Cover Story

What Can Southern Baptists Do?

H. H. Barnette

Southern Baptist pastors, denominational leaders and seminarians are burdened about the racial issue because they see a basic contradiction between our ideals about human relations and our practice of segregation and discrimination. They have the conviction that the Supreme Court’s decision to desegregate the public schools is in harmony with both Christian and democratic principles. But they honestly ask, “What can we do about it?”

Those of us who have lived in the South know that no shortcuts to the solution of the race problem are to be found in either legislation or Christian social action. But this should not deter the preacher in his efforts to achieve better race relationships.

One thing is certain: the Southern Baptist pastor cannot remain neutral any longer concerning the race question in the South. For two reasons: (1) He must face up to this problem honestly in order to live with himself. Recently, a Southern Baptist pastor accepted a call to a church in the South. Before he arrived to take up his new duties, the church in business session revised its constitution to prohibit the pastor from preaching on the race issue. With much prayer and tact the pastor got this prohibition stricken from the constitution of the church. He confided: “In order to live with myself I have to be free to preach my convictions on any issue.” (2) The race issue is a moral one and the preacher must take the lead in its solution.

Must Be Informed

In the first place, it is imperative for the preacher to be informed as to the nature of the racial issue. There is no place for consecrated ignorance at this point. For one thing, the white preacher must become acquainted with the Negro himself. He knows almost nothing about the Negro. Beyond Booker T. Washington, Dr. George Washington Carver and Joe Louis, most white Christians are ignorant of the Negro people in America. Even the textbooks for children say nothing prejudicial about the Negro—they just say nothing! Consequently, white people have grown up in ignorance of their colored neighbors.

Dare the white person forget that the Negro is a person made in the image of God? He is a person with emotional problems. He has emotional reactions when he is herded to the rear of buses, when he is forced to wait in the doctor’s office until all the white patients are cared for, when he is refused admittance to the State University, when he is denied his basic rights in the courts, when unkind epithets are hurled at him. It is a revelation to know that the Negro reacts just as a white man would under similar circumstances.

Again, the preacher must avoid a paternalistic attitude toward people of other races. The idea of working for rather than with Negroes is offensive to them. Any attitude of condescension repels people of other races.

Beyond getting better acquainted with the individual Negro, the preacher should study the local situation. He should find out how the Negro lives in his community, what his grievances are, what is being done, and what can be done about his situation.

Christian Attitudes And Actions

People are more influenced by the preacher’s pattern of life than they are by his moral preachments. When there is a discrepancy between what he preaches and what he practices, his words are not taken very seriously. The most effective way the minister can help to bring about a better understanding in race relations is to be Christian in his own attitudes and actions. An earnest Christian came to Mrs. Mary McCleod Bethune shortly before her death and asked her how he could help to bring an end to segregation in southern schools without the violence which has marked the attempt in other sections of the South. Among other things Mrs. Bethune suggested that he first live up to God’s requirements as outlined in the Bible. She went on to point out that the Christian of today must be willing to disregard the traditions of the past and have the courage within himself to live up to the requirements of mankind as stated in the Golden Rule. To put it another way, there must be a correlation between what we believe and the way be behave.

Recently I served on an ordination council examining a young candidate for the pastoral-preaching ministry. After the traditional questions as to his conversion, call to preach, and doctrinal soundness, someone on the council asked the young man, “What is your attitude toward people of other races?” I had never before heard this question put to a candidate for the pastoral-preaching ministry. But it is a question which is asked of all of our foreign missionary volunteers; failure to answer in terms of goodwill toward minority groups is a considerable factor in their rejection for mission work. Certainly no person aspiring to be a preacher of the Gospel should be ordained to this high office if he harbors unChristian attitudes in his heart toward other races. For the preacher must set an example of Christian brotherhood in all of his dealings with all races and classes of people.

Dr. A. C. Miller, Executive Secretary of the Christian Life Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, tells an interesting experience which illustrates the meaning of brotherhood. A few days before Christmas (when he was pastor in a southern town) Dr. Miller went into the post office to mail some Christmas cards. He stood at one end of the high writing desk in the lobby placing on each envelope a Christmas tuberculosis seal. A Negro woman stood at the other end of the desk using the same kind of seals on her Christmas cards. She opened a conversation with Dr. Miller. “Brother Miller,” she said, “I am glad to see that you use the tuberculosis seals.” The Negro woman went on to point out that many people of her race had tuberculosis and that these seals helped them in their struggle for health. Dr. Miller thanked her and after some further conversation mailed his cards and left. Some days later he saw this woman in one of the stores. She approached him somewhat uncertainly and said, “The other day after our talk at the post office, the postmaster called me to the window when you had gone and told me I owed you an apology because I had addressed you as ‘brother’.” “You owe me no apology,” Dr. Miller replied, then went on to say, “Two things I hope you will ever remember: first, the Postmaster is not a Christian and does not understand the relationship that should exist between Christians; and second, I am your brother and you are my sister through Jesus Christ, our Elder Brother.” This is an excellent example of a preacher practicing brotherhood in his daily living.

Articulating Biblical Principles

It is the task of the preacher to lay emphasis upon ethical principles of conduct rather than codes and rules of living. By emphasizing biblical principles the preacher can avoid semantical problems which grow out of the use of emotionally explosive terms as “integration” and “segregation.” This is not compromise, but an effort to reach the hearts and minds of the people with the spirit of the Gospel. It is easy for “ethical snipers” who are far removed from an issue to sit in judgment upon others who do not use their terminology and techniques in approaching that problem. To be honest, the preacher must proclaim principles rather than specifics about the race problem. For the Bible does not contain proof texts to support either segregation or integration. But the preacher should be fully aware that unbrotherliness, discrimination and injustice in human relations are not in harmony with Christian love by which he should be motivated and by which he must seek to live.

The biblical principles of human relations are found throughout the Bible. For example, humanity is one by creation (Mal. 2:10; Acts 17:26). Thus there is the unity of humanity in the order of creation. Again, God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). We are all one in Christ (Gal. 3:28). Thus humanity is not only one in the order of creation but one in the order of grace. Paul points out that God is creating a new man, a new commonwealth, the members of which enjoy the equality of citizenship (Eph. 2:11–22).

Again, there is the principle of the value of the individual (Mark 8:36; Matt. 12:12). Also there is the unqualified command to love everyone, even our enemies (Matt. 5:43–48; Luke 10:25 ff.). Moreover, Christians are to practice the Golden Rule, doing unto others as they would have others do unto them (Matt. 5:12). Again, Jesus set the example in race relations. He crossed racial barriers and challenged his disciples to follow him. His disciples were astonished when they discovered him talking with a Samaritan woman because the Jews and the Samaritans had no dealings with each other (John 4:8, 27).

Dr. C. Oscar Johnson, pastor of the Third Baptist Church in St. Louis, Missouri, believes that the fundamental scriptural passage about race relations in the New Testament is John 12:32. When two of his disciples brought certain Greeks to him, Jesus said among other things, “And I if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” Some scholars think that what Jesus means by “all men” is “all kinds of men.” Be that as it may, Jesus does draw all kinds of men to himself into a fellowship of the redeemed with equal rights and privileges in the kingdom of God.

Finally, the Holy Spirit makes no distinction but comes upon all people who open their hearts to him. Peter, who was filled with race prejudice, was bidden by the Spirit to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, making no distinction (Acts 11:12). He witnessed the falling of the Spirit upon Gentiles, notably Cornelius and his friends. Peter then concluded: “If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?” (Acts 11:17). Thus Peter perceived that it was not race but the action of the Holy Spirit in response to faith which determined participation in the fellowship of the church of Christ.

Pay The Price Of Conviction

Some Southern Baptist preachers who are paying the price for preaching their convictions have had to give up their pastorates because of their stand on race relations. They have found it necessary to go into the chaplaincy or into pastorates in the North or into some other kind of work.

The cost to the clergyman for acting on his convictions may be that of bodily harm. For example, a Southern Baptist pastor was severely beaten by a mob of white men after he had escorted six Negroes to the public school in Clinton, Tennessee. Fortunately, this incident served to bring about the re-establishment of order in a disorganized community. The high school was reopened on an integrated basis. And candidates for public office opposed to desegregation in the public school were overwhelmingly defeated at the polls.

At the peril of losing his pulpit the Southern preacher must discover positive ways of dealing with racial injustice. Preachers of Henderson County, Kentucky, discovered strength and effectiveness in a united effort to uphold law and order. The whole association of pastors concertedly attacked a movement to block integration in the public schools and won the battle. (“Henderson Pastor’s Diary,” The Christian Century, Oct. 24, 1956.)

Again, through personal and group counseling, study courses in his church and cooperation with the forces of righteousness in his community, the preacher can effectively work for the achievement of better race relations in the South. While some of these suggestions may seem to be too mild, some Southern churches will dismiss their pastors for implementing them.

A prophet of God must constantly challenge sin and injustice in every area of life. One of his great temptations is to preach to please. When the great preacher Hugh Latimer was about to preach before the king, Cardinal Wolsey drew him aside and said, “Latimer, Latimer, remember that today you are to preach before the high and mighty King Henry VIII who has the power to take your life. See that you do not displease him. But Latimer, Latimer, remember also that today you preach before the King of Kings, the Lord of Hosts, see that you do not displease Him.”

Paul warned preachers against this temptation when he said that those who are put in trust with the gospel must speak “not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts” (1 Thess. 1:4).

Where there are cases of discrimination against children, the Supreme Court has decreed that our public schools must be desegregated. This is the law of the land. As citizens of the Kingdom of God and of the state, Christians must uphold the laws of the land which are in harmony with the Christian view of love and justice. God’s key man in achieving this goal is the preacher.

END

Henlee Hulix Barnette is Acting Dean of the School of Theology and Associate Professor of Christian Ethics at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, from which he holds the Th.M. and Th.D. degrees. He was Assistant Professor of Sociology at Howard College, Birmingham, Alabama, from 1946–47, and Professor of Religion and Sociology at John B. Stetson University in Florida from 1947–51.

Cover Story

The Moral Sag in France

André Lamorte

The French drama is in effect a moral drama. But the meaning of the epithet reaches beyond the framework of frivolous morals, of which France no longer has the monopoly. It concerns a religious form of thought, of feeling, of action, and of reaction which determines the internal structure of the individual and which survives even when the individual has ceased to believe or to practice his beliefs.

A Nation’S Moral Shame

The moral revolt in France is largely written in contemporary life. Evidences may be found in the wide-spread religious indifferences and atheism, in social evils, in the increase of mental illness and in other aspects of the national life.

In a population of 43 million, according to the latest figures, there are, at most, less than 10 million “believers”—if that term dare be applied to the 9 million who are baptized in the Roman Catholic Church, and the 800,000 on Protestant church rolls. One fact is clear: three-fourths of the population, or 33 million persons, live on the fringe of the Christian churches.

Social evils are rife. Before 1914, there were 35,000 divorces annually; today the figure is 250,000, and some estimates lift it to 350,000. This is a direct consequence of religious indifference, for the home is no longer secure when divine law is unrecognized and when the church exercises no salutary influence upon it.

Alcoholism is a stigma upon the nation’s life. According to official statistics of the Minister of Finance, France has 450,000 liquor stores, or 10 to each baker shop—one for every 86 persons. In 1951 France produced about 1,276,000,000 gallons of wine, 484,000,000 gallons of cider, 176,000,000 gallons of beer. The average consumption annual per capita is high: for all adults 20 years and over, 34 litres; adult men, 54 litres; adult women, 18 litres. These figures far exceed the rest of Europe.

The causes of alcoholism in France are numerous, but three are especially prominent: the hovels, or poor housing conditions, with which inhabitants must often contend; nervous anxieties due to privation and suffering during the war and postwar years; and habit or custom. Public authorities have sought to improve housing, but the hovels are many. Liquor shops open to the working man divert and distract him from the burdens of insufficient income. Many alcoholics are nervously afflicted, resorting to alcohol to quiet their fears and to find a feeling of abundance. But most addicts are victims of education and custom: to drink is to evidence manliness. The masses believe that wine and alcohol are necessary for work and even for sanity.

In 1940 the population of psychiatric hospitals numbered 110,000. During the war legislation and lowered supplies of liquor brought a noticeable reduction in numbers. Since 1945 the increase of patients has resumed at an alarming rate: in 1954 the figures of 1939 were almost reached again. The increased number of liquor shops and their legal tolerance or approval are regarded as contributory factors.

Child delinquency is another sign of the decay of national life. There are more than 100,000 known delinquents. Most of the strayed youth have seen nothing but homes of quarreling, vice, violence and injustice; family life is deficient. Alongside the problem of environment is that of heredity; alcoholism, syphilis and tuberculosis are important factors.

Prostitution is a common vice, for which statistics cannot be easily obtained. In 1910 the Chief of Police estimated that 60,000 women in the Seine area alone lived more or less entirely by prostitution. The 1946 legislation, requiring registration, was exclusively for sanitary regulation, not for policing. The number of registered prostitutes in 1952 was 8,000; of these, 3,000 registered in Paris. These figures by no means tell the full story, for these are far outnumbered by a legion of clandestine offenders who escape control.

There are other evidences that the moral atmosphere vanishes, and law is bypassed, when spiritual checks no longer guard the national life. Pandering is a tragic phenomenon in the large cities, and is caused by traffic in dope. Bawdy literature, of the “Paris-Hollywood” type, is sold in a quantity of two million pieces monthly. Even sports have become an end in themselves, often serving as a pretext for indulgent eating and drinking after the game. Many old rugby players and boxers maintain tavern patronage in their associations with old comrades.

Origin And Causes Of Crisis

Because this writer sees in the religion to which the majority of the French people still adhere the fundamental explanation of the crisis France is passing through, he, though French by nationality, has agreed to write these lines. Other Frenchmen, better qualified than he in the sociological and political realms, have already analyzed the situation, as, for example, in the captivating book by Frederic Hoffett, Protestant Imperialism (Flammarion, 1948).

Romanism has pressed its mold on freethinkers as well as on believers. This invisible background alone can give a valid account of the actual behavior of the nation that was long called “the eldest Daughter of the Church.”

The crisis France is enduring commenced when she rejected the Reformation.

In other countries the “Protestant man” was prepared for liberty and thus for a natural adaptation to democracy; the “Roman Catholic man,” always submissive to the church’s direction, remained inadequately prepared for modern forms of political life. (Let us remember what Brunetiere said: “What I believe? Ask it of Rome.”) Hence the discipline of the Protestant, to which he freely consented (which explains the evolution and astonishing success of the Anglo-Saxon nations), contrasts with the revolt and complexities of the Roman Catholic man and with the germs of political instability and moral decline in the Roman Catholic nations.

Thus two factors of religious origin are at the basis of the decline of the French nation: persecution and the order of the Jesuits.

The opponents of French Protestantism admit themselves that the Reformation, at its beginnings, had conquered a quarter if not half of the kingdom. Neither the mind nor the French temperament was hostile to it. What arrested its salutary expansion, and what explains why French Protestantism today is a weak minority, is persecution. The latter was the work of the church. For under the cloak of a royal authority, frightened of liberty, one can discern the guidance of Roman inspiration. The history of three centuries of martyrdom and the heroism of epic Huguenot believers are the irrefutable proof of this fact. With consummate skill, the Roman church multiplied its efforts to win over the princes; she overcame their hesitations through seduction or through terror; she promised her support in the realization of their designs of despotism, and she held over them the threat of the mysterious and poisoned weapons of her occult authority. Thus the kings who, for a moment, had inclined toward the Reformation, finding in the latter no furthering for their tyrannical projects, nor for their vices and their passions, turned from the Reformation and became the executors of the church, implacable toward heresy, but smiling upon crowned corruption.

So it came about that fanatical popes, such as Paul III and Paul IV, depending on the intimate union between Church and State, managed to transform heresy into crime, and on those grounds were able to undertake the most serious measures against the Protestants. At their instigation, Francis I in 1542 proclaimed his intention to pursue heresy “until the foundation and the root of this pest should be exterminated and abolished,” and he ordered in the year 1544 “that one should proceed with all diligence to seize, chastise and punish those who propagate the Reformation.” In acting thus, the kings conformed to the will of the popes. Thus we find Pope Pius V writing to Charles IX at the time of the St. Bartholomew massacre: “Your Majesty must pursue the enemies of religion until extermination.” At his crowning, Louis XIII, who consecrated his reign to exterminating heresy, offered his crown and his sword to the Virgin, in so doing imitating the Spaniard Don Carlos who had placed his person and his army under the sovereign protection of Mary. “I will only reign if you reign,” said Louis XIII in calling on the Virgin.

Persecution exterminated with the Reformation every possibility of spiritual renewal, and at the same time political and social renewals, the latter revealing themselves strictly bound to the former.

But to open violence, a more baneful force was added, perhaps through the insidious work of moral and intellectual fragmentation of the French soul: the Jesuit power.

Havings made their entry as “timid foxes” to Paris University in the sixteenth century, the Jesuits came to “reigning there as furious lions” (the expression is from Etienne Pasquier, himself a professor of Paris University).

The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, which was to deprive France of her most fruitful spiritual substance, was the work of the Jesuits before it became that of Louis XIV.

Xavier de Ricard wrote that in order to break the Huguenots, Jesuitism “had invented, noted, classified, co-ordinated all the proceedings, all the maneuvers, all the intrigues, all the learned wiles and all the skilful violences prepared in cold blood which by a slow and successive extenuation, culminated in radical and legal extermination …” (The Political Spirit of the Reformation, 1893, p. 4). One can but read again the immortal “Letters to a Provincial” by Blaise Pascal, which edify one singularly on the pernicious work of the Jesuits and their machiavellian maneuverings for the education of men and nations.

“Radical and legal extermination,” said Xavier de Ricard. Extermination of bodies when the temporal gives its consent. But in every way—extermination of will, of conscience, of righteous judgment—through the substitution of a soul simultaneously servile and given to low desires clever and brutal, deceitful and inconsistent.

Persecution and Jesuitism have been the educators of modern France.

The Present And The Future

France has known the Revolution of 1789. The latter culminated in the formation of new and generous principles. But the idealists who conceived them, if they changed the facade, were not able to regenerate the soul of the nation. For the Revolution was above all an explosion of hatred against the joint despotism of the king and the church.

The political and social upheavals which have agitated France since 1789 and which led her in turn from the Republic to the Empire, from the Empire to the two most recent Republican Constitutions, did but powerfully underline the moral uneasiness of a long clerical regime. Men may change but the spirit remains. To royal absolutism the bureaucratic dictatorship succeeds; the separation of the church from the State has given the French clergy a wider liberty of action. The priest is no longer the holder of civic and legal authority, but the church is always present in the private counsels of those in authority and in the official organisms through her individual commands. Her voice is not alien to the solutions of compromise, to the dilatory maneuvers which characterize French political laws or French diplomacy.

As to the Protestant fraction, it was easily carried away by the current. Worn out by centuries of suffering and clandestine existence, deluded by the tolerance engendered by the well-being and buoyancy of a new-found peace, it accepts many fatal compromises. It suffices to read the collection of sermons of the nineteenth century to understand the obsequiousness of the Protestant clergy, who with bewildering suppleness were able to praise in turn the imperial prestige and the benefits of the Restoration. Today, with the exception of a few centers authentically Calvinistic and biblical by tradition, the Protestant mass has well accommodated itself to the moral, political and social standard of the nation. Its leaders seem more inclined toward “Reformed clericalism” than toward a return to the principles of the Reformation. The nostalgia for church union has silenced all problems of doctrine.

One is amazed to see how much certain churches which pretend jealously to maintain Calvin’s conception remain bound to the sacramental practices of Rome. For fear of alienating a vast number of Protestants with Roman Catholic tendencies, their heads, though evangelical, disapprove of pastors who refuse to baptize indiscriminately the children of the faithful and the children of unbelievers. The synodal assemblies bring forward again and again the question of the sacraments. Concerning this question, an uneasiness weighs on these communities. One realizes that one day one should put an end to these practices of “baptisms” and of “confirmations” which are nothing more or less than Roman Catholic. But one does not dare to make a change. On the other hand, these same synodal assemblies integrate into the pastoral body with disconcerting ease and without previous tests former priests newly converted.

Persecution seems to have eliminated the true Huguenot substance of France, and Jesuit education seems to have weakened the conscience of the sons of Huguenots. The Jesuit order is the determinating factor in the political and social life and general behavior of the French people.

The constant changes of government, the social upheavals, the periodical scandals such as the Stavisky affair, under the Third Republic, the “leakages” affair under the Fourth Republic, can only be explained by the moral deviations of clerical education. In the same way, the reproaches addressed to the French—lack of seriousness in the handling of affairs, lack of civic spirit—must be attributed to this same education.

The success of the French communist party is above all imputable to clericalism. Our Anglo-Saxon friends, whose hysterical fear of Communism sometimes warps their perspective, should realize this fact. The Frenchman, barring some exceptional cases, is not Marxist. He is attached to his small property or to the small capital which is the fruit of his labor. Social laws in France are as advanced as in the most democratic of foreign countries. The economic standard is not below that of neighboring nations. Communism in France is chiefly anticlerical reaction. Its advance in the recent elections is chiefly owing to the collusion, more or less avowed, of the different republican parties with clericalism. This explains why the communist party, which in the National Assembly is the most numerous, in the nation itself plays but a fairly effaced role. Its opposition is always justified on philosophical grounds. It does not justify itself on the plane of social progress.

Hope For Renewal?

We believe there is hope for straightening out the situation in France, if past experiences are taken into account and if men act with courage and without delay, relying upon the elements of promise which are as yet uncontaminated.

The ill being essentially of a spiritual nature, the redress of France may be a spiritual redress.

The failure of the Reformation in the sixteenth century should not augur a new failure. The constitutional and social conditions of the nation are today totally different.

On the other hand, however marked the French people are by the pharisaical turn of mind, they show themselves more and more detached from Roman Catholic practices. The people are psychologically open to a spiritual renewal. Religious meetings, stripped of all ecclesiastical stamp, are generally well attended, and sects of diverse kinds attract followers more than ever. The churches have lost all credit with the masses, but the Bible, almost totally unknown, is favorably accepted.

Therefore we are convinced that the hour has come to launch into France missionary teams of evangelists and scholars whose task will be the conversion of souls and the study of the Word of God. This work must be carried out by the French, but with the indispensable cooperation of believers from abroad.

Those who believe in the power of a new life through the Bible and in regeneration through the blood of Christ, and who do not want France to perish but who desire her renewal, take an interest in the evangelization of the French, and make this the subject of their prayers.

END

On The Late Hungarian Massacre

The blood of our brothers cries out from the ground,

As Rachael our mother weeps over her slain,

Fallen at Kilian. Again we are bound;

And alone we tread out the winepress in pain.

In words, multitude, the nations now clamor,

Resolve, passing censure against the oppressor,

While thousands desert the dread sickle and hammer

At the frightful exposure. They seek a confessor.

But the foe, crafty, taunts us, “Men forget past events,

And your plea, ‘Come and help, lest you suffer our fate,’

Will be drowned in the din of new world ferment.”

Even now in our ranks some murmur, “Too late.”

Is it nothing to you, all you who pass by,

That a people, a nation, for freedom now die?

F. MARK DAVIS

Dr. André Lamorte served for 15 years as Dean of the Faculty and as Professor of Theology at Aix-en-Provence in France. More recently he has been active in “France Evangelisation,” a movement aggressively interested in Bible study and evangelism. He holds the Th.D. degree from Montpellier and in 1954 was named attache to the National Center of Scientific Research.

Cover Story

Psalms: Heart of the Old Testament

J. Kenneth Grider

Here you have words that have soul in them and that lift up the soul. Words that have music in them and that set one’s spirit soaring. Words that have tears in them and that talk it out with you when you have dark days.

The thoughts in the Psalms are as warm as sunshine, as human as a baby, as personal as the next door neighbor’s greeting. They are living experience written out with incandescent words. Men sensitive to God’s marvelous works are stirred to their depths so that they think high thoughts about holiness and low thoughts about sin.

With the whole heart men poor in spirit here enter into Yahweh’s secret place and lose themselves in wondering adoration. They adore him as one many-sided in mercy, right ready to help all who pass through deep waters.

Not the shallow, fat-witted optimism that looks at troubles and laughs them off. Not that, here. Here you have candid camera shots. You see man as he is: sometimes in his midnights and sometimes in his noondays. And in his midnights you see him with his deep disturbed—really disturbed. Disturbed to the core, so that he hurts—out loud. Not with forced smiles does he look up, but with tears and sobs and anguish. He crys out to Yahweh. Crys out with wailing. And the Lord hears and delivers: hears and succors him; hears and shepherds him; hears and sets him singing—singing out of real victory and not out of a conjured up mental attitude that knows deep down it is not actually so.

A hymnbook sure enough. Lyrics and harmonies, rhythm of ideas and feeling—here you have them all. David, the Sons of Asaph, the Sons of Korah, and others—but mostly David—wing their way into the heavens here.

They Help The Persecuted

The Psalms were used in temple worship long ago. But they were soon loosed and given to the whole wide world.

At the Last Supper, just before the rendezvous with Judas, Jesus received strength for the gathering storm by the singing of a Psalm with the eleven.

These Hebrew songs that open the soul up on its Godward side helped Paul and Silas, jailed securely in Philippi. At midnight they broke out with psalms and God broke in with release.

The early Christians, dauntless in persecutions, hid the Psalms away in their hearts. Those who wrote the New Testament quoted them frequently. Of the 287 quotations from the Old Testament in the New, 116 are from the Psalter.

Martyrs through the centuries have been bolstered by the Psalms during their last moments. In the early days young and old faced lions in Roman arenas singing: “I will bless the Lord at all times; his praise shall continually be in my mouth” (Ps. 34:1).

John Huss, a Protestant before there were any, was condemned to death in 1415 by the Council of Constance. He walked to the stake reciting Psalm 31, a part of which reads: “For thou art my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name’s sake lead me, and guide me.… Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O Lord God of truth” (vv. 3, 5).

And Savonarola. Mutilated in body, but with his right hand left him so that he could write a confession of conformity, he lay in his cell and composed a meditation on Psalms 31 and 41.

And take Martin Luther. As a professor in the University at Wittenburg he lectured for many years on the Psalms. He also preached from them often in the church he pastored in that city. He considered them to be the Bible in miniature. How he relished these pantings after God! He adapted several of them for a “New Churches” hymnal. Some have not realized that he first found justification by faith in the Psalms and only later saw its full orbed teaching in such New Testament books as Romans and Galatians.

Luther had his share of persecution. After his excommunication he was fair game for anyone. And the Diet of Worms in 1521 added its authority to his death sentence. With the German populace four to one for him it was thought unwise to execute the sentence. But until his natural death twenty-five years later it remained. In his trying times Luther’s strength was “renewed like the eagle’s” when he turned himself to the Psalms.

Protestants by the hundreds of thousands, during a century of persecutions, died for Christ. As they went to their death on the scaffold or in the flames many of them sang, “This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:24).

Their Use Otherwise

The Psalter was “the first book which the early church put into the hands of her young converts, the primer of her religious teaching: and no man could be admitted to the highest order of the clergy unless he knew the Psalter by heart” (James Robertson, Poetry and Religion of the Psalter, pp. 7, 8).

John Paterson says, “No other book appears to have entered so deeply into the general life of humanity” (The Praises of Israel, p. 8). Many noble families of England have lines from the Psalms inscribed on their coats-of-arms. Sundials, coins, and even sword blades have been engraven with passages from this literature. Of their wide use F. B. Meyer writes: “In palace halls, by happy hearths, in squalid rooms, in pauper wards, in prison cells, in crowded sanctuaries, in lonely wilderness—everywhere they have uttered our moan of contrition and our song of triumph; our tearful complaints, and our wrestling, conquering, prayer” (F. B. Meyer on the Psalms, p. 7). Samuel Terrien summarizes his wide studies in the Psalms to say of them: “No other book of hymns and prayers has been used for so long a time and by so many diverse men and women” (The Psalms and Their Meaning for Today, p. vii). And one cannot forget that T. H. Robinson declared: “No other part of the Old Testament has exercised so wide, so deep, or so permanent an influence on the life of the human soul” (The Poetry of the Old Testament, p. 107).

A Psalm prepared Wesley’s inwardness for Aldersgate. We all know that his heart was “strangely warmed” as he heard the reading of Luther’s preface to the Epistle of Romans. But in his Journal, in the paragraph preceding the account of his conversion one evening, he tells us that that afternoon at St. Paul’s he had heard an anthem from the Psalms which had contained these words: “If thou, Lord, will be extreme to mark what is done amiss, O Lord, who may abide it? But there is mercy with thee; therefore thou shalt be feared. O Israel, trust in the Lord: for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption. And he shall redeem Israel from all his” sins.

Luther and Calvin fostered Psalm singing, along with hymns like Luther’s “A Mighty Fortress is our God.” But English-speaking Protestants long sang only the Psalms, considering that in worship services all words sung should be from the Holy Scriptures. They made metrical versions of the Psalms, for something had to be done to align them with the requirements of their developing sense of music. That way there was rhyme; but more important, there was definite meter so that the Psalms could be fitted to tunes. With Isaac Watts, however, there developed a new practice: that of singing paraphrases of the Psalms. This was done so that more New Testament teaching could be included in them.

Soon Watts, Charles Wesley, Toplady, William Williams, and others were writing hymns. These hymns were often based on Scripture, and frequently on the Psalms. Take Isaac Watts’

Jesus shall reign where e’re the sun

Does his successive journeys run.

Psalm 72 inspired it, verse eight of which reads: “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the rivers unto the ends of the earth.” Can we proceed without mention also of Watts’, “O God, Our Help in Ages Past?” Psalm 90 had helped him on that one. Watts had read, “Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations” (v. 1).

A Concluding Word

In the Psalms, surely, you have the heart of Old Testament religion. In them deep calls to deep, souls speak out in their dark nights, spirits have their sinews strengthened. From the Apostles to Wesley, and onwards, we have rightly cherished this inward heart-history of Israel as an integral part of our Christian heritage. Let modern Hegels and Schleiermachers discard them if they must. But we will keep them near, even in physical proximity to our New Testaments in many pocket editions. For while we might not want to baptize them into Christ, we nevertheless find in them the language of which hallelujahs and amens are born.

END

God’S Dimension

When mankind lays the age of time to sleep

By his methodic questing after cause

Of death, the single tenuous strand that draws

A screen across the Chalice true men keep,

Then God’s eternal watch beyond the deep

Of years will bring to focus all the flaws

Humanity has sanctioned by her laws

And Christ will be the Shepherd of His sheep.

Each soul will rise reclothed in his new face

To greet that dawn of ever-lucent day

Beyond earth’s old dimensions, time and clay.

And all will see the aureole God gives

To men whose faith in His unceasing grace

Proves God’s long-sought-for Kingdom ever lives.

JOHN RENWICK TAYLOR

J. Kenneth Grider is Professor of Systematic Theology at Nazarene Theological Seminary in Kansas City. He holds the B.D., M.A., and Ph.D. degrees, the latter from Trinity College, Glasgow. Formerly, he taught in Pasadena College.

Cover Story

Christian Ideals in Foreign Policy

Joseph Simonson

The Christian is not a Christian alone by himself in a vacuum. Christian faith and practice call first of all for an individual and intensely personal and subjective surrender to Christ. But if it stops with this, Christian faith ends. The effective and dynamic Christian must live and witness in fellowship, in community. His community is the family, the neighborhood, voluntary, business and labor associations, his city or rural area, his state and nation, and the family of nations.

In the political realm, national and international, there is, however, a threatening menace which this concept of man living in fellowship, in community, spawns. Historically, we have seen the rise of an exaggerated statism that insists that the state is the fellowship, the community, or certainly the master of the community, instead of only the police force of the community of society. A free fellowship of any purposeful life is possible only when its members individually and collectively recognize responsibility to God. Without the Christian corrective of personal worth, dignity and destiny in Christ, the community degenerates either into license or frozen conformation to a dictated pattern.

Four Views Of Society

There are four different approaches to the world of human affairs. We may regard the world, in which we must necessarily live a social life, as something meaningless, entirely without rhyme or reason, fighting each our own way to what success we can grab, or, failing that, at least achieving survival. Secondly, one may think of the world as entirely physical, governed by mechanical law. Everything, including man himself, is caught in the throes of mathematical patterns, with moral decisions and responsibility unnecessary, or, at best, futile.

Probably not many thinking folk hold either of these two views seriously any more, though both have had their devotees. They certainly are not Christian views of the universe. Of most validity for us today are two other ways of regarding the world, conflicting with and opposing each other: the secularist view and the Christian view.

The secularist sees life only in terms of this present world of sense and physical objects, pleasures, creature comforts, the accumulation and enjoyment of many things. Indeed, the Christian also is not insensitive to God’s bounties placed at man’s disposal. He will want to use them all. But therein lies the difference: the materialist finds money and all it can buy in this world to be ends in themselves and actually permits himself to be enslaved; the Christian uses God’s gifts to honor his Creator and to serve his fellow-men, thus making himself, under God, the master of money and things. All of this surely can be seen to have the most meaningful application in determining and carrying out foreign policy.

Of course, the secularist is opposed to any form of religious faith and practice, not merely to religion in its Christian form. To be sure, the Christian can make common cause, in a broad sense, in the field of foreign policy with other world religions. To this degree he casts his lot with others who, believing in a god or gods, at least discard a purely fatalistic, mechanical and materialistic approach to the life of the peoples and affairs of the world.

Christianity And Human Values

But we are here concerned with the much higher ground which must be taken by those of us who know the God our Lord and Savior came to reveal. He is not only a Supreme Being, but absolute Truth, Beauty, Goodness, and the Maker, Preserver and Governor of this creation we know and in the midst of which we live and work. We affirm that we may know him and his will for us personally and collectively. We are loved by him and we may love him. And what is more, we may love and serve him in loving and serving our fellow-men.

To the Christian human values are far more important than property values, though he does affirm that to own property is an important and basic human right. He sees men and women and children as immortal souls, whose chief purpose and end is to know God and enjoy him even here on earth and gloriously in all eternity. Obviously, such a scale of values makes a great difference in the way we treat peoples and governments of other powers in the world, both great and small.

By nature we humans are too weak to fulfill our destiny. Man must be redeemed from failure, by God’s grace in Christ given a supernatural strength. So God in Christ came into history, into the world of human frailty, and has lived and worked dramatically ever since in the dedicated lives of obedient followers. And as to Christ when he was here upon earth, nothing of man’s hopes and aspirations, his sorrows or joys, was foreign, so his devoted disciples must not neglect the smallest need of men anywhere.

Principles In Foreign Policy

In realizing Christian principles, even in the complicated pattern of today’s foreign policy and its execution, we may be assured of God’s aid and enlightenment. “Be ye perfect” is the Lord’s admonition. There is supreme value in obedience to the unattainable, surrender to the impossible. The Christian is not satisfied with what is better; he is seeking the best, the perfect. The better has too often been a deceiving half-way house on the road to the best. The Christian’s Leader bids him fix his goal as nothing less than the perfect, asks him to sacrifice toward its achievement, and leave the result to the Heavenly Father. Frustrations and failures must not be allowed to deflect our course.

Christian principles in foreign policy are not essentially different from those which govern relationships in other personal or social situations, though some would have greater relevance in international relationships. I do want to suggest, however, some Christian standards which need to be raised particularly in the area of dealings nation with nation.

One is that right thinking and conduct are positive, dynamic and creative, not negative, vapid and lifeless. The Christian must rid himself of a negativism which merely opposes, pointing the finger in condemnation and horror. He must be an informed, active participant in the determination of his country’s foreign policy and vigilant watchman of its execution. He does not wait for others less guided and illuminated to chart the course and then stand on the sidelines to criticize. He does not merely applaud from the bleachers if the fight is going well, but he is down in the arena doing battle.

That man always and in every condition is to be regarded as an end and not a means or instrument is another Christian principle of the highest order in foreign relations. This principle is closely allied to the concept and conviction that every individual person is precious in God’s sight. But this end-man and priceless person flowers perfectly only in sacrificial service for God’s honor and glory and the welfare of his brothers. The good and purposeful foreign policy must have room in it for the development of the individual’s fullest destiny as God’s highest creation.

The Power Of Love

The over-riding Christian principle in our relations with other powers is that love is stronger than force or hate. What difficulty we have practicing it! As someone has said, “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has only been found difficult and not tried.” But do we not have from Christ’s own life the example of love as the only redemptive, creative way of life? Of course, I am not speaking of love as something sickly and sentimental, but rather a strong thing of the will. I am not speaking of love as a Christian principle to apply in foreign relations because of desiring or expecting man’s love in return, but because when man is true to God and to God’s will and purpose for him, man cannot help but love, serve and give. Remember, we live in fellowship, or we do not live. We are not really human when we do not love. A fellowship of anger, conflict and hatred is unthinkable. Anger, conflict and hatred separate and isolate.

Foreign relations are often thought to be profound and complex. They are really simple. People all over the world, as well as those in the United States, want only simple things. They want to worship God according to conscience. They want to exchange opinions with others and freely choose what is reasonable and morally right. They want to live in their homes and communities with family, friends and associates without fear. They want to develop religion and morals, culture and tradition, arts and sciences, drawing upon the heritage of all peoples everywhere, both that life might be richer for them in the present and for their children in the future. They want to work productively at congenial creative tasks of their own choosing. They want to enjoy the fruits of their labor. They want government to which they consent.

International misunderstanding, distrust and tensions deny these simple wants to altogether too many people. It is the dedication of our President and our country to strive by all means to realize a world climate which will make these simple wants of all people to thrive and bear fruit.

In a deeply fundamental sense, the achievement of these simple wants is a moral and religious objective and the motivation must come from religious and moral sources. The love of God, the love of country, the love of others—will last always and win the final victory, because the Creator implanted a sense of divine origin and personal dignity in every human being. So, even as we face realities in the world about us, especially those of us of the Christian persuasion and practice must seek to make the world a better place, knowing that this shall be accomplished only as we humans surrender to the will of God and accept his guidance and help.

Draw The Sword Humbly

Peace with liberty and freedom is the over-riding issue of our times. Because of his own mixed nature of good and evil, man dare not throw away the sword, but he would do well to draw it humbly, knowing that the very deed is proof that he has failed once more in a better wisdom. Right here, however, you and I have a personal responsibility. We assume altogether too naively that peace will come without effort and cost. Of course, peace will cost us something. But does not war cost infinitely more, not only in money, men and material, but in lost happiness, liberties and purposeful, creative use of our talents? All of us can contribute to peace in our own thought, word and action. And we all must do so if we are to have peace. It grows out of our lives, hopes and aspirations.

Make no mistake about it: every one of us is involved. War diminishes life for each one of us and peace enlarges it. Therefore, we each have a private stake and a private responsibility. The world in arms spends not only money. It spends the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the aspirations of its artists, the faith and spirit of its religious thinkers and doers, and the hopes of its children.

We have in the United States not only a great and good life, but because of it, also a vast responsibility. Whether we wished it or not, we have come into world leadership. We can’t shrug off the responsibility of that by saying as does Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “The world is out of joint, O cursed spite that ever I was born to set it right.” It is not easy to be a world leader and possess great power. To know the pleasures of power we must inquire of those who seek it, but to know its pains we need only ask those who have it. America did not seek world power, but, having it, we have no choice but to play the role with dignity, patience and strength.

I plead that each of us learn the lesson from our founding fathers that the center of good government is in the heart of the good man. The good man is assured and made bold and strong to face his problems through the conviction that he is always in the hand of God. Every human life is of divine concern. This defies fatalism or the philosophy that man is a helpless pebble on the beach. Too, this prevents man from looking for ease and security, for which he often has bartered away his individual freedom and liberty. There is no security in this world, only opportunity. Recognition and practice of such principles of trusteeship and responsibility made and have kept this country strong, free and great.

I am asking you, with me, to emulate those who have gone on before us in leading lives of discipline, believing in our religion, our country and our children’s future. I want you to accept the role of a responsible member of your family, your community, your state, nation and world. I want you to be a responsible employee or employer, a responsible supporter of your home, church and school. Acceptance of such responsibilities by other Americans before us has made our country great. It can be kept great only if we in our time do likewise.

END

Preacher In The Red

“HIS EXCELLENCY …”

Many years ago the famous radio preacher, Dr. S. Parkes Cadman of Brooklyn, N.Y., addressed a great men’s meeting in Center Congregational Church, New Britain, Conn. The pastor, Theodore A. Greene, introduced the celebrated cleric with a sudden burst of oratory.

Dr. Greene said he had been backstage in a great radio station and had looked upon the electrical equipment, the batteries, generators, had witnessed the sparks, lights, powers of the air.

Increasing in eloquence, the New Britain pastor cried:

“Think of the radio ministry of Dr. Cadman and his incredible ministry across the air-waves of the nation every Sunday afternoon, the millions who listen in spellbound! I have introduced many prominent speakers to this Church, but I am happy on this occasion to introduce the king of the electrons, the ruler of the airways, in fact, the prince of the power of the air!”

Dr. Cadman arose as a man staggered; he hesitated as he moved toward the sacred desk. It was a strange moment, and Dr. Cadman wordless. Finally he found his voice:

“Gentlemen,” he gasped, “I have been introduced to many audiences with many compliments and sometimes with criticism; but this is the one and only time I have ever been released upon any audience as his majesty, the devil!”

—THE REV. PHILIP JEROME CLEVELAND, Canterbury, Conn.

For each report by a minister of the Gospel of an embarrassing moment in his life, CHRISTIANITY TODAY will pay $5 (upon publication). To be acceptable, anecdotes must narrate factually a personal experience, and must be previously unpublished. Contributions should not exceed 250 words, should be typed double-spaced, and bear the writer’s name and address. Upon acceptance, such contributions become the property of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. Address letters to: Preacher in the Red, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Suite 1014 Washington Building, Washington, D.C.

Joseph Simonson served as United States Ambassador to Ethiopia from 1953 to 1957. For twenty years he pastored Lutheran churches in the Midwest and then became Director of Public Relations for the National Lutheran Council from 1951–53. He holds the B.A. degree from St. Olaf College, Th.B. from Luther Theological Seminary and the LL.D. from Concordia College. His special interests, he remarks, are “preaching, politics and poultry.” In this article, he deals broadly with the first two.

Cover Story

The Christian View of the State

Joseph M. Dawson

To ascertain an authentic view of the state held by Christians is not as easy as might at first appear. The difficulty arises primarily from the fact that the New Testament, which forms the basis of the Christian belief and practice, is not a political book. It affords only a scant handful of passages which could be said to supply the Christian with a clear idea of what the civil state is and what his responsibility to it and participation in it should be. Again, in accounting for prevailing concepts we must allow for the continuing influence of the Judaistic tradition which preceded the Christian formulation, for the undoubted abiding influence of surrounding pagan philosophies and for effects of historical events which have tended even among Christians to alter or change the original Christian view.

In beginning with Jesus, we note the classical reference to his saying, (Matt. 23:21; Mark 12:17), “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” From the context we know he spoke of the obligation of men to pay taxes to the existing government. In the light of Paul’s detailed admonition to the followers of Jesus to support civil government, found in Romans, chapter 13, we construe the Apostle’s words to include more than payment of taxes, or an obligation to “render to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” This injunction is based by Paul on the prior premise (verse 1) that every one must be subject to the higher powers, civil powers being ordained of God, there being no power but of God.

The State Is Necessary

Neither in Jesus nor in Paul is there any direction that obedience shall be conditioned on the form of government, whether monarchical, democratic or any kind whatsoever. In other words, theirs is a definite recognition of the necessity for the state as a means to social order. Very few Christians—with exception of the Quakers at one time—have ever held to a stateless society. Christians universally have stood against anarchy. Paul offered his argument for this position in Romans 13:3, “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.” Peter likewise argued, 1 Peter 2:13–14, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governor sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right.” Although Jesus and the apostles lived under very corrupt governments, they counselled submission to them rather than risk anarchy, which would be worse. This rejection of a stateless society differentiates Christianity from communism, for communism in theory looks to a time when “the state will wither away” and there will be no need for its police power to coerce. (U.S.S.R., A Concise Handbook, Edited by Ernest J. Simmons, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1947. p. 164).

It is significant that Jesus and Paul made their pronouncements before organized Roman persecution of Christians began, while Peter entered his in the midst of the severest persecution. John, in Revelation 13, confronting the worst of government hostility toward his faith, suggested only passive resistance, not political or military resistance. This would show a fixed Christian idea concerning the state.

The Right Of Revolution

The latter Scripture, however, may have contributed to a later interpretation of these cited passages for supporting the doctrine of the right of revolution. Revelation 13, if the common identification of the “beast” mentioned with the Roman Empire be allowed, unquestionably permits rejection of the empire and its rulers, if indeed it does not sanction overt action against them. The later upspringing acceptance of the right of revolution under sufficient provocation grew to expression when the specific scriptural injunctions came to be considered in the light of the entire body of Scriptures. The New Testament as a whole does not countenance the absolute state presently denominated totalitarianism. It limits the state by the words, “there is no authority except from God.” It is not possible to conclude from Romans 13 that there is divine sanction for every existing order or that such cannot be changed, for the authority of the state is always subordinate to the over-riding authority of God. Therefore the Christian conscience finds voice in Acts 5:29, “We must obey God rather than men.” In this connection it is appropriate to quote John C. Bennett:

The warning against anarchy has often been understood in the sense that the most that Christians should ever do by way of resistance to even the most tyrannical and lawless state is to refuse to obey and to take the consequences in the form of punishment and persecution. Even Luther and Calvin, who were not passive by nature, had great difficulty in suggesting anything more than passive resistance to the most tyrannical authorities. Both, however, in different contexts did provide for active resistance on the part of lower political authorities against higher authorities. The loophole for active resistance, even for violent revolution, became a major factor in the history of Calvinism; and as a result, Calvinism helped to inspire revolutions in many countries, including Scotland, England, Holland and the United States. In the period of the National Socialist state, many Lutherans approved of active political resistance in Norway, Denmark and Germany. Roman Catholics have in general had less difficulty than Protestants in approving active political resistance where political authorities have threatened the life or freedom of their church. (The Christian As Citizen, New York: Association Press, 1955, pp. 49–50).

Separation Of Church And State

On the other hand Protestants, particularly the left-wing Puritan independents, took the lead in disestablishing the church and in separating the church from the state. Baptist Roger Williams was moved by dislike of the state controlling the church, while Episcopalian Thomas Jefferson revolted against church control over the state, with the result that the American Republic set the pace for separation of church and state for most modern countries. Both Williams and Jefferson agreed that the membership of a state and a church are quite different, the constituency of the state being the population and that of the church being those gathered out of the population by reason of their spiritual qualifications. They also agreed that the functions of the church and those of the state being secular are under enforcement of police powers. Those contending for church-state separation assert that it has lessened corruption which has characterized union of church and state wherever such has existed. The United States Supreme Court has declared that in America separation of church and state has proved best for the church and the state. Thus convincing proof by historic experiment has been given against the hoary contention that union of church and state is essential to national unity.

Although advocates of church-state separation frequently give Jesus’ words, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” as authorization for their belief, it is only fair to point out that the real reason for the new order originated in the struggle for freedom, both in the battle for religious liberty for believers and in the demand for political freedom on the part of citizens upholding the state. This is not to affirm that the plan is contrary to Christianity. Quite the opposite, adherents believe that while not explicit in the Christian system, it is implicit in the Christian teachings.

Secular State Is Modern

It is a fact, however, that the differentiation between the purely religious nature of the church and the essentially secular functions of the state is a comparatively modern development. No differentiation was seen in Babylonia, Egypt and the most ancient civilizations. Josephus wrote:

Some legislators have permitted their governments to be under monarchies, others put them under oligarchies and others under a republic form; but our legislator (Moses) had no regard to any of these forms, but he ordained our government to be what, by a strained expression, may be termed a theocracy, by ascribing the authority and power of God. (Against Apion, Book II. paragraph 17, in Complete Works of Josephus. New York: World Syndicate Publishing Co. X, p. 500)

The Hebrew Repudiation

It will be remembered, however, that the Hebrew theocracy gave place to monarchy under King Saul, and that after the Exile of the Jews, fearing control of their religion by the heathen states in which they lived, forever thereafter renounced union of church and state. Those same heathen states long before and for a millennium after, maintained union of church and state. In primitive Greece, as elsewhere, there was no distinction between the religious and the secular. The king, in his capacity as head of the state, was also the chief priest and the guardian of religion. Unity of religion and the state was observed in the Greek city-republic. Socrates was condemned to death for religious heterodoxy. In pre-Christian Rome the ancient mixture of state and religion obtained, and in the later empire the emperors were deified and worshipped, to the horror of the Christians.

Considering world-wide practice, it was not surprising that when Constantine the so-called Great in 313 A.D. accepted Christianity, he prescribed it should be the religion of the state and that he forthwith commenced to persecute all dissenters unto death. While it must be admitted that by the stupendous event of Constantine’s conversion the Christian church acquired immense prestige and grasped unmeasured opportunities, it nevertheless suffered tragic deterioration in quality and impairment in its fundamental principles. Tertullian when persecuted preached, “It is a right and privilege of nature that every man should worship according to his convictions;” but he subsequently argued, “Heretics may properly be compelled, not enticed to duty” (Religious Liberty: an Inquiry, by M. Searle Bates. New York: International Missionary Council, 1945, pp. 137–138). Augustine, when a youth in North Africa pleaded fervently for freedom of of conscience, but later in Rome his position on religious liberty may be truly described in the maxim sometimes (perhaps erroneously) ascribed to him, “When error prevails, it is right to invoke liberty of conscience, but when the truth predominates, it is just to use coercion” (ibid., p. 139). For a thousand years thereafter history records the shameful conflict as to which partner, the church or the state, should control the other.

The Welfare State

In earlier parts of this discussion, emphasis was placed on the Christian view that the state was God-ordained to prevent anarchy and preserve social order. More recently Christians have widely insisted that the state, in addition, has the responsibility of extending Christian love to those aspects of public life which affect for good or ill the welfare of one’s neighbors. This may either be approved or condemned as “the welfare state,” according as one is pronouncedly liberal or conservative. Those who supported this view during the 11th to the 15th centuries urged it, not on biblical grounds, but as “an uneasy compromise between the agape of the New Testament and the world powers of feudal society.” Bennett says that it partly tamed this world but at the price of identifying Christianity too closely with the culture of the times and of encouraging too much that was unjust in society. Increasingly in varying degrees, governments have come to regard the principle.

It is proper to introduce at this point the view expressed by the World Council of Churches at Evanston.

Those who make true justice must be made sensitive by love to discover needs where they have been neglected. Justice involves the continuous effort to overcome those economic disadvantages which are a grievous human burden and which are incompatible with equal opportunity to people to develop their capacities. Justice requires the development of political institutions which are humane as they touch the lives of people, which provide protection by law against the arbitrary use of power, and which encourage responsible participation by all citizens. (Evanston Speaks. Reports of the Second Assembly of the World Council of Churches, second section, “Social Problems—The Responsible Society in a World Perspective”)

Translated into particulars, governmental extension of love might cover social security, retirement benefits, assistance to the unemployed, aged and disabled, funds for veterans, housing, public health and care of the sick and mentally ill, soil conservation, agricultural subsidies, restraint of monopolies, regulation of public carriers, free education and the many other benefits.

At the outset of our discussion we conceded that Jesus and his followers prescribed no specific form of government for the state. It must be insisted, however, that democracy seems to be inherent in Christianity. Jesus himself has been called the great democrat. The implications of democracy are unmistakable in the Christian teachings. To the extent to which Christianity prevails in the world democratic government is likely to arise, for it has long been recognized that government tends to assume the pattern of the religion which prevails in a given society. An authoritarian religion produces a government akin to absolutism, and a voluntary religion encourages a government in which freedom is cherished. It becomes increasingly clear that Christianity initiated democracy in the world. Arnold Toynbee declares that democracy is a leaf torn from Christianity, although half emptied of its meaning by being divorced from its Christian context.

We conclude with the assertion that the rule of the people means the recognition of human rights—the right of the ignorant to education, the right of slaves to freedom, the right of the employed to fair wages, the right of the child to be well born, the right of all men to justice. This warrants the establishment of hospitals, schools, orphanages, a free ballot and a free conscience. Under the idea of the worth of man, we have never thought it necessary to claim that all men are equally endowed with gifts, or that they can get equal results; the idea demands only that all men shall be entitled to the same considerations under the law. It asserts that capacity and dignity are not conferred by station or possession but are inherent in the submerged as well as in the fortunately placed. Democracy recognizes that man’s personality is the highest value in the universe and society is to be organized in a manner to minister to his true life. Treatment of man is the test of merit in all institutions, systems, laws, philosophies. “What does it do to man?” is the validating question to ask of any government.

END

We Quote:

HOWARD E. KERSHNER

Author and Editor of “Christian Economics”

The Ten Commandments are the basis of satisfactory economic relationships as well as of morals. Coveting, stealing, untruthfulness, and murder are just as much violations of economic law as of moral law. Such practices in business or government can no more be made right by majority vote than the moral law itself can be changed by that method. One who does not establish a reputation for honesty and truthfulness rarely succeeds in business. The commandment against bearing false witness lies at the very heart of a successful business career. It is a question of morals, to be sure, but equally a question of economics. It is good economics as well as good morals to love one’s neighbor as oneself.—In God, Gold and Government, p. 49 (Prentice-Hall, 1957).

Dr. Joseph M. Dawson has served Southern Baptist causes effectively for more than a half century. Born in 1879 in Texas, he received the B.A. degree in 1904 from Baylor University, which conferred the D.D. in 1916 and is now proposing the J. M. Dawson Studies in Church and State because of his interest in this field as first director of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs. Dr. Dawson was cited in 1955 by Protestants and Other Americans United for his contributions to religious liberty. He is author of America’s Way in Church, State and Society.

Theology

Review of Current Religious Thought: June 10, 1957

William A. Mueller

Our modern world is truly one world. It is indivisible. More than anything else the missionary enterprise has driven home that fact. But our world is also a sadly divided world. Yet, what happens in the U.S.A. or Western Europe has its impact on folk everywhere. How strong are our spiritual defenses?

Mother’s Day is behind us. What of the American home? Kermit Eby, eminent social scientist, is alarmed about certain trends in our American economy that are a continuing threat to the home (Christian Living, April 1957). He writes on “Pressures on the Family.” What are they? He lists the following: 21½ million women working in shop and office, desertions of families by fathers rapidly increasing, mass-purchasing power financed by credit and debt, the blessing or bane of installment buying, loan companies charging from 6 to 14%—and the consequent strains on millions of families in America. Eby is convinced that the price we pay for our comforts is all too high. “We have produced an economy in which major satisfactions demand the extra earnings of the wife; as a consequence the American home is being radically changed—children are ‘farmed out’ or allowed to roam the streets.” But the pressures to keep up with the Jones’ continue. “The pressures are blatant and constant; and few of us there are who can resist; we believe our happiness to be intimately bound up with what we have or want.” Presently, Americans owe 28 billion dollars for luxury necessities.

Has the Church anything to say concerning usury, the use of leisure, the submarginal groups among our people caught in this economic squeeze and rampant materialism? Watchman, what of the night?

Walter Schlichting’s “Christians, Luxury and Sacrifice” (Moody Monthly, March 1957) tells of the amusement that two American business men visiting Korea experienced when they saw a young farmer pulling a plow guided by his father. A missionary told them that they had sold their only ox and given the money to their church for a new building. “What a stupendous sacrifice!” exclaimed the American visitors. “They did not feel that way at all … They counted it a great joy that they had an ox to give to the Lord’s work,” answered the veteran missionary.

The same author tells of a returning missionary and his impressions of significant changes among Christians in America. The answer? “Yes—an increasing spiritual coldness.” And then: “The Christians are too engrossed in getting things and gadgets.… In the scramble they have lost touch with God.”

This writer has been alarmed about the tremendous turnover in missionary personnel. He knows of five missionary couples who have returned after one term on the field and the cost at the most charitable reckoning must have amounted to at least $10–12,000. The cost of church-ecclesiastical committees are rising every day. One even hears that missionaries on the field must spend much of their time as tourist guides to “prominent” laymen and pastors encircling the globe. What of our stewardship at home and abroad?

G. Pitt Beers, writing on “Home Missions After 125 Years” (Missions, May 1957) surveys the extensive and sacrificial work of American Baptists since 1832. When the ABHS was established in that year, our population was 12,858,670. New York City had 202,589 people, including 17 slaves. Today America numbers more than 165,000,000 people. Dr. Beers passionately argues for greater efforts to win America’s unchurched millions to the Lord Jesus Christ. “Though more people are in our churches than ever before, there are also more unchurched people than ever before. There are more unchurched communities of larger populations. There are more people in deteriorated city areas, largely untouched by the evangel. The needs of the people call from every side.… It is, indeed, a time for the Christian forces to go forward.”

“Evaluating Our Religious Revival” by Dr. Edward L. R. Elson in The Journal of Religious Thought, (Autumn-Winter 1956–57) is a sobering word against too hasty evaluations. We have by now heard Reinhold Niebuhr, Edward Carnell, Homrighausen and even Paul Tillich on the matter. Elson warns against cynics and snobs who prematurely decry or denounce the current religious revival. He defends both Billy Graham and Norman Vincent Peale, although he by no means is in full agreement with either. Both have been in the writer’s pulpit. Elson is aware of the pitfalls of revivalism, but he rightly points out that “the methods which one religious leader rejects may be effective through another religious leader.” Presbyterians in the Great Awakening (1734–58) became sorely divided into Old Sides and New Sides, yet God was in that mighty movement of grace. Elson searchingly asks:

Can it be that the lamentation of some critics is so boisterous because the real awakening does not emerge from their particular theological school, their academic cult, or their personally approved techniques and methods?

Let us beware, he warns, lest we mistake biliousness for prophetic insight. Theology is important, Elson admits, and as a Presbyterian pastor he is grateful both for the vigorous evangelism and the resurgence of vital theology of our day. However, the critics of revival need to be reminded “that men are not saved by theology. Men are saved by the grace of God. The Gospel is simply the good news that in Christ God acted on behalf of man for his redemption. The gap between the theologian at the summit and the newly initiated may be very great; but a Christian must begin somewhere, and it ought to be sufficient for him to begin where the earliest Christian began, with the confession Jesus is Lord.” The concluding word of Elson’s address sums up the burden of his heart:

Let us not miss the wonder and the glory of our age just because we are too close to its impact, too complacent with its stirrings, or too cautious to comprehend its meaning.

Dr. Elson’s convictions were addressed to the 39th annual convocation of the School of Religion at Harvard University.

Another word of warning comes from the ever judicious missionary statesman, Professor Kenneth Scott Latourette. In an article “Rethinking Missions After 25 Years” (International Review of Missions, April 1957), he warns the leaders of ecumenical-minded missions against overlooking the rapid growth in Asia, Africa and Latin America of groups and denominations who do not cooperate with the ecumenical movement. “Indeed, the non-cooperating bodies are more and more the growing geographical edge of Protestantism” (p. 168). Their prominence, Latourette says, “should compel those churches who join in the ecumenical movement to re-appraise their methods and message in more drastic fashion than did even the Inquiry.” Protestantism must ever be self-critical in the light of God’s revealed truth and changing conditions.

Books

Book Briefs: June 10, 1957

Expository Stimulant

The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Ned B. Stonehouse, General Editor. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids. 6 volumes in print of the 17-volume set. $3.50 to $6.00 each.

In 1946 Eerdmans Publishing Company announced its proposed 17-volume commentary entitled The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Scholars from Europe, South Africa and America were engaged to offer their contributions to this project. Dr. Ned B. Stonehouse, the worthy successor to J. Gresham Machen in the chair of New Testament in Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, was chosen as General Editor.

It is both the desire of the publisher and the ambition of the General Editor that these works he abreast of modern scholarship in every phase which touches the craft of the exegete and interpreter of Scripture. More than noticeable is also the strong feeling that these biblical reference works ought to be slanted mainly to the usefulness of the man in the pulpit.

But as essential as both of these characteristics are, they are but secondary to the supreme devotion of all parties involved in the project; that is, to ever remain loyal to the Scriptures—the Word of God written, tapping every resource possible in the attempt to reveal the original intent of God’s written revelation.

In view of the first six volumes published in this set, it is apparent that the commentators and the General Editor contend that the realization of this goal will best serve the serious work of the Christian church.

Even though there is a solid agreement among the contributors in their acceptance of a strong theory on the inspiration of Scripture, and an unanimity of thought in their acceptance of the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man as compromising their basic theological structure, each scholar reveals himself as an independent thinker and in no way shies away from textual, historical and doctrinal problems.

Occasionally, to be sure, there is a point where the author fails to do full justice to a knotty problem or glides quickly over some chafing text. An example of a rather brief and slightly dogmatic treatment is Grosheide’s comment on 1 Corinthians 7:14. The text reads, “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the believing wife and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the believing brother, else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” Rather than face the several problems involved in this text in the manner of Meyer, Alford and others, Grosheide works quickly to his own conclusions. Capping his remarks on the last phrase, “sanctified in Christ Jesus,” is his rather axiomatic statement, “This refers to the life within the covenant and to the right to baptism, hut does not imply that each of those holy children will go to heaven” (cf. Romans 11:13 f.).

Another example of a rather hasty treatment is found in Jac. J. Muller’s work, The Epistles of Paul to the Philippians and to Philemon. The biblical text reads, “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue and if there be any praise, think on these things” (Phil. 4:8). Less than ten full lines are used to expose the truth of this salient verse.

Preachers attempting to bring to their people an exposition of this remarkable, homiletically-arranged verse will need more than a few suggestive synonyms for the virtues mentioned in the text. They will need to know something of the relationship which exists between the things honorable and the things just, things pure and things lovely and whether or not the order in which Paul records these virtues is of any consequence. They will also be concerned over the force intended in logizesthe (think). These considerations are the ingredients with which soul-feeding sermons are made. Besides the biblical text itself, commentaries are supposed to be the chief source of supply.

For the most part, the commentators in this series use a semi-technical style which is arranged in a similar semi-technical page format. The main copy includes a commentary on the text, cross references, related historical material and, in some instances, references to other source books which augment the particular discussions. The bulk of references to other sources, however, plus the technical discussions on the original language level are found in the footnotes. This arrangement allows for a wide and varied readership, the main copy providing the English reader with the burden of the argument, while the student able to use Greek and Hebrew has considerably more exegetical content at his disposal. Naturally, this being a New Testament commentary, a working knowledge of the Hebrew language in the line of scholarly equipment is not to be compared to that of the Greek. However, the references to Hebrew words and ideas are not infrequent, especially in Bruce’s work on the Acts. Aknowledge of these two languages, plus that of Latin, German and Dutch, would assure a full understanding of these suggestive footnotes.

Of the six volumes now at hand, Bruce’s work on the book of Acts carries the torch of thorough research in the area of footnote enclosures. Geldenhuys’ work on Luke insofar as footnotes are concerned does not reach the standard attained by Bruce; it is, nevertheless, a work of some stature. Even though Geldenhuys offers some pertinent remarks on special subjects such as demon possession, fasting and like topics and acquaints his readers with portions of S. Greydanus’ Het Heilig Evangelic naar de Beschryning van Lukas, Plummer’s Gospel According to St. Luke, Strack and Billerbeck’s Das Evangelium nach Lukas and Zahn’s Einleitung in das Neue Testament, the body of the text and the footnotes are something less than classic in the field of Lukan research.

In the areas of textual criticism and introductory and historical references, Bruce’s contribution far excels those evidenced in the other five volumes. In the light of this footnote material alone, the Book of Acts is easily one of the worthiest commentaries to have rolled from the evangelical press within recent years.

Although none of the other volumes printed thus far equals the scholarly product produced by F. F. Bruce, each of the other entries is academically acceptable and includes some points of excellence. Jac. J. Muller’s Philippians offers about as fine a discussion in digest form on the Kenotic Theory as can be found. After pointing out flaws in the interpretations of Calvin, Augustine and others, Muller shows how the use of the aorist participle which denotes simultaneous action manifestly states that Christ emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant. Neither the preacher nor the professorial scholar needs more on this subject than that which Muller presents in this place.

Among the points of commendation revealed in the Commentary on the Epistles of James and John by Alexander Ross, is the thick supply of cross-reference material. A close examination of these references shows a keen awareness of not only the parallel passages and related verses, but a fine appreciation of contexts out of which these texts are culled. Readily noticed also in Ross’ work is his devotional passion. Especially is this conspicuous in his treatment of John’s First Epistle.

As pointed out in the Foreword by Editor Stonehouse, one of F. W. Grosheide’s more telling virtues in his commentary on First Corinthians is his attempt to show the main thread of thought which runs through the entire letter. To Grosheide, Paul’s thesis is that the Corinthian people had to be reminded in various ways and in strong but simple language that God’s redeemed ought to be a humble, God-fearing, neighbor-loving and serving people. After due allowance has been granted for “main-theme enthusiasm,” the contribution set forth here by Grosheide is of considerable worth and should he of some real value to the man in the pulpit.

The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia by Herman N. Ridderbos, in some ways failing to meet the exegetes’ expectations, is a highly serviceable work. Perhaps the most glaring deficiency is the omission of contrasting views. A case in point already brought to the Christian public’s attention in other reviews is his one-page commentary on Galatians 3:20—one of the most stubborn problems in New Testament interpretation. The biblical text reads, “Now a mediator is not of one, but God is one.” Out of a few hundred interpretations offered during the span of Christian history, Ridderbos enlightens his readers on just two of these suggested interpretations. This commentary, however, as is true of the others, has many commendable features. If one of these features is to be singled out, it ought to be his discreet handling of the alleged contradictions which supposedly exist between the parallel texts of Acts and Galatians. Especially fine are his comments on the harmony of Galatians 2:1–10 and Acts 15.

In the light of what has been pointed out in this brief survey-review, it is apparent that each of these commentaries is a judicious work which ought to be something of an expository stimulant for the sermon-maker and ultimately a source of spiritual food for those who occupy the pew. Due basically to the conciseness of these volumes, they are judged as being something short of authoritative in the area of biblical reference works. Invariably the material circumscribed is of a high order, but not infrequently there is considerable room for expansion of thought and a fuller expression of existing interpretations. Yet, in spite of this defection, these theologically conservative commentaries stand among the very best biblical reference works coming from the evangelical press in our day. Students of the Scriptures who are serious in the things of Christ will be helped considerably with the constant use of this source material.

LLOYD A. KALLAND

Back To Sublime Truths

Doctrinal Preaching for Today, by Andrew W. Blackwood. Abingdon, New York, 1956. $3.00.

A long succession of able young men who came from Princeton Seminary to work with me as Assistant Ministers at the First Presbyterian Church, Pittsburgh, bore unanimous witness to the great help they had received from the instruction of Dr. Blackwood, then Professor of Homiletics at Princeton. An examination of the book by Dr. Blackwood, Doctrinal Preaching for Today, makes clear why those who sat under him at the Seminary valued the training they received.

Ministers who did not have the advantage of Dr. Blackwood’s instructions will find no little profit in this book; and other ministers who have been drawing their inspiration from such subjects as Ecumenicalism, United Nations and racial issues are finding that their wells have run dry, may be moved by a study of this book to turn back to the sublime truths of the Christian revelation and “with joy draw water out of the well of salvation.”

The great thing about doctrinal preaching is that it is not only for Today, but for Yesterday and Forever.

CLARENCE E. MACARTNEY

Conversation In Print

The Experiment of Faith, by Samuel M. Shoemaker, Harpers, New York. $1.50.

Among the writing ministers of the day, “Sam” Shoemaker must be rated as one of the most effectively articulate. Another Shoemaker book is the “expected” thing. Those who are familiar with his previous books will not look for a volume heavily weighted with scholarship or startlingly novel in its originality. They will look—without disappointment—for a kind of “conversation in print” on matters that are closely related to Christian experience and to the communication of Christian witness to others.

Something known as “The Pittsburgh Experiment” was called into being soon after the author became rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in “The Steel City” in 1953. This was a concrete venture in evangelism in which businessmen were challenged to Christian commitment in a way that would make their faith witness relevant to the problems of every-day living in a roaring industrial city such as Pittsburgh.

What happened to these men, many of whom are junior executives either in management or in labor, and what they in turn have caused to happen, by the grace of God, in the lives of others, will live for a long time in the annals of unconventional evangelism.

Starting with a “case history” that concerns an insurance manager, Dr. Shoemaker unfolds the story of what the Christian faith does when people are exposed to a virile and victorious expression of it, and when, being exposed, they respond to it. His knack of writing for the person who knows little or nothing of Christian theology was never put to better use than in the way he does it here. Take this from the first chapter as a sample: “Yet our first great need is not for a set of rules about how to be good; it is for something to bridge that yawning canyon between us and the God we dimly seem to remember but cannot entirely forget.”

The chapters on “How To Keep Going Spiritually” and “How To Win People To Christ” are never nebulous. They are kept close to the one-two-three of specific steps, the relevant practicalities on which laymen can get their hands. Some words both frank and wise are written in reference to the danger of over-simplifying and mechanizing the procedures by which Christians seek to bring others, one by one, to the realization of the new life in Christ.

Incidentally, Dr. Shoemaker brands as a species of “snobbishness” the attempt by a well-known New York theologian to discredit—at least so far as the New York scene is concerned—the ministry of Dr. Billy Graham.

Some readers will feel, justifiably, I think, that more might have been made of the place and power of Scripture in the ministry of soul-winning.

The final chapter, “How To Work For Christ Through Your Job,” blows like a refreshing breeze through the stuffiness and sterility of much of our thinking in evangelical circles with respect to this inescapable area of Christian responsibility. “I am convinced,” says Dr. Shoemaker, at the end, “that God enters the business scene in two ways: first, through converted men and women whose hearts he has touched and changed and who carry his Spirit with them at all times; and second, in human relationships that are different because he has become the Third Party to them.”

Here, in 64 pages, is a gripping description of how one converted person can, under God, reproduce his kind!

PAUL S. REES

Theology

Bible Text of the Month: Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23).

The distribution of rewards and punishments in the day of judgment will be in perfect agreement with the works of men; the righteous will be exalted to happiness; the wicked be doomed to misery. The Gospel makes no difference with respect to this: it provides relief for the penitent, but rather aggravates than removes the condemnation of the impenitent. But it opens to us an important fact: namely, that the punishment of the ungodly is the proper fruit and deserved recompence of their own works: whereas the reward bestowed upon the godly is a free unmerited gift of God for Christ’s sake.—CHARLES SIMEON.

Wages Of Sin

While the doctrine of eternal happiness is generally admitted, the eternity of future punishment is doubted by many. The declarations, however, of the Holy Scriptures respecting both are equally explicit. Concerning each of them the very same expressions are used. Owing to the hardness of their hearts, men are insensible to the great evil of sin. Hence the threatenings of future punishment, shock all their prejudices, and seem to them unjust, and such as never can be realized.—ROBERT HALDANE.

Sin is personified as man’s natural master (vv. 12, 14, 22), and he is represented as paying his subjects with death. This term, according to the apostle, does not seem to denote the annihilation of the sinner. To pay anyone is not to put him out of existence; it is rather to make him feel the painful consequences of his sin, to make him reap in the form of corruption what he has sown in the form of sin.—F. GODET.

The reason why death is the result of sin is, that sin deserves death. Death is due to it in justice. There is the same obligation in justice, that sin should be followed by death, as that the labourer should receive his wages. As it would be unjust, and therefore wrong, to defraud the labourer of his stipulated reward, so it would be unjust to allow sin to go unpunished. Those, therefore, who hope for pardon without an atonement, hope that God will in the end prove unjust.—CHARLES HODGE.

The punishment of that death which was the threatened penalty of the first transgression, will, according to Scripture, consist in the pains both of privation and suffering. Its subjects will not only be bereaved of all that is good, they will also be overwhelmed with all that is terrible. As the chief good of the creature is the enjoyment of the love of God, how great must be the punishment of being deprived of the sense of His love, and oppressed with the consciousness of His hatred!—ROBERT HALDANE.

Gift Of Eternal Life

Eternal life contains a great deal more than the two words, life plus eternity. Eternal life is not merely endless existence. It means endless life in its highest possible state of existence. It means that all that is piecemeal and temporary has passed away forever. It means that the absolutely perfect has come, that life has reached its highest altitude. It means that all the fulness and richness that this human vessel can receive of the goodness of God has been made ours.—R. E. GOLLADAY.

Eternal life comprehends all the blessings of the covenant of grace. The Scriptures make mention of it as the great end of the incarnation and sufferings of Christ.… The enjoyment of it is not confined to the future state; it commences in this world, when the believer not only obtains a title to immortal happiness, but is illuminated, sanctified, and comforted by the Spirit of Grace, and it will be perfected in the life to come.—JOHN DICK.

Llfe eternal—of which, all that we can say is but stammering, and all our knowledge and conceiting of it but ignorance, in regard of what it is: yet, so much we know or may know of it, as, if we knew aright, would certainly draw us more into desires and pursuit of it. The very name of life is sweet.… So happy, that there shall not be the smallest drop of any evil or bitterness in it, pure unmixed bliss; nothing present in it that is displeasing, nor anything wanting that is delightful; and everlasting, that when millions of years (if there were any such reckoning there) are rolled about, it shall be as far from ending as at the first.—BISHOP ROBERT LEIGHTON.

Of the nature of that glory of which the people of God shall be put in possession in the day of their redemption, we cannot form a clear and distinct idea.… Their blessedness will consist in a knowledge of God and His mysteries, a full and exquisite sense of His love, ineffable consolation, profound tranquillity of soul, a perfect concord and harmony of the soul with the body, and with all the powers of the soul among themselves; in one word, in an assemblage of all sorts of blessings.—ROBERT HALDANE.

Through Jesus Christ

Christ is the foundation of all spiritual life that is in us. He is the second Adam that conveyeth all that is spiritually good. “Because I live, you shall live also” (John 14:19). “I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it abundantly” (John 10:10). Christ came that we might have life, and that we might have abundance of life preserved for us, such abundance as he enjoyeth himself in the heavens.—RICHARD SIBBES.

Christ, God-man, Mediator, is the life, that eternal life, in respect of his threefold offices of king, priest, and prophet. As prophet, he is the life by way of revelation, discovering this eternal life to us; as priest, by way of impetration, procuring this eternal life for us; as king, by way of collation, conferring this eternal life on us. And as the fulness of water is dispensed by the sea to the earth, and the fulness of light is communicated by the sun to the air; so the fulness of grace and glory, of life, even eternal life, is conveyed by Christ to his church.—NATHANAEL HARDY.

Heaven is procurred, prepared, taken possession of, and retained, by means of the atonement. The blood of the covenant constitutes the title to its possession. The heavenly things themselves are purified with better sacrifices, than those by which the patterns of things in the heavens were purified. We have boldness to enter into the holiest of all only by the blood of Christ, and to the Lamb in the midst of the throne are the redeemed indebted for the permanency of their glory and bliss. Those immortal honors, those glorious hopes, those perennial enjoyments, which are imaged by crowns of glory, palms of victory, harps of gold, and rivers of life, have all their meritorious source in the cross.—WILLIAM SYMINGTON.

The Lord’s design is that His life may reappear anew in his people or be reproduced in them; and that there may be such a symphony, so to speak, that his people shall promote on earth the great object for which he lives in glory. The life of love and active service which he lived on earth is to be renewed and reproduced in all his people. And when we inquire how this is attained, we find that the tide of resurrection life flows into his people, in proportion as they keep before them His abasement, atoning death, and resurrection as the great themes of faith and the great springs of action.—GEORGE SMEATON.

If the greatest love hath been manifested in giving Christ to the world, then it follows that the greatest evil and wickedness is manifested in despising, slighting, and rejecting Christ. It is sad to abuse the love of God manifested in the least gift of providence; but to slight the richest displays of it, even that peerless gift, wherein God commends his love in the most astonishing manner, this is sin beyond description. Blush, O heavens, and be astonished, O earth; yea, be ye horribly afraid! No guilt like this.—JOHN FLAVEL.

Far East News: June 10, 1957

Reconciliation

For the first time since World War II a Japanese voice was heard over a Korean radio broadcast when HLKY, Korea’s first Christian station, used a taped rebroadcast of a service in Tokyo.

Delay in Korean reconciliation with Japan is understandable. The enmity is centuries old. In Japan tourists are still shown the great mound covering thousands of Korean noses and ears cut off and sent to Japan during the Hideyoshi invasion of 1592. Forty years of efficient but often brutal colonization (1905–1945) only whipped existing hatreds to white-hot heat. President Rhee was tortured by the Japanese when he was a young man.

Sharpest challenge yet given to Korea’s Christians on the necessity of reconciliation with their brother believers in Japan has come from an Ecumenical Youth Team touring the country under the auspices of the Korean Student Christian Federation.

Said Eliezer Mappanao of Manila, “The Japanese sinned against you, but that sin is past. Your sin is present. You have not forgiven.” When Korean students who had suffered bitterly under the conquerors questioned his right to speak thus, the young man vindicated himself very simply, “My father was killed by the Japanese without cause.” His plea that Korea’s Christians must take the initiative in forgiveness has stirred student thinking in city after city.

Membership of the Youth Team includes a Pakistani (the first ever to visit Korea other than diplomatic or military personnel), a Filipino, a Canadian missionary from Japan and an American college student now studying for one year at the University of Hong Kong.

—S. H. M.

People: Words And Events

Lost and Found—The California Senate, in a 20–7 vote, killed a bill to make “In God We Trust” the official state motto. Opponents said the bill would jeopardize the long-accepted but unofficial motto “Eureka,” which appears on the state seal. “Eureka,” which means “I have found it,” was put on the seal 100 years ago as a symbol of the discovery of gold in California.

The Wrong Key—A typist’s error in copying a Presidential proclamation led to an erroneous report in religious circles that President Eisenhower had designated the third Sunday in May for the 1958 celebration of Armed Forces Day. The observance will continue to fall on the third Saturday in May.

Morals and Money—Moral delinquency among U. S. airmen based overseas has been attributed, of all things, to an insufficient Air Force budget. Col. Harry J. Mrachek said the present indoctrination program is not sufficient to train airmen in the morals and customs of the foreign countries to which they are assigned.

Name Dropping—Alabama Baptist officials have demanded that the word “Baptist” be dropped by the Baptist Laymen of Alabama, a group of laymen organized for the avowed purpose of fostering white supremacy.

Bright New World—Twenty-two Roman Catholic members of the Moundsville (W. Va.) High School graduating class were barred by their principal from taking part in commencement exercises because they refused to attend baccalaureate services in a Protestant church. They sat at the exercises as spectators and the diplomas were given privately.

Age of Reasoning—Calle Parker Gates, 101, Jackson, Tenn., was awarded an honorary doctor of humanities degree by Lambuth College. Miss Gates, an 1873 graduate of Lambuth’s predecessor, the Methodist Memphis Conference Female Institute and a school teacher for 47 years, was honored for her service to the community.

“They’re just making me a doctor because I have lived so long,” she said. “In a few more years perhaps they’ll make me a Methodist bishop.” She will be 102 on July 3.

The Golden Orange—Anthony T. Rossi, builder of a $25,000,000 Florida citrus empire and a devout Baptist, relates his business success to his spiritual convictions—“God has always guided me, told me what to do and when to do it. He has used me for his purpose.”

Dancing on Campus—Action of the Wake Forest College trustees permitting dancing on the campus has led to threats of financial support withdrawal by individual churches. The college is a Southern Baptist institution. The action was supported, however, by the Cullom Ministerial Conference, comprising pre-ministerial students at the college, after a heated debate. “We have no right to impose our opinion on the student body as a whole,” the conference resolution said. It added that dancing is “a personal ethical matter which must be decided by each individual.”

Digest—Dr. Theodore F. Adams, president of Baptist World Alliance, recently suffered a heart attack, but is expected to recover “completely.” It may not even be necessary for him to curtail work, says his physician … Dr. Eric M. North retires as senior general secretary of the American Bible Society after 30 years service.… Dr. Ernest C. Colwell, vice president and dean of faculties of Emory University, Atlanta, Ga., elected first president of Southern California School of Theology.… Death claims Professor Emeritus Louis Berkhof, 83, first president of Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Mich. He wrote more than a score of books, among which were Systematic Theology, Manual of Christian Doctrine and Summary of Christian Doctrine.… Dr. Russell V. DeLong, Nazarene evangelist and author, elected president of Pasadena College, succeeding Dr. W. T. Purkister, who is going to the Nazarene Seminary, Kansas City.

Europe News: June 10, 1957

100Th Anniversary

The American Church in Paris, reported to be the first American chapel founded on foreign soil, marks its 100th anniversary this year.

Formed to serve the American colony in the French capital, the church is the oldest non-governmental American institution in Europe.

The present English Gothic structure, erected over the foundation of a tobacco warehouse on the Quai d’Orsy, was completed in 1931 at a cost of $1,000,000. It replaced the first chapel on the Rue de Berri, off the Champs Elysees. The building was called a chapel until 1883 when a French law prohibiting use of the “church” for a Protestant house of worship was repealed.

Co-Existence

Wladyslaw Gomulka, leader of the United Workers (Communist) Party, said in Warsaw that future relations between the government and the Roman Catholic Church in Poland will largely depend on the church “marching together with us.”

He spoke at the first full convention of the party since he was returned to leadership after Poland’s bloodless revolt against Soviet political domination last October.

Gomulka said the party believes that the “idealist outlook” of the Roman Catholic Church will exist for a long time side by side with the “materialistic outlook” of non-believers.

He added:

“We don’t prevent the church from marching in matters of faith along its road of Roman Catholic doctrine. The church should also recognize the fact that Poland has changed her former social system, that she is building socialism.

“In matters which are of vital concern for the interests of the people’s Poland and the nation, we want the church to march together with us along the Polish road. It is on this that the long-term shaping of relations between the people’s state and the church will largely depend.”

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