth that baffles all description and confounds all philosophy. Intimations, foreshadowings of it there are, to be sure, in the world around us. The tree standing in front of my house depends on God. His power lives in it, sustains it, and he clothes it in a leafy robe. Yet God is not the tree. In cutting it down I should do no violence to God. And God lives in man’s natural life. He gives me strength to think, to strive, to lead my daily life, while all the time not destroying my independence. My sins are mine, not God’s. Yet how poor are all analogies beside the unique relationship which comes to pass when Christ enters into the human soul and makes it, not a Leyden jar, a mere receptacle for his energy, but a temple resplendent with his presence, a tabernacle for his personal indwelling!

This is the astonishing truth that our Lord set forth under the figure of the vine and the branches. A vine with leaves and branches, with arms stretched forth laden with fruit, may seem a thing far removed from the life and relationships of responsible and free men and women; yet our Lord never would have employed the figure had it not imaged forth the half-concealed reality behind it. A vine is a unity. Its branches are only individualized stock. Stock and offshoots together form one organism. One life pervades the whole; and the supreme “concern” of the branch is, as it were, to live in the uninterrupted power of the union on which fruitfulness depends. “Abide in me,” Jesus told his disciples, “and I in you.”

More impressive still is the vastly significant fact that Jesus likened his oneness with his disciples to his own oneness with the Father. “I in them,” he prayed, “and thou in me” (John 17:23). That sets the thoughts soaring. Was our Lord’s union with his Father not a life union? Nothing less, then, is his union with his followers. This is a mystery. It was to his disciples; these babes in understanding did not at once grasp even the fact of it. But a day of revelation was coming, Jesus promised, when they should know that he was in his Father, and they in him, and he in them (John 14:20).

“Christ In You”

The Apostle Paul stands out as the most potent human examplar of vital relation. He is the man God chose to put Christianity into the form in which it has won its greatest victories for nineteen centuries. How did Paul live his life and do his work? This same life union with the Master is the answer. Union with Christ is the secret of the life of Paul. It is the cornerstone of his theology, and the key to unlock all the mysteries of his epistles.

“In Christ,” “in Christ,” “in Christ!” How the phrase recurs on Paul’s familiar pages. “I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you.” “I trust in the Lord to come to you.” “I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all.” Is there anything this man thinks, feels, believes, prays, hopes, plans or remembers, except through the will and power of the One within him?

A discouraged evangelist, so Bishop Moule once told us, was making his way through a field in solitude, his forces spent, his obstacles and burdens mountainous and hopeless. Suddenly, as though Spirit-prompted, these words stole into his mind: “When Christ, who is our life, shall be manifested, then shall we also be manifested with him in glory.” Then He came into view, of whose fulness we have all received, and who quickens whom he will. The burdens were rolled upon His shoulders, and a revived servant of God once more turned courageous steps into the path of surrender and faith.

Christ The Believer’S Life

How plain it is that our union with Christ is not “fidelity in the free imitation of the Master,” as some would have it, to whom every soul is severely separate and discontinuous and a teaching like that of the vine and the branches nothing more than a figure for the moral harmony that should exist between the disciple and his Lord. Trees do not root themselves in the air. Souls are not self-subsistent. Christ is our life. Those are bereft indeed whose little systems will not allow for a vast underground relationship lifting the strain from life, discovering our true glory, and making our chief task the joyous experience of abiding and believing.

How plain it is, too, that to receive the “life of Christ” is to receive the Christ who lives it. Life has no existence by itself, as though it could be stripped from a person as a coupon is stripped from a ticket or a skin from an onion. Life is a property, a function, of someone. If it is imparted at all, it is imparted only in and with the person who possesses and lives it. Why then should we build these abstract barriers between ourselves and Jesus our Master? First we build them, and then we deify them. But if his life is in us, it is because he himself is within us, living that life as his divine and blessed function. It is because, whether our intellects penetrate to it or not, he and we are one in a union divine and indissoluble.

Results Of Oneness With Christ

Now if union with Christ is as wonderful as this, what of its results? Must they not also be wonderful? It is simply a question of the wealth and potency of the wonderful divine being we know as our Lord and Master. Paul hints at one result when he says, “If any man be in Christ he is a new creation. The old has passed away. Behold, the new has come.” How could it be otherwise? What is the new birth but the beginning of the new life which now is come, revealed to the eyes of faith by the Spirit of the Lord dwelling within us?

Another result of union with Christ is hinted at when we read, “There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus,” and we find that the law of the new relationship in Christ makes us free from the old law of sinning and dying. Nothing could be more triumphant than the assurances which meet us on every hand of an immediate, complete, and continuous deliverance, wrought by Christ within us, from the seductiveness and strength of long-entrenched sinful habits.

A lovely fruit of this union is disclosed in the unity of the spiritual life which springs up between all believers. Severally members of Christ, they become together the Church, the Body. Possessing Christ as individuals, they have this supreme experience in common. Only Christians understand one another and are truly at home with one another. The Epistle to the Ephesians sets forth the glory of the Church of which Christ is the head, and which, drawing from his inexhaustible life, enters joyfully into the length and breadth and depth and height of the purposes of God.

A crowning result of this oneness with Christ remains in the eternal life with which Christ even now blesses his followers. How shall I live forever unless I am joined to him who is “the Life”? Cut off from the source of life, the “well of living water,” I shall surely die; but if I have trusted Christ, if I have cast in my lot with him, if I have become one spirit with him, then who shall separate me from his love? “For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.”

“Abide in me, and I in you.” There lies the emphasis. What we yield to Christ is as nothing beside what he bestows upon us; and even our power to yield must be drawn from his storehouse of grace and power. Yet even this becomes possible because he abides in us.

To abide then, what is it? It is to give and to take. Both are absolute. Both are continuous, calling for daily and hourly renewal. We are entirely Christ’s—that is the first step; we have deeded ourselves over, body and soul, with every faculty and power, to be his exclusively. And then he is entirely ours, with the wealth of his nature, with the riches of his wisdom and strength and love. We live for Christ, and Christ lives for us. We make the self-renunciation involved in the first. We claim the riches involved in the second. And we do both, because “Christ lives in us, the hope of glory.”

END

Professor Norman C. Hunt occupies the Chair of Organization of Industry and Commerce in the University of Edinburgh. He is a Sir Edward Stern scholar and a first-class honors graduate in Commerce at the University of London and holds the Ph.D. from Edinburgh. He is a member of the British Institute of Management and a director of the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce. An elder of Charlotte Chapel, the largest Baptist church in Scotland, he is also president of the Edinburgh Evangelistic Union and president-elect of the Inter-Varsity Fellowship of Great Britain.

- More from John Henry Strong

Cover Story

Fourth R in American Education

Renwick Harper Martin

Never in history has any nation invested as much in education and depended as much on it as the United States. At the beginning of 1957, 41 million Americans—one in every four—were in school. The cost of their schooling amounted to $15,544,000,000, or almost $400 per pupil. Our investment in school property was over 16 billion dollars in 1953 and today would probably reach 20 billion. Truly, education is Big Business with us.

Public And Private Education

In our early history education was almost entirely a private enterprise, provided by parents, churches and other private agencies. Now it is very largely a public enterprise, provided by institutions under state control.

In our public (state-controlled) schools in 1955–1956, 33 million pupils were enrolled at a cost of 10.5 billion dollars; in private schools, 5 million were enrolled at an expenditure of 1.5 billion dollars. Thus, there were 86–1/3 per cent in public and 13–2/3 per cent in private schools.

In higher education the enrollment was 3 million and the cost 3.4 billion dollars—divided into 2 billion dollars (56.3 per cent) in public and 1.4 billion dollars (43.7 per cent) in private schools.

Notwithstanding this vast expenditure of effort and money on education, we are confronted with an appalling crisis in morals, youth delinquency and crime. With reference to the latter J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI informs us that last year a total of 2,563,150 major crimes were committed in the United States, a 13.3 per cent increase over the preceding year; that since 1950 the increase in crime has been 43 per cent, while that of population has been 11 per cent. This is a worse criminal record than that of any other civilized nation. Hoover also says that crime is increasingly becoming a youth problem, that young people still in their teens are “committing crimes that are almost unspeakable,” and that in 1956 persons age 17 and younger accounted for 24.7 per cent of the arrests for robbery, 53.9 per cent of the arrests for burglary, and 66.4 per cent of all auto arrests. The underlying cause is the lack of the moral and spiritual training of American youth. Mr. Hoover says: “People for the most part commit crime because they do not have the moral stamina and traits of character to withstand temptation.… The criminal is the product of spiritual starvation. Someone failed miserably to bring him to know God, love him and serve him.”

Education And Character

The secular public schools cannot escape a large measure of responsibility for this frightening crime situation. It has taken over the major portion of time that can be given to formal education of American youth during the character-forming period of their lives—six hours a day, five days a week, for a period of 10 to 12 years—leaving the church only one day for youth education and only about one hour on that day. The public schools, backed by our compulsory school laws, enroll 83 per cent of our youth population, but the churches, relying on voluntary attendance, enroll no more than 50 per cent. Thus the average young person receives 30 hours of secular state education weekly compared to 1 hour of church religious education.

If the fourth R has anything to do with building moral character and preventing delinquency and crime, no wonder we face this perilous situation. Back in the early days of our nation’s history, all education was basically religious, public as well as private. Our founding fathers set forth its religious character in these words from the Ordinance of 1787 for the government of the Northwest Territory: “Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall be forever encouraged.” This has been called the “Magna Charta of American Education.”

The Retreat From Religion

This was the type of education our forefathers established: The fourth R—religion and morality its foundation; and the three R’s—knowledge built on this foundation. This continued until about 1870 when a great change took place in public education. The order was reversed. The three R’s became the major and the fourth R the minor role. We have sown to the wind and are now reaping the whirlwind.

To meet our nation’s perils and save our beloved country it is imperative that we again give religion its basic place in education. Our basic task is to build strong public sentiment for the right and duty of the state in its own schools to give adequate and effective moral training to American youth.

How shall we go about it?

The Bible In The Schools

We must build public sentiment for giving the Bible a place of importance in our public schools. There are many reasons for this: Its matchless English, its biographies, its history, its great moral and spiritual truths—to sum them all up, its contribution to our nation. We submit a few testimonies to its contribution to our nation and government: Justice Brewer of the United States Supreme Court said, “The American nation from its first settlement at Jamestown to this hour is based upon and permeated by the Bible”; President Andrew Jackson, “The Bible is the Rock on which this Republic rests”; President Thomas Jefferson, “The Bible is the Source of Liberty”; President William McKinley, “The more profoundly we study this wonderful Book and the more closely we observe its precepts the better citizens we will become and the higher will be the destiny of our nation”; President Woodrow Wilson, “There are great problems before the American people. I would be afraid to go forward if I did not believe that there lay at the foundation of all our schooling and all our thought, the incomparable and unimpeachable Word of God.”

To deprive American youth of the opportunity of coming to know this Book in their education is an injustice both to them and to the nation.

We must make the moral and spiritual development of youth the major objective in education. “Good education,” says Frederick M. Raubinger, Commissioner of Education of New Jersey, “has always been concerned with more than knowledge. Its ultimate objective is the development of persons of honor, integrity, vision and high purpose—in short, persons of character.” To achieve this objective will require much greater emphasis and more effective methods of developing it, namely, emphasis upon religious motivation that, because of secular influence, is rare in public education.

Perils Of Irreligious Education

We must show the peril of education from which the fourth R is excluded. Education multiplies power. Inventive science has put into man’s hands power not even dreamed of a century ago. That power can be used for good or evil. Long ago Alfred the Great said, “Power is never a good except he be good that has it.” In the hands of evil men such power over forces of nature can destroy our civilization. Someone has said: “It is not the ignorant, the primitive people who terrorize the world today, but the most educationally advanced peoples who have made learning a road to power without bringing that power under ethical control.”

We must correct the prevalent wrong idea that our laws and court decisions are nearly all against religion in public education. The opposite is true. They are indeed against sectarian religious instruction. The attempt to introduce sectarian views has been a leading cause of opposition to religion in public education.

Religious Liberty

We must correct the mistaken idea that the American principle of religious liberty and of separation of church and state excludes religion from public education. No one’s religious liberty is infringed on if he is not required to participate in religious exercises of the schools. For him to insist religious instruction be denied those who want it, when he is free not to take part, is not religious liberty but religious bigotry. Properly interpreted, separation of church and state is separation of control. That is, each of the two organizations is independent in its own sphere of action. Not separation of function—that is excluding religious instruction from state schools and restricting it to church schools and the home.

The carrying forward of such a program as this is imperative. Professor Ernest Johnson of Teachers College, Columbia University, has said, “The divorcement of education and religion is the most basic defect in American life.” This defect must be remedied. Let every Christian patriot help.

Alan Redpath is minister of Chicago’s Moody Memorial Church, which maintains a vigorous prayer life under his ministry and leadership. Born in Newcastle-on-Tyne, England, he studied at Durham University and began a career in London as an associate chartered accountant. From 1940–53 he served the Duke Street Baptist Church, Richmond, Surrey, and then was called to Moody Church. He has spoken frequently at English Keswick, and the Mid-America Keswick Convention is one of his interests. His books include Answer for Today, Victorious Christian Living and Victorious Praying.

I Rest in His Love

I rest in His love, as a ship in a storm

Takes rest on a restless sea:

Knowing the currents that bear it up

Are steady and strong and free.

I rest in His love, as a tree in the wind

Takes rest through the bitter blast:

Feeling the pull of the deep, deep roots

That anchor it sure and fast.

I rest in His love, as a babe on the breast

Takes rest from the world’s alarms:

Hearing the beat of the parent-heart,

Locked close in the parent-arms.

I rest in His love. He will bear me up

And anchored my soul shall be:

As a storm-swept ship, as a sleeping child,

I rest—as a wind-tossed tree.

HELEN FRAZEE-BOWER

- More from Renwick Harper Martin

Cover Story

The Holy Spirit in Preaching

William Still

Preaching is more than lecturing. It is more than exhortation. It brings Christ home to the hearts of men and confronts them with his living grace and power. It is not only that Christ is discussed—it is too easy to discuss people in their absence—but that he is proclaimed; even that he proclaims himself by taking over the personality of the preacher and speaking through him.

John the Baptist was such a “voice.” Pilate also, in his way, was nearer to proclamation than many preachers. He stood before the mob with Jesus at his side and proclaimed “Behold the Man!” There were two factors in his proclamation: (1) he proclaimed Jesus in his presence; (2) he proclaimed him, not to the winds, but to the people present. In his hour of crisis, Pilate was both “Christ-conscious” and “people-conscious.” Both are necessary for effectual preaching. Soliloquy will not do, however spiritual and “Christ-conscious” the speaker may be, for it is not directed toward men and their needs. Nor will “discussion” do, however aware the preacher may be of the human situation. Christian preaching must bring God down to men—to particular men.

How often on the radio we hear a sort of religious recital, as if a man said, “I am speaking: you may listen or not, but I will speak. It is fine to have an audience, but I can speak without one, for I get great pleasure from my own speaking.” How vain! Preaching must have direction—from and to. It should make men sit up and face Christ, as corporate prayer should make them kneel down and worship him. For the true preacher is saying, “Christ is here and is speaking to you. You had better hear him now, for you will have to later!”

It is all very well to compare preaching to Pilate’s presentation of Christ to the people, but they are not the same. No, but in true preaching Christ is just as present as he was then. It is often lamented that the Holy Spirit is the least understood Person of the Trinity, but surely we see why this is so; for the Holy Spirit comes not to speak of himself, but to glorify Christ. Where preachers are intent on glorifying Christ (and only crucified men can do so!), the Spirit is there with all his aid. All true showing forth of Christ is by the Holy Spirit. We are, therefore, to consider how the Holy Spirit manifests Christ in preaching.

Christ And Scripture

Christ is proclaimed in his Word and by his Word. The first qualification of the preacher, therefore, is that he acknowledge the Bible to be the Word of God, and that he understands that it was Christ by his Spirit who caused to be written “in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” There is no use saying that the Bible “contains” the Word of God if in our modern understanding of the word we mean to infer that it does so inter alia. “All Scripture is God-breathed and is profitable …”; its truth is therefore not partial and intermittent, but complete and permanent.

A prevailing wind of doctrine fails to see this because it confuses revelation and inspiration with illumination. Revelation is what God has made known to us once and for all by the inspiration of his chosen writers; illumination is the work of the Spirit in bringing the truth of the “closed Book” to light. The art treasures of London’s National Gallery remain intrinsically the same during the hours of darkness when they cannot be seen. We remain as essentially alive during the hours of unconsciousness in sleep as when we are awake. It is because we are alive that we can awake. It is surely a plain error of fact to say that the Bible “becomes alive” in the divine-human encounter, when what we mean is that it awakes and shines forth its light and truth into the dark mind of man. The revelation of Christ in the Holy Scriptures is a work of God established long before we were born, and owes nothing to us, nor can it be subtracted from or added to by us. It is the “word of the Lord which liveth and abideth for ever.”

The Spirit’s Illumination

But revelation and inspiration without illumination are useless; for man is by nature dark and cannot see the truth in the Word of God until he is enlightened. Why is it that one man preaching can bring spiritual light to bear on the sacred page and make the Book live, while another makes it seem the dullest book on earth? Because the Holy Spirit who was active in revelation and inspiration is present and active or is not present and active in illumination. The difference between a good and a poor preacher is not one of natural gift. That “gift” is necessary, we agree, but not necessarily natural gift. Some preachers can make people listen to them, but the test of a true preacher is whether he can make men listen to Christ, and that not with a little temporary interest but with lasting effect. What we hear by natural gift, of language, logic, passion, and powers of persuasion, may stir profoundly, but all this may be done equally well on the secular rostrum or in the theater. A true preacher may have a natural gift and aptitude for peaching. God is not foolish or perverse in his choices, but since God loves to do a hard thing, he may well choose men of no natural gift to do his work and add to them the spiritual gift of utterance. Who shall distinguish between natural and spiritual gift in preachers who have been used of God? The endowment of power and anointing of the Spirit sounds so “natural”! In this matter the need of the naturally eloquent is just as great as the need of the naturally tongue-tied.

Unfortunately, these things are too little understood by listeners to sermons, who are often quite unable to distinguish between the soulish-and the spiritual, not to say between the spiritist and the spiritual, in preaching; whereas the writer to the Hebrews tells us that the Word of God in action “pierces to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit.” Many who for the first time come under the sound of Holy Ghost preaching are mortally offended because while they may consider themselves expert sermon-tasters, having much experience of eloquent preaching, they have never been exposed to the white light of the Spirit. The atmosphere of the theater and the concert hall is so native to modern man that when it is produced in church he is pleased to believe that it is right and that the Holy Spirit is there. But while the Holy Spirit in former revivals produced overpowering experiences and created deep emotional sensations in many, that is not his essential work, but to convince of sin, righteousness, and judgment to come, and to be a savor of life unto life and death unto death.

The Spirit’s Power

How can a man ensure the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in his preaching? The Word must become flesh again; the preacher must become the vehicle of the Holy Spirit, his mind inspired and his heart inflamed by the truth he preaches. This will depend not primarily on what he preaches or how he prepares, but on what he is in himself. As his physical presence cannot be hid, no more can his spiritual condition be hid from the discerning. This is terrifying. In a vestry in Aberdeen these words used to confront the preacher ere he mounted the pulpit stairs: “No man can glorify Christ and himself at the same time.” If the Holy Spirit is to speak through the preacher and the preaching he must have clear passage—not through a void, but through a mind and personality laid open in all its delicate and intricate parts to the operation of the Spirit, to the end that his total powers may be willingly and intelligently bent to the present purpose of God.

What are the requisites of such dedication? A man must know Christ personally as his Saviour and Lord. He must also be sure of his call to the ministry, as sure as he is of his conversion; for God will never anoint a man for service to which he has not called him. We are sometimes dismayed when a man steps down from the ministry to follow a lesser calling, but is it not a good thing when he realizes that he had intruded into holy things without divine authority? When a man knows that he knows Christ and is called by him to minister his Word, he must believe the truth and accept the authority of that Word, for himself, and for those to whom he is sent. It is here that what he is and what he believes, however privately, is exposed to the discerning. Men may have private and secret reservations concerning the Word of God, and these not only as to Genesis and science, literalism and infallibility, but with cardinal doctrines, such as holiness or hell. These may never be aired in public, and so the preacher may gain a reputation for evangelical orthodoxy, but there is no converting or edifying power in his preaching. No one is very different for it, nothing much happens. Why not? Because while a man may hide from men, and from himself, what he doubts or disbelieves, he cannot hide it from God, and God will not give his Holy Spirit to those who doubt and disbelieve.

The Spirit’s Sword

There can be no doubt that the underlying secret of fruitfulness in preaching is in one’s attitude to the Word of God. The Word of God is the sword of the Spirit, but when men sheath it in the scabbard of their own limited conceptions and beliefs, it is powerless to do its two-edged work of saving and judging. To listen to and sense the multifarious quibbles, qualifications and guarded cautions with which a preacher hedges his utterances is to understand why the Spirit of God is not let loose among the people. The man does not believe. He strangles the Word he is supposed to be declaring even in preaching it; for it is faith, not un-faith, that brings God down to men. Yet preachers seem so proud of their unfaith. Is it because we think we have the Almighty in a corner bowing to our superior intelligence? Surely it must be because we think we can add something vital or subtract something superfluous, that we hedge with so many reservations and provisos. Think of an eminent scholar and eloquent preacher using nine weaker words apparently to avoid saying that Jesus bore our sins.

How should we think that we are personally involved in the content of the Word of God? We are only errand boys, trusted to be faithful and to deliver what is sent. To tamper with a parcel is grave misconduct on the part of a messenger, and has serious consequences: That we are more than errand boys is a lie of the devil and of our own conceit, for the only living preachers are “dead” ones, who know that they are no more than a “voice” sent to deliver what has been given them, without personal interference.

But there are further considerations. The prophets of old were called not only or always to be “preachers” for a lifetime, but to deliver specific messages (cf. 2 Chron. 20:14). The man who knows Christ and is called to be a prophet may yet find the Holy Ghost “desert” him because he is preaching out of turn or without specific commission. He may be preaching in the wrong place, or from the wrong motive, or the wrong message. He may be powerless for no other reason than that he is not in God’s appointment. He may have left his God-given post for personal or domestic reasons, to please his wife or educate his children or to escape persecutors. Though none of these are trivial reasons, if they do not please God he certainly cannot bless disobedience and has promised that “if ye forsake him, he will forsake you.”

The Sermon Itself

What of the sermon itself? What kind of sermon does God bless? It is not a question of whether it is carefully prepared or not, or written or not, but whether it is the Word of God for the occasion and for the people gathered to hear it. In this connection, although the same sermon may be preached many times because it is a God-given burden on the heart of the preacher, it is doubtful if the same manuscript is adequate to very different occasions. A man may fashion his utterance into an expression which he cannot improve (happy man!) and into which he cannot subsequently read new, deeper or truer insights, but if so, is he not in a dangerous state of “perfection”? It is surely not unworthy of each occasion he preaches the same sermon that he revise it! A well-known preacher nonchalantly stuffed two sermons into his pocket as he set out for a village church, not sure which he would preach and apparently not very exercised about it either. It was not surprising that discerning folk who came from afar to hear him preach were bitterly disappointed at his lack of conviction. We must get the Word for the day and for the occasion. This is not too much for our hearers to ask of us.

Walking In Fellowship

But the Word may be right, and the occasion also, and yet the sermon flat. Is there no end of the considerations that govern effective preaching? They are not few, but this above all—that the preacher be walking in close fellowship with the Lord, all known sin confessed and forsaken, forgiven and cleansed. For each message he must go down again into personal death, and probably into spiritual agony, ere he come up with a living word for his hearers. God will only give his unction to those who do his work in his way.

Unction may not be experienced before the service or even before the sermon begins: it may be quarter, half or more delivered before it seems to grip. It may not seem to grip at all. We must beware subjective judgments on our own work. If we know that all is well as we essay to preach, then we are to go through with it faithfully and leave it with God. Before we begin there may be a burden, or not; there may be coldness of heart that strikes fear into us; there may be accusings of the evil one, or the congregation may be restless, or some disconcerting face may catch our eye, or it may suddenly seem that the Word is inappropriate—the devil has a thousand ways of putting God’s servants off.

But if the preacher knows that he is the man for the moment and has the word for the people, if he has sunk himself into Christ for the message, its preparation, and its delivery, and has also prepared the hearts of his hearers by previous private prayer, he may expect the living Word of God to come forth. And he must believe that it will come forth and that it is coming forth, and must thereafter go home in this steadfast assurance and leave it with God.

No man who fulfils these conditions, however hard or unrewarding or discouraging his task, can ultimately fail. He must succeed, for God is faithful. But the important things are these: He must be sure that the Holy Spirit gave the Word and that only the Holy Spirit can preach it. For the Spirit is not a Preacher, but the Preacher. If we want an audience to applaud us, let us rely on all the tricks we know; but if we want fruit from our preaching, holy and lasting, let us rely on the Holy Spirit.

Paul Harvey was still in knickers and not yet 16 when he made his first radio announcements. After World War II, in which he served as Director of News and Information for the Office of War Information in Michigan and Indiana, his rise to radio fame was meteoric. One station alone received 10,000 requests for his obituary of President Roosevelt, which started, “A great tree has fallen.…” Monday through Friday he is heard over the American Broadcasting Company at 12 noon, CST.

- More from William Still

Cover Story

Christians and the Economic Order

Norman C. Hunt

The Christian Church is under fire from many quarters. The criticisms are legion. A common charge is that Christianity is “out of date” and “irrelevant” to the practical problems of the day, to the so-called “real” issues like war, poverty, color, privilege, totalitarianism and so on. On such issues the Church, it is claimed, is either silent or inconclusive; if she speaks at all, it is with no note of authority or conviction.

Many of these criticisms are mere rationalizations, excuses for indifference towards Christ and his Church. Nonetheless, some are justified. All too often Christians, and perhaps especially evangelicals, have failed to work out the implications of their faith for the urgent, practical problems of daily life. They have been understandably wary of anything which savors of a mere “social gospel,” and anxious to make clear the biblical revelation that man needs not reformation but regeneration. In this the position of the evangelical is unassailable. As George Whitefield, when asked why he so often preached on the text “Ye must be born again,” replied, “Why, simply because ye must be born again.” Ours is a personal Gospel; apart from personal faith in Christ there is no salvation and no true Christianity. Nevertheless this personal Gospel does have social implications and if our witness is to be effective in this sophisticated twentieth century the challenge of these social implications must be faced with courage and a thoughtfulness that is both prayerful and crystal-clear.

Inevitable Involvement

The challenge is inescapable because our involvement in society is inescapable; we are in the world although we are not of it. As Christians we cannot contract out of our social responsibilities, for we are dependent upon our fellows for maintenance of life itself. Moreover, we should not even if we could, for our economic and social activities have their beginnings in the creative work of God. It is of course true that, like the rest of creation, the economic order is subject to the fall and spoiled by sin, which expresses itself so clearly in exploitation and misuse of economic resources, sharp practice, industrial unrest and bad human relations.

In this situation the Gospel is the only answer. However much men may criticize it because of our failure as Christians to realize and live out its fullness, the Gospel is relevant to the economic crisis of our time. After all, the Bible has a great deal to say about our life and responsibilities in society. Writing to the Colossians, Paul has a word for workers and employers: “Servants, obey in all things your masters … not with eyeservice as menpleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God; and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men”; and again, “Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.” Can anyone deny the vital relevance of such principles of action to the critical problems of labor relations, wages and motivation that bedevil the economic scene today?

Indeed, Paul’s epistles are never exclusively doctrinal; they invariably move on to practical questions of social relationships. The great burden upon the soul of James is that faith may make itself manifest in works of social as well as personal righteousness. Peter’s epistles, written to Christians some of whom were dispossessed slaves suffering under a totalitarian government, are intensely practical and vividly relevant to the social crisis of our own time. In an earlier age Isaiah, Amos and Micah were equally practical. The message of the Old Testament as of the New issues not only in personal salvation but also in social righteousness.

The supreme word for the Christian must be that of the Master himself. In reply to the lawyer’s question as to which was the great commandment, Jesus said, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Here is a clear principle governing relationship of the Christian to social and economic activities of the community; he must engage in nothing which cannot be done to the glory of God; all his work must be dedicated to the fulfillment of God’s purpose in the world; and his attitude to his fellows, employer, employees, suppliers, customers and all the rest, must be governed by the love of Christ.

The Taint Of Sin

What, in practical terms, are the social implications of the Gospel? First, there is responsibility upon every Christian constantly to seek to relate his faith to the great social, economic and political problems of the day. He must avoid that dualism which, as one historian has put it, empties “religion of its social content and society of its soul.” There are two great dangers here. The liberal tends to argue and act as though the Kingdom of God can be brought in by social reform. He neglects or minimizes two great biblical truths: the sinfulness of man and the second advent of Christ. His solution is often some form of collectivism. On the other hand the evangelical too often makes the truth of the second advent an excuse for inaction in regard to social reform and gives uncritical support to free enterprise capitalism without challenging its imperfections and injustices. Since man is sinful it follows that all forms of human society must be imperfect and marred by sin; the Kingdom can only be fully established by the King, and will be at his coming. It can only do harm to the cause of Christianity to identify it completely with any existing order of society. All are the product of human history and human philosophy and contain features which cannot measure up to Christian standards.

Capitalism Versus Collectivism

That is not to say that capitalism is inconsistent with Christianity. That charge can rather be leveled against collectivism which in all its forms does violence to individual liberty and is unbiblical in its attitude to human sin and self-interest. In an imperfect world it is folly to try to operate a system which is predicated upon a false view of human nature. Collectivism is just such a system. It is based on an unbiblical concept of man. It minimizes or disregards his fallen nature and depends upon motivation which cannot work effectively in a free society made up of sinful men and women. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that attempts to make it work frequently end in loss of human liberty and, ultimately, terrors of totalitarianism.

The Christian, however, cannot simply say that capitalism is Christian and collectivism un-Christian and leave it at that. He must be prepared to admit and seek to remedy manifest imperfections of the system. The best evangelicals have done this down through the centuries. Although the Reformation released springs of individualism which were so essential to development of free enterprise capitalism, Luther denounced with the same vigor that he used against Rome the view that prevails so widely today, that the world of business can be divorced from authority of laws of God. Calvin proclaimed a message which sought not only salvation of the individual but also penetration of the whole of society with the influence of the Christian religion. The Reformed church at Geneva made a great effort to organize an economic order worthy of the Gospel it preached. Calvin’s Institutes declare that no Christian “holds his gifts to himself, or for his private use, but shares them among his fellow members, nor does he derive benefit save from those things which proceed from the common profit of the body as a whole.”

Among the Puritans, to whom our free enterprise economies owe so much, Richard Baxter insisted that the Christian was committed by his faith to certain ethical standards which were just as binding in the sphere of economic activity as in private life. He must do business in the spirit of one conducting a public service; he must not “get another’s goods or labor for less than it is worth” or indulge in “extortion, working upon men’s ignorance, error or necessity.”

Challenge To Social Evils

Many specific social evils have been challenged by stalwart evangelicals. As the late Archbishop William Temple wrote, “the abolition of the slave trade and of slavery itself were political projects; but they were carried through by evangelicals in the fervor of their evangelical faith.” Like Wilberforce and Buxton, the evangelicals who pioneered the abolition of slavery, Shaftesbury, Sadler and Oastler, all evangelicals, were leaders in the campaigns against the social evils of nineteenth-century capitalism. Their work gave Britain much of its legislation for protection of workers, especially women and children, against exploitation in mines and factories. These men and many others such as Barnardo, Muller and Booth, were convinced that the Gospel was not only concerned with the life of the individual but also that of society. They refused to allow their Christianity to be divorced from social problems of their day. Moreover they knew what is too often forgotten nowadays, that social reform without the Gospel of Christ is ineffective, self-frustrating and dangerous. Just as faith without works is dead, so are works without faith.

The clear duty of the Christian in society, then, is to uphold loyally and steadfastly those biblical principles by which all economic and social activity must be judged. He must never allow his faith to be isolated from his conduct as employer, employee or citizen. This is both difficult and costly, but it is essential if his Christian witness is to make sense to the man in the street. Indeed the Christian’s concern with social problems should always be conceived as extension of his witness for Christ and not as an end in itself.

Biblical View Of Vocation

One important aspect of this is the question of Christian vocation in daily work. The distinction often made between those who are in so-called “fulltime service” and those who are not is invalid. Nor is there justification for the view that a layman’s Christian service must be confined to spare-time activities, with his daily work merely providing necessary finance. Every Christian should be in fulltime service, all day and every day, but this does not necessarily mean he has to be a minister or missionary and give up his secular job. Writing to the Corinthians, some of whom were chafing at the apparent limitations of their daily work and were eager to enjoy what seemed to them a wider sphere of service in itinerant preaching, Paul said, “Let everyone abide in the same calling wherein he was called.” Clearly we must not use this as excuse to neglect the claims of the ministry or mission field; the needs there are urgent and those who are called of God must go, but it does mean that Christians must look upon their daily work as a “calling” in which they are to make their witness and which they are not to leave unless clearly called to something else. Evangelicals have a great tradition here for the concept of “calling” was at the very heart of Puritan teaching. God does not call men to withdraw themselves from the world, Puritans taught, but rather to engage in labor for his glory. Wrote Richard Steele, “God doth call every man and woman … to serve Him in some peculiar employment in this world, both for their own and the common good … and let him be never so active out of his sphere, he will be at a great loss, if he do not keep his own vineyard and mind his own business.”

Opportunity For Witness

This attitude to work is sorely needed in the world today. What desperate need there is for Christian politicians, doctors, teachers, business men, foremen, workers and trade unionists. One of the great problems in British labor relations at the present time is that a small number of communists are active in factories and trade unions, exerting an influence out of all proportion to their numerical strength. They are able to do so only because of apathy of the great bulk of trade union members. How different things would be if the many Christians in those same factories and trade unions were ready to take office and bring their Christian influence to bear in this workaday sphere.

Opportunities for Christian witness in journalism and authorship, in national and local government, in business and professions are so obvious and yet neglected. Many people today are outside the reach of church and the minister but are accessible to those who work alongside them in office and factory, who do the same job but in a different way and with more joyous spirit because they have found something more purposeful in life than mere money-making and material security. Many mission fields are closing to professional missionaries, but they remain open to engineers, chemists, architects—the men who do ordinary jobs with extraordinary purpose. This attitude to work as extension of Christian witness is costly; it does not permit slacking or shoddy workmanship, or coming in late because one has been to prayer meeting the night before. The Christian must be a first-rate worker because he is a Christian not in spite of it. As Macaulay put it, “The Methodist revival improved the quality of West of England cloth.”

Christian Stewardship

Finally, the Christian must work out the implications of his faith in terms of stewardship. If it is important that he should be prayerfully responsible in the way in which he earns his income, it is equally important in the way he spends it. This too is in the evangelical tradition. It was the great Puritan Richard Baxter who wrote, “Every penny which is laid out … must be done as by God’s own appointment.” In a free enterprise economy the consumer is sovereign; the way in which he utilizes his income is the prime determinant of the way in which scarce, God-given economic resources are used for production and consumption. Thus the principle of Christian stewardship involves the Christian inevitably in the working of the economic order. He cannot, he must not, live unto himself; he is personally responsible for the effects his economic activities as well as his words have upon others. Although his citizenship is in heaven, he must live and witness in the world of men. For the man in Christ, “all things are become new”; there is no deadly dualism of secular and sacred but a life that is both whole and holy.

END

Dr. Paul S. James is Pastor of The Baptist Tabernacle in Adanta, Georgia.

- More from Norman C. Hunt

Cover Story

Secret of Power: Revive the Prayer Meeting

Alan Redpath

One day a few months ago I opened my mail to find enclosed in a letter from a member of my church an old letter of Dwight L. Moody’s written to his grandfather. Dated Baltimore, October 27, 1878, Moody’s letter was encouraging Mr. Aitchison, sexton, prayer meeting leader, Bible teacher and later senior elder of the old Chicago Avenue Church, to seek through intensive and united prayer fresh blessing from the Holy Spirit both personally and in the work of the church. That letter, quoted below, reveals the great evangelist’s confidence that definite, believing prayer is the means to power.

My prayer is that you may be full of the Holy Spirit. Why should we not lay hold of Matthew 5:6? Surely there is a promise for us and why should we not make it real and enter into its fullness? Acts 1:8 comes to my soul over and over again and it is a mighty blessing to my soul and I trust it will be to you.

Now do you not think it will be a good thing to get all who are hungry for the same blessing together once a week in prayer? I would not give it out in the meetings, but get hold of them one at a time and if you do not get but a few you will find it a great help to you. I hope you will not rest until you get the full blessing. God has a mighty blessing for you and he can use you to do a great work.

I do want to see that church made a power in Chicago for good.

My heart thrilled because Mr. Moody’s burden almost 80 years ago for the church he founded and which now bears his name was also the present longing of my heart.

Our Great Danger

We live in days when our churches are in great danger of substituting busyness, activity, committee meetings, even evangelistic services, for men and women on their knees in travail before God. In so many cases Christian people do not recognize the fact that witness to Christ is inseparably connected with communion with Christ and prayer to God in his name. The result is that in many churches today the midweek prayer meeting has been discontinued altogether. In others it is just another church service where the members sing some hymns, offer a few trite prayers for the success of the church services, then the pastor makes announcements and delivers a small talk.

Prayer Is Warfare

Prayer is not mere prattle, it is warfare; real prayer engages in battle. That kind of prayer God answers: prayer grounded in the Word, founded on the promises and rooted in God’s past dealings. Prayer is not primarily a means of getting something done; it is a concern for the glory of God.

Every week we receive a number of requests for prayer. Is it, however, a reflection upon the general standard of our praying that virtually all of these requests center around physical needs? Seldom do we get a request to pray for a real spiritual issue, a revelation of the will of God, the glory of God in a life, the breaking through of the power of God in hearts. Our prayers are usually asking God to bless the work or to keep us plodding along.

Was prayerlessness on our part the reason that there was a lack of conviction of sinners in our services? I asked myself, were we seeking to do by program planning and committee procedure what could be accomplished only by sacrificial prayer? By that I mean praying which refuses to let go until God blesses. The disciples waited and the power came; we do not wait and the power does not come.

Among the problems that faced us constantly were lack of reality in our personal lives, lack of effectiveness in our witness, lack of effort in our prayers. What we needed were prayer warriors, a few humble, ordinary souls anointed with the fullness of God’s Spirit. That is the ministry through which God convicts of sin, transforms lives and promotes revival.

Even when we prayed, could it be that we were living and acting in such a manner that it was impossible for God to answer our prayers? We can be so aware of sin in the life of the unbeliever, or of breakdown and failure in the life of our brother or sister in Christ, when the Holy Spirit of God is trying to speak to our own hearts and convince us of the sin in our own souls. The secret of every discord in Christian homes and communities and churches is that we seek our own way and our own glory. Obedience and humility are the only attitudes through which God can hear and answer prayer. We cannot in sincerity bring our requests in the name of the Lord Jesus unless we are living so that it is possible for God in righteousness to hear and answer us. If sacrificial living and self-denial cease, then prayer becomes meaningless and righteous conduct impossible.

Some people come to church, even to prayer meeting, carrying the resentment of years, the bitterness of a lifetime, and when they ask God for blessing they wonder why their prayers are not answered. A condition of restored fellowship with Christ is a forgiving spirit and without that there can be no fellowship in prayer with one another. What separations develop, what resentments arise out of injuries and slights, real or imagined! What an appalling revelation of how we love ourselves and how important we think we are!

During the major part of my ministry at Moody Church thus far the emphasis in my preaching has been upon this need for holy living, because it is my deep conviction that only through holiness in the lives of Christians can the unsaved be challenged to come to Christ.

Times Of Refreshing

When individual lives were cleansed and principles of prayer practiced, we noticed increasing burden for prayer spreading throughout our church. We made innovations in our scheduled prayer meetings, the executive committee leading out by setting aside alternate meetings especially for prayer. We created separate prayer meetings for young people and adults and added other periods such as all-night prayer meetings and cottage prayer meetings in an attempt to enlist all the people in some kind of public prayer.

The first of our all-night prayer meetings on New Year’s Eve 1953–54 proved to be such a great time of refreshing and blessing we have had several more. Sometimes we take an hour or two of waiting upon God for special requests following a midweek service. At a night of prayer for foreign missions in connection with one of our missionary conferences the Lord drew very near to us and we were confident that our missionaries felt the impact. We shall never forget the hour spent in praying for revival in the church; truly heaven seemed to open on us and our hearts were melted—there were few dry eyes in that meeting.

Our next step was organizing groups in the homes of our people for prayer and testimony. The need for fellowship, Bible study and prayer among our scattered members was quite sufficient reason for setting up 27 districts for monthly or bi-monthly cottage meetings. Most of the groups started studying the Gospel of John, using a set of guide questions for analysis and personal application. We found this method stimulated helpful discussion and greater participation in study of the Word. A large percentage of time was devoted to ministry of intercession, and virtually all who attended took part in prayer, especially for a gracious visitation of the Holy Spirit upon all the life and ministry of the church. In many ways we witnessed the increasing impact of such prayer.

Charting A New Course

D. L. Moody suggested that Mr. Aitchison seek out one by one those whom he felt shared this burden with him and call them to prayer. I had half a mind to do that very thing, but then I remembered that we met for prayer for revival every Friday morning at seven. That was a difficult time for prayer meeting, of course—very inconvenient; it meant getting up and leaving home very early. For some people it was impossible, but the ten to twenty who came found a family-like spirit of oneness.

In January 1956 we put into operation a new plan for midweek prayer service—a supper fellowship at 5:30, prayer meeting at 6:30 and Bible study at 7:30. The response was most encouraging and the unhurried season of prayer paved the way for an evening of real blessing. By having a smaller group and a smaller room than the 7:30 service, we could hear each other’s prayers and those present felt more freedom in prayer.

However, the young people who came seemed to feel a hesitancy in praying before older people, and the next step was a separate meeting for those under 40. This proved the principle that “you can multiply by dividing,” because within a few months both groups were as large as the original group. “After a single month, the prayer meeting has become an almost indispensable part of our work week,” one young person wrote, “and we can only wonder why we hadn’t done it sooner!”

Praying To God’S Glory

But real prayer is more than just meeting together. The Lord said, “When you pray, do it not to be seen of men.” That applies to public prayer also. Unfortunately, it is all too easy for one or two people to ruin a prayer meeting and deprive others of blessings they might otherwise receive. A prayer meeting is no time for fancy phraseology, unnatural tone of voice, needless repetitions and long drawn-out prayers. Simplicity is a necessary ingredient of prayer and testimony in public gatherings. Above all, we should be thoughtful how we use the name of Deity; it is too sacred to be repeated without veneration or put in terms of human affection. We found that these principles of public prayer had to be emphasized at the beginning of each meeting and sometimes enforced.

When our praying is for his glory and our hearts are drawn together in love to God, in love to Jesus Christ and in love to each other, there is a triumphant note of victory in the church that drives out discord and brings liberty in work and worship. I find in my diary a few months back this entry: “The presence of the Lord has been very manifest today. It has been great encouragement to find our prayer meeting attended by many more people … How constantly we have to be taught that the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”

“Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled,” was D. L. Moody’s conviction and the promise he claimed. Is it yours and mine?

Let us keep our chins up and our knees down—we are on the victory side!

END

The Rev. A. Dallimore, B.Th., is pastor of the Cottam Baptist Church, Cottam, Ontario, Canada. He was for some years editor of The Union Baptist and writes a monthly column for its successor, The Fellowship Baptist. He is a graduate of Central Baptist Seminary of Toronto, and for some years has been doing research on the life of Whitefield in preparation for a new biography to be called, George Whitefield and the Eighteenth Century Revival.

- More from Alan Redpath

Review of Current Religious Thought: August 19, 1957

William A. Mueller

In recent days we have heard a good deal about the revival of the fundamentalist-modernist controversy. Both CHRISTIANITY TODAY and Christian Century have had editorials on this matter. It would be unfortunate if a destructive type of controversy would develop out of this endeavour. Please let us define our terms, beware of over- or understatements of the opponent’s views, and may we have the grace to recognize those as brothers beloved who acknowledge in word and deed Jesus Christ to be Lord and Saviour. That all is not well even among the critical scholars is attested by a discerning article, “The Current Plight of Biblical Scholarship,” by Prof. C. C. McCown (Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. LXXV, March 1956). But has agreement been reached with regard to the Greek New Testament? McCown speaks of “the dubious predicament of the ‘science’ of biblical exegesis today, a predicament shared with all culture.” He calls for “imagination, original and creative scholarship in the face of danger of failure and defeat.” He writes:

“For 75 years scholars (like ourselves!) have been presenting their most brilliant ideas to the annual meetings and printing them in the Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature. But, not only between the Continent and America, but within the American groups, differences are sharper than ever, partly because of the altered tone of society in general, but partly, perhaps largely, because of the failure of our scholarship to attain assured and agreed results. Our very right to freedom of thought, criticism and expression is under attack in many quarters. Biblical scholarship is most directly involved in the anti-intellectual and anti-liberal movements of the present moment, as well as from those who doubt the value of both history and religion” (p. 13).

Surely, these are serious admissions of failure on the part of a leading critical New Testament scholar. He even goes so far as to say “current ecumenicity highlights, rather than subdues, the contrasts” among students of the Bible. Scholars entertain different conceptions of criticism, principles, methods and results of biblical studies. We ask: is it pertinent to inquire whether or not much of the present plight of so-called higher and literary critical scholarship may be due to a faulty starting point? In other words, scholars since Schleiermacher have not been as objective as they claimed to be. Did not the astute Schleiermacher smuggle Spinoza into Christian theology? Ferdinand Christian Baur, eminent church historian though he was, sees nothing but a nasty struggle in apostolic history.

David Friedrich Strauss, to whom Professor Bultmann seems to be beholden in many ways, radically denied the supernatural element in the Gospel. He defined the faith of the early Church in Jesus Christ as Lord as a myth that crystallized out of the pious wishes of the first Christians. And Strauss, be it remembered, ended finally in gross materialism! Bruno Bauer, left-wing Hegelian, interpreted Christianity as the religion of abstraction. To him Christianity estranges man from kin and kindred, family and people, a charge heard in our day by followers of Nietzsche and Alfred Rosenberg. F. Ch. Baur spiritualizes the fourth gospel, while Strauss sees in it the most sensual gospel.

On the one hand, excessive emphasis on rationality and the historical approach, on the other hand contempt of history and historical facts. One need only read Albert Schweitzer’s The Quest of the Historical Jesus in order to be reminded by that “liberal of a higher order” of the vagaries, distortions and evasions of much of nineteenth-century critical scholarship. And has not Harry Emerson Fosdick in our day admitted the serious flaws of modernism in his sermon “Beyond Modernism” published in the fall of 1935?

But neo-evangelicals have their troubles too. Witness the present controversy between Gordon H. Clark of Butler University and the men around Professor Van Til of Westminster Theological Seminary. We commend to our readers Professor Clark’s article, “The Bible as Truth,” in Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 114, April 1957. Clark realizes that theories of truth are notoriously intricate, yet we must somehow achieve a decent biblical epistemology. And Clark is convinced that “truth is characteristic of propositions only.” However, “the thesis that the Bible is literally true does not imply that the Bible is true literally. Figures of speech occur in the Bible and they are not true literally. They are true figuratively. But they are literally true.” Moreover, Clark argues, if God should speak a truth, but speak it so that no one could possibly hear, that truth would not be a revelation. Clark finds it incredible that conservative theologians deny that the Bible, apart from questions and commands, consists of true statements that men can know.

Clark combats the assertion of “The Text of a Complaint,” written by Westminster Theological Seminary teachers, of the absolute qualitative distinction between God’s knowledge of himself and man’s knowledge of God. Clark does not for a moment deny that human knowledge of God is and always will be limited. That is so because men are creatures. The fall has darkened men’s understanding. But, even though men need the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, men have some understanding of sin and God. There must be some point of similarity between God’s knowledge and our own knowledge of God, otherwise men could never receive anything that God would impart to them in his revelation. “If there could be a truth inexpressible in logical, grammatical form, the word truth as applied to it would have no more in common with the usual meaning of truth than the Dog Star has in common with Fido” (p. 167).

Needless to say that Clark’s position with regard to biblical epistemology has its difficulties as any other theory of knowledge. But it points up the fact that the neo-evangelicals are seriously talking to each other.

Erich Dinkier in “Principles of Biblical Interpretation” (Journal of Religious Thought, Autumn-Winter 1955/56) advocates a synthesis of the older historico-critical method and Karl Barth’s neo-biblicist approach. He writes:

“The historian’s task or question: How did it happen? What are the facts? was not corrected and supplemented by the questions the texts themselves were raising, the questions, How do you decide with regard to Jesus Christ, the proclaimed Son of God? How do you understand your own life before God and in the midst of this world after having encountered the risen Christ, the living Lord, and the Gospel? Disregarding these questions does not result in objectivity but in restricting our insight in falling short of understanding the inner forces and even the very core of the text. All this is done on the basis of a highly subjective conception of objectivity” (p. 26).

In other words, Christian scholars must be “open to self-criticism.” This ought to be true no matter which theological position we espouse.

- More from William A. Mueller

Books

Book Briefs: August 19,1957

Biblical Criticism

Paul Before the Areopagus and other New Testament Studies, by N. B. Stonehouse, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1957. $3.50.

Since 1938 Dr. Stonehouse has been Professor of New Testament, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. During the last fifteen years his scholarly New Testament studies have found expression in formal addresses and in print. He has now collected and published seven of these studies in one volume.

Here is the list of subjects discussed: The Aeropagus Address; Who Crucified Jesus? Repentance, Baptism and the Gift of the Holy Spirit; The Elders and the Living-Beings in the Apocalypse; Rudolph Bultmann’s Jesus; Martin Dihelius and the Relation of History and Faith; and Luther and the New Testament Canon.

The author’s strength lies in his comprehensive understanding of the history of biblical criticism and interpretation; a deep conviction that the Bible, if permitted to speak its own message, is self-authenticating; scientific methods and principles of biblical exegesis; and a clear and dignified English style.

Each of the seven messages deals with controversial matters. Here are two examples. Men like Bultmann and Dibelius have contended that Paul’s message before the Areopagus is unchristian: that it contradicts Paul himself in the rest of Acts and his Epistles and also early Christianity as a whole. A second example concerns itself with Jesus’ crucifixion. In 1942 Solomon Zeitlin published a book in which he absolved the Jews from all responsibility in the death of Jesus, claiming that Jesus, like the Jews often in history, was the victim of a ruthless pagan political system.

Dr. Stonehouse shows that these conclusions are not based on facts.

Our author is disturbed by the skepticism and unscientific methods used by some critics in reconstructing biblical history and in re-evaluating the apostolic testimony and proclamation regarding Jesus Christ, resulting in a distrust if not repudiation of the Gospel. He works ably and effectively in defending the New Testament against unfair criticism.

With some justification critics will accuse Dr. Stonehouse of being as one-sided and as blind in facing all facts as he accuses them of being. They must also admit that he makes it necessary for them to be more careful and accurate in handling biblical truth.

These chapters will give helpful information and excellent training to those who are interested in essential and constructive biblical criticism.

WM. W. ADAMS

Expository Approach

Preaching from Great Bible Chapters, by Kyle M. Yates. Broadman, Nashville, 1957. $2.50.

Kyle M. Yates is an eminent Old Testament scholar of conservative and evangelical persuasion. He served on the Revision Committee which prepared the Revised Standard Version of the Old Testament in 1952. After service both in the pastorate and on the faculty of the Southern Baptist Seminary at Louisville, he is presently the “Distinguished Professor of the Bible” at Baylor University.

Preaching from Great Bible Chapters is the third volume of its kind to come from this author’s pen, being preceded by Preaching from the Prophets and Preaching from the Psalms. Yates has selected thirteen prominent chapters from both Old and New Testaments for detailed discussion, among them Psalm 23, Psalm 51, Isaiah 53, Matthew 5, Luke 15, Romans 8, and 1 Corinthians 13. His love for preachers induced him to prepare these studies in the hope and with the prayer that they “will inspire and provide material for at least thirteen good expository sermons.” He is quick to add that he has written equally for the layman in the interests of his fuller understanding of these portions of the Scriptures and his spiritual growth.

As indicated in the above quotation, Yates’ approach is expository. He takes the entire chapter, divides it into major sections on the basis of expressed themes or subjects, and then examines the parts in detail. In this way he provides a thorough analysis, yet always in relation to a central idea, thus giving coherence and structure to the exposition. True to the best expository tradition he is never satisfied to drop his pen after setting forth the contents of a passage, but carefully elucidates its relevance to the life of modern man. Underlying each study is a mastery of the original languages which makes for precision, thoroughness and poignancy. The book has deep spiritual and evangelistic overtones which are the outgrowth of a profound reverence for the Word of God and its basic teachings. It is not a volume of expository sermons, but an aid to the effective preaching of such sermons providing germinal ideas which can be further developed and implemented with illustrative materials. The form of presentation enhances its value for the layman’s devotional reading.

It is refreshing to find an Old Testament scholar of Yates’ stature who unequivocally affirms his faith in the Word of God, who perceives in Isaiah 53 a valid prophetic vision of Calvary and who insists upon the substitionary doctrine implicit in this passage. He does, however, infer his acceptance of the Deutero-Isaiah theory (pp. 116, 119). And at times this reviewer sensed a diluted doctrine of the divine sovereignty. Nevertheless, we commend the author on a noble purpose well achieved.

RICHARD ALLEN BODEY

Moral Principles

Religion in Action, by Jerome Davis, Philosophical Library, New York. $4.75.

This is another book which deals with the matter of the application of morality to practical living. It is written by Jerome Davis, “Author, Educator, Interpreter of Foreign Affairs.” In the preface the author notes that among all the forces operating in our changing world, the most “revolutionary in their potentialities are the moral and spiritual forces available to every human personality.” These, it is said, “must be applied to life,” and that is what this book aims to do. The book is “the culmination of nearly fifty years of study and activity and the conviction that religion and action cannot be separated.”

Jerome Davis seems to have gathered together all the loose ends of “fifty years of study and activity” into this one volume. He treats every conceivable subject relating to human living—from food distribution and consumption and the way parents ought to deal with their children, to communism, the labor movement, racial prejudice and the importance of a religious institution to the life of the community. In no part is the treatment thorough or intensive. It is in the nature of running observation, with free use of quotation, incident, biographical detail. And the treatment is disparate, unorganized, and without clear focus.

Davis believes in God and has high regard for Jesus Christ and the wisdom of the New Testament. For the rest it is difficult to know whether he has any other religious presuppositions than those of a moral God, a moral man, and a moral order that needs attention from moral man who acts under the stimulus and guidance of a moral God. Here is an example of the case for religion in the community, whether that of the “church or synagogue.” A wealthy atheist tried to establish a community without a church. To it gravitated the agnostics, atheists and criminal elements. Families not too religious wanted a church or synagogue to which they could turn, if only for the sake of their children, or perhaps for the social activities of church life. Not finding either, but only saloons and gambling places, the people moved away. Finally the wealthy real estate owner decided, “even though he did not believe in God, that he simply must have a church or a synagogue in the community if he wished to sell his lots advantageously. So in the end he donated land for a church” (pp. 219, 220).

Davis’ discussion of the application of moral principles to everyday living would have been more effective if his treatment were more sharply delineated and his objectives more clearly defined. And it would have been immensely more helpful if he really had a religion (instead of a body of common sense moral counsels) to apply to life.

GEORGE STOB

More Than Bombs

Atoms for the World, by Laura Fermi, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. $3.75.

This book is for those who like their reading laced with the unusual and for those interested in the social impact of science. Written by the widow of the atomic physicist, Enrico Fermi, it is an account of the first International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy held at Geneva in 1955. While a vast literature of a technical sort has been written for and about this venture, this is the only lay description in book form intended for an audience “whose interest is probably half way between that of the delegates and that of the uninterested public.”

Two years ago, seventy-three nations met in this unique event, held under the direction of the United Nations. It was intended to provide a place for discussion and publicity of the possible uses of atomic energy for peaceful pursuits. It was intended, too, to provide those social contacts between the scientists of diverse nations so necessary for the advancement of science. In both the success was remarkable—particularly so because of the friendly participation of the Communist bloc. The writer, realizing that so worthwhile an event deserved popular description, has excelled in her task, painting admirably and with keen feeling the details, discussions, ideals and ideas behind such a technical venture. We are taken from laboratory to display and lecture to conversation but also from frustration to fulfillment and from the individual to the community of nations; all with delightful and informative ease.

Today, the initial success is manifest in another similar conference planned in the same city for next year. It is also shown in recent ratification by the governments of a number of countries (including Russia and the United States) of the statute creating an international agency on the peaceful uses of atomic energy. Certainly one may question possible outworkings of the latter plan and one may be somewhat skeptical of the dreams of universal peace through science implicit behind both the conference and the agency. One recalls Max Born, the famous German theoretical physicist, recently writing, “In 1921 I believed … the unambiguous language of science to be a step towards a better understanding between human beings. In 1951 I believed none of [this].… Although physicists understood one another well enough across all national frontiers they had contributed nothing to a better understanding of nations, but had helped in inventing and applying the most horrible weapon of destruction” (Physics in My Generation). But with all this, our book does describe the inception of something new—an attempt to use the atom on the international scene for more than bombs. It may foretell greater social participation by the scientific community. It cannot demonstrate that international politics, and even applied science, will not continue to be used for the greed of the few rather than the good of the many.

THOMAS H. LEITH

Natural Development

Principalities and Powers, by G. B. Caird. Oxford University Press, London, $2.40.

Interest in biblical theology is on the increase today. This volume, a study in Pauline theology, is an investigation of that Apostle’s teaching concerning principalities and powers. It reproduces the Chancellor’s Lectures for 1954 delivered at Queen’s University, Ontario, by the Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at McGill University.

True to the task of biblical theology the first three chapters trace the history of Jewish beliefs which contributed to Paul’s demonology. The fourth and final chapter seeks to show in what manner Paul envisaged the Cross as the victory over principalities and powers. Among other things the author concludes that principalities and powers include the powers of state, that the history of the Law which was given and guarded by angels resembles that of Satan himself, and that the victory of the Cross is through revelation, identification and obedience.

While the book is fairly complete as far as the analysis of Pauline teaching is concerned, it leaves much to be desired theologically. In his introduction the author claims that his responsibility is mainly descriptive, which responsibility he has discharged well; but his denial that the consideration of such questions as Does evil exist? Are there personal powers of evil? What is meant by “personal”? are a part of his task is open to serious question. Biblical theology is concerned not only with what was written but also with the thought in the mind of the writer which, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, produced what was written. Certainly the answers to such questions which the author disclaims as part of his task are essential to the unveiling of Pauline thought in these areas.

In spite of this disavowal of responsibility the author in the course of his discussion does answer some of these questions, and it is these answers which make the work theologically inadequate. For instance, he denies the personal character of Satan. Too, and more basic, the author considers Paul’s ideas a result of natural development from his Jewish and Hellenistic background which ideas are set forth entirely in mythological language. This does not leave much room for Paul’s thought and writing to be moulded by revelation, nor does it predicate real substantial existence of these spirit beings which assume such a large place in Pauline theology.

CHARLES C. RYRIE

Teen-Age Problems

For Teen-Agers Only, by Frank Howard Richardson, M. D., Tupper and Love, New York, 1957. $2.95.

The market is being flooded with books having to do with the psychological approach to the various age groups, so much so that in many instances the psychiatrist’s couch has been substituted for the mourners’ bench.

When a physician who is a recognized authority in the field of child psychology is also a Christian it is fortunate that he is further gifted with the ability to write. For Teen-Agers Only is a book Christian parents can safely put in the hands of their own children faced with mounting teen-age problems, for it is sane, wholesome and frank.

One of the problems of young people today is that of “going steady,” with all of the emotional as well as physiological factors which may be involved. In this book Dr. Richardson, using hypothetical cases and names and a dialogue method, keeps the interest of the reader and makes one feel as though he were participating in the discussions.

Heartily recommended.

L. NELSON BELL

Competent Guide

Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, by Joseph Addison Alexander. Zondervan, Grand Rapids. $5.95.

Joseph Addison Alexander, son of the illustrious Archibald Alexander, who organized Princeton Theological Seminary in 1812, taught in the same seminary almost continuously from 1830 to 1860, the year of his death. His long teaching career covered most of the departments of the theological discipline. He was a man of consummate scholarship, a linguist, even from his childhood, of extraordinary ability and a teacher and preacher of exceptional parts. His massive erudition, which made him conversant with the Bible in its entirety, was constructively used in the defense and exposition of Holy Scripture.

Alexander’s commentaries on Isaiah and the Psalms, previously reviewed in CHRISTIANITY TODAY, have perhaps contributed more to the author’s fame as an exegete than the present commentary under review. It will be evident, however, that the reader will find in the present work, written in clear and crisp English which make reading a pleasure, those features of Alexander’s abilities which have made his writings the joy of the Bible-believer and the envy of the liberal.

The reader will not find in these pages a constant parade of names representing this or that view or opinion, as is customary in some commentaries; but, as a blessed compensation, he will soon feel that he is in the hands of a competent guide who is able to lead him through this Gospel with a stronger and more intelligent faith than that with which he began.

In Alexander you know you have an expositor who believes the Bible to be the word of God. His view of inspiration is high (e. g., pp. 136, 184, 308). He never finds mistakes and contradictions in the Gospels (e. g., pp. 86, 171, 209, 332, 393, 438). He constantly, though not obtrusively, defends Mark’s historicity and trustworthiness against the then current schools of “neologists” and “German sceptics.” If one has grown tired of the sultry commentaries by modern writers who think of Mark as little more than a bad copyist and a worse historian, Alexander will come as a refreshing and reviving breeze from the past.

The conservative Christian will rarely find a place in this excellent commentary where he will disagree with the learned author. In hardly one place has the reviewer placed a question mark in the margin of his copy to indicate dissent. Alexander is always eminently fair; his conclusions, based upon a judicious spirit of unquestioned sincerity, are always reasonably valid.

It is little wonder, then, that Zondervan Publishing House feels justified in reprinting this “classic commentary” in its “Classical Commentary Library.” Resurrected just before its centennial anniversary (1958), this commentary will be a delight to a new generation of Christians who, not knowing the author in the flesh, will surely feel that they know the spirit of this prince of American exegetes.

WICK BROOMALL

Devotional Study

The Story of the Cross, by Leon Morris. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1957. $2.00.

A devotional study of Matthew’s inspired record of the events of the last half of Passion Week (Matt. 26–28) forms the content of this volume by Leon Morris, Vice-Principal of Ridley College, Melbourne. The material, with the exception of the final chapter on the resurrection, was given as a Lenten series in 1956.

Avowedly designed and presented to a general Christian audience, the book is simple and popular in content and in tone. At the same time it reflects an extensive substratum of solid exegetical scholarship and wide research in the pertinent literature.

Perhaps it is expecting too much of a book which covers such well-plowed ground to unearth any startlingly new or refreshingly different insights, but the persistent impression of this work is—good but prosaic. For a devotional volume it is almost coldly analytical in its approach and too didactic in its method.

The meaning of the sacrificial death of the Lord Jesus Christ and the reality of his bodily resurrection are clearly stated. With these doctrines no orthodox Christian would find fault. But many would dispute Morris’ sacramentarian view of ritual baptism as a means of grace which is essential for entrance into the Church.

JOHN A. WITMER

Far East News: August 19, 1957

New Patterns

Climaxing 75 years of some of the most fruitful work in the history of modern missions, the Korea Mission of the Northern Presbyterian Church will dissolve itself as an administrative body in 1959 or 1960. The agreement was worked out between the Presbyterian Church in Korea, the Mission and the Board of Foreign Missions (Presbyterian U.S.A.), and adopted by the Mission at its annual meeting this summer. The “mission” as such will be gone but the missionary will be as indispensable as ever.

This “euthanasia of the mission,” as it has been called, opens a new pattern of integrated missionary approach to the uncompleted task of winning Korea for Christ. Missionary and Korean colleagues alike will be under the direction of the Korean church’s judicatories.

Mission leaders pointed out that the dissolution of the mission will be no emergency or revolutionary step, but rather the accomplishment of the goal set by the missionary pioneers who acknowledged that the mission they organized was like a scaffolding which should be removed as the building—the church—rose to completion.

Today, two out of every three of Korea’s 1,288,000 Protestants are Presbyterian, and over half a million of these belong to the Presbyterian Church in Korea. (Two smaller bodies, the Koryu Presbyterian Church and the Presbyterian Church in the R.O.K., are not affected by the agreement.) The church has been self-governing and independent of the mission since its organization in 1907, and the work of the missionaries within the presbyteries has been directed by the presbyteries. Since 1945 the schools and institutions of the mission have been under boards of directors controlled by the church. Since 1956 the work budget has been in the hands of a joint church-mission conference.

The new agreement simply adds two further steps to what has already been accomplished in the transfer of authority from the foreign mission to the younger church. The mission will disappear and the assignment of missionaries and the preparation even of special budgets will now be made by the Korean church through its proposed Department of Cooperative Work, which, however, will include missionary representation. American personnel will be organized as a Missionary Fellowship to oversee matters of missionary health, furloughs, language study and residence. Direct liaison between the Korean church and the Northern Presbyterian Church will be maintained through the latter’s field representative, Dr. Edward N. Adams.

Fears that the dissolution of the mission means the end of the missionary, and that church control of foreign aid means abandonment of the Korea Mission’s historic “Nevius policy” of self-support, self-propagation and self-government in the younger church, were met by a statement of three governing principles. The first, “the principle of the giving of life,” underlines the continuing importance of the missionary. “In the relationship between churches in different lands,” it states, “the most important element is the giving of life.… The giving of funds is secondary. The reversal of this order can be fraught with spiritual danger to both the giving and the receiving church.”

The second, “the principle of stewardship,” emphasizes self-support. “A Christian church must support financially its own governing body, its own officers, offices and ecclesiastical activities to remain a spiritual, vital and independent church. Only after this is done can a church receive aid for its institutions and projects from sister churches without danger to its own moral integrity and independence of action.”

The third, “the principle of administration of aid,” outlines the balance in partnership which characterizes missions in the day of the rise of the younger churches. “A sovereign, independent church has the right to decide for itself when aid from sister churches is no longer needed. As long as that aid is continued, however, personnel from the sister church shall participate on the church committee which assigns work and disposes funds provided by that sister church.”

The two other missions which are working in cooperation with the Presbyterian Church in Korea—the Southern Presbyterian and the Australian Presbyterian—are taking somewhat similar but less radical steps toward closer integration with the Korean church.

—S.H.M.

Army Promotion

General Sun Yup Paik, a hero of the Korean War and commanding officer of the First R. O. K. Army, accepted Christ and was baptized last year by Dr. Kyung Chik Han of Seoul’s Yong Nak Presbyterian Church. He was promoted recently to the post of Army Chief of Staff.

Vatican Ambassador

The first Philippine ambassador to the Vatican has recently been appointed by President P. Garcia.

For several years Catholic groups have been urging such a selection. They found the late President Magsaysay sympathetic to their idea and the creation of the Vatican embassy was approved by Congress last year. Due to strong opposition the law was not acted upon until this year.

Dr. Jose Ma. Delgado, medical practitioner and prominent Catholic lay leader, was named for the post. His appointment was hailed in Catholic circles and many believe that his designation may soon lead to the appointment of a Filipino cardinal. Reports from Rome for the past two years give speculation to the probability that the Pope might name a cardinal from the East. If the pontiff names a Filipino cardinal, it may be Msgr. Rufino J. Santos, Archbishop of Manila.

Protestant leaders in the Philippines view the Vatican appointment as another indication of the strength of the Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines.

—E.C.

Share

Labor’S Use Of Power

The Need Of A Conscience

Emptiness Of Perpetual Discontent

The Christian’S Responsibility

Separate Organization?

Preacher In The Red

Share

Share

The Form And The Spirit

Divine Poetry In Our Flesh

Cliches Move No Mountains

The Gospel’s Strange Power

Share

Share

The Reality Of Oneness

“Christ In You”

Christ The Believer’S Life

Results Of Oneness With Christ

Share

Share

Public And Private Education

Education And Character

The Retreat From Religion

The Bible In The Schools

Perils Of Irreligious Education

Religious Liberty

Share

Share

Christ And Scripture

The Spirit’s Illumination

The Spirit’s Power

The Spirit’s Sword

The Sermon Itself

Walking In Fellowship

Share

Share

Inevitable Involvement

The Taint Of Sin

Capitalism Versus Collectivism

Challenge To Social Evils

Biblical View Of Vocation

Opportunity For Witness

Christian Stewardship

Share

Share

Our Great Danger

Prayer Is Warfare

Times Of Refreshing

Charting A New Course

Praying To God’S Glory

Share

Share

Share

Share

Biblical Criticism

Expository Approach

Moral Principles

More Than Bombs

Natural Development

Teen-Age Problems

Competent Guide

Devotional Study

Share

Share

New Patterns

Army Promotion

Vatican Ambassador

Share