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.

Leviticus

The Book of Leviticus is at once the most legalistic of Old Testament books and the book which most clearly presents the grace of God in providing for man’s redemption. Minute prescriptions are given for the correct observance of rites and ceremonies, fast days and feast days. The most intimate details of life are regulated. Yet the very system of sacrifices which looms so large in Leviticus was designed to provide an atonement for the sinner. The shedding of blood at the brazen altar spoke of a God who desired to bring his errant people back to fellowship with himself.

Authorship Of Leviticus

Leviticus, along with the other books of the Pentateuch, has been traditionally ascribed to Moses. It shared in the dismemberment of the Pentateuch as proposed by the school of Wellhausen. Legal and priestly portions were assigned to the priestly writer (P). Most of Leviticus fell under this classification.

Archaeological discoveries of the present century tend to discount the neat schemes of source analysis which were popular a generation or two ago. The thought that the Levitical institutions were a projection into antiquity of the practices of the second Temple (from 500 B.C. onward) cannot be seriously entertained today. Clay tablets dating back to the fourteenth century before Christ, discovered at Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) since 1929, contain references to cultic practices which, in some cases, provide an exact parallel to Leviticus. In alphabetic script dating from the time of Moses we read of the burnt offering, the whole burnt offering, the peace offering, and the trespass (or guilt) offering.

That sacrifices were offered before Moses codified Israel’s law is taught throughout the Book of Genesis. Abel, Noah, Abraham and the patriarchs of Israel all offered sacrifices on altars which they built wherever they might be sojourning. In a theophany, God said to Isaac, “Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws” (Gen. 26:5).

Significant changes took place in the sacrificial system as codified in the Mosaic law. In place of the head of the family or clan officiating at his own altar (cf. Job 1:5), the sons of Aaron were consecrated to the priesthood. A portable structure, the Tabernacle, became the place of divine manifestation in the midst of the camp of Israel. Sacrifices were to be offered on the brazen altar at the gate of the Tabernacle court.

Trained as the adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter, Moses was providentially prepared to become Israel’s lawgiver. Our increasing knowledge of the ancient Near East helps us to understand him in the important role he played as the mediator through whom God gave his law to Israel.

Coming Articles

Future studies for Bible Book of the Month are being prepared by outstanding evangelical scholars. In the Old Testament field Dr. R. Laird Harris of Covenant Theological Seminary will write on the Book of Numbers; Dr. Oswald T. Allis, on the Book of Deuteronomy; Dr. Charles F. Pfeiffer of Moody Bible Institute, on I Samuel; Dr. David A. Hubbard of Westmont College, on the Book of I Kings; Professor David Kerr of Gordon Divinity School, on the Book of Ezekiel; Dr. J. G. S. S. Thomson of Columbia Theological Seminary, on the Book of Hosea; Dr. Edward J. Young of Westminster Theological Seminary, on the Book of Amos; Dr. David A. Hubbard of Westmont College, Santa Barbara, California, on the Book of Joel.

In the New Testament field Professor John Murray of Westminster Theological Seminary will write on the Epistle to the Romans; Dr. Philip E. Hughes, Lecturer, Mortlake Parish Church, Church of England, on the Epistle to the Galatians; Dr. John H. Gerstner, of Pittsburgh-Xenia College, on the Epistle to the Ephesians; Dr. Merrill C. Tenney of Wheaton Gradudate School, on the Epistle to the Philippians; and Dr. F. F. Bruce of Sheffield University, England, on the Epistle to the Colossians.

The Purpose Of Leviticus

Leviticus is often thought of as a directory of worship for the Levitical priesthood. It is that, and much more. The instruction is addressed both to the priest and the layman. Although the priest is the one consecrated to approach God in prayer with a prescribed sacrifice, the demand of holiness and the opportunity for a life of fellowship with God know no limitations.

The law has sometimes been described as a hedge. It was designed to separate Israel from the surrounding nations. There were sins of Egypt and of Canaan which proved a source of temptation to Israel. God warned his people of the danger of yielding to these sins. Israel must “make a difference between the unclean and the clean.” Certain heathen practices were associated with diet. In Ugarit an individual would seek to gain favor with his god by slaying a kid in milk. The Mosaic law. legislated: “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk” (Exod. 23:19).

The law which separated Israel from the nations was also to serve as a testimony to them. Abraham’s call involved the promise of ultimate blessing to “all the families of the earth” (Gen. 12:3). Isaiah triumphantly cried, “… out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. And he shall judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples” (Isa. 2:3–4). Throughout the Old Testament period there were souls like Rahab and Ruth who found in the law of the God of Israel that revelation of truth which became the guide of their lives. A Jonah might have no compassion on the inhabitants of Nineveh, but he was subjected to the discipline of God.

Leviticus also served as a part of that law which was to serve as a “schoolmaster” or “custodian” “to bring us to Christ” (Gal. 3:24). The fact of sin as an offense to God stands out in bold relief. The necessity for atonement through a prescribed sacrifice is the burden of Leviticus 1–7 and 16. The Lord’s claims on the time of his people are marked out in chapters 23 to 25.

Leviticus And The New Testament

In his earthly ministry, Jesus always spoke with utmost respect concerning Old Testament law. He made it clear that he had not come to destroy, but rather to fulfill the law (cf. Matt. 5:17). Paul considered the law as preparatory to Christ. It brought “the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20). In this way human hearts were prepared to receive the divine Saviour.

The Epistle to the Hebrews declares the Mosaic institutions to be “the example and shadow of heavenly things” (8:5). They look forward to the ministry of Christ, for “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins” (10:4). The words of Jeremiah (31:31) are recalled, wherein the Lord promised to make a New Covenant in which the law would be written on the hearts of his people (Heb. 8:7–13). The first covenant, entered into by Israel with God at Mt. Sinai, was not “perfect” or there would have been no need for Jeremiah’s prophecy of a New Covenant. Israel broke the covenant—“they continued not in my covenant … saith the Lord” (8:9). God, however, mercifully promised a New Covenant, of which the Sinai covenant may be regarded as a type or shadow.

Parallels are drawn between Christ and Aaron. Both are appointed by and acceptable to God. Both offer sacrifices. Christ is not of the Aaronic order, however, but of the royal line going through David to Judah. How then can Christ serve as a priest? Prior to Levi (progenitor of the Levitical priesthood), Abraham had paid tithes to Melchizedek, the priest-king of Salem. Psalm 110 had mentioned one who would serve as a priest “after the order of Melchizedek.” The author of Hebrews uses these facts to demonstrate that Christ is a valid priest of a more ancient and high order than that of Aaron. In discussing the work of the priest, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews makes use of the Levitical institutions, but in discussing the person of Christ, “our great High Priest,” he refers to the superior priesthood of Melchizedek.

As soon as Gentiles began to enter the Church in significant numbers it became necessary for the Church to define its attitude toward the Mosaic law. This was done at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). Even before this, however, Peter received a revelation which heralded a new day for the Church. To overcome his reluctance to preach to the Gentile, Cornelius, Peter received a vision. A sheet containing all kinds of animals, reptiles, and birds was let down from heaven. Peter heard a voice saying, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” Peter’s reaction, as an orthodox Jew, was prompt: “No, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” The answer was to have far-reaching significance in the history of the Church: “What God has cleansed, you must not call common” (Acts 10:9–15). Although the purpose of this vision was to prepare Peter to preach the Gospel to an “unclean” Gentile, the form of the vision is significant in indicating that “unclean” foods might be considered “cleansed” after the purpose of the law had been accomplished.

Relevance Of Leviticus

If the Levitical regulations are not binding on the Church of Christ, why should we study Leviticus? If the New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is superior to and supplants the old covenant, in the blood of bulls and goats, can we not safely disregard the Mosaic covenant? Theologically the Church replies, “No!” Leviticus is in the Canon of Scripture and no serious effort has been made to remove it. Practically, however, it is often removed by the simple expediency of neglect.

Leviticus has important truth for every age. God is, in his essence, changeless. He revealed himself to Israel as a holy God. The character of God and the demands of holiness are taught in Leviticus with an emphasis which demands the attention of God’s people in every age. The God who warned Israel of the perils of disobedience is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Much of the theological vocabulary of the New Testament is understandable only by one who is well versed in the Old Testament sacrificial system. On the first page of the most popular New Testament book we read, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). The Israelite who heard these words of John the Baptist needed no commentary on them. He knew of the animals that were presented in the Temple to make atonement for individual or national sin. He knew that Jesus was being spoken of in the terms of sacrifice. The same may be said for the concepts of atonement and cleansing, so oft repeated in the New Testament. The blood of atonement and the laver of cleansing are concepts clearly taught in Leviticus.

Outline Of Leviticus

The Law of the Offerings (1:1–7:38). The section 1:1–6:7 gives the laws of the offerings. Supplementary instructions for the priests are given in 6:8 and 7:38. The five offerings are:

The burnt offering, existing in three grades, depending on the ability of the worshipper. In each case the offering was wholly consumed on the altar.

The meal offering, in three varieties. A handful was burned as a “memorial” (i.e. to bring the worshipper before God for mercy), and the remainder was eaten by the priests.

The peace offering served as a thank offering. Considerable latitude was allowed in the selection of a victim. The best part was burned as an offering to God, certain parts were assigned to the priests, and the remainder was returned to the worshipper.

The sin offering was provided for the atonement of sins committed “through ignorance” in contrast to those committed “with a high hand,” or in willful defiance of God. Four grades are prescribed, depending on the position of the offerer (high priest, whole nation, ruler, and private citizen). Blood is applied in the Tabernacle. The carcass is burned in a “clean place” outside the camp.

The trespass offering was provided for the individual who was unfaithful in meeting his obligations to God or man. A ram was prescribed. Part was burned and the remainder eaten by the priest. The offender was obligated to repay the amount due in offerings to God or obligation to man, with an additional fifth as a kind of fine which served to recompense the offended party for the loss of the use of his property.

2. The Consecration of Aaron and His Sons (8:1–10:20). After special offerings, Aaron and his sons were ceremonially cleansed, arrayed in priestly garments, and anointed for their work. A sacrificial meal was eaten at the door of the Tabernacle by the priests. The ceremony was repeated for seven days.

Following the week of consecration, the actual priestly work began. Sacrifices were offered for priests and people. Fire from heaven consumed the sacrifices. Nadab and Abihu, sons of Aaron took “strange fire” and offered incense. They died on the spot. God insists that offerings be made as he prescribes. The case of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1–11) is a parallel case in the early Church.

3. Laws of Purity (11:1–15:33). Prescriptions are given in the matters of food, childbirth, leprosy, and sexual life. The one ceremonially unclean may not take part in the life of the community.

4. The Day of Atonement (16:1–34). The most solemn day of the Israelite calendar. On this day the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies to make atonement for the sins of the people.

5. Holiness on the part of the People (17:1–20:27). Laws concerning food, marriage, and conduct are presented. The heinousness of the sins of religious prostitution (common in Canaanite religion) and infant sacrifice (practiced by Molech worshippers) calls forth specific condemnation and severe penalties for disobedience to the God of Israel. On the positive side, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (19:18).

6. Holiness on the part of Priests and Offerings (21:1–22:33). A special responsibility must be felt by those who handle “holy things.” Priests and offerings alike must be without visible blemish.

7. The Sanctification of Feasts (23:1–25:55). Basic to the Mosaic institutions was the concept of sacred seasons or “set feasts” when the great facts of Israel’s history were commemorated. These included the weekly Sabbath, a series of annual feasts and fasts, and special observances on the seventh and fiftieth years.

The Sabbath was designed to be a happy occasion when families gathered together in happy fellowship (23:3). It was called a “sabbath of solemn rest” and no work was to be performed on the seventh day.

The Passover (cf. Ex. 12) with the associated feast of unleavened bread formed an eight day annual feast. The presentation of a “sheaf of firstfruits” (23:10–11) marked the beginning of the barley harvest, and a recognition of the fact that the harvests revealed the mercy of the Lord.

Fifty days after the “sheaf of first-fruits,” the Feast of Weeks, or Pentecost was observed. This marked the end of the wheat harvest.

During the seventh month, the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Tabernacles were observed. Trumpets became known as the New Year’s Day. The Day of Atonement is described in Leviticus 16. Tabernacles was a joyous feast lasting eight days and commemorating the wilderness wandering of the Israelites (23:33–44). It served as a kind of “thanksgiving” and “harvest home” celebration, for it marked the end of the agricultural year.

The New Testament makes use of the language of the set feasts. Christ is termed “the firstfruits of them that are asleep” (1 Cor. 15:20, 23). James terms believers “a kind of firstfruits of his creatures” (Jas. 1:18). The author of Hebrews concludes, “there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (Heb. 4:9). It was on the Day of Pentecost that the Spirit came in power (Acts 2).

Every seventh year was observed as a “sabbath for the land,” which was permitted to lie fallow. After seven sabbaths of years, the fiftieth year was celebrated as a Jubilee. Slaves were set free. Family property which had been alienated was restored. It was a joyous occasion when Israel was commanded to “proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof” (25:10).

8. The Blessing of Obedience and the Evil of Disobedience (26:1–46). God’s covenant to bless and protect his people was a conditional one. He made it clear that disobedience and idolatry would bring severe judgment. Repentance, however, would result in restoration.

9. Laws Concerning Vows (27:1–34). In addition to meeting the demands of the law, such as tithes and firstfruits, a man might pledge his person or property to the Lord as a gift. Vows were voluntary, but when once made they were considered binding.

Tools For Study

For a brief but helpful discussion of Leviticus, the treatment of the book by Oswald T. Allis in his book God Spake by Moses and in The New Bible Commentary should be consulted. Charles R. Erdman’s exposition, The Book of Leviticus is nontechnical but helpful.

The exegete will wish to consult the treatment of Leviticus in the Keil and Delitzsch series and the work of Frederic Gardiner in the Lange Commentary. Kellogg on Leviticus in the Expositor’s Bible is a classic.

The concepts of sacrifice, priesthood, and offering are popularly treated in W. G. Moorehead, Studies in the Mosaic Institutions. More conservative in its treatment of types is the volume by Patrick Fairbairn, The Typology of Scripture. The pertinent sections in Oehler, Old Testament Theology and Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology are of help in relating Leviticus to the progress of revelation in Scripture.

An old but still helpful work on the subject of sacrifice is that by A. Stewart, The Mosaic Sacrifices. For a discussion of such concepts as redemption, the blood, and propitiation—basic to an understanding of the Israelite sacrificial system—the student should consult the recent (1955) work by Leon Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross. Here is an excellent discussion of the connection between blood and life and the problems raised in the exegesis of Leviticus 17:11. The writer’s The Book of Leviticus: A Study Manual provides an annotated outline of the book.

CHARLES F. PFEIFFER

Professor of Old Testament

Moody Bible Institute

Chicago, Ill.

The intermediate state is the state of the human soul between death and the resurrection. Scripture represents the intermediate state as provisional, constituting neither the ultimate bliss of the saved nor the ultimate doom of the lost. It forms, in effect, a transition between life within history and the ultimate life in eternity. But this basic fact is often ignored and the intermediate state of the Christian dead is spoken of in terms Scripture reserves for the life after resurrection.

State Of Quiet Consciousness

All theories of “soul sleep” are excluded by the plain teachings of Scripture. The term “sleep,” as a description of death, is used in the case of Christians only. It refers either to the rest of the body after death, or is used metaphorically of the soul to imply a state of peaceful rest. Scripture is clear that consciousness continues after death; “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” (2 Cor. 5:8). As we are conscious of the body’s presence in this life, we shall be conscious of the Lord’s presence in the intermediate state. That the intermediate state of the redeemed is a state of quiet rest is shown by Rev. 14:13 (“Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord … that they may rest from their labors.…”) The same context says of the wicked: “they have no rest day nor night …” (14:11).

It is only through the instrumentality of the body that man is in touch with the earthly environment—the realm of nature and the world of human society. In the abnormal state of not having a body, the connection cannot exist. Whatever of objective reality there may be in spiritism, it cannot involve a real communication between the dead and the living. If the debated case of Saul at Endor involved a real appearing of Samuel, this must be regarded as an exception brought about by the will of God, not by the action of the woman with a familiar spirit. Between death and the resurrection, the human soul is completely separated from the physical world and from human society in this world. After death man is no longer a citizen of history.

State Of Moral Perfection

Scripture speaks of “the spirits of just men made perfect” (Heb. 12:23) and of “holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14). In harmony with this, the Westminster Shorter Catechism affirms that “The souls of believers are at their death made perfect in holiness.…” This scriptural truth rules out both the notion of purgatory and that of a second or continued probation after death. The body is not the seat of sin; yet in the instant of separation between soul and body, the process of sanctification is miraculously completed. This should not be difficult to believe, for the scriptural idea of sanctification is that it is supernatural from its very beginning (the new birth). There is no reason why God should not bring a gradual supernatural process to a sudden completion by an instantaneous supernatural act.

State Of Metaphysical Incompleteness

All tendencies to regard the intermediate state as the ideal condition are unscriptural. It is represented in Scripture as more desirable than the condition of frustration and struggle which characterizes the present life, and yet much less desirable than the completed blessedness of the resurrection. It is a “being unclothed,” a being “found naked” (2 Cor. 5:3, 4). Paul hoped to avoid it, if possible, by living on earth until the Lord’s second coming, so that he would not be “unclothed” (i.e., a disembodied soul). Man is a composite being consisting of body and soul (or mind), and both are necessary to his normal existence. The lack of the body in the intermediate state renders man in that state deficient and abnormal. In the intermediate state, man lacks something which he must have to be truly normal and completely happy; hence Scripture represents the intermediate state as a state of waiting (Rev. 6:11; Heb. 11:39, 40). The complete metaphysical perfection of man comes only by the resurrection of the body and its union with the completely sanctified soul (Rom. 8:23–25; 1 Cor. 15:50–54).

Relation To Time And Eternity

Recent researches in the comparatively new science of parapsychology seem to indicate that the mind of man, unlike his body, is not always necessarily geared to the time-sequence which makes up history. “Precognition, often recorded as happening spontaneously over considerable gaps of time, is now demonstrable statistically for a matter of seconds” (L. W. Grensted, The Psychology of Religion, New York, 1952, p. 165). There seems to be an increasing body of credible, carefully tested evidence that the principles of time-sequence and causation, which are universally valid in the physical world, are not always valid for the functioning of the mind.

Our faith, of course, is based on Scripture, not on researches in parapsychology. It may be said, however, that Scripture nowhere teaches that the time-sequence which we call history applies to other spheres of existence than the physical universe. Rather, Scripture seems to imply the contrary. J. Stafford Wright has suggested that in the intermediate state, the human mind will be geared to a different kind of time-scale from that of the physical universe, though we cannot guess what it might be (Man in the Process of Time, Eerdmans, 1956, p. 179). Scripture indeed suggests this. The duration between their martyrdom and their resurrection is represented to the souls under the altar as “a little season” (Rev. 6:11), yet in terms of historic time it must be at least 19 centuries, possibly much more.

J. Stafford Wright further suggests that to some, at least, the resurrection may seem to come almost immediately after death, adding that this would give point to the expectation of the early Christians that the Lord’s second coming would take place soon (ibid.). While we cannot speak positively where Scripture is silent, it seems probable that time as we know it in the present life does not exist in the intermediate state. When the soul or mind is separated from the body, clocks and calendars cease to have any relevance to the person.

Intermediate State And Progress

Many theologians have assumed that the intermediate state is a state of progress, though as J. Stafford Wright properly points out, Scripture nowhere teaches that it is (op. cit., pp. 182–3). Progress in sanctification must be ruled out absolutely; it would involve a struggle against sin and temptation which would be incompatible with the peaceful rest of the intermediate state; this state of rest implies complete holiness.

But what about progress of other kinds? Does an infant that dies remain an infant through the intermediate state and rise as an infant at the resurrection? Scripture is silent, therefore we must be cautious. On the whole, however, the implications of Scripture seem to be against any kind of progress in the intermediate state; rather, it is represented as an interim static condition. The lack of a body would seem to imply this, in view of the fact that man’s normal constitution requires a body for the development of his personality. If this be correct, it may partly explain the fact that in Scripture all the emphasis is on the resurrection rather than the intermediate state as the object of Christian hope.

In this article we have been considering principally the intermediate state of the redeemed. But what about the lost? Scripture teaches the continued conscious existence of the wicked after death, and their suffering and woe during the intermediate state. Obviously this cannot be bodily suffering, being prior to the resurrection; therefore the plea of the rich man for water to cool his tongue (Luke 16:24) cannot be interpreted literally. It has been suggested that the wicked, being alienated from God and having no spiritual communion with him, will be tortured in the intermediate state by having desires but no body through which any of these desires could be satisfied, while the redeemed in the intermediate state will be “comforted” (Luke 16:25) by their consciousness of the presence of Christ and their spiritual communion with God. No matter how we interpret the scriptural statements about the condition of the wicked in the intermediate state, that condition must be terrible beyond our ability to imagine, and it will end only in a still more terrible doom at the resurrection.

Johannes G. Vos is Chairman of the Department of Biblical Literature, Religious Education and Philosophy in Geneva College, Pennsylvania. He holds the B.A. degree from Princeton University, Th.B. from Princeton Theological Seminary, Th.M. from Westminster Theological Seminary, and honorary D.D. from Geneva College. He is Editor of Blue Banner Faith and Life, Bible-study quarterly of the Reformed Presbyterians.

In its meeting last spring at Omaha, Nebraska, our General Assembly [Presbyterian Church, U. S. A.] completed and adopted a resolution upon which several years’ work had been done relative to understanding our public schools. The statement has created discussion and controversy, by no means limited to Presbyterians.

The Presbyterian General Assembly came out in strong support of our public schools. Of recent years there has been a considerable movement to revive parochial education, not only among Roman Catholics, but also among Protestants. The Lutherans, for instance, have a very extensive parochial school system, and there are even a few Presbyterian parochial schools. But, said the General Assembly, parochial schools are not the answer. The committee which drew up the statement declared, for example, “that the inclusion of an overt observance of religion does not necessarily provide any institution with a dynamic religious character.” The statement goes on to make this claim: “General superiority neither in academic achievement nor in ethical behavior has been demonstrated when elementary and secondary students of parochial schools are compared with students of the public schools. Further, it has not been demonstrated that attendance at the parochial primary and secondary school better equips persons to participate as Christians in the life of the total community. Nor is it at all certain that attendance at parochial schools prepares a person to participate more fully in the life of the religious community. The moral ills common to our society are found in student populations in both parochial and public schools.”

Now, if a religious emphasis is to be left out of public education, are we to conclude that our schools therefore are “godless,” as many people have accused? If we should not have church-related schools, and if public education is “godless,” then we are really in a jam! We become totally dependent upon one hour a week on Sunday morning for the religious training of our children, and this is scarcely enough for anyone. How did the General Assembly answer this dilemma?

It answered by saying that our public schools are not “godless.” It calls attention to the fact that many dedicated Christians are teachers—that in fact most teachers are Christian, and that their influence cannot help rubbing off on the children. On the other hand, if we set up a lot of parochial schools and leave the public schools to teachers who are not Christian, then our public education will lose a great deal of the godly character that it already has.

And yet, even besides the Christian character of many teachers, there are other essentially religious influences at work, even though they do not parade under the name of religion. Dr. Ganse Little, in presenting the statement about the public schools to the General Assembly, spoke of these influences as the “leaven” which is hidden in the “three measures of meal” and with which “the whole loaf is finally leavened.” The most important of these religious influences are those we have already mentioned, viz., the basic commitment of our schools to the inherent worth of the individual child, and an insistence upon unfettered and dedicated search for truth. There is a religious influence again in the development of attitudes which are involved in living, learning, and growing together. “In the public school,” says the report, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female, black nor white.” In other words, despite the integration problem in the South, the public school is the most democratic institution in the world. Or once again, by introducing boys and girls to literature, history, art, music, and science, the public school is giving them something that is part and parcel of Christian culture. And finally, says Dr. Little, “there are thousands upon thousands of hours devoted to skilled counseling and the supervision of extracurricular activities designed to effect the acceptance of one’s self and reconciliation with one’s brother whose only ultimate source is the commitment to a gospel of reconciliation.”

There is much more, but this is the gist of the Presbyterian General Assembly’s defense of public schools. That our schools are not perfect is freely admitted, and church people are urged to assume larger responsibility and feel deeper concern for the public school system, while at the same time keeping Church and State fully separated. It is a good statement and a heartening one. Generally, most of us can approve. Not all the criticisms that have arisen against it are fair; and yet, though to many circles there is a kind of heresy and blasphemy in criticizing education, I myself would like to raise some concerning the very points in which the Assembly’s statement makes its strongest defense.

Some Current Dangers

The values and virtues of education as cited by the Presbyterian statement may, indeed, exist (at least to a degree and theoretically). But there are two dangers against which our public schools, and we who support them, must be on guard more than I think we are. One is the indiscriminate throwing together of students in a common curriculum and system of instruction irrespective of individual ability and talent. The other is the presenting of a hodge-podge of facts and a variety of subjects without relating them to an over-all philosophy of life. What we have in consequence of these two tendencies is a standardizing and homogenizing of people into a collective mass who look for their guidance in thought and behavior to the whim of the moment and the pressures of propaganda or crowd. When that happens, we have neither the reverence for individual personality nor the earnest search for truth which the General Assembly points to as the ideal of education. When that happens, it makes little difference whether our children are brought up to believe that God really exists. And individuality that is submerged, and minds that are not disciplined to think or hold to a consistent set of values, are at the farthest extreme from anything we can call godly or Christian.

Emphasis On Conformity

I am not saying that all schools and all students belong in this disturbing picture of things, and I have only the highest regard for many teachers who are doing a valiant job within the framework of a difficult situation, and in spite of gross underpay. Yet, are these defects not true of too many of our schools in America? For example, in regard to the first of the two dangers mentioned above, it is not individual achievement that is stressed so much as it is adjustment to the group. If an individual is different or superior, much effort is made to bring him to heel so that he does not stand out from the group. Many a superior student has been made to feel ashamed of his intellectual ability lest he be called an “egghead,” a “bookworm,” or a “square.” He is taught, if not by his teachers, at least by his schoolmates, to conform, to be part of the crowd and thus reduce himself to the lowest common denominator. There is an overwhelming fear of being different or doing anything alone. Heaven only knows how many men and women of superior ability have been lost to the world of creative work because of the very emphasis which the Assembly itself calls Christian, that of “living, learning, and growing together!” Together! Everything together! No individuality, no independence, no standing on your own feet, no self-reliance, no resistance to the crowd, no encouragement to grow to one’s fullest personal capacity. Everything together. One glorious collective, mass man! Up to a point, of course, togetherness is desirable and necessary; but in the overwhelming emphasis given to it, conformity is becoming the great and growing disease of our day. Surveys recently made in our colleges and universities reveal a glaring and disturbing contentment with things as they are, a strong disposition to let the government take care of things, and almost a pathetic satisfaction with the standards of mediocrity as against the standards of excellence. And I see too little evidence that public education and the public itself are even aware of it, much less trying to fight it.

Lack Of Integration

The hodge-podge of subjects given to students without a central motive or an integrating core of conviction confronts us with the second danger. In Life magazine Charles Van Doren, who won fame on TV with his phenomenal memory for facts on a quiz program, presented a searching challenge. There were some who cheered his triumph by saying that at last America has an “egghead” for a hero, and some parents wrote to tell him that their children have acquired a new respect for learning. But Van Doren has concluded after careful thought about his experience that “in the long run the effect of quiz shows on education is rather bad than good.” His reason is that the so-called “knowledge” which quiz contestants exhibit is nothing but “junk”—and I am using his own word. “I can’t imagine a wise man being a bore,” he said. “Yet a contestant could answer every question ever asked on all quiz programs and still be a nincompoop. He could ‘know everything’ and still know nothing, because he knew none of the connections between the things that he knew.”

That is the chief goal of learning—to be able to tie things together into a meaningful whole that gives one a philosophy of life. Unless we can see life steadily and see it whole, we become the victims of every whim of doctrine and every puff of propaganda. What we are faced with in America is a tying of people together as a substitute for tying ideas together. How much, I wonder, are our schools really trying to engender a passion, not just for “getting by” on examinations, but for the thrill of learning? And how much of this contempt for learning is our own fault as adults for the example we are setting for the young? How guilty are we, I wonder, of being satisfied with the smattering of knowledge we picked up in high school or college? We are scarcely aware of how much there is yet to be known, and kid ourselves on how much we think we “know.”

I recognize that these criticisms are strong. But they are intended to call attention to failures at the very points on which the General Assembly has expressed its faith in public education, namely, the supposed emphasis upon the sacredness of the individual and the unrelenting search for truth.

Edward W. Greenfield has joined Spiritual Mobilization as research director in the sphere of the spiritual foundations of freedom. Until recently he was Minister of First Presbyterian Church of Princeton, Indiana. He holds the B.A. from Linfield College, B.D. from Colgate-Rochester Divinity School, M.A. from Columbia University. He will edit Faith and Freedom.

The present temper of American education is such that prominent Christian influences at work a generation ago in the establishment of the National Education Association are now all but forgotten. Buried in scattered historical collections, however, remain irrefutable evidences that American education was founded by men of Christian idealism and character. Their conception of “world citizenship” and of the “American way of life,” to use contemporary phrasing, involved no suppression or obscuring of great Christian beliefs. On the contrary, these founders shared a vital concern for spiritual and moral priorities as integral elements of adequate schoolroom instruction.

A Century Of Activity

In 1957, National Education Association celebrated the centennial of its founding. Nearly 20,000 teachers from 48 states and outlying territories met in Philadelphia to discuss principles and problems of education in the march of freedom.

If we search the records, we can discover from the founding educators the foundations of our American education. The year 1857 was a period of social, financial, and religious depression. Abolition and secession were fanning heated passions toward the inevitable crisis. But the Spirit of God too was moving toward revival, not only in preaching and prayer, but in the rebirth of simple people like Finney, Moody, Sankey, Fanny Crosby, and of leaders in Christian education. Horace Mann, “father of American education,” was educated in the Christian tradition of New England. William H. McGuffey’s Bible-centered Readers were going into extra editions. Charles W. Sanders’ Readers were popularizing new hymns of the Church. An obscure musician, Lowell Mason, discovered by Horace Mann, pioneered in music education. Christian educators from widely separated regions felt the need for a united stand and called for a convention in Philadelphia on August 26, 1857, to form a national teachers association.

It is significant that Daniel B. Hagar, president of the YMCA and a leading Episcopalian layman of Salem, Mass., and James Valentine, a Baptist teacher-preacher of New York, wrote that national invitation. Keynote speaker was William Russell, a seasoned scholar, educated in Glasgow, brought up in the “Auld Kirk.” His address called attention to “the recognition of teaching as a career, with aim, purpose and dedication of life and talent to the moral and intellectual proposition for useful, constructive, Christian citizenship.”

As the man qualified to establish a state normal school at Lexington, Mass., in 1839—first of its kind in America—Horace Mann selected the Rev. Cyrus Peirce, distinguished alumnus of Harvard, and later of its divinity school. His Christian character in the classroom and years of fruitful educational service won him the tribute of teachers and students alike as “spiritual guide and father.” Himself “dean of American educators,” Mann was key speaker at the second convention of the National Teachers Association in 1858. He initiated many modern methods of educational development, but gave the Bible first place among the many indispensable reference and guide books.

Zalmon Richards, first president of the National Teachers Association, was a native of Massachusetts, a graduate of Williams College and a student under Mark Hopkins. In college he led in Bible study and temperance activities, and became an active Baptist. With a strong Christian philosophy of education, he influenced schools and teacher training in both Massachusetts and New York. In 1849 he accepted a call to Columbia College in Washington, D. C., and in 1852 organized a city YMCA, and devoted time to the E Street Baptist Church, reform movements, and to saving the Union. His Christian impress remained in the formative years of the NEA from 1857 to 1899.

In William S. Bogart of Princeton, Principal of Chatham Academy at Savannah, Georgia, we find one who bore the torch of those Christian pioneers, Oglethorpe, Wesley, Whitefield, and Zinzendorf. From Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania came that great Presbyterian elder and Bible teacher, Henry Duval Gregory, who was to leave his impress on the life and Christian policies of the famous Girard College.

Outstanding and outspoken in their declarations of Christian policy in public education were men of Pennsylvania. Governor Pollock, in his inaugural address, declared the Bible to be “the Foundation of true knowledge … the Charter and Bulwark of civil and religious freedom.” James P. Wickersham, who founded the first state normal school at Millersville, and his colleague, Edward Brooks, who became Superintendent at Philadelphia, carried Christian thought into state and city schools. A glance at the School Controllers Report for 1834 reveals this significant comment: “It is to sound, practical CHRISTIAN education that we must look for improved morals, judicious industry and the maintenance of those principles upon which alone our free and happy institutions can be preserved from destruction.”

The Modern Drift

Today our city schools present a problem and a contrast far removed from the intent of the founding fathers. In Philadelphia, for example, startling changes are seen in the school population, in faculty lists, in alumni, and in general policies.… “Minority groups” without the Christian vision, have gained control, and the results are found in the daily headlines.

To such men as John Seely Hart, great prophet-educator and president of the Central High School, distinguished men in many walks of life today look back with grateful appreciation for Christ-centered education. Dr. Hart’s story might well have been written by Horatio Alger. A sickly boy, discovered by a lady Sunday School missionary, he became a first honor graduate of Princeton College and Seminary. His preaching, his Christian character and teaching, so impressed the Philadelphia School Board that they called him to their new “School of the Republic.” From 1842 to 1858 he molded in a city school a curriculum equal to most colleges of his day. He selected a faculty of scholarly Christian men. The courses he taught in person were Bible-centered, and to every boy during those years he presented a copy of Evidences of Christianity. But Dr. Hart saw changes coming. In 1858 he resigned from the school to assume editorship of American Sunday School Union publications. He founded the Sunday School Times, and from the editorial desk for many years he called on educators everywhere to “stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.”

Loss Of Soul

Undoubtedly we dwell in perilous times. We note with concern in Dr. Edgar Wesley’s History of the N.E.A. since 1857 what he calls the “Lost Causes” of temperance and Bible emphasis. And when we hear from the platform and on the air the pleas of leaders for a re-emphasis of the spiritual in education, it is time for Christians to assume their responsibility to God and country and our children. This country under God must have a new birth. We are commanded to witness and to teach. Let us swell the ranks of the teaching profession, of state and national organizations. And let us begin right in the home community of parents and schools, knowing that we are living in the “Last Days” and that we have our marching orders from the Divine Teacher himself—Christ our Lord.

Albert C. Norton holds the A.M. from the University of Pennsylvania and also from Harvard, and is an active life member of the National Education Association. He has made a lengthy study of the Christian foundations of public education from state and historical society records, and from the narratives of long-established local educational associations. A resident of Philadelphia, Dr. Norton has completed more than 1000 gospel song lyrics as one of his avocations.