The kingdom of God is near.

Give and double your impact.

Eutychus and His Kin: May 13, 1957

FELLOWSHIP QUILT

In the bedroom at the old-fashioned home of the retired Reverend Van Dyke is a fellowship quilt of curious design. There are wheels within squares and spokes from the wheels. Or perhaps they are sun-bursts in window panes that spread across the four-poster bed.

Radiating from each center are the embroidered names of the pastor’s flock. Here the ladies of the Dorcas circle are stitched in the rays of their square. Near the center are the names of the members of the senior choir in sectors of sopranos, altos, tenors and basses. In one corner is the male chorus. There are “memory” circles, and one center is labeled “Sunday School Class #7”; others bear the names of teachers.

A curious, but not a crazy quilt. I suppose it is a more constant comforter to the kindly Reverend than any electric blanket. The young Dr. Jones who succeeded him might not appreciate such a gift. It would hardly fit the contemporary decor of the new parsonage. Judging from the Doctor’s encounter with the Martha Circle, he might find the quilt had some hot patches!

The emeritus pastor, being advanced in years, is rather sentimental. In his afternoon nap he has used the quilt as a prayer reminder. Sometimes he worked his way across so many squares that he quite forgot to doze off.

I’m not sure that such a quilt should be made for every pastor—there might be too many stitches and perhaps too much chatter in the making. Yet it would be splendid for every Christian to own one, covered with the names of the saints. Tucked under it on a chilly spring night, one might get to thinking of the Lamb’s Book of Life and of the great fabric of the spiritual Temple in which we are wrought together, not as stitches, but as living stones, in the hands of the builder of his church.

EUTYCHUS

THE WORD OF GOD

Surely for the Christian theologian Holy Scripture should be as binding as the axioms of Euclid are to the mathematician.

GORDON HOLDCROFT

Victoria, B. C.

You speak of “… an authoritative canon of revealed truth.” What is this authoritative canon?… We note the flippant way the words, The Word of God.… are being used today …

EDWARD L. HUGHES

Trenton, Mich.

Dr. Mueller (CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Jan. 21) has argued vigorously and skillfully for the view that Luther essentially held to the view of the Scripture which later Lutheran and non-Lutheran theologians call “verbal” or “plenary” inspiration. My personal feeling is that just as Luther has managed to survive his Roman Catholic detractors he will probably survive his Missouri Lutheran defenders as well.

CHARLES E. CARLSTON

The Theological Seminary

University of Dubuque

Dubuque, Iowa

Shame on you for allowing such an error in your magazine as to give the wrong reference to the verse, “Holy men of God.…” in your article on “Luther’s Doctrine of Inspiration.” “2 Tim. 3:14” should read, of course, “2 Pet. 1:21,” as any Bible student can tell you.

JOHN R. SHEARS

Providence-Barrington Bible College

Providence, R. I.

It will be received warmly everywhere by all who love the unadulterated Word of God.… More power to your group in their high and holy endeavor.…

C. C. MORLAN

Arlington, Calif.

… A concentration of much of the best of conservative Christendom.… Reading CHRISTIANITY TODAY, I feel the glow of enthusiasm for the authority of the Scriptures.…

REINDEER VAN TIL

Highland, Ind.

While there is much which is very encouraging and helpful, there is one particularly distressing feature. This is the frequent use of the phrase “the Word of God” in contexts where it would appear to be intended as a substitute for the phrase “the Holy Scriptures.”

There are untold millions of us who, having received and receiving the inestimable blessing of God’s saving grace within the framework of his holy Church, have learned that when the Holy Scriptures speak of “the Word of God” they refer ultimately to no one and to nothing less than our Incarnate Lord, the second person of the most holy and glorious Trinity, The stature of your journal would be immeasurably increased in our eyes if you could assure us that it is not your policy (some contributors notwithstanding) to degrade the phrase “the Word of God” by unscriptural uses of it which make it refer to anyone or to anything less than him, by whose precious blood we are saved.

A. P. HORSFIELD

Vicar of Alberni

British Columbia

• Evangelical theology has always noted the various meanings of the term the Word of God and has distinguished the personal Logos and the spoken and written Word. But this distinction provides no basis for demeaning the authority of Scripture. Our Lord himself spoke of Scripture as God’s Word (Jn. 5:38 f.; cf. 10:35, 14:25). This regard for Scripture is preserved by the apostles, who identify what Scripture says as what God says (Rom. 1:2, Gal. 3:8, Rom. 9:17). The identification of Scripture as the Word of the speaking God is found also in Acts 4:24 f., 13:34 f. It is a New Testament presupposition that Scripture is the crystallized voice of God.—ED.

SCIENCE AND RESURRECTION

The lead article “Twentieth-Century Scientists and the Resurrection of Christ” is very startling and timely. However, I would like to have you mention that several hundred scientists, born-again, Bible believing and of course believers in his resurrection, are members of the American Scientific Affiliation of which H. Harold Hartzler, Ph.D., is President.… Many are listed in American Men of Science, etc.…

WILLIAM J. SCHEPP

The Schepp Labs.

East Paterson, N. J.

Mr. Smith’s article … states “The replies give no evidence that the scientists who deny the resurrection have carefully examined the New Testament historical records.…” Mr. Smith assumes, apparently, that scientists who accept the bodily resurrection have “carefully studied.” May it not be equally true that the scientists who accept … have not given careful study to the matter: perhaps they learned it as children in Sunday school and have given the matter no further thought. It would appear that those who reject the physical resurrection have given the matter more thought, on the whole, than those who accept it.…

… The question was concerning acceptance of the bodily resurrection, which, to me, appears to be a loaded question.… Had Mr. Smith stated his question more fairly probably many who reject a physical resurrection might have replied favorably to a spiritual resurrection.

EMERSON W. HARRIS

First Congregational Church

Detroit Lakes, Minn.

Mr. Smith seems to have been impelled to write this article by the false notion that Christianity, somehow, needs the endorsement of Who’s Who. This heretical idea is a popular one among today’s Christians. Indeed many Christians go so far as to confuse Who’s Who with the Lamb’s Book of Life … Extremely few names will be found in both these books … In fact it is everywhere apparent in the New Testament that the Holy Spirit carefully kept the Gospel from contamination of human wisdom, human accomplishment and human greatness.

As to the scientist segment of Who’s Who, these men are the Pharisees of our time … As to evangelizing them, should we not rather say of these twentieth century scientists: if they heard not of Jesus of Nazareth and the apostles, neither will they be converted though one rose from the dead.

BONNARD LEAVITT

Miami, Fla.

I cannot help but praise the Lord for the 60 non-believers in the resurrection he found through his survey of scientists. This praise is not predicated upon a lack of such belief on my part, for I am a minister in the U. S. Presbyterian Church and hold this belief without flinching. Rather I praise God that they are members of churches where I hope that they have held before them constantly the basic beliefs of Christianity.

ROBERT B. BRANNON JR.

First Presbyterian Church

Ennis, Tex.

A good service has been rendered to evangelical Christianity in the publication of the fact that only one out of five leading scientists today believe in a bodily resurrection of Christ. Such a fact both reveals our failure and defines our duty to send a communicating witness to men of science. What I like particularly about Dr. Smith’s report is that warm-hearted, kindly manner which displays itself in the judgmental parts of his article.

Might I suggest that a copy of the Easter issue be sent to the 521 scientists who were polled?… Why don’t you send them a record without comment of the pertinent New Testament passages which deal with our Lord’s resurrection? Better “evidence” one cannot find.… Our scientists need the powerful witness of the Word of God itself. Too much of modern apologetics is Wordless. Give men of science that first hand evidence with which they love to deal. Not a few would be very willing to examine such evidence.

EARL JABAY

Summer St. Christian Reformed Church,

Passaic, N. J.

The article … is excellent. I am sorry to find, though, that half of the Episcopalian scientists queried did not believe in the bodily resurrection. The church teaches and believes it as central to the Christian Faith—without the resurrection the story of our Lord becomes just that of a wandering teacher of ethics who is sort of a Hebrew version of Socrates.…

JAMES H. DAVIS

Ascension Episcopal Church

Hinton, W. Va.

Ideas

Future Of The American Worker

Christianity Today May 13, 1957

Future Of The American Worker

The investigation of racketeering and corruption in the labor movement raises several important questions of concern to the American worker. The immediate question is: In the event of guilt, what punishment of a union leader is proportionate to his crime? The broader question is: What legislation and enforcement are needed to prevent the repetition of such crime? The ultimate question is: Whither the labor movement?

Since no man is considered guilty in America until after trial, it is a bit premature to hang Dave Beck, even in effigy. The McClellan Committee, however, in its search for evidence of racketeering and corruption, has not lacked for serious charges, and its work is just begun. Already the Executive Council of the AFL-CIO has suspended Mr. Beck, its vice president (hence one of its most powerful officers) and president of its largest affiliate, the 1,400,000-member Brotherhood of Teamsters, an official who retreated to the Fifth Amendment with assembly-line monotony to avoid “self-incrimination” when his union deals came under scrutiny. Beck’s “million dollar public relations plan” to offset publicity of a possible $320,000 misappropriation of union funds has been blocked. On May 20 the Executive Council gives him a hearing—without benefit of Fifth Amendment, and without his being under oath—to determine if suspension should be turned into expulsion. In New York two former union officials, George Scalise and Sol Cilento, pleaded guilty to welfare racket charges in a $299,000 union fraud, and face maximum jail terms of three years.

The question of the relation between punishment and crime is an important one. In the event of misuse of union funds for personal gain, is mere dismissal from office a sufficient retribution? Is a stiff fine or a jail term proportionate punishment? Or ought union leadership to be required as well to make commensurate restitution for misappropriated assets?

If the labor movement itself does not “clean house” and insist upon punishment which fits the crime, the danger exists that reactionary legislation may hinder labor in its rightful pursuits, not simply with a view to reprisal but to discourage repetition of the offenses. Some labor leaders, on the other hand, tend to provoke such legislation when they seize the present period of union racket disclosures to propagandize against “right to work” laws, attacking them as a move to punish the unions. The fact is that the legitimacy of the closed shop has been long debated. A vote for right to work laws cannot be considered an effort to punish the unions, since its concern is to break the closed shop’s power of compulsion, which compromises the liberty of the individual worker.

The spotlight is now turned on the moral climate of the labor movement. Since neither the Senate Committee nor the AFL-CIO Executive Council has legal power to prosecute, the depth of dissatisfaction and ethical indignation in the ranks of the teamsters is being tested. It may be true that less than 5 per cent of labor union funds have been mishandled, but that is no slim bonanza. One misappropriated dollar would raise the ethical question.

Some locals have voted against contributions for Mr. Beck’s defense; others have requested his removal from office and the resignation of other leaders like Brewster and Hoffa as well. In one local, sentiment was said to run 50 to 1 against Beck. Since union members are often written off as interested only in higher wages and improved working conditions, and willing to tolerate corrupt bosses who take a generous slice of benefits if only the workers’ lot is bettered, these are hopeful signs.

But they must not be misread as an index to moral earnestness in the unions. Next to the church constituencies, the labor movement is the biggest movement in American life. Unless its moral concern is revived, the social outlook is dim. There are 1100 locals in the teamsters union alone, but only a pitiful minority show signs of moral revulsion. The vanished sense of righteous indignation on the part of the unionized American worker is, in fact, a bitter fact of our times. The union movement has not noticeably sharpened ethical sensitivities. Too many members respond to racketeering with a shrug and the reaction: “Look how well off we are!”

But there is another way of looking at this problem. The American workers have seldom aggressively participated in the union decision-making process. Except for meetings at which a strike was in prospect, or a raise in union dues, they have left the destiny of locals to their leaders. The present apathy reflects this characteristic temper of the worker.

For this indifference the union leadership is partly to blame. In the major labor conventions the leaders constitute an insuperable power bloc to which opposition has seemed futile. And in the locals many workers fear intimidation or reprisal if they challenge leaders from the floor.

But the churches too are culpable in some measure. It is true enough that many laborers avoid the Church. Some dismiss the churches as indifferent to the economic welfare of the workers, but more often they rationalize the discomfort that most unregenerate persons associate with the house of God. The fact remains, however, that the churches have too little attacked the problems of the laboring man. And where they have, labor leaders have tended to require endorsement of their own pronouncements and objectives as the evidence of economic earnestness.

The endorsement of the platform that labor has a right to organize is an example. Most denominational social action groups long ago approved “labor’s right to organize.” Yet the hesitancies of other church groups to lend ecclesiastical approval to this bare formula had some justification. There are some goals for which labor is illicitly organized; among them are the exploitation of the working man by a corrupt union boss and violence by the labor movement in its disagreements with management.

Nonetheless, if the churches include the largest grouping of American citizens, and the labor movement the next largest, there must be in many situations a generous overlapping of union member and worshipper. The lack of moral sensitivity and courage in the labor ranks indicates not only that the function of the labor movement has been conceived too narrowly in terms of higher wages, benefits, and standards, but that the churches themselves have not imparted to the worshipper as a worker the Christian view of the daily job as a divine calling. The labor unions are as much a part of the permanent structure of American society in the foreseeable future as any other grouping; it is high time that the local churches interpreted the meaning of work and the responsibilities of the economic sphere, to union and nonunion workers. For out of this conviction of ultimate spiritual responsibility can rise a new sense of moral integrity and earnestness in the workaday world.

It is easy, because of the secular current of our era, to underestimate the crucial importance of this spiritual-moral orientation of the economic life. Some observers will plead simply for a program of education emphasizing labor’s social responsibility; others will stress the necessity of additional legislation, or the enforcement of legislation already on the statute books; others will argue that the public and the worker will be best protected through a better implementation of democratic processes. There is something to be said for all these emphases, and a word of caution to be uttered in connection with them too. Important as they are, the real need today runs deeper.

The problem of the American worker today, like that of society in general, is the problem of false gods. The solution of his problem must therefore be a religious solution. He may blame the meaninglessness of work upon the monotony of the assembly lines, upon the disproportions of capitalism, or a hundred and one other things. Some of them, indeed may be contributory factors, but their rectification will not solve his problem. Deep down, the modern worker’s sense of estrangement in his job is due to his estrangement from God. He does not know the meaning of life, and hence he does not know the meaning of work.

In Great Britain, labor is more fully unionized than in the United States, yet corruption is quite foreign to labor. This should give pause to those who argue that racketeering is due to labor’s sheer bigness. What really accounts for the moral temper of the labor movement in Britain is its heritage from the days when labor unions were Christian in outlook. Britain still shares the lingering influence of the Methodist Revival on the trade union movement. A lapse in moral standards is always a reflection of spiritual defection, whereas the temperament of honesty which survives in society is to be explained by surviving spiritual supports.

Secularists may argue for the relativity of ethics, pointing out that the pattern of strict honesty and accounting pervades all aspects of British life. Those who invoke this line of argument aim to justify wrongs in the American unions as a sheer reflex of the relativity of business ethics generally. After all, they say, labor leaders are just doing what others are doing: politicians in their electoral campaign fund practices, business executives in their supplemental benefits. American corporation executives, they argue, often acquire marginal benefits, such as company airplanes and yachts; moreover, the highest paid labor executive gets $60,000 while management salaries go much higher. But labor leaders, at any rate, have condemned such benefits as immoral, whereas most management has not. A reliance on the relativistic ethics of our day will therefore hardly enhance the defenses of the labor movement. The retrogression in labor to self-justification of what it has condemned in management can only reflect on its moral earnestness.

There will be needed discussion in the days ahead over stricter enforcement of existing legislation, over the enactmnt of sterner laws, and over ways to insure the democratic process. Laws can and always will be broken in the absence of moral and spiritual integrity, but they provide at least an outward restraint and a rebuke to evil. Most crimes by which a labor leader is tempted to exploit his constituency are already prohibited by law, and the real problem is one of enforcement. But minimal codes of conduct within the unions need to be strengthened. The constitution of the Machinists union is worthy of emulation; it forbids loans of union funds to private individuals, and it requires certified public accountants to audit funds regularly, with a printed and publicly accessible statement showing each payment to every official by name, and approved by an audit committee of rotating membership from various locals. A full accounting of union welfare and pension funds and their use, with public disclosure of all transactions, will be widely demanded.

Alongside this emphasis on sterner legislation there is a growing insistence that the democratic process be strengthened within the unions. Already there is some clamor that boss control and union trusteeships be abolished; that free elections be guaranteed, with secret ballots to eliminate fear of loss of one’s job or other reprisal. In this “nod to democracy,” proper enough, three serious risks remain.

The first is the apathy of union members in regard to their union responsibilities. It is highly dubious that the labor movement can make good its claim to have involved more Americans in decision-making than any other social structure. The lack of participation reflected by society generally is compounded within the labor ranks, and this indifference allows labor leaders to take control. It was this situation in Britain, where an average of only 8 to 9 per cent of the members showed up at union elections, that provided Communists their opportunity, although small in number, to infiltrate strategic labor positions.

Another risk is that the elected union official tends to feel that the workers have given him a mandate to implement any policy that the labor leaders endorse. This pledges the conscience of workers in matters on which there has been no debate.

A third danger derives from the fact that an elected official is not necessarily the best qualified. Within the present structural setup, ostensibly democratic, the same leaders and officers are often elected and re-elected, and the rank and file seem incapable of effecting a change. There remains much to be said for appointed salaried leaders chosen on a competitive basis.

It is not democracy which guards the moral earnestness of the labor movement, but the Christian heritage which best guards the integrity of democracy and of all the social structures. Since the social problem is primarily a religious problem, it is the tragedy of our century that Christian influence upon the economic world has worn thin. In part, this deterioration came about through the liberal Protestant displacement of the gospel of personal regeneration by the social gospel; the task of the Church became that of organizing society, rather than of evangelizing it. But evangelical Protestantism was also at fault; in its concern for the purity of the gospel, it ironically gravitated toward social inactivism and neglected the exposition of Christian imperatives in labor and economics, and the state and culture.

The world of work today stands in need of Christian compass bearings. If these are concealed, the labor leader and the worker will not be challenged to grasp the significance of work as a divine vocation. And the labor movement itself will drift aimlessly, or run aground in the shallow waters of misguided ambitions. There are other ways than financial of exploiting labor. Leaders may also use it as a means of enhancing their public and political recognition through an ability to control votes. When mass movements are adrift, there is always the danger that leaders may use them simply as a political weapon, or carry them directly into politics. It is a time to cast anchor, and to be sure that the line reaches from the sphere of economic interests down to the changeless spiritual and moral world. A democracy that prizes a citizenry under God must learn to prize business and labor under God as well.

Neo-Universalism: A Threat To The Gospel

Within the Church today there is an ominous recrudescence of an old heresy, a line of reasoning that precludes eternal punishment and holds out assurance of the ultimate salvation of all mankind, regardless of whether Christ has been accepted or rejected.

Does the love of God preclude eternal punishment for the unrepentant sinner?

Are the holiness and justice of God incompatible with his love and mercy?

Shall we admit the scriptural reality of redemption from the guilt and penalty of sin and deny the scriptural reality of the dread alternative to faith in Christ?

Is the question of Job’s friend no longer relevant: “Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more purer than his maker?”

The many variants of Universalism are nothing new. Annihilationism, conditioned immortality, “second chance” and other theories have been held by individuals and groups down through the centuries.

The annihilationist believes that man is created immortal but loses immortality through sin and is therefore, by a positive act of God, deprived of immortality, his final state being devoid of consciousness and hence virtually devoid of actual existence.

A variation of this theory suggests that man has a conditioned immortality—the individual who accepts Christ gaining immortality, while the individual who rejects him ultimately ceases to exist.

In the nineteenth century a small group who advocated the theory of a second chance had a following. They believed that after death there is an intermediary state during which men may accept or reject Christ, the final state of man being determined at the judgment.

Universalism in America had its official beginning in Gloucester, Massachusetts, in 1779. Today the Universalist Church of America is comprised of about 400 congregations with a total membership of 75,000. That this group has grown so slowly reflects its lack of a vital Christian message. It seems certain that a similar blight will descend on wavering evangelical churches espousing doctrines inherent in Universalism.

It is one thing to magnify the love and mercy of God. It is an entirely different thing to do so to the exclusion of other attributes of God revealed in Scripture.

To affirm that “God is too loving and kind to damn anyone to eternal punishment” meets a responsive chord in the heart of each of us. But what it overlooks is the fact that man is already lost, that he is born in sin and that he continues to commit sin, and that the wages of sin is death. The love of God is evidenced in the sending of his Son into the world and confirmed by the sacrificial death on the Cross. The best known passage in all of the Scripture makes plain man’s lost condition and his sole basis for redemption. Even a cursory study of John 3:16 reveals these vital truths: God’s compelling love; the sending of his Son; the proffered gift of eternal life; and faith as a necessary factor.

Scripture depicts the ultimate state of the soul after death as fixed. In our Lord’s story of the rich fool, Abraham says to the one in torment: “… between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.” The final words of this dialogue as recorded by Luke are deeply significant: “… If they hear not Moses and the prophets neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Could this not be prophetic as well as declaratory?

A study of the Scriptures will also reveal that the final judgment determines the soul’s ultimate destination on the basis of that which is done in the flesh. It is never in any way made to depend on what has occurred in an intermediary state.

Why then this new (yet old) universalism? On what is it predicated? A number of factors can be mentioned, the order of their importance and their particular appeal varying with individuals.

Probably the idea of ultimate salvation for all, regardless of man’s response to Christ, most frequently stems from a misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the love of God. Regarding eternal punishment wrongly as contradictory of a loving heavenly Father, it argues that there can be no such end for an unrepentant sinner.

Another cause for this neo-universalism is man’s failure to understand the nature of sin itself. Sin is more than the commission of certain acts, and the failure to perform others. Sin is rebellion against God, an ingrained trait of character with which all men are born. Sin is infinitely deeper than maladjustment; it is broader than an unfortunate environment; it is not a matter of externalities but of the warp and woof of man’s heart and all that proceeds from it. Man is a sinner by nature and by practice and the fruits of the unregenerate life show themselves in the sins of the flesh and the sins of the spirit. Adultery and theft are sins; so are pride and jealousy. The awfulness of sin can be imagined only in the light of the price God paid to restore the sinner to fellowship with himself.

Undoubtedly one contributing cause to the increasingly popular belief in universal salvation is a false doctrine of the universal fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man. That all men are God’s children by creation is obvious. But that this relationship was broken by man’s sin is also clear from Scripture. According to our Lord’s own statement, in this state of estrangement from God man is of his father the Devil. He also affirms that unless we are born again we shall never see the Kingdom of Heaven. This works havoc with man’s pride but it offers the only adequate remedy.

Unquestionably sincere Christians are troubled about those millions who have died and are dying without ever having heard of Christ and his love. Why not leave them to a merciful Father? The Bible affirms man’s responsibility in relation to the light he has. The possibility of rational faith in God is open to men everywhere through the works of creation. In all of this there is cause for redoubled incentive for witness rather than for wishful speculation. To affirm the universal salvation of all mankind, regardless of what man may do with Christ, places one in direct opposition to the volume of biblical truth. To cast aside God’s revelation of man’s destiny in the age to come inevitably jeopardizes the revelation of his redemptive love. To presume either annihilation, a second chance or some hoped-for universal work of redemption beyond the grave disregards revealed truth and replaces it with a hypothesis which is unscriptural and desperately dangerous. A comparative study of the spread of evangelical Christianity and historic universalism will reveal an abysmal difference in the two. The former is dynamic, living and evangelistic, carrying the message of salvation to the ends of the earth. The latter is static, listless and bogged down in a false optimism on the one hand and a lack of a missionary urge on the other. To the evangelical, faith is a burning message of eternal import which must be told. To the universalist, faith is a religion of options, not of imperatives.

According to the Scripture man’s eternal destiny depends on the answer to this question: “What will ye do with the Christ?” Does man know a better way?

Prayer And The Spirit The Door To New York

The pagan city of Rome became an immediate objective for evangelization on the part of the early church. Its capture for Christianity was no doubt due in large part to the zeal, prayers, sacrifices and efforts of devoted servants of Christ. The difficulty and seeming impossibility of evangelizing pagan Rome did not deter nor discourage. Much of the progress of Christianity in middle centuries was due to the strategic capture of the center of the Roman Empire.

When the seige of Rome started by the forces of Christ, it mattered not to true believers whether Peter, Paul or Apollos led the attack as long as God gave the increase. True—some were anxious that one or the other of the leaders be given prominence and honor, but this spirit was rebuked by the apostle. The great desire of the leaders was for supporting prayer.

Important in situation as Rome but not as pagan, stands the city of New York. In the name of Christ a gideon band of evangelists strengthened with local pastors will set seige to this cosmopolitan commercial city. Modern means of communication and publicity will facilitate and provide aid in the proclamation of Gospel. But the preaching of the Gospel and the effusion of the Holy Spirit are the two main requirements to overcome the largest city in the world.

Forgetting the conquest of Rome—as the Israelites forgot the miracle of Egyptian deliverance—timid Christians cry that the giants of indifference, worldliness, and commercialism are too strong and mighty for conquest. Surely the blessing of the Lord upon the Billy Graham campaigns in London and Glasgow should provide encouraging examples of what God has done and is able and willing to perform. Faith in the power and love of God is essential to-victory.

Faith must be mingled with sincere and constant prayer. Believing and importunate prayer should constantly ascend to the throne of grace, especially for the outpouring of the Spirit of God. New York City can no more be regenerated and sanctified, without the work of the Holy Spirit, than it can be redeemed without the blood of the Son of God. The difference between a spurious revival and a genuine one is the Holy Spirit.

Man must be blotted out. Billy Graham goes forth not in his weaknesses, imperfections and mistakes but in the name of the Lord. He proclaims the Word not as an infallible prophet but as a preacher of the infallible Word. Pray that God may lead him to preach the good news of salvation. Pray that God may send the Spirit with regenerating power. Pray that God may turn New York City upside down. Pray without ceasing.

Virtues And Weaknesses Of The Fifth Amendment

The significance of the Fifth Amendment as an element in the American tradition of liberty must not be missed. The law against self-incrimination, that is that no person shall be compelled to witness against himself, has been one of the great principles of Anglo-American jurisprudence, reaching back to the Twelfth Century.

In a recent article on “The Fifth Amendment and Its Equivalent in the Halakhah” in Judaism (Winter, 1956), Norman Lamm points out that in the Hebrew laws supplementing Scripture, the disqualification of the confessant as a bona-fide witness is required and not a matter of the defendant’s personal privilege. This religious formulation overcomes the presumption of guilt which often attaches in our day to the invoking of a privilege. Whereas the Fifth Amendment took its rise out of a humanitarian reaction against the use of torture in legal trials and hence has in view primarily a negative protest against compulsion, Mr. Lamm notes that biblical connections of the idea that the accused is not to be judged by the testimony of his relatives, or of himself but by the testimony of other witnesses.

The sad fact remains, however, that in our day the Fifth Amendment has been so much invoked as a means of obstructing the due processes of law that the term “Fifth Amendment Communist” has passed into the vernacular of the times. Those who invoke the Fifth Amendment repeatedly in the face of Congressional investigations into political and economic corruption have come to be regarded, and in many cases not without good reason, as invoking a privilege in order to frustrate the cause of justice rather than to facilitate it.

There is one court of justice, however, in which the resort to the Fifth Amendment is useless. The conscience of man hails him constantly before the judgment throne of God. In that great and awful day, when all men shall stand in his presence, it will be futile to raise a point of personal privilege.

Pleading the Fifth Amendment to frustrate justice cannot avail the sinner before the judgment seat. His life, his deeds, his words are written for the Judge to behold. No legal technicality can prevent access to the book of life written by each individual.

Acquittal from the charge of guilt can only be brought about by an appeal to the perfect work and merit of one whose righteousness is imputed to all who believe. The point of personal privilege can only be raised by those who are in Christ Jesus. Not the Fifth Amendment but Jesus Christ forms the protection and accomplishes the acquittal of the sinner.

Theology

Life after Death (John 14:1–14)

Vernon S. Broyles, Jr.

A story—to be a good story—builds up to a climax and a conclusion. Every paragraph contributes—or fails to contribute—to the final unveiling. Furthermore, we almost instinctively insist that, ultimately, the good must win and the evil lose. Cynics call this unreal, but actually it is a sound insight into the human heart; for that is the way God made life really to be.

Life Moves To A Climax

Our lives are like a story. They move on out toward the end for which they were appointed from the foundation of the world. It is the unveiling of the glorious conclusion God has prepared for His children and for His world that gives God’s Word its power over the hearts of men. This conclusion for our lives is vividly pictured in these words: “But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him” (1 Cor. 2:9).

This conclusion, this glorious future, casts its light over our every thought and act in this earthly existence. As each paragraph in a story moves events onward, so in our lives every thought and every act we experience has meaning for, and makes contributions to, this conclusion. So, too, these acts and thoughts are judged at the end by the contribution they make or fail to make to the future God has prepared for his children. The sure instinct that the story of life must turn out well with the good winning and the evil losing is proved right in God’s conclusion.

An End Beyond The Grave

The end of the story of life revealed by God’s Word carries us beyond death. The life and the world to come constitute the conclusion of our story and bring us into the field of eschatology—the doctrine of the last things. Here there is mystery; here we are given so few details that our finite minds must indeed bow before the infinite mind and heart of God. We need to walk humbly and to acknowledge that there are many things we cannot understand in our lives on earth. It is only in heaven that we shall know as we are known. We walk literally by faith and not by sight—“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1).

But certain lines of the conclusion of our life story we can read, since God has revealed to us those things necessary to answer the questions we need to have answered. Let us fix our minds on certain revealed facts about life after death.

Death is not the end of being—either to saint or sinner. It cannot be, since morally, intellectually and spiritually, man’s incomplete development here demands a future for completion. In every culture and in every civilization since the dawn of history, man has felt there must be a continuation of life for the righting of earth’s wrongs. Egyptians called their caskets “chests of the living.” The German poet Goethe said that one of the weightiest arguments for the future life is that we cannot do without it.

The Teaching Of Christ

But it was to the heart of man, prepared by God’s Spirit, that God spoke his clear word in the life and death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In time of stress we are neither good at understanding argument nor balancing probabilities, but the simple, direct word of Christ lifts us up and assures our hearts: “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:2, 3).

The One Who Came Back

In Christ we find our proof that life continues after death, the kind of proof that convinces the heart and comforts the mind. Christian faith offers not a theory, not an illusion, but a fact of history as proof of its Gospel. Nothing could be clearer, simpler, more convincing, or more definite. A man once said to me it was hard to believe in life after death because no one has ever come back. Here is where Christianity meets the need of the human heart for assurance. God offers to you and to all men one who did come back from the grave.

Here is no debate but a demonstration. Let it be said again that Christianity rests its whole case not upon what will happen or what might happen, but upon what has happened on this hard-rock earth. We want eternal life for many reasons, and God’s resurrection of Jesus assures us of obtaining it. Paul knew this was the crux of the whole matter when he said: “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (1 Cor. 15:17–19).

Doom Of Evil Is Sure

In the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead we reach the climax of our life story, and one of the surest instincts of the human heart finds its proof—the good must win, the evil lose.

Jesus Christ, having died, came back leading death captive. Because he came back and lives, those who accept him will also live with him, and those who reject him also will live without him. His life and death, his teaching and example, the fact of his revelation of God, all these culminate in the one clear, simple, convincing and definite fact: he is risen.

Comfort In The Valley

This fact needs to have added to it our glad acceptance. And usually this glad acceptance comes most completely in the valley of sorrow. Christ came to glory through suffering and death. He is the way, and suffering is often in God’s providence the pathway to glory. Today God’s heaven is more real and more precious to those who see it from the valley of the shadow of death: “… if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together” (Rom. 8:17).

To those who in sorrow seek assurance of life beyond death—not proof, but assurance—look “… unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Heb. 12:2).

Read about, think about his resurrection and repeat over and over his promises of life in and through himself. You will find fears receding and confidence and assurance growing. Conviction will form as the dominant note of your soul.

Dividing Of The Ways

As you follow Christ and the writers of the New Testament, your heart finds certain answers to this question about life after death. What do we really know of it?

First, it is clear that there is in this life a dividing of the ways which lead after death to two separate destinations—heaven and hell, life with God and life without God. In him who is our assurance of life after death we have not only the glorious promise of heaven but also the dark picture of hell.

Nowhere is the contrast more direct than in the teaching of Jesus himself. Everyone, says Jesus, will have life after death, but some will go to heaven and some will go to hell.

Christ At The Crossroads

Second, God’s word makes it simple and clear that this dividing of the ways—one to heaven and one to hell—is at the point where Jesus Christ stands. Your life after death depends upon your personal decision here on earth concerning Jesus Christ—eternity depends on your choice or rejection of Jesus Christ as the son of God and as your Lord and Master. You cannot occupy Christ’s mansions in the father’s house without Christ. The only way you can go to the Christian’s heaven is by the Christian’s Christ. This sounds simple enough, but men and women everywhere take for granted that they will slip in somehow.

Christ has made this clear and convincing in the following passages:

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God (John 3:18).

And:

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him (John 3:36).

And finally:

Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven (Matt. 10:32, 33).

From this we see that the most awe-inspiring gift God gave to man was his power of choice, with all eternity dependent on whether he chooses or rejects God in Jesus Christ. You don’t earn heaven by your merit. Heaven is in no sense a reward for your good deeds. It is a reward only for your faith, your choice of God.

Continuity Of Identity

Third, we find the assurance that we shall live in the world to come as the same persons we are now. Identity shall be preserved and we shall know one another. Jesus Christ made it manifest that people would and did live after the experience of death. Death to him was not a major defeat but an experience whereby he could “deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. 2:15).

Jesus Christ never argued the future life. He spoke of it as an existence where people were dealt with on the basis of their experience here. On the Mount of Transfiguration he met and talked with Moses and Elijah. He told of Dives and Lazarus, conscious of one another after death, conscious of the gulf separating them, conscious of the reasons for the gulf. At the grave of Lazarus, brother of Mary and Martha, he turned to them and said with definite conviction: “I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?” (John 11:25, 26).

Again, he told the thief on the cross that he would be with him that day in Paradise. Thus God teaches us that death does not rob us of our individual identity, nor does it take from us our experience here, as His words tell us:

But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned (Matt. 12:36, 37).

And:

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad (2 Cor. 5:10).

All of this simply means that after death we are changed, but the change preserves our personal and social identity. We are still the possessors of our earthly experiences. All of them will be a part of us. The forgotten and the remembered will be there, the good and the bad. The environment will be the truth, the beauty, and its goodness of God, but we will be ourselves and will be with those we know. We shall be alive in a world with which we are familiar.

Of course, there are unanswered questions here. But we must not let the unanswered questions hide the fact that many questions are answered. Christ reveals clearly and definitely that we move through death into the life after death as persons and together. God’s word is filled with this assurance to hearts whose loved ones are gone:

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him (1 Thes. 4:13, 14).

This removes one of the darkest shadows from the soul of the believer. The supreme comfort to be derived from this assurance finds expression in the Latin words that the widow of Charles Kingsley put on the tombstone of her husband: ‘We loved—We love—We will love.”

The Nature Of Heaven

Fourth, we are given some indications of the nature of heaven—the kind of life prepared for us. Those who are the Lord’s will be there in person and will fellowship with others whom they have known in this life. We really know very little about the nature of the life to come. Our finite minds simply cannot comprehend its glory. Our descriptions are in pictures that only hint at the reality behind them. God will be all in all there; in Revelation 21:22, 23 we find the following passage: ‘And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.”

And in Revelation 21:4 is God’s pledge that all of life’s ills need be suffered no longer: “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.”

In reality, the heart of it all is in the words of Jesus, “I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” (John 14:3b).

In heaven we have a glorious world of boundless horizons. This is the glorious conclusion that satisfies every demand of the heart. Here is God’s proof that when death has done its worst, it has not begun to touch the real heart of life’s essential glory.

The dread of death can be combated and defeated only by placing against it the picture of God’s Heaven, which we enter only by death.

Dread Picture Of Hell

Fifth, in our search for the answers of eternal life, we cannot leave the divine revelation of life after death without noting its picture of hell.

In hell are, and will be, those who refused the Son of God. Hell is the final separation of a person from God. It carries to ultimate completion what was chosen in this life. For those who here reject God in Jesus Christ there shall be a total blackout of the presence of God—hell we call it—as explained in these verses:

Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 22:13).

Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power (2 Thes. 1:9).

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41).

Hell, too, is the final separation, not only from God but from the fellowship of the redeemed. Hell is the absolute loneliness of the loveless. Hell is to have no future toward which to look and only failure and regret and remorse in the backward look. It is to find no forgiveness, no affection. This and more is the fire of hell, never quenched.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and the bright light this fact throws on all our thoughts and actions, poses for you your gravest decision, offers you your greatest boom, and gains for you your greatest confidence.

A Story Of Two Endings

In the light of these facts you face the one determining decision of your life—for or against Christ. If Christ be raised, then what you do with him is the most important decision you face or can face. Heaven and hell wait on your answer; your place in eternity is determined by it.

In the light of these facts you have opened before you your greatest blessing. You have the opportunity by self-surrender to him to receive the power to make every event of your life serve you, even unto death. We need and must have power to take the fixed facts of life, among which death is central and to overcome them. We need the power to live through them with victory. This power Christ brings to you in his living reality. Experiencing the truth of the life after death, one can say with Rupert Brooks: “Secretly armed against all death’s endeavour; Safe though all safety’s lost; safe where men fall; And if these poor limbs die, safest of all.”

In the light of the resurrection of Christ we gain our greatest confidence in the guarantee of the truth and final victory of his way—the victory of love over hate, of forgiveness over revenge, of mercy over cruelty, of generosity over greed, of humility over pride.

This, then, is the end of the story. Each event of our lives, like the paragraphs of our story, has contributed to the final judgment in the world to come. We have made our choice—and the good will triumph and the evil lose.

This is the magnificent climax—the ending that gives all the parts of our lives meaning and value and direction toward eternal life—for which we thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Vernon S. Broyles Jr. is minister of North Avenue Presbyterian Church in Atlanta, Georgia. A native of Tennessee, he holds the A.B. degree from Davidson College, which conferred the D.D. in 1946. He also holds the B.D., Th.M. and Th.D. degrees from Union Theological Seminary in Virginia. From 1950 to 1954 he served as executive secretary of the Board of Church Extension for the Presbyterian Church U. S.

Cover Story

Christ and the Scriptures

John Murray

The term “Christianity” designates that stage in the unfolding of God’s redemptive purpose which began with the advent of the Son of God in the flesh.

We are prone, however, to overlook the fact that Christianity never existed apart from the inscripturated Word of God. When Christianity originated, this Word was embodied in the Old Testament.

Jesus And Scripture

For Jesus the Word of God was that which was written, and for him that which was written was infallible. It is not irrelevant to appeal in this connection to such well-known texts as: “The scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35) and “Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished” (Matt. 5:18). These texts expressly affirm the indestructible character of what was written.

Besides such express assertions indicating our Lord’s attitude to Scripture, copious additional evidence shows that for him Scripture merited and constrained absolute reliance. There is something desperate about the supposition that in reference to Scripture Jesus accommodated himself to current Jewish conviction. It is impossible to adjust the total attitude to Scripture reflected in the Gospel records to any such view of accommodation.

The Mouth Of God

During the temptation in the wilderness, our Lord was in deathly encounter with the archenemy. Satan’s assaults were aimed to defeat the very purpose for which the Son of God came into the world. Only the verity and finality of an infallible Word could have provided the wherewithal to resist temptations that themselves had been buttressed by Scripture misused. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). And when Jesus quotes two other words from the Old Testament the only possible interpretation is that he relied upon these words because he recognized that they proceeded out of the mouth of God. That is Jesus’ concept of what was written; that is the definition of Scripture which alone explains the confidence of Jesus’ appeal to it. Scripture is God-breathed.

No Retreat From Scripture

On another occasion Jesus appealed to what was written: “The Son of man goeth even as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed” (Matt. 26:24; cf.Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22). Jesus was face to face with the indescribable ordeal of agony that lay before him and with the tragedy of Judas’ betrayal. Our Lord could contemplate neither without agony of spirit. When he says, “The Son of man goeth,” he is thinking of the abyss of woe about which he was later to pray, “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me” (Matt. 26:39). And with respect to Judas it was the outcome of irreparable woe that engaged our Lord’s thought. These were circumstances that called for an immovable foundation on which to rest his feet. Can we escape the significance of the word, “as it is written”? If we have any sensitivity to the demands placed upon our Lord in this situation, we can tolerate only one thesis, that of what was written there was no gainsaying and from it there was no retreat. In what was written Jesus deciphered God’s determinate counsel and the certainty of its accomplishment. Nothing less than the intrinsic certitude of the written Word is engraven on this appeal to Scripture.

The Spoken Word Of Jesus

If we think of Christianity as the movement associated with the life and ministry of Jesus in the days of his flesh, centered, of course, in Jesus himself but exemplified in the company of disciples whom Jesus had chosen, we must recognize that it never existed apart from another infallible word. It is not in this instance the inscripturated word but the spoken word of the Word incarnate.

That Jesus was infallible in all that he spoke and taught is the indispensable premise of all Christian thought. To put it negatively, the supposition that he was fallible in any word he spoke is a suggestion from which the Christian must instantaneously recoil. Infallibility is the correlate of his being God with us. “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matt. 24:35).

If it be objected that Jesus was also human, and that fallibility inheres in the limitations which belong to human nature, then we have made the mistake of equating limitation with fallibility and partial knowledge with error. It is true that Jesus was also human, and that in respect of his human knowledge he was not omniscient any more than was his human nature infinite.

But in order to know truly and to speak truly it is not necessary to know everything. Our Lord was perfect in his human nature and he was therefore perfect in his human knowledge as in his human will, though infinite in neither. Besides, when Jesus said that his words would not pass away, he uttered these words in human nature and it would be impossible to regard the claims he made for himself and for his words as not applying to that human nature in which he manifested himself. When Jesus claimed to be “the truth,” it was of his divine-human self in the unity and integrity of his person that he spoke.

We have thus two respects in which infallible word determined, conditioned, and directed Christianity from its inception. Christianity never existed apart from these two norms and sources of infallible revelation. It is futile to maintain that Christianity can be abstracted from inspiration. For inspiration means simply God-breathed word. And if the testimony of Jesus is our norm, Old Testament Scripture “proceeds out of the mouth of God,” and his own words are as irrefragable as the Scripture itself.

It would be necessary to pursue this same line of evidence as it applies to Christianity after the ascension of our Lord. Suffice it to say that the promises of Jesus, particularly the promise of the Holy Spirit, and his appointment of the apostles as his authoritative witnesses are the guarantees that when Jesus ascended on high Christianity was not deprived of that authoritative and infallible word required by, and appropriate to, that stage in the unfolding of God’s redemptive purpose which was signalized by the session of Jesus at God’s right hand and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost—an infallible word embodied for the church in due time in the documents of the New Testament.

Inspiration As Verbal

It is a strange phenomenon, therefore, that the doctrine of the infallibility of Scripture should evoke so much opposition within evangelical Christianity. Such opposition fails to reckon with the facts of Jesus’ own witness as well as with the facts of the origin and the early history of Christianity. And it is likewise strange that the term “verbal inspiration” should evoke so much dissent, if not scorn. When we speak of the inspiration of Scripture, we refer to Scripture as written; otherwise we should not be speaking of Scripture. But there is no Scripture without words, and, if we are to speak of the inspiration of Scripture at all, we cannot dispense with the inspiration of words. B. B. Warfield has written: “The Church … has held from the beginning that the Bible is the Word of God in such a sense that its words, though written by men and bearing indelibly impressed upon them the marks of their human origin, were written, nevertheless, under such an influence of the Holy Ghost as to be also the words of God, the adequate expression of his mind and will. It has always recognized that this conception of co-authorship implies that the Spirit’s superintendence extends to the choice of the words by the human authors (verbal inspiration), and preserves its product from everything inconsistent with a divine authorship … (Revelation and Inspiration, New York, 1927, p. 173). Or if we are thinking of revelation in word—revelatory word—we cannot think of revelation nor of the inspiration that guarantees the veracity and supplies the content of that revelation apart from words. Furthermore, inspiration is organic and must never be conceived of apart from the redemption that is the central theme of the Bible. Inscripturation is the guarantee of the veracity, divinity, and authority of the redemptive revelation that the Scripture embodies. The guarantee of these qualities is verbal inspiration. And it is quite untenable to attempt to abstract what has been called “spiritual truth” from historical truth. Redemption is intrinsically historical, and the historical is, therefore, profoundly “spiritual.”

No word of our Lord offers more evidence of the esteem with which he regarded the Old Testament than that quoted above: “One jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished” (Matt. 5:18). It shows that he posited for the minutiae of the law an inspiration that guaranteed their divine character and veracity. We are not to suppose that Jesus is speaking of these details in themselves apart from the words and clauses and sentences in which they appear. He is not speaking of jot and tittle in abstraction for the simple reason that what represents a jot is no longer a jot if it exists in abstraction. Jesus is thinking of jot or tittle in construction and combination with relevant words, clauses, and sentences. In these relations they have the greatest significance, for to change one jot changes the meaning of the whole. And inspiration, of course, extends to the jots and tittles because it extends to the combinations of which they are integral elements. It is easy to see the force of what Jesus said. If there is inspiration at all, it must take care of the smallest details that are indispensable to the conveyance of the truth enunciated. Likewise, when we speak of verbal inspiration, we are not thinking of the words in abstraction and independence. Such words are not inspired because they do not exist in the Scripture. But words in relevant relationship must be inspired if that in which they have relevance is inspired. Inspiration must extend to the words if it extends to the truth which the words in construction and combination convey. It is impossible, therefore, to think of inspiration without verbal inspiration.

To predicate verbal inspiration and infallibility of the Scripture is the same as to speak of its inerrancy. Something cannot be infallible if it contains errors of judgment or representation. We see, therefore, that the concept implicit in our Lord’s use of Scripture and in his express estimate of it is that Scripture is the inerrant Word of God.

A native Scotsman, John Murray, M.A., Th.M., has been for some years Professor of Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. His published writings include works on such themes as redemption, Christian baptism, and divorce. His latest work, Aspects of Biblical Ethics, is soon to be published by Eerdmans. He is a contributor to the Westminster faculty symposium on The Infallible Word.

Cover Story

Let the Bible Speak for Itself

Robert A. Traina

One of the heartening signs in Christianity today is the resurgence of Bible study in many quarters. Of greatest significance, the Bible is increasingly coming to the fore in the training of Christian ministers and in the program of local churches.

Though thankful to God for this progress, we would be unrealistic not to recognize two outstanding shortcomings of Bible study today.

Failures In Bible Study

The first is that this renewed emphasis on Bible study is not as widespread as it needs to be if the Christian church is to be revitalized and equipped for its crucial mission to our needy world. Many preparing for Christian work are still not being trained for a Bible-oriented ministry. And the rate of “Bible literacy” among the laity is still relatively low.

A second shortcoming has to do with the fact that the way in which the Bible is studied has a great bearing on the value of such study. As a result, our lack of concern about study methods or our espousal of unsound methods may make some Bible study less beneficial than it should be or may even result in study that is more detrimental than uplifting.

Doctrine And Practice

One underlying cause of these shortcomings is of special significance to those who have a high regard for the Scriptures. It is the fact that we have often not put into actual practice the theory we profess to accept, that the Bible is the final authority for faith and conduct. We have not been sufficiently aware that it is possible to hold to a strict doctrine of Scriptural inspiration and authority and at the same time neglect to give the Bible the vital place in church and personal life that such a high view requires.

This discrepancy between doctrine and practice poses an especially subtle threat, because we often succumb to it with the best of intentions and without malice aforethought. This schism can often be traced to our acceptance of a creed or confession apart from an open-minded study of biblical evidence. The creed or confession then becomes our final authority, our doctrine of Scripture notwithstanding. As a result, the study of the Bible becomes dispensable, and it is therefore dispensed with, or if Bible study is attempted at all, it becomes an exercise in finding biblical support for a position already accepted. For instance, a minister once warned that he did not want anyone who came to his church to teach any doctrine that conflicted with his denomination’s position, even if it were found in the Bible. Not very many ministers, of course, are willing to make such a statement, but some may think the same though not choosing to express it in so many words. Again, in studying the Bible with a group, one often finds resistance to changing of convictions previously held. Even before the biblical evidence is examined, some will take the position that anything which deviates from their present beliefs cannot possibly be sound. Some fear that if they examine the Bible with an open mind, they may have to change their views. One student, for example, when queried as to why he did not do his assignments, admitted that he was afraid that he might find something in the Scriptures which contravened his doctrinal position. Then there are those who declare a certain theological point of view, but are unable to give the biblical data from which their point of view is derived. In fact, a leading official of a certain denomination, when questioned about the scriptural grounds for his group’s unique emphasis, freely admitted that he was not conversant with them. And yet in each of these cases, if the question had been asked whether the individual concerned accepted the Bible as the final authority for faith and practice, the answer would have been in the affirmative.

Return To Bible Study

What then should be done in order that we may realize in practice the commonly accepted view of biblical authority? Of first importance is a more general return to the study of the Scriptures themselves. And that study must be carried on with the proper attitude and purpose. For if the Bible is to be genuinely authoritative, it must be allowed to speak freely without the imposition of our prejudices upon it. Bible study needs to be approached with a sincere willingness to find the evidence, whatever it may be, and to come to whatever conclusions the evidence justifies, whether they accord with our confessions or not. Our first concern should be, “What is justified by the biblical evidence?” not, “How can I find support for my point of view?” With fearless and bold spirits we must venture forth in faith, like Abraham, not knowing beforehand the doctrinal land to which we are going.

The Inductive Spirit

This willingness to examine biblical evidence carefully and to make valid deductions from the data found, whatever these deductions may mean for changing our doctrines and lives, may be called the inductive spirit. Such a spirit is the very essence of sound Bible study.

It is not to be inferred, however, that perfect objectivity is a practical possibility. Gamaliel Bradford was right when he observed, “There are simply those who think they are impartial and those who know they are not.” But such a realistic acknowledgment should not deter us from making impartiality our goal. Indeed, it should be the prelude to a valiant effort to be as open-minded as, with God’s help, we can be. And though the practice of perfect induction is beyond our reach, our grasp for it should be marked by wholehearted devotion to the ideal of biblical authority.

Without such devotion to the Scriptures, one may easily abuse a concept of authority based on his own examination of biblical evidence. In fact, one reason for giving a focal place to confessions is to avoid the danger that an unbridled individualism may masquerade under the guise of induction. However, it should also be realized that a position based primarily on the fear of the abuse of another position is not on sure ground. For to negate points of view because they are susceptible of abuse would be to negate all truth, since no truth is beyond abuse. Furthermore, the determination of truth by ecclesiastical majority carries with it even more disastrous abuse. The Romanism against which Luther protested represented such abuse. Thus, in view of our limitations as men, we may find it wise to accept the Reformation principle that each individual is to study the Scriptures for himself and to draw the conclusions which he judges to be valid under the guidance of the Spirit.

To do so is not to deride the value of historic creeds. In fact, because they have gained such a widespread following and because they have survival value, they need to be considered an important part of the data for interpreting Scripture. But creeds must never be elevated to the place of final authority, lest they replace the Bible. Rather, they should be brought constantly under the judgment of the Scripture.

Sound Bible study, then, has as its point of departure and as its prevailing attitude the spirit of induction. But it must involve more, for spirits need embodiment and implementation. No matter how well-intentioned we may be, it is possible to negate in the area of techniques what we affirm in the area of principles. Thus, a methodology is needed to express the inductive spirit.

Marks Of A Sound Method

Such a methodology should involve, first, the working out of definite study procedures so that men from all walks of life may be enabled to examine biblical evidence for themselves and to draw sound conclusions. To accomplish this task we need to translate our topical approach to hermeneutics into a psychological approach, which relates the laws of explanation to the study experience of people of varying capacities.

In so doing we need to recognize the primacy of the firsthand study of biblical text. For the moment some other text is made primary, it tends to become authoritative. It does not follow that commentary helps should be shunned. They are valid in the study process, but only as they are secondary to the Bible itself.

Attention should also be given to enabling individuals to make sound applications of biblical truths to present-day life. The necessity for such training may be underscored by conducting an experiment with a Bible study group. All one needs to do is to have the group agree on the meaning of a scriptural statement, and then to let individual members suggest its relevance for life. In many cases applications will be offered that are not only contradictory but at times bizarre and even shocking.

We have outlined briefly a task which, in some ways, is ideal and beyond achievement: to develop with Christians in all walks of life an inductive spirit and a Bible study procedure in harmony with such a spirit. But much can be done, and even an approximating these goals will bring impressive compensations.

Anticipated Results

One result will be a movement toward a sounder theology because it will be more biblically based. For even if certain man-made confessions were infallible, the need still remains to interpret them. And it is often more difficult to make valid interpretations of abstract creeds than it is to understand correctly the concrete, historical revelation embodied in Scripture.

Another salutary effect of inductive Bible study will be a more vital Christian faith. We come into a closer relationship with the Spirit who underlies the record and who uses the record when we have firsthand experience with the record itself. For the words of our Lord are spirit and they are life. The Bible nourishes and revives the human spirit in a way that statements about the Bible can never do.

The result of an intense personal faith will be a witness given with assurance and with enthusiasm. One who has gone to the source itself testifies to what he has seen and heard, and his testimony will carry the authority and the contagion that cannot be generated by secondhand experience.

The ultimate outcome of the resurgence of genuine Bible study will be the greater realization of the oneness of the Church for which our Lord so fervently prayed. The true spirit of ecumenicity will be realized when we gather in one accord to find the biblical message and to experience biblical faith. In so doing we will come to understand the complex problems involved in interpreting and applying Scripture. And even though we may differ from our brothers in some of our conclusions, we will gain a sympathetic understanding of their views. But, more important, we will find a great body of fundamental biblical verities to which we can give common and wholehearted allegiance. When this happens, the world will believe that our Lord was sent by the Father, and that the Father has loved those who are in the world as he loved his own Son.

Robert A. Traina is Associate Professor of English Bible at The Biblical Seminary, New York City. He holds the B.A. degree from Seattle Pacific College and the S.T.B. and S.T.M. degrees from Biblical Seminary, where he has taught since 1945. He has published two works, Methodical Bible Study and Methodical Bible Teaching.

Cover Story

Evangelizing America’s Cities

Faris D. Whitesell

America has become an urban nation. This change, from rural to urban dominance, has proceeded with ever-quickening pace through the last century. In 1850, the population of the United States was only 15.3% urban; by 1920 the figure had jumped to 51.2%. In 1950 it was 64%, and today it is approximately 67%.

Virtually saturated cities are now bulging into their suburbs. For example, Chicago’s population in 81 suburbs increased 35% in five years following the 1950 census. The United States not only has five cities of over a million population, and 14 metropolitan areas of over a million each, but it contains 103 cities of between 100,000 and 1,000,000 inhabitants; 127 of between 50,000 and 100,000; 266 of between 25,000 and 50,000.

God’s Concern For Big Cities

If our nation is to be evangelized, we must reach these urban areas. We dare not neglect the metropolitan masses. In Jonah’s day Jehovah was concerned over Nineveh, “that great city wherein are more than six-score thousands [120,000] persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand and also much cattle” (Jonah 4:11). Jesus had compassion for Jerusalem: “And when he was come near, he beheld the city and wept over it” (Luke 19:41). The major item in Paul’s first-century evangelistic strategy was to evangelize the important city centers and to plant churches there before moving on.

Difficulties rise mountain-high in the path of an urban program of reaching the lost. The mobility of city dwellers makes them hard to find, hard to reach and hard to hold. People find it easy to isolate themselves and to dodge religious responsibility when they live in the city. The sense of loneliness, the constant tension and the discouraging frustration of city life cause many to plunge deeply into worldly amusements, drinking, gambling, immorality and even drug addiction. Thus, they easily become Gospel-hardened slaves of Satan.

Obstacles Require Multiple Effort

City life is so complex with its variety of racial groups and social strata that any single thrust is hardly enough. Moreover, our cities are beset with false cults and inadequate religions that oversow the field with tares to offset the evangelistic approach. Roman Catholicism is strong in our major cities. The 1956 official Catholic directory claims 1,899,357 Catholics for the Chicago area; 1,490,229 for Boston; 1,458,240 for New York: 1,325,740 for Philadelphia; 1,179,469 for Newark; 1,125,000 for Detroit, and 1,075,000 for Los Angeles.

While we cannot hope to win a large city 100% to Christ and evangelical allegiance, yet the writer believes that it is possible so to saturate a city with Christian witnesses and to make such a Gospel impact that every normal individual will be challenged and the city evangelized.

How can we do it? The writer does not suggest adding more agencies but rather revitalizing and empowering those we have. The breath of God in mighty revival across our land would do it! But while we pray, wait and work for that, we must do all we can to reach the city multitudes on their way to hell. Not more man-made machinery but more Holy Spirit power is the need.

For convenience, we can examine all existing evangelistic efforts in our cities under four headings.

The Local Church Thrust

Evangelism is the primary responsibility of every evangelical congregation. Every local church must work to carry out the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20). There were 273,508 Protestant churches in the United States in 1950, enough to evangelize each city quickly and thoroughly—if God’s people would launch out earnestly and sacrificially to do it.

Most local churches lack a view to aggressive evangelism. Each church should have an evangelistic committee of three, five, seven or nine burdened Christians who are not loaded with other duties. This committee should study the church’s past evangelistic record, what it is doing now, what its evangelistic responsibilities are and how other churches are doing the job. With this information, the committee can make intelligent and effective recommendations to the church and all its organizations for bigger and better evangelism.

Evangelistic Task Force

The evangelistic committee should see that the church has an efficient and growing prospect list; that Sunday services are geared to evangelism; that the Sunday School faces its evangelistic opportunities; that a permanent program of lay evangelistic calling is in operation and that the prayer power of the church supports its evangelistic program. This committee should retain every possible means of soul-winning—radio, clubs for boys and girls, the vacation Bible school and summer camping. Christian literature should be widely distributed. The use of church buses, deputation teams and outdoor meetings could be emphasized. Advertising, family worship programs and extension work in new housing areas, hospitals, jails and institutions are of vital importance. Occasional evangelistic campaigns in the home church produce inspirational results.

If every local church, depending on its size, would attempt to evangelize faithfully every person within a radius of one-fourth mile to one mile from its walls, the territory in every city would be covered.

The Denominational Thrust

The major Protestant denominations have a history, a size, a standing, an organization and an over-all bulk that cannot be discounted when it comes to evangelistic impact. By marshalling the strength of its member churches a denomination can accomplish evangelistic feats virtually impossible otherwise.

The major Baptist groups of the United States are planning a joint evangelistic effort to begin in 1959 and to run for five years, the climax to be reached in 1964 with the 150th anniversary of organized Baptist life in this country. If these Baptist groups could actually get together for such an effort, backing it with all-out praying, preaching, personal witnessing, advertising and organizing, we might see the United States swing into the Baptist column numerically. And what Baptists could do, any other major denomination might do.

The larger denominations have departments of city church work which do significant work wrestling with city church problems, particularly that of city evangelism. Denominations are able to foster new churches in our mushrooming suburban areas better than any other agency, but they should be doing more.

Neglected Downtown Churches

Upon denominations largely rests the problem of aiding and encouraging struggling inner city churches saddled with huge buildings and declining memberships. Often these old inner city churches are in the midst of more people and greater needs than ever before, and without their evangelistic ministry paganism closes in on a big mass of people.

Many of the social service ministries with indirect evangelistic influence must look to the denominations for support. Among these are settlement houses, work among foreign groups, student projects, and chaplaincies in public institutions.

Roman Catholics specialize in hospitals in our cities. We need more hospitals under the sponsorship of evangelical denominations. Southern Baptists have done a good work through hospitals in the larger southern cities. But we know of only one local church (First Baptist in Evansville, Illinois) able to own and operate its own hospital. Christian hospitals condition their patients for the evangelistic approach.

Denominational radio and television programs are able to reach many city dwellers with the Gospel. An independent Gospel broadcaster needs a long time to buildup the respectful and responsive listening audience that a denomination has to start with. Lutherans, Southern Baptists, Free Methodists, Mennonites and a few others are doing a good job in the broadcasting field.

When we remember that about 90% of Protestant church members in America belong to just eight or ten leading denominations, we can understand what evangelistic impact these denominations might have, both on urban and rural areas, if they all threw their whole weight into evangelism and missions.

The Interdenominational Thrust

When denominations keep on an evangelical and evangelistic footing, they can make a tremendous impact by cooperative effort. The National Council of Churches of Christ in America is the cooperative agency of about 30 Protestant denominations. While its theology may not be as biblical and evangelical as we wish, yet we must recognize that it does have a department of evangelism which prints literature, maintains radio and TV programs and supports certain types of mass evangelism. Affiliated with the National Council are local councils of churches in practically every American city. It is encouraging to note that these local councils or federations have been backing the Billy Graham campaigns.

If evangelicals, without compromise of theology or conscience, could make their weight felt and voices heard for evangelism in local church councils, a great deal more might be done toward evangelizing our cities. Often the National Council affiliate is the only organized interdenominational channel through which we may evangelize.

The National Association of Evangelicals is another interdenominational organization, conservative in theology and evangelistic in spirit. Among the smaller Protestant communions it has done and is doing a fine work for evangelism, missions and other interdenominational projects.

In addition, the American Bible Society is an interdenominational organization deserving the support of all evangelicals. It accomplishes the basic evangelistic task of putting the printed Word of God into the hands of the people. During 1955 it distributed 14,918,343 volumes of the Scriptures in the United States and abroad. Since its founding in 1816, it has made available nearly one-half billion copies of the Scriptures. Many city people do not possess a Bible. A good evangelistic activity would be to put a Bible or New Testament into the hands of every person who would promise to read it.

Evangelicals might well give thought to the Young Men’s Christian Association. This interdenominational organization was originally evangelical and evangelistic. Its facilities in most cities may still be used by evangelistic organizations and some of its staff members are evangelical Christians. If we could somehow reclaim and redeem every local “Y” for Christ and evangelism, we would do much to reach the boys and men of our cities.

The Independent Thrust

We include in this category all organizations, groups and individuals operating without specific denominational backing but supported by Christians from many denominations. Our century has produced a multitude of independents in the field of city evangelism. If older denominations had remained true to the Bible and to their original doctrines, perhaps most of the independents never would have arisen. But they are here and are doing a big work.

The Bible institute movement belongs to the last 75 years. Every major city in the United States has one or more Bible institutes, and nearly all of them are independent. The total weight of these schools is on the side of grass roots evangelism in the streets, hospitals, jails, factories, missions and churches of our American cities. Every student is trained to be a personal evangelist and a supporter of every sound evangelistic cause. Where American Christianity would be today without the influence of the Bible institutes, it is hard to say.

The rescue mission movement seeks to reach the inhabitants of skid row. Every city has one or more rescue missions to reach these socially disinherited people. Chicago alone has some 25 rescue missions. All could use more financial support, and if to the staff of each mission could be added a Christian doctor, a Christian psychiatrist and a Christian social worker, its power to reach and hold more men and women would be evident.

The Gideons, a traveling men’s organization, seek to put the Bible into the hotels, motels, hospitals and schools. These Christian men are nearly all personal soul-winners. They have done a splendid work.

The Christian Business Men’s Committee International has its group of organized laymen in every citv of any significant size in our land, with many branches abroad. The big burden of CBMCI is to win fellow business men for Christ. This they do through breakfasts, dinners, evangelistic meetings, service men’s centers, distribution of tracts and Gospels and personal evangelism.

Youth for Christ has enjoyed the blessing of God in its evangelistic emphasis. Some of our leading evangelists got their start in Youth for Christ, and thousands of young people have not only been saved through this organization but have dedicated their lives to full-time Christian service. The Hi-C clubs affiliated with Youth for Christ have some 2,000 Bible study clubs in high schools across the country, reaching about 25% of our high schools. Hi-C alone reports some 23,000 high school youth won for Christ last year.

Press And Radio Media

The independent tract publishers such as American Tract Society, the Good News Publishing Company and Moody Press are doing a needed operation in furnishing and distributing evangelistic tracts.

Independent gospel broadcasters, such as Charles E. Fuller, have large listening audiences, and many are turned to Christ both in the cities and country areas. No better means of reaching a total city population has ever been found than broadcasting. Chicago will certainly be under heavier judgment than ancient Chorazin and Bethsaida (Matt. 11:21) if it rejects the Son of God, after having Moody Institute’s WMBI broadcasting the Gospel to it every day for over 25 years.

The Child Evangelism Fellowship seeks to win the children not otherwise being reached for Christ. Christian women open their own homes and invite in the neighboring children to sing choruses, learn Scripture passages and hear simple gospel messages. This organization has world-wide scope.

Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship endeavors to reach the students on college campuses for Bible study, Christian fellowship and evangelistic projects.

Future Prospect For Evangelism

What more can we say? Time and space prohibit a discussion of the many additional aids to evangelism today—the independent evangelists, evangelistic bands, personal workers groups, Christian publishers, radio stations, churches, tabernacles, gospel halls and Salvation Army citadels, all trying to win the lost in our cities to Christ.

How can we do the job better? More spiritual power is the big need! Let all in these four classifications repent of liberalism, unbelief, worldliness and materialism, wherever these exist, whether in the local church, denominational, interdenominational or independent groups. Let denominational bigotry, rivalry and pride be put away; let group and individual jealousy, bitterness, narrowness and carnality be renounced.

Let us all love God with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves; let us pray more, give more, witness more, love one another more, help one another more and join our hands and hearts in evangelizing our cities while we may.

Faris D. Whitesell has served on the faculty of Northern Baptist Theological Seminary for more than 30 years, from 1925–44 as Professor of Evangelism and since 1944 as Professor of Practical Theology and Homiletics. He holds the A.B. degree from William Jewell College, M.A. from Loyola University and Th.M. and Th.D. from Northern. He is author of a number of books in the sphere of practical theology.

Cover Story

This Can Happen in New York

George Burnham

If you care enough to pray, a number of incredible things will happen during Billy Graham’s New York Crusade, beginning May 15.

Here are a number of predictions, based on taking God at his word and what he has done in the past—not with an idea of trying to go before him:

1. Billy Graham will tell more people about Jesus Christ during the next six weeks than he has during all of his phenomenal ministry, with the exception of the worldwide radio program, “Hour of Decision.”

An estimated 20,000 will be present for each meeting in Madison Square Garden. Scores of other meetings, will be held daily by various members of the team. The demand for seats will grow and result in several stadium rallies, boosting the possibility of extending the crusade.

(London’s Harringay Arena was filled practically every night for three months after critics laughed that even an orator like Sir Winston Churchill couldn’t fill it for two consecutive nights. A crowd of 120,000 attended the final rally at Wembley Stadium.)

Nationwide Telecasts

Daily radio and television opportunities will take the message into hard-to-reach areas of the huge city, often referred to as the capital of the world because of the United Nations headquarters. Nationwide telecasts from Madison Square Garden over the ABC network from 8 to 9 p.m. each Saturday night, beginning the first week in June, will start with an audience in excess of 20 millions. The number of viewers will show such a startling growth each week that the “gray flannel suit” advertising executives on Madison Avenue, most of whom worship comparative rating charts, will rush new evaluations on the power of God.

“Thank God he’s going off the air at 9 o’clock,” muttered an agency vice-president, without any attempt at reverence, when informed about the program. His show to sell coffee for another sponsor begins at 9.

(In 1955, Mr. Graham spoke from Glasgow, Scotland, over BBC-TV. The audience was estimated at 30,000,000—second only in British history to the number of viewers for the Coronation telecast. Queen Elizabeth and members of the royal family watched the service from beginning to end. She was so deeply moved that she wrote a letter, inviting him to speak at private services in Windsor Castle. In less regal surroundings, teen-agers passed up parties to hear a preacher. Bartenders said men lined their rails and watched for an hour without buying a drink).

Response To Invitation

2. The number of inquirers who respond to the invitation at the close of each message, by the grace of God, will surpass any campaign to date.

From New York’s melting pot of 60 nationalities, the inquirers will represent every phase of society—a name television performer, major league baseball player, playboy, prostitute, business executive, criminal, housewife, teen-age gang leader, etc. The same message, used by the Holy Spirit, will affect all types.

Scoffers then will ask the question: “Will it last?”

Some won’t last. All didn’t last when Christ was doing the preaching. Part of the seed fell on rocky ground and was blown away. Some fell on poor soil and failed to take root. But other seed fell on good earth and grew.

Billy Graham, a fun-loving young baseball player, made a decision to live for Christ over 20 years ago. He has lasted. His buddy, Grady Wilson, was sitting in the choir next to him and made the same decision. He has lasted. People will stand up around the world, look you straight in the eye and testify they have lasted.

Revival In Churches

3. Ministers and church members will be revived. Unity and love will spread as they place Christ first and denomination second, endeavor to help instead of hinder, offer comfort instead of criticism.

(A minister in Great Britain told Mr. Graham: “You are having a serious effect on my ministry. For years I have taught in my church that many of the stories in the Bible are myths, but I realize now that I have never had any power in my sermons. You stand there on the platform night after night and tell these same stories as the gospel truth. And I have seen with my own eyes the power of God as the people get out of their seats and walk to the front.…” The revolution against formalism spread fast among ministers of Britain, most of whom had never given a public invitation for people to accept Christ. One clergyman gave his first invitation and was shocked when 25 people walked down the aisles. Next day, he sought out the crusade chairman and asked, “Now that I’ve got them, what am I going to do?” He was advised to, first, start a Bible class; second, begin a weekly prayer meeting, and then to inaugurate a regular visitation program with the new members doing the visiting.)

(Dr. Marc Boegner, a past president of the World Council of Churches and known in his native France as “Mr. Protestant,” refused to take any part in the five-day Paris campaign. He changed his opinion after talking with two former members of his church who found Christ at the evangelistic services. At a testimony meeting a few weeks later, Dr. Boegner rose to his feet and declared, “I didn’t take any part in the campaign, but I’m sorry that I didn’t. I have been shown very clearly that the decisions were real and I believe they will be lasting. I want to state in public that if Dr. Graham returns to Paris for a campaign, I will be privileged and happy to support the meetings in any way possible.”)

Encouraged Christians

4. The name of Jesus Christ will be for many the biggest topic of conversation on the streets, in factories and offices and on the dimly-lit night circuit of such spots as the Stork Club and Toots Shor’s.

Not all the conversation, of course, will be favorable. But God can use criticism to arouse interest. Sophisticates already are inventing excuses to explain why they are going to attend at least one meeting. The smart, bored set, on the spur of the moment, will make up gay little parties to visit Madison Square and squeeze another laugh out of life. Some will find eternal life. The new existence will mean so much they will tell their friends about it. (A few name performers already are strong boosters of the crusade.)

With Christ brought out into the open, partly through the talk of unbelievers, encouraged Christians will rejoice in the new-found freedom to witness for Christ.

The Press Speaks

5. The effect of the campaign will be felt in many parts of the world.

The press and radio will spread the news from Madison Square Garden to all nations, where thousands have been praying for months. Some of the stories will be written by reporters with suddenly-changed perspectives. They will go to the meetings with clever journalistic phrases of derision running through their heads. Expecting a religious circus of sorts, they will be strangely impressed by the sincerity of the effort, as Cliff Barrows leads the mammoth choir in old songs of the church, as the voice of George Beverly Shea comes rolling from a loving heart and as Billy Graham, carefully avoiding any emotional tactics, paints a clear word picture of man’s need to be born again by the Spirit of God.

Not all the writers will be impressed. A few will jeer to the end. But others will toss their false pride into a cocked hat to publicly surrender their hearts and talents to the Lord.

(At a press conference in India, Mr. Graham was asked to explain about sin, death and eternal life. His answers came from the Bible. As reporters were milling around the room at the end, one walked up to him, stuck out his hand and said, “I want to become a Christian.” … In the press room at Glasgow, two writers were discussing the campaign. “Every night,” one voiced, “Graham says Christ died for me.” A puzzled expression came over his face. He repeated the words, slowly, “Christ died for me.” The Holy Spirit had shot home the meaning. He made a public profession.… England’s most famous columnist, Cassandra, complained that Mr. Graham had all the best of it in a setting of worship and asked the evangelist to meet him on “sinners’ ground.” They met in a pub. Cassandra had beer. Mr. Graham had milk. And they talked. Next day in print Cassandra retracted the disparaging things he had written, saying, “Sincerity and truth are weapons too sharp to oppose”.)

Communist Smears

6. Communists in New York will face the rising threat to their godless way of life by smearing Mr. Graham in any way possible.

(In another city the communist publication said, “We are assured that not a penny for Billy comes from the churches, ministers or countries that invite him to run campaigns. If this is true, then his activity is subsidized by the American Wall Street interests. It is one way or the other. He is spreading what is really a definite anti-Christian and pro-capitalist gospel in the name of Jesus Christ.” The communist paper in Germany, after a meeting in Berlin, gave a detailed eye-witness account of Mr. Graham taking his team to a night club, buying liquor by the case and then getting thrown into jail for trying to slip out without paying the bill.)

The communists evidently are unaware that people laugh at such “whoppers” instead of believing them.

7. Opposition will continue to come from small extreme groups within the Church.

Some of the criticism will fall away as the expected blessings of God on the campaign become too evident to ignore. The jeers will turn to joy for many as God honors the simple preaching of his Holy Word, without pulled punches. Along with Paul, these people will say, “Christ is proclaimed; and in that I rejoice.”

(Two years ago, when Mr. Graham was preaching in Scotland, rumors spread through America that he had compromised his hard-hitting Bible sermons in favor of a modern social gospel more pleasing to man. Dr. John R. Rice, widely-known evangelist and publisher, visited Glasgow to see for himself. After hearing several sermons, he told this writer, “Thank God for Billy Graham and members of his team. He is preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in all its simplicity, authority and power—like Dwight L. Moody and Billy Sunday. He preaches a plain message leading to a definite point—repentance and faith in Christ.… Have you ever noticed that when a man runs 15 yards in a (football) game, he always seems to have plenty of interference, but when he gets loose on a long touchdown run, he has to get way out ahead of the interference and some of the blockers don’t like to be left behind.… I followed the converts into the counseling room. Billy didn’t tell them what church to join, but he told them to get into a good church where the Bible was preached”.)

Mr. Graham has announced on scores of occasions that he will preach the same kind of sermon in New York. He will go there with no strings attached.

United In Prayer

8. Most important of all, Jesus Christ will be glorified.

Members of the evangelistic team secluded themselves in a home recently to spend a weekend in prayer and meditation. Friday and Saturday were spiritual feasts. On Sunday morning they met for devotions. Dr. Ralph Mitchell, who fills an important role as spiritual counsellor, began to speak. His words went something like this:

“The man was burdened for real revival. He recalled a sermon illustration he had heard about a Christian and a circle. Even though aware that his actions probably would seem peculiar, he drew a large circle in the kitchen of his home, knelt inside and prayed, ‘Oh, God, send a revival to our city and let it start in me.’ He spent hours there pleading with God. His wife had seen him pray many times, but didn’t quite know what to think when she came home and found him kneeling in the circle. After he explained, she said, ‘You have room in there for me.’ They prayed together. Later, their daughter arrived and asked what was happening. She listened quietly before saying, ‘There is enough space left for me.’

“They prayed for revival, with each asking, ‘Let it begin in me.’

“From the prayers of this united family came the beginning of a great revival in that city.”

Dr. Mitchell paused for a moment, then continued:

“In my mind’s eye, I am going to draw a circle here on the floor.”

He dropped to his knees and prayed, “Oh, God, send a revival to New York and let it begin in me.”

Billy Graham was sitting at the back of the room. He rushed to the front and fell on his face before God. Nineteen persons were present. Within seconds, all were kneeling in the unseen circle, with each pleading, “Oh, God, send a revival and let it begin in me.”

A Broken Heart

It was an unforgettable moment. Members of the most publicized team in the history of evangelism prayed, wept and confessed.

Mr. Graham, visibly affected, spoke for a few moments before the closing:

“You men know that I am not very emotional, but while we are here I want to confess that as late as one month ago my heart had grown cold. I didn’t have the passion and love that I should have had for the souls in New York. I don’t know why. Maybe some of the criticism centered around the campaign got into my heart unawares and brought on the coldness. On a mountaintop in North Carolina, alone before God and deeply troubled, I told him that I couldn’t go to New York without tears for the lost and love for all people. In my prayers I asked the Lord to break my heart—no matter how awful the consequences might be, no matter how dear the loss.

“A week later God answered my prayers. He broke my heart and filled it with compassion, without making me go through the pain of a close personal loss.”

These are the men who are going to New York for a crusade which can, under God, be the most significant and far-reaching event within Protestantism in our generation.

Dependent Upon God

The men are talented and superbly trained, but they will go, in their own words, totally dependent upon God.

Mr. Graham will give all the praise and honor and glory, without hesitation and before any group, to Jesus Christ. Better than anyone else, he knows that the organization and publicity will amount to nothing unless the power of God falls. A warning ever before him will be, “It is not by might nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord,” and, “My glory I will not share with another.”

Greater things than the few listed here can happen in New York.

They will happen … if you care enough to pray—without ceasing!

George Burnham, news editor of Christianity Today, has covered all major Billy Graham campaigns abroad the last three years for as many as 600 secular and religious publications. His two books on the world tours are entitled Billy Graham: A Mission Accomplished and To the Far Corners. Burnham, formerly with the Associated Press and The Chattanooga News-Free Press, will record significant highlights of the New York Crusade for Christianity Today.

Cover Story

Universalism

G. C. Berkouwer

Theological problems sometimes have a way of rising with urgent contemporaneity without any specific way of accounting for them. Many historical factors can contribute to their rise; the underlying spirit and mentality of a given era can form a point of contact with various specific ideas that are thrown out at that time. Recent discussions about universalism present a theological problem of this sort. The doctrine of universalism is also called the doctrine of apokatastasia, the restoration of all things and redemption for all men. This doctrine is at present high on the agenda of theological debate. It is urgent, as always, because it is a genuinely existential problem. Since it is concerned with all men, it includes us. This is why universalism has a certain compelling quality that touches us all.

Salvation for all men: this is the thesis of universalism. One day the bad dream of sin will be over. We shall all rise and go back to our father and home. There is, to be sure, a powerful resistance to the grace of God in the world. There is rebellion and a hardening of hearts. But sin’s rebellion shall be done away. This is not to suggest that sin and unbelief are not taken seriously in universalism. It is not to say that according to universalism man has not earned God’s judgment. It does mean, however, that the grace of God shall triumph in the end and break down all resistance. Universalism proclaims the glorious victory of divine grace. This is the thought that will not down. Though ancient forms, such as given by Origen, are rejected, the main motif continually returns to brace the human spirit. Contemplating the final end of the ways of God, universalists cannot imagine that there can be any other than this good ending for the human drama.

Palatable To The Heart

It is understandable that this doctrine recurrently exercises strong influence in theological thought. It is palatable to the human heart. For our hearts find it hard to take the judgment of God upon human sin with complete earnestness. With a kind of universalistic optimism, it is considered unthinkable that God’s love should not triumph. Dr. J. A. T. Robinson, for example, ended an article which he called “Universalism—Is It Heretical?” with these words: “Christ, in Origen’s old words, remains on the Cross as long as one sinner remains in hell. This is not a speculation: it is a statement grounded in the very necessity of God’s nature. In a universe of love there can be no heaven which tolerates a chamber of horrors, no hell for any which does not at the same time make it hell for God. He cannot endure that—for that would be the final mockery of his nature—and he will not” (Scottish Journal of Theology, 1949). This statement drew a reply from Dr. T. F. Torrance for whom the argument of Robinson seemed too simplistic. “Dare we go behind Calvary,” asked Torrance, “to argue our way to a conclusion which we could reach by logic, and which would make the Cross meaningless?” What, he asks, must we think of the Scripture passages “which declare in no uncertain terms that at the last judgment there will be a final division between the children of light and the children of darkness?” This is typical of the kind of discussion that universalism arouses: it is never abstract, but is always charged with emotion, for it has to do with the love of God. Is universalism not “the very necessity of God’s nature?” asks Robinson. And is it not self-evident and forced upon us? Is God’s love not almighty and triumphant even over the dark rebellion of the human heart? “Its will to lordship is inexhaustible and ultimately unendurable: the sinner must yield.”

The discussion of universalism has also been carried on in Germany and Switzerland. Wilhelm Michaelis wrote a book in 1950 called, Universal Redemption: The Good News of the Grace of God, in which he attempted to give universalism an exegetical basis. But perhaps the weightiest discussion about universalism has centered around Karl Barth. Barth has insisted many times that he rejects the doctrine of universalism. Yet, Emil Brunner has declared that Barth teaches the most radical form of universalism that has ever been proposed, more far-reaching than that of Origen. This is not the place to enter into this discussion, but it is enough to remind us how minds are being moved by the doctrine of God’s final purpose.

Significance Of Unbelief

We will limit ourselves here to one question: the relationship between universalism and the preaching of the Gospel. This is the urgent question that concerns every one who would preach. For what is the significance of preaching, granted the truth of universalism? If we can reason from the “necessity” of the nature of God to the conclusion of the universal triumph of divine love, what must we preach? This is the decisive question that is asked more and more frequently within the contemporary discussion of universalism. Must we, in preaching, inform the people of this “logical” conclusion; is this the preaching of the Gospel? According to universalism, we are driven to ask, is preaching a factual communique instead of an urgent message which places aweful responsibility on the hearer and calls him to a decision? It is not surprising that certain Scripture passages are much in the discussion. For example, the word of our Lord in John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life and he that believeth not shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.” Thus, the discussion concentrates on the character of the Gospel message.

Universalism does indeed attempt to show that its doctrine also has room for a kind of preaching that sets men before responsibility, but it is not clear how the communique regarding the necessity of God’s nature leading to universal redemption can bring man to feel the need for making an important decision. Is the human choice—belief or unbelief—really important in universalism, if God in his love actually cannot be anything else but merciful to all men?

Urgency Of Decision

It is natural that there is also a good deal of discussion about the teaching of Scripture regarding the future, about the final judgment and the coming of Christ, in short about the eschatological message of the Gospel. But what was the message of the evangelists of the Kingdom of God? Was there not a tension in their message, an urgent appeal to a decision, a call to a decisive choice? Is there really not the terrible possibility of both belief and unbelief according to the Bible? Is there not a danger that we draw conclusions out of the well of human optimism which are really totally different from the original Gospel? When the Church rejected the teaching of Origen, it was not prompted by a lack of feeling or a failure to appreciate the love of God or the power of the Spirit. It only refused to tone down the command to go into the world with the Gospel of the cross and the resurrection, a Gospel full of responsibility, calling and pleading. No, the Church was not calloused in the regions of its heart. Pharisees exclude people because they do not fit into their categories of righteousness. But the Church preaches a broad Gospel, Christ as a door that is really open. It preaches the seriousness of the Gospel whose content is the Cross, a stumbling block and an offense. This was the seriousness that Simeon saw when, filled with the Spirit, he said, “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel and for a sign which shall be spoken against” (Luke 2:34).

Earnestness Of Preaching

Thus, the Church upholds the earnestness of preaching which demands a decision concerning the “kindness and love of God our Saviour toward men” (Titus 3:4). It will not be led to a conclusion that, dislodged from the historical cross, proclaims a divine “necessity” which is self-evident and which ultimately takes the edge of reality away from redemption. The Church is not to speculate but to preach. For “how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard; and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14).

It is no accident that the discussion about universalism is concentrated on the preaching of the Gospel. For here is where it must appear whether or not the Church has understood its command. Its command is not to investigate into the secrets of God, not to soften the Gospel into a communique informing the world that everything is going to come out all right in the end. Its command is to let the voice of the Cross resound through the world with its summons to faith and repentance. This is the only “necessity” which is allowed in our preaching, the “necessity” which Paul felt when he said: “for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is me if I preach not the Gospel” (1 Cor. 9:16).

When the Spirit was poured out on all flesh, when Peter preached and thousands turned to the light, an urgent appeal went out: “And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, ‘Save yourselves from this untoward generation’ ” (Acts 2:40).

G. C. Berkouwer is the peer of evangelical theologians in our day. Professor of Systematic Theology at the Free University of Amsterdam, he has provided our generation with the most extensive theological effort next to Barth’s Church Dogmatics. Berkouwer’s Studies in Dogmatics are now in process of translation in 18 volumes. In his most recent work, The Triumph of Grace in the Theology of Karl Barth, he deals fully with the universalistic tendencies of Barth’s theology.

Cover Story

Can Billy Graham Slay the Giant?

Edward John Carnell

Billy Graham has made elaborate preparations for the New York Campaign. This is only natural, for New York City is the cultural and economic center of the world. It is the home of the Metropolitan Opera and the vast financial interests of Wall Street. Name anything essential to the human venture and it seems that New York City can boast of it in a superlative degree. This complex metropolis is a veritable Goliath. Billy Graham has his sling and his smooth pebbles from the stream, but what are these against the granite towers of Manhattan?

But more exciting for the Christian community, the New York Campaign brings Billy Graham to the very doorsteps of Reinhold Niebuhr. This leads to an interesting question. If Reinhold Niebuhr has not succeeded in stirring New York City for Christ, what chance has Billy Graham? The issue is not academic. It involves the very essence of Christianity.

Billy Graham defends Christian orthodoxy, while Reinhold Niebuhr defends Christian realism. Orthodoxy mediates problems of man and history from the perspective of Scripture, while realism mediates problems of Scripture from the perspective of man and history. This is the difference between these two positions, but how does this difference work itself out in practice?

Modern Man’S Need

Since Reinhold Niebuhr restricts himself to issues arising out of modern life, he enjoys a provisional advantage over Billy Graham. Realism subjects theology to very severe tests. Unless a doctrine answers to the religious and moral needs of twentieth-century man, it is cast into the fire and burned. This is one reason why young seminarians often find realism intellectually more stimulating than orthodoxy. Judged by the contemporaneity and dexterity of realism, orthodoxy seems unimaginative and vapid.

Reinhold Niebuhr’s theological abilities were verified when he delivered the celebrated Gifford Lectures. The Lectures called for a critical interaction with issues which concern cultured people in an age of great anxiety. Reinhold Niebuhr rose to the occasion with acceptable skill. He succeeded in challenging human pride on every level of life. His finished work The Nature and Destiny of Man is now the systematic theology of Christian realism.

Problems Of Relevance

It is this prophetic defiance of religious and moral complacency which keeps Reinhold Niebuhr in the forefront of theology. Orthodox theologians often become so devoted to hallowed forms that they shrink from participating in the modern Christian dialogue. They rarely succeed in relating Christianity to the peculiar difficulties rising out of contemporary life. Furthermore, orthodoxy’s reliance on revelation tempts it to overlook, if not forthrightly defy, the relative insights of science and philosophy. This partly explains why orthodox scholarship is often a full generation behind the times. It also helps explain why the theological leadership has been caught up by Christian realism. While orthodoxy is distracted by such questions as whether there is any common ground between Calvinists and Arminians, or whether the Church will be raptured before or after the tribulation, Reinhold Niebuhr is quietly constructing a systematic view of sin, mercy and the total creative and destructive possibilities of man.

Since he is such an astute observer of human nature, Reinhold Niebuhr has developed a rather profound insight into the polarity tension between law and grace. Orthodoxy usually supposes that the law of love is only a convenient summary of the Ten Commandments. Reinhold Niebuhr scores this as a capital theological error. He properly contends that Jesus Christ gave substance to ideal human nature by actuating the terms of love. Only love can comprehend the self-transcending limits of human nature. Reinhold Niebuhr’s insight into the essence of love is so broad in scope and so exact in detail that the dialectic of law and grace impinges on every area of human experience. The total enterprise of man is simultaneously inspired and judged by the heights of love in Christ Jesus.

I cheerfully acknowledge a personal indebtedness to Reinhold Niebuhr. It was only as I studied Christian realism, long after I graduated from seminary, that I began to sense the power of pride and pretense in my life. Orthodoxy has an easy conscience about its own sins because it does not understand the connection between Christ’s active obedience and the total creative and destructive possibilities of man.

The Relevance Of Realism

But back to the problem of the New York Campaign. Since Billy Graham defends the traditions of orthodoxy, it would seem that his prospects of stirring Manhattan for Christ are not very good. But this need not necessarily be the case and for a very convincing reason.

When the man on the street asks about the plan of salvation, he receives very little precise guidance from the theology of Reinhold Niebuhr. This, I assert, is the grand irony of Christian realism. Reinhold Niebuhr can prove that man is a sinner, but man already knows this. Reinhold Niebuhr can develop the dialectical relation between time and eternity, but this is beyond the tether of a dime store clerk or a hod carrier. When it comes to the acid test, therefore, realism is not very realistic after all. A concrete view of sin converts to an abstract view of salvation. And all of this is a direct fruit of realism’s decision to mediate problems of Scripture from the perspective of man and history. For example, Reinhold Niebuhr does not speak about Christ’s literal cross and resurrection at all. He speaks, at most, of the “symbols” of the cross and the resurrection. But of what value are these symbols to an anxious New York cabby?

The Relevance Of Orthodoxy

Billy Graham has no fear of New York City. Like David of old, he confronts his Goliath in the name of the Lord God of Israel. His sermons are drawn from the clear teachings of Scripture. He deems human speculation as flax before the flame. When Billy Graham rises to speak, he patterns his words after those of the Apostle Paul. “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve” (1 Cor. 15:3–4, R.S.V.).

Billy Graham may not succeed in relating the biblical message to the total life of modern man, but he does succeed in telling a sinner how to go to heaven. God made a covenant with Abraham, and the blessing of this covenant is Christ. “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, ‘And to offsprings,’ referring to many; but, referring to one, ‘And to your offspring,’ which is Christ” (Gal. 3:16, R.S.V.). Since God found none with whom he could enjoy fellowship, he began a new race of righteous men through the resurrection of Christ. Christ invested human nature with perfection by living a sinless life. He offered up this perfection as a vicarious sacrifice. The cross of Christ makes it possible for a holy God to receive penitent sinners into fellowship. “It was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26, R.S.V.). Here, perhaps, is the clearest line of demarcation between orthodoxy and realism—and Billy Graham knows it. Orthodoxy teaches that Christ propitiated an offended judicial element in the character of God. Realism does not. Moreover, orthodoxy contends that this difference decides the gaining or losing of the Christian gospel.

If a student of theology wants to examine the complex relation between law, grace and human freedom, he may find Christian realism more rewarding than Christian orthodoxy. After Billy Graham has reviewed the plan of salvation, he has very little to add. Billy Graham has not been to seminary. He has no criteria by which to measure the shades of better and worse in the complex systems which vie for the modern mind. And his weakness pretty well sums up the weakness of orthodoxy itself. Orthodoxy tries to relate Scripture to the more technical phases of science and philosophy, but its efforts are seldom very profound. Orthodoxy does not know enough about modern presuppositions to speak with authority. Publishers confront such a paucity of first-rate orthodox literature that they must fill out their lists by reprinting the works of older apologists and divines.

Let us bear one thing in mind, however. When we say that Billy Graham does nothing but make the plan of salvation clear, we intend to pay him a gratifying compliment. As one studies the Book of Acts, one finds that the apostles devoted most of their energies to this same task of clarification. Thus, if orthodoxy is naive, so were the apostles. What is the work of an evangelist, if not to tell sinners how to be saved? Billy Graham preaches Christ in such clear and forceful language that even a bartender can find his way to the mercy seat. This is why the multitudes discover a power in Billy Graham which they miss in Reinhold Niebuhr. Billy Graham may know little about the inner technicalities of theology, but he does rest in the full and undoubted persuasion that Christ was delivered for our offenses and was raised for our justification. And this is the good news that repentant sinners are waiting to hear. The common man is weary of theories; he is hungry for the gospel; he craves a firm note of authority. And Billy Graham meets this need. He stands before the anxious multitudes and thunders, “Thus saith the Lord!”

Despite its anachronisms and inconsistencies, therefore, orthodoxy remains a stronghold of biblical Christianity. It puts first things first. It preaches that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Hebrews 9:22, R.S.V.). If the church fails to tell sinners how to be saved, of what final value is anything else that is said?

Realism’s diagnosis of human sickness is profounder than that of orthodoxy. No one can safely question this. But it so happens that sick people are more anxious to get well than they are to learn how sick they are. And since this is the case, it may turn out that Manhattan’s granite towers will offer little final resistance to the message of Billy Graham. There are no giants in the sight of God.

Edward John Carnell holds the Th.D. and Ph.D. degrees from Harvard Divinity School and Boston University respectively. He is author of The Theology of Reinhold Niebuhr and other works, and contributed a chapter on “Niebuhr’s Criteria of Verification” to the Niebuhr volume in The Library of Living Philosophy. His latest work, Christian Commitment, will soon be published by Macmillan. Since 1954 he has been President of Fuller Theological Seminary.

Theology

Review of Current Religious Thought: April 29, 1957

John H. Gerstner

Christianity Today April 29, 1957

In the current issue of Pastoral Care attention is called to the centennial of the birth of Sigmund Freud (1856–1939). The Rev. Kenneth H. Rogers, Ph.D., tells something of the life of the famous Austrian Jewish psychoanalyst and his present significance for religion. Freud was a man of deep feeling who seldom revealed it, although control was often difficult for him. He was a good husband and an exemplary father of his six children. Professionally, he began as a neurologist and achieved distinction before he turned his attention to hypnotism in 1895. “This led to the use of the method of ‘free association’ as a cathartic technique in working with neurotic patients. The great turning-point came with Freud’s intuition that ‘free association’ was not really free, but determined in every possible respect.”

The above experience led to his first fundamental principle in psychoanalysis, namely, that all mental phenomena are completely determined. All abnormal behavior was but an inhibition or distortion of this normal deterministic pattern; this was his derivative second principle.

The nature of this psychological deterministic pattern as being oriented in the libido, which is usually taken as basically a sexual drive, has been regarded as uncongenial to Christian thought. Certainly Freud himself was hostile to religion. But Dr. Rogers feels that we may distinguish between the man and his method and use the latter for religious purposes. (One cannot help feeling that the religious Freudians are betraying a “sacred” trust of their dead master.) In any case, the enlightening article is rather provoking in not explaining quite what this area of cooperation between psychoanalysis and religion (especially Christianity) is. A system developed by an intelligent man who used it in lieu of, or against, religious theories, cannot now be taken captive by religion without some more convincing justification than is here given.

The question of the nature of God and gospel makes the brilliant analysis of the present trend to religion on college campuses, by Lewis W. Spitz (“Jerusalem and Athens: A Tale of Two Cities” in The Lutheran Scholar, January 1957) all the more intriguing. After a survey of considerable evidence of a return to religion in the colleges, Dr. Spitz warns: “There is, it should now be obvious, no cause for a premature celebration of Christendom over the return to religion on the campus. But therein lies the challenge.” A return to religion may be good, depending on what religion. The professor then makes some suggestions especially appealing to Lutheranism which he calls American Protestantism’s “secret weapon” (quoted from Professor Sidney Meade).

Speaking of Lutheranism reminds us of a strong statement that this theology, though it has sometimes adopted episcopal government, has never regarded it as essential (Ragnar Askmark, “The Lutheran Church and Episcopal Succession” in The Lutheran World, September 1956). At the same time the Episcopal Church organ, Living Voice, gives notice that the Church of South India is in danger precisely because it is apparently playing free and loose with this essential of the church (April 7, 1957). “A warning that the Episcopal Church is faced with decisions that might well lead to serious rifts was expressed by the Rev. Canon Albert J. du Bois, executive director of the American Church Union. Canon du Bois … said he was referring specifically to recommendations concerning the relationship of the Church to the pan-Protestant Church of South India.…” In the ensuing report, evidence of departure from the Episcopal view of the bishopric plus laxity in doctrine are the chief grounds of the present anxiety. [The Ordinal of the Book of Common Prayer requires unequivocal adherence to Christian doctrine, belief in Catholic sacramental doctrine and belief in Catholic Orders—requirements which the C.S.I. ministry did not fulfill.] Canon du Bois said his criticism was offered along the lines of the purpose of the ACU “to uphold the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church; to extend the knowledge of the Catholic faith and practice of the Church,” and “to maintain unimpaired the position of the Episcopal Church as an integral part of the whole Catholic Church of Christ.”

These two notes, a Lutheran insistence on the dispensability of episcopal order and an Episcopalian insistence on its indispensability, point up the fact that the acids of modernity have not eaten away this ancient bone of contention.

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