Book Briefs: July 31, 1970

The Emperor And The Church

Augustus to Constantine, by Robert M. Grant (Harper & Row, 1970, 334 pp., $10), and Constantine, by Ramsey MacMullen (Dial, 1969, 263 pp., $7.95), are reviewed by Frederick A. Norwood, professor of the history of Christianity, Garrett Theological Seminary, Evanston, Illinois.

From both of these books the sculptured image of Emperor Constantine stares out awesomely at the mere reader. Stylized in the classic carving appropriately much larger than life, the head well depicts the powerful Roman emperor who promoted the fateful assimilation of Christianity into the structure of Roman civilization.

Grant’s survey covers the first three hundred years of Christianity. It is well organized for systematic study, and offers a well-rounded interpretation of the history of the early Church in the context of secular society. The author emphasizes religious developments in relation to Roman life and plays down correspondingly internal theological themes. One learns as much about Roman governmental structure and financial policy as about Alexandrian theology and homoousion. Grant’s up-to-date view of that early period offers important insights today without the slightest hint of propagandistic intent. Especially characteristic is his repeated insistence that early Christianity was not primarily a revolutionary movement. He is not arguing that the Gospel does not have revolutionary implications. He is saying that the actual course of the story shows very little revolutionary activity. Christians did not participate in the violent revolts of the Jews against Rome. They did not agitate against social norms unless a clear threat to Christian witness was present. They did not come from an oppressed and desperate lower class, though all classes were represented. Early Christianity emerges as in general a middle-class movement, illustrated by such diverse spokesmen as Tertullian, Minucius Felix, and Origen.

MacMullen’s book is a biography of the life-and-times variety, identified as the first in a series to be known as “Crosscurrents of World History,” at least four of which introduce issues of church history. The approach is that of the historian of Rome who observes the impact of the challenge of Christianity through the principal agent of its establishment as the official faith. It is written in a vivacious style with excellent use of thumbnail portraits and perceptive descriptive settings. One learns a great deal about the complicated process by which Constantine moved from a subordinate role on the western frontier to the apex of power in the throne whose occupants had for generations been deified. This tradition required modification to fit the startling new factor—the emperor’s conversion to Christian faith. One therefore also learns a great deal about the manner of his conversion and its significance for his own religious development and for the status of Christianity in the empire. He comes out looking very much like a typical layman, firm in his commitment but strangely lacking in understanding of the real meaning of the faith and its implications for the common life.

Both books bring us face to face with this crucial person who unintentionally determined what kind of church most Christians would have for the better part of the next two millennia. Both books have been written by eminent historians who have mastered their fields. But they exhibit several interesting differences, not so much in their conclusions as in their method and style. Grant, though he has done a survey, has provided useful and illuminating footnotes that lead directly to the sources and to recent scholarly research. He has paid the reader the compliment of assuming he can read not only English but also French, German, and Italian, to say nothing of Latin and Greek—although these languages are not necessary to understanding of the text. MacMullen, on the other hand, though well established as a scholar, has contented himself with no more than a brief bibliographical note at the end limited to a few English works. One is left completely dependent on his reputation as a scholar. Grant’s style is clear and organized; MacMullen’s is in addition scintillating. Grant introduces the reader to more controversial issues. MacMullen has added a sheaf of carefully chosen illustrations. Obviously the authors—or editors—had somewhat different audiences in mind. Both books make profitable reading for people interested in learning about Christian life as the early Church moved from apostolic obscurity toward imperial dominance.

Toward Arbitrary Exegesis

Biblical Theology in Crisis, by Brevard S. Childs (Westminster, 1970, 255 pp., $8), is reviewed by Robert G. Rayburn, president and professor of practical theology and homiletics, Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri.

The biblical theology referred to here is not the biblical theology of Vos or of the conservative seminaries, in which the method of approach of biblical theology to the study of doctrine is contrasted with the approach of systematic theology. Rather, Childs is referring to an approach to the study of the Bible that developed almost exclusively in America after the Second World War and has been called the “Biblical Theology Movement.” This by no means included a return to an orthodox view of the inspiration of the Scriptures. It was rather a reaction among the neo-orthodox against what they considered a misuse of historical criticism by the older theological liberals. The scholars of this movement did not direct their attack against historical criticism; they accepted the validity of the critical approach to Scripture. They agreed, however, that the critical scholars had so fragmented the Bible that its message had been distorted and the Church had largely forgotten what the message of the Bible was.

The great problem of the “Biblical Theology Movement” was how to accept biblical criticism without any reservations as a perfectly valid tool of exegesis and still recover a strong, confessional theology. Childs’ book traces the history of the movement and shows clearly its failure to recover a theological dimension for the Bible. While its scholars sought “to experience a new urgency in the Biblical message,” and scorned the liberals for their lack of theological perspective, they blamed the conservatives (consistently called fundamentalists) for rejecting what they considered valid biblical criticism. Only rarely were any of the presuppositions underlying the historicocritical method even questioned.

This is a book for those well trained in theology. The layman would find it very hard to follow the intricate theological devices that these scholars used in seeing the Bible as revelation in history and as an essentially unified message and at the same time recognizing that much of its content was myth and that what purported to be history was far from accurate and was thus definitely nonrevelation.

After describing in detail the collapse of the Biblical Theology Movement, Professor Childs presents his own proposal for a new type of biblical theology worked out within what he calls “the canon of the Christian Church as the context.” By this he does not mean to reject the critical approach to the Scriptures any more than did those scholars whose failures he has so adequately described. Rather he proposes the “acknowledgment of the normative quality of the Biblical tradition.” He says:

The Bible does not function in its role as canon to provide a collection of eternal ideas, nor is it a handbook of right doctrine, nor a mirror of man’s religious aspirations. Rather the canon marks the area in which the modern issues of life and death are defined in terms of what God has done and is doing, and what He demands as a response from his people.

Thus the contemporary minister seeks in the context of a normative body of tradition to understand what the will of God is and to proclaim that to his people.

In the last section of the book, Professor Childs illustrates different elements in his proposed method with examples from the Bible. His own complete commitment to the presuppositions of the critical approach to Scripture is immediately evident. The evangelical student will find little that is satisfying or even stimulating, since the words of the Scriptures, despite the emphasis upon the importance of the canon as context, are continually treated as “the words of the tradition.” The author’s exegesis is often as arbitrary as that of any fundamentalist.

The Marijuana Epidemic

The New Social Drug, edited by David E. Smith (Prentice-Hall, 1970, 186 pp., $5.95), is reviewed by A. E. Wilder Smith, professor of pharmacology, University of Illinois, Chicago.

This symposium by fourteen contributors covers the medical, legal, and cultural aspects of the current marijuana epidemic. It is markedly, but informedly, slanted toward permissiveness in regard to cannabis and other “soft” drugs and is therefore likely to be frowned upon in religiously and culturally conservative circles.

The clinical and pharmacological investigations reported are a breath of fresh air to the pharmacologist normally subjected to official tendentious reporting intended to scare the younger generation off drugs, psychedelic and otherwise. One contributor, F. H. Meyers, classifies marijuana not as a psychedelic drug at all but rather as a mere hypno-sedative along with the barbiturates. The fact that alcohol consumption and marijuana use seem to be inversely related is taken to mean that marijuana is a substitute for alcohol.

That cannabis may cause psychotic episodes even when smoked as marijuana is freely admitted, particularly where smoking is taken up again after a period of abstention. Thus there seems to be evidence for a sort of sensitization to the drug. However, the small number of subjects investigated under controlled supervision reflects the serious lack of real knowledge we have to date on cannabis.

Legal and cultural aspects of cannabis control are adequately handled, and the similarities to the marijuana position now and that of alcohol legislation after the introduction of Prohibition are well drawn. Is it in the best interests of society to deprive the majority of the “benefits” (that is, allegedly, insight, relaxation, euphoria, hedonism, and so on of cannabis) in order to protect the small proportion of society that admittedly reacts badly to it? Is it fair to deprive society of its right to privacy (allowing such things as no-knock police searches) in the interest of protecting a few from themselves? Prohibition, so runs the argument, caused the building up of a vast system of organized crime and a huge counter system of police surveillance, both of which made society the poorer.

The entirely relative nature of marijuana (and LSD) toxicity is well brought out. It is admitted that cannabis will cause “amotivation,” sloth, lack of initiative, and lethargy. “If one hundred nineteenth century English bankers were to take LSD at least 95 per cent of them would have ‘bummers’ (bad trips).” Under the same conditions, it is suggested, one hundred of the present generation would probably react 95 per cent favorably. Toxicity is a very relative matter and depends on the drug, the “set,” and the “setting.”

Finally, the religious implications of the psychedelic era are noted by mention of the religious void in which the younger generation has often been reared. Allegedly, the “old protestant mythology” (including the value of hard work and achievement) is over. Machines are going to put half the labor force out of work in the near future. We shall soon no longer have to work hard and achieve in order to live. We shall all have time and opportunity to withdraw, which is what the drug-users are doing already. Today we are already living off machines. More of us will allegedly become parasites of machines—just as members of the psychedelic community are presently parasites of society! Allegedly, the drug users are just a little ahead of their time!

The whole symposium is highly factual but shows little patience with the absolute standards that are the life blood of the one who believes that God has revealed them.

The print of the book is small, the paper of moderate quality, and the price rather high.

Questions Biblical History

New Atlas of the Bible, by Jan H. Negenman (Doubleday, 1969, 208 pp., $19.95), is reviewed by Carl E. DeVries, research associate, The Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Covering so long a span of history and so great an area of geography is a difficult task for one writer. Jan H. Negenman has accomplished it in an informative, interesting, and readable book that testifies to his erudition. It is inconceivable that such a work could escape criticism of details by specialists in various periods and geographical areas, but the scholarly level of the book is generally good.

On the credit side the book is beautifully produced. One distinctive feature is that it has a number of charts, plans, and drawings. For the theological student, another asset of the book may be its compact presentation of the standard “liberal” view of the composition of the Bible, which is the basis for much of the outline of this atlas.

It is this, however, that in my opinion gives rise to the most telling criticism of Negenman’s atlas. Ideally, an atlas should have numerous detailed maps and should be concerned essentially with geography and topography; this atlas leans heavily on literary criticism. The particular brand of literary criticism limits the usefulness of the book, for the author appears to have little confidence in the Bible as a book of history. He neglects the early sections of Genesis, doubts the historicity of the Israelite exodus from Egypt, and challenges the historical character of many incidents related in the Old Testament as actual events, though often he does this by qualified rather than by outright statement. He expresses relatively fewer objections to the historicity of New Testament happenings and voices no questions about the resurrection of Jesus.

Although it provides much interesting information about the background of the Bible, this atlas is not recommended for the use of the Bible-believing layman, who may find its liberal emphases a source of confusion.

Book Briefs

Paul Tillich’s Philosophy of Culture, Science and Religion, by James Luther Adams (Schocken, 1970, 310 pp., paperback, $2.95). Paperback edition of what has become a standard introduction to Tillich.

Christ’s Suburban Body, by Wilfred M. Bailey and William K. McElvaney (Abingdon, 1970, 208 pp., $4.95). Two suburban pastors are optimistic about the potential of the suburban church.

Heredity: A Study in Science and the Bible, by William J. Tinkle (Zondervan, 1970, 182 pp., paperback, $2.45). This reprinted study of the science of genetics rejects heredity as a process and vehicle for evolution.

Sacramentum Mundi, Volume 5, edited by Karl Rahner (Herder and Herder, 1970, 438 pp., $17.50). The most recent volume of a major Catholic theological work. Treats in alphabetical order subjects from philosophy to salvation.

Exposition of Psalms, by H. C. Leupold (Baker, 1970, 1010 pp, $8.95). Reprint of a commentary helpful for pastors and laymen alike.

Mark: The Gospel of Action, by Ralph Earle (Moody, 1970, 127 pp, paperback, $.95). A commentary that loses none of the freshness of the Gospel itself in its systematic discussion of it.

New Life for All, by Eileen Lageer (Moody, 1970, 144 pp., paperback, $1.25). An account of the indigenous in-depth evangelistic movement in West Africa that began in 1964.

Sinners Anonymous, by H. S. Vigeveno (Word, 1970, 170 pp., $4.95). The author contends that Christians must begin with confession of sins if they are to change the Church and the world.

Where Are You, God?, by David A. Ray (Revell, 1970, 160 pp., $3.95). Using specific illustrations, the author shows how to combat the feeling of separation from God that at times confronts every Christian.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.