Holy Scripture teaches definitely that as God is the Creator of all men, so also is he their final Judge who will reveal his omnipotent power and his saving grace especially on the last day in the presence of those who love him and those who do not.

The difficulty of the Bible student is not to find adequate Scripture proof for this doctrine, but to select from the many passages of Holy Writ witnessing to the final judgment, those which present the biblical teaching in its widest scope. Such a clear, full, and most convincing passage we have in Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, where he writes: “But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest thou up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.… In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel” (Rom. 2:5, 16).

Here, as in many other places in Scripture, the final judgment is ascribed to God who executes it by Jesus Christ, his divine Son. This agrees with the words of our Lord: “For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son” (John 5:22). Similarly the apostle declared at Athens on the Areopagus: “He [God] hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained” (Acts 17:31). The Redeemer of mankind will be also the final Judge of man. Indeed, the apostle predicates the final judgment directly of Christ when he writes: “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor. 5:10). The fact that the Father will judge the world by Jesus Christ mightily proves the deity of our divine Saviour, who is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit (John 10:30).

As Scripture in all its doctrines reveals to us only so much as is necessary for our salvation and never attempts to satisfy carnal man’s vain curiosity by presenting needless details, so also it does in teaching the final judgment. It offers the sweetest comfort to all believers and the most earnest warnings to all who reject Christ, but it always confines itself to what man must know to obtain everlasting life. Nor can human speculation supplement or clarify God’s saving revelations on this important doctrine; they can only mislead and obscure. Luther, therefore, reminds his readers time and again that they must learn to adhere to the divine Word (sich ans Wort halten) and to desist from trying to fathom God by suggestions of human reason, since he cannot savingly be known outside his Word.

The Day Of The Final Judgment

As the Holy Scriptures declare, the final judgment will take place on a day definitely appointed by God. This revelation Paul by divine inspiration enlarges by adding that the resurrection of those asleep in Jesus and the transmutation of the living believers at Christ’s second coming will occur “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Cor. 15:52). Therefore, the final judgment, when the unrighteous “will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal” (Matt. 25:46), is not a long, protracted process, but a momentary act of God when time will have been replaced by eternity. As with Christ’s final triumphant coming, heaven and earth will pass away, so also time will then be no more. “The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). Schelling’s often quoted statement that the history of the world is also the world’s judgment (Die Weltgaschichte ist das Weltgericht) contains a quantum of truth, but God’s punitive judgment upon perverse nations in time is certainly not his final judgment at the end of time.

Judgment And Resurrection

At Christ’s triumphant second coming all the dead will be raised and made to appear before his judgment seat. “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of glory. And before him shall be gathered all nations” (Matt. 25:31–32). In Matthew 25:31–46 the final judgment is described in detail. “Then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (v. 34). “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (v. 41).

Properly speaking, the final judgment will be executed only upon the unrighteous, in particular, upon those who have rejected the saving gospel of Christ, as he himself tells us: “He that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). It is to the wicked only that the Lord will say: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,” and it is only they that “shall go away into everlasting punishment” (Matt. 25:41, 46). Believers in Christ, placed on his right hand, will hear only words of praise and welcome (v. 34) and will “go away into life eternal.”

Hell Not Intended For Man

On the day of the final judgment the divine Judge will command the unrighteous to depart into everlasting fire “prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). Therefore hell, the everlasting fire, has been prepared only for the devil and his angels and not for fallen men. Since Christ is the “Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29) and has atoned for the sins of all men by his vicarious, substitutionary death (2 Cor. 5:19–21), heaven stands open to all who by faith accept his divine redemption (Matt. 11:28). Of course, those who reject the Gospel will be damned, but through their own fault (Hos. 13:9). “He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18).

As the believers in Christ will not be condemned (John 3:18), so also the holy angels will be free from the final judgment. They will rather aid their and our divine Lord in executing the final judgment (Matt. 25:31). Scripture does not reveal in what way this will be done, and so we must leave also this question to the many other details which now we are unable to know.

Seemingly Contradictory Passages

There are passages in Scripture which declare emphatically that believers in Christ will not be judged. “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life” (John 5:24). On the other hand, there are passages which warn Christians most earnestly against falling from grace and becoming subject to the final judgment: “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). Most earnestly the Holy Spirit addresses us especially in such passages as Heb. 3:7–19; 6:4–6; 10:26–31; 12:14–17 and others. Scripture also warns us by many examples of persons who did not remain faithful to Christ such as Judas and Demas.

There is, however, no real discrepancy between these seemingly contradictory passages. Such passages as promise believers eternal life without judgment are pure Gospel, addressed to them according to their “new man” or to them as a “new creation” in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17). Again, those passages threatening believers with judgment, are addressed to their “old man” or to their “corrupt nature,” which does not do God’s will (Rom. 7:14–24; Gal. 5:16–21). It is in this sense that the Holy Spirit warned the seven churches in Asia: “He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches: To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7).

All Scripture passages, warning Christians or admonishing them, belong to the category of the Law. It is true, the believer as a believer does not need the Law, but only the Gospel (Gal. 5:22–24). However, inasmuch as the believer is still burdened with the “flesh” or corrupt nature, he needs also the Law (Gal. 5:24–26). Thus the Christian, being divided between two times—the earthly and the heavenly, needs the Law to restrain his flesh and the Gospel to comfort his spirit. The paradox of Law and Gospel finds its explanation in the believer’s paradox of flesh and spirit, and to this twofold nature the merciful God appeals at the same time by the Law and the Gospel (Rom. 7:25).

The Ground For Final Judgment

As the ground for final judgment, Scripture stresses the deeds which men have done in their earthly life. St. Paul writes: “Who [God] will render to every man according to his deeds” (Rom. 2:6). More specifically the apostle affirms: “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every man may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10). The works of men attest their attitude toward Christ, as our Lord himself states when condemning the unrighteous: “Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me” (Matt. 25:45). Deeds are manifestations of either unbelief or faith and so demonstrate either man’s rejection or his acceptance of Christ: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me” (Matt. 25:40).

Of course, many heathen did not have the Gospel and so could not know of Christ, the divine Saviour of the world. Nevertheless, “the judgment of God is according to truth” (Rom. 2:2), that is, according to justice. Just how God’s judgment will be according to justice, the apostle explains very clearly when he says: “For as many as have sinned without law [i.e., without the revealed Law] shall also perish without law; and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law” (Rom. 2:12). The heathen who did not have the saving gospel of Christ’s redemption, though knowing God, “glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” and “changed the truth of God into a lie” (Rom. 1:21–25). Hence even the pagan idolaters must acknowledge God’s righteous judgment on the last day, for they will be judged by the law of God which they had, but rejected, “so that they are without excuse” (v. 20).

So far as believers are concerned, their failings and shortcomings will not be mentioned at all in the final judgment, for God “will cast all their sins into the depths of the sea” (Micah 7:19). Instead, the divine Judge will enumerate only their good works: “I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in” (Matt. 25:35). That, too, is pure gospel preaching which the believer must not misuse to his eternal harm by permitting his corrupt nature to sin against grace. Nevertheless, Christ’s declarations definitely prove that true believers will not “come into judgment” on the last day (John 5:24).

Final Judgment Determined

With the final judgment, the destiny of both believers and unbelievers will be unalterably determined, for each class of men will then be assigned to their final, everlasting abode: “life eternal” or “everlasting punishment” (Matt. 25:46). The Greek original does not make the distinction between the modifiers “everlasting” and “eternal” which we find in the King James Version, but uses the same adjective aioonios to describe both the never-ending bliss of the righteous and the never-ending punishment of the ungodly. All attempts at explaining the everlasting punishment of the wicked as “annihilation,” fail in view of the clear and unmistakable Scripture passages which do teach the everlasting damnation of the unrighteous.

Unbelievers may scorn this Scripture teaching, but it comes from the infallible lips of the Son of God, our Redeemer, whose Word is truth. The doctrine of the final judgment, of course, is severe Law preaching, designed to terrify the wicked and also to warn believers inasmuch as they still are “flesh.” In view of the final judgment and the everlasting punishment of the unrighteous, believers should “work out their salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12), trusting at the same time in the divine promise that “it is God who works in them both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (v. 13).

With the final judgment the world will have come to its end, for the day of the final judgment will be the last day (John 6:44). Paul writes: “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power” (1 Cor. 15:24). In place of this sin-cursed earth there will be a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness (2 Pet. 3:13). Whether the passages predicting the end of this world and the new heaven and earth declare its renovation or its total annihilation has been a matter of discussion among theologians, for some Bible verses seem to speak of a renovation of this present world, while others undeniably assert its annihilation. But all exegetes are agreed on the apostle’s inspired teaching that “the fashion of this world passeth away” (1 Cor. 7:31). The new heaven and the new earth, no matter of what nature it may be, will be the believers’ everlasting home of glory, happiness and perfection, where God will wipe away all tears from their eyes” (Rev. 7:9–17).

Leads To Salvation

Mockery is not the answer to the Christian doctine of the final judgment. That was heard already when Peter proclaimed God’s final wrath and judgment upon the ungodly world of his day (2 Pet. 3:4). The Holy Spirit has graciously revealed this doctrine to men in order that they might seek the eternal life which Christ has prepared for all sinners and which they may now receive by grace through faith in Christ, the divine Redeemer of the world. The doctrine of the final judgment should cause the sinner to flee to the Son of God for salvation.

Not The Central Doctrine

The doctrine of final judgment is an important teaching of Christian theology and, in addition, a very fair teaching, by which the divine Judge frankly and mercifully foretells what he will do to all who reject his divine Gospel. Nevertheless, it is not the central message of the Bible. The central proclamation of God’s Word is the blessed Gospel tidings: “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). Those who accept this comforting Gospel truth of divine love do not fear the final judgment, but rather “look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working, whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself” (Phil. 3:20–21).

“For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Cor. 6:2)

J. Theodore Mueller has long been identified with the Systematic Theology Department at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis. He has passed his 73rd birthday, but continues on modified professorial service. He and Mrs. Mueller observed their golden wedding anniversary on February 25. He was ordained by the Missouri Lutheran Church 50 years ago.

Early in its history, Islam had had contacts with Africa. When the Islamic religion made its great sweep in the course of the seventh century, it moved across North Africa, sweeping everything before it from the Nile Delta to Gibraltar. It even crossed Gibraltar into Spain and across the Pyrenees into France. That year, 732 A.D., when the spearheads of Islam were blunted by Charles Martel at Tours, was one of the great hours of Europe and Christendom.

This sweep of Islam across North Africa, at the time the North African church collapsed like a house of cards, still puzzles us in many ways. Even today it makes strange reading. Why should groups of Christians in North Africa have welcomed the armies of Islam to their cities? Could they not realize what it would mean? What did they hope to gain through the Islamic conquests? Why exactly did this great North African Church of St. Cyprian and St. Augustine meet disaster and ignominy in this way? Why was it almost completely swept from the face of the earth with the exception of a few isolated Christian groups like the present day Copts of Egypt or the Abyssinians?

Some Reasons For Catastrophe

No single reason explains this vast catastrophe in one of the most promising areas of early Christendom. From a political standpoint, we can ascribe some of Islam’s early success to the fact that it moved into the vast power vacuum left after the enervating struggles between the Roman and Persian empires. This set the stage for the armies of Islam to sweep onward without any real opposition. It was like the opening of great flood gates over a vast flat land. Islamic armies were actually able to move for thousands of miles before they were blunted at Tours in France. But this factor in itself does not explain the favorable reaction which the North African church had toward the invasion.

Why did sections of the North African church literally welcome the armies of Islam as if they had come as liberators? Why did they not realize that for them this was the beginning of the end? The church of Origen, Cyprian and Augustine was to tumble into ruin.

It is sometimes said that the church failed to prevent calamity because it did not do missionary work. Up to a point this may be true, but it does not seem to be the basic reason. More probably the church in North Africa failed because it did not become indigenous. It failed to become a part of the very life of the people. It was too much of a Roman and Roman-controlled church for North Africans. And because the native peoples of North Africa hated Rome, the Roman-controlled church failed to win their deepest loyalties.

These people had had many grievances against Rome. We need only think of the vast system of absentee land ownership through which Romans owned large tracts of North African land. The local populations detested this system and everything that went with it. And when Islam moved in, some groups—even Christian ones—welcomed it as a liberator against Romanism.

What made this invasion worse was the fact that as soon as Islam moved in, the Roman Christians in North Africa moved out and went back to Sicily and Italy. The North African church was thus left in a sad plight and could in no way face up to the victorious onrush of Islam.

A Moslem Stronghold

Soon the vast stretches of North Africa, from Egypt to Gibraltar, were part of the new Moslem world. Today, after 12 centuries, Africa is still spiritually part and parcel of the world of Islam, although most of these regions have become independent states again or colonies of European powers like France or Spain. This vast area where the church of Augustine once flourished is now an almost solid and unbroken Moslem stronghold. Christian missions, which are few and far between, have made little impression.

The North African church was not so much destroyed by the sword of Islam as it was bled white through isolation from the main streams of Christianity. As a matter of fact, the church acquired some freedom under Islam, but a very restricted freedom; it was not allowed to expand under Islamic rule and lost contact with the rest of Christendom. For this reason, it slowly became exhausted. Today the remaining Christian groups in these areas represent almost petrified forms of Christianity. The victory of Islam was, to all practical purposes, complete.

From bases in Europe, the Christian church tried in succeeding centuries to reconquer Islamic North Africa. We need only mention the name of that great man and indefatigable fighter for the Cross, Raymond Lull, the Spaniard from Majorca, who made three journeys to North Africa and ultimately was stoned to death not far from the coasts of the Mediterranean. A great man of letters and a hero for the Cross, he confronted the Moslems with the challenge of Christianity and tried through argument to convince them.

Today it is often said that Lull’s method was not the most fruitful. On the other hand our failure through current methods to convert Moslems should make us less dogmatic in judging Lull and his methods. This lone man made a magnificent effort to take the message of the Cross back to Africa.

Islam In Africa Today

What are the relative positions of Christianity and Islam in Africa today? There is no doubt that Islam is still ascendant. But Christianity is also progressing at a very hopeful tempo.

As things stand today, one out of every three Africans is a Moslem. Because almost all the inhabitants of vast tracts of Africa are Moslems, it is relatively easy to make a fair estimate of their number in Africa. By general agreement Islam has from 65 to 70 million African adherents. More than 90 per cent of the African Moslems live north of the equator, but at many points the southward movement of Islam has crossed the equator. In most parts of southern Africa, however, Islam is limited to small groups of settlers especially from India. And in other areas we find Moslem communities like the Malays in Cape Town.

Events in North Africa, Egypt, the Nile Delta and the Middle East, however, all point to new life in Islam. The Moslem world is once more self-conscious and on the move. Missionaries and Western agencies find it increasingly difficult to continue work. The resurgence of Islam coupled with anti-Western sentiments are creating ever more formidable barriers in the path of Christian missions.

For generations we Western Christians have become accustomed to the fact that the nominally Christian nations of Europe or the West were the masters of the world, the great powers who controlled the masses of Asia, the Near East or Africa. Ours was the religion of the conquering West, of Western man, the rulers of the world. Up to a point this world situation favored Christian missions. We had open doors with at least a minimum of protection. Through hospitals, schools and other Christian agencies, we were in a position to help and influence and befriend these peoples.

The West Is Losing Face

But how rapidly this world picture changes! The West is losing face. Asia, as well as Africa, is on the move. Varied forms of nationalism and Communism are rapidly changing the spiritual climate of these countries.

When our descendants look back someday on this second half of the twentieth century, they may call it one of the great liberating and creative periods in history. Many age old shackles will be broken. What the ultimate result of all these movements may be, we do not know; we cannot even make a useful guess. But one thing at least is certain. While vast changes and liberating movements on the economic and political fronts are being consummated, the Christian church in all these areas will be confronted by stormy weather. It may have to face trying times; great disappointments may be in store for Christian missions. All the political and economic changes in the Islamic and Communist world may have far-reaching repercussions among the indigenous peoples of Africa, and may temporarily, at least, create obstacles in the way of Christian missions.

Christianity In Africa

How strong is Christianity in Africa today? If we take all types and groups of Christians into consideration and include also the 10 million Copts and Monophysites, the maximum number of Christians cannot be more than 30 million. For every Christian in Africa there are more than two Moslems. But every Christian church in Africa with which I am in touch is experiencing an upsurge of missionary fervor, and men are entering new fields of opportunity every day.

At the present time, all the material factors seem to favour Islam as the religion of Africa. But the day may yet come that Africa will be overshadowed by the cross of Christ. Christianity is making great strides. Its greatest problem, however, is as yet unsolved: How to create real deep community among different racial groups. If Christianity ultimately fails in this, it must fail to win the heart of Africa. For whether Christianity or Islam will be victorious in Africa may well depend on the solution of this problem.

The Lantern

I walked in darkness through a twisted maze,

But He who made the garden knows each path

As every bird sings hymns of sounding praise

I walk in confidence … my lantern, faith.

MAUDE RUBIN

Ben J. Marais is Professor of the History of Christianity in the University of Pretoria, South Africa. He is a minister of the Dutch Reformed Church of South Africa. Some of his graduate study was pursued at Princeton and Yale. Of his writings, some have been translated into English. Among these is Colour—Unsolved Problem of the West.

Sometimes it appears that the Church is being prostituted for purposes that were not given to it by its Lord. These may even be questionable ones, but most often they are good and things with which any Christian should concern himself. But Christ, the head of the Church, has given it a purpose which ought to occupy all its time. And any purposes other than the one only serve to divert its attention. It is true, there are various ways by which the Church’s aim can be served, but becoming involved in those things which have only a remote connection, if any, with the Church’s chief end must be avoided. There are many persons who consider themselves to be “working for the Church,” yet who have never thought of making disciples for Jesus Christ and teaching them all he has commanded. The reason may lie in the fact that there are so many names on the church roll who have no real conception of what it means to be a Church member, a part of the Body of Christ.

Making Disciples

It is the Church’s definite responsibility to make disciples and to teach them all the things that Jesus commanded. Is there any other agency, institution, or organization in this world charged with that responsibility? The truth is that it is the business of the Church to make new men, or rather to lend itself to the Lord so that he can make new men through it. Only new men can and will walk in the new ways of life that the Church ought to set before them. We must note that it is the “disciples” who are to be taught to obey Jesus’ commands, not men everywhere who probably do not know Jesus as Lord. We must remember that the Epistles were addressed to the Church, the society of the redeemed. And in one sense Christ’s parable of the wineskins applies here. How foolish it is to attempt to force a man to walk a new, more noble way of life when he is still a slave to sin. Such men cannot be made to do moral good by law or love their brethren by law. Now the Church is a society within a society. The Church is in the world, but is not to be of the world. Yet, if it remains true to its Lord, it can have a profound effect upon the world. Christians, living Christian lives, can be “light”; they can be “salt”; and their community will feel their presence. Society’s conduct will be influenced by them, indirectly if not directly.

We must confess, however, that the failure of members to live the life that the Church proclaims is a serious drawback to the work of extending the Kingdom. Evidently the mass of Church members do not yet realize they are Christ’s chief witness in the world. The Church is supposed to be made up of those who have been redeemed by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and whose lives have been transformed by his power. That the true (invisible) and the apparent (visible) church are not one and the same is sadly and only too obvious.

At present, the church, as an earthly organization, cannot decide what its mission in the world is. One of the mistakes that we have often made is that what the Church will do is determined largely by what is expected of it. Now, it is true that human institutions must often change as circumstances vary; in fact, their whole purposes may have to be altered due to external conditions. But this is not so with the Church. The Church is not a human institution governed by the laws and purposes of men. It has one head, one lawgiver, and one resolve. Now some men in the Church have appeared to assume these powers themselves, and this is unfortunate, even tragic. However, the fact that some will, out of vanity or ignorance, take these things into their hands in no wise affects the truth that they belong only in the hands of God.

What then constitutes the role of the Church as far as the serious problems that face our nation and world are concerned? Does it have a word to speak, a witness to give? And what is the manner in which it is going to perform these tasks? Many are the answers being put forward, both by those within the Church and those without; and this is the reason so many are so confused. Both conflicting leadership and a lack of understanding on the part of church members are obscuring the purpose which God has for his Church in this world.

We must note the fact, too, that the Church does not really belong to this world. Surely it is in the world, but not of the world. And just so far as the Church becomes a part of the world, so far does it cease to be the Church. This is true despite the urging of those who claim that the Church should be a part of the community. (There is indeed something anomalous in the very term “community church.”)

Speaking To The Times

Certainly the Church must put its message in the language of time and place if it is to reach people. It rightly offers temporal aids—the Church must deal with the whole man, and the soul can only be reached as it lives in the body. But in no way does this mean that its message can be altered or its purpose modified. The Church (and this means the members that make it up) needs to remember God’s admonition through Paul (as Phillips translates it): “Don’t let the world around you squeeze you into its own mold …” Rom. 12:2a).

The “voice” of the Church is to remind the New Israel of its sins and to call God’s people to a life that becomes the followers of Jesus Christ. It is to remind them that their reconciliation with God depends upon a firm faith (not a shifting away) in the hope of the Gospel. And it is to bring to their attention constantly Jesus’ own words, “If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love” (John 15:10).

And while the “voice” of the Church calls its members, yea, insists that they follow Christ in their daily lives, the word to those outside can only be, and must be, “Come to Christ.” The Church must not forget nor forsake the revelation of God that the great need of all men is to come to Jesus Christ in surrender and to receive him as Saviour and Lord.

Three Pitfalls

In our day, and in any day for that matter, the Church must especially beware of three pitfalls: (1) Misleading men, or supporting those who do mislead people into thinking that the Church is an agency for securing certain rights or temporal benefits for men; (2) Lending itself as a pressure force upon the state to bring about reforms needed and even desirable from the Christian viewpoint; and (3) Confronting unregenerate men with a regenerate pattern of life and expecting them to walk in it.

Peril Of Misleading Men

The Church must beware lest it deceive or mislead men. In supporting the cause of minority or suppressed groups, the Church must take heed lest it attract those who see in it only a champion for their temporal rights. Christ was rejected because he insisted on holding true to his mission to free men from the tyranny of themselves rather than some external oppressor. Israel desired that God set them free from every form of earthly tyranny and oppression. But God had not freed Israel from Egypt simply that they might enjoy the “four freedoms.” The word of the Lord to Pharaoh was “Let my people go, that they may serve me” (Ex. 8:1; 9:1; 3:19; 4:23; 5:1).

We must remember that Christ did not come offering to remove all of men’s troubles. Rather, he warns those who truly seek to follow him to expect trouble in this world. “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:19). “In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). Jesus admonishes us to enter the narrow gate, to travel the hard way; it is the only one that leads to life (Matt. 7:13).

Now someone may remind us that on Jesus’ first appearance in public ministry (according to Luke), he said that the portion of Scripture he had read was fulfilled. This was the portion: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has appointed me to preach the good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (4:18, 19). But who among us takes this to read in its literal sense? Certainly not all the blind were healed in Jesus’ day, nor all the slaves freed, nor all the poor enriched. And he did not mean this in its literal sense to be the purpose of his Church. Indeed, our Lord rebuked those who followed him with the hope of receiving temporal benefits. He made it clear that he offered men the Bread of Heaven and there was no place in his Kingdom for those who sought only earthly bread—after which most of those who had been following Jesus left him (John 6). Is the Church today afraid to speak the truth because its proclamation will turn many away?

Not A Power Lobby

With regard to the second pitfall mentioned above, the Church cannot lend itself as a power lobby to bring pressure on the state. There is grave danger that in joining human agencies to support actions in the community at large (which we must admit is composed mainly of unregenerate men, or certainly of men little concerned with the will of God), the Church will play false even to those it professes to help. People will thus receive a wrong conception of the Church’s true purpose according to Jesus Christ, and for man, this will be travesty and indeed tragedy.

Is not the declaration of the Confession of Faith still the best rule for the Church? Synods and councils are to handle or conclude nothing but that which is ecclesiastical; and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth unless the way of humble petition in cases extraordinary; or by way of advice for satisfaction, if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate (Chap. 33, IV).

Diluting The Challenge

Furthermore, we may well ask that when the Church by its actions aligns itself with unregenerate “socializers,” no matter how good may seem their aims, is it not forgetting God’s warning about being unequally yoked together with unbelievers? Some may scoff at the thought that Paul’s admonition has any bearing here. But we must face his question: “What communion has light with darkness?” Can it be that the path by which the Church becomes “of the world” is that of aligning itself with secular and non-Christian agencies in the promotion of “good” causes?

Many may vociferously deny this, but even in participation in Brotherhood Week the Church has sometimes weakened its own witness. All men are not brothers in the most important sense. Surely Christians ought to be willing to associate and to cooperate with non-Christians. Christians must not look down upon others. But those who do not own Christ as Saviour and Lord are lost, and anything that we do to weaken our witness of this fact is unfair to our “brethren” who are not in Christ.

We have hereto covered the question of calling unregenerate men to walk in a regenerate pattern of conduct. But let the Church remember that its message to those outside Christ is the call to come to him in surrender of life and in accepting the difficulties of true Christian living for his sake. And let the Church remember that this is its message to all the unredeemed, oppressed and oppressor alike. Christ still says to men today, “Come to me … Take my yoke upon you … learn from me … You must be born again … Deny yourself and take up your cross and follow me.” Christ is the head, and the Church is his body.

Let The Church Be Herself

To be sure, the cry is raised that the Church must take its stand on issues facing our world today. But who says so?

During the last great war one wise churchman even suggested that even in time of war the Church has something more important to consider. Does not the Church have something more important to say and do today than become involved in the petty issues of the hour? (In the light of eternity, which of our disturbing issues is not petty?)

Surely Christian citizens as individuals must take the lead in seeing there is righteousness and justice in their governments, and as individuals exercise and fulfill their responsibility wherever it may fall. But who says the Church as such must do this? Does the Lord of the Church command it? And who or what is “the Church” that must do this? Who is to decide on which side the Church will take its stand? Do not the teachings of the Lord of the Church rather cut right across the issues and those who are in conflict over them?

A most important question for us is: Do we really believe that we today are wiser than the devoted Christians of yesterday? (The writer confesses he has met some who feel they have a better understanding of God’s will than had Peter or Paul, and much more than the writers of the Confession of Faith!) Of course, there are those with ready answers for all these questions. Perhaps we should respect their integrity and sincerity, but to accept their judgments and follow their lead is another matter. We must remember that even in these matters “there is a way which seemeth right to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Prov. 14:12).

Preacher In The Red

WHO’S WHO

We had been expecting a missionary from Colombia, a Latin-American whom none of us had seen before. So when he arrived, my wife ushered him into the parsonage of our Chinese church and called me in the church office on the extension phone.

Before I could reach home, a young man from our downtown metropolitan neighborhood, somewhat under the influence of alcohol, came to the door. Thinking that perhaps the missionary could help the man, my wife led him into the living room.

“Oh,” exclaimed the astonished missionary, looking from one person to the other and obviously expecting to greet the pastor. “How—how are you, my—my brother!”

My wife scarcely had time to clarify the situation when I burst into the house. Looking forward to meeting a missionary, I was taken aback at the swaggering figure who dominated the scene.

“Hello!” I gasped. “What can I do for you—and your friend?”

There were three red faces—that of the alcoholic, the missionary and also his confused host.

—The Rev. HONG C. SIT, Houston, Texas.

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.

W. H. Beckmann is a native of Georgia and a graduate of Columbia Theological Seminary, Decatur. He is Pastor of Red Bank Presbyterian Church in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

In this year of 1958, when the world is so rent by divisive forces, America stands in great need of spiritual guidance. The country as a whole must draw from its great heritage of religious freedom, justice and liberty to meet the challenge of the future. Ministers of America are truly on the front lines of the battle for freedom. On their shoulders, in large measure, depends the future of our nation.

The Crime Wave

The threat of crime still looms heavily. After World War II there were hopes—now dispelled—that crime rates would subside. Many people thought: “Just wait until normal conditions return and then we’ll see life settling back in the good old ways.” This has not happened. In 1957, for example, major crimes jumped 9.1 per cent over the comparable figures for 1956! This is an extremely high increase and merits the careful attention of every individual interested in a better society. In 1957, over 2,700,000 major crimes were committed, representing a 23.9 per cent increase over the average for the previous five years.

The great tragedy, moreover, is the evil effect of crime on young people. Persons under the age of 18, for example, in 1957 represented 53.1 per cent of all arrests reported for robbery, auto theft, burglary and larceny. Here lies a most potent danger to law and order. The adult criminal is the product of the juvenile offender. The criminal habits which create the hardened, veteran criminal are formed very frequently in the years of youth.

Guidance Of Youth

That is one of our great challenges today—to make American youth into productive citizens of tomorrow. Young people are full of energy, initiative and talent. They are looking for something to do. They need guidance. The key lies here. If that guidance comes from evil minds, from men and women interested in exploiting youthful energy for criminal pursuits, then that youth’s life will be blighted. So often juvenile delinquency is actually adult delinquency—older persons through neglect or lack of interest allow youth to drift into illegal activities.

Neglect Of Family Life

The family is so important to the proper rearing of young people. Often today, unfortunately, the family is more a name than a fact. The home is merely a place to sleep, to catch a hurried meal or to display fine furniture. Frequently, for example, family members do not eat together—life is so busy! Often the remark is heard, “This is the first meal we have all eaten together for a week.” That is a terrible commentary on our way of life. A gathering of the family around the dining table should be encouraged as often as possible. There the saying of a blessing before the meal, giving thanks to Almighty God, is a tie which binds the family. This custom, often neglected today, is an essential ingredient in the rearing of young children. The conversation at the family dining table is vital to the shaping of growing minds. Here members of the family express their opinions, tell their experiences of the day and exchange information. To miss this fellowship is to deprive boys and girls of part of their rightful heritage.

Most important are family worship services. Here the reading of the Bible, the discussion of stories from Scripture, and prayer are invaluable in the developing of youthful character. Many men and women today remember these devotional services in their own family circle. Other facets of their early life have faded from memory, but that picture of father or mother reading the Bible remains bright.

The Minister’S Influence

We must all work together for a common aim. Ministers, in their contacts with young people and adults, are doing invaluable service in fighting crime. You, as ministers, probably do not realize the great help you can render in molding the career of a young man or woman. Time after time criminals, often with tears in their eyes, tell our special agents that they should have followed the advice given to them years before by their ministers.

What is needed are men and women willing to take the time to work with young people. How many times in churches, schools and civic organizations do you find this complaint: “We simply can’t find anybody who’ll work with our young people.” Why? Because many people plead they are too busy, that they have too many other things to do, to lend a helping hand.

Such an attitude is wrong. Our youth merit the very best of our attention. We are dealing with the leaders of tomorrow’s society. These youngsters need religious training; they need to know the Bible. Adults simply must take the time to work with them. The alternative is an ever-increasing crime-rate.

The Communist Challenge

Another challenge is that of Communism—the evil appeal of an atheistic doctrine which would destroy our way of life. The clergymen of America can make a great contribution to defeating this menace. Communism is evil. It is anti-God. It seeks to demean the human personality.

Under Communism the human being becomes a slave of the state. He is told what to do. He must think the way the state and party want him to think. Never must he question why.

Communism would destroy our system of free government. In a communist society the Church would be one of the first targets of secret police. Clergymen would be silenced or liquidated. No room exists in Communism for the free play of the human spirit. That is the experience of slave states behind the Iron Curtain.

The clergymen of America have a vital role in meeting this challenge of the future—to defeat crime and subversion. The Church is the heartbeat of America. By urging members to rededicate their lives to God, clergymen are striking against these evil enemies.

This nation was founded on religious freedom. Religions have guided us in years past. They must continue to be our guide in the future. An America faithful to God will be an America free and strong.

Carrying His Plea To The People

By varied means, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s crime appraisals have a way of consistently penetrating to grass roots. His interpretations of trends in lawlessness, which serve to arouse the citizenry, have been attracting ears, eyes, and minds for many years. This month, for example, news media are giving wide publicity to Mr. Hoover’s analyses in the two areas of “challenge” presented in the Christianity Today article—influences among youth and Communism. In a message to law enforcement officials, he called for public pressure to halt “ominous trends of crime glorification” in movies and television. In congressional testimony made public he warned that the Communist party in America has renewed and intensified its program of infiltrating mass organizations in order to disguise its operations.

“In the face of the Nation’s terrifying juvenile crime wave, we are threatened with a flood of movies and television presentations which flaunt indecency and applaud lawlessness,” Mr. Hoover wrote in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. “Film trash mills, which persist in exalting violence and immorality, spew out celluloid poison which is destroying the impressionable minds of youth.”

“No standard of decency or code of operations can justify portraying vile gangsters as modern-day Robin Hoods,” he added. “Not since the days when thousands filed past the bier of the infamous John Dillinger and made his home a virtual shrine have we witnessed such a brazen affront to our national conscience.”

One of the few immediate public reactions to the FBI chief’s charges came from Harold E. Fellows, president of the National Association of Broadcasters, who said: “To the best of my knowledge, and that of the members of the Television Code Review Board, there have never been released any authoritative studies, made by accepted scientific methods, supporting the contention that television contributes materially to juvenile delinquency.”

Industry expert Fellows thus implied disagreement with the considered opinion of a respected psychiatrist, Dr. Lawrence Kubie, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University. Mr. Kubie said in a CBS symposium a few weeks ago: “Quite frankly, I think the movies, TV, comics, the constant confrontation with killing, bloodletting in a form so realistic that to a child it’s as real as life itself, cannot fail to have an effect not on the impulse to rebel but on the form that your rebellion will take and what your standard then is of how you express the fact that you are rebelling.”

As for Communism, the threat is not waning, Mr. Hoover told a House subcommittee. “We now have approximately 150 known, or suspected, Communist-front and Communist-infiltrated organizations under investigation,” he said.

Here is a portion of his testimony:

“Certain organizations obviously dedicate their efforts to thwart the very concepts of this nation’s security programs.… They protest they are fighting for freedom, but, in reality, they seek license.

“They hypocritically bar Communists from their membership, but they seek to discredit all persons who abhor Communists and communism … they launch attacks against Congressional legislation designed to curb communism.

“Sadly, the cult of the pseudo-liberal, which is anything but liberal, continues to float about in the pink-tinted atmosphere of patriotic irresponsibility.… Every pseudo-liberal in this country should look inside his heart and give heed to the destruction he may be bringing upon the very country that permits him to enjoy this very freedom of thought.”—ED.

J. Edgar Hoover has been Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation since 1924. He holds the LL.B. and LL.M. degrees from George Washington University. Seventeen universities and colleges have conferred honorary degrees on him. Mr. Hoover first entered the Department of Justice in 1917.

Is there A conflict between Christianity and science? This is a question which has engaged the attention of scholars, both Christian and secular, ever since the time of the Copernican revolution, and the debate continues today with, if anything, renewed vigor. Critics of Christianity show no signs of forgetting that Galileo was condemned by an authoritarian church for his advocacy of the Copernican system—though they do not so readily remember that many of the church leaders of that day were convinced in their own minds that Galileo was right, but felt powerless to oppose the official machine of the Roman Inquisition. A most interesting book by Giorgio de Santillana on the Trial of Galileo has recently been published (London, 1958) and gives a full and very fair account of the whole sorry business. Little wonder that Galileo, who always protested that he was a loyal and dutiful son of the church (what else could he do?), was filled with frustration as he sought vainly for recognition and the acceptance of views the truth of which he was denied any opportunity of demonstrating to his accusers. Little wonder that he should have complained that “of all hatreds there is none greater than that of ignorance against knowledge.” His chagrin was not diminished by the realization that the Commissary General of the inquisitorial court which tried him was persuaded of the rightness of the accused man’s views, yet was ineluctably caught up in the authoritarian machinery of his high office.

The scientific doctrine of Galileo has long since been embraced by church as well as state and the Ptolemaic world-view disowned. Nobody now believes that the earth is the fixed central point of our solar system. But it does not follow from this that science is always right; indeed, it follows that science may be persistently wrong, as was the case for centuries during which the Ptolemaic interpretation continued unchallenged (and Galileo had scientific as well as theological opponents!), and as was the case, to take another example, with beliefs concerning spontaneous generation until Louis Pasteur demonstrated in the middle of the last century that all life comes from previous life of the same kind—a conclusion which has been amply confirmed by the development of the science of genetics. In every age there is a disposition to regard “modern science” as unassailable and authoritative, as though it has already spoken a final word. Christians, therefore, must treat the oracular pronouncements of science with caution and discernment; otherwise they may find themselves sharing an embarrassment similar to that of Emil Brunner who, having accepted the view that “modern science” precluded the possibility of there being, as Scripture foretells, a catastrophic end to our world, now finds it necessary to retract that opinion.

Far more radical is the approach of Rudolf Bultmann whose “demythologization” of Scripture involves the ruthless eradication of every supernatural element from the Christian faith, on the ground that “modern science” has shown our world to be a closed system which will not brook intervention “from without,” such, for example, as that implied by the doctrines (when literally understood) of the incarnation, resurrection, ascension, and ultimate return of Christ (see in particular the volume Kerygma and Myth, London, 1953, and also my Tyndale Lecture Scripture and Myth, London, 1956). This represents a complete capitulation to the supposed authority of “modern science” which, however, is scarcely modern any more; for Bultmann, as John Macquarrie says, “is still obsessed with the pseudoscientific view of a closed universe that was popular half a century ago” (An Existentialist Theology, London, 1955, p. 168).

In his book Modern Science and Christian Beliefs (New York, 1955) A. F. Smethirst (whose untimely death a few months ago removed a familiar figure from the convocation of Canterbury) maintained that “the antithesis between religious knowledge on the one hand and scientific knowledge on the other is … a completely false one,” since “religion by its very character must be concerned with the whole of reality, including the entire natural world and every type of material or spiritual existence” (pp. 71 f.). E. L. Mascall, another recent contributor to the contemporary debate, points out that “when people declare themselves unable to accept the Christian religion because of the outlook of science, the science involved very frequently turns out to be the now largely abandoned science of the nineteenth century” (Christian Theology and Natural Science, London, 1956, p. 32).

On the assumption that “the spirit of mutual respect for both science and Scripture preserves us from any charge of being anti-scientific or blindly dogmatic or religiously bigoted,” Bernard Ramm declares that “we must be as ready to hear the voice of science as we are of Scripture on common matters” (The Christian View of Science and Scripture, Grand Rapids, 1954, p. 32). It is somewhat astonishing to find a Christian apologist contending that “if the theologian and the scientist had been careful to stick to their respective duties, and carefully to learn the other side when they spoke of it there would have been no disharmony between them save that of the non-Christian heart in rebellion against God” (p. 58)—as though the non-Christian heart in rebellion against God were not the radical cause of all conflict between science and theology (and as though it were the scientist who always had the rebellious heart)! This, in fact, is the really crucial issue, for it is the revolt of the proud human mind against God, the Sovereign Creator of the universe, whose mind conceived the whole design of the order of the natural realm and is therefore the sole ground of all true knowledge and science, that corrupts unregenerate man’s understanding of things in their ultimate, that is, their most important, significance. That man may know certain things in connection with their proximate significance none will deny, but that he may know anything in its ultimate significance is impossible so long as he refuses to glorify God as God. And that is the nemesis which dogs all the science and all the philosophy of the unredeemed intellect.

Whether our contemporary would-be reconcilers of science and theology have succeeded in their object is certainly open to question. One suspects that in their acceptance of evolutionism, of the possibility of the formation of life from lifeless matter, and of the doctrine of progress by means of fortuitous and unpredictable mutations in the genetic structure, they are, after all, marrying the spirit of this age and will find themselves widowed in the next.

Pulpit Chronicle

A History of Preaching In Britain and America, by F. R. Webber, Northwestern, Milwaukee, 1952–1957. Three volumes. $7.00 ea.

The author will hardly need an extensive introduction to the clergy of America. His previous books, Studies in the Liturgy, The Small Church, and Church Symbolism are standard in their respective fields and have won him a reputation for sound scholarship combined with a high degree of versatility, always expressed in limpid prose, with Celtic verve and, frequently, in striking phrase.

Mr. Webber, for many years Secretary of the Committee on Church Architecture of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, and editor of The Church Builder, is himself a preacher of wide experience in the pulpit of a large church in Cleveland. And although he is now listed by his denomination as emeritus, he still preaches every Sunday.

These three volumes, containing a total of more than 2000 pages, discuss the history of preaching in the British Isles and in America, much of which has never before been gathered into one place, and little of which, perhaps, has ever been so fascinatingly told.

In the first volume the author tells the story of preaching south of the Tweed from the time of the original Celtic preachers to the present day. His extensive chapters on the trends and movements of the theological scene provide invaluable background for the biographies of the many eminent men of the pulpit whom he presents.

Among the topics of this volume are chapters on the Celtic Church, the English Reformation, the Puritan Age, the Evangelical Awakening and the Tractarian Movement, besides a chapter on preaching in Cornwall.

The second volume treats preaching in Scotland, Wales and Ireland. The Covenanters, the Field Preachers, the Marrow Controversy, the Evangelical Awakening and the Disruption of 1843 are the subjects of some of its chapters.

Volume III deals with preaching and preachers in America, from Elder Brewster, who came over on the Mayflower, to Gilbert P. Symons, who died in 1956; and it contains orienting chapters similar to those found in Volumes I and II.

Webber’s work is based for the most part on secondary sources. There are some repetitions which are inevitable, perhaps, when, after the discussion of an era, the biographies of the preachers of that period are related. Some sections have been carelessly proofread and are consequently blemished with more typographical errors than should be found in any work of its distinctive merit.

Mr. Webber is well known for his staunch conservatism. He does not slant his material. And although he presents few biographies of Lutheran preachers—none at all, of course, in Volumes I and II, he is frankly and honestly a protagonist of the theology of Martin Luther. But non-Lutheran Christians interested in the field that he covers will find compensation for that circumstance in his unconcealed and enthusiastic admiration of Calvinistic, Arminian and even, in some instances, Roman Catholic preachers. They will delight in the patent essential ecumenicity of Christian love with which he regards those not of his own denomination who hold the fundamental tenets of Christianity. Webber has knocked about a bit and knows that there are often good things and excellent men on the other side of the denominational fence. And in the present work he has gone to great lengths to search some of them out.

Somehow in this trilogy Webber has managed to combine the factuality and informativeness of a work of reference with an eminent degree of entertaining and—for most preachers, we should guess—fascinating reading. This is the magnum opus of its author, a work which should find an honored place not only on the shelves of the libraries of theological seminaries but also in the studies of Christian pastors, young and old, who are concerned with the effective preaching of the truths of Holy Scripture. For all Christian ministers who are concerned with effective preaching, these three volumes should prove a rewarding study and a powerful stimulus.

E. P. SCHULZE

Apostolic Religion

Paul and Jesus, by Herman Ridderbos, Presbyterian and Reformed, 1957. $3.75.

Each generation needs a fresh statement of basic biblical problems in the light of contemporary criticism. The relationship of Paul’s preaching and teaching to Jesus is one of these problems. J. Gresham Machen served his generation in this important area of New Testament studies in his famous Origin of Paul’s Religion. Now Herman Ridderbos, Professor of New Testament at Kampen Theological Seminary in the Netherlands, has put the present generation in his debt by his recent publication, Jesus and Paul.

Professor Ridderbos is primarily concerned with the origin and character of Paul’s religion, as the subtitle of his book indicates. He finds its origin in Jesus’ Kerygma about himself, and in the proclamation of the early Church. Both are important. To bypass the Kerygma of the early Church is not to do justice “to the position which the person of Jesus as the Christ assumes within Paul’s preaching … and to understand the faith of the early Christian church without accepting the factuality of Jesus’ Messianic self-disclosure and resurrection, brings with it unsolvable historical riddles.”

The primary sources of Paul’s preaching are revelation, the tradition of the Church and the Old Testament. Ridderbos recognizes Hellenistic influences in Paul but rejects with good reason the reconstructions of the religionsgeschichtliche school which would derive Paul’s Kerygma from the pagan world. It is in this regard that Ridderbos enters into vigorous debate with Bultmann and his Christology.

The general character of Paul’s preaching is eschatological. That is, Paul was “the proclaimer of a new time, the great turning point in the history of redemption, the intrusion of a new world aeon.” In this heilsgeschichtliche approach Ridderbos finds the answer to the question of the relationship between Jesus and Paul. Paul’s preaching in essence is “simply the expression of what Jesus referred to when he spoke of the kingdom of heaven being at hand.”

This is a stimulating book and a solid contribution to New Testament theology. Its value, especially to American readers, is further increased by its constant interaction with the best of European scholarship.

WALTER W. WESSEL

Scholarly Comment

Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, by E. K. Simpson and F. F. Bruce, Eerdmans, 1957. 328 pp., $4.00.

This is the seventh volume now available in the New International Commentary on the New Testament, whose general editor is Prof. Ned B. Stone house. This series has distinguished itself as a standard of scholarly exactness and evangelical orthodoxy among those who take the Bible as the infallible Word of God.

Mr. Simpson writes the comments and notes on Ephesians; Prof. Bruce expounds Colossians. Both scholars maintain the Pauline authorship of these epistles. Technical problems are confined largely to the footnotes. Thus both the scholar and the general reader will find material suited to their needs.

Criticisms of this valuable work are few indeed. The somewhat elegant style of Mr. Simpson’s comments is distracting at times. Difficult words abound. On page 59, for example, are found such words as “mystagogues,” “pharos,” “pyrrhonism,” “purlieux,” and a Latin quotation. It is almost easier to read Paul’s Greek than some portions of Simpson’s English! We feel also that illustrations should have been cited more from the Septuagint rather than Greek and Roman writers. Modern problems of interpretation (such as the dispensational use of Eph. 3:5) are sometimes completely ignored.

However, there can be no doubt that we have in this volume a worthy addition to exegetical literature.

WICK BROOMALL

Pre-Exilic History

Fertile Soil, by Max Vogelstein, American Press, New York, 1957. 137 pp., $3.00.

This is a concise thought-provoking history of the Divided Kingdom from Solomon’s death in 933 B.C. (Vogelstein’s date) to the Babylonian Exile in 586 B.C. Although the subject is highly technical and bristles with problems on every page, the author’s treatment is so fascinating that he lures the lay reader over the pages without losing him in the problems. The expert, on the other hand, will not only find the problems, but will discern with delight that the author has wrestled with them and presented challenging, if not always convincing conclusions. Behind the author’s conclusions, whether one accepts or rejects them, can be detected original research.

Moreover, the college student or the seminarian will also find this volume an eminently suitable text on ancient Israelite history. Its clear outline by topics, its useful maps and its thorough use of original and other sources (there are 16 pages of single spaced notes), and its vigorous treatment will not only illuminate the student, but lend zest to any professor’s class.

Anyone conversant with the general period behind the Book of Kings will already be familiar with Max Vogelstein’s chronological studies dealing with this period. While all chronologists will not agree at all times with the details of his reconstruction of this era, the author’s thorough familiarity with the field does command attention. His chronological survey of the Divided Kingdom in the framework of the contemporary Near Eastern scene at the end of the book will be a valuable feature, enhancing the general brevity and lucidity of treatment.

Vogelstein still holds to the existence of Benhadad I, II and III. The reviewer maintains with W. F. Albright that the Melcarth Stele of Benhadad recovered from the Aleppo region of North Syria in 1941 argues for the identity of the so-called Benhadad I and Benhadad II (see Israel and the Aramaeans of Damascus, James Clarke, London, 1957, pp. 59–61; 141 f.). This evidence, however, has not been accepted by all scholars.

Dr. Vogelstein’s reinterpretation of the contemporary Assyrian records is stimulating, as well as his observations on the Zakir Stele and the Mesha Stone. The book simplifies an exceedingly complex period. The author is to be congratulated for his ability to say much in few words.

MERRILL F. UNGER

Handbook Of Evidences

Archaeology and the Old Testament, by J. A. Thompson, Eerdmans, 1957. $1.50.

It will be difficult to find anywhere else, in such brief compass, so much valuable material on the foremost subject in biblical studies. The author, who is a professor in the Baptist Theological College of New South Wales, Australia, is not a career archaeologist. Yet he has provided a collection of the most pertinent evidence from competent sources. He has also avoided extremes of interpretation of the facts.

The date of the Exodus from Egypt has long been a topic of discussion. Thompson presents a series of convincing arguments both from the Bible and from archaeology for a date about 1300 B.C. The encouraging feature is that he does it, not by discounting the statements of the Bible, but by seeking to show their consistency.

At certain points the author has shown how archaeology clears away some obscurities in the King James Version, indicating also that the Bible is an accurate source of ancient geography. For example, the King James Version, in 1 Kings 10:28, tells us that Solomon “had horses brought out of Egypt and linen yarn” (Hebrew QWH). Recent study has shown that QWH or Que, was a district in Asia Minor from which horses were procured (p. 84). According to the King James Version of 2 Kings 7:6, the Syrians fled from Israel because they thought they heard the sound of Hittite and Egyptian forces. It is now known that there was a land of Musur north of Palestine, and a proper reading would be “Hittite” and “Musurite.” The misunderstanding in the Authorized Version was natural enough, since the Hebrew root for Egypt was MSR. The combination of Musurites with nearby Hittites is undoubtedly more accurate, however (p. 101).

Joseph is described on p. 37 as “vizier” of Egypt. Some doubt has been cast upon this view by recent studies. Joseph may very well have been second only to Pharaoh in his ministry as supervisor of granaries.

On the whole, this is an excellent handbook for the student of the Bible, whether pastor or layman.

DAVID W. KERR

Anthology Of Mystics

Late Medieval Mysticism, edited by Ray C. Petty, Westminster Press, 1957. 424 pp., $5.00.

This thirteenth volume of the Library of Christian Classics consists of selections, none newly translated, from Bernard, the Victorines, Francis, Bonaventura, Lull, Eckhart, Rolle, Suso, Catherine of Siena, van Ruysbroeck, Theologia Germanica, Nicolas of Cusa, and Catherine of Genoa.

The editor notes that asceticism is the normal source and accompaniment of mysticism. Thus most of the mystics were monks.

In spite of this unhealthy and unscriptural mode of life, mystics sometimes write intelligibly and their thoughts are profitable, e.g. Bernard On the Love of God (p. 54). The selection from Ramon Lull is not so much mystical as it is a fanciful though serious plea for the study of foreign languages in preparation for missionary work.

Francis, on the other hand, shows his Mariolatry; and the Victorines are intolerably allegorical. So is Eckhart, who wrote, “Why did Christ say, Martha, Martha, naming her twice? Isidor says there is no doubt that prior to the time when God was man he never called anyone by name lest any should be lost whom he did not name and about whom it was doubtful. Christ’s calling I take it, means his eternal knowing.… Why did he name Martha twice? He meant that every good thing, temporal and eternal, destined for creature, was Martha’s. The first ‘Martha’ stood for perfection in temporal works; the second one for her eternal weal” (pp. 194–195).

The selections are good examples of the travesty of Christianity effected by monasticism, mysticism, and Romanism. The volume has carefully prepared indexes.

GORDON CLARK

Hot spring weather with intermittent storms greeted commissioners to the 98th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, U. S., in Charlotte, North Carolina. Meeting April 24–29 in this stronghold of Presbyterianism, the clergymen and elders, hosted by historic First Church, promptly took their cue from the weather. If the heat and storms generated by the assembly did not match nature’s excesses, there were sufficient pressure areas in view to maintain a sense of expectancy on the floor and in the corridors.

Retiring moderator, Dr. William M. Elliott Jr. of Dallas, wasted no time in declaring the chief emergency area, In his year of travel for the church, he had discovered a “rampant … form of individualism and Congregationalism” which was manifesting itself in repudiation of “constitutional processes” and in “hostility” toward the “courts of our church, particularly her highest court.” The threat was to “ ‘the peace and unity of the church,” ’ (some delegates quickly pointed out that this quotation from their ordination vows was incomplete, the word “purity” having been dropped).

Dr. Elliott’s reference was obviously to the negative reaction of many to the church’s Council on Christian Relations, which has been reaffirming the 1954 General Assembly endorsement of the Supreme Court’s outlawing of segregation in the public schools. For a week the press had been heralding the coming battle on the race issue, but when it came—on the assembly’s last day—it was in terms of an ancient theological debate on the nature of the church, the significance of which was missed by many, who regarded this simply as a smokescreen.

Admittedly, the occasion of such a debate decreed the “loadedness” of both sides of the question. The assembly heard both the majority and the minority report from the Standing Committee on Christian Relations. The former recommended the adoption of the report of the Council on Christian Relations, the major part of which was entitled, “Speaking for God—the Prophetic Role of the Church.” The argument for this role was based upon the traditions of Old Testament prophets and on Christ’s prophetic office as well as on the history of the church, which “is impelled to declare the will of God for every morally and spiritually significant relationship of life.” Thus the council proposed through the General Assembly certain guiding principles for the Christian people of the South. These included repudiation of the branding of any people as inferior; recognition of the Supreme Court decision in question as the law of the land, unless “changed by legal and constitutional methods;” and the necessity for preserving and strengthening the public school system.

The majority report also asked the General Assembly to rule improper the use of Presbyterian church buildings for schools “designed to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling through the maintenance of segregation on the basis of race.” The report deemed unnecessary a provision for moral and material support by the General Assembly of “ministers involved in difficulties in the matter of racial reconciliation.”

There followed the presentation of the minority report by a recently-transplanted Northerner, Dr. John Reed Miller, pastor of First Presbyterian Church, Jackson, Mississippi, and former president of Knoxville College in Tennessee, a United Presbyterian-related Negro institution.

Exception was taken to the proposed continuity between Old Testament prophets living under a theocratic system of government, and the modern Church. The Westminster Confession was adduced as allowing for no further special revelation from God after the completion of the New Testament. The Holy Spirit works now in the capacity of illumining the “completed Word.” The Church’s “prophetic role” is the declaration of this Word.

Further appeal was made to the Confession as stating, “ ‘Synods and councils are to handle nothing but that which is ecclesiastical; and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs …’ ” The council’s report was thus declared to be out of bounds in calling, in “quasi-authoritative” manner, for such as the strengthening of the public school system, a matter left by the Bible to the individual Christian parent.

With regard to the use of church buildings for schools, the report stated “primary responsibility for the use of church property” to reside in the church session.

The report recalled that the Southern Presbyterian Church originally split from its parent body over a resolution which was “essentially” political. In recommending the dissolution of the Council on Christian Relations, the report disavowed any leanings towards individualism or Congregationalism, but warned against the substitution of “a new authoritarianism of church courts for the authority of individual conscience instructed by the Word of God” and “the assumption of authority by the church over all areas of thought and life.”

Subsequent debate as to acceptance or rejection of the minority report proved interesting even if it did not rise to the level of the highly-regarded reports. Southern eloquence seemed to soar more easily on this topic than on some others. Judge L. F. Hendrick of Central Mississippi Presbytery warned that “intervention in secular affairs would impair the spiritual mission of the church.”

Hungarian-born William Bonis of Austin, Texas, decried the church’s frequent lag behind the community in accomplishing integration. General Joseph B. Fraser of Georgia, speaking against the minority report, said the time had not yet come in the South for integration, but that the problem demanded facing.

Mississippian James Finch was convinced that the majority report “does not represent the ‘grass-roots’ views of the Southern Presbyterian Church.”

In summary, Dr. Miller warned that to break down the confessional safeguards of conscience in social and political matters, would be a “start down the road which leads inevitably, I feel, to the days before the Reformation.”

The assembly then voted, the count revealing the minority report to have been defeated, 288 to 124. The majority report was then accepted, with amendments providing consideration for opposing views and softening slightly proposed support of the U.N.

Thus the crisis was past with little apparent bitterness. Lending personal charm to his position, newly-elected moderator, Philip F. Howerton, Charlotte insurance executive and son of a former moderator, predicted to newsmen that this issue would return again and again to haunt future assemblies.

Another election saw the unanimous calling of Dr. James A. Millard Jr., for the post of stated clerk. If he accepts, he will succeed Dr. E. C. Scott, who retires in 1959 after 22 years in this position.

Occasionally in some of the ceremonies Wistful sounds were heard on possible future union with northern Presbyterians, such being considered an affront by many, since a majority of the presbyteries only recently voted down the proposed merger. One said, “We are not trying to maintain Southern Presbyterianism as such, but we are seeking to preserve historic Presbyterianism.”

Notable on the floor of debate was the historic procedure of repeated appeals to Scripture and to the Westminster Confession of Faith.

There were occasional rumblings in the debate on Christian relations that the seeds of schism were being sown. However, one minister said that he could put up with “political differences” but when the assembly proceeded to tamper with the Confession in the manner it had done on the divorce question, this was a vital issue which could lead to “my seeking another fellowship regardless of the cost.”

In point of fact, the assembly had voted to amend the Confession of Faith and the Book of Church Order to permit remarriage after divorce, with the blessing of the church, when the minister has satisfied himself as to proper penitence for past failure and firm purpose to make the new marriage truly Christian. Debate at times seemed to equate a continuing celibate state with an unforgiven condition.

Present church law allows remarriage after divorce only for the innocent party in cases of adultery and willful desertion. The approved changes now go to the 83 presbyteries for vote, three-fourths of which must give approval for the changes in the Confession to become church law. The chances for this eventuality are not bright, similar tries in the recent past having failed.

Some point to the fact that issues, such as the recent merger-plan, can be decisively passed in the assembly only to be decisively defeated by the presbyteries—demonstrating that the highest court is no longer as representative as originally intended. It is also said that the General Assembly is losing its features as a “deliberative body” and becoming more like a church “convention” with issues being pushed through with greater ease.

Another effort was made to change the Confession through a presbytery overture to remove what were termed “the harsher statements concerning predestination.” The assembly, after vigorous debate, upheld the recommendations of the Committee on Bills and Overtures that the overture be rejected. Chairman of the committee, Dr. J. N. Thomas of Union Seminary, Richmond, Virginia, while not believing the portions questioned to be fully biblical, spoke against tampering further with the Confession and thus depriving it of inner consistency. Rather, he would favor a complete revision of the entire Confession or the drawing up of a new document, maintaining the old as a “guide” and a “monument” of midseventeenth-century theology.

One authority said this to be the first such expression made on floor of the assembly. It was apparently disturbing to some. On the last day of the assembly a commissioner sought passage of a resolution that the church “does continue to stand on the Westminster Confession.”

But it was too late.

Worth Quoting

Heard at last month’s National Association of Evangelicals convention:

—A telegraphed message from President Eisenhower which congratulated NAE for “playing an important role in the life of the nation. Inspired by the precepts of the faith, you bring strength and direction by the daily work of many millions.”

—“Nine million card-carrying Communists are winning the world, while 600 million Christians are losing it.”—Billy Graham.

—“Theologians may well keep one eye on the stars while keeping another eye on the social challenges of immediate living. Heaven and hell do not only exist in outer space, they exist in the present state of human living.”—Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, pastor, Park Strec Church, Boston.

—“Revival is not schismatic. God offers a revival to the churches as they exist.”—J. Edwin Orr, evangelist.

—“All intervention by a secular state in the field of religious education is a two-fold travesty of justice. It is interference with legitimate private enterprise, and it is state intrusion in the field of religion.”—Dr. Mark Fakkema, educational director, National Association of Christian Schools.

Psychologists Meet

Nearly 100 psychologists gathered last month for the fifth annual convention of the Christian Association for Psychological Studies at Calvin Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

The group will meet next year at Pine Rest Christian Hospital, an institution for mental patients, also at Grand Rapids, according to Dr. Cornelius Jaarsma, executive secretary.

P. D. V.

Niebuhr Illness

Professor Reinhold Niebuhr was reported ill to the extent that he was forced to cancel engagements.

The report said Niebuhr’s illness was not grave, but that “he is under doctor’s orders to drop all activities for the time being.”

Renewed Effort

The Protestant Council of New York will sponsor a Madison Square Garden evangelistic rally May 15, first anniversary date of the start of Billy Graham’s New York campaign.

Graham will greet the rally by direct wire from San Francisco.

Methodist evangelist Joseph Blinco of England will deliver the main address.

Musical guests scheduled to appear include soloists Ethel Waters, Jerome Hines, Arthur Budney, John King, and Richard Parke. Jab Williams will lead a 2,000-voice choir.

L. N.

New Crime Record

Crime in the United States during 1957 was at an all-time high, according to J. Edgar Hoover, FBI director.

He announced that an estimated 2,796,400 crimes were known to police last year, an increase of 9.1 per cent over the previous record set the year before.

“This is an extremely high increase,” said Hoover, “and merits the careful attention of every individual interested in a better society.”

Last year, a record number of 2,068,677 arrests were made by police, with one out of eight involving juveniles 17 years of age or under. Nearly one-third of all arrests involved young people under 25.

Bold Approach

Considering current missionary shortages, communist gains, and population growth, Park Street Church finds little reason to be satisfied with its $250,000-a-year missionary program, largest of any single congregation in the nation.

To arouse Christians anew to missionary responsibilities, the historic church adjacent to the Boston Common sponsors an annual missionary conference.

The 19th such gathering, April 25 to May 4, featured 60 missions leaders from all over the world in public services, luncheons, forums, and prayer meetings.

Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, pastor, saw the opportunity to stress a threefold need. He said that the most urgent area was in the field of literature, with more printed material required to counteract deluges of communist propaganda. He said that the other big needs were more missionary personnel and access to presently unreachable areas such as lands behind the Iron and Bamboo curtains.

The Park Street Church now supports 121 missionaries. Ten more candidates were to be presented to the conference this year. The church first sent out missionaries in 1819.

Baruch On Law

Statesman Bernard Baruch was appearing as a witness before the Senate Finance Committee. He was asked to suggest what Congress could do to prevent periodic ups and downs in the nation’s economy.

Said Baruch:

“Yes, pass law changing human nature, and make it retroactive to the Garden of Eden.”

Air Time Appeal

National Association of Evangelicals’ Board of Administration carried the gospel broadcasters’ fight against discriminatory air time policies to the Federal Communications Commission.

NAE President Herbert S. Mekeel submitted board-adopted resolutions which call for reports to the FCC by broadcasting stations on time given or sold to religious program sponsors.

The resolutions ask the commission to examine the reports and consummate “appropriate action … embracing … notification to all stations that qualified religious broadcasters must have equal opportunity with all other Americans (as citizens) in purchasing time any hour of the day or night.”

The board charged that (1) certain stations refuse to offer preferred time for religious broadcasting, (2) these stations cover themselves by allocating a small amount of sustaining (free) time for religious broadcasting, and (3) certain stations are reducing their number of Sunday religious programs.

Evidence Of Wrath

An archaeological expedition uncovered evidence last month indicating the destruction of the ancient city of Dothan in the period described in Bible history as the time of an invasion by Assyrian armies.

The expedition headed by Wheaton College Professor Joseph P. Free found shattered house walls and broken pottery among other ruins.

Professor Free and his wife are among 11 Americans who have been digging at the Jordan site, 60 miles from Jerusalem.

A Visitor’S Report

“The congregational singing was the most phenomenal I have ever heard,” said Congressman Brooks Hays after a two-hour service in Moscow’s First Baptist Church.

Representative Hays said 1200 people jammed the pews for Sunday morning worship, another 800 stood and “other hundreds” were turned away.

The Arkansas Democrat flew to Moscow for a four-day stay with Dr. and Mrs. Clarence W. Cranford. Hays is president of the Southern Baptist Convention. Cranford is president of the American Baptist Convention and pastor of Washington’s Calvary Baptist Church, which is affiliated with both the ABC and the SBC.

All spoke to the congregation through an interpreter. Most of the worshippers were older women.

Hays told a Senate Commerce Committee hearing upon his return to Washington that the liquor problem “is so serious in Russia that Mr. Krushchev has taken notice of it himself.” The remark was included in testimony given to endorse a Senate bill which would ban liquor advertising in interstate commerce.

Hays said his trip was financed by the Foreign MisSions Board of the SBC.

First Auca Convert

The first Auca Indian convert, a girl named Dayuma who fled the fierce Ecuador tribe before its warriors killed five American missionaries two years ago, was baptized as a Christian in Wheaton, Illinois, last month.

The girl is a language informant to Rachel Saint, sister of Nate Saint, one of the slain missionaries. Miss Saint has been studying the Auca language with the Wycliffe Bible Translators. She and Dayuma are to return to Ecuador. Both were seen last June on the television program, “This Is Your Life.”

Dayuma was baptized by Dr. V. Raymond Edman, president of Wheaton College and one-time missionary to Ecuador.

Latin America

Tribe Responds

Preaching the Gospel to Paraguay’s Chulupie Indians is a task to test the perseverance of any missionary. It took more than a decade to produce a convert.

Is it worth the effort? The North American Mennonite Brethren Board of Foreign Missions surely thinks so, now that 21 Chulupie men have been baptized into Christian fellowship. More than 2,500 persons attended the baptismal ceremony.

The Mennonite work among the Chulupies was begun about 12 years ago. Not until about a year and a half ago were there definite responses.

There is only one North American missionary couple present, the Rev. and Mrs. J. H. Franz of Coaldale, Alberta. The rest of the missionary staff is made up of workers from churches in Paraguay. They are also ministering to the area’s Lengua Indians. All the workers are Mennonites.

India

Limits Of Witness

Government workers in India must not use their influence to proselytize, warns a decree from New Delhi.

Public employees are free to profess and practice any religion in their private lives, but they must avoid the connection of any such activities with their official positions, the pronouncement said. Disciplinary action was threatened in case of violations.

The decree added, “Cases of government servants taking part in such activities are not likely to occur frequently.” One observer said he was not sure whether this was a compliment or an indictment of Christian witness.

The announcement was not interpreted as necessarily anti-Christian, for it will apply also to Buddhism, which is now experiencing revival. The ruling may be felt most among Hindus, who have often been somewhat careless about intermingling official functions with religious rites.

Australasia

Mormon Temple

The South Pacific’s first Mormon temple was dedicated near Auckland, New Zealand, last month.

David O. McKay, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, presided over the dedication of the million-dollar temple and its adjoining college campus which was developed at a cost of six million dollars.

The Latest Method

The Anglican Board of Missions in Australia had to find six missionaries in a hurry or close its New Guinea jungle outposts.

Off went a telegram to every unmarried Anglican clergyman with not less than two or more than 10 years service. The complete text of the telegram: “Will you place your future in the hands of your diocese and bishop offering yourself for service in the Highlands of New Guinea?”

Nineteen clergymen replied. Five said simply, “Yes.”

NEWS

Christianity in the World Today

A crusade that may be destined to shape the pattern of American Protestantism in the latter half of the twentieth century opened in San Francisco’s Cow Palace on Sunday afternoon, April 27, before an overflow crowd of more than 18,000.

With nearly 300,000 advance reservations received a week before opening date, the Billy Graham team reported that statistically San Francisco was surpassing every other campaign, including New York. Participating churches, counsellors, buses … all are breaking records: only New Yorks total budget figure remains unchallenged.

It was not the size of opening throngs that marked off this Billy Graham crusade from previous campaigns, however. What makes San Francisco significant is the definite theological shifting and realignment that is taking place. Discussions in past weeks at student and faculty meetings in the numerous seminaries and Bible schools of the bay area, at pastoral conferences, at denominational and ecumenical gatherings and ministerial breakfasts, have moved inevitably toward the burning issue: Is the San Francisco Bay Cities Crusade authentic Christianity or is it not?

By opening day the opinion had crystallized and the lines were being drawn. The division was not the one so familiar to America of “liberal” and “evangelical.” The great central segment of Protestantism was committed to a mass evangelistic effort as never before. Twelve hundred churches had responded, 300 more than on opening day in New York, and a number of them showing a drive and zeal—not to say hospitality—that astonished the Graham team. Endorsements came in from councils of churches and denominational offices, though not from all. An attitude worthy of note was expressed by the Episcopal Diocese of California in a letter urging its clergy and churches to make their own decisions regarding crusade participation:

“We wish Dr. Graham well, feel a sincere friendship, have a sympathetic attitude toward his Gospel message, and pray God’s richest blessing upon his endeavor.… We urge the prayers of each member of our Communion for him and his forthcoming mission in San Francisco.”

The Presbytery of, San Francisco voted its official approval of the crusade. Many Methodist churches are working enthusiastically and some are conducting all-night prayer meetings with a zeal reminiscent of the days of Wesley. Lutherans also are in this crusade far more strongly than they were in New York City, according to crusade director Walter H. Smyth. American Baptists and Southern Baptists are participating almost to a man. Pentecostals, Mission Covenanters, Salvation Army and independents are working side by side. A surprise endorsement came from Oakland’s Lakeside Unity Temple. The numerous minority group churches—Negro, Spanish-speaking, Oriental, are in most cases entering vigorously into the campaign.

No official invitation from bay area inter-church bodies was ever received by Dr. Graham, but friendly resolutions have been forthcoming from the San Francisco, Oakland and other Councils of Churches. Evangelical associations have avoided the endorsement issue, but have provided much of the effective local leadership of the crusade. Thus the executive committee has brought together such men as the Rev. George Bostrom of San Francisco Mission Covenant and the Rev. Ernest Hastings of Oakland’s Melrose Baptist Church, to work with Dr. Carl Howie of San Francisco Calvary Presbyterian and Dr. Earle Smith of the Bay Cities Baptist Union, the latter two being the co-chairmen.

Concurrently there has been a process of polarization. Denominations and local churches which have been considered on the liberal side have moved even farther left in an effort to avoid contact with Billy Graham. Unitarians, Universalists, Congregationalists, Christians (Disciples) and Friends, with some notable exceptions, are staying away from the Cow Palace. Within the “old line” denominations there is some strong opposition as pastors decry the techniques of mass evangelism in Templetonian fashion.

Similarly those churches which have been considered on the far right have in some cases moved even farther right. Dr. G. Archer Weniger of Foothill Boulevard Baptist Church (Oakland) has provided vigorous leadership for the opposition among the Conservative Baptists. His charges against the crusade have been directed mainly at (1) “extravagance,” (2) “cooperation with modernists” and (3) so-called “referrals to Roman Catholic churches” (consistently denied at Graham headquarters). He has been joined by other fundamentalist groups across the country who have been increasingly disturbed by Dr. Graham’s policy of cooperative evangelism.

No statement has been issued from the Roman Catholic diocesan office, and it is presumed that the Roman church has chosen to ignore the crusade.

Will this be simply a jumbo-sized series of “church meetings?” With San Francisco reporting a Protestant population of only five per cent, this hardly seems likely. On the other hand, it is expected that large numbers of church folk will be experiencing renewal. Says committeeman Hastings, “If Billy Graham chooses to evangelize our church members, it may just prove that he is more perspicacious than we are.”

San Francisco’s gay front, as is well known, conceals a host of serious moral problems. Along Market Street as the crusade opened could be found wide diversity of recreation: the casual who looked upon it as a vast joke, the indifferent, the civic-minded who saw it as an “influence for good,” the fugitive from God who looked upon it as something to be avoided like his conscience, the curious and the spectacle-conscious, the alcoholic who paused between bars to express a wild hope, and the man whose lips were moving in prayer for Graham.

Will the crusade bring real revival? Hard-working pastors, cranking out handbills and arranging bus rides, gathered to pray at their weekly meetings and admitted that the divine fire had not yet fallen; something was missing. Mass evangelism is new to the bay area, and many pastors and people who are willing enough simply don’t know what to do, and are leaning heavily on the team. There are others, however, who are reporting conviction and tears at their cottage prayer meetings, and are calling for more prayer.

Perhaps a typical pastoral attitude was expressed by the Rev. Hugh David Burcham, of the First Presbyterian Church, Oakland: “I have been concerned with the staid aspect of my congregation. I hope this Crusade will bring a new warmth to my people. Even if we get no new additions—and I am confidently expecting that we will—it would be worth our participating if only some of our members can get recharged by the Spirit.”

Covering the crusade for CHRISTIANITY TODAY is Dr. Sherwood E. Wirt, Presbyterian minister and former newspaper correspondent. Dr. Wirt, editor of a book titled Spiritual Awakening, holds a Ph. D. from the University of Edinburgh.

Crusade Results

An estimated 18,000 persons crowded into San Francisco’s Cow Palace for the opening of the Billy Graham crusade, Sunday, April 27.

Another 5,000 persons were turned away at the doors. For these Graham delivered a special open-air message.

Traffic tieups were reported as far as six miles from the auditorium.

The following morning, the evangelist addressed a gathering of 700 bay area ministers.

By Tuesday night, the aggregate attendance figure pushed over the 50,000-mark.

More than a thousand decisions for Christ were counted in the first three days of the crusade.

Policy Shifts

Harvard University gave added recognition to non-Protestants in two distinct departures from tradition last month.

First, the Harvard Divinity School announced the establishment of a professorship in Roman Catholic studies. Subsequently, the university’s Memorial Church was opened for use by other than Christians.

Christopher Dawson, British Catholic historian and author, was named to be the first guest professor of Roman Catholic theological studies in the Divinity School’s 139-year history. The new chair was made possible through a gift from Chauncey Stillman, a 1929 graduate of Harvard. Its purpose is to attract to the school scholars and students who can contribute a wider understanding of the Roman Catholic church.

The university agreed to permit use of the church “on certain occasions” for private ceremonies by non-Christian clergy.

The decision ended a controversy which started when a graduate student charged that marriage of a Jewish couple in the edifice had been refused. At that time, a university spokesman said that the marriage had been performed in the church by a Protestant minister with a rabbi present.

The church was dedicated in 1932 as a memorial to Harvard’s World War I dead. Since then it was the policy to have a Protestant clergyman present for marriages or funerals of non-Christians in the church.

Following the student’s protest, The Harvard Crimson, undergraduate daily, fed the controversy with stories, editorials and letters dealing with the subject.

The student newspaper pointed out that the church was built with funds solicited from persons of all faiths and should be used also for services other than Christian.

The final step came when a group of Harvard faculty members entered the dispute with a petition to Dr. Nathan M. Pusey, Harvard president.

Although the text of the petition was never released, a spokesman for the group said it contained a request for a “tempered revision” of the standing tradition.

The resulting decision statement explained that in view of the “complex society of contemporary Harvard,” private services may be conducted in the edifice by an official of an individual’s own religion providing he is willing to do so notwithstanding the church’s essentially Christian character.

People: Words And Events

Deaths: Dr. J. Howard Williams, 63, president of Southwestern Baptist Seminary, in Fort Worth … Dr. John Taylor Tucker, 74, Protestant missionary leader, in Lisbon … Dr. Nyles Huffman, director of Air Mail from God Mission, in a Mexican plane crash … Dr. Peter MacFarlane, 73, rescue mission leader, in St. Paul.

Elections: As president of Religious Newswriters Association, Richard Wager, religion editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer; as vice presidents, Miami Herald’s Adon C. Taft, Chicago Tribune’s Richard Philbrick, Minneapolis Star’s Willmar L. Thorkelson; as secretary, Erik Modean of the National Lutheran Council; as treasurer, Dolores McCahill of the Chicago Sun-Times … The Rev. Morton W. Dorsey as president of the National Holiness Association.

Appointments: Lillian R. Block as managing editor of Religious News Service … Lorin Whitney as organist for the Billy Graham evangelistic team … Dr. J. Glenn Gould as professor of religion at Eastern Nazarene College.

Awards: To Roy B. Covington Jr., religion editor of the Charlotte, North Carolina, Observer, for “excellence in religious news reporting in the secular press,” the Religious Newswriters Association’s James O. Supple Memorial Award … To United Press, the Detroit Free Press, and the Medford, Oregon, Mail Tribune, the National Religious Publicity Council’s “Awards of Merits” for distinguished coverage of local, national and international religious activities.

Statistics: There are nearly 71,000,000 Lutherans in the world, representing 32 per cent of Protestantism, according to the Lutheran World Federation. Lutherans in Europe total 59,000,000; in the United States, 8,400,000.

Rally: To commemorate completion of 18 years of broadcasting, planned for Madison Square Garden June 7 by Jack Wyrtzen, director of “Word of Life.”

Congress: Planned for Madras, by Youth for Christ, Jan. 4–10, 1959.

Groundbreaking: For a $600,000 Presbyterian ecumenical training center at Stony Point, Long Island, held April 19.

Resignation: Dr. William McCarrell, after 45 years as pastor of the Cicero, Illinois, Bible Church.

Jubilee: Dr. Oswald J. Smith celebrates 50 years in the ministry May 18. He has been pastor of Toronto’s Peoples Church for 30 years.

Ecumenism: A Review

“Where have we come?”

The question was addressed to a panel of four ecumenical leaders at the tenth anniversary meeting of the United States Conference for the World Council of Churches.

A long way? Perhaps so, according to Methodist panelist Charles C. Parlin, lay member of the WCC’s Central Committee and chairman of public relations at the council’s 1954 world assembly.

The other members of the panel were Dr. Franklin Carl Fry, Dr. Henry Smith Leiper, and Mrs. Leslie E. Sivain.

“People no longer feel confined to their denomination,” said Parlin. “They have come to feel that through their denomination they are a part of the great ecumenical movement involving all the great Christian communities.”

On the other hand, the three-day meeting at Buck Hill Falls, Pennsylvania, later heard a plea for conversations on Christian unity “at the much advertised and much neglected level of the grass roots.”

The plea was made by Washington Episcopal Bishop Angus Dun, who was not on the earlier panel.

He suggested that laymen should share experiences of top ecclesiastical leaders in interdenominational understanding.

The bishop was chairman of the North American Conference on “The Nature of the Unity We Seek” last year.

As a preliminary step, he asked denominations to work together “to bring small laymen groups” into local conversation with other denominational groups.

Halt Obscenity!

The Military Chaplains Association asked for a halt to the sale of “morally offensive” literature at military bases.

In a resolution passed at the chaplains 33rd annual meeting in New York, they said such literature is “a serious menace to the minds and souls of our military personnel” and urged support of a joint program of armed force chiefs of chaplains to eliminate it.

The “military ministers” from all three major faiths heard addresses by Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, Republican Representative Walter H. Judd of Minnesota, atomic energy chief Admiral Lewis L. Strauss, and RCA chairman David Sarnoff. Dr. Edward L. R. Elson, minister of National Presbyterian Church and an Army reserve chaplain, also was on the speakers’ platform, along with Francis Cardinal Spellman, Catholic archbishop of New York.

(Colonel) Elson was re-elected president of the association. Chaplain (Lieutenant Colonel) William Golder was reelected executive secretary and treasurer.

Chain Of Prayer

Some 262 Disciples of Christ churches completed a chain of prayer which began on New Year’s Day.

Most of the congregations throughout the United States, Canada, and Hawaii held prayer services consecutively for 24 hours until Easter.

The final service was held in the chapel of the Disciples Missions Building in Indianapolis when prayers were offered for the activities and personnel of the denomination’s work around the world.

The first meeting had started. The entire bay area had become aware that the “pitiful minority” representing Protestant Christianity had joined hands in a united witness for Christ.

Church and city officials had brought words of welcome, and a magnificent choir of 1600 voices had stirred the audience as they sang, “How Great Thou Art,” and later, “The Lord’s Prayer.”

Through all this, a man in a grey flannel suit had watched from a box seat. He seemed only an incidental spectator. When the vast audience joined in hymns of the Church he did not sing.… But now the sermon—a message of man’s need and of God’s love—was over. There was a short invitation, telling of the vital importance of accepting the Christ of Calvary as Saviour and Lord.… First to walk purposefully forward were a husband and wife, the latter carrying a sleeping child. Then by the tens and even by the hundreds came men and women, boys and girls—people of every social strata and many national and racial backgrounds … a sailor holding his girl by the hand … on and on they came. There was little suggestion of outward emotion, only determination; and, on the faces of some, obvious joy and relief. Just as the more than four hundred were turning into the counselling room, the man in the grey flannel suit, accompanied by a distinguished elderly man, head high and purpose in his eyes, walked forward and took his place with the others.

I attended the early meetings of the Billy Graham San Francisco Bay Cities Crusade, not only because an area stirred for Christ is a spiritual stimulus, but also because this witness holds a significance which has no relation to the statistics, reports and news stories in the daily papers. The great significance of these meetings has nothing to do with crowds, with sponsorship, or with a personality. Nor does it center in this demonstration of true ecumenicity in which varying denominations have joined in a united witness for the Lord Jesus Christ, valuable as this experience is proving.

What then is the peculiar importance of what is taking place in San Francisco during these weeks? It is a matter of theological import, and centers in what is either uniting or dividing men straight across Christendom—the content of the message itself.

We live in a day when almost every doctrine of the Christian faith is called in question; in a time when many center their concern far more in ecclesiastical and organizational matters than in the Gospel. For that reason San Francisco is deeply significant because of the particular emphasis of the message. There men are being confronted with basic realities—sin, righteousness and judgment to come. Could anything be more needed in our day? Because this foundation has not been consistently laid in recent years, so many within the Church are floundering today, and the Church herself has lost some of the influence so sorely needed in this age of space and crisis.

The message being preached in San Francisco is nothing new. It has been historically believed and clearly affirmed in the articles of faith of most of the major denominations; it is the Gospel which is still relevant for the needs of the individual and for society as a whole.

By some it is said that this message lacks intellectual respectability and social content. But the Apostle Paul warned of preaching with enticing words of man’s wisdom, affirming that effective preaching must be in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit lest faith be placed in the wisdom of men rather than in the power of God. How can the claims of Christ be presented except before the backdrop of man’s sinfulness and the inevitability of God’s judgment? Only then can he appreciate the love and mercy of God in Christ and the righteousness of Christ imputed to those who believe.

In London a prominent churchman remarked that in his opinion God had raised up Billy Graham for the stressing of one doctrine above all others: the new birth and its inescapable place in the Gospel. In a measure this is true, for he preaches regeneration as one of God’s imperatives, not as an elective, as the gateway through which all must pass if they enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

No one realizes more than Billy Graham that effective evangelism is but the first step in leading men into the fullness of Christian experience. He is first to admit that mass evangelism is but one of many ways for winning men to Christ.

I studied the faces of those who walked forward to make a public decision for Christ in San Francisco. God alone knows what was in their hearts, but I am very sure that for many of this number it was the beginning of a new life with Christ as a vital reality. As the seed of the Gospel was sown some unquestionably fell on stony ground from where it was quickly removed by the emissaries of Satan. Others fell in callous hearts, and some where there is more preoccupation with time than with eternity. But some fell on fallow ground where, under the gentle nurture of the Holy Spirit, it will bring forth an abundant harvest.

When our Lord was on earth only a comparatively few accepted him. But those who did went on to win others.

It is not Billy Graham who is being tested in San Francisco. Nor is it a particular method of presenting Christ. At stake is the relevance of the Gospel to meet the needs of men and women who live on the edge of eternity. Nearly 1,200 churches in the bay area believe in both the power and relevance of the historic message of salvation and have joined in this effort. Many of these will reap rich rewards, for cold Christians are having the fires of their faith and love rekindled while thousands of others are meeting Christ for the first time.

This is a time when the Church should restudy her message. According to the world’s present physical and spiritual birth rate only one person in four will become a Christian. It does not solve the dilemma to preach universalism, or deny the eternal implications of sin, or to ignore the words of our Lord: “… no man cometh to the Father but my me.”

It is urgently important that we return to divinely revealed truth and preach it without apology, trusting in the power of the Holy Spirit to take that message and use it for the redemption of mankind. It is also vitally important that we who name the name of Christ shall so live that we shall honor his name.

If San Francisco should be used to lead to a new realization of the relevancy of the old Gospel, it will prove of inestimable value to the Church and to the world to which she ministers.

At the Cow Palace, and in homes across America as people view the telecasts, there will be many thousands who will respond. Should a new acceptance of the message eventuate in the churches of our land it will prove an epochal event.

L. NELSON BELL

THE SIN OF FLESH

No suburbanite could make the Manichean mistake. The American body is not evil! Indeed, there is only one sin of the flesh likely to arouse modern guilt feelings: the sin of the bulge. How the Psalmist could envy those whose eyes stood out with fatness is now hard to imagine. Ehud’s treatment of the king of Moab seems more understandable; what else can a fat man expect?

This widespread anxiety feels the pinch at this time of the year, for last summer’s wardrobe—in fact, any summer wardrobe—demands a more fashionable shape.

In the days when other fleshly sins were taken seriously, fasting and spiritual exercises were zealously practiced. Contemporary saints of physical culture urge similar drastic remedies. They rally the faithful with magazine homilies on eight-day diets. Photographs of their graceful deep-knee bends guide the struggles of those with less bounce and more ounces.

Such measures are for the stern. Others prefer the Ramadan plan: fast in the day and feast at night. But the ideal weightlifting scheme requires no exertion, permits gorging as usual, and gives astounding results in 10 days. It is, of course, a blend of chemistry and electronics. One smokes reducing cigarettes and eats reducing candy while relaxing the pounds away in a contour massage chair. To repeat the achievement, shut off the current and put on weight in the same chair!

With such electronic control of the flesh, guilt becomes nominal. Remaining tensions may be eased by a taste of religious TV, or dissipated on the new plug-in psychosomatic couch, where the soma is vibrated while the psyche is analyzed. Even the mortido drive is satisfied as one settles back in his own electric chair. The placidity of vibratory sedation is just this side of Nirvana.

EUTYCHUS

ADVENTISTS AND OTHERS

Harold Lindsell, in the March 31 issue (“What of Seventh-day Adventism?”), declared that I wrote Ellen G. White and Her Critics “to demonstrate the immaculate nature of Mrs. White’s teachings and life, defending her not only against all charges of plagiarism, lying, and breaking her word, but against doctrinal vagaries. I know of no SDA literature that hints that Mrs. White was ever wrong. This had led, and can only lead, to the notion that there is an intrinsic affinity between her writings and … the Bible.”

I am a bit startled to learn that this is what I set out “to demonstrate.” As my preface states, I set out to answer a specific list of charges against Mrs. White—charges which, if left unanswered would lead men to view her as either a psychopath or a crafty deceiver. I affirmed belief that she possessed the gift of the spirit of prophecy. But it never occurred to me to view her as “immaculate.” Indeed, to borrow Mr. Lindsell’s words, how could Adventists show any “affinity between her writings and those of the Bible” if we thus viewed her? I have never heard anyone claim that David, for example, was “immaculate” both in “teachings and life,” or that any prophet of the Bible ever expressed merely human thoughts. Elijah declared that he alone remained faithful, but his figures were 6,999 off.

However, in common with all loyal Christians, we like to focus on the inspired words and deeds of God’s prophets,—not on their finite limitations—and often with appropriate defense of these great men against skeptics, whose specialty is the finite side of the prophets. Adventists have ever believed that Mrs. White was a frail human being as well as one who received revelations from God. But we do not believe she was what her critics have charged. That is why I wrote my book.

Review and Herald

Washington, D. C.

• CHRISTIANITY TODAY has asked Dr. F. H. Yost, former professor of systematic theology at the Seventh-day Adventist Seminary, to reply in an early issue to published criticisms of that movement. In the meantime, representative excerpts chosen from a tidal wave of correspondence will be printed.—ED.

As for the writings of Mrs. White: Were you to read extensively in her works or only the volume Desire of Ages, you could not help but confess the writings of all other contemporary authors including your editors but chaff in comparison. Buena Park, Calif.

Harold Lindsell’s articles “What of Seventh-day Adventism?” are interesting and thought-provoking (CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Mar. 31 and Apr. 14, 1958). But his references to Christian Science are factually incorrect.

It would be entirely correct to say that Christian Science does not wholly agree with the evangelical concepts of traditional theology, but completely contrary to the facts to assert that Christian Science denies any of the basic tenets of Christianity as conceived by Christ Jesus and established by early Christians such as the Apostle Paul.…

Christian Science unequivocally accepts the divinity of the Christ, but it differentiates between Jesus as the son of man and Christ as the Son of God. It not only fully accepts Christ’s atoning work on Calvary, but teaches that cross-bearing today—the sacrificing of a false material sense of self, illustrated by Christ Jesus for all mankind throughout all times—is the only way to reach the understanding and demonstration of man’s spiritual selfhood in God’s perfect image and likeness.

Christian Science fully accepts the Virgin Birth as evidence of the spiritual conception of the child Jesus.

May I ask your further indulgence in order to correct a misconception of the teaching of Christian Science regarding “death” (Feb. 3, 1958, issue)? Contrary to the assertion in that issue, Christian Science does not deny the incident common to human experience termed “death.” We understand, however, that this experience does not terminate the individual life of man in God’s image, for we accept the Bible teaching of the immortality, eternality and indestructibility of God’s man. The words “died” and “death” appear in Christian Science periodicals where the context requires them, but the term “passed on” we consider to be more accurate.

Christian Science Com. on Publication

Washington, D. C.

• By the divinity and atonement of Christ, Christian Science means—as Mr. Douglass implies—something quite different from the doctrine that God has become uniquely incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth and that the Redeemer’s work on the Cross expiates sin and propitiates divine wrath. In Science and Health Mary Baker Eddy writes: “Final deliverance from error is not reached … by pinning one’s faith without works on another’s vicarious effort” (p. 22).… “The Christian … virtually unites with the Jew’s belief in one God, and recognizes that Jesus Christ is not God, as Jesus himself declared, but is the Son of God” Cp. 361).… “Evil has no reality. It is neither person, place, nor thing, but is simply a belief, an illusion of material sense” (p. 71).—ED.

Mr. Lindsell knows nothing about Christian Science.…

South Bend, Ind.

GOSPEL OF THE CATHEDRALS

I have just read … “Meditation” (Mar. 31 issue), a poem purporting to reflect what … Hough calls the godlessness of a cathedral. The sentiment expressed is not as lofty as “Murder in a Cathedral,” nor does the poem reflect the depth of feeling one would have on entering the Cathedral of the Holy Wisdom in Istanbul where Christians sang, “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace,” and then had their throats cut. Does Mr. Hough know that Coventry Cathedral is rising again and that he can kneel there to thank God that the Nazi airplanes did not have the last word? There is a fiery gospel written into the bulwark of cathedrals.

St. George’s Rectory

Central Falls, R. I.

God can get completely lost in the outward forms and creature comforts of a wealthy church; but such a tragedy is not found only in cathedrals, but also in evangelical temples (even in Madison Square Garden) where sinners also go and “nod to God,” shutting their ears to God’s Word.

Grace Episcopal Chapel

Wyandotte, Mich.

It is so typical of his keen wit.…

First Baptist Church

Salisbury, Mo.

INTERPRETATION DOUBTED

In … “Gone with the Resurrection” (Mar. 31 issue) are found the words, “Sorry, Father, that I was angry and impatient”.… They seem to make our Lord confess the sins of anger and impatience.…

Pomona, Calif.

The words … brought me up short with a shock like a cold bath.

Daytona Beach, Fla.

I would like to record my astonishment at what I consider a bizarre interpretation of our Lord’s weeping at the grave of Lazarus. Has Mr. Seerveld never experienced the tenderness of earthly associations and the sorrow that comes when they are broken? And to make the absurd statement that “tears are actually out of place” when a Christian dies, is sheer nonsense.

The First United Presbyterian Church

Columbus, Ohio

If it were necessary for Jesus to apologize to the Father on route to the grave of Lazarus one is prompted to ask, “Who did sin, this man or his parents.…?”

With respect to his rigid interpretation, how literal should we become when we say, “Let the dead bury the dead?”

We have rejoiced in the opportunity of presenting the claims of Christ at countless memorial or funeral services. In doing so we often reach an element of humanity which cannot be reached with the claims of Christ in any other way.

First Baptist Church

Oneonta, N. Y.

CHARITABLE CONSTRUCTION

The comments which you made at the close of your editorial on the Resurrection (Mar. 31 issue) … were very comforting and helpful.…

The first statement … by Dr. Ockenga [“Far from being an historical event two thousand years removed from us, … the Resurrection is a contemporaneous occurrence.…”] … troubled me very much.… The most charitable construction that can be put upon this thought is that it does not express exactly what Dr. Ockenga wanted to say. I find it very hard to believe that he would not hold that the Resurrection was an historical occurrence of 2000 years ago.

Westminster Theological Seminary

Philadelphia, Pa.

Your March 31st number … had very significant and helpful articles on the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Schenectady, N. Y.

DIGNITY OF MAN

May I tell you how pleased I was with the March 31st issue.… I thought … “The Problem of Prejudice” was one of the finest that I have read in a long time. It was as though he were skinning an onion as layer by layer he reached into the center of this problem of prejudice which, at bottom after all, is a failure to acknowledge and recognize the essential dignity of man that derives from his creation.

Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith

New York, N. Y.