Cover Story

Jonathan Edwards: A Voice for God

Two hundred years ago at Princeton, the ministry of Jonathan Edwards ended (March 22, 1758) in untimely death. He was and is considered to be one of the outstanding minds of American history. He stands out as a philosopher, theologian, man of letters, and revivalist. His reputation has been maligned for many years because of false judgment against a certain sermon and a particular emphasis in preaching. The time has come to revalue Jonathan Edwards and his ministry in the light of the eighteenth century, the Great Awakening, and our present age. During his lifetime (1703–1758) he lived and labored under the eye of the divine Taskmaster. The several lives of Edwards give the details of his life of dedication and devotion.

New knowledge about Edwards indicates that he was primarily a pastoral preacher who did the work of an evangelist. Puritan in life and ideal, he followed well defined models of Puritan homiletics and hermeneutics. Study filled most of the day, and a well-disciplined mind was lighted by the Holy Spirit for his ministry.

Election And Decision

The manuscripts at Yale and Andover throw new light upon his inner convictions and the emphases he made in preaching. These suggest that in Edwards there is a paradox. How was it that he, a Calvinist convinced of the sovereignty of God, could at the same time act as a persuasive Arminianist in storming the will of man and urging man to press in to the Kingdom of God? This is most enlightening, especially as we are witnessing in our day a revival of preaching closely akin to this. Modern evangelism raises afresh the question concerning the stress in preaching which brings people to repentance and faith.

Is there any difference between revival preaching and evangelistic preaching? Are we too ready to assume that what is evangelistic is also revivalist? Do not the Scriptures make a distinction here? Men advertise that revival services will be held at a Church, but attendance on the preaching would indicate that here is no revival but simply evangelistic preaching. Evangelistic preaching has its place and is the reaching out of the church through the evangelist or the pastor to win the lost for Christ. But revival is the renewal of spiritual life, the revitalizing of lives grown careless and cold in spirit. Evangelism is primarily to those without the church, but revival is for those within the church. True, when church people and Christians are revived in spirit there is an outflow of love and compassion through evangelism to those without.

Sinners And God’s Anger

All this can be seen in the life of Edwards. His pastoral ministry was for a congregation primarily, but he also ministered to communities and people without. The Great Awakening found him in the midst of revival. He was used of God in reaching multitudes, yet he never ceased to be the pastor who reached his congregation. When revival came to his own church in Northampton, it did not come with “hell-fire” preaching as many imagine. The facts are these:

One Sunday he preached on “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” What happened? Nothing! That morning the good people listened with respect and agreement. After the service they stood outside the church and talked about the weather, births and deaths, crops and other domestic interests, including no doubt the finer points of that long sermon. But no one is on record as having been convicted and converted. Three months later, at Enfield, Edwards was asked to preach to the gathering of the district church people, and he took from the sermon barrel (or was it his saddlebag?) the manuscript of this sermon. A study of the manuscript at Yale shows how he worked over it and altered selected words and phrases. The revised manuscript then was used as the basis of the sermon which that day found the people “in great expectancy” (B. Trumbull, History of Connecticut, II, p. 112). The Holy Spirit brought conviction of sin, and people were moved to cry out and seek repentance and salvation. Revival broke out that day and spread across a wide area. It was the same sermon in essence which Edwards had used in his regular pastoral ministry, a token that the Spirit blows where he wills.

The question is asked—when did Edwards witness revival among his own congregation? The evidence is that he was not preaching imprecatory sermons, but delivering a series of expository sermons based on 1 Corinthians 13. The stress on love moved his own people, and again we see how the Spirit blows where he wills.

In the light of these experiences, let us not make the mistake today of demanding that God will send revival to his people or reach the lost through evangelism by any one method or by any one kind of preaching. In the book of The Acts we trace the regularity of the irregular. God is sovereign, as Edwards believed, and he acts in ways not stereotyped or fixed in ruts.

Edwards was neither a hireling nor a middleman in his conception of the ministry. He was a voice for God. While God was pleased to reach men in diverse ways, Edwards said it pleased God most of all “to call his saints in all his proper person, but in practice, preferring to employ his ambassadors and conforming his grace to the process of cause and effect.” It was the accepted belief of the Puritan that “whatsoever any faithful minister shall speak out of the Word, that is also the voice of Christ.”

Aiming For A Verdict

Edwards knew that he was an instrument of God. He based his preaching on a view of life in which God was all-sovereign. He revitalized conventional religion with this truth. He believed in redemption for the individual and the sermon as the agency of conversion. Others stressed ritual and sacrament in a day of declension and barrenness. He restored the sermon to its primacy in worship, and application in a sermon was usually more than mere exposition! He emphasized one idea, and then looked for salvation of the hearer.

Man’s sinfulness or depravity was stressed to show man’s inability to save himself. God’s sovereignty was central to show how man is shut up to God’s grace alone. It was Edwards’ testimony that he found “no discourses more remarkably blessed than those in which the doctrine of God’s absolute sovereignty with regard to the salvation of sinners was insisted on.” Stressing God’s grace in “Narrative of Surprising Conversions” and the sermon on “A Divine and Supernatural Light” he witnessed that “those that are under conviction will enquire earnestly what they shall do to be saved, and diligently use the appointed means of grace.”

In aim, Edwards appealed to the emotions by self-interest. He believed that unless a man was moved by some affection, he was by nature inactive. His defense of the Great Awakening supposed that the element of fear loomed largely in his imprecatory sermons, but the appeal to self-blessedness was always found in sermons dealing with heaven and the joys of salvation.

Then again he aimed to awaken the conscience for a verdict. The evangelist in Edwards appealed for a response. “I have not only endeavored to awaken you, that you might be moved with fear, but I have used my utmost endeavor to win you.”

The Paradox Of Preaching

We may summarize the paradox of Edwards’ preaching by stating his own aim: “the unconverted are guilty and deserve the punishment awaiting them; this punishment is given by an infinite God in his justice; and the only hope of escape is by the gift of salvation which cannot be won by man’s effort, but if anyone is violent he may press into the kingdom.”

In our day of man’s failure and fear of world doom, we may learn from Edwards. There is place for “hell-fire” sermons and the preaching of judgment in the right spirit but not in a cold manner. Conversion is a reality for the sinner and “whosoever may come.” John Wesley in the same day as Edwards had no stress on philosophy or a doctrine of the will comparable to Edwards’, but he also preached evangelistically, and multitudes were found in the valley of decision.

God honored and used both Edwards and Wesley. Calvinist and Arminian, philosopher and scholar, revivalist and evangelist, each had his place in God’s plan. Edwards’ paradox, from which we learn, lay in the predetermined sovereign will of God which knows man’s end, but allows his servant to preach as a means of urging people to press into the Kingdom of God.

Both evangelist and revivalist must unite to affirm that there is no final opposition between divine sovereignty and human free will. God is sovereign and man is free. God the Father works out his redemptive purpose and his Kingdom is sure.

Ralph G. Turnbull is pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Seattle, Washington. A native of Scotland, he holds the M.A. degree from University of Edinburgh, B.D. from United College, Manitoba University, Th.M. from Princeton Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Whitworth College. His Jonathan Edwards the Preacher is to be published in March.

Preacher In The Red

A FRIEND IN NEED

I was completing my first funeral service in my first congregation on the plains of Kansas. The words of committal for a dear, aged mother had been spoken and a prayer following concluded the grave-side service. Unexpectedly, one of the sons of the family approached me and asked me to thank those who had been of help to the family during their bereavement. This is what the nervous and frustrated young preacher announced, “In name of the mourning family I want to thank all the neighbors and friends who have made this funeral possible.”—The Rev. FRANK DEJONG, Home Missionary, Christian Reformed Church, Bellflower, Calif.

Cover Story

Unbelief Today

The outstanding fact about twentieth-century unbelief is that it is organized and massive.

Before the beginning of the century there were, of course, skeptics who voiced their unbelief as individuals in and through their philosophical or critical works, poems, essays, and novels. Up to 1870 religious works and sermons were among the “best-sellers,” but by 1900 they had dropped nearly to the bottom of the lists. During that thirty years, novels with a religious or moral purpose had displaced them.

By 1898 rationalistic writings had gained sufficient hold to make possible the founding of the “Rationalistic Press Association” in London, from which, year by year, cheap reprints of scientific, “positivist” and skeptical works poured forth, attacking the Bible and theology and the Church from the standpoint of scientific materialism, evolutionary agnosticism, and evolutionary ethics and sociology.

Unleashing Of Unbelief

Unbelief was not yet “organized” unbelief. It was, however, being so organized, particularly in Germany, in support of the ambition of a grandiose Germanic world state. Bernhardt’s Germany and the Next War, for example, had as its fundamental premise that “war is a biological necessity,” which the writer had arrived at on naturalistic, evolutionary grounds. “Nature was deemed to be red in tooth and claw.” The “struggle for existence” and “the survival of the fittest” were natural phenomena, and “fittest” meant “most forceful.” Thus, Bismarck’s “Blood and Iron” theory was justified on naturalistic grounds, and the doctrine “Might is Right” was widely preached and practiced.

The war of 1914–18 undoubtedly stemmed directly from this root, and the world at large should have learned a lesson, but it failed to do so despite the 12 million precious lives that holocaust extinguished. Even before the Armistice was signed Lenin, with, be it observed, the help of Germany, was busy organizing the foreboding Russian Revolution of 1917. The basis of that Revolution was “unbelief,” and it just as patently was of the same naturalism that lay behind the German bid for world power. It was, of course, Marxist through and through—a materialistic interpretation of history, with progress to be achieved by class war. Its objective was a Communist world state, professedly egalitarian, but in fact a robotian enslavement of the common man by the brutally strong and animal-istically cunning. Tsarist tyranny was replaced by the tyranny of even worse ruthless brute force. If Nature was “red in tooth and claw,” the new Russian despots showed that man could easily beat her record in murderous blood baths, cruelty and viciousness.

This same basic creed took another turn in Italy in 1922 (Mussolini) and in Germany in 1933 (Hitler), which in 1939 plunged the whole world into World War II. Again murder and destruction stalked abroad and ended in the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But while Fascism and Nazism hated Communism, they nevertheless invoked its aid against the democracies. Stalin, tongue in cheek, gave aid, which ended in a stricken Poland and an enslaved Eastern Europe. When these later turned on Stalin, the Russian Bear was, strangely enough, upheld by the democracies.

The democracies thought they had won the war. Doubtless they had, but Russia annexed territory all around, seized power and is now the most extensive force—if not the mightiest—in the world. Based on what? Complete unbelief. No God, no spirit in man, no moral or spiritual values, no freedom, no compassion, no semblance of shame, no sense of sin or evil. Russian Communism, thrusting its tentacles into every part of the globe—to Egypt and the Arab world, to China and the Asian world—is unbelief, massive, organized, Satanic.

Complete Secularization

This is the unbelief of the twentieth century, different from the unbelief of any previous age. An American writer has said that “for perhaps the first time in history we are confronted with complete secularization of the opinions, emotions and practices of mankind.” He was writing a judgment of the democracies in particular. He would have used a stronger word than “secular” to describe the Russian communistic menace. He might have said the complete “animalization” of the opinions, emotions and the practices of people, for at bottom it is dehumanization. He might have said that this “unbelief” is the organized embodiment of hell itself: anti-God, anti-Christ and man, anti-moral values—Lucifer let loose.

For Christians there can be no “peaceful co-existence” with such a creed. God and the Devil cannot possibly be at peace. Nor can there be any compromise. It is war—war to the death. But Russian Communism is “organized” as a powerful state—a state that means business and has no scruples as to how it achieves its end.

Amiel’s prophecy of 1856 is coming true in 1956. “What terrible masters,” he wrote, “would the Russians be if ever the might of their rule should spread over the southern countries! A polar despotism of tyranny such as the world has not yet known, silent as darkness, keen as ice, unfeeling as bronze, a slavery without compensation, or relief; this is what they would bring.” The truth of that warning is evident today as the Russian Bear’s paw reaches out far beyond the southern countries—to Egypt and the Arab world. That paw has already grabbed China and much of the Asian world, and its claws are even in the Americas and beyond the Southern Cross.

We know, of course, that the almighty Russian communistic world state opposing itself to Almighty God cannot win. In the end it will destroy itself. “God is not mocked.” But meanwhile it can devastate and destroy and enslave. It can bring in George Orwell’s “1984”; it can repeat on a much larger scale Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Vast masses of mankind are fearfully aware of this—the Western democracies especially.

Towers Of Babel

But what do we find among these powers? A clear understanding diagnosis of the situation? Indeed no. Rather, we find them building, out of their own proud self-sufficiency and for their own self-glory, materialistic, God-defiant Towers of Babel. They erected a “Tower” called the League of Nations after the First World War. It ended in “Babel.” After the Second World War they erected the United Nations. Is that becoming “Babel” as well?

Why did the League of Nations fail? It failed because it did not abjure “unbelief.” If the United Nations fails it will be from the same cause: lack of faith in God. How can men be united in spirit and truth if there is not worship of God in spirit and in truth—if men do not believe in God?

Is it not the same with the other “isms”—Socialism, Humanism? What hope have these against Communism if men are building them upon the same major premise—whose name is Naturalism? Communism is, after all, devilishly logical—if there is no God and no spirit in man. Are not all our “isms” contradictions in terms if Nature is all—if materialism is the real—if secularism is our master? Is it possible to deduce “Liberty—Equality—Fraternity,” from a godless nature, or a godless world of men? Nay, it is impossible.

But this means abjuring our own “unbelief.” It means shedding our anthropocentrism, our self-sufficiency and self-glory. It means recognizing our utter dependence. It means rehabilitating the Bible’s major premises: “In the beginning God created,” and “God made man in his own image,” “God breathed into man the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” It means reading the Garden of Eden story with spiritual insight and understanding; not with mockery as an ancient tale, but as revelation. Therein is unfolded the wrongheadedness and pride of man; he imagined he knew better than God. And that imagination, so man’s history shows, has ever been the forerunner of calamity; it is shouting this today louder than ever in man’s history. Man does not and cannot know better than God. It is only fantastic, conceited, self-centered unbelief that makes him follow that ignis fatuus which is today the match that (unless there is a very radical change in the spirit of society) will explode the H-bomb.

Changing The Social Spirit

Radical change in the spirit of society! But how is this to be brought about? Is politics equal to the task? If so, which brand? Have not we in this century pretty well tried them all, and fruitlessly, from Fascism to Communism, and all the brands in between these extremes, which literally stand back to back and scream different slogans concocted in the factory of Naturalism? Can economics do it? Even the economics of the welfare state? Can scientific materialism and its offspring, materialistic Socialism, change the spirit of society when it does not even behave in the spirit of man? Can technical education perform this miracle of change? Look again at Russia, which probably has more technicians than even the United States; are they changing the spirit of Russian society? Recent events in Hungary give an appalling answer.

One is neither blind to the importance of these activities, nor does one wish to disparage their service to mankind in their proper sphere. But it is obvious nonsense to think that they can, by their collectivism and environmentalism and this-worldism, change the spirit of society. Jeremiah long ago asserted in the name of God, “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it?” A greater than Jeremiah pronounced a similar judgment: “From within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: all these things come from within, and defile the man” (Mark 7:21ff.). The world today is thus pinpointed. The Lord Jesus said to Nicodemus: “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again” (John 3:5ff.).

The Wisdom Of Christ

We err sadly if we value the wisdom of either science, or politics, or economics, or even education, more than the wisdom of Christ. For in the light of his wisdom they all turn out to be plain foolishness. And yet it is to just such foolishness that modern unbelief is leading us. Neither social nor ecclesiastic externalism can change the spirit of society, for neither of these can change the heart of man. It is only as the heart of individual man is changed by the Eternal Spirit himself that the spirit of the twentieth-century world can be changed. Only as each man “believeth” can he be “saved.” It is “believers” the world needs—obedient, dependent believers, personal believers—in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Word of God, the Light of the world, the Saviour, the Regenerator of men, the Way to God, the Truth of God, the Life of God. Neither dictatorship nor democracy can save the world from disaster. Only Christ can do that through ordinary men and women like you and me who humbly cry, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”

All of which is, admittedly, old-fashioned. Yes, as old-fashioned as the New Testament and “the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1). The Gospel which Paul declared in pagan Rome was “the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth” (Rom. 1:16). Why not do as St. Augustine did, “open and read” for yourself, and let the Word himself speak to you? You want peace. Why not listen to the “Prince of Peace”? Can anyone be a surer guide than “the Son of God”?

J. H. Ward has held pastoral posts in the Church of England for 47 years. He holds the B.A. and M.A. degrees from Cambridge University, and served from 1914 to 1919 as Director of Religious and Educational Work for the Y.M.C.A. in England. Now in his 79th year, his present parish in Ongar, Essex, is 30 square miles in area. He is a frequent contributor to church periodicals on current spiritual concerns.

The Busy Man

My life has been too much on little spires,my heart intent on second-rate desires;my soul has struck its spark too much to lightthe chaff and tinder-stuff of petty fires;while God’s great beacon, patient in the night,has waited for the torch to make it bright.

TERENCE Y. MULLINS

Cover Story

A Church Powered for an Atom Age

Through 30 or more years of air wave communication, I have never heard any commentator speak of the Church as a world power. In an earth shaken by the fear of atomic destruction, commentators today refer only to two sources of restraint upon potential war-minded aggressors: massive military might, and the United Nations. However necessary fearful military equipment may be, it is at best but a negative restraint upon the passions of potential dictators. It cannot transform a warmonger into a lover of peace. The United Nations is a useful public forum for the focus of world opinion. But again it is fundamentally an organization of external pressure. Its range of influence is on the circumference of life. It seeks to shift the balance of nations by outer compulsion. It lacks power to deal with inner motives. Only the Church dares to claim it can change a man’s heart, and wash away lust, greed, hate and fear. Yet, in the affairs of nations, the Church is ignored.

New Power For A New Day

Now, one cannot ignore a hurricane. A sidewalk cannot ignore the root beneath it which by persistent growth eventually splits the concrete pavement in two. Peter, the fisherman disciple of Jesus Christ, was not ignored. The mind and heart of St. Paul could not be ignored. Peter and Paul had access to the source of life like that growing in a twig on a hillside that cracks in twain a granite rock. Equipped with holy boldness, their private prayers and public speech were spiritual hurricanes of faith and love that crumbled the strongest resistance. Slowly but surely, they and the early disciples took over an ancient empire. What life-giving power has the Church lost that it cannot duplicate that experience today? Were the Church to have this same spiritual power in our atomic age, it could not be ignored!

Thirty odd years in pastoral work makes this problem mine. If the Church has failed, it has been my failure. In retrospect, I would like to examine the Church from the standpoint of personal observation and experience. In the two churches where I have served a major part of my ministry, I received into church membership perhaps 1200 individuals. I now realize that they fall into three groups.

The first group are those who lack a living experience of Jesus Christ. I received them into church membership, but as far as knowing who Jesus Christ was and what he had done for them, they were still in spiritual darkness. If that was true, how dared I welcome them into full church membership?

I am speaking now from hindsight, the backward look, as I try honestly to assess my action and their condition. So far as I can now determine I was blinded to the full reality of what I was doing. In the natural life these men, women and young people were normally kindly, goodhearted folks in their daily fellowship. They were helpful to one another in time of physical distress or financial need. When they were asked if they believed in Jesus Christ, their reply was correct. They said, “Yes, I believe in Jesus Christ.” They were not dishonest people who deliberately affirmed what they did not believe. If anyone then had challenged the veracity of their affirmation about Jesus Christ, they would have been deeply hurt. They did believe in Jesus Christ. But I see now that it was a mental belief, an intellectual statement about Jesus, rather than a living experience of passionate love for Jesus Christ as their Saviour and Lord.

Facing The Fact Of Failure

If I try to excuse myself at this date by saying what I have said in the past, “They gave the right answers,” I know now that I would be hiding behind an evasion. When I face my Lord in heaven about my personal responsibility for the destiny of their souls, he will rightly and justly say to me, “In those dealings with souls for whom I died, I never knew you.”

Why, then, do I say this, when my part in their living relation to Jesus Christ is beyond repair? First of all, I say it because I believe it is true. Furthermore, if in spiritual blindness and irresponsibility, I failed those who were entrusted to my spiritual care, it may be that other ministers have had or are facing similar experiences. If this is one reason why the Church lacks power for its Master when the fate of a world hangs in the balance—to face the truth of failure with penitence and renewed faith may help open the channels of God’s grace to a new and greater flow of his power in this hour of world need.

I see plainly now that I welcomed into church membership people who from the world’s standpoint were goodhearted, generous folk, but who had not yet been born into the spiritual plane of life where Jesus Christ dwells continually. To receive them under those circumstances was deception on my part, however blindly I acted. I did them grievous spiritual harm.

Life From Outside

In my own boyhood, at the age of fifteen, I had a living experience of Jesus Christ as my Saviour and Lord that revolutionized my life and became the foundation for every good thing that came to me thereafter. The Holy Spirit entered into my spirit, led me into a life of daily prayer and opened to me a love of Scripture that every blinding experience since has never been able to destroy. Yet, in those days of youth, I didn’t understand what was happening to me. Nor did anyone ever make it fully clear to me. A clear understanding of the development of my spiritual life could have made me far more useful to my Lord.

Now no one disputes the facts of physical birth. No one denies the self-evident fact that a germ of life from one human body must invade another body and two forms of life merge into one to produce physical conception. Unfortunately it has not been made as clear in the teaching of the church that entrance into the spiritual plane of life requires the same process—an invasion of the human spirit by divine life outside the human spirit—the living Spirit of Jesus Christ entering the human spirit in a union that brings regeneration, and birth from above, a second birth, even as physical conception makes possible generation, or our first birth as human beings.

All nature confirms this process. Every seed has been born once by the self-evident fact of its physical presence. When planted in the earth and the life outside the seed breaks through the decayed, dying, protective shell, to merge into union with the life inside the shell, the seed has had a second birth, a new birth, a “born again” experience. The seed has now entered that marvelous plane of harvest abundance where one seed becomes multiplied a thousandfold.

Truly for the seed, this is life from “above,” a plane of existence the seed could never have known if it had not been buried in the earth in the death experience for the outer shell or “self” life of the seed.

The first step for spiritual power in the Church is a membership made up of people who have actually been born into the spiritual plane where Jesus Christ, the Risen Lord, abides. How can a person know anything about the physical world until he is born into it? How can anyone know anything about the spiritual world until they are born into it?

The Dawn Of Daylight

The second group among the church members I received were those with a lack of the life-giving expression of Jesus Christ. They were born into the spiritual plane of fellowship with Jesus Christ. But birth into either the physical or spiritual realm, was only at the infant stage. It was only the dawn of spiritual daylight. Spiritually, this salvation experience is only the cradle or Bethlehem stage.

Physical infancy is a lovely thing if it is only a passing stage on the road to physical maturity. However, passing years that leave a human being as physically helpless as a babe is very sad. It is an even sadder experience to see promising spiritual infants who never mature into the developed capacity for a life-giving expression of Jesus Christ. It is a double tragedy for a pastor to look back through the years of his own spiritual blindness and realize his failure to nourish these individuals with an eternal destiny until they have grown beyond the need of constantly being rocked in the cradle of spiritual infancy by maturer spiritual hands. It is my personal failure, which I wish again frankly to confess, that I have shared in a Church that lacks power in an atomic age. My failure to help guide those children of God into the New Testament experience of spiritual maturity can be another area where my Lord can say to me, “In this area of soul need, I never knew you.”

The second step for spiritual power in the Church today is strong, wise nourishment for those who have been genuinely regenerated through penitence and faith, and who now through that second birth live in the spiritual plane where Jesus Christ always dwells.

The Expansive Life

The third group in the members I received into the Church were those leading a life of expansion for Jesus Christ. They were the ones who by God’s grace were soundly born into the Kingdom of God and grew beyond spiritual infancy to a measurable life of Christian maturity. They became spiritual disciples of Jesus Christ. They reached the point of Christian usefulness to their Lord. The Lord saved them. But he made me responsible for a ministry of the Word that eventually made disciples of them. His command was, “Go, make disciples.…”

An editor once wrote me that he was more interested in people having the experience of “salvation in Christ” than he was in seeing people have “success in Christ.” My own share in keeping people in the cradle stage through failure in nourishing them to spiritual maturity, makes it necessary for me to bear a part of the responsibility for the lack of power in the Church today. Altogether too many “saved” people in our churches never make it to the disciple stage of useful spiritual maturity. As one who can see his failure in pastoral responsibility, I know I cannot dodge my Lord’s solemn judgment.

There were many activities in my churches that no one would label harmful, save for the fact that although they were generally accepted parts of church machinery, they had nothing whatever to do with my Lord’s command, “Go, make disciples.” Even in those moments of my higher vision as a Christian, it was far too easy for me as Henry Ward Beecher used to say, “To pray cream and live skim milk.”

Resurrection Power

The “unborn” lives in my churches exercised no spiritual power. The “undernourished” ones who were only in the cradle stage, were only then at the beginning point where they could be led by careful guidance into the stage of usefulness to their Lord—discipleship. Only the undaunted lives of spiritual maturity in the Church exercised New Testament resurrection power.

These were the ones who clearly understood who Jesus Christ is and what he has done for them on the Cross. They were the disciples who, on the basis of the redemption of Jesus Christ, clearly recognized and joyously acknowledged his absolute sovereignty over their lives, and who witnessed to his absolute Deity. They knew they no longer belonged to themselves. They had been bought with a price. They had given up all right to themselves. With St. Paul, they affirmed, “I (the self man) die daily,” abiding in death to self at the Cross with Jesus Christ in order that they might abide in his risen life, the power of his Resurrection.

I know now why the Church lacks power today. I know where I have failed my Lord. I know that he is the Lord of the harvest and that my obedience is to him alone who wills to bring in his Kingdom his way, not mine. I know that I love and serve a Saviour and Lord who has all power in heaven and earth, whose promises are unfailing, whose love is infinite and who still commands and empowers me by his Holy Spirit to, “Go, make disciples.” My trust and obedience determines the flow of RESURRECTION POWER in and through his Church.

Carlos Greenleaf Fuller holds the A.B. degree from Colgate University, B.D. from Union Theological Seminary (New York City), and M.A. from Teachers College, Columbia University. He served Featherbed Lane Presbyterian Church, of New York City for 16 years, and then First Presbyterian Church of East Rochester, N.Y. for 13 years. A prolific writer, he has written some 60 articles for religious publications.

Review of Current Religious Thought: December 23, 1957

As we near the end of the old year we go through the Christmas season toward the New Year with its new tasks and responsibilities. Our thoughts, therefore, quite naturally turn toward a perspective on our life and our work.

We must not lose sight of the connection between Christmas and the New Year. If what is involved in Christmas were simply something romantic, there would be in it no power for a new beginning. But we are reminded that over against the romanticizing of Christmas, we have also the picture of light and darkness, of peace and struggle. We shall have to give thought and attention to these elements of darkness and strife, for the light shines, indeed, in the midst of this darkness. And as we ask ourselves the questions concerning 1957-why has God permitted so many, many things?—then it is good to consider that one can also ask such questions in connection with the Christmas story, as we think of the terrible shadow of the slaughter of the children at Bethlehem.

In all of the history of the church and of theology men’s minds have been occupied again and again with God’s “permitting.” It has been pointed out that the word “permission” is too weak an expression, that God is not simply a witness to world events who simply observes but does not intervene. Calvin calls it foolishness to think of God as “sitting on the observation post, awaiting the fortuitous course of events, so that his judgments depend on the approval of men.” It is exactly the gripping application of all of history, that God rules.

When God permits frightening things, his dealings are at the same time full of activity in the unsearchableness of his ways. His mighty dealings cut directly across the sin-filled horrors of events.

The cross of Christ was not a passive “permission” of God, but a Godly atoning act. When Herod and Pilate and Israel lay violent hands upon Christ, then we read concerning this: “For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done” (Acts 4:28).

The providence of God is least of all satisfactorily described by the term permission. The question is certainly to be understood, as arises so often in the heart, why does God permit so much; why does he not make an end to it, now that there is so much evil on the earth? This is a question that especially in our time once again troubles many hearts and minds. Augustine was concerned with it and we can go back still farther to the Old Testament and the cry of “Why?” resounds out of many troubles and oppressions. But at the same time the Old Testament declares that God has not surrendered the reins out of his hand, but that he “bringeth the counsel of the heathen to nought: he maketh the devices of the people to none effect” (Psalm 33:10).

Especially at Christmas time are we reminded of this. Directly across and through the shadows (Herod!) we see that there is also a boundary to God’s permissiveness. This limit is clearly depicted in the Christmas story. It lies in the preservation of the Christ. Over against the activity of Herod in its deepest darkness, we see the flight to Egypt as the boundary of the evil acts of men. It is not so, also not then, that evil has the upper hand, unlimited as an independent opposition power against God. In the middle of all the unveiling of evil we see, in faith, the dealing of God, which does not always interfere at the moment, as we would sometimes desire to have it, but which establishes boundaries, now here, then there, and which preserves Christ for the world and which will bring forth the coming of his Kingdom.

God asks of us, therefore, a boundless trust. He is not to be counted out in the events of the first Christmas. Looking back we can see the thread of events, but as we stand before them we do not always understands that the protector of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps (Psalm 121). But there will come a time when, anew and in totality, the sense and purpose of the dealings of God will be made plain.

There is a great struggle going on for the hearts of men. We are sometimes awed by the enormous proportion of the things and events that frighten and amaze us. There are people who do not seem to be able to hold out any longer and who cry in despair, Where is God? They no longer see the boundary of God’s permissive will; they are no longer conscious of God’s overruling might. They begin to believe in the overpowering might of evil.

It is exactly because of this that it is so appropriate that we go alongside the crib of Bethlehem to the end of the year and soon to the new task of the New Year. Round about the manger there are involved the final and deepest decisions, as Mary saw in her thrilling vision: “He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away” (Luke 1:51–53).

Out of the lowly humiliation of the manger, all things and all human concerns and relationships are placed in an entirely new light. It is a moving scene indeed that Mary here witnesses.

As we pass alongside the manger toward the threshold of the New Year, we shall remember that in the eyes of God things look quite different than we often imagine. He proves all things and judges their worth in the light of his Kingdom. He does this out of the secrecy of the “great mystery.”

We shall then not celebrate Christmas in simply a romantic tradition. The feast does indeed have its impact upon the emotions (and not alone on the understanding), but with a little romanticism over “the light” we shall not get very far in this hard world.

In this real world there is only one perspective: the gospel, the message of salvation, that is also now made known to us. And in all our asking “Why?” there comes to us through the darkness a voice which encourages and spurs us to our work and to our task. For there is always a boundary, a limit, to the permissiveness of God.

To this faith we are called as a faith full of perspective. And this faith is at the same time the assurance that the irrefutable witness has come to us that the proud shall be scattered and that God will comfort the lowly.

It is this humility that is the test for all of life, also in the coming year. Our own lives, too, will be tested by it.

This review is prepared successively for CHRISTIANITY TODAY by four evangelical scholars: Professor W. Stanford Reid of Canada, Professor G. C. Berkouwer of the Netherlands, Professor John H. Gerstner of the United States and Dr. Philip E. Hughes of England.

Book Briefs: December 23, 1957

Original Sources

A New Eusebius, edited by J. Stevenson, Macmillan, 1957. $4.50.

The best way to study history is, of course, by reading the original sources. In most areas, however, they are so voluminous that time permits very few people to follow that policy. The history of the ancient church is an exception. Here the sources are relatively few, and a reasonable number of them may be read within the average man’s time budget. But are they accessible? The answer is: Yes, increasingly so. One of the newest and best helps to that end is the present volume. Just as the original Eusebius made up a large part of his text by quotation from earlier writers, this is a source book in which are gathered for the reader the most important documents or extracts from them in English translation.

The volume is based on an earlier collection, now out of print, B. J. Kidd: Documents Illustrative of the History of the Church, and covers the period up to 337. It is, however, an improvement upon the already very useful Kidd. It contains more selections (319, of which 266 cover the period of Kidd, v. I as against 225 in the latter). The arrangement of the selections by subject rather than by author’s date is a great advance in usefulness. Explanatory notes are added at the end of a large number of selections. There are very useful annotations on the source documents and their authors, a fine set of chronological tables, an endpaper map and an extensive index. Anyone interested in the ancient church needs to have the volume at hand.

PAUL WOOLLEY

Novel Solution

The Hill of Stoning, by Edward V. Ruskin, Vantage, New York, 1956. $3.50.

Puzzled as all evangelical expositors have been by the dilemma of Jesus’ apparent expectation of an early return to earth and by his apparent failure to do so, the writer of this book attempts a novel and somewhat startling solution. He proposes that the appearance of Jesus to the dying Stephen was the fulfilment of his promised return, and that he was secretly and invisibly present with the Church ever thereafter. He adopts the “year-day” theory of chronology, making the 69 weeks of Daniel 9 equal to the chronological span between the edict of Cyrus to rebuild Jerusalem and the public appearance of the Messiah on Palm Sunday. The seventieth week he interprets as the time between Palm Sunday and the conversion of Cornelius, with the midpoint of the week at Stephen’s martyrdom.

The “he” of Daniel 9:27 he refers to the Messiah, not to the “prince that shall come” of verse 26. The cessation of the sacrifice he equates with the sermon of Stephen, who pointed out that the worship of God did not need either sacrifice or Temple. The “one that maketh desolate” he asserts is Saul of Tarsus, who desolated the Church by persecution.

Along with this revolutionary hypothesis he suggests some other equally unconventional interpretations. The election of Matthias was a mistake which prepared the way for the establishment of a hierarchy in the Church. Stephen was the “beloved disciple” of the Fourth Gospel, and its author. Peter was in error when he wrote that “the Lord is not slack concerning His promise as some count slackness” (2 Pet. 3:9), because he did not recognize the fact that Jesus had already come. His statement, therefore, has misled the entire Christian Church since then, and has obscured the truth which has only recently been made plain to the author of this book. James, the moderator of the Jerusalem church and brother of Jesus, was a Jew at heart rather than a Christian, an enemy of Paul, and a traitor to Christian faith who did nothing to rescue Peter from prison or to avert the arrest of Paul in Jerusalem.

While new light on Scripture is always welcome to its students, Mr. Ruskin’s interpretations will not meet universal approval. Too many of them are unproved and probably unprovable. For instance, while it may be possible that the Fourth Gospel was written—though perhaps not published—in the first decade of the Christian Church, there is no external evidence whatever that it was written by Stephen, and the internal evidence adduced here is quite inconclusive.

Neither in history nor in eschatology does this book make a very convincing case for its contentions. The author fails to explain how Jesus’ predictions of a final judgment could have been fulfilled if his return took place in 35 A.D., nor why the epistles of Paul, written after that, should still predict his future advent. His theory of the tension between Peter and James on the one hand and Stephen and Paul on the other sounds like a counterpart of the Tubingen theory of a century ago. It makes interesting reading, but it cannot be considered as the final interpretation of Christianity in the apostolic age.

MERRILL C. TENNEY

Guide For Study

The Epistle to the Hebrews, by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Baker, 1957. $1.50.

This is a Bible study handbook of great value. Based on an exhaustive study of the Greek and Hebrew, it presents a summary of the literary questions connected with the epistle, a detailed analysis of the epistle in outline form and then an exposition corresponding to the outline by way of definition, explanation and suggestion.

For a minister preaching through the book of Hebrews this little book will be most suggestive and will take the form of a guide. For a lay student wishing to master the contents of the book of Hebrews, Dr. Archer’s treatise will be most illuminating.

H. J. OCKENGA

“Biblical” Preaching

The Integrity of Preaching, by John Knox, Abingdon, 1957. $1.75.

These days everyone seems to be jumping on the bandwagon of biblical preaching. In this little volume the author, professor at Union Theological Seminary, New York, makes an eloquent plea for the cause. Biblical preaching he recognizes as a pressing need of the day, but he defines it as expounding texts as recurring events in our history and as concerning the great event, Christ. Such preaching, he believes, will be personal, priestly and sacramental.

With many things in the book one is in hearty agreement. There is a pressing need for biblical preaching; there is a need for teaching from the pulpit; there must be careful study of the text and historical circumstances of the passage; and every preacher certainly should immerse himself in his own message before ministering to others.

However, these thrusts of the book in the right direction are largely abrogated by the author’s basic position. To him biblical preaching is not really Bible preaching. In reality the Bible is merely a witness to what we should preach and not the substance which we preach. While the book emphasizes the need for faithful pursuit of the art of exegesis, the impression is left that biblical preaching must not emphasize the historical facts which occurred in the first century. Again, while the author pleads for preaching which concerns what he calls the central event of the Bible, Christ, and although he mentions many of the important events of the life of Christ—even atonement—he fails ever to include preaching about the blood of Christ. Furthermore, the author’s conception of authority in preaching is not based on biblical preaching but on relevant (twentieth century) preaching. Somewhere in the background, one suspects, there has been strong neo-orthodox influence moulding this manuscript.

To those who may read this book: (1) beware of the basic position, and (2) be aware of what is not said as well as what is said.

CHARLES C. RYRIE

Constant In Prayer

The Sure Victory, by Madame Chiang Kai-shek, Revell, 1957. $1.00.

It is important and interesting for us to be informed concerning the religious faith of such a personality as Madame Chiang Kai-shek. This little book (45 pages) is a kind of spiritual autobiography. The author tells of the remarkable faith of her mother and shows how her own faith developed from the early formal, intellectual faith to a genuine heart faith, deepened largely through the experiences of the difficult years of Japanese terrorism and Communist infiltration.

The “sure victory” over the forces of evil in this world is through prayer, the author claims. She describes the way in which her little prayer group has grown and many others have sprung up throughout Formosa. She tells of how much has been accomplished through their efforts, including the supplying of Christian chaplains for the Chinese armed forces. She makes a plea for a chain of prayer groups throughout the world as the means of achieving victory over non-Christian ideologies.

Surely we rejoice at this insistence upon the importance of prayer in the individual Christian life and the power of prayer in world affairs. But the fact that these prayer groups were originated outside the Christian church appears to be a sad commentary upon the condition of the Protestant church in Free China. Is it not because the church has failed to provide an earnest, vital fellowship of prayer and failed to possess an evangelistic zeal that would make it reach out to the lives of those who were in need of the Gospel that Madame Chiang and her friends were compelled to begin prayer groups of their own? And is it not regrettable that the zeal of these prayer groups is not being incorporated into the church as well as strengthened by the doctrinal backbone that the church should be able to offer?

NORMA R. ELLIS

Young Churches

The Church in Southeast Asia, by Rajah B. Manikam and Winburn T. Thomas, Friendship, New York. Cl. $2.50, pap. $1.25.

This book was written under the sponsorship of the Joint Commission on Missionary Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U. S. A. as a mission study book for adults. Leaders of study groups will find this book basic for mission study.

The authors are exceptionally well-equipped for the preparation of this survey. Dr. Manikam, a native of India, has done post-graduate work in the U. S., earning both Ph.D. and B.D. degrees. For 20 years he was an active leader in the National Christian Council of India. From 1950 to 1955 he was joint secretary in East Asia of the World Council of Churches and the International Missionary Council, a position that required travel throughout Southeast Asia and provided an intimate knowledge of the life and work of the Church. Since January, 1956, Dr. Manikam has been Bishop of the Tranquebar of the Federation of Evangelical Lutheran Churches of India.

Dr. Thomas is a native of Arkansas who in 1933 went to Japan as a missionary under the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. The years of World War II were spent in the U.S. where he earned his Ph.D. and served with the Student Volunteer Movement. He has traveled extensively in the Far East and since 1951 has been field representative in Indonesia of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in U.S.A., living in Djakarta.

In the compass of this brief volume of 167 pages is packed a mass of information of the Church in every country of this area. An account of the political situation of each country is presented. The culture and religions of these lands are discussed and the Church is seen in her environment, problems, state of health, progress and prospects.

Of special interest is the effect of nationalism and communism both upon the Church and upon work of missions.

Surprising is the strength of the churches. For example, in Indonesia there are thirty autonomous church bodies, numbering 5,000 to 600,000 Christians each. There is a Protestant “community” of about 5,000,000.

The vast numbers of the unreached is overwhelming, nearly 175,000,000, and the density of this population is almost unbelievable. In the delta near Saigon (Indo-China) up to 6,000 rural people are living in each square mile.

The Church in Southeast Asia is chiefly factual and very informative. There are sketches of men and women, whose service to the Kingdom reveals what God can do through lives transformed by his power.

In his portion of the foreword Dr. Manikam says, “These young churches in these old lands of Southeast Asia are minority churches set amidst vast numbers of non-Christians, and they therefore face many problems. But thank God they are there—in every one of these countries—and however small they may be, they are the hope of these countries.… The churches in these ancient lands of Southeast Asia beckon to their partners in North America to come over and help them. May God help many to hear this Macedonian call! This time it comes from Southeast Asia.”

LEWIS H. LANCASTER

Superego Theory

Psychotherapy and Religion, by Henry Guntrip, Harper, 1957. $3.00.

This book by an English clergyman-psychotherapist is more concerned with elaboration and promotion of a theory of neurosis than with finding how Christianity can better collaborate with psychotherapy.

The system presented is an extension of the Melanie Klein variation of Freudian superego theory and was formulated by Fairbairn, a British psychoanalyst. The Freudian concept of instinct is discarded in favor of the viewpoint that all impulses arise from object relationships. The biological context of classical psychoanalysis thus gives way to a social orientation, personal relationships being regarded as paramount. The Freudian ideas of repression and unconscious are retained.

According to this theory, the disturbing figures of childhood are banished by repression deeply into the unconscious, where the ego continues to maintain with them relationships of longing, anger and fear. Anxiety is the product of these repressed bad object relationships. Neurosis is the consequence of the disintegrating, demoralizing influence of this continuing conflict.

Healthy self-realization is achieved, not by the scientific analysis of the individual’s history, but by a therapeutic personal relationship with the therapist. Psychotherapy may not be unscientific, but must be more than merely scientific. Values must be a concern of the therapist, although they lie outside the domain of science. The patient must go beyond the utilitarian goals of symptom relief and economic rehabilitation to face the kind of person he is.

The author struggles with the question of relativity of values, coming to rest in an ambiguous position where values are recognized as essential but are to be judged in terms of mature and successful personality. Man remains the measure.

The closing chapter, with the same title as the book, likewise reflects the author’s ambiguity. His effort to maintain some kind of scientific status as a psychotherapist seems to stand in the way of his offering as a minister any real contribution to improvement of relationships between Christianity and psychotherapy. He affirms “sound and enlightened religious faith” as the best and most hopeful setting for psychotherapy, while wondering in the same paragraph whether religious experience can penetrate into the unconscious depths of personality in the way that psychoanalytic psychotherapy can do.

Guntrip echoes Toynbee’s call back to religion from science and technology, and affirms religious experience and faith as giving “the largest scope for self-realization possible to man.” In the end, however, the attenuated, denatured character of his religious concepts is apparent in the syncretistic platitude that “psychotherapy is evidently a truly religious experience.” ORVILLE S. WALTERS, M. D.

Scholar’s Commentary

The Gospel According to St. John. An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, by C. K. Barrett, Macmillan, 1957. $4.75.

Interest in the Fourth Gospel continues at a high pitch. Of the several commentaries produced in this field in the last few years, this is the most weighty. It is primarily a scholar’s commentary, approaching everything from the critical standpoint.

About one-fourth of the book is devoted to introduction, and this is the most valuable part of the whole. In the commentary section, the notes are often jottings. One misses an integrating touch. Perhaps one becomes spoiled by the use of Hoskyns, with its insistence on tracing the strains of theological thought, so that comments of the type found in Barrett do not appeal as strongly.

Barrett is skeptical, as are most moderns, about the traditional view of authorship. With Dodd, he sees also a different hand at work in the First Epistle, though many scholars are still prepared to defend the unity of authorship of Gospel and Epistle.

The Introduction deals with the characteristics and purpose of the Gospel, its non-Christian background as well as the Christian, the theology, the origin and authority, and finally, the text. The reader is impressed with the variety and subtilty of John’s allusions to matters which presuppose a knowledge of current Judaism, Greek philosophy, mystery religions and gnostic systems of thought. It is this background material which has challenged recent study even more, perhaps, than such questions as the eschatology of the Gospel or the special interest of the writer in the sacraments.

Barrett is of the opinion that the Fourth Gospel reflects a knowledge of the Marcan materials, but that we cannot go beyond this with confidence.

This learned work may well become the most widely used critical commentary in this field. Its author handles problems with care and is not an extremist in any direction. In this day of the high cost of books, it is gratifying to see this substantial volume offered at such a reasonable figure.

EVERETT F. HARRISON

Bright Story

Horses and Chariots, Popular Report of the British and Foreign Bible Society (London) for 1956.

This is a bright story full of indications of advance. As one turns over the pages and perceives the immense area of the society’s work, it staggers the imagination. The chapter about the Translations Department reveals that there are 47 new languages in which pioneer work is going on and in 32 other languages additional books are being translated. The number of New Testament translations nearing completion for the first time is 36 and those of the whole Bible is 47. Four new languages have now been added to the society’s list, making a total of 836. The publication of the Ndonga Bible, for which a large Christian community among the Ovambos has been eagerly waiting for years past, is now an accomplishment.

The demand for the Bible is as great as ever and every bookseller and colporteur is at the same time an evangelist. “The sower soweth the word” (Mark 4:14); if the servants of God will sow it, God will look after it.

ERNEST F. KEVAN

Salvage Operation

About the Bible, by Frank W. Moyle, Scribner’s, 1957. $3.50.

Earlier in the twentieth century, under the destructive influence of classic liberalism, the Bible was dethroned from the seat of ultimate authority which it had occupied in the life of societies molded by the Reformation, and was replaced with a variety of substitutes, or none at all. This being the climate within the Church, it was only natural that on the outside the reaction should take on a still more decided negative character. Hitherto, with the exception of several isolated periods in post-Reformation history, even the non-Christian public maintained a form of respect (often little more than superstition, to be sure) for the Scriptures. With the birth of the new theology, which while maintaining the critical spirit still finds permanent values of decisive import in the Scriptures, the problem of communication has become severely acute because to the common man the Bible is a closed and forgotten book. In this setting it has become both desirable and necessary to re-educate the public in the Scriptures with what is conceived as the abiding message of revelation. In recent years, therefore, numerous volumes have been published with this purpose in view. The present book is of this type.

Frank Moyle is an active parish priest of the Anglican church with an Oxford background in theological education. He is fully abreast of the current trends in biblical research and scholarship, although in keeping with his purpose his extensive learning is not made obvious by the technicalities and esoteric vocabulary of the scholar. Moyle writes in the style of J. B. Phillips, who incidentally endorses his work enthusiastically. He deliberately limits the scope of his coverage to a selective group of representative biblical documents.

The book is an example of the most radical school of contemporary criticism. Moyle tries desperately to salvage something from the critical wreckage for the man on the street, but hardly achieves his purpose. With respect to the Old Testament he speaks approvingly of the Marcion heresy and regards many of the passages embarrassing. He finds here a number of crude pictures of Deity (within the veil of revealed religion), eg., the God of Sinai is an apparently imaginary storm deity. The origin of man as recorded in Genesis is similar in certain respects to the Greek myth of Athena’s springing from the head of Zeus. He defends Uzziah’s violation of priestly restrictions in the interests of more personal access to God. He brands Ezra a “fanatical priest” on a “merciless mission” to dissolve mixed marriages in defense of an overt nationalism. He interprets the book of Ruth as a contemporary attempt at correcting this evil. He sees human suffering as one of God’s “unsolved problems.” His solution to the difficulty of the book of Jonah is the admission of its allegorical kinship with the tales of Hans Christian Andersen. He freely castigates the Christian Church for its approval of the imprecatory Psalms, failing to understand adequately their real significance in relation to the holiness and justice of God.

The New Testament literature receives equal abuse at this author’s hands. The only essential difference between the canonical Gospels and the pseudo-gospels is the apostolic authenticity (challenged in specific instances, however) of the former, not the historicity of the recorded materials. Matthew’s appeals to Old Testament prophecies are “monotonous reiterations,” both illegitimate and artificial. His accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection are “far-fetched stories.” Jesus’ apocalyptic sayings with reference to his second advent are poetical. St. Paul’s warnings against an expected early return are interpreted as a repudiation of the doctrine of the literal Parousia altogether. The Sermon on the Mount is also the masterpiece of a poet, not the manifesto of a spiritual kingdom. He strips away all the miraculous in the ministry of Jesus, insisting that a Christianity which demands the traditional view is unworthy of rational, intelligent creatures. He opposes Stephen’s Christianity to that of Peter, James, and John, as a more desirable “liberal” version.

Throughout the book Moyle bitterly attacks all literal interpretation of the Scriptures, reducing the historical values of the documents to zero. It is interesting to note that he very purposefully directs his attacks against the positions of the most naive literalists, passing by without recognition the great conservative scholars of past and present alike. Moyle senses no need of any historical, objective redemption. He finds no essential difference between the Sonship of Jesus and that of humanity in general. The former reveals what the latter actually is.

All in all, the book leaves the man on the street right where he has been these many years, providing him with no better understanding of the Word of God than he previously enjoyed. It compels him to push his way through a morass of error, superstition and darkness to a few kernels of truth which are in no wise the revelation of saving grace. One concludes that the attempt, therefore, is not worth the effort. The book demonstrates most clearly the endeavor of the unregenerate, depraved mind of man to inquire into the things revealed and effected by God for eternal redemption, an endeavor unaided by the power of faith and the illumination of the Holy Spirit. This book is not heresy; it is the most outrageous blasphemy.

RICHARD ALLEN BODEY

Struggle In Hungary

History of the Hungarian Reformed Church, by Imre Revesz, Hungarian Reformed Federation of America, Washington, D. C., 1956. Pp. 163, $1.50.

The recent heroic revolt against Soviet oppression in Hungary has focused world attention on that small country. When refugees began streaming across the borders people in this country who supposed that all Hungarians were Roman Catholics like Cardinal Mindszenty were surprised to learn that many of them were Protestants. They were further surprised to learn that the congregations from which they had come in the old country were evangelical and Bible-centered and that the refugees who arrived here felt most at home in similar congregations. The reason for this surprise is American ignorance of central and eastern Europe; its history is not taught in our high schools and only history majors touch it in American higher education.

The Protestant church in Hungary today is one of the most spiritually virile communions in Christendom. One can find no more stirring tales of heroism, great faith, and heart-rending tragedy than those of the church there as it, hemmed in by peoples of other faiths, struggled to maintain its witness. This volume is an account of that history from the Reformation to the present, written by a leading historian of the Hungarian Reformed Church.

The book traces the story of the rapid spread of Protestantism in Hungary early in the Reformation period until virtually the entire population had embraced the new faith; the Turkish conquest and occupation of the greater part of Hungary for a century and a half; the rise and eventual victory of the Counter-Reformation (1608–1715); the period of repression (1715–1789); the period of reform (1789–1848); further struggle against Romanist attempts to destroy the witness of the church in the nineteenth century, and its revitalization in this century. Readers will follow with interest the titanic struggle waged against Rome in this easternmost bastion of evangelicalism; they will learn about an experiment in Unitarianism centuries before the New England defection from the faith; and they will be inspired to read about the recent awakening and witness of the church there. Some will be surprised to know that one out of every five persons in Hungary is a member of the Reformed church, that its leadership early took the part of the landless peasants in the social struggle, and that many thousands of Jewish converts have become evangelized and admitted to the Church since World War II.

The only fault of the book is its brevity. Too much is of necessity left out in order to keep the book within its present limits. It is only an outline of the thrilling story which ought to be told English readers, but it is an outline which is well conceived and well told. We wish for it the wide reading it deserves and express our gratitude to the publishers for a very necessary and readable volume.

M. EUGENE OSTERHAVEN

New Interest

The Puritan Tradition in English Life, by John Marlowe, Cresset, London. 16s.

This is an evaluation of the influence of Puritanism, and is designed to show that the tradition of Victorian middle-class life springs from the theological and religious influences of sixteenth and seventeenth-century English Puritanism.

Of necessity the author devotes a substantial part of his theme to the historical and theological origins of Puritanism. In analyzing the strength and weakness of the Puritans with shrewdness and penetration, he is not always fair, as for example, “Their attitude towards other people was regulated not by love but by a sense of duty.… They paid their debts but did not always forgive their debtors.” It is easy to oversimplify when dealing with the complex situations of Cromwellian England, and the author has not escaped doing so. Beyond any doubt is that Puritan emphasis on theology, on right living and the simple virtues gave English national character a quality lacking in most countries at that time.

Marlowe points out that Puritan influence was renewed through the evangelical revival of the eighteenth century even if its theology was not fully endorsed. It is noteworthy that the evangelicals of the Church of England had more in common with the Puritans than the Methodists who later found their way into dissent.

S. W. MURRAY

Bible Book of the Month: The Book of Revelation

The Book of Revelation is undoubtedly the most mysterious and at the same time the most intriguing part of the New Testament. Its open affirmation that it deals with future events, its weird symbolism of seals, trumpets, bowls, thunders and lightnings, beasts, and angels, its strange and sometimes almost incoherent expressions have frightened some from giving it the attention it deserves. For many readers it is either a frustrating puzzle or else the happy hunting ground of fanatics. Concluding that they can find in it nothing relevant to their spiritual welfare, they avoid it completely.

Its History

Since the earliest days of the Christian era Revelation has been under discussion. It was known and circulated in the Church in the first half of the second century. Justin Martyr (c. 145) used it, and ascribed it to John, one of the apostles of Christ. Melito, Bishop of Sardis in 170, wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse. Theophilus of Antioch (c. 175) quoted from it, and Irenaeus (c. 170) in no less than five passages alluded to it and asserted that it was written by the John who leaned on Jesus’ breast at the last supper. Clement of Alexandria (c. 200), Origen (c. 250), and others concurred in accepting it as of apostolic origin and canonical.

Authorship

The authorship of Revelation was disputed first by the Alogi, a heretical sect which seems to have had no great importance, and which was probably opposed to the Apocalypse for theological reasons. A more serious objection was raised by Dionysius, an honest and competent scholar who succeeded Origen as the head of the catechetical school in Alexandria. He reasoned that John, the son of Zebedee, did not write the Apocalypse because (1) the Revelation cites the name of its author, whereas the Fourth Gospel is anonymous; (2) the concepts, vocabulary and syntax of Revelation are radically different from the Gospel; (3) the Greek of the Apocalypse is ungrammatical, whereas the Greek of the Gospel, though not always idiomatic, is generally free from errors.

Dionysius’ arguments against the Johannine authorship have persisted to the present day. Eusebius, the great church historian of the fourth century, regarded the canonical status of the Apocalypse as doubtful, though he did not reject it utterly. In recent times R. H. Charles concluded that the Fourth Gospel and Revelation are not by the same author. Many modern scholars deny the apostolic authorship of Revelation completely.

On the other hand, there are a number of words and concepts, such as “word of God” as a title of Christ, “witness,” the concept of the “Lamb,” and some others that characterize both John and the Revelation, and are common to no other writings of the New Testament. Some of the grammatical irregularities can be explained by the use of fixed titles treated as indeclinable nouns. The writer may at times have used ungrammatical expressions, but he did not do so habitually. When he violated some rule of grammar, he did so because he had a purpose in mind, not because of ignorance.

Literary Form

A deeper cause than uncertainty of authorship has prompted some to reject Revelation. It belongs to the general class of apocalyptic literature, which employs highly symbolic language and which stresses the supernatural intervention of God in the affairs of men. For this reason it has been branded as wholly fanciful and unreal, and has been dismissed simply as a piece of wishful thinking, a lurid picture of the much desired triumph of right over wrong which has not yet been literally realized, and probably never will be. Truth, however, is not made or unmade by the literary form through which it is expressed; and in this case the Apocalypse differs from the ordinary Jewish apocalyptic writing in several ways. Although it possesses the usual characteristics noted above, it is not pseudonymous. It was written to seven actual churches in seven well-known cities, and its emphasis on practical ethics is different from the general trend of apocalyptic works.

Author

Internal evidence concerning the author shows that his name was John, and that he was a familiar figure among the churches of Asia to whom the Apocalypse was first sent. He calls himself their brother (Rev. 1:9). He had lived among them long enough to share in the persecutions and trials which they had endured for Christ. At the time of writing Revelation he was in the island of Patmos, probably as a prisoner of the Emperor. While immured there, he saw the visions of which the book speaks, and he committed them to parchment.

Date

Various dates of writing have been proposed, but the best choice seems to be about A. D. 95, near the close of the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus, Victorinus, Eusebius and Jerome all agree that it was written at that time, and the internal evidence tends to support their testimony. The fact that several of the Asian churches had backslidden demands time enough for their rise and fall. If they were founded in the active ministry of Paul, between A. D. 50 and 60, it is doubtful if the Revelation could have been written as early as the reign of Nero in A. D. 65. By Domitian’s time a second generation would have arisen concerning whom the charges of having left their first love and of harboring false teachers, or of having grown self-satisfied and lukewarm, would be more easily true. It probably marks the beginning of outward tension between the Church and the empire which eventuated in the persecution of the second and third centuries.

Interpretation

The interpretations of Revelation have been almost as numerous as its expositors. Generally they may be divided into four classes: the futurists, who regard all of Revelation beyond the third chapter as future, belonging to the period immediately preceding the advent of Christ; the historicists, who interpret the sequence of seals, trumpets, and bowls as depicting the entire course of history from the close of the apostolic age until the end of time; the preterists, who interpret Revelation as a figurative representation of the conflict between the Church and the empire at the end of the first century; and the idealists, who divest the prophecy of any chronological significance, and who make it simply a symbolic picture of the eternal conflict of the righteousness of God and the machinations of Satan.

While not all of these interpretations can be final, there is a measure of truth in each of them. The futurist can claim rightly that “the things which must be hereafter” (4:1) apply to the future, or, at least, to the future of the writer. The historicist has the advantage of continuity in interpretation, rather than assigning the bulk of the book to one narrow period in the remote future. The preterist recognizes the relevance of Revelation to the day in which it was written, and attempts to show how the symbols and thought are rooted in the history and vocabulary of the first century. The idealist tries to maintain the spiritual emphasis of the book with its theological and ethical teachings, rather than to lose himself in a maze of inexplicable details.

Structure And Content

The best approach to Revelation, however, is through its internal structure. If the book were to have any meaning for the churches to whom it was first addressed, it must have been sufficiently plain for them to comprehend its main message, even though details would have to be studied and absorbed gradually. How would they have understood it?

Revelation can be divided naturally into six main sections. The first of these, the Prologue (T. 1–8) contains the introductory details. It is organized like the title page of a book. The title, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ,” announces the subject. The book is primarily concerned with the person of Christ as he relates himself to the events of the future. The method of impartation of this revelation is indicated by the word “signified,” which means literally to declare by symbols, or to respond as an oracle would to an inquirer in enigmatic language. The word is used three times in the Gospel of John about Jesus’ death (12:33, 18:32, 21:19), and in each instance it means the figurative statement of a predicted fact. In the introduction to Revelation it conveys the idea that the content of the book will be symbolic, and that it will deal with realities.

The name of the author is the next item on the title page, coupled with the statement that he “bare record of the word of God and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw” (1:2). The language is that of the Fourth Gospel, and one cannot avoid the feeling that the writer sought to identify himself by his previous work, which was presumably known to the churches of Asia. He acted as the messenger of Christ, and he claimed only subordinate authority (22:10). Nevertheless he expected that the words of his book would be heard and obeyed as the very message of God.

The destination was the seven churches of Asia. Just why these seven should have been selected is not stated. There were more than seven churches in Asia by the end of the first century. Perhaps these were chosen because they were representative of different types which existed then, and which collectively make a picture of the churches of the entire age to follow.

The greeting from the Triune God, the eternal Father, the sevenfold Spirit, and the redeeming Son, sets the doctrinal tone of the book. Redemption is stressed in Christ’s character, “the faithful witness, the firstbegotten of the dead, the prince of the kings of the earth”; in Christ’s work, “he loved us … loosed us … made us”; and in Christ’s prospect, “Behold, he cometh with clouds.…” The seventh verse declares unmistakably that the theme of Revelation will be Christ’s return, which will complete and crown his redemptive work for men.

The eighth verse, the last of the Introduction, is like the publisher’s name on the title page. It declares God’s approval of the work and his responsibility for it.

The main body of the book is divided into four visions, each of which is introduced by the phrase, “… in the Spirit” (1:10, 4:2, 17:3, 21:10). “In the Spirit” does not mean “a spiritual attitude,” but rather refers to the control of the Holy Spirit over the mind and person of the author so that he was transported in mystic fashion to the surroundings which he describes. The first states that he was “in the island that is called Patmos” (1:9), a definite geographical location; the second, that he was called up to heaven where he saw a throne set (4:1, 2); the third, that he was removed to “a wilderness” (17:3); and the fourth, that he was placed in “a mountain great and high” 21:10).

The four divisions consist of two balanced pairs. Each member of the first pair is introduced by “a great voice” (1:10, 4:1), and each member of the second pair by “one of the seven angels that had the seven bowls” (17:1, 21:9). These contrast the divine discipline of the churches and the judgments on the world. The second couple contrasts the fall of Babylon, representing the spiritual organization of godless civilization and the ultimate perfection of the Bride, the heavenly Jerusalem, which is the perfected community of the redeemed.

Furthermore, each of the divisions in Revelation marks some aspect of the character of Christ as he brings redemption to perfection. Perhaps this can he stated best in a brief outline:

Prologue: Christ Communicating 1:1–8

Vision I: Christ in the Church 1:9–3:22

Vision II: Christ in the Cosmos 4:1–16:21

Vision III: Christ in Conquest 17:1–21:8

Vision IV: Christ in Consummation 21:9–22:5

Epilogue: Christ Challenging 22:6–21

The progress of the outline is evident in the text. As already noted, the Prologue states that the entire book will be occupied with the Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to communicate to his servants. This revelation carries the work of redemption into the future, and purports to show what the final scope and effect of salvation will be. Grounded in the pivotal events of Christ’s death and resurrection, the purpose of God will be carried forward in the process of human history until evil is overcome and the Kingdom shall be finally established. So certain is this outcome that the Prologue states the fact as past: “he made us to be a kingdom, priests unto his God and Father …” (1:6, ARV).

The first vision opens with a portrait of Christ clothed in priestly garments, moving among his churches on a tour of inspection. Their weaknesses and their virtues are typical of the Church of all ages. Reproof and commendation are given to all in proportion to their respective merits. It is noteworthy that the future advent of the Lord which seems indefinite in the letter to Ephesus, “… or else I come to thee” (2:5, ARV), is in the letter to Laodicea an imminent fact, “… Behold, I stand at the door and knock” (3:20). The first message of the book is to the Church, for “judgment must begin at the house of God.”

The second vision deals with the world-process of judgment, administered by God’s delegated agent. Two symbolic words dominate the thought of this section. The vision is set in heaven, but the focus of attention is not fixed on the surroundings but on the throne, in relation to which all other figures are located and from which proceeds the action of judgment. In this way the sovereignty of God over the affairs of the world is asserted. The deputy of this sovereignty is “a Lamb as it had been slain,” who takes from the right hand of the Occupant of the throne the seven-sealed scroll which gives him the authority to exercise judgment upon the earth. “Lamb” emphasizes the sacrificial aspect of Christ. He is the enduring Atonement for sin upon whom the divine judgment has already fallen, and because he has made Atonement he is capable of bringing the final victory over evil.

The entire section that follows is given over to cataclysmic judgments through which the people of God are miraculously preserved, and by which the culminating organization of evil—political, social, economic, and religious—under the domination of the “Beast,” is finally crushed. Revelation presents the current world process as a titanic struggle of supernatural forces in which human governments, societies and religions are involved, and which will eventuate in a climactic rebellion against God, terminated by the advent of Christ in judgment.

The final aspect of this judgment which is the climax of redemption is told in the two remaining visions. Christ in Conquest (17:3–21:8) reveals the Word of God on the white horse, judging and making war in righteousness. The fall of Babylon, the city in which organized wickedness reaches its fullest manifestation, the destruction of the beast and his armies who have rebelled against God, the imprisonment of Satan for a thousand years, his release and final doom, the millennial reign of Christ, and the introduction of the city of God fulfil the purpose of redemption.

In contrast to this vision of the overthrow of evil, the last vision (21:9–22:5) reveals Christ in Consummation, the everlasting joy of his redeemed people. The term “Lamb” is reintroduced, evidently as a reminder that redemption will be the basis for the eternal state and its chief delight. The city of God, with streets of gold and gates of pearl, may be figurative; but if so, the language is an attempt to describe the indescribable—God’s ultimate destiny for his people. Seven negations contrast this city with the cities of men as they were known in the ancient world: (1) no temple, (2) no sun or moon, (3) no closed gates, (4) no uncleanness, (5) no curse, (6) no night, (7) no artificial light. In contrast to each of these points the Lamb supplies a true worship, a true light, an open welcome, a holy populace, the blessing of his presence, and the eternal illumination of the presence of deity. The New Jerusalem will restore to the saved all the blessings that man lost by his sin in Eden.

The Epilogue (22:6–21) focuses the theme of the book in one climactic appeal. The threefold repetition of the theme, “I come quickly,” with its accompanying exhortations, challenge the will to obey, the moral nature to prepare for Christ’s coming, and the emotional desire to see the Lord. It makes all the preceding text the practical foundation for an attitude of readiness and alertness in view of Christ’s promised return.

Tools For Study

Commentaries and expositions of Revelation are almost numberless. The most complete critical work on the Greek text are the two volumes on Revelation by R. H. Charles in the International Critical Commentary. Charles was the most learned scholar of recent times in the field of apocalyptic literature, but his literary criticism was radical. Swete’s commentary is not quite so exhaustive as Charles’, but it is thorough. William Lee’s commentary on Revelation in The Bible Commentary is helpful to the student who wants discussion of detail. The earliest and the most popular of the premillennial futurist commentaries is J. A. Seiss’ Lectures on the Apocalypse. A more recent volume in the same category is Wm. R. Newell’s verse-by-verse exposition. Milligan’s treatment of Revelation in Schaff’s Popular Commentary on the New Testament is both scholarly and practical. The most recent general conservative commentary is The New Bible Commentary by Davidson, Stibbs and Kevan. Its discussion of Revelation is necessarily brief, but it is up to date. Sir William Ramsay’s Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia contains a wealth of material by an expert archaeologist on the historical setting of Revelation. It is hard to say which is the best commentary on Revelation, since each one has a different approach, and since many may excel in different ways.

There is no easy road to an understanding of Revelation, but prayerful acceptance of what one does understand, with equally prayerful meditation on what one does not understand, will bring a growing appreciation of this book which after all has the same theme as the rest of the New Testament—the person of Christ.

MERRILL C. TENNEY

• The procedure followed in the above article is developed much more fully in Dr. Tenney’s recent volume, Interpreting Revelation.—ED.

Fourth General Assembly of NCC

WORLD NEWS

Christianity in the World Today

The Triennial General Assembly of the National Council of Churches of Christ met in St. Louis the first week in December to review and appraise the work carried on by the staff and General Board. Some two thousand delegates were divided into 21 groups to consider 75 programs carried on by the Council. They listened to 22 major speakers in addition to reports of staff members.

Dr. Edwin T. Dahlberg, pastor of Delmar Baptist Church, St. Louis, was unanimously elected president of the Council and will hold office for three years. The congregation of which he is the pastor belongs both to the American Baptist Convention and the Southern Baptist Convention.

Faith In Man

The former president of the Council, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, gave the opening keynote message by calling the delegates to a new faith of man in man. He said, “Of all the failures and weaknesses of the Christian Church, there is none today more costly to our cause than lack of faith in one another.” In regard to the political aspect, Dr. Blake said, “The free world faces a true crisis in that it will be as dangerous to continue 100 per cent skepticism of totalitarian communism as it would be to believe all the protestations of peaceful intentions that come from the Kremlin.” His greatest concern, however, was with the distrust that existed among the churches composing the National Council of Churches. Variety of faith and differences of opinion were welcome since uniformity and monolithic structure would be the death of the NCC. That faith and trust in man had a limited character was revealed the following day in Dr. Blake’s address on the “State of the National Council.” He maintained there was more confidence in the NCC being a council of churches since it was evident that the Council was not the instrument of the controversial Lay Committee or Liberal “Ecumaniacs.”

Issue Of Segregation

No issue stirred the Assembly more than the sore problem of segregation. Dr. Martin Luther King deplored the use of physical violence. He said, “The alternative to violence is the method of non-violent resistance. This method is nothing more and nothing less than Christianity in action. It seems to me to be the Christian way of life in solving problems of human relations. This method was made famous in our generation by Mohandas K. Ghandi, who used it to free his country from the domination of the British Empire. This method has also been used in Montgomery, Alabama, under the leadership of the ministers of all denominations, to free 50,000 Negroes from the long night of bus segregation.” He further declared, “We must say to our white brothers over the South that we will match your capacity to inflict suffering with our capacity to endure suffering. We will match your physical force with our soul force. We will not hate you and yet we cannot obey your evil laws. Do to us what you will, and we will wear you down by our capacity to suffer and in earning our freedom we will so appeal so your hearts and consciences that we will win you in the process.”

Col. Francis Pickens Miller of Virginia pointed out that the two races in his state are drifting apart with growing mistrust of each other. He said, “While legal segregation is on its way out, a new and in some respects even more distressing form of segregation is rushing in to take its place—segregation of the mind, of the spirit and of the heart. And this new form of voluntary segregation is not unilateral—it is bilateral. I am reminded of the seven devils that came to occupy the house after one had been cast out.”

The Church was pointed out as probably the most racially segregated major institution in American life. Dr. Liston Pope, dean of Yale Divinity School, declared that “the churches have lagged behind the Supreme Court as the conscience of the people on questions of race, and they have fallen far behind trade unions, factories, schools, department stores, athletic gatherings and most other major areas of human association as far as achievement of integration in their own life is concerned.”

The Assembly reaffirmed its renunciation of the pattern of racial segregation, both in the churches and in society as a violation of the Gospel of love and human brotherhood. In light of the refusal of some taxies in St. Louis to convey Negroes it resolved that future meetings of the General Assembly would take place in such communities “where the prevailing practice in restaurants, transportation and all other public facilities, is service to all people without regard to race or color.”

Nature Of Unity

Dissatisfaction with denominational divisions appeared in many speeches. The Rt. Rev. Henry Knox Sherrill, presiding bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church, stated, “I cannot believe that the present condition represents the mind of God.” He pointed out that when problems of church unity are discussed there must be a fearless facing of the truth. Bishop Sherrill said, “There are diversities of gifts, of course, but the purpose of Christ cannot embrace contradictory, even competing ideas and aims. Truth may have various manifestations, but essentially, truth is one. There is a unity in the mind of God. Our present unity, such as it is, stands only as a symbol of what can and should be.”

A strong stand for organic union was made by the Rt. Rev. Rajah B. Manikam, Bishop of the Federation of Evangelical Lutheran Churches in India. “Cooperation in itself was not and is not enough,” he said. He admitted that union did not always result in greater missionary activity. The Bishop stated, “It is not to be denied that United Churches have not become far more missionary-minded after the union than before. Union has not always begotten Mission.” He insisted that union cannot be achieved if the negotiating parties insist on settling every disagreement in doctrine, theology and polity. Bishop Manikam concluded, “the churches in the States and their missionary societies would do well not to put any impediment in the way of the young churches desiring to unite with one another. They should select and send to the East such men and women missionaries as will not look at each other critically over denominational walls, nor desire to perpetuate those historic divisions which, whatever they may mean to the West, have far less relevance in the Eastern context. They should do all they can to further ecumenical missions wherever possible, and in turn seek to unite with other churches in their own homelands.”

Conciliar Movement

What promised to be a controversial amendment in regard to increased representation of local, city and state councils was deferred to a future Assembly. This amendment previously received 40–27 endorsement by the General Board. Promised opposition by Dr. Franklin Clark Fry of the United Lutheran Church undoubtedly caused the postponement of the amendment. He had previously pointed out that the passing of the amendment would cause the NCC to lose its character of being a council of churches. At present the General Board has 54 per cent representation on the part of constituent denominations. The passing of the amendment would drop this to 50 per cent representation.

In a major address, Dr. Truman B. Douglass of New York City made a strong plea that more authority be granted to local, state and national councils. Dr. Douglass maintained that in some aspects councils embody more fully the Church of Christ than denominations. He declared, “There is a Church of Christ which transcends all the churches. This true Church is never perfectly embodied in any of our existing churches, nor will it ever be so long as we continue in our present divisions and in separation from one another. The councils of churches embody some aspects of the Church in its fullness which are not made manifest in the churches.” Concerning the NCC he voiced the opinion, “that at a number of crucial points its witness is more faithful and more nearly adequate than that of the member denominations.” He further maintained that the NCC has a kind of authority over the churches and, “When the Council mediates the judgment of the Church upon the churches, as it surely does concerning their disunity, it becomes the Church in one of its modes.”

Nuclear-Space Age

The Russian Sputniks succeeded not only in causing nations to gaze into the stratosphere and work feverishly to defend their plot upon earth, but also caused church leaders to gaze into the heaven of heavens and work feverishly to defend spiritual and moral values against encroachment of a scientific materialistic concept of life. Woven through many of the main addresses at the Assembly was a grave fear that the nations might fall prey to Russian atheistic materialism. This was expressed by Dr. Roswell P. Barnes, “ ‘Greece captured took Rome captive.’ More than once history has witnessed the irony of a people unconsciously and unintentionally assuming the cultural characteristics of the nation it has defeated in a contest of power. As a nation we could establish technological superiority and succumb to the very materialistic dialectic which we abhor.”

Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, a Philadelphia Lutheran, charged that Americans were acting like spiritual adolescents at a time of scientific maturity and called attention to “the stupidity of corporate humanity.” He said, “We are in danger of falling into the trap of those who by their own profession are atheistic materialists. God have mercy on the children of men if the two giant powers of the world, in deed if not in word, recognized as their only governor dialectical materialism.” Charles Parlin, New York attorney, found some elements of hope in Russian scientific advance. He said, “In the progress of communist technology, now being so dramatically advertised to an apprehensive world, are factors of hope. There was search for truth and accuracy. There was vision and imagination. There was bravery of concept and daring in execution. Here are virtues where our peoples meet in common respect. It gives substance to the hope of the Russian churches that their country can some day be restored to the family of Christian nations.” But, alas, as the apostle Paul pointed out long ago, the world by wisdom knew not God. The study of natural revelation can never make a nation Christian.

The General Assembly adopted a document that stated the crisis was fundamentally moral and spiritual. For a solution it stated, “efforts must be redoubled to realize the final goal of world-wide disarmament in the framework of the United Nations.” The document was chiefly a call to the nation “to demonstrate the values of our society in economics, political procedures, and human values.… to take new diplomatic initiative.… to give increased moral and spiritual leadership to the world.… to build international understanding and good will.” The churches were called upon to shape public opinion and to urge all men to repentance and faith in God.

Miscellaneous

Four church bodies with a total of 478,000 members were voted into the National Council. They are the Armenian Apostolic Church of North America, the Polish National Catholic Church of America, the Free Magyar Reformed Church in America, and the Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese. This brings to 34 the number of constituent communions within the NCC.

Six million copies of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible have been sold since it was published a little more than five years ago, it was announced by Dr. Luther A. Weigle. This version headed the list of nonfiction best sellers in 1952, 1953 and 1954.

Concerning corruption in the labor movement the Assembly stated, “We believe the labor unions are responsible for the situation that has been revealed; but so is management; so also is the Christian Church. The degree and kind of responsibility may differ but we all share in the responsibility.”

Freedom of association was upheld. Churches and churchmen were urged to recognize the gravity of the threat to all associations and to all liberties when the freedom of any legitimate voluntary association is assailed.

The Assembly urged the government to revise “the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to eliminate discrimination based on race, color and sex, revise the national origins quota system and provide more adequately for the admission of relatives, and of refugees.” Concern that moral issues “be clearly set forth” in connection with the retention or return of alien properties in the United States seized during World War II was expressed in a resolution.

The Assembly declared that technical and economic aid “should not be primarily for political and military association but for the purpose of helping people to help meet economic and social needs and opportunities.… Oneness in Christ across the nations requires mutual aid and trade.”

The Council voted to hold its fifth general assembly at San Francisco in the summer of 1961. This date was set in order to avoid conflict with the general assembly of the World Council of Churches scheduled to meet in December of 1960.

J. MARCELLUS KIK

People: Words And Events

Sunday Home Showings—The Denver Board of Realtors has voted to end the open-house showing of homes on Sunday. Said many salesmen, “Thank goodness we can finally get to church on Sunday.” One Denver realtor, Max Moore, said, “We plan to run pictures of churches in the Sunday paper, saying, ‘This is our open house today.’ ”

Better Films—The best way to raise the moral standards of movies is for top actors and actresses to improve scripts through their story acceptance clauses, says entertainer Bob Crosby. The stars will listen, he said, if enough people insist on better movies. “If the performer realizes he is losing his box office, he would be pretty stupid to continue that type of show,” Crosby said.

Service to HumanityEvangelist Billy Graham, Mrs. Clare Booth Luce, former U. S. Ambassador to Italy, and Gen. Alfred Gruenther, president of the Red Cross, have been cited for their “distinguished service to humanity” by the National Institute of Social Sciences. President Eisenhower praised the medal winners as “symbols of the diversified power of our nation.”

101st BirthdayDr. Arthur J. Brown, secretary emeritus of the Board of Foreign Missions, Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., celebrated his 101st birthday recently at a small New York dinner party. During the same week the vigorous ex-missionary served in his usual active role as senior elector to New York University’s Hall of Fame.

Fourth Century Church—Discovery of the oldest Christian church ever excavated in Israel has been announced by the Israeli Antiquities Department. The church was uncovered in the village of Shavei Zion on the Mediterranean coast. An inscription on one of its stones sets the date of construction of the basilica-type church during the reign of Emperor Constantine the Great in the fourth century.

Religious Liberty Stamp—A three-cent stamp honoring religious liberty, to be released by the Post Office Dec. 27, has the Bible as its central design. The stamp will commemorate the 300th anniversary of the Flushing Remonstrance—a protest by citizens of Flushing, N. Y., against an edict banning Quakers by Dutch Governor Peter Stuyvesant.

Protestant Pastor SentencedPastor Siegfried Schmutzler, 42-year-old chaplain to Evangelical students at Leipzig University, has been sentenced to five years of hard labor by the district court in East Berlin on charges of counter-revolutionary activities. Lutheran Bishop Hanns Lilje denounced the sentence as the newest “grave assault” in a concentrated campaign by the communists against the evangelical churches in the Soviet zone. Student groups also protested.

The Last IssueOur Hope magazine, founded 63½ years ago by Dr. Arno C. Gaebelein and continued monthly without interruption for 772 issues, stops publication with the December issue, Dr. Frank E. Gaebelein, publisher and son of the founder, announced. The magazine, which is merging with Eternity beginning in January, has constantly stressed the exposition of the Scriptures, especially in relation to premillennial and prophetic exposition.

Digest—Dr. F. Townley Lord, London minister and former president of the Baptist World Alliance, has accepted a position on the faculty of Furman University, Greenville, S. C.… Dr. John A. Mackay, president of Princeton Theological Seminary, is on a trip to Hungary and Ghana.… The goal of $4,000,000 for a new Methodist theological seminary near Delaware, Ohio, has been reached, Bishop Hazen G. Werner of Columbus announced.… Finland and Norway are expected to bid for the Fourth Assembly of the Lutheran World Federation in 1962.… Dr. Fred C. Wiegman, 58, died in a December automobile accident, four months after he assumed the presidency of the Ohio Synod of the United Lutheran Church in America. He was the fifth president of a ULCA synod to die in the last 14 months.

Rejected Again

For the second time in two years, congregations of the Lutheran Free Church have rejected a proposal to merge with three other Lutheran denominations.

The proposal was defeated by only 17 votes. Of the 1,156 ballots cast by 342 congregations 754, or 65.22 per cent, were in favor of resuming union negotiations and 402, or 34.78 per cent were opposed. A two-thirds majority was necessary for approval.

Involved in the merger are the Evangelical, American and United Evangelical Lutheran churches scheduled to form the American Lutheran Church in 1960.

Broad Range

A statement on world problems ranging all the way from the Middle East to outer space was adopted by The Methodist Church’s Board of World Peace at its annual meeting in Cleveland, Ohio.

On the Middle East crisis, the board declared: “The United States can accomplish more for peace and democracy in the Middle East by sponsoring bold solutions to its economic and social problems under the United Nations than by sending arms to unstable or feudalistic governments.”

On the question of rights to outer space, the board urged the UN General Assembly “to declare the title of the international community and to establish appropriate administrative arrangements.”

Crumbs From Table

The mainstream of theology in America today is closer to evangelical Christianity than at any time in history, a Minnesota educator told the eighth annual conference of Lutheran foreign students at Columbus, Ohio.

Dr. Edgar Carlson, president of Gustave Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minn., told the seminary students that theology has its own domain today.

“There was a time when the theologian lived off the crumbs from the table of the psychologist, the philosopher and the sociologist,” he said. “But developments in biblical theology have been so decisive that theology is recognized as having a definite field of its own.”

Worth Quoting

“When I first came to the (Catholic) University (of America) as a student 40 years ago, there were 17 million Catholics in America. I found a University only 28 years old and comparatively small.… Today the Catholics of America have doubled in number to 34 million and our Alma Mater has developed correspondingly.… If now we were to look forward another 40 years, it will bring us to the end of the century. The Catholic population will, no doubt, have doubled to at least 70 million people.”—The Most Rev. Bryan J. McEntegart, Bishop of Brooklyn and former rector of the Catholic University of America.

“This is no time for Americans to be proud, snooty and unsympathetic. What free-world peoples want from us today is companionship in their sufferings, not cocktails in their socials.”—Dr. Caradine R. Hooton, General Secretary, Methodist Board of Temperance.

A Christmas Gift

Children out at our house were living in a popeyed wonderland of wants as Christmas made its jolly approach last December.

The wants ranged from a “twactor, twain and twuck with all the twimmings,” to a bicycle and grown-up dolls. As the postal bombardment of Santa Claus continued without let-up, the “littlest angel” with grubby hands was finding such constant tension too hard for him.

Much like the boy ordered to the bathroom by his mother to wash his hands, he splashed some water over the dirt, only to be sent back with the admonition, “Wash off all those germs.” Returning to the gruesome task, he muttered, “All I ever hear about around here is God, Santa Claus and germs, and I can’t see any one of them.”

Something different was needed to get the spirit of Christmas into its true perspective. The woes of wanting had to be changed into the joy of giving. An ideal solution presented itself when the family discussed the situation during devotions and decided to sponsor a Korean orphan.

Selection of the child was left to World Vision, Inc., an American organization that cares for more than 9,000 orphans in the Far East. Dr. Bob Pierce, president, founded the work and has spearheaded its growth.

A short while later the child’s picture arrived in the mail. Her name was Moo Hee and she was a beautiful two-year-old resident of the Sung Lac Babies’ Home in Taegu. World Vision said, “We don’t know anything about Moo Hee’s parents. She was brought to this home by police women.” Other babies have been found in ditches and garbage dumps. Some parents have brought children to the police with this request, “If you can’t find a home, then kill it.”

The cost of sponsoring an orphan is $10 per month, and the entire amount is sent to Korea by World Vision.

In order to make the project a family affair in which every member had a stake, jobs were assigned and the pay scale set. Each contributed monthly to the support of Moo Hee.

With other savings, the children sent gifts to their new “sister” and wrote letters telling her about life in America. They received letters from her nurse, written in Korean and translated by the World Vision staff.

Without fail, since the beginning, the children have prayed each night for the little girl halfway around the world. Before that, the prayers had been of the “God bless me” variety. Now their treasure was going to another and their hearts were there also.

I visited Korea recently to prepare a special series of newspaper articles, but had received definite orders from the children: “Go see Moo Hee if you have to miss everything else.” And they purchased clothing for me to deliver.

Having learned well the chain of command during four years in the Navy, I did as directed—gladly. Sung Lac was clean and looked comfortable, a sharp contrast with the surrounding area. The home was filled with children.

The nurse patted an adorable little girl on the head and said, “This is Moo Hee.” She didn’t quite know what to make of the big American who picked her up and let him know it in the only way she knew—with a flood of tears. The clothing he had brought was far too big, but the children had thoughtfully bought a doll that was a perfect fit.

She sat on the floor with the doll and didn’t utter another peep. As I sat there with her, I marveled at the way in which God had worked. Moo Hee had done far more for my family than we would ever be able to do for her.

Outside of Christ, Moo Hee had given the children out at our house the greatest Christmas gift they will ever receive.

She gave them the desire to care about others!

GEORGE BURNHAM

Wanted By Fbi

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has asked clergymen to be on the alert for a man who has preyed upon Protestant ministers by posing as a theological student and as a former assistant to an Air Force chaplain.

He was identified by the FBI as Paul Cline Gross, about 30, sought on charges of conditional release violator and impersonation. A number of fraudulent checks have turned up in his wake.

Gross has served time at the U. S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pa. Aliases used include Captain P. Cross, Paul Cline Cross, Cline Droce, Major Ralph Gross, Paul Clyne Gross, Clide Ross, Paul Ross, Paul Clyne Cross, Paul G. Woods, Paul Woodward and others.

A native of Knox County, Tenn., he is described as follows: Height, 6 ft. 1 in. to 6 ft. 3 in.; weight, 180 to 220 pounds; build, medium; hair, brown; eyes, blue; complexion, medium; race, white; nationality, American. He has a half-inch circular scar on the back of his left thumb and may wear horn-rimmed glasses. He is reported to be stoop-shouldered, with a hump, because of a broken back.

Gross may be armed and should be considered dangerous. Any person with information about him is requested to notify the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Department of Justice, Washington 25, D. C. or the special agent in charge of the nearest FBI Division.

Question Deadline

The Census Bureau must make a firm decision by next April 1 as to whether a religious affiliation question will be included in the 1960 census, a spokesman for the agency said.

The bureau has made no decision as yet on including the question, “What is your religion?”

Some religious groups favor such a question as a means of securing valuable statistical information. Others oppose it as a violation of the separation of Church and State.

The bureau spokesman said the April 1 deadline is made necessary by the huge printing job required to prepare the forms on which data for about 180,000,000 Americans will be recorded.

Congress will have a voice in the final decision since the bureau must clear plans for the enumeration with appropriations committees before funds for printing of the forms are approved.

These funds will be included in the budget requests which the Department of Commerce submits to Congress in January for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1959.

Far East

Praise In India

A Hindu leader in Madras has praised the humanitarian and educational work of Christian missionaries in India and branded as “unproved” and “exaggerated” charges that they use improper pressure to win converts.

Dr. A. Krishnaswamy, member of the Indian parliament, took exception to the findings published by an official commission of the Madhya Pradesh state government, which recommended that foreign missionaries engaged primarily in proselytizing be withdrawn from the country.

The commission, headed by Dr. Bhamwami Shanker Niyogi, former chief justice of the Nagpur high court, charged that missionary work was not prompted by strictly spiritual motives. It said attempts were being made to create “Christian pockets” with a view to disrupting the solidarity of the Hindu society.

Dr. Krishnaswamy said that “even if the instances mentioned in the commission’s report had been substantiated they would not have justified the commission in arriving at the conclusion that foreign missionaries pursued activities of an undesirable character.”

The Indian legislator said the Niyogi commission’s findings “provoked outspoken criticism not only from members of the Christian faith but of other faiths as well.”

“The consensus of opinion in India has been, and is,” he said, “opposed to drawing up a bill of indictment against missionaries. It was, therefore, not surprising to find responsible men belonging to different political schools of thought criticizing the Niyogi report, not only for erring in its presentation of facts but also for overstepping the bounds of propriety and national interests.”

Mayor Of Madras

Mrs. Tara Cherian, an active member of the Church of South India, has been elected mayor of Madras. She is the first woman ever named to the post.

Mrs. Cherian, 44, is connected with many welfare organizations. She has headed the advisory board of the Hospital for Women and Children in Egmore, Madras, for nearly 20 years. She also has served on the senate of Madras University.

Medical Mission

An unique mission stirred Christian and medical circles recently in Ceylon. It was undertaken by Dr. Jacob Chandy, Professor of Neurology and Superintendent of Christian Medical College, Vellore, South India. He was accompanied by Dr. Paul Brand and other doctors of the same institution.

The men of medicine came preaching rather than to treat patients, although many of the sick were seen privately. Members of the Student Christian Movement of the Medical College of the University of Ceylon invited the team to give Christian testimony, to sharpen ideas of what it means to be a Christian doctor and to give lectures on professional medical subjects.

Dr. Chandy is a noted brain surgeon and Dr. Brand has had much success in restoring hands crippled by leprosy and in equipping lepers for a useful life.

One result of the mission came when several medical students announced intentions of working in mission hospitals.

—W.R.H.

A Working Day?

Sunday as a holiday, or holy day, may be eliminated in Ceylon if a proposal of the Buddhist Religious Affairs Advisory Committee is adopted by the government.

The advisory committee has recommended to the Minister of Local Government and Cultural Affairs that weekly poya days should replace Sunday as the day off beginning Jan. 1, 1959. The poya day is determined with reference to the phases of the moon which means that full moon day, new moon day and a day one week before full moon and new moon are all poya days.

Claiming that Ceylon’s present 26 holidays hinder a vitally necessary increase in production, the committee made five proposals:

The same holidays are to apply to everyone.

Poya day and the half day preceding it should be holidays in the place of Saturday afternoon and Sunday.

In addition, there shall be 12 extraordinary holidays. These include Good Friday and Christmas but not Easter.

Hindus, Christians and Moslems shall be given the right to select any two other days on which they will be entitled to leave as a matter of right without these days being counted against their annual leave.

The privilege now given Moslems in getting short leave for religious purposes on Friday afternoons should be extended to Christians by allowing them to come an hour late to offices on Sunday.

Combining the first and fourth provisions strongly suggests that Christians and other non-Buddhists would enjoy three days of holiday each week. Since this would presumably have an anti-Buddhist tendency, such could hardly be the intention of the advisory committee. However, the matter has not yet been clarified.

It seems unlikely that this plan for eliminating the Sunday holiday will be adopted for the simple reason that the rest of the world is largely committed to the present arrangement. But the proposal indicates that strong, official forces in Ceylon are devoting thought and energy to making this country as Buddhistic in culture as possible.

—W.R.H.

Eutychus and His Kin: December 23, 1957

Christianity Today December 23, 1957

THE GIFT OF GOD

Among the Christmas magazines on the newsstand, I found the cartoon cover. There was Billy Graham giving the sales pitch on a packaged mix labeled “Instant Salvation.” Dr. Ivy had described it in his luncheon talk. He regards Graham and TV commercials as a survival of the revivalists and medicine men of the frontier. Dr. Ivy is against magic, superstition, quack nostrums and panaceas. He is suspicious of all miracles except those of modern science.

When I remarked that “Instant Salvation” was hard, indeed, impossible to sell, he seemed puzzled. He admitted that he couldn’t be sold, but one cannot exaggerate the gullibility of mass man.

He is quite wrong. People are already sold on do-it-yourself salvation. It is another matter for a man to acknowledge that he can do nothing to gain salvation and to turn in penitence and faith to Christ.

“Instant Salvation” might outsell vitamins if it could be sold. But it must be given away. It is precisely impossible for the self-assured, prosperous American to enter the Kingdom as a spiritual pauper. The disciples asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus answered, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Only by a miracle does a man receive salvation on God’s terms. It was by a miracle that this salvation was given. “Nothing is impossible with God,” said the angel to Mary. When Sarah heard the promise of her son she laughed. Even Zacharias before the altar doubted. But Mary bowed in faith. “Be it unto me according to thy word.” The Spirit who wrought in her womb wrought first in her heart.

Before the impossible gospel men still laugh in unbelief—foolishness! The foolishness and weakness of God. “Be it unto me according to thy word!”

EUTYCHUS

HOPE FOR THE YMCA

Of course the YMCA’s are concerned for public affairs and Christian citizenship; that is part of their purpose. In 1893 Robert McBumey, the dynamic secretary of the great New York City Association, said, “The best thing for you and me is to engage in earnest Christian work for the bodies and souls of men …” Theologically-minded critics of the YMCA must remember that it is a lay movement, that it has always addressed itself to men and boys where they were to be found, that it deliberately avoided theological and dogmatic pronouncements and ecclesiastical entanglements, and that it sought as a lay movement to supply those practical applications of Christian ethics which the churches could not or would not provide.

Your inference that the student branch of the Movement is like one Association you describe as “drifting in Unitarianism,” is totally at variance with the facts: since the early days of the Student Movement it has been the most spiritual and the most consistently devoted to the development of vital Christian faith of any one of the dozen major branches of this quite amazing and universal organization. Your inference that the Y has somehow been disloyal (“semi-socialist”) or unchristian by opening its platforms or forums to liberal or radical speakers (“world church”) is reminiscent of the protests raised by ultra-conservatives of another day when Dwight L. Moody (of whom you appear to approve) brought to an early Northfield student YMCA conference a scientist named Henry Drummond who was the first to apply what you disparage as “evolutionary theories to moral and spiritual realities.”

The material which you quote from Mr. Fisher (page 72) at the bottom of your third column is unfortunately misplaced, since he somehow used the revised form of the “Social Creed of the Churches” of 1932 out of context at this point in his narrative. In my History of the Y.M.C.A. in North America I inadvertently quoted him at this point; an errata sheet issued with the book endeavored to correct this. Hence I apologize on the part of both of us but at the same time question both your use of the material and your conclusion. In endorsing this statement, which you do not identify but infer was some set of wildeyed leftist YMCA notions, the Associations were as usual following the leading churches of the nation, since the “Social Creed” they approved in 1919 was that of the Federal Council of Churches and had then been widely publicized for a decade. But you have virtually changed the meaning of one of these phrases, which originally read “subordination of speculation and the profit motive.…” Why omit “speculation” in this day of legalized gambling?

In my estimation it is not “ironic” to to say that “the YMCA today stands as a vast mission field.…” It is rather a revelation of fundamentalist myopia and I fear ignorance. The “Paris Basis” of 1855, which you cite with apparent approval, was reaffirmed at the Paris centennial celebration in 1955. When the American Associations planned their centennial in 1951, the chief study manual for groups across the country faced the Movement with four imperatives: We must renew our Christian faith, rediscover our sense of Christian vocation, strengthen democracy, and seek world peace and unity. The negative inferences of your editorial are not justified by the facts. This kind of social concern, in spite of your assumption that it died with Moody, continues to be “rooted in the Gospel of Christ.”

A characteristic of the Movement that impressed me as I worked on its centennial history, was a broad and pervasive awareness of faults and deficiencies. Next to the Protestant clergy, the Association secretaryship is the most introspective professional body I have encountered, concerned continuously not only with self-improvement but with the purposes of the Movement. This evidence of the internal activity of the Protestant principle of creative criticism leads me to believe they will find their way back to a more positive Christian witness in the years ahead. I was critical of them in my History. But they published it (admittedly not without some fussing)! I think there is hope for them, especially as I read the literature of the World Movement as reflected in the World Alliance organ, World Communique. I suspect that you also hold this hope, but your editorial is a pretty backhanded way of saying so.

C. Howard HopkinsDeanStetson UniversityDeLand, Fla.

• The YMCA cannot be at one and the same time defended for theological naivete because it was a lay movement avoiding “ecclesiastical entanglements” and excused for social gospelism (including leftist tendencies) because it followed the social pronouncements of ecumenical leaders. CHRISTIANITY TODAY would welcome evidence that the majority of American YMCA’s still carry forward the original zeal of the London Association for prayer meetings, Bible study, personal evangelism, weekly offerings for missions, and that they pursue their interest in public affairs as a reflex of the thrust for personal acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord.—ED.

Re “Will the YMCA Recover its Gospel?,” the Mansfield News-Journal (Nov. 17, 1957) carries an illustrated feature article: “Jazz came to the Y last Sunday.… Some 80 spectators sat quietly …, listening almost religiously.… The Sunday afternoon session was something new and vital.…”

V.T.H.Mansfield, Ohio

We all hope that the YMCA can recapture its evangelistic fervor, and I feel that your article will be instrumental in causing a widespread evaluation of present trends in that organization.

N. H. McCrummenFirst Baptist ChurchSelma, Ala.

My reply to “Will the YMCA Recover Its Gospel” would be, No, not in the United States.… In my opinion, the American YMCA has evolved into a rather confusing paradox by attempting to relate itself to the Paris basis on one hand and at the same time.… no attempt to make the issues of this basis clear in our program.

We have been, and are, an opportunist movement, sensing the pressures of our community and then conforming to them. Unfortunately, while we were maturing into stable and effective community agencies and fellowships, the theological impact made upon us was liberalism. Consequently today our staff, boards, and committees are populated with men and women not sympathetic to evangelism. A constituent today has little chance of learning of Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord through YMCA contacts.

It will be interesting to see how we fare in the next decade or so with neo-orthodoxy as today’s theological impact on the one hand, and the pressures of the Roman Catholic Church and its insistence that no Catholic be involved in our devotional and religious experiences on the other.…

We have nothing left but somehow to inculcate Christian ethics and to create a wholesome environment which we claim stems from Christian motivation of our staff. We find ourselves holding Christian by-products, but we’re embarrassed to claim they come from a Christian theology.…

Everett R. JohnsonAsst. Membership Secy.Y.M.C.A.Bridgeport, Conn.

I fully believe that the YMCA has done and is doing a great job in communities around the world. However, its members are united.… simply by a good social organization. This is worthy, but when taken alone seems barren in comparison to a movement born out of loyalty to Jesus Christ. Some of the men in the movement know next to nothing about the Bible, prayer, a vital church membership, and dedication to Jesus Christ.CLIFFORD V. ANDERSONBethel CollegeSt. Paul, Minn.Asst. Dean of Students

MORE ON SEPARATION

“What is Christian Separation?” … has statements … out of harmony with the Scriptures and is a menace to Christianity.… Dr. Cowie seems to hold that shows, card playing, dancing and such like are nonmoral. While the Bible may not mention all things that are wrong, it does give principles that the Christian must abide by. 1 John 2:15–16 says, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.…”

T. A. Faulkner, ex-dancing master of Los Angeles, states that “Two-thirds of the girls who are ruined fall through the influence of the dance.” The matron of a home for fallen women in Los Angeles declares that “seven-tenths of the women who go there have fallen through the dance and its influence.” 300 prostitutes were questioned; 80% said they began their downfall through the dance.

C.E. DyeHolbrook Church of GodFlint, Mich.

Surely a Christian should … refrain from those things specifically condemned by the Scriptures and other things harmful to the spiritual welfare. Just as surely the condemning of “all appearances of evil” in others may lead some to pharisaical bigotry.… Bigotry itself is no mean sin as sins go.…

Weston HareWilmington, Del.

The major assertions and principles laid down are entirely right.… However, the mistake Mr. Cowie makes is that he places in the non-moral category some practises which actually involve morals.… Mr. Cowie seems to follow the idea that if something is not specifically named and condemned in the Bible it is non-moral. However, the laws or commandments of the Bible are to be applied wherever they fit.

Christianity is not being hindered to any great extent where I live by legalism, but is being paganized by the prevailing attitude, “If I think it is all right … no one should judge me.” Antimonianism is the real enemy.…

Raymond G. JohnsonFirst Baptist ChurchGlennville, Ga.

Legalism is a very prevalent disease in evangelical Christianity, especially in the fundamentalist context. This legalism breeds the worst kind of hypocrisy. It is my observation, however, that those churches which take pride in emphasizing the social freedom of the individual in the realm of shadow-revelation are all too frequently those churches which first have dissipated the lucid and fundamental teachings of the Scriptures (for example … regeneration … the real bodily resurrection.…). This is not to defend hypocritical legalism but it is to object to hypocritical freedom.…

C. W. BrightwellSutersville Presbyterian ChurchSutersville, Pa.

APOCRYPHAL WRITINGS

Dr. Metzger is condemned (by R. C. Wroten, Nov. 11 issue, p. 23) for leading people “to mistake the apocryphal writings for the written Word of God.” … The Episcopal Church is worse than timid Dr. Metzger. The Apocrypha is part of our official Bible and is required by our canon law to be in the Bibles used on the lecterns of our churches. Further, in churches where Holy Communion has not replaced Morning Prayer, the Apocrypha is read publicly in the church as the first lesson a number of times each year. Advancing from Dr. Metzger’s hesitant opinion, buttressed by John Bunyan, that some good may be found therein, the Episcopal Church boldly proclaims the Apocrypha in church, just as it does “the written Word of God.” Since the manner of announcing the reading of Holy Scripture is prescribed by rubric, no distinction or intonation would differentiate the reading of the Maccabees from Isaiah.…

Lewis SasseSt. Andrews Episcopal ChurchTucson, Ariz.

Ideas

Signs of Vitality

Expansion of evangelical vitality has been a conspicuous 1957 religious omen. Christianity Today’s fifty contributing editors, in their year-end appraisal of spiritual dynamisms in the Occident, report evangelical gains on several significant fronts: the student world in England, religious publications in France, mass evangelism in Ireland, and evangelistic gains in America at national and local levels.

*

In the United States this heartening advance spells out this way:

1. Billy Graham’s ministry at Madison Square Garden spectacularly accelerated a fresh accent on evangelism. “Nothing in this century,” states Dr. Faris D. Whitesell, “has so alerted the nation to the possibilities of mass evangelism as the New York Crusade. It proved that the simple Gospel of the New Testament still has its ancient power.” Dr. Paul S. Rees remarks that “the distinguished evangelist never towered quite so high in his use of the ‘mass meeting’ approach to evangelism. New York Protestantism owes him a debt which no words can fairly describe. And perceptive Protestant leaders know it.” “The Crusade was a demonstration,” comments Dr. Oswald T. Allis, “of the Gospel’s power to save all sorts and conditions of men, when preached in simplicity and earnestness and in dependence on the effectual working of the Holy Spirit.” Dr. J. T. Mueller finds 1957 significant for “an amazing spread of evangelical truth by oral testimony,” including radio, television, and printed word. If this advance is to be preserved, however, Dr. James G. S. S. Thomson contends, American churches must “begin in earnest where Dr. Graham left off.” Dr. C. Adrian Heaton discovers that emphasis on evangelism is rising in local churches; that some congregations, long led by liberal ministers, now demand evangelicals in their pulpits; and that there is new stress on the role of laymen in evangelical effort. In Chicago, the Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship witnessed scores of its business men volunteer publicly to go to mission fields for periods of three months to a year at their own expense.

2. Concern for Christian unity on a sound evangelical basis has gained momentum. CHRISTIANITY TODAY, which now has the largest circulation of any magazine distributed to the Protestant ministry, is itself widely viewed as a factor contributory to such unity. Dr. Rees detects a stiffening resistance to the “super-church” trend and deeper soul searching within ecumenical ranks. “A realignment and reappraisal of committed evangelicalism,” he observes, emphasizes personal witness to the historic Christian faith more than denominational or interdenominational affiliations. Conservative Protestantism has suffered from “hardening of the categories,” and more mature criteria for determining the boundaries of fellowship must yet be defined. Professor Clyde S. Kilby considers the “tendency of evangelical Christianity to stop splintering,” while not yet universal, a hopeful development. Yet Dr. Ned B. Stonehouse warns that “evangelical strivings for unity, while admirable in many ways, fall far short of the biblical conception of unity. Traditional and current divisions are often defended by an unbiblical doctrine of pluriformity or by a one-sided emphasis upon the spiritual character of the unity of the Church which loses sight of the other requirement that the Church give fullest possible visible manifestation of its character as Christ’s body.”

3. The evangelical position is being defined with new force, and related to current events with new vigor, through encouraging developments of evangelical scholarship in magazines, journals and books. Speaking only of the mounting influence of CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Dr. Whitesell observes that “though misrepresented and criticized, its impact has been solid, stabilizing and stimulating; it cannot be ignored even by critics.” A volume as weighty as Christian Personal Ethics has reached a first year distribution of 10,000 copies, and Evangelical Books has provided circulation for other volumes like Contemporary Evangelical Thought and Inspiration and Interpretation. This conservative impact is now being registered, as Dr. Thomson notes, at a time when the “continuing trend in the field of Old Testament study” is in the direction of “a position closely identifiable with the conservative view vis-a-vis the text and theology of the Old Testament.” Other reversals of critical positions contribute a propitious evangelical opportunity.

4. In the literary realm evangelical works are again being placed in the main stream of religious publication. Examples of this include more than 100,000 copies of the missionary epic Through Gates of Splendor by Harper & Brothers, and the reappearance of evangelical authors on lists of secular publishing houses. Some secular firms are projecting editorial boards of evangelical advisors to implement their programs.

Yet it would be easy to exaggerate these achievements. A definitive edition of the writings of America’s most celebrated evangelical theologian, Jonathan Edwards, is at present being prepared under the auspices of non-conservative thinkers. Moreover, Dr. Kilby mentions a general “ineffectuality in the evangelical world,” a lack of scholarship and neglect in creative re-evaluation of music, architecture, poetry and literature. “The greatest need” he says, “both spiritually and every other way in our time, is vision, leadership, vitality and imagination.”

Evangelicals are standing face to face with counter trends, therefore, in and against which they must contend. The greatest hurdles, perhaps, obstructing the advancement of evangelicalism are neo-orthodoxy, inclusive ecumenism and sheer religiosity. At the Oberlin conference, for instance, where American theologians reflected a more earnest glance at biblical theology, the neo-orthodox left no doubt of their continued growth at schools like Harvard, Yale, Union, and Chicago. Ecumenism advanced nationally and denominationally, though local enthusiasm lagged far behind organizational moods. (But curiously, Billy Graham’s ministry provoked a reaction from some liberal churchmen opposed to “inclusivism with conservativism,” and their own professed ecumenism thereby became suspect.) One particular sign of indiscriminating ecumenism has been the merger of United Presbyterian Church of North America, mainly conservative (historically it has ordained no candidate denying the truthfulness of Scripture, the virgin birth, or the bodily resurrection of Christ) with the Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., one of whose ministers, after publicly repudiating “the virgin birth, … bodily resurrection, … substitutionary atonement of Christ” (in a letter to CHRISTIANITY TODAY, Dec. 24, 1956, issue: “Personally I have no truck with any of them. Our Presbyterian church does not require belief in these three things. If it did, a lot of us would be out on our ear.…”), was promoted from assistant to associate minister in an action approved by the local presbytery.

On the practical side, obstacles to evangelical advance are numerous. Dr. Andrew W. Blackwood, for instance, is impressed “that hearts are more open today than at any time since I became a minister; but that pastors, like professors, are so busy and troubled about many good things that they do not have time enough for things that matter most.” Dr. Heaton warns of a discontinuity between church attendance and moral practice, confusion of values in sex morality, and an unwillingness of many Christians to work cooperatively with fellow Christians. Dr. Stonehouse is unsure that, despite evangelical progress, the spirit and mind of the age are not actually moving away from Christianity. He speaks not simply of the increased crime, lawlessness, liquor saturation and worldly pleasures to which evangelicals always point; rather, he observes that “the new age in which we are living, whether it be described as the nuclear age, the cosmic age, or the age of the Sputnik, appears to be giving new impetus to various anti-Christian tendencies. The most conspicuous of these is the tendency toward Scientism or the virtual worship of science. This characteristic tendency of our age is being greatly stimulated by the present political crisis. Even more basic than the manifestation of Scientism is the development of a man-centered view of reality and existence.” Dr. Stonehouse also mentions “the emergence of a new syncretism with its repudiation of the exclusiveness of the Christian religion.” It is perhaps of import that Dr. Allis singled out dedication of a Mohammedan mosque in Washington, D. C., in President Eisenhower’s presence, as “a serious violation of the principle of separation of Church and state” and the endorsement and approval of its building by the Chaplain of the U. S. Senate as “an example of extreme ecumenism which is definitely unchristian.”

Lt. General William K. Harrison, U.N. truce delegate at Pan-mun-jom, finds prophetic significance particularly in four major developments: nations preparing for war with weapons capable of worldwide destruction; Israel as a nation inhabiting the Holy Land after eighteen centuries of dispersion; Russia with ability for the first time to invade the Near East and Middle East in power equal to that depicted in Ezekiel 38 and 39; and nations situated in the territory of the old Roman Empire progressing (through Nato, Benelux Customs Union, Euratom, the Common Market) toward the “ten state federation” reminiscent of Daniel 2, 7 and Revelation 13. These are conditions, comments General Harrison, “which, unless I am badly mistaken, point very directly to the near culmination of our age in the Great Tribulation followed by the Second Advent.”

Dr. W. Stanford Reid thinks that perhaps Russia’s satellite has shaken the smugness of the Western world more than any other event since World War I. Evangelical Christians on this side of the Atlantic have been as guilty of lethargy as everyone else, he believes; for they have had a tendency to believe that “all is well” since the United States and NATO profess to be on the side of truth and righteousness. “This religious nationalism develops in the Church repeatedly,” he adds, and “only too frequently [we] feel that because Communists are atheists and sinners, ultimately our force in the Western world will stop them. History does not prove that this is so. All it proves is that the world of man is desperately sick and the Gospel is his only remedy.” Dr. Reid adds that historians 50 to 100 years from now may be able to see “that the flight of Sputnik I drove the evangelicals back to the realization they were not to put their trust in man but in God alone.”

The feeling among CHRISTIANITY TODAY’S contributing editors is that American evangelicals have not yet addressed themselves adequately to the challenge of the age. And as they unify and advance as a movement, opposition from all sides becomes more formidable. The result is a period of delicate balance and cautious transition rather than of finality. Dr. Stonehouse exhorts: “If the evangelical cause is to make genuine progress in our times, we shall have to cast off our complacency and pride and take vigorous measures to renew our strength. In the first place, we dare not deceive ourselves with regard to our scholarship. Educational standards, at least in the United States, are shamefully low and Christian institutions have done far too little to elevate these standards.” There are hopeful signs, he believes, “that the present political crisis may stimulate the improvement of education as a whole, including that of Christian institutions, but there will be a greater challenge than ever to develop genuinely Christian education. In the second place,” he concludes, “my impression is that current evangelism, partly because of its tendency to be concerned exclusively with the salvation of individuals, often misses the God-centered character and cosmic scope of the biblical message of the coming Kingdom of God.”

Bishop Arthur J. Moore of the Methodist Church reminds us, however, that the Risen Christ is still at work in these tumultuous times. “It may be true that for the moment the general life of the world, amid the many confusions of our age, does not realize that from Jesus Christ must come the creative and directing spiritual energy necessary to sustain our race,” he comments. “But there are multitudes who believe we are soon to witness a great reassertion of Christ’s power to redeem human character and elevate human society. Christ emerges from a period of shattering change and fierce opposition without rival as the spiritual Inspirer and Redeemer the world so sorely needs. Supreme in suffering, he is supreme in understanding, supreme in his deity, supreme in his authority. He walks the broken roads of our time and lays his healing hand in power upon the world’s stricken heart.”

*

In Great Britain today, the spiritual pulse is fluctuating and uncertain. The Rev. W. E. Sangster of the Methodist Home Missions Department believes it still dubious that more than 10 percent of the people have any “vital link with the Church of God.” Agnosticism frequently expressed in British broadcasting and telecasting, plus logical positivism to which many younger philosophers are drifting, would suggest that the number of Christians is not increasing. And Dr. Sangster admits that he sees no early prospect of revival of religion. Religious societies at the universities are doing well, yet not equally well in all faculties. There is a need for fresh study of apologetics and philosophical theology, he feels, alongside the past quarter century’s rising interest in biblical theology.

Editor J. C. Pollock of The Churchman (Anglican) likewise observes, in retrospect, a rather indecisive past year. There has been uneasiness over the waste of manpower and money on side issues attacking symptoms rather than the roots of trouble, and over ministerial preoccupation in church routine at the expense of aggressive evangelism. The Church’s impact on national life, moreover, has been spoiled by a reputation for squabbling. Yet the moves toward church unity (Church of England and Church of Scotland and Church of North India), now being discussed, run the danger of marrying inward disunity with outward unity. All denominations are reflecting some concern for the work of expansion, given impetus by recent Graham crusades.

In Scotland, the past year has been disappointing in many respects. The “Tell Scotland” movement has lost much of its original impetus, and disputes and divisions are figuring more prominently in church life than positive endeavors. Well-filled churches in the suburbs do not mask general spiritual indifference of people in industrial and country areas. Christians are not praying, working, giving or witnessing with any sort of real sacrifice. For many of them a second Sunday service and a mid-week prayer meeting are too much to ask. This is perhaps the most depressing aspect of Scotland’s contemporary religious life, and undoubtedly the real key to the general climate of spiritual lethargy.

On the other hand, there are hopeful features. Dr. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Rector of St. Thomas Episcopal Church, Edinburgh, has noted recently a significant advance of evangelical interest in colleges and universities. In the face of contemporary non-Christian or pseudo-Christian thought and practice, it may be many years before this new movement will take effect, but it augurs well for the future.

Somewhat in reaction to the expansion of evangelical influence, there is in Britain a continuance of sneers about “fundamentalists,” and this is contributory to growing opposition. The phrase “uncritical Fundamentalism” is being more and more applied to England’s historic evangelical position. In the York Convocation in May, the Bishop of Southwell, while courteously commending the zeal and pastoral faithfulness of evangelical clergy, made a direct attack on the conservative evangelical position within the Church of England, and Gabriel Hebert’s Fundamentalism and the Church follows the same bias.

Canon Law Revision, moreover, has tended to move toward legalizing High Church practices within the Established Church, which in the last century were condemned by the Privy Council Judicial Committee.

From the effects of the Graham crusade, most evangelical churches have been gaining rather than losing ground. Those which showed the most gain were in middle class areas, and some in working class vicinities where growing economic problems were leaving men and women more approachable and responsive to the Gospel than they had been previously. Both in the Church of England and in the historic Free churches there was an eagerness to learn from evangelicals the methods of pastoral evangelism and personal soul-winning. Even Ireland brought a favorable response to evangelical penetration there. The Dublin campaign by Eric Hutchings and the “Hour of Revival” team during October led to a civic reception where the Roman Catholic Lord Mayor voiced appreciation of the entire effort.

In many evangelical churches, however, there is such preoccupation with evangelism, with bringing people to conversion, that, in Dr. Philip E. Hughes’ words, “the essential task of building up believers by systematic instruction in the great doctrines of Holy Scripture is largely neglected, or is carried on at a superficial level. Christians are expected to exist on milk, without being permitted to develop a stomach for meat. The result is that, generally speaking, men and women of spiritual strength and stature are not being produced—and this is a serious matter for our cause. As we look forward to 1958, I would suggest that as evangelicals we must earnestly apply ourselves to the duty of systematically teaching the Word, from the pulpit and elsewhere, as well as preaching the Evangel. The two should never be divorced, if we are zealous to see much fruit brought to the Father’s glory.”

About the beginning of the year more than 500 Church of England clergy attended the first Clerical Conference of evangelical clergy at the restored Parish Church of Islington, of which Dr. Maurice A. P. Wood is vicar. The event was a revival of a conference founded 126 years ago by Bishop Daniel Wilson of Calcutta and first Metropolitan of the Church of India. Keswick Convention last July also proved to be larger than it had ever been before.

The Archbishop of Canterbury this October opened new buildings of London College of Divinity (formerly St. John’s Hall, Highbury, bombed during the war). This and every other evangelical theological college in the Church of England have in the past months become completely full, with a steady increase in evangelical candidates for ministry in the Church of England. At the Michaelmas ordination in St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, 22 of the 39 men who were ordained were evangelicals.

Student evangelism is reflecting fresh strides in Oxford and Cambridge through their largest religious societies, the Inter-Collegiate Christian Unions. The Reverend John Stott, Rector of All Souls, Langham Place, whose Sunday congregation is the largest of any in London, ministered to both campuses. At Cambridge’s “Freshers’ Weekend,” 450 students attended Bible study, and nearly 1000—seated in the chancel and aisles and standing at the back—came to the Sunday night evangelistic service. The eight-day Oxford mission, conducted by the Reverend Mr. Stott and 30 assistant missioners, saw the student attendance at services build from 500 to 900, with 120 definite commitments to Christ. This was on a campus whose philosophical atmosphere has not always been receptive to the Gospel.

*

For French-speaking countries (France, Belgium, Switzerland) the significant event this year in evangelical interest has been the decision to re-edit in French the Old and New Testament commentaries of John Calvin. The last edition of his New Testament commentaries was that of 1892 (Ed. Toulouse). And except for the Book of Psalms, edited in 1889, commentaries of the Old Testament have not been re-edited since 1564, the year of Calvin’s death. All French reissues since have been in Latin or in foreign languages. At present, churches, congregations and students alike are in prayer for funds necessary to reproduce this gigantic 25 volume edition.

*

Evangelical advance for the year 1957 has been slow and unsteady. This is a time of tension and trouble, and hostility to biblical conservatism is as evident in some circles as evangelical growth and penetration. Debate over the weakness of church life and Christian witness is still being waged on the surface of unresolved theological tensions dating from the 19th century. One of our most urgent tasks, therefore, to quote Dr. Bromiley, is “to work constructively for the end of these tensions; otherwise even a revived practice of religion might not be accompanied by true or lasting revival. A particular responsibility thus devolves upon evangelical theology to pass from negative resistance to positive leadership.” Steady development of gifted and germane evangelical literature in monograph, magazine, and textbook form is a responsibility for our day.

Evangelical exploits by spoken and written word have not lacked the spectacular in the year just completed. But we have no cause for respite, especially when men are turning to God with wistfulness and receptivity. The world today is more combustible than ever; the Bible saw its need a long time ago, and the Gospel is still the panacea for its ills. But for the toilsome task of personal rescue, the evangelical lifeline is not yet extended far enough; for the maturing of disciples, it is too much lacking in doctrinal content; and for the task of social renewal it is as often tangled by its friends as distrusted by its critics.

***

NCC Re-Examines its Organization and Message

A number of speeches and reports at the Fourth General Assembly of the National Council of Churches reflected realistic appraisal of the effectiveness of its program and a desire for greater theological content and depth. Since organizational efficiency must be judged finally by impact on church membership, and since in the absence of an adequate theology the Council would possess no vital message, this was a wholesome point of beginning.

Dr. Roy G. Ross, general secretary, admitted that most Americans, including members of churches, know little about the National Council and its role. Knowledge is limited largely to leaders of churches and their boards. Emphasizing this point, the Reverend Frederick Fox, special assistant on the White House staff, related that Congressmen are aware that the testimony of religious leaders did not always jibe with letters received from church members they profess to represent. The proud claim that the president of the NCC speaks on behalf of 37,000,000 church members therefore loses force. In a panel discussion Dr. Theodore A. Gill of The Christian Century remarked that the programs of the Division of Christian Education fail to reach the local church. Dr. Gerald E. Knoff, executive secretary of the division, acknowledged that he and other staff workers had been disillusioned for some time on that score. Yet programs are developed nonetheless and sent forth to indifferent and unresponsive churches.

No real attempt was made to analyze the cause for the ineffectiveness of the NCC programs. Doubtless one reason is that policies and programs are determined not by constituent churches but by a relatively small group of leaders—the General Board and staff members. In reality the NCC is not a council of churches but a council for churches. Member communions do not formulate policies and forward them to the Council for adoption and execution. Delegates and Board members are not instructed as to the mind of their particular churches in regard to important matters. A glance at the roll of delegates to the General Assembly or of Board members indicates that many are church board secretaries and few are pastors of average congregations and parishes. It has been stated that the General Board is largely dominated by ecclesiastics with expense accounts. Lay representatives are for the most part successful business and professional men and women. Average Christian volunteer workers—generally nearest to the needs and hearts of church members—are conspicuous by their absence. Because of its unrepresentative character the National Council is, for all practical purposes, far from the real life of the churches.

Several movements may isolate the Council further from actual church life. Continuity of elected Board members has been suggested. One report stated that “for the most intelligent and responsible actions by the Council it is exceedingly important that there be continuity, in reasonable measure, of elected General Board members.” However, this is a step towards a hierarchy, threatening a further divorce from local church life.

Some urge larger representation for local and state councils. But it is generally recognized that local councils do not exercise the real functions of the Church. Strangely enough, Dr. Truman B. Douglass scolds denominations for not entrusting the major church functions to the councils, asserting that the denominations are responsible “for making these councils symbols of religious and ethical triviality.” The triviality of many local councils is well known, but that is not the fault of the churches. Councils do not manifest the true marks of the Church such as the proper administration of sacraments, the preaching of the Gospel, and exercise of biblical discipline. Greater representation of local and state councils would in effect deny the name of National Council of Churches.

Another reason for ineffectiveness of the NCC programs has been the absence of theology. Here a change has now been promised. The past president of the NCC, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, told the Assembly that “there has begun a process which I trust will grow and flower, viz: to examine theologically the whole Council movement and its various programs.” He illustrated this by “the practice of bringing to meetings of the General Board some of the great theological voices of our Churches: Niebuhr, Tillich, Calhoun. This to the end that the thought and discussions shall be deeply oriented in the best available insights into the nature of the Gospel itself.” This will hardly comfort and assure the many evangelicals within member churches who rather think that the best insight into the nature of the Gospel is to be found in the authoritative Scriptures. Perhaps of significance is the fact that theologians of denominational seminaries were unmentioned.

Reviewing the Gospel, the churches and the social scene through 50 years, Dr. Roswell P. Barnes disputed the adequacy of the social gospel as based on “somewhat romantic estimates of human nature and history.… What Rauschenbusch seems to have neglected and what our world needs desperately is an understanding of the cross, not only as an event in history, but also as a revelation of what is essential in history.” The doctrine of the Cross and the principle of redemption revealed by it seems to consist chiefly, in Dr. Barnes’ exposition, of sacrificial discipleship: “I do not presume to give an adequate definition. But for me it includes the voluntary giving of self and the yielding of self-advantage out of concern and compassion for the sin and suffering of others.” The biblical doctrine of Christ’s vicarious atonement was not mentioned. Seemingly the offense of the blood of the Cross has not ceased.

The same doctrine appeared in a message by Dr. Donald Black. He said, “The essence of the Christian message and the culmination of Christian ethic is in the cross. Its supreme example is the cross of Christ, and the supreme test for the Christian life is to experience the cross.… The essence of the cross is sacrificing life for those not worth it.” Contemporary preaching emphasizes that the Church must be the suffering servant that the undeserving world may be saved. This has been termed the extension of the atonement. This doctrine thrives today at the expense of the scriptural view that Christ suffered and died once and for all in behalf of doomed men—a doctrine not expounded at the Assembly.

The judgment and the sovereignty of God did receive emphasis, however. Dr. O. Frederick Nolde said, “God stands in judgment over all the nations of the world and all men have a share in the guilt for the plight in which the world finds itself.” In its official message to the churches and the nation, the Assembly warned, “We cannot be sure how much time is left to us, planning and working as men and women to whom every day is a day of judgment.”

But how is judgment to be averted and guilt removed? It seems to be by ethical endeavor: establishing freedom, justice, sympathetic understanding and good will, racial integration and the commitment of science to human betterment. There is subtle legalism in this suggested remedy—a justification and removal of guilt by good works. But the New Testament finds the solution in Christ and him crucified. Judgment is averted by accepting Christ as Saviour and Lord; good works are the fruit and evidence of genuine faith in Christ.

The Assembly waited expectantly to the last day for the message upon which a committee had worked for months and throughout the Assembly. This was to be a message of inspiration to the churches and of comfort to a fearful nation. But the message was disappointing. It pointed out the fact of a broken world and its sins. But, alas, that is all too obvious. The only hope expounded by the message was to point to our “oneness in Christ,” and it urged the Church to give witness of that oneness. That was the great thrust of the message. Far better had the Assembly echoed the message that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.”

The Christian Sabbath

We write from a sense of deep concern and because of the conviction that America is being destroyed from within—one of the sources of destruction being man’s desecration of the Sabbath Day.

In writing on this subject we have no intention of becoming involved in argument. There are those who speak of the Sabbath as the Lord’s Day, others call it Sunday, and still others prefer to speak of the First Day of the Week.

Nor do we intend to become involved in an argument between those who keep the original Sabbath of the Jews, and those who observe the first day of the week, although we believe New Testament evidence fully supports the generally accepted keeping of the Christian Sabbath, our modern “Sunday.”

The setting aside of one day in seven as a day of rest and worship did not originate with the Jews, nor does it appear for the first time in the law of Moses.

At the conclusion of God’s work of creating the world we are told: “and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it” (Gen. 2:2, 3).

Here God laid down a principle of life which has never been set aside and which mankind violates to his own great loss. We believe that God established a ratio between work and physical and spiritual rest from which flow rich blessings to those who order their lives thereby.

Here in America today only a small minority honor this principle and there is abundant evidence that the Lord’s Day is increasingly becoming a holiday, not a holy day. This tendency is found with church members and is intensified by commercial interests whose concern is mammon, not God.

Within the church there are also those who would demonstrate their “freedom from the law” by ignoring or belittling the importance of the Sabbath. In so doing they forget that while the Christian is free from the Jewish law and saved by grace and grace alone, this in no way relieves him from the moral law.

Also, within the church may be found others who feel that secularism has so destroyed the Christian Sabbath as to make an adjustment necessary, even suggesting that the main worship service be on Thursday evening with communion service on Monday morning, thereby leaving the weekend free for recreation and other secular pursuits.

But most dangerous of all is the philosophy which ignores the reason for the Sabbath and the blessings flowing from it to those who regard it as God’s day.

There is every reason to believe that there is operating in nature a law which makes a day of rest and spiritual refreshment necessary for mankind. The physical effect on those who work seven days a week is a demonstrable fact; efficiency wanes and in time becomes so impaired as to greatly lessen the usefulness of the individual. Furthermore, those who have never known or have turned from one day in seven as a day for spiritual refreshment find their interest in such matters fade away and with it spiritual and moral judgments blunted.

Our Lord made it abundantly clear that a legalistic attitude to the Sabbath destroys the spirit which should pervade the day. He scandalized the Jews by doing good, by healing the sick and sanctioning acts of mercy. Some details of the Sabbath as outlined in the law of Moses cannot be translated into the life of the Christian for they were largely restrictive and geared to the law as a whole, but the principle of rest from labor and the need for spiritual refreshment abide.

The Ten Commandments have never been abrogated. It is still wrong to kill, to steal, to commit adultery. We are still obligated to God and to our neighbor, although the basis of these obligations has changed. To deny the validity of one day in seven as a day of rest and spiritual refreshment is to miss one of God’s great gifts to mankind.

Although the prophet Isaiah was speaking directly to wayward Israel, his words on the Sabbath ring down through the centuries to speak to Christians today and their relevance for our time is proven by the effect a reverent attitude to the Lord’s Day has on those who so observe it: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride on the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it” (Isa. 58:13).

As the “Continental Sabbath” developed in England and Europe, the influence of the church waned. Or, the process may have been just the reverse. In any case, we see exactly the same trend in America today. The prophets of old inveighed against Israel for her sins and again and again included the “profaning of the Sabbath” as one of the sins which was bringing judgment on the nation.

The Christian’s primary reason for observing the Lord’s Day is the spiritual blessings and privileges which flow therefrom. A change of occupation and physical rest bring blessings to the body. Worship, meditation, service to others all combine to bring the refreshment to soul and spirit which make the difference between existing and living.

Has the modern way of life, with its games, amusements, and entertainment, brought the peace and inward power people had when God’s day was recognized as such? Is there not cause to believe that in some measure the physical and mental tensions of today, with their accompanying demands for vitamins and tranquilizing pills, stem from breaking God’s holy laws and cheating him of his rightful place in our lives?

The pagans all around us, no matter how intelligent or cultured, are not to be blamed for the debacle now facing our country. The Christian Sabbath is being destroyed because too many Christians look on the weekends as an invitation to the secular, rather than the spiritual. Some pay lip service to the day by attending one service on Sunday while the rest of the day and evening is completely secularized. But in doing this they are missing some of the greatest blessings in store for those who keep God’s day holy.

The Westminster divines, meeting more than three hundred years ago, knew nothing of the tentacles of our modern octopus of secularism, but facing the problems of their own day they spoke with a wisdom which was steeped in the Scriptures and their voice should be heeded today: “This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations, but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.”

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