The current moral upheaval demands a return to biblical ethics and a rejection of the new morality
Many free-wheeling moderns call it “the name of the game.” Episcopal chaplain Earl Brill of American University claims it is dead. Billy Graham says decaying civilizations become obsessed with it. Sociologist Lee Rainwater reports that the middle class enjoys it more than the lower class. Brandeis University’s Catholic chaplain Joseph Walsh believes the attitude college students and adolescents have toward it is becoming the prime worry of the public. Hugh Hefner asserts that our society has too long and too rigorously suppressed it. What are they all talking about? The same thing nearly everyone else is candidly discussing these days: sex.
The Western world is now undergoing a sexual revolution perhaps more debilitating than any other moral upheaval in recent centuries. Along with the accelerated passion to examine, explain, and experience all aspects of man’s total environment, people today are operating on the premise, suggests psychiatrist Rollo May, that everyone has the duty to live the full, free, uninhibited life. As self-centered people carry this attitude into the realm of sexual behavior, established moral standards are being overtly challenged; unrestrained, exploitive, and lascivious patterns of behavior are becoming commonplace. Sexual sins have continually been a part of man’s life, but the mounting incidence of promiscuity, premarital intercourse, prostitution, adultery, illegitimate births, homosexuality, prurient nudity in public, pornography, and various sexual aberrations at all levels of society today causes even long-time liberals to blanch. The West cannot afford to forget the lesson of history that a civilization that turns from the commandments of Almighty God and lavishly devotes itself to carnal pleasures cannot long endure.
The growing desire to bend and break rules of sexual conduct and yet maintain respectability is illustrated by the phenomenal success of the slick and sophisticated Playboy enterprises. Hugh Hefner’s ability to gross 2.4 million fast bucks in 1966 by catering to America’s hedonistic appetite is not difficult to understand. Less understandable is that leading theologians have frequently lent their prestige to Playboy in journalistic contributions. Last month’s Playboy panel on “Religion and the New Morality” brought together nine apostles of the new morality, including Lutheran Martin Marty, United Church of Christ’s Howard Moody, Baptist Harvey Cox, and Presbyterian Robert Wood Lynn, to record their collective observations on today’s sexual revolution. The panel’s advocacy of the new morality, abandonment of the inviolability of the Ten Commandments, and permissive attitude toward dangerous, biblically condemned sexual practices further reveals the sickness in our society and in Christendom.
These theologians rightly point out the impersonalization of sex in the current rage of promiscuity and perversion, and call for responsibility and respect in sexual relationships. But they hold that responsible love may at times transgress biblical commandments against fornication, adultery, and homosexuality. For example, Martin Marty, associate editor of the Christian Century, hypothesized that the seduction of a certain older unmarried churchwoman might be a good thing “because perhaps then she would stop being so judgmental … and start being somebody.” Later, in a burst of enlightenment, he crudely admitted, “I’m not sure that compatible plumbing is the best basis on which to build a relationship.”
Greenwich Village pastor Howard Moody assessed current sexual mores this way: “A girl used to feel guilty because she went to bed with a guy. Now she’s often guilty if she doesn’t.” He declared, “In my religious persuasion there are no beliefs in absolutes about premarital sex. The individual’s conduct is left to his own judgment in the context of the situation.”
Panel participants viewed adultery as legitimate in certain circumstances. Harvard Divinity School’s Harvey Cox considered it acceptable in a situation in which one of the spouses was institutionalized or incapacitated, providing “some kind of understanding” with the spouse was worked out. Martin Marty believed it permissible in what might be called the “Tea and Sympathy” context (in Robert Anderson’s play, the wife of a headmaster in a boy’s school has an affair with a boy falsely accused of homosexuality to convince him of his virility).
The panel said that homosexuality between consenting adults in private should be allowed. Union Seminary’s Robert Wood Lynn stated, “Frankly, I don’t think we really know whether homosexuality is a psychological condition or just another kind of normality, and any dogmatism here is decidedly premature. We should listen far more seriously to homosexuals than we have before.”
Although these new-morality proponents assert their loving concern for people, their moralistic theories in reality work against the welfare and happiness of those they desire to help. By saying that divine commandments on sexual behavior are not absolute, they encourage disobedience of God. By leading people to rationalize sinful acts on the pretext of an undefined “love,” they contribute to the deepening of degradation in society.
The Christian ethic is based on love—God’s love. Such love is not inimical to the Ten Commandments but rather motivates man to fulfill the law. God has given his law, not to keep man in bondage, but to reveal his standard of righteousness, which alone can bring true freedom and personal fulfillment. The law of God is not the sterile legalism of a divine despot but the gift of a loving and righteous Father. As Stuart Barton Babbage has written, God’s law is (1) a means of preservation that sets a bound to the lawlessness of sinful man, (2) a summons to repentance that convicts men of sin, and (3) a guide to confirm and instruct the Christian as he pursues the will of God in daily living. While sinful man cannot in his own power keep the law, he can by faith enter into newness of life in Jesus Christ, who lived in perfect obedience to God’s commandments.
Because sex is such a strong force in man’s life, God has provided explicit admonitions on sexual behavior. Paul declares, “The body is not for fornication, but for the Lord …” (1 Cor. 6:13b). The Bible views sex as sacred and joyful; it advises a man “to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor” (1 Thess. 4:4, RSV). Jesus warned against adultery not only in deed but also in thought: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matt. 5:27, 28).
Marriage was ordained by God to bring unity between a man and a woman and make possible the procreation of children and the proper setting for their upbringing. The mysterious unity between partners in a consummated marriage wherein the two have “become one flesh” is an exclusive relationship of such great depth that it serves as the best illustration of the unity between Christ and his church. The Bible tolerates no contextual circumstances that ever justify violation of the marriage vow.
Biblical teachings on sex are unambiguous. We read: “Flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18a); “You shalt not commit adultery” (Ex. 20:14); “It is better to marry than to be aflame with passion” (1 Cor. 7:9b); “The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.… Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season” (1 Cor. 7:3, 5a). Homosexual behavior is not viewed in Scripture as normal or condonable but is said to deserve God’s judgment: those in Sodom and Gomorrah who “acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire” (Jude 7).
If man in the twentieth century continues his revolt against God’s law in the realm of sex and other areas of life, he not only will create his own hell on earth but also will face the terrible judgment of a righteous God. The moments of ecstacy experienced in an illicit affair are greatly outweighed by the hours of remorse that come from disobeying God and exploiting another person. Modern science may have lessened the fears of “conception, infection, and detection” for many people, but all men still are obliged to live in accordance with God’s absolute law of sexual relations only within marriage. The subterfuge of the new morality that relativizes God’s laws leads not to responsible love for another person but to human disruption and divine judgment. Paul Ramsey has rightly said, “No social morality was founded, or ever will be founded, upon a situational ethic.” Christians must repudiate the new morality.
Let men involved in today’s debilitating sexual revolution turn from sins of the flesh and spirit and by faith in Jesus Christ live in obedience to God’s law. The living Christ stands ready not to condemn sinners but to receive them in love, as he did the woman taken in adultery, and to tell them: “Go and sin no more.”
Dodd And Powell In Perspective
Congressional censure of Senator Thomas Dodd (D.-Conn.) and expulsion of Congressman Adam Clayton Powell (D.-New York) shroud the Washington political scene with uncomfortable implications. Dodd prophesies that re-election from Connecticut will wipe his slate clean, even as Powell’s Harlem electorate has returned him to office. But, regrettably, even in a democracy rightness does not always coincide with the majority vote. And indications are strong that both men invited the adverse judgment of their peers.
Both legislators argue that they did only what political colleagues have done, the essential difference being public exposure. Yet that would hardly provide a basis for exoneration. If other legislators merit the same censure or expulsion, let Dodd or Powell present their facts—or maintain silence.
Both Senate and House owe the American public a prompt and precise exposition of standards of conduct by which men in public life may be expected to preserve their trust. The Dodd case raises large issues of right and wrong in the complex situations that now often confront men in government and business.
“Conflict of interest” is a vexing problem, and it can compromise clergymen no less than officeholders. Hardly a week goes by when leading ministers are not approached to lend their names and indirect influence to some business development, insurance program, or Holy Land tour, with promised personal rewards.
A lot of people are now talking about the need of a congressional code, but nobody seems to be suggesting what that code should be. Meanwhile the temptation prevails to decide issues pragmatically rather than on principle.
All persons in public positions carry a heavy burden of responsibility for proper use of influence and funds, and their lives are subject to open scrutiny. What the politicians are doing, churchmen in public life may well do for themselves. In an age when influence-peddling on credit cards seems to have become part of a way of life, any small donation toward ethical consensus may prove helpful.
The Institute for Advanced Christian Studies is born
A significant evangelical breakthrough in the academic realm has been achieved with the incorporation of the Institute for Advanced Christian Studies and the provision of a preliminary grant by Lilly Endowment, Inc., that will permit a modest beginning no later than October, 1968. The Lilly Endowment grant will total nearly $100,000 over a three-year span.
Members of the institute board are Dr. John W. Snyder, dean of the Junior Division, Indiana University, president; Dr. Carl F. H. Henry, editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY, vice-president; Dr. Gordon Van Wylen, head of the School of Engineering, University of Michigan, secretary-treasurer; Dr. Martin J. Buerger, distinguished professor and former head of the School of Advanced Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Dr. Orville S. Walters, director of health services, University of Illinois.
Although the institute is incorporated in Indiana, no commitment has been made regarding location. An action committee has emphasized that the institute should be near a prestigious university because of the excellent research facilities and opportunity for academic dialogue such a university would offer. Six target cities have been approved as acceptable locations, should properties be offered for a research center and headquarters. An application for tax-exemption privileges is being processed, and early approval is expected.
The Lilly Endowment grant, which will subsidize scholars engaged in research and writing, was provided to launch a new program idea holding promise of an exciting dimension of Christian academic engagement. The ultimate aim is to gather a constellation of Christian scholars for intensive research and writing at a time when the university world is far adrift from the Christian moorings it once had and when many church-related institutions have diluted their distinctives. It is hoped that other foundations and interested individuals will supplement the institute’s resources, both for the acquisition of properties and the expansion of research funds. The Lilly Endowment grant is an initial investment in persons while founders of the institute seek a permanent location and headquarters. Some scholars have voiced the hope that a suburban estate within easy reach of a major academic complex might become available, particularly since many such properties have become tax burdens.
To their credit, hundreds of readers of CHRISTIANITY TODAY have already given $830—mostly in one-dollar gifts—to encourage establishment of the institute. This money, deposited in a special account in the American Security and Trust Company of Washington, D. C., has been made available to the institute and may still be supplemented. The prayer interest of this initial circle of friends is one of the outstanding assets of the new venture.
Dr. Charles Hatfield, head of the mathematics department at the University of Missouri (Rolla), is devoting the summer months to contacts with representatives of various foundations in behalf of the IACS. In the months ahead the institute board will project a preliminary program, devise criteria for participating scholars, and name a selection committee.
James L. Baldwin, who had an active role in the beginnings of International Christian Leadership, has said that American higher education by the most generous estimate now turns out a leadership only 10 per cent Christian in orientation and commitment. He asks, Are more than 90 per cent of the future leaders in American life to be non-Christians or anti-Christians? If so, in another generation the public climate of America may become as irreligious as that of the Soviet Union.
Today the overwhelming majority of students are being trained in secular universities and colleges. Some observers warn that the fate of the Christian Church in the remainder of the twentieth century is now being decided on the secular university campuses, and the omens are not good. Ministerial candidates are declining; churches are closing; and the interest of university students in vital religious commitment is on the wane.
A variety of ideas have been put forward for an evangelical confrontation of this trend—among them proposals for a Christian university, a national university combining the facilities of existing evangelical colleges, a Christian college adjacent to a secular university campus, and a Christian research institute. At a meeting of scholars at Indiana University a year ago, the Institute for Advanced Christian Studies was singled out as both necessary and feasible. It will be a symbol of what is desperately needed to help reverse the rising tide of secularism and atheism in Western culture. Another pressing need is the preparation of a master bibliography of competent evangelical literature in all fields of modern learning. Preliminary work on this is already being done by a group of Christian scholars in Australia. The Christian Research Institute has also proposed formation of a master list of all research and writing projects under way by evangelical scholars at their various points of teaching and study. An effective long-range program must include the goal of visibility for Christian philosophy and theology throughout the academic world, and not all ends can be expected from any one means. The Institute for Advanced Christian Studies can play a critically important role in giving prominence to evangelical perspectives in the modern world.
Summer Of Racial Discontent
Recent eruptions of violence in Negro sections of Boston, Atlanta, Buffalo, and Cincinnati have made us shockingly aware that the expected long, hot summer of racial disturbances is upon us. With the steaming month of August ahead, all citizens, Negro and white alike, must work unrelentingly to build good will in urban communities so that other racial fires of Watts intensity will not ignite in any of a dozen tinderbox cities across the nation. Stop-gap measures such as city-wide public-relations programs, youth employment and job-training opportunities, and well-publicized police readiness to control street riots have already demonstrated their value and should be expanded.
But no lasting solution of the problem can be achieved unless whites and Negroes genuinely accept each other in mutual trust and respect and work together for justice and righteousness. Economic, political, and educational injustices must be challenged; housing and job opportunities must be made available without racial bias; every citizen must carry his share of the burden to provide for his family and contribute to the betterment of his community. The majority of perceptive people of both races are committed to these goals, and steady progress is being made to achieve them.
Continuing violence in the ghettos jeopardizes inter-racial progress and good will. These incidents are largely the work of a small segment of the Negro community—youthful gangs and volatile groups of underprivileged slum-dwellers aroused by the hate-filled demagoguery of irresponsible leaders bent on inflaming passion and creating disruption. Unfortunately, such leaders have become heroic idols eagerly followed by many younger Negroes. Columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak write: “Even Washington officials are coming to realize that moderate Negro national leaders now are out of touch with the slum Negro. If any real authority is wielded there, it is by gang leaders.” Men of reason inside and outside the Negro community are finding it extremely difficult to work reciprocally with these leaders.
Racial unrest is the most serious internal problem America has faced since the Civil War. It must be solved if the nation is to prosper. Certainly public programs of educational, economic, and political advancement must continue in the Negro community. But also the Church of Jesus Christ must assume a major role in the struggle if racial peace is to be realized. It alone can provide the ultimate means of achieving real harmony between whites and Negroes—including the young radicals. The claims of Jesus Christ must be presented in the midst of the strife-torn areas. Since Negro ministers and laymen are the primary agents for reaching the Negro community, white Christians must encourage and support Negro Christians devoted to this task. The evangelistic ministry of dedicated men like Tom Skinner is a hopeful sign and deserves the fullest support. The entire Negro community must be helped to understand that white Christians deeply care for them in their total situation because in God’s sight there is but one race: the human race. The serious rift between Negro and white people can be healed—but only as Christians by acts and words of love share the good news that awaits all men in Jesus Christ.
Shadows Of Armageddon
With the Johnson-Kosygin summit over, the Soviet spokesman moved along to Cuba, the United States carried on against Viet Nam, and the United Nations extended its stalemate over the Middle East. The two world leaders clarified their differences to political constituencies and indicated face-to-face where they intend to stand firm. But nobody thought the world had nudged a solid square inch nearer a millennium. One wit commented that the U. N. debate had at least rescued television from monotony. But that salvation was also short-lived. The networks displayed an expert awareness of vital news values; but when the U. N. debate deteriorated to comedy, they switched to their own performers.
Most modern political leaders—whether in Moscow, Washington, or Zion—seem to think that the world’s problems can be solved without supernatural help. Since they do not look for that help, it is hardly surprising that little is forthcoming. To Christian observers, the cresting confusion in international affairs makes it increasingly obvious that the world needs a summit conference with the transcendent God. True, nobody is proposing a locale. But the Book of Revelation reminds us that long ago God scheduled one in Armageddon.
Promoting An Errant Bible
Recently we were reading “Prexy’s Prose,” issued by California Baptist Theological Seminary to its supporting evangelical constituency. We were interested in its commendation of the “high view of Scripture” espoused by one of the faculty members in a recent Watchman-Examiner article declaring that “the Bible is suffused throughout with the quality of revelation.”
But the essay itself, we discovered, asserts also what the constituency wasn’t told, that “all questions of [the Bible’s] inerrancy … are without substantial meaning and should be discarded.”
Evangelicals are aware that not all conservatives agree on the inerrancy of Scripture. But they need also to learn that some seminary promotional literature now considers the explicit rejection of inerrancy as praiseworthy evidence of a high view of the Bible.
