World News: September 16, 1957

G. B.

People usually write growling letters to the editor about policemen.

Conrad S. Jensen, captain of one of New York’s roughest police precincts, the 23rd, switched the procedure. He wrote one to the editor of Life magazine on the unlikely subject of Billy Graham and his critics.

It was in relation to the views in Life of a theologian, Reinhold Niebuhr, and a practicing pastor, Dr. John Sutherland Bonnell, Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church.

Since the letter isn’t likely to see the light of print, unless it appears here, portions of it are quoted, as follows:

“I am aware that my scholastic background, as compared to Mr. Niebuhr and Mr. Bonnell, leaves me only a rung or two off the ground … because I am a policeman I encounter the danger of being put into the category of a ‘dumb cop.’ Notwithstanding, I have no ulterior motives and God knows my heart.

“Nineteen hundred years ago a centurion (a police captain like myself, if you will allow this parallel) stood by the foot of the cross of Christ and made this statement: ‘Truly this was the Son of God.’

“He had just witnessed the crime of all crimes. No doubt he was reluctant to carry out the order to crucify ‘this just person.’ Whether or not the centurion had time to reflect on the worth of this sacrifice and recognized it as a ‘bargain,’ as Mr. Niebuhr puts it in his closing statement, I don’t know … Perhaps the centurion saw the peace of God in the face of the penitent thief and then looked at the other malefactor who refused a ‘bargain.’ However, both men came to a decision without the benefit of ‘Christian historical scholarship.’

“It has been my experience to witness the ‘gospel’ of some of those taught by Mr. Niebuhr. The message is mostly ‘birth control’ and ‘rent control …’

“When Mr. Niebuhr calls the gospel preached by Billy Graham a bargain, he must realize there will come a time when he will have to justify this remark. Jesus also had his critics—his greatest being the intellectual, religious, self-righteous pharisee, who, no doubt, had a lot of ‘historical scholarship.’

“Throughout Mr. Niebuhr’s views, he refers to the fact that Billy Graham’s approach is ‘too simple,’ ‘less complicated,’ ‘over-simplified’ and ‘uncomplex.’

“If America ever needed something simple and uncomplex, it is now … The vitals of America are being chewed out by plain ordinary sin and lawlessness.

“It is easy to understand how Mr. Niebuhr has difficulty with the simplicity of Christ. Nicodemus, a religious ruler of his time, asked Jesus, ‘How can these things be?’ He tripped over his historical scholarship and fell flat on his face when Jesus said, in simple words, ‘Ye must be born again.’

“God establishes his Word by picturing for us the attitude of some people when they hear the gospel. ‘For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.’ When Mr. Niebuhr puts the gospel of Christ, faithfully proclaimed by Billy Graham, into the basement with other bargains, close-outs and items reduced for clearance, I believe he verifies the verse above.

“Apparently, man will ever labor to put God into a pattern that fits his miserable, finite, inadequate intellect.

“I thank God that Jesus was not ‘marked down’ for my benefit, but was ‘sent down’ to pay the price of my sinfulness. Also, I thank God that I am just foolish enough to believe that salvation comes by faith in the sinless Son of God. As long as Billy Graham preaches the ‘unsearchable riches of Christ’ I shall pray for him and those that labor with him.”

Lots of folks probably will disagree with Captain Jensen. They can tell him so most any day at the 23rd precinct headquarters. It will be easy to spot him. He is the big, tough-looking fellow in charge.

Romance Over

Meeting in Oberlin, Ohio, on the threshold of the World Council’s Faith and Order Conference, an estimated 40 professors of ecumenical theology grappled with the problem of vitalizing ecumenical Christianity on the level of the local church and laity.

“We are in a post-Evanston period,” lamented one spokesman. “The romance of the ecumenical impact is now over.”

The dilemma facing the theologians, chosen from 120 teachers of ecumenical theology (there are none in Canadian seminaries as yet), was confessedly that of making “abstract institutionalism” intelligible to the laity. No effective transition from “ecumenics in general” to “ecumenics in particular” has been achieved; ecumenical concerns seem remote from the normal church program.

Ministerial enthusiasm is lacking also. Ecumenical journals have attracted unimpressive subscription lists. While many of the 945 Councils of Churches in the United States breed ecumenical enthusiasm, a large number of member ministers and congregations remain unenthusiastic. Ecumenical institutes this year met failure as often as success.

Dr. W. A. Visser ’t Hooft of Geneva, WCC General Secretary, expressed fear, however, that the ecumenical movement may be growing too fast. He noted that the term was not introduced in the U. S. until 1937. He warned that its result might be “the opposite of what we want” unless there is “a deep change in the content of preaching, an orientation to the authority of the Bible and to Christocentric teaching (as Karl Barth would tell us) as the climate in which ecumenical education becomes meaningful.

President John A. Mackay of Princeton Seminary declared: “Despite my commitment to the ecumenical movement, I say it is becoming too impersonal through its concern for group relations and is apt to lose sight of the individual.” He urged “a mission in which people can work together, such as evangelism, that grips the soul-hunger of the people.”

One professor noted that “ecumenical conversion” from an “unconverted ecclesiology” is no easy achievement. Another lamented that although half the seminaries give some scope to ecumenical theology, the remaining half have no particular theological interest.”

Presided over by Dr. Charles L. Taylor, executive director of the American Association of Theological Schools, the theologians outlined plans to ecumenize both the church community and theological curriculum. Seminarians will be discouraged from a final theology before study of a wide range of theologians and ecumenical attitudes. The inner seminary movement is expected to yield a theological preparation for ecumenical leadership.

Ecumenical institutions henceforth will utilize existing schools instead of creating new study situations. More denominational programs of ecumenical study will be sought.

Evangelical observers noted the dominating assumption that ecumenical concern is validly expressed only through participation in the WCC inclusive effort; evangelical interdenominational movements were unmentioned as a valid ecumenical expression. While an occasional voice was lifted for the primacy of Christ and the Bible, there was no emphasis that ecumenicity is genuine only when it is evangelical and evangelistic.

The Day It Began

Evangelical churches of America are being urged by the Spiritual Life Commission of the National Association of Evangelicals to plan special prayer observances on September 23, the centennial anniversary date of the beginning of the great spiritual awakening of 1857.

September 23 was the day the famous Fulton Street noonday prayer meeting began in New York City. Soon prayer meetings had sprung up throughout the country, bringing one of the most powerful revivals of the nation’s history. Within two years, 500,000 people were converted to Christ.

“Revival for America” has been suggested as the general prayer theme. The commission is under the direction of the Rev. Armin Gesswein of Pasadena, Calif.

Evangelical churches also will be asked to observe October 20–27 as “NAE Week.” The theme will be “The Strength of Spiritual Unity,” with emphases on the many services provided evangelicals for the last 15 years by the NAE.

Worth Quoting

“Strength and effective Christian witness do not come from organic union.… Too close organic union, especially under compulsion, may well defeat the good relations and effective cooperation necessary to achieve the common goal.”—Congressman Walter H. Judd, Minnesota.

“Berlin is like an island completely surrounded by the communists. The only answer for these people is to look up.”—Darlene Janzen, Youth for Christ.

“God is using Billy Graham to shake towns, cities and whole countries out of their indifference. Wherever he goes, he preaches Christ! God has changed thousands of lives through this man. He has also changed mine … May I ask a pertinent question? What is your job during this time of awakening? Are you supposed to stand by with your hands in your pockets and complain because Billy Graham has not done all the work single-handed? The situation would be comical if it were not so extremely tragic.”—John Bolten, director of General Tire Co.

Celebrations

Plans for marking the 400th anniversary of the founding of Calvin’s Academy in Geneva and the 400th anniversary of the first synod of the Reformed Church are being made by the executive committee of the World Presbyterian Alliance.

Dr. Ralph Waldo Lloyd, president of Maryville College (Tenn.), who is the alliance’s North American secretary, announced the plans. The Calvin Academy anniversary, he said, would be observed during the first week of June, 1959 and the anniversary of the Reformed Church’s first synod in May of that year.

Dr. Lloyd said the committee was issuing a call to all churches affiliated with the alliance to observe Sunday, May 31, 1959, as a day of special remembrance for the Reformed faith.

The preceding day, May 30, he said, will mark the 450th anniversary of the birth of John Calvin at Noyon, France. An International Day will be observed under the auspices of the Reformed Church of France in Noyon on that day.

Racial Freedoms

Rep. Brooks Hays, president of the Southern Baptist Convention, urged that ministers “be freed from economic, political and social pressures” in dealing with the race issue.

The Arkansas Democrat spoke to 2500 Baptist laymen and women in Atlanta, Ga. He outlined a three-point program that he feels could help churchmen in facing racial problems:

  • The sentiment of the churches, even those completely dedicated to segregation, must be pointed towards a nonviolent settlement.
  • The rights of ministers to raise their voice on all current issues must be protected.
  • Efforts must be made to seek justice for all people in all specific situations growing out of racial tensions.

Twin Sessions

The 12th annual National Sunday School convention of the National Sunday School Association will be held October 9–11 in Los Angeles and October 30-November 1 in Grand Rapids.

Each city is expected to register an estimated 5,000 people for the assemblies. There will be 134 different sessions in the two places.

The eight major sessions in each city will feature Dr. Edward Simpson, president of NSSA; Dr. Bob Cook; the Rev. Burt Webb, vice president of NSGA; Dr. W. A. Criswell of Dallas, Texas; the Rev. Norman Townsend of Providence, R. I.; Dr. Henrietta C. Mears of Los Angeles and the Rev. Arthur Gaglardi of Kamloops, B. C.

Youths Unite

Seven hundred delegates from Young Calvinist Societies of the Christian Reformed Churches of the United States and Canada met for their first combined convention in Chicago recently.

The convention completed the merger of the Federation of Young Women’s Societies and the Federation of Young Men’s Societies which until this year had been separate organizations holding separate conventions.

The newly organized group, called The Young Calvinist Federation of North America, includes 432 societies, according to its director, Richard Postma.

New Science Film

Moody Institute of Science has announced four premiere showings of “Red River of Life,” a movie more than four years in the making and reportedly the first attempt to depict on film the spiritual significance of the blood.

The premieres will be the first week of October in Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit and Philadelphia.

Africa

Appeal In Ghana

Dr. Kwame Nkrumah has called on the Christian Council of Ghana “to support the Government in all moves they may make to preserve the independence of the judiciary.”

The Prime Minister was replying to an appeal sent to him by the Christian Council asking him to withdraw the special Deportation Bill under which two Moslem leaders were recently deported from Ghana. The bill violated the principle of justice, “whereby every citizen possesses the right to defend himself against any charge preferred against him,” the council claimed.

In his reply, addressed to Dr. Richard Roseveare, Anglican Bishop of Accra, Dr. Nkrumah explained that the special bill, which gives power to deport “without appeal to or review in any court,” was needed to protect the judiciary from attack. “The reason why the bill was necessary was, first, that those supporting the case of the two men were engaged in a systematic campaign to provoke with the object of coercing the government and bringing pressure to bear on the court,” he added.

Christian leaders have been concerned since the two Moslems and a leading nationalist editor were deported because of criticism of the government. They see in it a dangerous precedent that would be used as a weapon against missionary activity in the future.

W.H.F.

Journal Folds

New Nation, monthly journal supported by missions in Ghana (Gold Coast), will go into voluntary liquidation this month, Director David C. B. Smithers announced.

London journalist Smithers left his job on Reuter’s Africa desk two years ago to start New Nation in an effort to encourage indigenous Christian writing. The Christian Council of Ghana officially backed the publication, but chief support came from the Methodists.

With a staff of three missionaries and three Africans, the 20-page paper reached a monthly circulation of 17,000, selling at 6d. Because of lack of adequate commercial printing facilities in Ghana, editorial copy was sent to England to be printed. Rising costs, dropping sales, (down to 7,000) and lack of financial support forced Editor Smithers and his colleagues to decide to stop publication.

New Nation has turned its unexpired subscriptions over to the Sudan Interior Mission’s African Challenge, which has a current monthly sales of 28,000 within Ghana (160,000 throughout Africa.)

Training Center

Plans to set up an industrial training center for young Africans were announced in Nairobi, Kenya, by the Church Missionary Society. The proposed project was hailed by Kenya civic and government leaders as a “true example of practical Christianity.”

The center is intended to train youths who complete school at 13 but must wait until they are 16 before they can work. Such boys often join street corner groups of “loafers” and drift into undesirable company, Anglican officials said. They said the training center will seek to meet this problem.

Far East

Riot In India

A mob of 5,000 Hindus burned down a four-story American Protestant missions community center in Raipur, India, after its superintendent, an Indian clergyman, protested against the use of a Hindu idol during a meeting in the center’s hall.

Eyewitnesses said the mob sought to kill the superintendent, the Rev.Gurbachan Singh, who went into hiding. Missionaries and many Indian Christians also fled this central Indian rail junction and district seat.

Police fired on the demonstrators in an effort to restore order, killing a 14-year-old Hindu youth. They later arrested nearly 50 persons for arson, attempted murder or looting.

Damage to the center was estimated at $200,000. It was operated by the Evangelical and Reformed Mission Board in Philadelphia working through the United Church of Northern India. The building included about 50 hostel rooms, a dining room, auditorium, clubrooms, library and bookshop.

The center’s auditorium had been rented by a committee of Hindus for a program commemorating the centenary of the first Indian uprising against British colonial rule. When an idol was set up on the stage for a dramatic number Mr. Singh objected. He said organizers of the program had not informed him that such a dramatic performance would be staged.

Hindu elements resented the clergyman’s stand. This resentment was fanned by inflammatory articles in the local paper and the activities of what a Madhya Pradesh government communique called “anti-social trouble-seeking elements.”

The stone-throwing, shouting demonstrators, including many students, marched on the building and thwarted the efforts of 170 policemen and scores of firemen to protect the mission property.

Demonstrators stoned Mr. Singh’s house and burned effigies of him.

The demonstrations spread to other areas. At Jabalpur, 70 miles away, students abandoned classes and 5,000 of them held a rally at which they condemned American missionary activities.

They also demanded that the Madhya Pradesh government implement a report by a state committee in July, 1956, recommending that all foreign missionaries engaged primarily in proselytizing be withdrawn from the country. The government has not yet acted upon the report which was denounced by Christian leaders.

Protest In India

Meetings are being held by Christians of South India against the Education Bill sponsored by the communist government of Kerala State.

The proposed law would put all schools in the state under government control.

Protest rallies were launched after 26 archbishops and bishops of various Christian communions issued a joint statement condemning the measure. Signers included prelates of the Roman Catholic, Mar Thoma and Jacobite churches, the Church of South India and the Church Mission Society.

They charged that the bill is “clearly aimed at the liquidation of private agencies” and seeks to “regiment the educational system on a communistic pattern.”

The China Visit

It is obvious from a number of sources that some of the Japanese Christians who recently visited China saw only that which it was planned they should see.

As a result, they came away with glowing reports of the church in China, reports often at considerable variance with authentic stories coming out of China from uninspired sources.

Commenting on this trip, the Asahi Evening News, Japan’s largest newspaper, carried the following:

“A Japanese Christian church leader has urged that Japan oust foreign missionaries to gain the same kind of freedom of religion now prevailing in Communist China.

“Kaneyo Oda, a Free Methodist who returned from a recent visit to Red China as a member of a 15-man Christian mission, made his statement during a ‘welcome home’ rally … at the Tokyo YMCA.

“Mr. Oda, who was a pastor in Peking 12 years ago, said before he made the trip to Communist China, ‘I received many letters and warnings from missionaries and others telling me not to go … for they said I would become brainwashed, Communist and pink: but I had to go in spite of their protests.’

“He said he found no more robbers or prostitutes; no tipping was demanded and no more discounts were asked.

“Mr. Oda added that the Red Chinese offer people freedom of faith.

“Mr. Oda added that if it had not been for the concerted efforts of the Chinese Christian church, the nation would not have been able to win its independence from foreign missionaries.”

Evangelical observers wonder if Mr. Oda understands the “kind of freedom of religion now prevailing in Communist China.” Freedom bought at the price of collaboration with an anti-Christian regime is a high price for “religious liberty.” China is not the only place where a communist government has endeavored to make the church an agent for its own ends.

People: Words And Events

Defends ‘Do-Gooders’—Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, president of the National Council of Churches, calls upon Christian “do-gooders” to be unconcerned with derisive cynical criticism. He said: “Too often for complacency the sober man is called a killjoy, the moral man a prude, the honest man a Milquetoast, and the idealist a simpleton. A wastrel is now often called a good fellow. A loose woman is ‘emancipated.’ A cheat is ‘clever’ and ‘smart.’ ”

Christian Athletes—Clarence (Biggie) Munn, athletic director at Michigan State University, elected president of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Succeeds Dr. Louis H. Evans, minister-at-large for the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. Others elected: Don McClannan, executive secretary; O. C. Glenn, treasurer; directors, Branch Rickey, George Kell, G. Herbert McCracken and Tad Wieman.

Modernistic Chapel—The House of Representatives has approved a $3,000,000 appropriation for construction of an ultra-modern chapel at the Air Force Academy near Colorado Springs. Previously the lawmakers voted tentatively to withhold funds after critics had called it a “monstrosity” and “garish monument.” One legislator said the 19-spired design looked like “a rectangular accordion stretched out on the floor.”

Children’s Mite—The Southern Baptist Convention received a $2 check recently for use in the Cooperative Program. The money came from children who attended a Vacation Bible School in Korea. They wanted to help other people.

Clergy Fares—Northeast Airlines, effective September 15, will grant a 50 per cent discount on passenger fares to clergymen traveling in the U. S. Other companies now offering lower rates to clergymen include Central Airlines of Washington, Bonanza Air Lines of Las Vegas, Nev., and Cordova Air Lines of Anchorage, Alaska.

Another View—Citing incidents in which at least 23 airliners in the last two years were seriously endangered by drunken passengers, pilots and stewardesses asked a Congressional ban on liquor service aboard aircraft.

They described instances of drunken passengers forcing their way into the cockpit, creating disturbances in the cabins and creating fire hazards in flight.

Spiritual Values—Sir Edward Appleton, Nobel prize-winning scientist and vice-chancellor of the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, urges fellow scientists not to forget “the sustaining values of the spirit” in research. He said: “At the opposite pole from our scientific endeavor there are many ways of thought which don’t change, whose concern is with what is not now, with things not to be superseded.”

Christian Statesman—Dr. Austin Crouch, executive secretary emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention executive committee, was hit and killed by a car in Nashville August 28 as he crossed a busy thoroughfare about a half block from his home. On the day before his death Dr. Crouch had returned from a visit to McKinney, Texas, where he was ordained to the Baptist Ministry 64 years ago.

Upper Room Award—Warner Sallman, Chicago artist who is internationally known for his paintings of religious subjects, will be presented the 1957 Upper Room Award for World Christian Fellowship at a dinner in the National Press Club, Washington, D. C., on October 3. Millions of copies of Sallman’s “Head of Christ” have been purchased by people of many countries. Toastmaster at the award dinner will be Maj. Gen. Charles I. Carpenter, chief of the Air Force Chaplains.

Digest—Christian Life Commission of Southern Baptist Convention elects A. J. Moncrief, pastor of First Baptist Church, St. Joseph, Mo., as its new chairman. Succeeds Rep. Brooks Hays (D.-Ark.) who was serving second term as chairman when elected president of Southern Baptist Convention … Dr. Frank Woods, Bishop of Middleton, England and chaplain to Queen Elizabeth II, elected Anglican Archbishop of Melbourne. Succeeds Archbishop Joseph John Booth, who retired last year.… Gordon W. Ward Jr., 21, student at Philadelphia Theological Seminary, elected president of the Lutheran Student Association of America.

Theology

Bible Text of the Month: John 7:37

Rudolph Besser

In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink (John 7:37).

Great Day of the Feast—A few days after the ceremonies of the great day of the Atonement, in which solemn expiation was made for the sins of the people, the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated. This feast commemorated the passage of the Israelites through the wilderness, and was celebrated with such joy that both Josephus and Philo call it “the holiest and greatest feast.” It was kept for seven consecutive days, from the 15th to the 21st of Tisri, and the 8th day was celebrated by a holy convocation. Each morning a vast procession formed around the little fountain of Siloam down in the valley of the Kedron. Out of the flowing waters the priests filled a large golden pitcher. They proceeded to the temple and one of the priests poured the water upon the altar. As the water was poured the people joined in the song of praise, “God is my song, He also is become my salvation! Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation.”

In the midst of this magnificent festal rejoicing, Jesus cried aloud, If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. It is the cry which resounds throughout the whole of Scripture and which had already been laid upon the kindly lips of prophets. Jehovah’s invitation, “Ho! every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters,” Jesus here distinctly appropriates to himself. In this cry the Lord Jesus delights to reveal his readiness to save all souls needing salvation, from the time of his pronouncing those blessed who thirst, in Matthew 5:6, on to the word in Revelation 22:17, “Let him that is athirst, come; and whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely!”

Quenching Of Thirst

He stands there on the great day of the feast, and around him are men who for seven successive mornings have witnessed acts and uttered words telling, though they know it not, of the true satisfaction of spiritual thirst, and thinking of the descent of showers on the thirsty ground, and in some vague way of the Holy Spirit’s presence. They are as the woman of Samaria was by the side of the true well. For every one who really knew his need, the source of living water was at hand.

C. J. ELLICOTT

Christ calls on the thirsty soul to come and take of that water freely. How pleasant to find that all this is in harmony with the grand invitation of the Evangelical Prophet, “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price,”—showing the same spirit pervading as well the Old Testament Scriptures as the New, illustrating the unity and harmony of the whole Book, and pointing to the fact that from the very beginning the same salvation has been preached as the pure and free gift of God.

P. W. GRANT

Thirst, like hunger, is something of which we are acutely conscious. It is a craving for that which is not in our actual possession. There is a soul thirst as well as a bodily. The pathetic thing is that so many thirst for that which cannot slake them. Their thirst is for the things of the world: pleasure, money, fame, ease, self-indulgence; and over all these Christ has written in imperishable letters, “Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again.” But in our text Christ is referring to a thirst for something infinitely nobler and grander, even for Himself. He speaks of that intense longing for Himself which only the Spirit of God can create in the soul.

ARTHUR W. PINK

The expression thirst is to be here referred to that strong and quenchless desire which springs up in the soul, ill at ease through the upbraidings of a wounded conscience and a sense of the hollow and deceitful nature of earthly good, for something better, more substantial, and congenial with the cravings of the immortal spirit within. Under the imagery of one thirsting for water, which everywhere, and especially in countries like Palestine where the want of water is so frequently experienced, would be well understood, our Lord proffers to all such persons that which will forever satisfy the longings of the soul and give it permanent rest.

JOHN J. OWEN

He who thirsts is just the man who is conscious that he needs something to make him happy, and who is desirous of obtaining it. It does not matter whether he be right or wrong in the estimate he has formed of that, the want of which, he thinks, is the cause of the uneasiness he feels, and the attainment of which, he thinks, would remove that uneasiness. He may be thirsting for that which, instead of quenching, would inflame his thirst. He may be desiring and seeking that which, were he to obtain it, would make him still more miserable. To bring him within the range of our Lord’s invitation, it is enough that he thirst—that he is destitute, and desirous, of happiness.

JOHN BROWN

When our Lord represents himself as the fountain which can quench the thirst for happiness of all mankind, he intimates that he is capable of making men, however miserable, truly happy,—that he can supply all the wants, satisfy all the desires, of the human soul. Man has a mind, and, as an intellectual being, he is naturally destitute of the knowledge of the truth about God, which is necessary to the true happiness of a being constituted as he is. Jesus is the great revealer of God; he is the truth. Man has a conscience; and as an accountable, guilty being, he needs pardon and acceptance with God. “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin.” Man has a heart; and he needs a suitable object on which to place the affections of supreme veneration, and love and confidence; and God in Christ is the suitable and satisfying portion of the heart, the appropriate object of the supreme esteem and entire confidence. Man is weak, and he needs strength; and Christ can “strengthen, with all might in the inner man.” Man is mortal, and needs deliverance from death, and the grave; and Jesus is “the resurrection and the life.”

JOHN BROWN

Gracious Invitation

Jesus is no longer visible upon earth; but he has promised his spiritual presence to abide with his word, ordinances, and people, to the end of time. Weary and heavy laden souls have now no need to take a long journey to seek him: for he is always near them, and in a spiritual manner, where his gospel is preached.

JOHN NEWTON

It does not appear that those to whom our Lord spoke in person were so much perplexed as many are now, to know, what coming or believing should mean; he seems to have been understood, John 6:30; 19:36, both by friends and enemies. Many questioned his authority and right to exact a dependence on himself; but they seemed to be at no difficulty about his meaning. Coming to him implies a persuasion of his power, and of their own need of him help. They knew that they wanted relief, and conceived of him as an extraordinary person empowered and able to succour them. They depended on him for salvation, received him as their Lord and Master, professed an obedience to his precepts, accepted a share of his reproach, and renounced everything that was inconsistent with his will, Luke 9:23–61.

JOHN NEWTON

Come signifies our approach to an object or person. It expresses action, and implies that the will is operative. To come to Christ means, that you do with your heart and will what you would do with your feet were He standing in bodily form before you and saying, “Come unto me.” It is an act of faith.… Make sure that nothing whatever is substituted for Christ. It is not come to the Lord’s table, or come to the waters of baptism, or come to the priest or minister, or come and join the church; but come to Christ Himself, and to none other.

ARTHUR W. PINK

And drink—It is here that so many seem to fail. There are numbers who give heart-exercise, or a conscious need of evidence of an awakened conscience, of Christ; and there are numbers who appear to be seeking Him, and yet stop short at that. But Christ not only said, “Come unto me,” but he added, “and drink.” A river flowing through a country where people were dying of thirst, would avail them nothing unless they drank of it. The blood of the slain lamb availed the Israelite household nothing, unless the head of that household applied it to the door. So Christ saves none who do not receive him by faith.

ARTHUR W. PINK

Whosoever drinketh of the water I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

JOHN 4:14

Eutychus and His Kin: September 16,1957

ECCLESIAN: LESSON I

This is your first language lesson in Modern Ecclesian. (Dialectical Eglisais and Kirchendeutsch are available also.) You may supplement these exercises by attending selected churches and by reading journals written in Ecclesian.

1. Translate from the Ecclesian:

a. By developing new perspectives in creative tension we shall gain fresh insights into the dialectic of our situation.

b. Our fundamental concern must always be the existential expression of our common solidarity in the ambiguity of the human condition.

c. Openness in history to the judgment upon history from beyond history when the historic becomes historical demands a meaningful encounter with mythological symbolization.

d. This is deep. This is big. This is man in his predicament. Today. Here. This is you. Now.

2. Render these in simple Ecclesian:

a. I have a headache.

b. You can’t get there from here.

c. Peace, it’s unbearable!

d. Fairy-tales are really true.

3. Vocabulary

Develop: to rarefy ambiguities in thought or discussion. Loan-word from Business Eng.; used especially for committee reports.

Perspective: the horizontal structure from a given viewpoint. An invaluable term for reconciling contradictions. The plurality of perspectives is the structuring figure for unitive prose.

Dimension: see perspective. To give further perspective to all perspectives, add another dimension.

Insight, invaluable: the force of the prefix seems to be without, as in the term income.

The Human Condition: the mess we take pride in being in.

4. Notes

a. Observe the shift in style in 1. d. above. This is Low Ecclesian. The staccato rhythm of this dialect gives it the relevance and immediacy of a dentist’s drill.

b. To enter into competition for the Babel Medal in High Ecclesian, send your completed lesson to this magazine, addressed to the undersigned.

EUTYCHUS

A WORD FOR THE RIGHT

“What’s Right With the Billy Graham New York Crusade” by Dr. Jesse M. Bader is being published in Protestant Church Life. Permission is hereby granted for reprint usage in full or in part. Protestant Council HUBERT A. ELLIOTT New York City Executive Secretary

• CHRISTIANITY TODAY is happy to print generous excerpts from Dr. Bader’s article in the interest of objective coverage of the New York campaign. Dr. Bader served as Secretary of Evangelism for his own communion (Disciples of Christ) for 12 years and as Executive Secretary of Evangelism of the Federal Council and National Councils of Churches for 23 years. During the Billy Graham New York Crusade he served as Chairman of the Visitation Evangelism Program.—ED.

What Is Right with the Billy Graham New York Crusade?

One of the most significant religious events of this year is going on at the present time in the New York area of 15,000,000 people. This event is known throughout the Metropolitan community and even throughout much of the Christian world as the “Billy Graham New York Crusade.” It began on May 15 this year and will close on Reformation Sunday afternoon, Oct. 27, in a closing climactic mass meeting at the New York Polo Grounds.

I have lived in New York … for 25 years. I feel that I know something about my city and its tragic need for the redemption that is found in Christ and the Christian gospel. I know of nothing that has happened religiously during the past 25 years in New York which has so stirred the city and captured the interest of so many thousands as this Crusade has done.

Because of my wide experience in evangelism … I feel impelled to point out some things about the New York Crusade which are very important. Others have been pointing out what is wrong with the New York Crusade. I desire to point out what is right with the New York Crusade.

Some of the articles appearing in a few religious journals have been highly critical of the Billy Graham New York Crusade. There is another side to the Crusade which has not had the attention it deserves. I speak as one who has been present many nights during the Crusade and who has served on two important committees. In other words, I am speaking as one on the inside looking out, rather than one on the outside looking in.

Some of the critics of this Crusade have attended, in some instances, only once or twice. Others have not attended even one service. To criticize the Crusade without attending even one meeting is much like a theater critic who stays home on the opening night of a New York play on Broadway and then attempts to write a review of the play he has not seen.

I would like also to state that I know something of the weaknesses in the various methods of evangelism. These need to be corrected as rapidly as possible, for the sake of the churches and the Kingdom of God. In speaking of that which is right in the New York Crusade, I do not want to be understood as one whose eyes are closed to that which needs changing and adjusting in the Crusade. Nothing human in this world of ours is perfect. If perfection is expected in evangelistic methods, we are expecting the impossible. In the New York Crusade the good things that are happening far outnumber the objectionable things. I presume that no one of us will ever live to see the day when someone has discovered a perfect method that will commend itself to everyone alike. Billy Graham is eager to refine, strengthen and perfect his Crusades. I have never worked with any evangelist in my time who is more open to constructive suggestions than he is.

What is right with the Crusade? The larger unity found among the New York area Protestant churches is right. There are over 1,500 ministers and churches cooperating harmoniously in this evangelistic Crusade. However, this number does not tell the whole story, since there are many other ministers and churches attending and working who did not sign enlistment cards. In this Crusade there is more real fellowship among the New York ministers and churches than I have seen in the past 25 years on anything. These are praying and working together for the evangelization of this city. This united effort will be a source of strength to every council of churches in the entire area.

What is right with the Crusade? The Christian witness of the Protestant churches is right. In this vast community of 15,000,000, Protestants are a minority. Because of their smaller numbers, there has developed an inferiority complex among many Protestants. At Yankee Stadium on last July 20 there were over 100,000 Protestants present. It was the largest meeting ever held by them in this area. Because of this and other meetings held during the Crusade, Protestants now have a new sense of solidarity and strength. The attendance at Madison Square Garden night after night has done something also for Protestants. The average evening attendance in the Garden was about 17,000. On many evenings the Garden has been packed with 19,500 present and many turned away for lack of room. The total Garden attendance as of August 28 was 1,742,100. By bringing these large numbers of Protestants together during the Crusade, they now have a new sense of a united witness which they had not experienced before. Most of the Protestant churches in the New York area are small. In fact, there are only about 15 churches with large memberships and with nationally known ministers. This vast New York area is a mission field and one of the greatest in the world. To do evangelistic work in the New York area is very difficult. It is liking digging in flint. The same amount of effort put into any Protestant evangelistic project west and south of the northern half of the Atlantic seaboard would produce many times the results. Even so, the Billy Graham New York Crusade is a “near miracle” in its results thus far. These results have gone far beyond human expectations. God has been in it all. Apart from him and the power of the Holy Spirit, these results cannot be explained. Prayer has had much to do with the results. I suppose that no city in all the world has had so many Christians praying daily in its behalf as New York has had during this Crusade. Christians in 109 countries have been praying for this Crusade since last April 1. Over 20,000 Christians in the New York area have signed prayer partner covenants. These pray personally, and in small groups.

What is right with the Crusade? The sponsorship is right. Billy Graham and his team were invited by the Protestant Council of the City of New York. They accepted the invitation. Therefore, the Crusade is being conducted within the framework of the churches and not apart from them. The Executive Director of the Protestant Council, Rev. Dan M. Potter, is on the platform every night and is present in all the committee meetings. His guiding hand is on the entire Crusade. The Chairman of the Department of Evangelism of the Council is George Champion. He is one of the best known Christian laymen of the city. He is the President of the Chase Manhattan Bank. The Council’s Department of Evangelism named Mr. Champion as Chairman of the General New York Crusade Committee, and Roger Hull as Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Crusade. Mr. Hull is a consecrated churchman and also he is the Executive Vice-President of the Mutual Life Insurance Company. This Crusade is of the churches, for the churches and by the churches. It is being carried on, not apart from the churches, but as part of their cooperative life and work. It should be noted also that no person has been appointed to any Crusade committee without the approval of the Executive Committee. This Committee has passed on all the details of the Crusade. I have heard some people say that the Billy Graham team comes into a city and takes over. This is not true. It may suggest procedures, but it does not take over.

I have conducted many preaching missions across America since 1936. I feel I know something of what a united, successful, evangelistic program can do for a local Council of Churches in producing a new unity and a larger fellowship of Christians.

What is right with the Crusade? The motives are right. Some of the driving motives of this Crusade are:

To enlist every possible church in the “fellowship of the concerned” for those outside her life.

To make the entire metropolitan area God conscious.

To win men, women and youth to Jesus Christ as their Saviour and Lord. To bring lukewarm church members to a new commitment to Christ and the church.

To train an army of lay witnesses to share their Christian faith with others in face-to-face evangelism.

To present the message of the redeeming love of Christ to the entire metropolitan area and also, by means of television, to the entire nation.

To lead Christians, new and old, into a deeper understanding of what it means to be a committed follower of Christ within the social order.

To integrate into the local churches all those who make “decisions for Christ” during the Crusade.

What is right with the Crusade? The finances are right. The Executive Committee adopted a budget at the beginning of the Crusade. No one handles the money received, whether received through the evening offerings or from individuals, except the Executive Committee. Billy Graham and his team members, each and every one of them, are on salary. Not one penny of the Crusade offerings go to them. Their salaries are paid from Billy Graham’s Minneapolis office. By agreement with the Executive Committee, the Sunday night offerings taken during the Crusade go to help pay for the Billy Graham radio program, “The Hour of Decision.” At the end of the Crusade a public accounting firm will audit the financial records of the Crusade, following which a complete report will be sent to the churches of the area. This report will be published also in the local papers. The cost of the Crusade will exceed $1,500,000, exclusive of the television expenses, for the 23 weeks and 4 days of this unprecedented evangelistic program. The evening offerings and gifts from individuals will cover all the expenses of the Crusade. Because of what the Crusade has meant to the New York community, we feel the expense is more than justified.

What is right with the Crusade? The music is right. There is a Crusade choir of 5,000 enlisted from the churches of the area. Of this number, 1,500 are in the choir each night, and at Yankee Stadium 4,000 members were present. Some of the most majestic hymns of the churches are being sung night after night.

What is right with the Crusade? The human relations are right. Many people of many colors of skin are attending. Many languages are represented. There is racial integration everywhere. One can find many races represented in the choir, among the ushers and among the counselors. Each night those of different colors of skin walk down the aisle together during the hymn of invitation to “receive Christ as Lord and Saviour” or to make a new commitment to him. In this Crusade Billy Graham has three or four races represented on his team. It is a great inspiration to see 17,000 people present and integrated in the Madison Square Garden meetings. All this, after the Crusade has closed, may have some implications for a number of local churches in the New York area.

What is right with the Crusade? The worship services are right. To sit through a Crusade service any night is much like being in a Sunday church service. There is reverence. There is real worship and it is corporate worship. For many, Madison Square Garden has become a cathedral where the presence of Christ is fell and the work of the Holy Spirit is seen, No one, in my humble opinion, will ever need to apologize for the worship part of the Crusade after it closes. This has not always been true of mass evangelism. At no time has the Crusade stooped to claptrap or cheap methods: One of the most moving parts of the evening services is the response to the invitation at the close of the sermon, when hundreds get up quietly out of their seats and come forward to make a rededication of themselves to Christ or to accept him as their Saviour and Lord for the first time. During this time of decision in each service there is emotion, but emotionalism is absent.

What is right with the Crusade? The Crusade has made it easy to talk religion in New York. People talk seriously about Christ, the churches and the Crusade in buses, on subways, in taxicabs, in stores, in offices and homes. This is something new in New York. People of this teeming city now find it the normal thing to talk naturally about things spiritual. Not since the days of the Billy Sunday Crusade 40 years ago has there been so much religious conversation. For the most part, American Christians have lost the art of religious conversation. Anything that helps to restore this lost art is worthwhile.

What is right with the Crusade? The emphasis on the assimilation and conservation of the results is right. In none of his Crusades has Billy Graham and a local committee made such elaborate plans for a follow-up program as in the New York Crusade. As of August 28, more than 53,283 had responded to the public invitation either to make a rededication of themselves to Christ or to “receive Christ as Saviour and Lord” for the first time. Before the final mass meeting at the Polo Grounds on Sunday afternoon, October 27, the probable number of those who will have responded to the invitation will be at least 75,000. This includes those yet to be reached during the week of Visitation Evangelism, October 20–24. To assimilate and conserve this large number is a huge task, the main responsibility for which rests upon local ministers and churches. Not every one of those who have been counted as “converts” will go ahead and take the “next step” in becoming members of some church. Some will fall away and others drop out.

Some of the things that are now being done during the Crusade itself, to conserve the results are:

Personal attention and counseling with the person on the evening he or she makes a public decision.

Bible classes are held each evening for one week for all those making decisions. The next week another group attends and so on during the entire Crusade meetings in the Garden.

A packet of literature is given to each person making a decision to get him or her started in the Christian life.

The ministers and churches are expected to call on each “convert” within a few days after the name is received. Special meetings will be held in September, emphasizing the importance of the church, Bible study and the devotional life …

What is right with the Crusade? The leadership is right. I know very well all the members of the Protestant Council of the City of New York. Some of the best ministers and laymen are leaders of its work. I know very well the members of the Executive Committee of the Crusade. I know very well the members of the Billy Graham team. I have never seen men and women more dead in earnest about evangelism, more cooperative in spirit or more eager to see the redemption of a city, than these three groups. These represent various shades of Christian thinking and theological beliefs, yet underneath all the differences they belong to the same Christ and they are part of the same Christian family—the Church of Christ Universal.

Billy Graham is unquestionably sincere, earnest and humble. I have found no one here in New York who doubts this. He preaches with conviction. He has a high Christology, for without that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to be an evangelist. In all my experience in evangelism, I have never known a minister or an evangelist who was a successful winner of souls to Christ and membership in the Church, who did not have a high Christology. If man is a sinner, he needs a Saviour and a Saviour who “can save to the uttermost.”

Billy Graham is only 38 years of age, yet at the present time his voice is heard by more millions of people of the world than that of any other preacher today. He has learned how to use mass media for the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. This man and his associates have been and are a real blessing to New York—to the churches and to the entire community. Protestants in New York owe him a great debt for what he and his team have done and are doing for their community through the leadership and power of the Holy Spirit.

JESSE M. BADER

RSV AND PAUL’S THEOPHANY

I entirely agree with Dr. Robinson’s emphasis (Aug. 19 issue, p. 25) that Paul experienced an objective theophany when the glorified Lord appeared to him in person. This however was not my point in the article in CHRISTIANITY TODAY. There are two points: 1. Did the translators intend to minimize the deity of Christ by their translation of this passage? 2. This question rests on a second: Is it “specifically stated” that Paul recognized the Lord before he was told it was Jesus? If so, then the translation of RSV misrepresents the text. If it is rather a matter of exegesis and judgment, then the matter is open. Perhaps Paul did so recognize the Lord, and perhaps the translators are wrong. If so, the error is in judgment, not in a minimizing theology.

In my judgment, the text is not clear that Paul realized that God was appearing to him, that he was experiencing a theophany. He saw a great light; he heard a voice. At first he did not know what the light meant or whose was the voice. Only after it was interpreted to him did he understand that he had experienced a theophany of the glorified Lord. The text does not say, nor in my judgment does it intimate that Saul fell to the ground at first in worship. He, and the others journeying with him, were overwhelmed by the brilliance of the light, and their prostration was more a physical reaction than an act of worship. There is surely no evidence that the theophany included Saul’s companions or that they were converted.

My position is, I believe, supported by the OT theophanies. In Genesis 17:3, the form of the theophany is not disclosed. God appeared to Abram; God made himself known; then Abram fell on his face in worship. In Exodus 3, Moses saw a burning bush which was not consumed, and he turned aside, not to worship, but to behold the marvel. Then God spoke to him, yet Moses remained erect. Then God made himself known; only then did Moses realize that it was God and worship. He removed his shoes only upon the express command of God. In Joshua 5:13–17, a man stood before Joshua, and Joshua addressed him as a man, challenging him as to his identity. Only when the man asserted that he was commander of the army of the Lord did Joshua fall on his face.

This, I believe, was the order of events at Saul’s conversion. He saw a blinding light but did not know its source. He heard a voice but did not thought it was an angelic visitation; we do not know. Only after the Lord identified himself did Saul understand.

I have no zeal, in principle, to defend the RSV per se. I do feel, however, that many attacks against RSV are not factually grounded and I believe the rendition at this point is defensible.

GEORGE E. LADD

Heidelberg, Germany

In reply to Dr. Ladd’s kind answer, I acknowledge that there is exegesis in my understanding of the Lord’s conversion of Paul. In the three accounts, Paul calls the One Who encounters him, Lord, before he is told that this One is Jesus, Acts 9:5; 22:8; 26:15; cf. also 9:17; 22:14. The whole context, blinding light from heaven, smitten to ground, Hebrew language, familiarity with O.T. theophanies, carry the notion that this address was to the Lord whom Saul had worshipped as a Hebrew child. Here, as elsewhere in the theophanies and in the incarnate Lord, God himself encounters man, and the one so confronted responds by addressing God with an appropriate pronoun.

WM. CHILDS ROBINSON

Columbia Theological Seminary

Decatur, Ga.

A BISHOP IN TROUBLE

The personal experiences recorded in “Preacher in the Red” remind me of an incident referred to in one of Bishop Hensley Henson’s published letters.…

At a celebration of the Thanksgiving for Founders and Benefactors of Durham Cathedral, the special preacher was Dr. Headlam, then Bishop of Gloucester. The services proceeded with due solemnity and order, until the Bishop began his sermon. He was then seized with a fit of coughing, in the course of which he evicted his false teeth with some violence. He managed, however, with very creditable effort, to catch the errant treasure before they fell to the floor, and then coram populo, indulged in the difficult art of replacing them.… The boys of Durham School were present in the large congregation.… The whole episode was indescribably funny.…

SAMUEL HULTON

Knaresborough, Yorks, England

CHRISTIAN SANITY

It has that atmosphere of orthodox Christian sanity which one seeks—but so seldom finds—in religious publications today.

D. W. ELSTED

St. Barnabas’ Anglican Church

New Westminster, B. C.

Ideas

Evangelicals and Fundamentals

The Editors

A number of circumstances have transpired that call for review of the terms evangelicalism and fundamentalism in relation to the present theological situation. Several opposing schools of thought vie for use of the term evangelical. Appropriation of the word by those who do not hold to its biblical and historic content has caused some hesitancy on the part of those who hold to the doctrines of revealed Christianity, as to its proper use. They fear misunderstanding of their theological position.

Complication also results from the diverse connotations surrounding the term fundamentalism in various countries. Fundamentalism has a different savor in England and Australia than in United States and Canada. Further confusion has been caused by criticism of the “fundamentalism” of Billy Graham by liberal and neo-orthodox leaders and the censure of the “modernism” of Mr. Graham by some fundamentalists. All this semantic confusion calls for clarification.

•

A growing preference for the term evangelicalism has developed within recent years in circles that keep to traditional doctrines held to be fundamental to Christian faith. This choice finds root in several important facts: first, the word is scriptural and has a well-defined historical content; second, the alternate, fundamentalism, has narrower content and has acquired unbiblical accretions.

In the New Testament the Greek to euaggelion (the evangel) is translated gospel, glad tidings. After the death of Christ the term signified the history of Christ and is the title prefixed to each of the four narratives of his birth, doctrine, miracles, death, resurrection and ascension. Further, the evangel signified the Christian revelation and was applied to the system of doctrines, ordinances and laws instituted by Christ. The evangel indicated more than a proclamation of pardon through faith and included all the teachings of Christ. Thus in the commission recorded in Mark the apostles were instructed “to go into all the world, and preach the gospel (the evangel) to every creature.” That they were sent not only to proclaim pardon through Christ but to instruct men in all details of the Christian religion, is plain from the parallel passage in Matthew, “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations … teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” Moral precepts of the Sermon on the Mount must be included in the term evangel. Following biblical content, evangelicalism calls attention to the whole gospel as set forth in God’s Holy Word.

Historically, the term evangelical follows the biblical content. Webster’s New International Dictionary defines “evangelical” as “designating that party or school among the Protestants which holds that the essence of the gospel consists mainly in its doctrines of man’s sinful condition and the need of salvation, the revelation of God’s grace in Christ, the necessity of spiritual renovation and participation in the experience of redemption through faith.” In accord with this definition the evangelical follows in the succession of Augustine, Wycliffe, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Wesley, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Hodge, Walther, Moody, Kuyper, Warfield, Machen and men of like caliber. These men, for the most part, not only proclaimed the great doctrines which concerned with salvation, but made the evangel apply to the whole of life. Spiritual and moral renovation receive emphasis as well as justification by faith.

•

The term fundamentalism does not possess biblical background nor has it gained the rich and well-defined content that history has endowed on evangelicalism. By this statement we do not disparage the contribution fundamentalism has made to the cause of Christianity. In the early part of the twentieth century the movement fought firmly and courageously for scriptural theology and the historic faith. Unashamedly fundamentalism clung to the supernaturalness and uniqueness of Christ and to the authority and inspiration of Scripture. Those who decry fundamentalism little realize that some liberals now speak of the supernatural Christ and the neo-orthodox leader, Karl Barth, defends the virgin birth. However, the word fundamentalism has an inherent weakness in that it cannot be biblically defined, and has an unpleasant connotation that cannot be blamed on the originators of the movement.

Because fundamentalism cannot be biblically defined, it cannot authoritatively define what is fundamental and what is not fundamental to Christianity. History associates it with five points that have become the sine qua non of the movement: the infallibility of the Bible, Christ’s virgin birth, his substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection and second coming. This reduction of vital doctrines has limited and circumscribed fundamentalism and reduced its effectiveness. The first World War caused some fundamentalists to focus their hope on the second coming and to exclude those who did not accept their interpretation. Unfortunately, extreme and weird prophetic interpretations became linked in the public mind with fundamentalism. The failure to employ the whole counsel of God in combating unbelief contributed to its ineffectiveness and placed the stamp of narrowness upon the name.

•

At the inception of the movement in 1910 fundamentalists gave a place to the intellect and made plans for the establishment of a Christian university and Christian colleges. Later, men of lesser vision opposed education and nurtured an anti-intellectual spirit. In the debate against evolution extreme ridicule and vituperative personal invectives, rather than logic, became the custom. The charge of obscurantism was not entirely unearned. Not only in the fight against evolution, but in opposition to other matters, fundamentalists became involved in abusive personal attacks, rather than using the sword of the Spirit. Unyielding individualism of its leaders and their dictatorial spirit did not help the cause of orthodox Christianity.

Concentration on a few points of doctrine to the exclusion of ethics has also brought fundamentalism under discredit. Impression was given that ethics need only involve a spirit of negation—abstinence from externals such as smoking and card-playing. The more subtle and dangerous sins of the spirit and mind received scant attention. Failure to develop a system of Christian ethics for all phases of life proved harmful. Fundamentalism neglected to give biblical emphasis on true holiness in living and love among the brethren. Squabbles between fundamentalist leaders on minor issues has given the movement an unwholesome reputation and has made the term synonymous with bitterness and pettiness of spirit.

•

In all fairness it must be stated that some accretions have been superimposed by unkindly and ignorant critics. Fanatic actions and teachings of fringe groups have been attributed to the whole. The handling of poisonous serpents by some sects (from a literalistic interpretation of Mark 16:18) has been cited as illustrating the literalism of fundamentalism. The dictation theory of inspiration has been unjustly foisted on the entire group. Unethical practices of some radio broadcasters have been cited to reflect the practice of all fundamentalists. These and many other unjust accusations have added to its unsavory reputation in the eyes of the public.

Evangelicals are turning away from the term fundamentalism not because of any inclination to disavow traditional fundamentals of the Christian faith, but are prompted by its inadequate scriptural content and its current earned and unearned disrepute. Moreover, the term lacks the appropriateness of the word evangelicalism. Scripture gives content to the evangel and not the exigency or crisis of the moment. The full-orbed gospel and the whole counsel of God comes to view in its classical meaning. It has a proud and noble succession in the history of the Christian church. While certain periods of history have obscured its true significance and foes have usurped its use, yet Scripture and history have made its import clear and its name dignified. Christians who hold to traditional fundamentals of Christianity would be guilty of grievous strategic error to accept a term not defined by Scripture and of doubtful connotation or to meekly yield the word evangelicalism to those who do not accept the content of the evangel revealed by Christ. Secular dictionaries, history and Scripture give strong witness that only those who maintain the fundamentals have the right to the term. In the midst of theological confusion evangelicals have a wonderful opportunity to live up to the scriptural and historical content of their name and proclaim the whole counsel of God.

Our Standard Of Living: Highest, But Is It Best?

The standard of living in America is said to be the highest in the world and the highest ever attained by any nation at any time in history.

It is a sobering thought that the highest may not be the best and that if our present standard of living had obtained from the beginning of our national history we probably never would have survived a war. Through good food, “gracious living,” the automobile and television, Americans have become softer and softer until the youth of our land, compared with those of other lands, now rates far down in the scale of physical fitness.

All the comforts of home are desired for our men in the armed services. Our children never walk because they ride the family car or on their thumbs. Whereas in previous generations young people either worked or engaged in active sports, many of them now get their exercise watching others play, either on the athletic fields or before a TV screen.

During the Korean war some 1,600 American prisoners were quartered with 300 Turkish prisoners in a North Korea POW camp. It is reported that more than 400 of the Americans died from the rigors experienced, but not one Turkish soldier succumbed.

In our obsession for ease, exotic foods and gadgets for physical comforts, we may have attained the world’s highest standard of living only to discover that it is far from being the best.

END

Theology

From Here to Eternity

L. Nelson Bell

“If it works it is obsolete,” is a common saying at the Pentagon. This is but a facetious recognition of the rapidity of change in an era of unprecedented discovery and development.

We see the mansions of one generation become the boarding houses of the next and the slums of the third. That which is the acme of modernity becomes, in time, its very antithesis.

Thoughtful people in every generation, aware of the kaleidoscopic changes which seem to come with ever mounting tempo, long for something that endures and is not subject to revision. Cardinal Newman expressed the thought in his immortal hymn:

Change and decay, in all around I see,

Oh Thou who changest not, abide with me.

Centuries earlier, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Apostle Paul wrote: “While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal (temporary), but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 COR. 4:8).

Paul was no pessimist; he was a realist. To anticipate the night while it is still day is based on sound reasoning. We live in a time of unprecedented discoveries, many of which tend to make life longer and living more comfortable and enjoyable. But with change and progress the inexorable law of change and decay also operates. Strange that so few in this world prepare for the inevitable.

The glory of Christ’s redemptive work is that full provision for time and eternity has been made for man’s salvation. This truth grasped and acted upon can solve every problem. While the complexities of modern civilization, dominated by revolutionary industrial change and developments and accelerated by the atomic era, have brought with them problems that require new approaches and solutions, the basic need of the human heart is the same from one generation to the next.

Whether in the time of Abraham, Isaiah, Paul, Luther, or Moody and Graham, whether in a Fifth Avenue mansion or the jungle of Ecuador, men are still prone to lust and kill, to pride and jealousy, to sickness and death. Man has never, of himself, escaped from the dilemmas inherent within himself.

True, social complexities, corporate sins, cultural deficiencies exist that are the reflections of ignorance, indifference or deliberate perversions of truth and right. But scratch the surface and one invariably finds underlying all these the manifestations of inherent evil within the individual. We are all prone to think of sin only in limited terms and then only as it is manifested in others. We forget that the sins of the spirit are as vile in God’s sight as the sins of the flesh, that pride and envy are cancers as much as lust and dishonesty.

A third category, indifference to our brother’s spiritual and material needs, is even less frequently recognized as evil and sinful.

Change and decay within ourselves and on every hand are but the inevitable results of man’s separation from God through sin. For that reason the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only message that is completely relevant for our times. Once restore the perspective of eternity to time, of the Creator to the creature, then life itself falls into clear focus.

Nearly two millenniums ago John the Baptist exclaimed: “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” In the twentieth century, just as truly as then, Christ remains the answer to the sin problem of the world. Degenerative processes of the physical body and of the society to which we belong will inevitably take their course, but Christians are united with the One who changes not—the same yesterday, today and forever.

This is being written on the fortieth floor of a midtown hotel as I look down on lower Manhattan. The Woolworth building, the pride and wonder of a former generation, is now dwarfed by scores of larger and more modern structures. People occupying them are no different than the occupants of the older building. The carriages and trams of yesterday have given away to the cars and buses of today. But the same kinds of people drive them. Sleek liners now dock where windjammers once tied up; giant planes and an occasional helicopter cross the sky. But the man traveling at six hundred miles an hour has the same heart as the one driving an oxcart.

Tomorrow will see even greater changes. We are on the eve of the greatest technological advances in all history and our imaginations are staggered by that which science may produce. But none of these things can alter the human heart one whit. Change? Yes. Decay? Certain.

In the midst of the storm there stands a Rock. Confronted by chaos there is Certainty. Lost in the maze of conflicting roads there is for us a Way. Perplexed by multiplied philosophies there is the Truth. Facing inevitable death we are offered Life. Surrounded of spurious messiahs there stands the living Christ, man’s only access to the Father.

Change and decay men can see and their inevitability should cause all to ponder. But the god of this world has blinded man’s eyes lest he would see the truth and turn to the light. The lost horizon of contemporary teaching and preaching is the future life. Concerned with the social ills about us we forget that their solution rests primarily in regeneration, not reformation; in new men with new hearts. Only that is relevant which really changes and only the Gospel of Jesus Christ in its fullness does this.

Some have accepted Christ as Saviour but failed to make him Lord. This is a perversion of truth, not an invalidation of truth itself. An unending emphasis on taking Christ into every area of our daily lives is needed, but it is also a compelling truth that no one can have Christ as Lord of life unless he is also Saviour from sin.

To neglect the fact of change and decay is folly. To look at time and forget eternity is to be utterly blind. There is turmoil and uncertainty—admit it. We are transients in a dying world—act accordingly. Christians are each generation’s visible link with eternity. That some give little evidence of this relationship in no way contravenes the validity of the fact. The imperfections of the most saintly are added evidence of the love and grace of God.

Facing the inevitability of death, only the Christian has the answer. He alone knows who he is, why he is here, and where he is going. And all that he is and all that he knows centers in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God.

We do not fully know what the future holds. But we do know the One who holds the future—and in his keeping it is safe.

Cover Story

Bultmann: Genius or Apostle?

Robert Paul Roth

What is the storm over Bultmann’s demythologizing of the New Testament? Hailed by friends as the monumental genius who has made Christianity meaningful to modern man, he has been charged by critics with both subjectivism and Docetism. He has been investigated for heresy, and he has had the honor of delivering the much coveted Gifford Lectures. What is the reason for the heated controversy raging about this man, not only on the continent of Europe and in England but now also in America?

Bultmann’s chief concern is to make the Christian message relevant to the present generation. A discerning student of history of the early Christian period, he tries to understand the Gospel in its primitive milieu so that he can divest it of all unnecessary accoutrements and present the original message in all its purity.

While his intentions may be good, Bultmann does not let this original Gospel speak to him. Coming to the scriptural record with a preconceived existential philosophy, he finds everything supernatural or other worldly to be unhistorical and mythological. Thus he declares that from the beginning the Christian message was couched in mythological thought patterns of the ancient world.

There were two mythical patterns prevalent in Jesus’ day—the Jewish apocalyptic notion of a final day of the Lord when the earth would melt and the redemption of Israel would be realized, and the Gnostic myth of the Greeks which promised redemption through the coming of a pre-existent Lord who humbles himself to save others. The preaching of the early Christians, Bultmann asserts, combined both of these so-called myths and thereby presented Jesus to use both as the pre-existent Lord sent to die on the Cross and the expected Son of Man who will come again in glory. Thus Paul is supposed to have naively combined the Gnostic myth of a dying and rising deity in Romans 6:2 with the Jewish myth of an atoning judge and redeemer in Romans 3:25 (cf. Bultmann, Primitive Christianity, New York, 1956, p. 197).

Because of these two mythical forms the true Christian message, according to Bultmann, was obscured from the very beginning. In the Middle Ages obscurantism persisted through the preservation of the Gnostic drama of a cosmic salvation. It is only in modern times, says Bultmann, that we are able to shake loose from false metaphysical world-views and gain a genuine understanding of man as he really exists. According to this modern understanding, man sees himself as the historically unique product of his past. The world around him is not a fixed structure to which he must fit himself, but it is an infinitude of future possibilities for which man is responsible. This means that man’s life is constantly being challenged with decision. Unlike the Stoic, who tries to find serenity through a rational decision that frees him from the future, the Christian, says Bultmann, finds release through a decision for Christ which frees him for the future. But this freedom is purely historical (existential) and has no relation to a future life in a new world to come.

Event As Confrontation

The Stoic thought he could rid himself of his past by rational choice, but Bultmann says that Paul with a surer realism knew that a man cannot shake himself loose from his past. If he is to be saved at all it must be by a gift of grace. This gift is the event of Christ, not understood as an historical occasion, but as the moment of revelation, a crisis of decision, which comes to individuals in every generation repeatedly whenever God meets them in judgment and mercy. In this regard Bultmann says that Christianity agrees with Gnosticism because both declare man incapable of saving himself, and both define redemption as an event. The only difference is that while Christians connected this event with Jesus, the Gnostics relegated the event to a mythical age before history began (ibid., p. 200).

Since this mythological framework is not necessary, Bultmann wishes to cut away all prescientific myths in the Bible so that nothing but the relevant message of the early Church remains. This message alone can speak to our day of “electricity and radio.” Thus the miracles, the birth stories, the empty tomb and the resurrection stories must all be discarded. The core of the message which is left is the historicity of the Cross and the good news of justification by faith. Bultmann says that man in his existence is suffering from a desperate calamity. This lostness is the point of contact for all Christian preaching because when a man reaches the boundary of his resources he can find release by making a decision for Christ. This decision, made at the edge of the abyss, will bring a man to a believing self-understanding (Selbstverstandnis), or a release from the powers of this world which he can control (and which in sin control him) into the service of that Power which he cannot control (which is the hidden God). This gives a man “serenity of soul” in the face of otherwise hopeless frustration. The historical Jesus is significant in this picture only as occasion for the encounter between the cross-event and the sinner who makes the decision for the ultimate. Apart from this personal encounter, there is no more significance to Jesus than to any other martyr in history. Really it is not the Jesus of history that concerns us (he was assertedly not even conscious of himself as Messiah), but the personal Lord we meet in the moment of decision.

Subjectivistic Criticism

Now how does Bultmann know all this? How is it possible for him to say that the original and relevant message was from the beginning clothed in an unnecessary mythical dress? The answer is that he uses the useful but dangerously sharp tool of form criticism in a most unscientific and subjective fashion. For example, every time the text of the Gospel of John does not corroborate Bultmann’s existentialist philosophy, he ascribes the discrepancy to redactional gloss. Thus when John’s futurist eschatology contradicts Bultmann’s realized eschatology in John 6:39, 40, 44 and 12:47, he simply pleads ecclesiastical redaction (Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, New York, 1955, Vol. II, p. 39.) Similarly, when the Jewish concept of an atoning sacrificial death is found in 1 John 1:7, 2:2, and John 4:10, 6:53–56, 19:34, Bultmann declares these passages to be late theological accretions because they do not fit his theory that John used a Gnostic representation for his message. This method has further led him to say that “for John, Easter, Pentecost and the parousia are not three separate events, but one and the same” (ibid., 6:57). That this fails to distinguish properly between Spirit and Son and thereby truncates the Trinity does not seem to bother Bultmann.

In addition to this question-begging subjectivism Bultmann has been rightly charged with a Docetic Christology. It seems fair to say that for Bultmann the Cross becomes an empty symbol because of his failure to take into consideration the suffering Saviour on the Cross. The Cross is not just a symbol pointing to an occasion which, having no meaning in itself, becomes meaningful only in the crisis of personal decision. As Luther said, “The Kingdom of God comes indeed of itself without our prayer!” And moreover, the Cross does not occur without the historical resurrection as it was witnessed by the apostles. Bultmann seldom mentions the resurrection because he has reinterpreted it in terms of existentialism to be a release from frustration in this life rather than a gift of new life both here and hereafter (ibid., p. 200). Ironically, in his attempt to understand man in a purely historical way Bultmann has denied the decisive significance of the Cross for all history by defining its meaning only in terms of human decision.

Furthermore, the serenity of soul that comes from this decision cannot really replace the gift of resurrection which the Gospel proclaims. The Gospel offers not serenity indeed but a holy war against sin and the joyful foolishness of forgiveness. The holy war is not fought in the ivory tower of dialectics but in the flesh and blood association of Christians who are yoked together with Christ in love. Faith is not a nontemporal, nonhistorical symbol that exists only in the realm of meaning. It is not man’s decision but God’s gift in bringing men into communion with himself through Christ, the Lord of the Church. This is no simple I-Thou encounter; this is the divine action of election as it reaches its fulfilment both in the history of the Church and in personal history. Such history will be anything but serene; actually the Christian and the Church become involved in a new tension under the Cross which tears at their hearts but is also accompanied by an abounding hilarity in hope.

Misunderstanding The Worlds

Another aspect of demythologizing is Bultmann’s criticism of the biblical three-story universe. The modern scientific world-view involves a one-story universe, and since the biblical view is mythical, Bultmann says it can be discarded. In brief this would mean that we must stop talking about heaven and hell. This criticism involves a misunderstanding of both Scripture and science.

Actually Scripture teaches not three worlds, nor one world, but two worlds. There is an eschatological, not metaphysical, dualism between this present world which is in bondage to decay and the world to come which has already begun in the coming of Jesus. It is true that the Bible also teaches that God has created things visible and things invisible, things in heaven, things on earth, and things under the earth. The invisible things are not to be understood as subjective realities only, but they refer to angels, principalities, powers, demons, departed spirits in nether regions. This biblical viewpoint was just as offensive and irrelevant to the Gnosticism of Paul’s day as to the materialism of ours. But the real issue is the resurrection. We must say to Bultmann as Paul said to the Corinthians: “For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised.” If Jesus is the first fruits of the resurrection, then departed spirits must pass from some kind of fettered condition to a new freedom and life in Christ, and this cannot be consummated within the confines of the visible world.

The scientific misunderstanding is due to a common confusion between science as a method and science as a materialistic philosophy. Most practicing scientists clearly understand this distinction, but nonscientific people often do not. No scientist today would claim that his science makes incredible heaven, hell, angels, demons, miracles. Science is not a philosophy, nor a world-view, but a method of investigating how things happen in our experience. The scientist is an honest observer who simply describes what is given him in experience. He tries by the help of reason to construct meaningful “shorthand” resumes of a wide range of data, and thereby he hopes to gain some control over what he experiences. There is no unity in the sciences; the only thing besides method which binds the sciences together is the assumption of uniform causality, but this must be recognized as a construct of human reason which is not binding on God in the least. When it comes to the data of faith and revelation, the scientist admits that his methods of investigation cannot apply. In this realm there can be no experiment, manipulation, or control; for in this realm we must simply wait upon the Holy Spirit to call us ubi et quando vult.

In summary we must say that just as Bultmann’s historicism is utterly unhistorical, so likewise his scientism is unscientific. Is he a genius or an apostle? Certainly he is a genius, for one cannot help but marvel at the ingenuity of this man’s handling of scriptural interpretation, but it is precisely this human ingenuity which denies him the right to be called an apostle. An apostle is one set apart by God to proclaim the Gospel of Christ Jesus, who was promised beforehand, descended from David according to the flesh, and designated Son of God in power by the resurrection from the dead! Bultmann does not proclaim that message.

Bastian Kruithof is Associate Professor in Bible and Philosophy at Hope College. He is author of five books and has contributed frequently to religious periodicals. He holds the B.A. and B.D. degrees from Calvin College and Seminary, the A.M. from University of Michigan and the Ph.D. from University of Edinburgh, where his dissertation was “The Relation of Christianity and Culture in the Teaching of H. Bavinck.”

Cover Story

Christianity and the Pagan World

Oswald J. Smith

If you want to find countries where there is little or no poverty and much prosperity, you will have to go to Christian countries. In non-Christian lands the lot of the masses is indescribable poverty and the virtual absence of prosperity.

If you want to find countries where there are hospitals to care for the sick, homes for the aged and orphanages for the helpless, again you will have to go to Christian countries. In non-Christian lands there are few, if any, hospitals or orphanages except those provided by Christian missionaries and no provision for the aged.

If you want to visit countries where people live in houses and where beggars do not clutter the streets, you will have to visit Christian countries. In non-Christian lands multitudes live in caves and shelters made out of old cans and boxes or in crowded river boats and beggars in their rags and nakedness throng the roads.

If you want to see countries where individuals own their own homes, and where they get three square meals a day, once again you will have to turn your eyes toward Christian countries. In non-Christian lands countless multitudes are destitute. They lack even the common necessities of life. They sleep on the street without enough cover to warm their bodies, and all their lives they are dependent on others. Even in communistic countries men cannot forge ahead and freedom is unknown, for they live as slaves of an atheistic, dictatorial government that holds life cheap and knows no mercy.

If you enjoy a country where there are schools, universities and colleges, where the courts administer justice, you will have to live in a Christian country. In non-Christian lands the masses have no opportunity of getting an education and justice is unknown, for bribery is rampant.

If you love a country where women are equal to men and where hard manual labor is not the lot of the weaker sex, and where woman can take her place in the office and even in politics, you will have to seek a Christian country. In non-Christian lands woman is the slave of man. She may be one of several wives or concubines. She is illiterate. In many such countries she is seldom seen; even when parades are going by, it is the men who stand and watch, not the women.

Christ Makes The Difference

What has made the difference? Christianity. Who has made the difference? Christ. Only in the countries that have been influenced by the teaching of Jesus is this difference found. Where Christ has gone, hospitals, schools, orphanages, leper asylums, homes for the blind, nurses and doctors have appeared. Where Christ has gone prosperity and plenty have followed. Where Christ has gone beggars have disappeared, homes have been built and the comforts of life have come. Where Christ has gone law has taken over and justice has been exercised. Where Christ has gone woman has been exalted, educated, reverenced and loved. Christian marriage has taken the place of polygamy. Where Christ has gone life is sacred and property protected, the individual given an opportunity to develop his business and to prosper, so that he can care for his family and leave something for them to inherit.

Go to a non-Christian land and you will find people hungry. Millions of them get only one meal a day or less and that a bowl of rice; they never know what it is to be satisfied. That is why there are so few fat people in non-Christian lands. They are thin for lack of nourishment. That is why they beg for a morsel of food. They are hungry. They have always been hungry and they always will be, for pagan governments are not long interested in their people’s welfare.

Most people in Christian countries do not know what it is to be hungry. They have more than enough. The United States throws away sufficient food to feed a nation. God has given America and Canada a superabundance of everything. The nation that recognizes Christ is rich. In 3 John 2 we are told that it is the will of God that his people should prosper. The greatest prosperity the world has ever seen will be during the millennium and it will be because Jesus Christ will be exalted as Lord of lords and King of kings.

The Duty Of Missions

What about the heathen? If Christianity makes such a difference, then ought we not to tell them about Christ? Their own religions cannot save them. They have never bettered their lot. Only Christianity can raise them from their degradation and filth to prosperity and righteousness. Only Christ can change their condition. Then why not give them Christ? He died for them. They have no other hope. All the by-products of Christianity will be theirs once they know Christ. Let us send out missionaries. Let us distribute the printed page. Let us get the message to them. By some means let us “Go … into all the world and preach the gospel.”

One Church’S Program

During the past years the Peoples Church in Toronto, Canada, of which I am the pastor, has contributed well over $3,000,000 for missionary work, most of it for foreign work. At the present time we are giving seven times as much to missions as we spend on ourselves. For instance, last year we spent $39,000 on ourselves in Toronto and during the same period we sent $282,000 to the regions beyond. Thus we are trying to put missions first. At the present time we are contributing toward the support of 350 missionaries on 40 foreign fields under 35 accredited faith missionary societies.

Each year we hold a missionary convention that lasts for four weeks and five Sundays. There is no period of the year when the attendance is as large as it is during this convention. On Sundays we hold four services—one at 11 o’clock in the morning, one at 3 in the afternoon, one at 7 in the evening and another at 9. As a rule some 2,000 people attend each of these services, making a total of 8,000 people for the entire Sunday. This continues for five Sundays.

We bring missionaries from various parts of the world, invite missionary leaders to speak on their work and show pictures, until our people catch such a vision that they can hardly wait for Sunday to make their investment for missions. Everyone takes part in the convention. They do not give cash. They make a faith-promise offering, agreeing to send in so much each month for the next 12 months. A pledge offering is, of course, between the individual and the church, and the officials may be sent to collect it, but a faith-promise offering is between the individual and God, and the individual is never asked for it. He makes it to God and he deals with God alone. As a rule much more is received than the amount promised.

It is like buying on credit. If we had to pay cash we could not get what we want, but by signing a contract and agreeing to pay so much a week or month it is possible to obtain things that are beyond our reach otherwise. So it is with missions. We sign a contract with God and we agree to send in so much month by month for a year. Thus we receive sufficient to carry our great missionary work.

Built On A Vision

The Peoples Church is built on a vision—the vision of getting the message to the Christless masses in the regions beyond. It is that alone which binds our people together. We have never had a split of any kind in the history of the church. Our people realize that “the supreme task of the church is the evangelization of the world” and they put missions first.

We have seen the same thing happen in dozens of other churches in the United States and Canada. It was my privilege to conduct the first convention ever held in Park Street Church, Boston. That church was then giving $3,200 a year to missions; it is now giving over $200,000 a year. For six years in succession I conducted this convention. The same thing happened in Grace Chapel, Philadelphia. That church was giving about $8,000 a year for missions. I held a convention there for five consecutive years. The Chapel is now giving over $100,000 each year. I have seen it happen in Presbyterian churches, Baptist churches, Pentecostal churches, Independent churches, all kinds of churches. I have never known it to fail. God’s plan is the convention. With a convention and a faith-promise offering, missions can be supported.

A Motto For Missions

About a quarter of a century ago God gave me a motto which I put in the form of a question: “Why should anyone hear the Gospel twice before everyone has heard it once?” I have used that motto all over the world and God has greatly blessed it. Missionary leaders everywhere are using it today. I have no objection to people hearing the Gospel a thousand times, but I do object when a church gives it to the same people for a quarter of a century and never once turns to those who have not yet heard. “The mission of the Church is Missions.” “This generation can only reach this generation.” “You must go or send a substitute.” “The church that gives is the church that lives.” These are some of the mottoes that influence us in our missionary work.

We must decide whether we are going to put our money into buildings or into the message. Jehovah’s Witnesses build Kingdom Halls, not luxurious in any sense of the word. They know that the message is more important than the building. They do not build a beautiful church and invite the people to come in; they put their money into the message, the printed page, and send it out. At one of their services they baptized 6,000 converts, every one of them won by the printed page. The communists are doing the same. They even boast that they took China by means of the printed page. The Church of Jesus Christ is going to have to change its methods. If we are going to depend upon missionaries, we are going to fail. The message is more important than the messenger.

Our people do not give as the world gives, namely, out of sympathy. We know that anyone will respond to physical needs. We have taught our people to give in order to carry out God’s program, which is to evangelize the unevangelized tribes of earth and thus bring back the King. Our policy is: “To hasten the return of our Lord by following his program for this age, which is to ‘preach the Gospel in all the world for a witness to all nations,’ and ‘to take out a people for his name.’ Our aim is to work among peoples, tribes and nations where Christ is not named.”

When Jesus left this world he left us one job and one only—world evangelization. Everything else is of secondary importance. We have no women’s missionary society in our church because we place the responsibility of missions upon everyone. It is only when the most important work of the church is given to everyone in the church that the church will indeed be a missionary church. I would never dream of giving the most important work of the church to any one of the many societies in the church. I give it to the entire church.

We have 130 elders. Last year our elders gave $42,000 to missions. No one becomes an official in the Peoples Church unless he is backing the great work of world evengelization and, if he ever ceases to back that work, he ceases to be an official. We have a choir of about 70 members. Last year our choir gave $10,000 to missions. We have a very small Sunday school, for we do not emphasize Sunday school work. There are less than 400 in it and yet our Sunday school gave $28,000 to missions last year. We have a small group of business girls, about 40 or 50, and they gave $5,000. Thus we have trained our people to put missions first. Any church can do the same.

There are still some 2,000 tribes without the Gospel, 2,000 languages into which no part of the Word of God has yet been translated. Jesus Christ cannot come to reign in millennial splendor, power, and glory until these tribes have been reached, for there must be some in the Body of Christ from every tribe, tongue and nation throughout the world. When, then, are we going to complete the task? When will we take him seriously? When will we invest more in missions than we invest at home? When will we put missions first? I have been preaching the Gospel now for 49 years, but I am a pastor second, a missionary first. I am a hymn writer and an author second, but a missionary first. I am an evangelist second, a missionary first. “The gospel must first be published among all nations.” God help us to accept the challenge and evangelize the world that the King may come back and reign.

END

George Stob is minister of Prospect Street Christian Reformed Church of Passaic, New Jersey, has been pastor in the state of Washington, chaplain in the U.S. Army during World War II and has taught Church History at Calvin Seminary, Grand Rapids. He is author of handbooks on Bible history and an editor of the monthly Reformed Journal.

Cover Story

Universalism in Today’s Theology

Harold B. Kuhn

The teaching of universalism is one which has divided Christian thinkers since the days of Clement of Alexandria and Origen. The subject has been raised in recent years with new force, so that it challenges consideration from the point of view of newer theological currents. The Christian Gospel raised the blunt question: “Will there be lost men who finally find themselves irrecoverably in outer darkness?” Universalism answers this question in the negative.

Early universalism held that man was created with opportunity of improvement as enduring as his being. This was the view of Clement of Alexandria. Origen, his pupil, rooted his universalism in the Platonic doctrine of the pre-existence of souls. The major thrust of his teaching was that human souls were now in bodily garb for the purposes of discipline and education, the outcome of which was held to be necessarily favorable. In similar vein Gregory of Nazianzen held that all punishments led necessarily to salvation. In his view God permitted evil only because he foresaw that all would be saved.

In the Middle Ages, John Scotus Erigena, following Plato’s view that our earthly life is the result of the imprisonment of the pre-existent soul in a body, taught that Jesus came to repair the entire damage, and finally to restore all to God. In general, medieval theology condemned universalism. Thomas Aquinas gave the classic formulation of the Roman church’s opposition to it, asserting that partialism was not only in keeping with the doctrine of God’s grace but that it was required by the clear statements of Scripture. Protestant orthodoxy continued the same teaching, asserting even more emphatically that the Scriptures are the final court of appeal at this point, and that they teach that the final reconstitution of all things in Christ would be accomplished only at the price of the eternal loss of a portion of mankind.

The last 50 years have witnessed a restatement of the case for universalism, given skillful expression by a number of able theologians. It will be helpful to know the basic arguments by which these defend the view that all will ultimately be saved.

Karl Barth has given expression to his belief that God’s final triumph must include the salvation of all men, in terms of what has been called “Christomonism.” In seeking to give a full account of faith as it relates to all of human life, including the mystery of man’s struggle with evil, Barth insists that Jesus Christ is the Elect Man and that we are elected in him collectively—not as separate individuals. It was Emil Brunner who first raised a vigorous protest against Barth’s weird doctrine of election and who pointed out its universalistic implications.

Reinhold Niebuhr has in less systematic fashion announced a similar doctrine. He sees salvation as being always in principle, not in fact. To him divine action is at present hidden action; we can only know it indirectly. Thus to Niebuhr as to Barth, our best attitude is that of taking our place with the sinners, living in penitence moment by moment. His confidence seems to be that the ultimate well-being of all souls must be achieved eschatologically. What Niebuhr fails to see is that his principles do not clearly rule out the possibility that there may be men with a hardness of heart which eternity does not change.

British Advocates

In Great Britain the three major recent exponents of universalism are Dr. C. H. Dodd, Dr. J. A. T. Robinson and Dr. H. H. Farmer. Dr. Robinson defends the view that universalism is in keeping with the Christian Gospel upon the ground that if divine love is omnipotent it must finally eliminate all opposition to itself. He recognizes that this involves the doctrine of human freedom, but insists that freedom can be safeguarded in a manner harmonious with the doctrine that all shall finally come to contrition. He holds that an all-compelling love can nevertheless leave freedom intact, because “the very act of submission is an act of freedom and embodies the assertion of its eternal integrity” (Scottish Journal of Theology, June 1949).

Dr. H. H. Farmer follows a similar line of approach in his volume The World and God. He assumes that if God is holy love, then we must conclude “that not only is he seeking to reconcile every individual to himself, but also that he will in the end succeed in so doing … Thus the profound concern of religious faith for God’s ultimate victory seems in its Christian form to move unavoidably towards universalism” (p. 255). He rejects the idea that the destiny of man can be once and for all settled by what happens in this world and is thus forced to assume, gratuitously we think, a post mortem existence in which even the most stubborn spirits are brought to yield to the truth.

Dr. Farmer feels that we must restate the ideas of freedom and of coercion. He insists that, given a theoretically eternal opportunity, God can manifest his wisdom with such force that it can no longer be resisted. He allows that the process may entail a very long period of time and much suffering. However, he believes, just as an irresistible logic may bring us to conclusions which we may not like but nevertheless accept, so also the appeals of God in the post mortem situation may bring even the most recalcitrant soul to yield to divine mercy, without his personality being overridden in the process.

American Supporters

In this country, Dr. Robert L. Calhoun puts the case in a slightly different form in his volume God and the Common Life. He insists (p. 248) that God’s redemptive world must be as extensive as his work within man’s environment. He infers from the triumph of God in the cosmos that “The Hound of Heaven” will never ultimatively fail, but will bring to bear upon men such influences, from within and from without, that they will hear and respond.

From similar premises, Dr. Harris Franklin Rall insists that since God has worked with success through ages of cosmic development, it would be irrational if he were to fail to achieve his objectives in the salvation of men. Assuming that God is greater than evil, he reasons that ethical triumph, no less than cosmic triumph, is implicit in divine activity. Rall’s conclusions are conditioned by his view that salvation is chiefly positive in nature. That is to say, he understands salvation almost exclusively in terms of the achievement of eternal life, not as escape from eternal death and outer darkness.

A word needs to be said with reference to the implications of the thought of Rudolf Bultmann and of Paul Tillich for the subject at hand. Both of these theologians are concerned primarily with the way in which the Gospel is to be interpreted today. They feel that a contemporary understanding of the gospel can best be expressed in terms of an existentialist philosophy, which lays stress upon living decisions in the present, rather than in terms of traditional theological expressions concerning either the past or the future. Thus such terms as “the wrath of God” and “the final judgment” are paradigms expressing dramatically the absoluteness and unapproachability of God. These and similar modes of speech are held to be poetic, useful chiefly to evoke the mysterium tremendum, or the overpowering sense of awe in the presence of the Divine. To such a view, of course, the teachings of Scripture concerning the factuality of either future blessedness or future perdition become meaningless and irrelevant.

Perhaps the most pronounced of the American exponents of modern universalism is Dr. Nels F. S. Ferre. The cornerstone of Ferre’s system is that God combines in himself the ideal and the actual, is absolutely sovereign, and will finally save all men. The final outcome of the course of things is beyond our present power of understanding. By “faith,” however, he sees God as finally supreme above all.

Ferre sets up an antithesis between God’s love on one hand, and his power and justice on the other. From this dialectic he concludes that if any of the sons of men were to be irrevocably lost, God would have acted in a manner which was both “subjustice” and “sublove.” He, like Dr. Farmer, assumes a set of conditions after death in which those who die impenitent here will be once again faced with both the terror of evil and the grace of Christ. Ferre’s language is picturesque; he sees men in this situation promptly perceiving themselves to be out of their proper element, and in consequence quickly beating a retreat to Father’s house.

Fallacy And Oversight

These modern assertions of universalism share more or less largely in three serious fallacies and in one critical oversight. Their exponents assume, first, that anything less than universal salvation is unthinkable and therefore impossible. They are unwilling to allow as a possibility that which seems to them to be unthinkable. Now it needs to be said that some of the subjective factors involved here come as reaction to the ill-advised and lurid preaching upon the subject of hell by well-meaning persons. Who of us has not heard some minister deal with the subject of eternal perdition in such manner as to create suspicion that he was in reality giving vent either to his own feelings of aggression or to his own frustration? This prompts one to add, homiletically, that no minister is prepared to preach upon the subject of hell until his soul has been gripped by the poignant fear that some of his audience may make their bed there.

The supposed unthinkability of eternal punishment rests, in general, upon what we believe to be a faulty human analogy. Universalists tend to feel that the love of God must be like human love, raised to the nth power. Now it is clear that there is a relation between God’s love for us and the love of the parent for the child. “Like as a father pitieth his children …” But this analogy must have its limits, and these limits are reached when we face the clear words of our Lord concerning “the strait gate” and “the great gulf.” It is significant that such statements, together with our Lord’s solemn references to “the shut door” and to “both soul and body cast into Gehenna,” are neatly bypassed by universalists.

These statements seem clearly to reveal in concrete form the realities of the situation as God sees it. No abstract reasoning on our part can hope effectively to explain away these statements, since they rest upon what God has actually done in history through his Son. The Cross goes beyond any of our logical processes of analogy in which we may try to set God’s love and God’s power in antithesis.

Rationalizing Iniquity

The second fallacy is the assumption that the problem of evil is capable of being rationalized. Universalism shares the weakness of absolute idealism at this point. It needs to be remembered that evil is ultimately illogical and unsystematic in character. Those who assert or imply that evil can easily be transcended by reason, or rendered logically coherent by any process of dialectic, have forgotten that our Lord speaks of “the mystery of iniquity.”

Both ancient and modern universalism fail to see that sin is in its essence ultimately contradictory, so that the gulf between the sinner and God cannot be bridged by human reason. Men are reconciled to God only in terms of the activity of God at the Cross. At Golgotha the mystery of evil was not denied; man was reconciled to God by an act which at the same time affirmed the bottomless reality of sin. No unitary interpretation of existence can possibly do justice to the mystery of iniquity, and it is perennially true that the preaching of the Cross is foolishness to the wisdom of this world.

The third fallacy of universalism lies in its shallow understanding of Calvary. Its proponents fail to see that as the darkness settled around our divine Lord at Gethsemane, and as it enveloped him on the Cross, it was not a darkness springing from a normal manifestation of his will-to-live, but a darkness born of the shocking realization that shortly divine love was to be pressed to the point of no return. From henceforth the frightful possibility should exist that in spite of God’s absolute love for men, some may resist in arrogance and selfishness and go into eternal night. In other words, in the Cross the incredible became possible; men henceforth might, in a personal and decisive rejection of divine mercy, manifest the incredible mystery of iniquity.

What is needed to correct this third fallacy is, of course, a more profound insight into two things: first, into the Eli, Eli lama sabachthani of our Lord upon the Cross; and second, into the unfathomable horror of the act by which men, in arrogance and proud denial, refuse the ultimate work of love at Calvary. When one grasps these in their profundity, he will scarcely dilute the significance of the sufferings of our Lord by a declaration of universalism. He will see, in the light of the Cross, that hell is no crude medieval invention but a hideous reality, prefigured here and now in the wreckage of character evident all about us, and the ultimate and inevitable consequence of the power of men finally to contradict God and to depart from him.

Finally, universalists overlook the clear statements of Scripture concerning the possibility of a final and decisive rejection of the love of God in Christ and a consequent eternal estrangement of the human soul. Reference has been made to the neglect of the statements of our Lord which can scarcely have any other significance than that the day of mercy has its final moment, and that some will reach this moment in impenitence. Worthy of special study in this connection is his account of the rich man and Lazarus, with its total lack of any indication of a postmortem repentance and its clear statement that death precipitates a character finality. “Neither can they pass to us that would come from thence!” To this may be added the statement concerning Judas, that “it would have been better for that man had he never been born.”

False Guides Amid Urgency

In the days of his flesh our Lord continually emphasized two things: first, that eternal life is available to all men; and second, that it is the urgent duty of all to accept it promptly and immediately. This is the “word of eternal life.” Urgency was and is the keynote of the proclamation of the Church. “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men,” said Paul. The reason is not far away: “The love of Christ constrains us as we make this judgment that when Christ died, all died.” This urgency is not merely rhetorical; it springs from the tragic fact that the kerygma is both a savor of life unto life and a savor of death unto death.

In the light of these things, it seems incredible that men entrusted with the proclamation of the Gospel should take away the railings from the precipice roads of life. We cannot refrain from voicing the conviction that those who thus remove the red flares and the danger signals do so as false guides who stand in desperate need of returning for instructions to him who said, “Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many will seek to enter in and shall not be able.”

END

Cover Story

The Complete Life

Bastian Kruithof

We spend our years, not only as a tale that is told, but also in fractions. The brevity and swiftness of life have much to do with this, yet these are not entirely to blame. We are apt to remain in the valley of particulars too long and that way neglect the heights of universals. Keats on first looking into Chapman’s Homer felt like a watcher of the skies standing on a peak in Darien. And Shelley once said that if he were to die tomorrow, he would have lived longer than his father. The intensity of our lives and right perspective have much to do with seeing life steadily and whole.

In our world of specialization and the scientific outlook there is a real tendency to be content with the fractional. There may be a basic humility about this, but there may also be a creeping pride which narrows the field of interest and mistakes a trail for a highway.

It is the maturing Christian’s blessed, fundamental prejudice that he is far on the way to grasping the complete life. He is closer to seeing life steadily and whole than Matthew Arnold who gave us the telling phrase. His experience is greater than that of Keats when that young poet walked into the mind of Homer. The comprehensive intensity of his life is more full of adventure and discovery than that of Shelley, the passionate rebel, who felt so much and left out more.

But we are speaking of the maturing Christian. There are others who have the one thing needed, whose destination is heaven, but who have no sharpened senses toward the infinite boundaries of the pilgrimage that begins here and lasts forever.

The Christian stands in that enviable position where everything can be evaluated sub specie aeternitatis. His can be that cosmic wanderlust which is of the very essence of the complete life. He considers is no sin to explore the universe and get stardust on his nose. Gertrude Stein at one time made the remark that all of us have a certain amount of “stupid being.” And some have more than others. One of our dangers as Christians is that, afraid to include too much, we exclude more. One day Michelangelo walked into the studio of Raphael to study the artist’s canvas. Then he picked up a piece of chalk and wrote the word amplius—greater, more ample. The picture was too cramped, too narrow. That is how our lives appear.

Religion And Culture

I have tried to formulate for myself a definition or description of the complete life. It is the life under God, lived alone and in society, with the proper concern for soul, mind and body. It is both contemplative and active, as the Middle Ages revealed at their best, and our contemporary age could and should reveal at its best.

For us the complete life includes the proper relation of Christianity to culture. In a time of decadence during the Nazi heyday there was not only a denial of Christianity but also a sneering at culture. In a play staged in Berlin one of the characters said, “Culture? Whenever I hear that word, I remove the safety catch from my gun.” The startling matter is that each time these lines were spoken they were greeted by a roar of applause.

The Two Questions

The Christian quite naturally affirms Christianity. But that affirmation can suffer from an application that is too narrow. We who experience divine grace are challenged by two persistent questions: What must I do to be saved? and, What must I do now that I am saved? If our concern is only with the first of these, we separate our religion from the cultural mandate that has come to us through the ages from God himself. Then the whole realm of culture may draw from us a sneer like that of the Nazis.

Long ago the Lord said to Adam, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.” Both sacred and secular history are evidence of the real though partial fulfillment of that order. The purpose of creation is the showing forth of the glory of God. Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. To do that man must take all revelation into consideration. That was so before the fall, and that is so now. Creation, providence and redemption—all of these have their religious and cultural significance.

Definitions of culture are many and at times confusing. Perhaps a simple description will serve our purpose. By culture we understand the cultivation and appreciation of all that is true, good and beautiful in God’s world. Ideally there is no conflict between it and religion. In fact, religion is the mother of culture. T. S. Eliot reminds us that we must not look upon religion and culture as two separate but related things, nor must we identify the two. And he goes on to say that “no culture has appeared or developed except together with religion” (Notes Towards the Definition of Culture, p. 15). Of course, sin has blurred man’s vision with the result that religion and culture often appear as antagonistic. It is Christianity based on divine revelation that gives the proper perspective.

The Natural And The Spiritual

Now in terms of the two questions there is a tendency among Christians to honor the first and to ignore or misunderstand the second. The Dutch theologian Herman Bavinck quotes J. Christian Blumhardt as saying that man really needs a twofold conversion, first from the natural to the spiritual life, and then from the spiritual to the natural (Philosophy of Revelation, Dutch Ed., p. 207). The implication is that the Christian should appreciate not only special revelation which deals primarily with redemption, but also that general revelation which speaks unmistakably in God’s universe. The redeemed person must think not only in terms of what he is redeemed from, but also of what he is redeemed for. Redemption has a cosmic significance. As R. H. Strachan writes, “It is impossible for a Christian who thinks at all to have Christ in his heart and keep him out of the universe” (The Historic Jesus in the New Testament, p. 72).

We have no quarrel with the first question. Evangelism thrives on that cry and the answer to it. But an exclusive concern easily results in an asceticism not worthy of Protestantism. If only the soul’s salvation and heaven count, there is a withdrawal from man’s place and purpose here. That way we lose the abundant life over and in which the two revelations shine, and we fail to prepare for it hereafter. We spend our days in a sort of perpetual spiritual schizophrenia, vascillating between a distorted spiritual claim and a desire for health and wealth and the latest gadgets that ease and confound our existence.

With such a withdrawal from the world the wholehearted and wholeheaded Christian is not at all satisfied. He sees his salvation in broader and deeper perspective. Pilgrim of eternity, he considers the importance of all that God reveals and demands in time. For him the second question certainly implies the urgency of witnessing that others may be won, but it also means his bearing witness to all that God is trying to tell us in creation, providence and redemption. He looks upon life as the unfolding of one increasing purpose. To him the City of God takes in and transforms the city of man and gives man his most significant role. For him the scientific, the aesthetic, the social and the religious are inseparable.

The Scientific

Man appears in his lights and in his shadows. There is truth in Hamlet’s soliloquy and in Pascal’s parody of the words. Yet to the latter, man is a thinking reed.

The Christian rejoices in knowledge and its quest, for all knowledge is from God. These two revelations in the Word and in the world find a response in the mind of man. Learning is indispensable and the adventure is rewarding. Whatever of value has been thought, said and done challenges our searching and our research.

We must cultivate the open mind which at its best is blessedly greedy. It reveres all revelation whether it be the mystery of the stars or of the ocean floor, the unleashed forces of the atom, the secrets of the human heart, or the being and purpose of God—or all these and more. The quest is a perennial one. Though we cannot all be scholars and specialists, we are the poorer and live the more fractionally if our senses are not keen to all the worthwhile that beats at our doors.

For the Christian, science and the scientific sense are not estranged from religion. Knowledge is not to be separated from deep religious certitude, but neither is it to be injured by unintelligent conviction. For him theology is a science feeding on the Word of God and growing from more to more, nurtured by all that is worthy and knowable.

The Aesthetic

The aesthetic sense must also be intelligent. God is the author of beauty as well as of truth. The Bible witnesses to that in content and form. Nature and life witness to it. The creativity of saints and sinners does as well.

Christians should strive to cultivate and appreciate beauty. It is part of their religious and cultural mandate. Sadly enough we are living in an age when the ark in the holiest place has given way to the jukebox. Taste has suffered even among Christians. While the psalms and great hymns remain unsung because they are “heavy, slow and boring,” our worship is invaded with secular tunes and primitive rhythms. Bach, Beethoven and Handel are considered long-haired, and instead we hear sentimental ditties and choruses that express a marked immaturity.

Television and radio have crowded out our bookshelves. Pictorial magazines are more important in our homes and hospitals than the living Word and books of value. If there is any reading, predigested digests curb our own spiritual and mental mastication. The heavens declare the glory of God and much on this good earth does the same, but we hurry through life with blinders, unmoved by the pre-education for eternity.

It is not entirely so. God pours out his beauty in nature and through poets, artists and musicians. One who has traveled remembers mountains, museums, music halls, cathedrals and libraries stocked with lore, more than eye and ear can grasp and the mind understand. All that beauty is for God to contemplate. The spillover is our reward until that greater comprehension unshackles our receptivity.

The Social

It was the divine will that man should not live alone. We have millions of brothers and sisters sprung from one common stock. The image of God in us, though sadly marred and needing restoration, makes for responsible relationship. I am more than my brother’s keeper; I am his brother. That implies privileges and duties in the family, society, the state and the world. Christianity gives us the shining ideals for each sphere. These cannot be spurned with impunity.

Christians basking in an atmosphere of, “When we all get to heaven,” are living very fractionally. If they lament the breakdown of the home, social delinquencies, labor disputes, separation from religion in education, economics and politics, and bitter race relations, they have also themselves to blame. For God requires of them that they love him above all and their neighbors as themselves. Their faith, wrapped in cellophane or hermetically sealed as insurance for the life to come, belies the words of Jesus that his followers must be the salt of the earth and the light of the world.

What Christian principles have done for all the social spheres is a long and astounding story. What they can and must still do is an adventurous chapter the denouement of which depends on how faithfully Christians will practice what they believe.

The Religious

Christian faith and practice are basic to the complete life. Christians are the children of God, the people of the Book, the beneficiaries of all divine revelation. The more sharpened our senses are to the ultimate values of life and to our calling in a world that bristles with problems, the more we answer to God’s purpose and will.

Personal piety, the assurance of salvation, a healthy walking with God, a profound theology of grace are essential. And a translation of these into dynamic action for the living of these days is indispensable. We must have the devotion of St. Augustine, the brotherliness of St. Francis, the heat of Luther, the burning heart of Calvin, the passion of John Wesley, the faith of our fathers, not dead but living.

Would you strive for the complete life? Then walk with God in the city streets, through alleys and on highways, in pastures and over mountains, in the atom and among the stars, in realms of duty and of beauty. And as you walk, keep your eyes on the City of God. That is the way of the complete life.

The Cathedral

Here it stands in humble eloquence,

The great cathedral, handsome, splendid, tall.

Across the street its morning shadows fall

As if to hide the sin and arrogance

Of foolish men, who by some plan or chance

Scorn heavenly things. But yet they heed the call

To worship in this great cathedral hall

And give its ornate walls a prideful glance.

They crowd its aisles, they listen to the choir,

And hear its echoes like a heavenly lyre.

Forgetting for the moment basic sin

They lose themselves to wandering thoughts within.

The temple bell rings solemnly from crypt to floor,

While Christ outside, waits lonely at the door!

Inspiration

He entered the cathedral timidly

As if its choir and chancel frowned on him

A stranger. But the soft and vibrant hymn

The organist was playing, seemed to be

A full processional—a melody

That caught his heart and cast aside his sin,

Making him guiltless, clean and pure within.

His life felt joyous, full, and free.

He found a seat among the silent crowd

Of worshippers, and in deep reverence bowed

His once proud head in strange humility,

As voices of the choir, in ecstasy,

Caught up the hymn in childhood he had known—

ABIDE WITH ME. He was with God, alone!

HARRY ALBERT MILLER

Cover Story

Billy Graham’s Impact on New York

The Editor

How shall we evaluate the colossal religious drama recently concluded in New York City? The magnetic attraction of nearly two million persons to Madison Square Garden in summertime? More than 50,000 public decisions for Christ. New York’s official ecclesiastical cooperation with mass evangelism. The very person and message of Billy Graham. Are these factors God-propelled or man-made? Do they accelerate the collective pulse of sluggish Protestantism? Do they retard the ecumenical throb by their injection of a specifically delineated theology? Such questions engage the vigorous interaction not only of professional theologians, ministers and evangelists, but of laymen as well. What shall we say of Billy Graham? Whose voice is he?

The Spirit Or The Serpent?

Liberalism and neo-orthodoxy have virtually exorcised the Devil from their theology. Consequently, the theological left shows little disposition or reason to dismiss Billy Graham as a voice of Satan. On the other hand, some spokesmen for reactionary fundamentalism, appalled at Billy Graham’s technical and organizational alignment with modernistic clergymen, have made this very charge. A Christian college president, for example, forbade students on his campus to pray publicly for success of the meetings. Elsewhere an evangelist privately attributed the mass response in New York to Satan. A greater number in the reactionary rightist classification, however, have prayed for the evangelist and the meetings. Albeit, they speak of Graham with more reserve than gusto, and avoid reference to the Holy Spirit in evaluating his ministry.

Radical liberals, too, have leveled sharp criticisms at Graham’s ministry. Among such, Professor Arnold Nash of University of North Carolina considers the New York campaign a portent of the end of Protestantism. Similarly, others view mass evangelism as a major danger in contemporary spiritual life.

Critics Right And Left

Billy Graham’s critics include distinguished leaders in Roman Catholicism, Protestant liberalism and neo-orthodoxy, as well as irreligious secularists claiming no spiritual profession whatever. Secularists either explain mass evangelism in terms of “a promotional achievement,” or lampoon it as “a religious circus.” Modernists dislike Graham’s theological re-emphasis on the “five points” of fundamentalism (the inspiration of the Scriptures; the deity, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, bodily resurrection, and second coming of Christ); many of them actually view Graham’s ministry as a sinister plot to undermine their accepted theologically inclusive ecumenical views. Roman Catholics consider Graham’s converts only “half saved,” since his evangelical convictions are not carefully related to the world of culture. For several reasons, neo-orthodox leaders speak of Graham’s thrust as “naive.” They assert that in Norman Vincent Peale fashion it appropriates God for purposes of personal success; that it allegedly perpetuates an antiquated theology appended to an outmoded world-view; that, lacking a deep cultural vision, it pursues easy solutions to complex social problems.

Serious Challenge

Because of the liberalistic monopoly of organized Protestantism, evangelical Christianity has long been spurned in American religious life. The searching public criticism of representative men like Reinhold Niebuhr, Father Gustave Weigel and Harold E. Fey, however, gives evidence that leaders in virtually all major religious traditions today consider Billy Graham together with his theology a serious competitor for the loyalties of hundreds of thousands of people.

Graham is convinced that biblical evangelism moves within the orbit of biblical theology. Criticize him as some will for reviving “the five points of fundamentalism,” his doctrinal emphasis belongs not only to extreme fundamentalists but also to the historic Christian churches (whereas the semi-unitarianism that prevailed virtually unchallenged in many churches in recent decades is not expressive of genuine Christianity at all). Fears expressed over the influence of Graham’s ministry upon the ecumenical movement will hardly shape confidence in that movement’s biblical concern. An ecumenics so narrow that it considers fundamental Christian doctrines to be divisive, yet so broad that it includes both Greek Orthodox and the most liberal churches, can hardly be expected to offer a return to Christ and the gospel.

Friends As Well As Foes

On the other hand, approval of Graham’s ministry is wider than sympathy for his theology. While some Protestant leaders attach little significance to doctrine of any kind, they interpret mass evangelism as a legitimate phase of the wider “return to religion” in contemporary American life. Others, actually apprehensive of Graham’s theology, nonetheless welcome his impact on the masses for its inevitable spur to church attendance, and even to reinforcement of membership with new recruits at a time of financially burdensome physical expansion. Still others, while in theological disagreement with Graham, feel that his evangelical supporters could enrich the ecumenical movement no less than liberal, neo-orthodox and conservative forces already within its framework have done. To some, Graham holds a strategic key to the ecumenical movement. To others, whatever theological difficulties may be involved for contemporary Protestantism, Graham’s ministry demonstrates the pragmatic success of his evangelistic message.

While proponents of Graham’s ministry fall into all these categories, his fullest support unquestionably comes from Protestant ministers personally convinced of the theological basis of his work. To them, Christian witness includes the ministry of mass evangelism, a ministry in which Billy Graham excels. Moreover, for them, biblical theology and biblical evangelism imply each other: the evangelistic challenge inevitably raises the theological question, while theology to be biblical must yield a missionary and evangelistic concern for lost masses in need of salvation.

A Pathetic Minority

New York City, to which Mr. Graham courageously carried a missionary investment that some of his friends feared might prove “a colossal bust,” is a metropolitan area of ten to fifteen million persons. Roman Catholics “claim” 75%, Protestants 33% of the population. But churches of all faiths reach less than half the population, and Protestantism is a pathetic minority.

Despite liberalism’s domination of Protestantism in New York for almost two generations, the movement made little impact upon the city’s unconverted masses. While the Protestant Council of New York had a department of evangelism from its beginning, interest in evangelism was at such a low ebb that the department had not been staffed. Yet more than four million inhabitants within the city limits belonged to no church, Protestant, Catholic or Jewish.

These facts must not be forgotten in weighing criticisms that Mr. Graham’s influence upon social institutions and the world of culture has been meager. Religious forces primarily dedicated to Christianizing the social order have little to show for many decades of effort. The long-established church agencies achieved no obvious turn in the dominant temper of New York life.

Indispensable Beginning

Over against the attempt of some to spawn a Christian culture through ethical reorganization of unregenerate humanity, Billy Graham summoned New York churches to their primary task of evangelizing lost multitudes for personal acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. The requirement of individual repentance and faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord, neglected by the “social gospel,” gained new biblical centrality.

Much criticism of Mr. Graham’s ministry is directed against the social phase of his message. Does he sharpen the religious awareness of central moral problems in national life? Is he concerned to infuse justice into the social order? Does he seek the translation of personal commitment into great social institutions? In short, Mr. Graham is often charged with diluting and over-simplifying the requirements of Christian social ethics.

The question is pertinent whether the Church properly looks to the evangelist to delineate the intricacies of Christian social ethics, any more than the Church rightly expects proficiency in mass evangelism from the theologian. Much of the Niebuhr-Graham debate has overlooked the fact that the bulk of the Apostle Paul’s teaching on social ethics is hardly deducible from his sermonic ministry.

Optimism And Pessimism

Nor must we accept every current plea for Christian social ethics as framed in an acceptable evangelical way. Mr. Graham has so much stressed the new birth as the basic ingredient to a new social order that neo-orthodox thinkers charge him with ignoring the corruption of sin in regenerate experience, and therefore with reflecting the illusions of liberal Protestantism.

While the problems of Christian culture are no doubt somewhat more complex than Mr. Graham implies, perhaps under the necessities of an evangelistic thrust, to many observers the neo-orthodox approach seems needlessly overcomplicated; by shrouding the simplicities of the gospel with theological subtleties, neo-orthodoxy well nigh places the Christian faith beyond the reach of the man in the street. Indeed, the charge of naivete pressed against evangelical Christianity today by Bultmann, Tillich and Niebuhr is not in all respects modern; it reflects a line of attack made already by the Gnostics in early Christian ages, and is based in part upon disposition to question aspects of the theology of revelation. Unfortunately, Christianity has often become more concessive, the more highly intellectualized; in place of “uncritical bibliolatry” scholars readily yield the field to criticism of the Bible. Tumult over “the obscurantism of literalism” has a long echo and bespeaks an eagerness to reject as antiquated vital elements of the Christian world-life view.

If Mr. Graham’s approach to the social question is too optimistic, the neo-orthodox approach may be too pessimistic. Neo-orthodoxy suffers from viewing man as sinner simply on the grounds of his creatureliness, i.e., on the basis of original creation. Its despair of social progress reflected in Karl Barth’s earlier writings is often criticized. While orthodox evangelism may underestimate the difficulties of social progress within the framework of redemption, neo-orthodox ethics underestimates the power of the Spirit in collective life. Whereas in the last generation liberalism dismissed the evangelical view as pessimistic, an ironic twist of twentieth-century theology is evangelicalism’s discovery of unjustifiable despair in the theology of neo-orthodoxy.

The Social Vision

To charge Billy Graham with deficient social vision is less than fair. He underscores the need to reflect Christian ideals in family, in business and labor, and in political relations.

Graham offered no direct reply to Niebuhr’s proposal that the genuineness of personal regeneration be demonstrated by applying the commandment of “love for neighbor” especially to the contemporary vice of race prejudice, thus sharpening the religious conscience at the very point where secular agencies are most indignant over social evil. But he replied indirectly (Life Magazine, Oct. 1, 1956), that such a test would tend to narrow the dimensions of neighbor-love. (Niebuhr was rightly concerned because the trade union movement supported the Supreme Court decision more aggressively than the churches; Graham might properly have noted the long-standing trade union tolerance of another type of exploitation involving all races within its ranks.) Total repentance seemed a far more complex matter.

In actuality, Graham emphasizes regeneration and sanctification, more than a broad program of social action, as the key to the problem of race hatred. The campaign in New York, where there are more colored than white Protestants, was wholly integrated. Negro and white Christians shared alike in the choir, in ushering and in counseling. Ethel Waters, Negro radio and television star, was a featured outside soloist. For thousands of Christians it was a new experience to share a hymnbook in worship with a member of another race. From Madison Square Garden, quite unpublicized, rose outlines of a new working relationship between believers of all races. Gain was registered, therefore, in the very realm that most concerned some of Mr. Graham’s critics.

At the conclusion of the Garden campaign, the Rev. Dan Potter, executive director of the Protestant Council of New York, told a news conference that he did not know another clergyman in the city who had spoken as forcibly from the pulpit as Billy Graham during the Crusade on areas of Christian social responsibility.

Depth Of Penetration

Depth of social penetration remains nonetheless an important question. Idealistic short cuts have stranded modern life in the swamps of secularism near the jungles of naturalism. All social agencies today acknowledge the difficulty of moral penetration in big cities. Because of the structure of modern community life, the sense of social solidarity is all but gone. While many workers live in city tenement and slum districts, the upper classes usually only work in the cities while they reside in the suburbs. Here in these suburban communities residents are thrown together mainly for purposes of self-preservation and self-aggrandizement. In earlier generations community interests ran deeper; today, community existence poses major obstacles to a decisive turn in social outlook and life.

Moreover, the influence of evangelism upon the social order—marriage and the home, labor and economics, the state and culture—cannot be measured overnight. (Few of Mr. Graham’s critics would want their localized ministries evaluated hastily.) The striking response of young people to Graham’s plea for Christian commitment in the face of New York’s juvenile delinquency problem, and the response of college students as well, both involve strong future significance. While New York still faces the delinquency problem on a large scale, Graham’s special plea to teen-agers gained a dramatic response after police authorities had tried virtually everything else without success. During youth week in the Garden teen-agers comprised 60% of the capacity crowds. Decisions were more numerous than during earlier weeks of the campaign. More than half the converts were teen-agers, mostly unchurched. Some admittedly had participated in gang wars. Garden statistics also indicate that 2000 students from more than 400 colleges registered decisions. For these young lives strategic problems of Christian vocation and life still remain, but they represent evangelical resources with which the Church can hopefully face the coming generation.

In evaluating social impact, however, the question of present-day achievement inevitably pushes to the fore. Those who stress social issues ask: what centers of sin have shut down? what changes have taken place in the ethics of business and labor? what spheres of culture and art have been penetrated by Christian claims? what discernible impact has been made upon the problem of divorce and in the realm of sex? One critic has lashed Graham on the ground that “he failed to make enemies—enemies of the politicians at Tammany Hall, the publishers of filth magazines, the liquor traffic, the labor racketeers, and many of the fellows in the front pews of our churches who can continue their sinful practices of deceit and thievery …” What shall we say to these things?

The Gospel And Reform

It is tempting to reply that none of the great evangelists has been a social reformer in the direct sense. Cultural reformers have arisen, however, under their inspiration and impetus, as Wilberforce, for example, followed Wesley, to eliminate the slave trade in England. Those who would capture the realms of culture for Christ must first follow Mr. Graham’s initial penetration, for the spheres of marriage and the home, labor and economics, politics and government, education and culture largely remain in the grip of secularism today.

Some critics argue that Graham’s ministry has not successfully “broken through” to the unchurched. It might be asked, what Christian spokesmen achieve a conspicuous breakthrough today? And who has tried more than Graham? When in the history of this century has New York City witnessed a more sustained evangelistic attempt? If there is no general revival of historic Christianity, is this Graham’s fault? Those who speak of the disproportion between the magnitude and success of Graham’s campaigns when measured in lasting converts and religious and moral concern in the social sphere, easily forget that almost every local church program must wrestle with the same difficulties.

The fact is, however, that Graham has achieved a partial penetration, however fractional. Surely Graham’s ministry has lifted Christian evangelism into a prominent and respectable place in the national news. During the last generation it was a rare achievement when, through some evangelistic impact, Christian commitment was made an easy subject of conversation. Graham’s ministry has created a climate of evangelical witness in England, Scotland and the United States. In this Communist era how many spiritual leaders have done more to allay Christian “lost cause” jitters? Graham has gained national interest for the gospel on television (the Garden telecasts attracted letters from 100,000 seekers), competing against featured Saturday night entertainment programs. The late telecast of Impact reached many a barroom crowd. In the heart of pagan New York, Madison Square Garden and the gospel were made so synonymous that the Christian witness was given an initiative which 1700 participating churches will be able to exploit for months to come. Hundreds of thousands who missed the Garden meetings will admit privately to their probable loss of spiritual blessing. For years the “worldly crowd,” whenever it returns to the Garden for a sports event, will recall Billy Graham’s call for decisions; will hear Beverly Shea singing “How Great Thou Art”; will see hundreds of converts grouped at the altar. For a generation to come, those who shared the blessings of the Garden will be telling their children and their children’s children.

The Problem Of The Home

In repairing unhappy marriages and broken homes the New York campaign achieved spectacular results, especially in its television ministry. Suicides were averted; clandestine sex appointments interrupted; separated mates restored; dead marriages revived. The conversion of marital partners was a nightly spectacle of the campaign.

Admittedly there are few signs that Graham’s meetings significantly affected the worlds of business and labor. These spheres are vast machines today. One can scarcely say that many who control their destinies were enlisted for Christ. The campaign did reach the comfortable middle class, as one could tell from its nightly dress; the extreme poor and the rich were seldom present. Large blocs of workers from the garment industry attended through the encouragement of their leaders, which was all to the good, although Graham’s ministry is pointed toward personal decision without elaborating the world of daily work as a realm for the service of God and one’s fellow man. The New York committee drew to itself some men of towering influence in the world of finance, and committee members did not hestitate to describe the experience as a time of personal spiritual growth and gain. New campaign decisions at the executive level were not numerous, though there were some. Graham’s meeting on Wall Street had a profound momentary effect upon influential men; how good or ready the soil was it is too early to tell. The cost of the Garden campaign was $1,500,00 ($650,000 additional for television), a budget that could not have been met without substantial gifts from dedicated wealthy sources. Liberal churchmen often ask what evident changes have come into the prevailing climate of business ethics? This type of question has often harbored an anticapitalistic edge. But even when it has not, and probes rather for a healthy correlation of free enterprise and Christian principles, the inquiry too often looks to resolutions, organization and legislation, rather than to personal regeneration as the real key to social change.

In the sphere of culture and the arts the campaign shaped the Christian Arts Fellowship, after 400 seekers from the entertainment field responded at the Garden. Jerome Hines (Caruso Award winner) of the Metropolitan Opera company is first president. The group enlists twice-born talent in the entertainment world of television, radio, theater and stage (including playwrights, producers, actors, musicians, singers and models). While its main drive is personal religion and soul-winning (most affiliates are babes in Christ), with the aim of changing men, some revision of the theatrical world could issue from its concern for an enlarged evangelical witness.

Back To The Gospel

In surveying the campaign from the foregoing perspectives, however, one inevitably returns to the basic principle that the major Graham thrust is personal. The social complex is viewed, quite in accord with biblical theology, as a reflex of the realm of spiritual decision. Graham’s mission is that of an evangelist, not that of a social reformer, though he is convinced that biblical evangelism is the best road to social reform.

This emphasis, moreover, introduced into inter-church Christianity in New York City the deepest bond in its history of ecumenical enthusiasm. “There has been more real fellowship among ministers and churches in New York City than at any time for 25 years,” said one leader. Another put it this way: “The Church is most ecumenical when it is most evangelical.”

Madison Square Garden may not tower far enough, but it laid strong foundations. One reason to think that the social force of Graham’s converts can be preserved is his emphasis that Christian growth is more than a private affair; it requires fellowship in a church where Christ is proclaimed as Saviour and Lord. The real problem, therefore, is whether the churches will channel these converts into constructive action without sacrificing either evangelistic priority or social vitality. The conservation or non-conservation of converts will reflect the virility of the churches to which Billy Graham has entrusted them. Whatever may be said about the task that remains, the New York sponsoring committee is confident not only that the campaign was “the most prayed for crusade in history,” but also that in Madison Square Garden “the tide came in.”

END

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube