- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Special Report
Amid Burma’s changing political scene, an alert Christian minority, predominantly Baptist, is today probing new opportunities for evangelistic witness. A leisurely 75-minute flight from Bangkok, which brought visiting World Vision speakers to Rangoon just 146 years to the day after Adoniram Judson’s arrival, contrasted with the tedious route of many delegates, some fording treacherous streams and coming by river boat, others trekking days on foot through rugged mountain passes until at last they reached Insein. There Karen Theological Seminary opened its new centenary memorial auditorium July 13–17 in advance of dedication to accommodate 815 delegates and 300 additional unregistered workers from Rangoon who shaped Burma’s most representative meeting of Christian workers not only racially but geographically and denominationally. Burma Christian Council sponsored the four-day conclave, and featured the ordination of John Thetgyi, its erstwhile lay associate secretary, with Dr. Paul Rees speaking.
General Ne Win’s Burma army, in power since the fall of U Nu’s government in October and pledged to free elections, in a gesture of good will entertained World Vision speakers and national Christian leaders at a 10-course dinner, invited the entire conference to tea and a command performance of Burmese singers and musicians seldom seen outside the royal court, and procured the large turtle dome of Rangoon University’s engineering college for a final evangelistic rally. In the absence of Dr. Bob Pierce, Dr. Richard Halverson, who has labored six summers with Pierce in Asian conferences, addressed the congregation of 2500, some 200 responding to the call for decision and dedication.
Burma’s army has improved government efficiency, reduced bribery and corruption, cleaned up the towns, checked profiteering and vigorously opposed communism in a semi-socialist state. Although Burma was first to recognize neighboring Red China in 1949, it supported U.N. intervention in Korea, pursues studied neutrality between East and West, and aims to maintain constitutional government. While the nation is dominantly (85 per cent) Buddhist, with widespread animism in the hill country, the army recently has encouraged gatherings of entrenched religion to denounce communism and promises them all fair treatment. The present government senses the spiritual nature of the clash with communism. The new constitution gives Buddhism special place in the life of the state, although not as a state religion, and grants freedom of worship. There is liberty to preach anywhere, and to teach the Bible in Christian schools. Even government schools permit Bible teaching if enough Christian students are enrolled.
In the face of this situation Christian leaders voice dual concern. Aware that the Christian movement lags in exploiting prospects, they are eager to materialize opportunity without reducing churches to instruments of government.
Many fear that when the country returns to normal party government the gains in honesty and discipline achieved through military compulsion will evaporate slowly through lack of spiritual dedication. Whether Buddhism as a unifying tradition, with its emphasis on moral law and order, carries sufficient vitality to contravene subtle Communist influences also remains to be seen. Burma owes her social institutions, economic development, and civil liberties to Britain more than to Buddha.
In a land about the size of Texas, left in shambles by World War II, 13 million Burmans, 3 million Karens, 1 million Shans and smaller groups of Chins and Kachins are the indigenous groups with 800,000 Indians and Pakistanis and 300,000 Chinese contributing to the 11 main language groups with 126 subsidiary dialects. Burman is the language of the public schools, and three in four non-Burmans understand it; the educated use English (dating from British conquest) almost interchangeably.
The Christian movement represents but three per cent of the population, and includes only 10,000 converts from Buddhism. Most converts come from the hill country where animism prevails. The language barrier and limited training of many workers doubtless levelled some of World Vision’s challenge. Whereas half the delegates to the Malayan pastors’ conference understood English, only 10 per cent in Burma did, and those who did not understand Burmese required a second translation. The sessions saw Bibles open in 30 languages.
The pastors’ conference daily schedule began with group prayer meetings from 5:30 to 6 a.m. Then at 7:30 came Bible study led by Dr. Carl F. H. Henry; 8:40–9:40, Dr. K. C. Han of Korea, on effective preaching; 9:50–10:50, Dr. Rees, on stewardship. After lunch came the 1:30–2:30 hour with Bishop Enrique Sobrepena of the Philippines, on evangelism. After tea came the afternoon discussion hour, and after dinner, the evening meeting, addressed by Dr. Halverson or Dr. Rees. The team schedule was so rigorous in Burma weather that World Vision marimba soloist Jack Conner (with Xavier Cugat’s orchestra before his conversion) suffered a heart attack and was hospitalized. Arriving as lay helpers to the team were Jack Johnston and William Yinger of Oklahoma.
In most of Asia Christianity is denominationally diverse, but in Burma the Baptists predominate much as do Presbyterians in Korea. Baptists outnumber other Protestants 20 to 1 and outnumber Roman Catholics 2 to 1. With 200,000 baptized church members, the Baptist community is estimated at 400,000 to 500,000. Rangoon has 23 Baptist churches. Burma Divinity School (Baptist) has an enrollment of 109.
Despite favorable prospects in Burma, Protestantism does not fully rise to the opportunity. Christian schools lack adequate Bible teaching. Some centers open to Gospel preaching are neglected. Some pulpits neglect Bible teaching, and theological roots need deepening. Evangelistic and pastoral concern needs to be sensitized. Backsliders have drifted from the churches due to lack of follow-up. Moral life has slipped in some churches in the aftermath of World War II. Drinking, gambling, border smuggling, opium growing and trading, bribery, sub-Christian home life, and even sexual laxity have cropped up here and there as social vices which Christian leaders now challenge with fresh earnestness.
World Vision leaders spurred Burma’s workers to deeper devotion to the Word of God; to fuller understanding of stewardship, including the stewardship of time; to new evangelistic concern in the face of Burma’s special opportunity; to deeper self-discipline and sanctification; and to a fuller look at the divergence between Christian and Communist views of life. The Burma churches presented World Vision with a sacrificial offering of $1,000 to help support 12,000 orphans it assists in Korea. Christian workers began to talk hopefully of an evangelistic crusade in Rangoon. The Christian task force in Burma, if set aflame in its mission, could help count decisively for Asia’s destiny.
C.F.H.H.
Gains And Losses
Alcohol And Law
Should use of alcoholic beverages be restricted aboard commercial planes?
The question had the attention of both the executive and legislative branches of the government this month.
A House subcommittee held hearings on proposed legislation which would ban liquor from commercial flights entirely, then favorably reported one of 10 similar bills now before Congress.
The Federal Aviation Agency, meanwhile considered adoption of a ruling which would restrict consumption of liquor in flight to the limited amount served by hostesses and stewards. The ruling would impose civil penalties on persons who drank from their own supply and on airlines which served a passenger who “either is or appears to be intoxicated.”
‘The Son Of God’
A New York corporation plans to spend an estimated 30 million dollars on a film to portray the life of Christ.
William Free, board chairman of newly-organized Parliament Pictures Corporation, has been working for eight years on a script. The cast will number 50,000, with 150 principal parts.
Free said the cast and director have not yet been chosen. But the actor who is to play Christ, he explained, will remain anonymous.
The four-hour film, titled “The Son of God,” is to be premiered simultaneously in six countries during Christmas week, 1960.
It presumably will be the most costly film ever produced. Free said one-third of the profits will go to religious and other charities.
He added that many denominational leaders, Catholic and Protestant, have acted as advisers in script preparation.
Amish Appeal
A group of Amish leaders are appealing to the federal government for exemption from social security taxes. They petitioned the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in Washington last month after having been told that a bill to grant them such an exemption has little chance of passage during this session of Congress.
“Our faith has always been sufficient to meet our needs as they came about,” the petition said, “and we feel the present social security laws are an infringement on our responsibilities.”
People: Words And Events
Deaths: Dr. Charles Tudor Leber, 60, general secretary of the Commission on Ecumenical Mission and Relations of the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., in Sao Paulo, Brazil, while attending the General Council of the World Presbyterian Alliance … the Rt. Rev. Henry St. George Tucker, 85, former presiding bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church, in Richmond, Virginia … Dr. Arthur William Klinck, 59, chairman of the department of historical theology at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis … Dr. Isaac Halevi Herzog, 70, chief rabbi of Israel, in Jerusalem … the Rev. George Bolton, pastor and director of Christian Herald’s Bowery Mission, in New York.
Resignation: As president of the San Francisco Conservative Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. John Dunkin.
Appointments: As president of California Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. C. Adrian Heaton, head of the department of Christian education at Eastern Baptist Seminary … as associate pastor of Bream Memorial Presbyterian Church in Charleston, West Virginia, the Rev. Robert B. McNeill.
Election: As president of Gideons International, H. S. Armerding.
Quotes: “Sin may be an old-fashioned word, but we need more plain talk about God, the Bible and Christian conviction.”—Methodist Bishop Arthur J. Moore, addressing a regional laymen’s conference at Lake Junaluska, North Carolina … “It would be an invaluable asset to be able to send throughout the world colored church leaders, missionaries, teachers, doctors and administrators to the colored peoples-men who already because of the color of their skin, preach the Gospel of equality before God.”—Dr. N. Arne Bendtz of Augustana Theological Seminary, addressing a missionary conference in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Religious Assemblages
Gideons In Dallas
More than 1,000 persons attended the annual convention of the Gideons International in Dallas, Texas, July 21–26. The Gideons, who number some 19,000 in the United States and 47 other lands, are dedicated to Bible distribution. In the 60 years since the founding of their organization, they have placed some 42 million Bibles in hotels, motels, schools, colleges, hospitals, prisons, and military establishments.
‘New Approach’
At Pacific Grove, California, the General Convention of the New Jerusalem in the U. S. A. (Swedenborgian) voted at its annual meeting last month to make a “new approach” to the National Council of Churches. The convention had previously considered joining the NCC, but plans never materialized.
11Th Congress
Youth for Christ International held its 11th World Youth Congress in Mexico City this month. More than 3,000 delegates and visitors were on hand for an opening rally. An evangelistic thrust characterized the two-week congress. Plans were made to send out teams of workers for gospel crusades in at least a score of Mexican cities.
Evangelical Methodists
The fourteenth annual General Conference of the Evangelical Methodist Church drew a record number of more than 500 registrants. Held at Salem, Virginia last month, the conference voted to employ a full-time youth director, the Rev. Everett Ashton.
A Happy Ending?
The World Presbyterian Alliance went on record at its 18th General Council as favoring the drawing up of a new statement on the Reformed faith “articulated in the language of our day.”
Delegates to the July 26-August 6 meeting in Sao Paulo (where concurrent celebrations marked the centennial of Brazilian Presbyterianism) pledged support of a statement which “while remaining loyal to the Holy Scriptures and the faith of our fathers,” also should have reference to the “false teachings of our age.”
The 400 delegates and observers from 53 nations made the council the largest in the 84-year history of the alliance, a Presbyterian-Reformed fellowship said to be the oldest world-wide confessional organization in Protestantism with 45 million constituents.
Delegates (1) doubled the organization’s budget to allow for expanded activity; (2) reaffirmed a statement adopted by the 1954 council expressing willingness to subordinate their own interests to those of the ecumenical movement; and (3) received as the 77th member of the alliance the Presbyterian Church in the Republic of Korea.
Dr. Ralph Waldo Lloyd, president of Maryville (Tenn.) College, was elected president of the alliance. The only other candidate was Dr. Joseph Hromadka, who withdrew his candidacy.
Hromadka, a World Council of Churches leader and wartime lecturer at Princeton Theological Seminary, is dean of the Amos Comenius Theological Faculty in Prague, Czechoslovakia. He has frequently been labeled an apologist for the Communist regime in his country.
Hromadka denied before newsmen in Sao Paulo that he was a Communist. He said that although communism’s atheism “weakens” the authority of the church, it also challenges churches to “purify themselves.” He added:
“The Communists say that religion is the expression of obscurantism and reaction. But, in their contact with me, they say: ‘How is it possible that you, being a religious man, are not a reactionary?’ Our methods of action are causing confusion among the Communists who are trying to revise their attitude towards religious people. It will be a long, slow process, but there will be a happy ending as far as we are concerned.”
Coptic Concern
Leaders of the state Coptic church in Ethiopia view with concern signs of growing cooperation between their government and the Soviet Union.
They wonder if a new joint trade and economic pact between the two nations may result in a possible change in the Ethiopian government’s traditionally pro-Christian outlook. The state Coptic church proudly connects its history with the conversion of the eunuch recorded in the book of Acts.
Missionaries in Addis Ababa, Ethiopian capital, say they are still “as free as ever” to preach the Gospel and report that a strong evangelical church is growing under national Christian leaders.
Foreign Tours
Probing Marxism
Upon their return home last month from a four-week tour of Russia, Czechoslovakia, and China, six Australian Protestant clergymen issued a statement which was promptly branded by fellow churchmen as unduly optimistic.
The visiting clergymen included a Baptist, two Methodists, and two Presbyterians, plus a Churches of Christ educator.
The statement said “there seems to be a genuine conviction on the part of Christian people that it is possible to be a believing and practicing Christian in a Communist state.”
In all three countries, the statement said, there was evidence that the church “appreciated the efforts of the state to improve the lot of the common man.”
The statement was challenged by Dr. Malcolm Mackay, Presbyterian minister and master of Besser College in the University of New South Wales. Mackay suggested that the churchmen, in making the visits, had played into the hands of the Communists, “who want to exploit the churches’ enormous desire for peace, brotherhood, frankness and understanding.” He urged that Australian Protestants set up a special commission to investigate “all aspects” of the situation of the Christian churches in Communist countries.
Queen At Church
Queen Elizabeth, expecting her third child, attended worship services on four of the six Sundays she and Prince Philip spent in Canada.
Plans for the Queen to attend a Sunday service at the Anglican Cathedral in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, were cancelled when she suffered what was described as a “stomach upset.”
The royal couple spent Sunday, July 12, at a mountain lake retreat in British Columbia. Anglican Dean James C. Jolley flew from Kamloops to hold an informal service in a lodge dining room.
Both missed church on Sunday, July 5, while travelling from Port Sound, Ontario, to Chicago.
They attended Sunday morning services on June 21 at St. Paul’s Anglican Church in Gaspe, Quebec, and on July 26 at St. Mark’s Anglican Church in Port Hope, Ontario. On June 28 they attended a late afternoon service at Sydenham Street United Church in Kingston, Ontario.
Tim F. LaHaye
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
TIM F. LAHAYE, Pastor, Scott Memorial Baptist Church, San Diego, California
“This is, without a doubt, the most inefficient organization I have ever seen. I’ll let them take care of the Sunday School, and I’ll take care of the church.”
Such was my cynical attitude about our Sunday School after two weeks in a new church several years ago. The school was running around 90 to 100 in attendance, and it amazed me that anyone bothered to come at all.
As a firm believer in evangelism, I felt certain that the way to build a church was to preach the Gospel and get people saved. The Sunday School, I reasoned, could take care of itself. One year later I sat at my desk a very discouraged young pastor. I had just taken stock of our Sunday School situation. To my dismay I had found that our Sunday School had increased by the grand total of 10 members! What were we to do?
The answer came that very day in the mail, although I didn’t realize it as I opened the envelope. It was an invitation to attend a Sunday School conference featuring Dr. Henrietta C. Mears, well-known Sunday School authority and Editor-in-Chief of Gospel Light Bible Lessons.
I decided to attend, and invited several Sunday School leaders in our church to join me. After three days of informative, inspiring, Sunday School workshops, lectures, and messages, all of us were literally transformed. Our outlook on Sunday School work was completely changed, and we returned to our own church filled with enthusiasm. We lost no time in putting what we had learned into action.
During the next five years we had the joy of watching our Sunday School attendance grow steadily from around 100 to close to 400. I have since taken another pastorate, but understand that this same Sunday School is now running well over 400.
Now the important question is, what was the reason for this new enthusiasm and growth? What did that conference do to change our outlook?
Well, first and foremost, I, the pastor, saw the tremendous importance in Sunday School work. The leaders who attended with me saw it too.
For the first time we all realized that here was our greatest opportunity for Bible teaching. Here was the greatest soul-saving agency in our entire church program. Here, indeed, was the best way to reach homes for Christ.
Here was the greatest training center, and here was the place where more lives were to be dedicated to the mission field than anywhere else.
We decided that if Sunday School had the potential for the most fruit, it was worthy of the most work. In these busy days, no Christian can spend his time without getting proper return for the Lord. We realized that the best place to make our lives count for Christ was the Sunday School. There we could invest our lives in other lives, and these in turn would be invested in still other lives.
It was revolutionary for me as a pastor to realize that I didn’t have to lead every soul in our church program to Christ single-handed. I very quickly saw that a consecrated Sunday School teacher, with only a small flock, was in a much better position to reach them for Christ than I was. For this reason I concentrated on helping teachers learn how to become good shepherds, able to bring many into the fold and keep them from straying with efficient, effective, teaching of the Word.
The second factor, then, in the growth of our Sunday School was teacher training. At the Sunday School Conference that gave us our new vision, proper training of teachers and staff was strongly emphasized. We launched our own teacher training program, and even had a Sunday School Conference in our own church on a minor scale.
This gave confidence and “know-how” to teachers who previously never dreamed it possible that they could teach, but who secretly wished they could.
The better trained our teachers were, the higher the standards of our Sunday School. It seems a complete circle: the better trained and more enthusiastic the teacher, the more interesting the class; the more interesting the class, the more children who attend; the more children attending, the more enthusiastic the teacher.
The Sunday School has no problem in getting visitors to attend. The main problem is making the lessons interesting enough so visitors will come back.
The third factor was our change to closely graded Sunday School materials that helped train our teachers, giving them confidence, and making their Bible teaching interesting to all of the age groups in our Sunday School.
The fourth factor was another significant change in my own attitude. I hesitate to say this for fear of being misunderstood, but a pastor’s attitude sets the pace for the entire church.
If the pastor is not concerned about the Sunday School, the church members will not be concerned. If the pastor is concerned, he can use the Sunday School as illustrative material in his messages, and occasionally exalt Sunday School teachers as an example of “good works” in the Christian life.
Through these and other methods he, week by week, can mold the congregation into a Sunday School-minded church. This, in turn, enthuses the workers on the staff so that they do better work, and it makes it much easier to secure additional workers as needed. Without any question, the pastor is the key to the Sunday School.
Pastors are frugal with their time, and they may well ask the question, “What results can I expect if I invest myself in the Sunday School?” I think there are four:
One result is the salvation of many souls. The better the Sunday School, the more who will attend; the more who attend, the more who will be converted. National figures record that 85 per cent of all church converts come from the Sunday School.
A second result is mature Christian leaders. Leaders are trained, not born. The Sunday School is the best training ground the church has. I am convinced that, because of the diversification of duties, anyone who really wants to serve the Lord can find some place to do it in the Sunday School. In exercising his talents toward the fulfillment of Sunday School duties, he is automatically training himself for additional offices throughout the church.
Result number three is a faster growing church. I have never met a preacher who was not interested in increasing the size of his church. Nothing does this as consistently as a good Sunday School. I know of relatively few churches that are being built today because of tremendous preaching in the pulpit. I do know, however, that across America many churches are growing by leaps and bounds because of an efficient, progressive Sunday School.
A fourth important result is that entire families can be reached for Christ. As soon as our Sunday School started to improve, we saw parents start to come to church with their children instead of merely sending them. More Christian homes were definitely established in our community because of our rejuvenated Sunday School.
As a final word for all fellow pastors, it is my studied opinion that next to our responsibility to “preach the Word” is our responsibility to build a strong Sunday School that can “teach the Word” as well. Truly, in building a strong Sunday School we are building a strong church, for the honor and glory of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
To help you build a strong church through more effective Bible teaching in your Sunday School, send for the new full color filmstrip, “Johnny, Don’t Do That”. It presents a dramatic picture of the spiritual growth of a normal boy, and his Sunday School’s effect on his life. Use it free for your next teaching staff meeting. Please state whether you require sound on 33–1/3 LP record or on tape, and give your first and second choice of dates. See your authorized Gospel Light supplier or write Gospel Light Publications, Dept. CT89, Glendale 5, California or Mound, Minnesota.
- More fromTim F. LaHaye
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
NEWS
CHRISTIANITY TODAY
An estimated 400,000 Protestants assembled for an outdoor rally which ended the ninth German Evangelical Church Day Congress in Munich August 16.
The gigantic crowd assembled around a 120-foot steel cross on Theresien Meadow, a huge lawn area famous for Munich’s traditional beer festivals.
Launched at Essen in 1949, the Church Day movement has become a permanent institution with the state-supported Evangelical (Lutheran) Church in Germany. Virtually all Protestant groups in Germany have endorsed the Church Day movement.
For the first time, the Church Day congress was held in a largely Catholic area. Many Roman Catholic families opened homes to visiting Protestants.
This year’s congress also was the first at which relations with Roman Catholics came up for official discussion. (German Catholics also have a Church Day known to them as the Katholikentag. Protestants call theirs the Kirchentag.)
The five-day assembly also took up study of the ecumenical movement and the influence of mass media. There were seven mass rallies, more than 200 other assorted smaller meetings, 74 cultural events, and 37 performances of church music. Meetings held in conjunction with the congress were sponsored by the German free churches, the German Evangelical Missionary Council, and a number of professional groups.
Still another new feature of the 1959 congress was a counselling service that made theologians, lawyers, doctors, and psychiatrists available for individual consultation on personal problems. Facilities for private confessions were provided.
Leaders of the congress sought to affirm that a spiritual unity exists in Germany despite the fact that the country still is divided. Ten “working groups” explored religious problems as well endeavoring to consider social questions in the light of religion.
Bishop Otto Dibelius of Berlin, head of the Evangelical Church in Germany, took the occasion to denounce continued curtailment of personal freedom by the East German regime.
The bishop said it was a “monstrosity” that a Communist state should dictate where citizens may travel and what they may think. His reference was to a decision of Soviet Zone authorities that they would only issue 1,000 travel permits to East Germans who wanted to attend the Munich congress.
Communists attacked the meetings as a “tool of atomic armament and war preparations against the socialist camp, thus destroying even the last remnants of its all-German character.”
West German church leaders had hoped that 30,000 Soviet Zone Protestants might attend the congress. At the last all-German congress, held at Frankfurt on Main in 1956, more than 20,000 East Germans participated. Another congress had been planned for Erfurt, Thuringia, in the Soviet Zone, in 1957, but Church Day leaders called it off because of restrictive conditions imposed by Communist authorities.
Among foreign guests at the congress were representatives of the World Council of Churches and the Lutheran World Federation, both of which have their headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.
Among prominent speakers were Bishop Ralph Manikam of the Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church of India; Archbishop Jaan Kiivit, of the Lutheran Church of Estonia; and Dr. George F. MacLeod, former moderator of the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian).
Dr. Reinhold von Thadden-Trieglaff is president of the German Church Day movement. Dr. Reimer Mager, of Dresden in the Soviet Zone, is vice president.
The chiming of eight bells, designed to be installed ultimately in the Reformation Church in Speyer, officially opened the congress. Cast in a Karlsruhe bell foundry, they were transported to Munich on a convoy of flatbed trailers made available by the U. S. Army.
A highlight of the closing rally was a question and answer session broadcast over loudspeakers which stressed the importance of the congress theme “Ye Shall Be My People.” The session also summarized conclusions reached by the “working groups.”
Among scores of West German public leaders present were outgoing President Theodor Heuss, who hailed the Church Day movement as an instrument of “reconciliation and understanding;” and Vice Chancellor Ludwig Erhard, who brought a message of greetings from Chancellor Konrad Adenauer.
Adenauer, a Roman Catholic, declared that with the “fundamentals of Christianity being attacked by atheistic forces with unprecedented vigor, Christians of all confessions are called today to stand together more than ever.”
Nearly all of the Congress’ closing events and many of the earlier ones were broadcast to East Germany by West German and West Berlin radio and television systems.
Lectures and discussions were held in halls of the Munich exhibition ground and were attended by some 40,000 persons, including 3,000 from foreign countries.
One of the key speakers was Dr. Joachim Beckmann, president of the Evangelical Church of the Rhineland, who said that while the church, by its essence, is “no political factor and has no political message, God does not relieve it or individual Christians of political responsibility.”
Days Of Prayer
From The President
President Eisenhower is calling on Americans to observe October 7 as a “National Day of Prayer.”
Eisenhower made the appeal in an official proclamation, the eighth annual such document, authorized by a Congressional resolution in 1952. October 7 was designated in order that the observance would fall on the first Wednesday of October, as in previous years, enabling churches to plan for the observance.
Here is this year’s proclamation:
Let us give thanks for the bounty of providence which has made possible the growth and promise of our land.
Let us give thanks for the heritage of free inquiry, sound industry and boundless vision which have enabled us to advance the general welfare of our people to unprecedented heights.
Let us remember that our God is the God of all men, that only as all men are free can liberty be secure for any, and that only as all prosper can any be content in their good fortune.
Let us join in vigorous concern for those who now endure suffering of body, mind or spirit, and let us seek to relieve their distress and to assist them in their way toward health, well-being and enlightenment.
Finally, let us rededicate ourselves and our nation to the highest loyalties which we know, and let us breathe deeply of the clear air of courage, preparing ourselves to meet the obligations of our day in trust, in gratitude and in the supreme confidence of men who have accomplished much united under God.
From An Admiral
A special day of prayer (September 15) is being proposed to coincide with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s arrival in the United States.
Admiral Ben Moreell, noted industrialist and an active Episcopalian layman, summoned leaders of numerous citizens groups (total constituency: some 10 million) “to explore the implications of this visit and to attempt to ascertain the prevailing view of an appropriate posture for the American people with respect thereto.”
“There was general consensus,” Moreell said after meeting with these leaders, “that while we should refrain from demonstrations of hostility, it would be right and proper that Mr. Khrushchev’s arrival in this country should be set aside as a day of prayer in all the churches of the land.”
He also urged that all cities on Khrushchev’s itinerary observe the day of his visit by holding special church services.
Moreell’s prayer plea won widespread support from prominent clergymen. Among those who endorsed the project were evangelist Billy Graham; Dr. Frederick Brown Harris, Senate chaplain; and Dr. George L. Ford, executive director of the National Association of Evangelicals.
Protestant Panorama
• Thirty-five African members of the eccentric Matswanist sect reportedly died in a mob scene near Brazzaville, capital of the Middle Congo, last month. About 100 others were said to have been injured when police tried to evict the defiant Matswanists from a compound.
• Appointment of Major General George P. Vanier as Governor-General of Canada makes him the first Roman Catholic to hold the office. All his predecessors have been Anglicans.
• English Bishop Mervyn Stockwood startled Anglican ecclesiastical circles last month by announcing that he would ban the use of the 1928 communion service in all churches. In a letter to clergy and lay people of the Southwark diocese, he said “the only communion service I can countenance is that of 1662, with such minor deviations as are generally accepted.”
• Special services for Australia’s horse racing fraternity—believed to be without precedent anywhere—were scheduled in Roman Catholic, Anglican and Presbyterian churches this month, marking the 101st year of Australian horse racing. Dr. A. Harold Wood, president general of the Methodist Church of Australia, said he opposed participation.
• The National Sunday School Association is holding three conventions this year: October 7–9, San Jose, California; October 21–23, Atlanta, Georgia; November 11–13, Columbus, Ohio.
• Finishing touches are being put on the first Mormon chapel to be built in Palmyra, New York, birthplace of Mormonism. The chapel is located near Hill Cumorah, scene of an annual Mormon pageant.
• A bill designed to close discount houses and supermarkets on Sundays became law in Pennsylvania this month.
• New Mexico safety officials are calling on clergymen to put over the idea that drivers “should not leave God behind” when they enter their cars.
• The Rev. Edmund Burritt Galloway celebrated his 100th birthday August 16 by attending the First Church of the Nazarene at Santa Ana, California. He sang a solo and assisted in the dedication of a great-grandchild. His son, the Rev. Fletcher Galloway, preached.
• Having secured FCC approval, the Evangelical Covenant Church of America hopes to have a 5,000-watt station on the air at Nome, Alaska, by year-end.
• Two nudist magazines are seeking federal court action which would compel the post office to grant them second class mailing privileges.
• Bishop Hazen G. Werner officiated at cornerstone-laying ceremonies for the new Methodist Theological School on a 70-acre campus at Stratford, Ohio this month. Buildings are scheduled for completion by spring at a cost of $2,700,000.
• “This Is the Life,” religious TV drama produced by the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, begins its eighth year this fall. The half-hour weekly presentation is carried by more than 300 stations in the United States, Canada and overseas.
• A second contingent of young West Germans are taking up work in Norway in repentance for suffering caused by the Nazis in World War II. The project is being sponsored by the Evangelical Church in Germany.
• The Methodist Board of Temperance executive committee says it opposes “at this time” union of the agency with the Board of Social and Economic Relations, which has approved the idea of a merger, and the Board of World Peace, which disapproved it.
• The Church of God school in Portland, Oregon, formerly called Pacific Bible College, will hereafter be known as Warner Pacific College.
• The Methodist Church is making available a 27-minute film designed to help understand problems involved in an interfaith marriage.
Church And State
Taxes For Theology
“The Congress reaffirms the principle and declares that the States and local communities have and must retain control over and primary responsibility for public education. The national interest requires, however, that the Federal government give assistance to education for programs which are important to our defense.”—National Defense Education Act.
The deteriorating wall of separation between Church and State showed a new crack this month: for the first time in U. S. history, the federal government appropriated public funds for direct aid to a theological seminary.
U. S. Commissioner of Education Lawrence G. Derthick said New York’s Union Theological Seminary is getting five graduate fellowships in theology under provisions of the National Defense Education Act of 1958.
The law does not specifically mention theology. But the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare interpreted it to include provision for theological study. Many proponents of Church-State separation charge that the law and its implementation are unconstitutional. (CHRISTIANITY TODAY expressed anxieties about the law in its December 8, 1958 issue.)
The Union grant drew immediate criticism from Protestants and Other Americans United, who characterized the development as “another step toward full-fledged federal subsidy for the training of ministers and priests,” and from the National Association of Evangelicals.
“Few citizens are given enough of the facts to know the seriousness of the precedents which are being set,” said the Rev. Donald H. Gill, NAE assistant secretary of public affairs.
The five fellowships, awarded to four Protestant ministers and an Army chaplain, are among 997 being given to assist graduate students pursuing doctoral degrees with the intention of becoming college teachers. They are under the same program which gives Emory University (Methodist) three fellowships for Old Testament study and Dropsie College (Jewish) three for training in comparative religion.
The Union students will get $6,600 for a three-year program. The seminary will get up to $37,500 as compensation for cost of instruction.
A POAU spokesman said his organization was studying the possibility of testing the legality of the grants.
Ideas
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Christian Education is big business in America. In the area of the local churches alone it involves 40 million people in Sunday Schools and Bible classes. No other agency in the churches is doing more to teach the Word of God, build Christian character, and train church leaders and workers. Modern pastors have the opportunity and responsibility of guiding this vast enterprise into ever-enlarging fields of usefulness.
The traditional Sunday School was organized for Bible study. This must still be its chief concern. Through the years, however, experience has shown that the total educational task of the church is much broader. Young people’s societies with specialized expressional functions were set up to meet the needs of a limited age group. Other groups demanded similar attention, so ladies’ guilds, men’s clubs, and clubs for boys and girls were formed. Missionary promotion resulted in missionary societies. The inadequacy of time in the single Sunday study hour gave rise to weekday schools and vacation Bible schools. As new educational needs came to light, new agencies arose. There was little or no organizational relationship between these groups. In some cases their functions overlapped with resulting friction and inefficiency. Often these agencies were not amenable to the properly constituted authority of the church itself. Through them the church’s life was often segregated into isolated blocs which made for division and offered a breeding ground for strange doctrines and subversive influences.
The modern concept of Christian education in the local church rises above this provincial and inadequate situation. It sees the church’s total educational function merged into a properly correlated and supervised organization that fully meets the needs of the individual and the community. The challenge of building an adequate program of Christian education for the church in our day should elicit the highest qualities of leadership the pastor has to offer.
The day has passed when the minister can devote himself exclusively to preaching and ignore the fact that he is the overseer of the church and its educational functions. The pastor who is most successful and whose influence counts for most in teaching the Word of God and building character now has a great church school “used as a field to be reached and as a force to be worked.” Here is an area in which his whole ministry can be enlarged in teaching, administration, evangelism, and in community outreach and service.
As the key figure in the life of the church, the pastor must interpret the privilege and task of Christian education to the entire congregation. He can create a community conscience by occasional sermons that lay on the hearts of his people the inescapable duty of every church to advance its members—young and old—in the truths of Holy Scripture, in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and in effective Christian service. In meetings with church officials and key leaders in auxiliary agencies, he can enlist cooperation in an enlarging and continuing educational program.
To do this competently presupposes an expert knowledge of Christian education in the local church. Unfortunately many pastors have had little opportunity to study the subject either in church colleges or theological seminaries. Progressive schools provide courses in Christian Education. Some institutions have a department of religious education wherein it is possible to major in courses leading to graduate degrees. History, principles, and methods are taught. Lectures are given by successful church-school leaders, and project work is carried on through nearby churches. If the ministerial student avails himself of several of these courses he will take up his active duties as a pastor equipped not only for the pulpit but for leadership and administration in Christian education.
A recent survey, however, indicates that there are still scores of colleges and seminaries so behind the times, in their concepts of training essential to an effective ministry in this modern age, that they provide either inadequate studies or no such studies at all. The pastor who finds himself in the predicament of being illiterate in this field needs to equip himself by reading the best books available. His first books should deal with the general field and the philosophy, psychology, pedagogy, and theology underlying the educative process. After that any number of specialized texts can be studied, as well as leading periodicals devoted to Christian education and church school methods. Every down-to-date church has a library with books and periodicals available to all interested persons.
The pastor is responsible for determining and maintaining educational standards. During recent years the Sunday School has been undergoing serious criticism because of its haphazard program and inadequately prepared teachers and leaders. Capable observers also point out that other educational factors are operating in a disorganized and uncorrelated manner. Where this situation exists the pastor is primarily to blame. He is the expert, the leader to whom the church looks for guidance in this as well as all other matters pertaining to church welfare. Sometimes the pastor finds it difficult to deal with all the problems involved. One or more of the agencies concerned have a long-standing tradition of independence or leadership, however, inadequate, that considers itself indispensable. Such a situation requires much prayer, tact and patience, a long-term program of educational change and revitalization, and perhaps a gradual change of personnel. Whatever the barriers to the ultimate achievement of educational effectiveness, there should be vision and faith enough to move toward the goal. The minister may have to start with personal conferences, then move to group study and planning, cooperative adventures, and finally official action by the responsible church boards and organizations. Some sort of group clearing-house at high-echelon level—a council, a cabinet or an advisory committee of which he is an ex-officio member—may accomplish what the existing agencies of the congregation are not prepared to do.
Curriculum content and method should be under constant ministerial scrutiny. Proper choice of materials is often a serious problem in the church school. Too often study helps and guides contain teachings foreign to accepted Christian doctrinal and social principles or are of mediocre quality. There are instances where materials have been used to destroy faith in Holy Scripture or to promote socialistic or communistic political views. Authority for choice or approval of curriculum materials should be vested in a well-qualified committee of which the pastor should be an ex-officio member. Among the matters to be considered are (1) Is the material in harmony with the objective sought? (2) Is it true to the Bible? (3) Does it contain subversive doctrinal or social views? (4) Is it prepared by scholarly and otherwise capable writers? (5) Is it suited to the needs and capacities of the pupils? (6) Can the teachers use it successfully? (7) Is it otherwise practical in the light of local conditions? Merit based on some such standard as this should be the primary consideration in choosing from a wide range of samples which have been made available to the committee for study and criticism.
It is essential that Bible instruction be suited to the age, abilities, and circumstances of the pupil. Experts, realizing the problem that exists here, have come to favor graded lessons which provide the pupil at each step of his growth with adequate lessons and teaching approaches. Beyond the study of the Bible itself, there is a rich store of study materials in missions, church history, religious art, stewardship, hymnology, and kindred subjects. Special consideration should be given to personal problems, vocational guidance, spiritual nurture, social issues, parent training, leadership training, and other vital matters. In the average church, who but the minister fully understands what is involved in the educational process and is capable to direct planning and give guidance in this area?
The time factor is directly related to this problem. The average Roman Catholic church in America gives 300 hours of religious instruction annually to its pupils; the Jewish synagogue schools, 305 hours; the average Protestant church schools, a maximum of 25 teaching hours. It is small wonder that the average child in most Protestant homes can give no adequate reason for his faith. Furthermore, the major time allowance for religious instruction is poorly distributed. Half-hour lessons a week apart make continuity of instruction well-nigh impossible. Many educators believe that a few weeks of continuous, intensive training (such as offered by Vacation Bible Schools) is far more fruitful than 52 weeks of Sunday School instruction. The child mind is unlikely to carry a line of thought from one study period to another when there is an interval of seven days. Neither trained teachers, good equipment, nor improved lesson materials can adequately overcome the lack of time for instruction.
The church school of the future will not only meet on Sunday morning, but Sunday evening and through the week. It will give expressional training not only to the youth but to the child and the adult. It will not only “teach the Bible” but will offer advanced courses in every area of knowledge and practice vital to Christian living and Church efficiency. Such a concept of the church school makes it the supreme opportunity of the church to become the medium through which souls are intelligently led to accept Christ as Saviour and Lord. Here characters are molded, life is interpreted in Christian terms, abilities are developed for church leadership, and service and Christians are equipped to live in a world which is in dire need of the Christian life and message. It is the minister who must provide the impetus for this enlarging impressional and expressional educational program.
Trained and qualified leadership in Christian education is a primary concern of the pastor. In a very real sense he is responsible for the instruction of his flock. Most of their training is accomplished through the instrumentality of the church school. The character of the teachers and supervisors of instruction, their beliefs, their capabilities, their effectiveness, and their loyalty to the church are extremely vital. To provide this, leadership training classes should be conducted regularly and a system of preliminary internship should be developed under proper supervision. If the pastor has the time, he could use his abilities to no better advantage than in teaching one of these classes and counselling the growing recruits. The texts and requirements for leadership training should be carefully screened and only those with a sound philosophy and methodology approved. Weakness at this point can endanger the whole educational structure.
The pastor who visualizes the school as an evangelistic medium and thus utilizes it to the fullest degree can build a great church. The amazing growth of the Southern Baptist churches in America is largely due to the instrumentality of the Sunday School. The largest Sunday Schools and the largest churches in the nation are to be found in this denomination. Surveys of American Protestant churches over a period of years reveal that 50 per cent of the new additions to church membership come through the work of the Sunday School alone; 35 per cent through the school and other agencies; and only 15 per cent through media other than the school. Millions of people in America are out of Christ. Many of these have never been touched by the church or any of its agencies. It is said that there are some 20 million children and youth, four to eighteen years of age, who are not in any church school. The Sunday School offers an already-organized body of workers equipped to make a graded approach to the unreached and unsaved. Once imbued with the spirit of evangelism, the school can develop a list of prospective church members which may well be the potential church of tomorrow. Through the medium of the school new members and prospective members may be trained in classes taught by the pastor. Thus he can become intimately acquainted with each new church member and live his life into their own. Educational evangelism and evangelistic education give new life and purpose to the church school.
Adequate buildings and equipment for education will be provided on the advice and approval of the pastor. If he really believes that religious education is a basic and indispensable factor in the training of the children and youth of the congregation and the community at large, he will not be satisfied until the church has the best possible facilities.
Underlying and undergirding the educational task of the church there must be a distinctively evangelical Christian philosophy and theology. One of the great needs of the hour is an entire volume dealing with these foundational considerations, and written in the context of our modern culture. We can only intimate skeletal outlines. (1) Christian education has its source and end in God—a perfect, self-revealing, unitive Person. (2) God created man in his image—a self-conscious, self-determinative being, but man has fallen from his perfect state. (3) God makes himself known to man through natural and special revelation. The written Word of God is the authoritative revelation of God and his purpose. (4) The nature and the needs of man are to be served to the end that he may have fellowship with God, with mankind, and with himself to the glory of God. (5) The design of God revealed in Christ to man through the Holy Scriptures gives unity, meaning, and purpose to all of life. (6) Since modern man is generically sinful, self-centered, and evil he must recognize the need of redemption in Christ and the reorientation of his life, ideals, and experiences. (7) The Word of God is the source of authority for and the essential content of the curriculum by which God reaches into the whole man with his redemptive purposeful power. It is the basis for vital, personal choices and experiences when coupled with capable instruction and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. (8) Comprehensive goals embracing all of life’s needs and experiences will be achieved through growth in knowledge, spiritual understanding, and through right choices and activities. (9) The pole of interaction in the educational process is the authority of Christ as revealed in the Holy Scriptures, and the orb of creativity is the experience of the whole person. (10) Thus the pupil grows into a perfect measure of Christ’s moral stature and makes his maximum contribution to the moral and social order to the glory of God. Such an understanding in depth of what the church school is set to accomplish is essential if the pastor is to direct intelligently this important arm of his church program.
The pastor is under divine compulsion to direct and participate in the task of Christian education. Our Lord set the example in such a deep educational concern that he was hailed as “the Master Teacher.” Before Christ’s ascension, he gave the directive that was to activate the Christian ministry for all time to come: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to do all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway even unto the end of the world. Amen” (Matt. 28:19, 20. ASV). Teaching was at the heart of the Christ-centered program of the apostolic church and was largely responsible for its intelligent virility and effectiveness. Our continuing ministry must conform to that pattern if it is to achieve the divine purpose in our day.
END
L. Nelson Bell
Teaching the Bible
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
To many laymen there is given the responsibility and privilege of teaching the Bible, usually within the curriculum of the church school.
The responsibility involves the importance of such a task, the fact of men’s need for deeper understanding of God’s Word, and the nature of the Book itself.
The privilege consists in the marvel of this volume of “God-breathed literature” which is living and relevant to our times—a divinely given revelation of great truths to be found nowhere else and without which man gropes in darkness.
In a day when so much emphasis has been given to methods, those who teach the Bible should explore not only teaching techniques but the philosophy of teaching upon which methods are built.
There are those who strongly support the discussion method. This has been considered by many as the acme of effectiveness, while the lecture method has been relegated to the era of the one room school house.
Anyone acquainted with the philosophy of progressive education promulgated by John Dewey, along with his emphasis on individual “adjustment” and “methods” of teaching, knows the havoc these ideas have played with American education. The seed was not recognized until its evil fruit had already begun to ripen. A generation trained under this “progressive” method turned out to be uneducated and undisciplined in those things that education should produce.
Has the philosophy which so nearly wrecked American education filtered into the realm of the Church and become adopted by some of those responsible for Christian education?
One can only wonder why the replacement of emphasis on teaching the Bible with discussing it has been thought an improvement.
What lies hack of the change from responsible Bible teachers to “moderators” whose chief qualification is not so much a knowledge of the Bible as an ability to keep discussion going? I believe we should reject any “teaching” which raises questions without answering them—which engenders doubt rather than fosters faith.
We must of course make our Christian faith relevant, in action, to the needs of our times. However, such social emphasis must be balanced by a faithfulness to the content of the faith without which no one can become a Christian.
Basic to Christian education then is the teaching of the Bible. But teaching must be done by those who know the Bible and believe it. Discussion can be profitable only when the ultimate authority of the Scriptures is recognized. Without such reference to authority, decisions arrived at are merely on the level of human reasoning.
Any method which contributes to a knowledge of the Bible—its historical content, moral implications, and spiritual teachings is worthy of use.
That which falls short of leading to an understanding of and faith in the authority and trustworthiness of the Scriptures and the Christ of the Scriptures, should be discarded as unworthy of true Christian education.
It is unfortunate that there exists a cleavage of opinion on a matter of such grave significance. For those of us who believe there is an authority above and beyond the limitations of man’s reason, a revelation of divine truth to which we may turn for final word, the teaching of the Bible is of greatest importance.
There is abundant support for the time-honored method of teaching which has richly borne fruit in the past.
In the Old Testament we find that true revivals started because of the reading and hearing of the Law.
In the New Testament there is similar evidence. Our Lord and the apostles backed their teaching and preaching with the Scriptures. When Apollos went to Ephesus he was fervent and zealous to teach and preach, but his understanding of the Scriptures was limited. Aquila and Priscilla heard him and “expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.” Following this detailed instruction in the Bible we are told that “he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ.”
Teaching the Bible is a thrilling experience when it is backed by adequate preparation and undergirded with prayer. It is thrilling because of the blessing which the teacher himself receives, and it is exciting because it brings a similar blessing to those willing to be taught.
Let it never be forgotten: we are not dealing with an ordinary book but with a marvelous collection of books written by men of different backgrounds and with varying degrees of education over a period of nearly two millenniums; and still we find a unity of message throughout all the writings which only the Holy Spirit could have produced.
How right is Dr. Crossley Morgan when he speaks with deep reverence of this “God-breathed literature”!
Reverence for the subject being taught makes for an authority on the part of the teacher which is not his own, an authority which students sense.
We note first of all that this authority derives from the very nature of the Holy Scriptures. It is a word of finality which speaks to the longing heart, to the one who has come to realize that the things which are seen are temporal but the things which are not seen are eternal. There is no substitute for the finality of “Thus saith the Lord.”
In his short book called Authority, Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones emphasizes the importance of viewing the Bible as a whole. He says: “The Bible is a whole and its authority is complete. But having accepted it all, I still have residual difficulties, problems, and questions. It is surely nothing less than tragic that a man should start with a detail and because he is unhappy about that should say, ‘I cannot recognize the authority of the Scriptures at all.’”
In teaching the Bible one also has behind him the authority of Christ revealed in this Book. It is here that we learn of Him and find that he too took as authoritative and final the Old Testament Scriptures with which he was so familiar. At his feet we can learn that attitude of faith which accepts the Scriptures for what they really are—God speaking to men.
Thirdly, a teacher of the Bible speaks by the authority of the Holy Spirit. Only as He is present can the Scriptures be understood. Only as He teaches can we be taught, or can we in turn teach others. It is the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth, who resolves our difficulties, gives understanding to the simple, and enables even a child to apprehend spiritual truths which seem as foolishness to the worldly-wise.
A call to teach the Bible is a privilege to be prayerfully heeded. To the Christian it affords a channel of service, a glorious opportunity not to be found in the secular field. And the fruits of such labor last for all eternity.
- More fromL. Nelson Bell
J. J. Peterson
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
LABOR RALLY
My dear Eutychus,
Sorry to trouble you at your vacation cabin, but I wanted to remind you that we are counting on your participation in our Labor Day program. I know you are anxious to return. The storm damage to your property was relatively slight. The water level in the basement was perhaps raised a little by the overflow from a bathroom fixture that was not shut off. Nothing that plaster and paint won’t fix!
About our plans for Labor Day—my sermon topic for Sunday is “Working for Christ,” and we have announced a Church Labor Union Organization Rally for 2 p.m., on Monday. This description of the meeting has attracted unusual interest, and I appreciate your suggesting it. A few have taken the announcement quite literally. A local labor organizer, who preferred not to give his name, warned me that preachers had no business meddling in labor politics.
The religious news commentator on our local station took the edge off the phrasing by indicating that the rally was for church workers and would spark a crusade for lay participation in the church program. Perhaps it is just as well not to push your clever wording too far.
It is high time that our members began to think of themselves as united workers rather than bench warmers. When our Painters’ Local is organized, one of its first projects will be to paint out the “Come ye apart and rest awhile” lettering over the north entrance. When so many active members manage to sleep through every sermon and regard this performance as their principal Christian activity, another invitation would seem more appropriate. What would you think of “Work today in my vineyard”?
Our Labor Rally will include a panel discussion on “Full-time Christians,” and we expect to organize into “Locals” for united action in various phases of church work. We have questions about some of your suggestions. Most of us feel you were not serious in proposing that every member carry a worker’s union card, and that we be known as “the church of the union shop.” Were you?
As ever,
RELIGION’S ENEMY
I have just read the article by J. Edgar Hoover “The Bitter Enemy of Religion” (June 22 issue).… I do not like his inference that the monastery is a symbol of Christianity. After more than a half-century in a Catholic community I fear the Roman Catholic hierarchy far more than communism. I consider it more anti-Christian.
Carroll, Iowa
The fact that we are so eager to accept moral, religious, and philosophical judgments from respected, famous government officials without a second word is itself enough to raise a question, as it did in Constantine’s day or should have done in his day.…
Hoover needs to have an answer. His nationally-approved or state religion is always blinding to a prophetic voice, or perhaps it is what stirs up and demands a prophetic voice. His appraisal of communism leaves much to be desired—his points 2 through 6 could be applied with equal vehemence by a communist against capitalism. In affronting the communist menace, Hoover, although a sincere Presbyterian Christian, overlooks the main point of all, that communism is an anonymous dialecticism, and its answer from the Christian point of view is not further absolutes and anonymity but reference to a living personality, Christ, our Lord.
Elgin, Ill.
THE BALANCES
Your brief editorial “Twentieth Century Perspectives Weighed in the Balances” (June 22 issue) dealing with the United Presbyterian Church’s stand on scientific contraceptives and refusal to take action on the question of the Virgin Birth, was truly unbalanced. The Virgin Birth problem could not be dealt with in the context in which it came before the Assembly. I think both actions showed churchmanship at its best.
As regards the Virgin Birth, when will CHRISTIANITY TODAY arrive at mature biblical scholarship and see that it isn’t how our Lord was the Logos of God, but that he was. Why keep sniping at churches and clergymen who give full consent to the Incarnation but see no relationship with this central doctrine and a method?
University Presbyterian Church.
West Lafayette, Ind.
The confirmation by the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church of the appointment of Theodore Gill to the Presidency of San Francisco Seminary, even though he was unable to furnish satisfactory proof of his acceptance of the doctrine of the Virgin Birth, furnishes additional evidence of the doctrinal laxity within this body. This contention is not disproved by the fact that the June issue of Presbyterian Life was devoted almost entirely to a review of the glories of Presbyterian and Reformed Theology. Neither is it successfully refuted by the statement of Dr. Mackay: “Calvinistic to the core, I believe we are predestined to give leadership to the churches of the nation and the world.” These sound like empty words in face of the fact that the Presbyterian Church has, by arbitrary and questionable methods, eliminated from her membership some of her ablest scholars and staunchest exponents of the Reformed faith, while at the same time giving highest honors and offices to men unwilling and unable to affirm faith in doctrines held in common by nearly all branches of the Christian Church. These are some of the unsavory fruits of “inclusivism” which triumphed in the reorganization of Princeton Seminary in 1929.
Minneapolis, Minn.
THE COMING OF THE LORD
Dr. Loraine Boettner’s review of Hughes’ book, A New Heaven and a New Earth (May 25 issue) gives a little known quotation from Dr. G. Campbell Morgan—a statement he made in 1943 indicating his change of views relating to “the promises made to Israel.”
A dozen or more years before that date, during a Boston pastorate, I was privileged to attend a course of lectures given by Dr. Morgan at Gordon College. He was always most gracious in answering questions. At the end of one session I ventured to ask: “After your long study and extensive exposition of the Bible, Dr. Morgan, do you find any scriptural warrant for the distinction which many Bible teachers draw between the second coming of the Lord for his own (the rapture), and the coming of the Lord with his own (the revelation) with a time period of 3½ or 7 years between these two events?”
“Emphatically not!” Dr. Morgan replied. “I know that view well, for in the earlier years of my ministry I taught it, and incorporated it in one of my books entitled God’s Method with Man. But further study so convinced me of the error of this teaching that I actually went to the personal expense of buying the plates of that book from my own publisher and destroying them. The idea of a separate and secret coming of Christ to remove the church prior to his coming in power and glory is a vagary of prophetic interpretation without any Biblical basis whatsoever.”
As I travel about the country in an itinerant ministry which takes me into a great variety of churches, I am impressed with the way in which pastors are expressing their appreciation of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. Many of them say, “It’s the most helpful and spiritually stimulating magazine that I receive.”
Oak Park, Ill.
PROBLEM OF POWER
I am a visitor to your country from the island of Ceylon. I have been reading some of the conversations on “Communist or Free” (May 25 issue). There is … a problem of power, as between the U.S.A. and the Soviet Union.… It is important for us to appreciate this factor, if only because it is precisely this factor of power which heightens our tendency to equate Communism with the hosts of darkness. Clearly, the fact of the matter is that the basic power struggle would continue even if the Soviet became officially Christian and its forms of government underwent a process of “liberalization.” It is surely also this inherent power struggle between America and Russia which makes it hard for American Christians easily to separate a natural desire that America should triumph anyway, from a concern for the triumph of Christian principles.…
For three hundred years or so, a Christian West held unchallenged sway of the fortunes of the world—this was the heyday of colonialism, white race superiority theory, and here American isolationism. After all this period of control of Africa and Asia, these areas are officially described by UNESCO as “have-not” and “under-developed” lands.… Dr. Boyd Orr has just reported that China has jumped the population-food gap. And this is a remarkably short space of time.
The Bible often talks of “judgment” and even suggests that God is able to use heathen powers to purge His people.
Chicago, Ill.
ELUSIVE NEUTRALITY
If schools cannot speak for God, why be allowed to speak against Him?
Canterbury, Conn.
QUAKER POSITION
In the article by Richard C. Wolf (April 27 issue) there is a very embarrassing and erroneous general summary of the theological position of the Quakers in America. No doubt Mr. Wolfs association with a few Quakers has caused him to class the Quakers in the category of outstanding liberal denominations such as the Universalists and Unitarians. Such a general categorizing is definitely not correct.… Most anyone who has had experience within the majority of the American Yearly Meetings knows that the greater majority of American Quakers believe in historical Christianity as taught in the Old and New Testaments with a belief in their inspiration.
In Collier’s Encyclopedia, one of the most recent summarizing statements of the Society of Friends, by Henry J. Cadbury, a Quaker and previous Hollis professor of Divinity, Harvard University, states that “the principles and practices of the Quakers were not novel, the Quakers themselves claim that they are in accordance with the New Testament …, they trusted in the guidance of the Spirit, so long as it did not positively contradict the Bible.” “… New waves of Evangelistic Conservatism have continued in the United States”.…
Friends University
Wichita, Kan.
CALLED IN JAPAN
I was very impressed by “Security” (L. Nelson Bell, May 25 issue). I have experienced these priceless gifts in my own life. And there are so many who seem to be missing this. Your expression should be very encouraging and helpful to many.
Would you have any objection if I have this made into a tract? I can do so here in Japan.… I am on duty here …, having been a Naval Officer and Aviator for 20 years now. Over six years ago God called me out in Christ Jesus in a wonderful way.
San Francisco, Calif.
- More fromJ. J. Peterson
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
The fourth book of Moses is called Numbers in the English Bible, and this follows the usage of the Greek Septuagint translation. In the Hebrew it is called Bammidhbar (“In the wilderness”). The former name comes from the two census lists that appear prominently at the beginning and end of the book. The latter name, however, appears to be more descriptive, for the book of Numbers largely describes the wilderness wanderings of Israel. Numbers takes up the narrative of the wilderness journey close to the point where Exodus leaves off.
Difficulties In Numbers
The prominent feature of the census lists in Numbers needs a little explanation. Israel had no Bureau of the Census, nor were the people interested in mere vital statistics. This was not an ordinary census such as we are familiar with. The Hebrew word saphar often means to “count,” but it is not the word used in these lists. There is another word, paqadh which sometimes means “visit,” either in judgment or in blessing, but which also means to “number an army.” It really means to “muster troops.” To illustrate its usage, one may turn to 1 Kings 20:15 where Benhadad mustered an army against Israel, or to Joshua 8:10 where Joshua prepared for the battle of Ai, or to 2 Kings 3:6 where Jehoram mustered an army against Moab. The word does not mean merely to count; its meaning is technical and refers to raising an army. It was this fact that made David’s action in 2 Samuel 24 sinful. David’s sin was not in proudly counting his population, but in embarking on a campaign of war when it was apparently uncalled for. So in Numbers: the use of this word gives us the picture of Moses organizing the soldiers in preparation for the invasion of Palestine. After the first attempt failed and the wilderness wanderings were finished, Moses mustered the troops again in preparation for the assault upon Palestine under Joshua. For this reason only the fighting men over 20 years of age were numbered.
The tribe of Levi was also numbered, but for a different purpose. Instead of choosing a percentage of men out of each tribe for the carrying on of the tabernacle work and service, God chose to use the whole tribe of Levi. He substituted them for the firstborn on the principle that the firstborn belonged to God since he had spared Israel’s firstborn in the last Egyptian plague. The firstborn of Israel were therefore counted, the Levites also were counted and the difference adjusted by a payment of five shekels apiece (Num. 3:47). A problem arises here in that there were so few firstborn (22,273) among so many people (603,550 grown men). Different suggestions have been proposed, but it is probable that the trouble arises from our ignorance of what constituted a firstborn son. Possibly the firstborn was only counted as such when the oldest child was a boy (Exod. 13:15). Perhaps if a father and son in one family were both living and both firstborn, only one of them was counted in the reckoning. Possibly the number of the firstborn was reckoned with one from each family or clan rather than from each household—or there may have been some other restriction.
The size of the nation has also been a problem to some. From the number of 600,000 grown men, the total has been estimated at about 2,000,000. It is thought that such a movement was impossible. Indeed, critics are fond of saying that these figures are a backward projection of some of Solomon’s lists.
Now it may be admitted (as is pointed out in a note in the Scofield Reference Bible, p. 1220) that the transmission of numbers with unfailing accuracy was difficult in ancient Hebrew. Still, these numbers are similar for the various tribes and add up to a total which checks. The totals are about the same in the later list of Chapter 26 though some of the individual tribes changed rather widely during the 40 year interval. There is actually no basis for skepticism as to these numbers except the feeling that the Exodus really could not have been so large an event. But of course it could have been. We must not picture it as a military parade with everyone in step and banners flying. It was more of a mass emigration of nomad peoples. Out in the wilderness the camp may have spread out over hundreds of square miles at various times in order to forage the animals.
The figures are at least consistent with other similar figures. It is not a copy of Solomon’s list, for in David’s time the nation had over 1,300,000 soldiers (2 Sam. 24:9). Saul, a much weaker king, had 330,000 (1 Sam. 11:8). Rehoboam after the division of the kingdom had only 180,000 men in Judah (1 Kings 12:21). During the days of the Judges, the number is once given as 400,000 not counting Benjamin (Judges 20:2). Gideon mustered 32,000 men out of three and a half tribes in a time of heavy oppression (Judges 6:35) which compares favorably with Joshua’s 40,000 out of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh (Josh. 4:13). Comparison with Numbers 26 would show about 100,000 soldiers in these Transjordan tribes, but presumably half of them had to stay in Transjordan as occupation troops.
We should remember, also, that a handful of troops could not do what Joshua did. Ancient armies did not have 18 men in the factories for every one man at the front as we did in the last war. If he had, Joshua would only have had 33,000 men in his fighting force! And yet he could not put his whole army in the field at once. Many of these counted were infirm or IV-F! Many had to guard the camp and occupy what had been won. And yet at the height of his northern campaign, Joshua was able to capture the city of Hazor which had gathered to itself a large defensive coalition. The city of Hazor has lately been excavated and is estimated to have contained 40,000. Such a city, strongly fortified, and with numerous allies could not have been conquered by a handful of wandering shepherds. Joshua evidently moved at the head of a large and powerful fighting force.
We do not have the figures for many other ancient armies. Sennacherib claims to have taken 200,150 prisoners from the towns of Judah exclusive of Jerusalem. Shalmanezer claims that the army he led at the battle of Qarqar numbered 120,000. These were doubtless first line troops as they were operating 400 miles from their home base (see the documents in J. B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, pp. 288 and 280). The armies in Numbers thus appear to be of a reasonable size.
There is more to Numbers than problems. There are valuable lessons. There are beautiful lessons to be learned of the Lord’s guidance. The presence of the Lord was visibly symbolized in the cloud by day and the fire by night that hovered over the Tabernacle. And when that presence of the Lord removed, the people were to journey. The words of Numbers 10:33 probably do not mean that it went “before” the camp. The word may as well be translated “in the presence of” the camp. In the march as in the encampment the ark was in the middle of the people. The beautiful invocation of Numbers 10:35,36 is quoted by David in Psalm 68:1 and in Solomon’s prayer of dedication in 2 Chronicles 6:41 (cf. Ps. 132:8). It doubtless became a precious invocation in Israel.
Rebellions
But familiarity breeds contempt and the generation that refused the leading of the Lord at Kadesh Barnea rebelled many times both before and after that experience. They tired of their situation. After all, they had been used to plenty and security in Egypt. Now they had to adapt to nomad life in the edges of the desert and the oases of the Sinai peninsula. In Egypt they had security with slavery and surely could not worship God as they pleased. The Egyptian state was totalitarian and the king was God. In the wilderness, on the other hand, they could worship God according to their conscience and they had freedom, but with privation. Many there were who would look back at Egypt and be willing to sell their soul for a mess of pottage.
The individual rebellions recounted in Numbers cannot be treated in detail. At one time Miriam and Aaron grew envious of Moses because of his Ethiopian wife—apparently she was his second wife and quite possibly a Negro! His first wife may or may not have been living. Moses, the record says, did not defend himself, but God severely rebuked the pair for their actions. Numbers 12:6 is a remarkable divine commendation of Moses the great head of the prophetic line and type of “that Prophet” who was yet to come. God evidently spoke with Moses in great intimacy. Truly he was a chosen vessel. Some have taken exception to Numbers 12:3 where Moses is said to have been very meek. They say that Moses could not have written this or he would not have been meek! But customs differ in reporting such matters. Paul says about the same thing in Acts 20:19 and no offence is taken.
Sometime after the disaster at Kadesh Barnea came the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. The rebellion was strong and a rather complete record is given of it in chapters 16 and 17. Korah’s men were consumed by fire from the Lord when they approached with their incense. And Dathan and Abiram and such of the congregation as stood with them were buried alive as the earth opened under them (went down “quick into the pit” merely means “buried alive.” There is no thought of a passageway to some underworld region). Another famous incident of rebellion is given in chapter 20 when the people murmured for lack of water. Such an incident is also recorded in Exodus 17 and some have argued that these are two accounts of the same incident. But it seems supercritical to feel that in 40 years of wilderness sojourning the people could not have complained about the lack of water more than once!
The rebellion at Kadesh Barnea was the most decisive of all. The story is brief, but the consequence of their lack of faith was 40 years of trouble. The people were encamped in the wilderness of Paran south of the area called the Negeb which Israel is developing today. The Lord told Moses to send out spies, one for each tribe, for a reconnaissance mission to gauge the resources of the land and the best way of attack. All the spies agreed that the land was attractive. All agreed that it included many well-fortified independent city states. The only difference was that Caleb and Joshua believed that the Lord was able to give them the land; the others did not. It would seem that the Israelites were as able to take the land of Palestine on the first attempt as later.
Conquest And Balaam
The conquest of Transjordan is given briefly in Numbers 21. In early times, the Amorite kingdoms of northern Transjordan had pressed down into the territory of Moab dispossessing the Moabites and driving them to the south of the Arnon canyon. Israel, in pitched battles with Sihon and Og, kings of the Amorites, won all this territory north of the Arnon valley which is at about the middle of the Dead Sea. The record of this conquest is repeated more extensively in Deuteronomy 2 and 3 and Jephthah repeats the same story in Judges 11 when the Moabites laid claim to this area 300 years later. Interestingly, Numbers 21:28, 29 are quoted in Jeremiah 48:45, 46 in connection with Jeremiah’s woes upon Moab. This section, said to be “from those that speak in proverbs,” can only refer to the political situation before Israel invaded. The short songs in Numbers 21:14, 15 and 17, 18 also probably refer to this period of conquest. Verse 14 does not seem to speak of the Red Sea experience. “Sea” is not in the Hebrew. Septuagint and other evidence favors a translation something like the following: “It is said in the book of the wars of the Lord, a fire flamed in Suphah and in the brooks of Arnon.” W. F. Albright holds that verse 17 is only a title of the song mentioned (Hebrew Union College Annual, 1950–51, p. 7).
The time in Transjordan included the interesting contact with Balaam. We know little enough about him. He was from Aram, the mountains of the East (23:7), for example, hinter Syria. He was from the land of the children of Ammo (22:5, Hebrew). This place apparently can now be identified from the Idrimi inscription of about 1450 B.C. as a place in Syria near Aleppo (W. F. Albright, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, April 1950, p. 15). It has been much disputed whether Balaam was a worshiper of the true God outside of Israel like Melchizedek, or whether he was a heathen soothsayer through whom God truly spoke on this occasion. The latter is perhaps the easier to maintain since Balaam was later slain among the Midianites who had seduced the Israelites to go after idols (Num. 25 and 31:8).
The messages of Balaam first speak in general terms of God’s blessings upon Israel. It is of interest that Balaam quotes the old Abrahamic blessing (Num. 24:9; Gen. 12:3). Had he some contact with the Abrahamic tradition? Or was this a common proverbial way of giving a benediction? At last Balaam gets more specific. The prediction of a star from Jacob and a scepter from Israel had its fulfilment in all of the victories of Israel and the Davidic dynasty, but is to be fully fulfilled in the Messianic King of whom David was but a type.
The final chapters are somewhat parallel with the end of Deuteronomy. Numbers 27:12–23 gives the preparation for Moses’ death which took place only after the farewell addresses of Moses were given to the last assembly as recorded in Deuteronomy. As in the central portion of Deuteronomy, so here, there are various laws especially for the offerings and feasts (Num. 28 to 30). The arrangement was concluded for Reuben and Gad and half of Manasseh to stay in Transjordan but to send a contingent to assist in the invasion of Palestine (Num. 32). Chapter 33 is a summary of the places where Israel had encamped in the trek through Sinai. Of all the places mentioned it seems that only about two, Ezion Geber and Punon (modern Feinan) can be identified with any certainty. Finally, the boundaries of Palestine proper which Israel was to inherit are given in chapter 34. As in the Abrahamic promises, the boundaries go north as far as Hamath near “the great river, the river Euphrates.” Only in the heyday of David and Solomon did Israel’s control actually extend this far. But the biblical promised land includes what we speak of as Palestine, Transjordan, and Syria as well. The book of Numbers mainly is the record of Israel’s preparations to enter this promised land.
Outline
I.Preparations to leave Sinai (1:1 to 10:10).
A.First numbering of the host (1 to 4).
B.Miscellaneous laws and ordinances (5 to 10:10).
II.From Sinai to Kadesh Barnea (10:11 to 14:45).
A.The order of march (10).
B.Rebellions by the way. Taberah, the Quails, Miriam’s leprosy, the Defeat at Kadesh (11–14).
III.Wilderness wanderings (15 to 21:20).
A.Various laws (15).
B.Korah’s rebellion against Aaron’s priesthood (16–18).
C.Ordinance of red heifer (19).
D.Moses’ sin, Aaron’s death, and the fiery serpents (20 to 21).
IV.Conquests in Transjordan (21:21 to 25).
A.Conquest of Sihon and Og (21).
B.Balaam’s prophecy (22 to 24).
C.Mixing with Midian (25).
V.Preparation to enter Palestine (26 to 36).
A.Second numbering and appointment of Joshua (26 to 27).
B.Laws of offerings, feasts, and vows (28 to 30).
C.Further war with Midian (31).
D.Inheritance of two and a half tribes in Transjordan (32).
E.Summary of the wilderness journeys (33).
F.Arrangements for settlement in Palestine (34 to 36).
Literature
Helpful literature on Numbers is not abundant. The standard commentaries of Keil and Delitzsch, Lange, and Calvin are good. The special study of W. F. Albright, “The Oracles of Balaam,” Journal Biblical Literature, LXIII, 1944, pp. 207–233 should be mentioned. It maintains the antiquity of this section. An excellent treatment is given by Allan A. MacRae in The New Bible Commentary, edited by F. Davidson, Inter-Varsity, London, 1953.
R. LAIRD HARRIS
Professor of Old Testament
Covenant Theological Seminary
Cover Story
V. Raymond Edman
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
When Youth for Christ appeared dramatically on the religious scene in 1944, some evangelical leaders began to criticize it. Others postponed their criticism with the belief that the new “baby” was basically healthy and in time would grow up to make a large contribution to the cause of Christ. Youth for Christ is now in its fifteenth year, and I believe it is ready for a frank appraisal. Having worked with the organization and its leaders from the early days, but never as an official part of it, I think I have sufficient detachment to be objective, and enough knowledge to be factual.
A Baby Matures
There is no doubt in my mind that Youth for Christ has matured and has “put away childish things.” Some Christians, when they hear the name “Youth for Christ,” still think in terms of the “toys” that characterized the movement in those first years: loud bow ties and suits, spectacular programs of a sideshow nature, and some untrained, almost uncouth “workers” who posed as “youth experts.” If these elements are present in local YFC programs today, it is the exception and not the rule. To me it is a definite strength in YFC that the organization has matured without becoming an evangelical edifice with more past than future. Youth for Christ has not only remained true to the evangelical faith these past 15 years but it has retained its spontaneity and unique approach to evangelism. True to the slogan adopted then, it is “Geared to the times but anchored to the Rock.”
Specialists In Youth
There was a period in Youth for Christ’s history when the main purpose of the organization, namely, to win teen-agers, was temporarily eclipsed. Along with the teen-age ministry there was a program for servicemen, for church revival and evangelism, and for overseas relief. All these were good, but they were alien to the aims of Youth for Christ. The decision to specialize in teen-age evangelism was a turning point and, in my opinion, saved the organization from becoming just another evangelistic outreach. Youth work is demanding; it calls for a constant freshness of manpower and ideas to keep a movement creative and contemporary. The daring, dedicated young men who invade the ranks of YFC each year make for a spiritual renewal that guarantees emphasis on youth.
The caliber of Youth for Christ workers has become higher. “Anyone can work in Youth for Christ!” is no longer an accurate statement. The International Directors’ School, held twice annually, produces from 50 to 75 trained workers, pastors, and businessmen who are channeled into local YFC programs for first-hand experience. The YFC chartering program both develops new programs and helps to remove local organizations that do not meet the standards. This kind of organizational solidarity makes for progress and strength.
Lasting Results
The prophets of doom who announced that Youth for Christ would soon fade from the scene have, in some cases, changed their line to “The results are not lasting!” Undoubtedly in those early years many may have made a decision for Christ who were not properly nourished for Christian growth. But the fact that there are pastors, missionaries, and Christian workers today who were won to Christ in YFC meetings years ago is proof of fruit. More than one evangelical leader today received his early practical training in the Youth for Christ program: Dr. Billy Graham; Dr. Bob Pierce, president of World Vision; Dr. Robert Evans of Greater Europe Mission; and Dr. Robert Finley of International Students. The evangelical world can be grateful for these men.
While phases of the overseas ministry during the first years proved sporadic and more sensational than substantial, good roots were nonetheless planted in many places. YFC leaders are to be commended for concentrating in the 45 nations where the program is well grounded, rather than announcing, as they used to do, that YFC was active in 76 nations. This kind of “retrenchment” is not popular with many evangelicals, but it makes for a more lasting program. That which remains is substantial. The future is as rich “as the promises of God.”
Whatever a local pastor or lay Christian might say against Youth for Christ, there is much that must be said for it: Youth for Christ is composed of leaders who believe unreservedly in the power of the Gospel and the importance of prayer. Any secular organization with so little machinery would have collapsed in a year! Without the imposing structure of denominational prestige or financial support, Youth for Christ has made a phenomenal impact on cities and on entire nations. It is to be commended for maturing without institutionalizing, maintaining its emphasis on youth, putting evangelism and world missions in the foreground, and depending on the power of God.
Progress Without Planning
One gets the impression that Youth for Christ, like Topsy, “just grew.” First came the Saturday night rallies, then high school clubs, Bible quizzes, teen talent contests, a ministry to juvenile delinquents, teen films and literature, and other programs. The total organization does need co-ordination and direction in a long-range plan. And there is still too much “panic programming” as yet. President Ted W. Engstrom and his staff members have made a good beginning in their “Miracle Year” program for 1959, but I think it is time that we chart the course for the next decade.
One must remember, of course, that Youth for Christ is made up of independent local groups, and that the direction taken locally is not always the responsibility of the international office. Each local YFC ministry must be chartered to bear the Youth for Christ name and participate in the program, but the international office has no direct control over what is done on the local level. Some local organizations are an asset, others are a liability; but if there were a long-range program that tied each group closer to the parent organization, much more could be accomplished. I think it is a definite weakness that local YFC organizations can own an official charter, vote on official business at the conventions, and yet ignore the international program.
“I Sought For A Man”
Like many other religious groups, Youth for Christ today faces a manpower shortage. There are scores of major cities in America alone that have no YFC program, and the answer to this problem lies not with the Directors’ School but with each local YFC ministry. Youth for Christ could double its working force in a few years if each local director would adopt a “Timothy” and train him for the work. Furthermore, experienced YFC leaders need to move out into unreached territories and let others move up in the ranks.
There is always the danger of an organization becoming top-heavy by constantly adding new personnel to the headquarters staff. I believe that YFC’s emphasis should be on the development of area programs covering several states, rather than the promoting of one unwieldy staff at the top. A crew of specialists, responsible to the work of a given area, is likely to accomplish more than an international staff member who tries to cover the world. There needs to be a responsible “chain of command” before YFC can enjoy the expansion needed in our day.
For Such A Time
Youth for Christ is an organization that has the program, passion, and potential for world evangelism despite all its weaknesses and past faults. Young people are at the controls of the future. Even the new state of Hawaii boasts that 43 per cent of the population is under the age of 19. Dictators of the past, including Communists of today, have captured nations through the minds and hearts of youth, and the only way they can be fortified against totalitarian doctrine is in the spiritual freedom offered to them in Christ. Christian educators tell us that 80 per cent of our Sunday School pupils leave Sunday School when they reach their teen years. That fact strongly suggests the need for an agency like Youth for Christ to help fill this gap and reach those of this age with the Gospel.
During its 15 years of ministry, Youth for Christ has proven itself worthy of evangelical support. It has made mistakes, but it has also captured a great many young people for Christ. Perhaps Youth for Christ, working in and through churches and missionary agencies, will be the channel for a great spiritual awakening in the decade to come. Remembering that great Christian leaders like Charles Spurgeon, J. Hudson Taylor, John Calvin, D. L. Moody, and Billy Graham were converted in their teen years, I am prone to agree with Youth for Christ leaders that “unless we win teen-agers today, there may be no Church tomorrow!”
END
Wisdom And Ignorance
Wisdom goes looking for a light,
And speaks not till that light is glowing.
Ignorance claims by day and night
It has all knowledge worth the knowing.
All things that perish or endure
Give us alike this implication:
Ignorance only is cocksure,
While Wisdom knows its limitation.
CLARENCE EDWIN FLYNN
V. Raymond Edman is President of Wheaton College (Illinois), from which have come many of the leaders in evangelical Protestant effort. On the fifteenth anniversary of the Youth for Christ movement, he writes a candid appraisal.
- More fromV. Raymond Edman
Brooke Walker
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
The growing dissatisfaction in our cultural milieu with the presuppositions, policies, and practices of the American public school system raises a question of some importance: “Who has the right to educate—the family, the State, or the Church?”
Within contemporary Lutheranism two approaches towards an answer to this problem may be discerned. One affirms that the family, as the basic (core) unit of society, has the right to educate or to delegate this right to the State or Church. The other says that each order of creation (family, Church, State) has a right to educate, and that each receives this right directly from God (that is, there is no delegation from one order to another).
However, it must be asserted that in either case no “right” to educate can exist without some corresponding responsibility in the sight of God to educate as he desires. The formula, “no rights without responsibilities,” holds true for all the so-called “rights” of man. This means that neither family, Church, or State has the right to educate unless such education presupposes and points to God as Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier. What then does this imply? It implies three things:
1. The family as the basic order of creation normally exercises the dominant influence on a child for at least the first five years of life. But in our extremely complex and technological world the family is generally inadequate for the task of preparation for citizenship in the two kingdoms. Most parents are simply unqualified to instruct their children in these matters. And the few who are so qualified may not have the time nor the inclination. Therefore the Church and community must play a role in education.
2. The Church has received a mandate from its Lord to teach all nations. It dare not ignore or alter this responsibility. The only variable in this task of the Church is the form which its education may take.
3. The community (State) may have a right to educate or to supervise education (by insuring that minimum standards of facilities and health are met), not arbitrarily but under the Word of God. Whether the State receives its right to educate from God or from parents, it still holds true that this right is dependent upon and conditioned by the State’s recognition of itself as the agent of God.
Trend To Secularism
On the American scene today the Constitution has been juridically interpreted in such a way that the public school is prevented from fulfilling the purpose for which it was founded. Theoretically our public schools must be neutral in their approach to religion. Actually, however, such neutrality is impossible. Our public schools have become increasingly secularized. They are teaching the religion of democracy, or the religion of science, or the religion of life adjustment. This, of course, is not the case in all schools. But it is more and more the case whenever and wherever the courts are called upon to render decisions. There is no mistaking the trend toward secularization.
No conscientious and serious Christian can be satisfied with this situation. Several solutions have been suggested, as for example, revitalizing the Sunday Schools, creating Saturday and other supplementary schools, or released time classes. Another solution is the Christian day school as a full-time substitute for the public school, though not a parochial school in the Roman Catholic sense (with hierarchical or clerical control). Instead, the school would be under the auspices of one or more Christian congregations using the facilities of the parish. Rather than a church (institutional) school, it would be a school which is Christian in its presuppositions and orientation, where teachers could witness to their faith explicitly as well as implicitly, and in which the Gospel would be brought to bear upon all subject matter and in all areas of life.
The time has come for us to admit that the majority of our people are religious illiterates unable to articulate or defend the faith and unable to relate it to daily activities. The Christian day school is an answer to this situation—not the only answer, but an important one.
The time has come for us to repudiate also the notion that it is somehow un-American to criticize the public school. It needs to be brought down from its sacrosanct pinnacle. From an historical standpoint, the public school system in the United States developed as a supplement for the already extant private and religious schools. There were no public schools in the United States until the 1830s, and then they came into being only to take care of those who would not otherwise receive a formal education.
Christians today cannot be happy over certain policies of such powerful groups as the National Education Association. Furthermore, the increasing clamor for Federal aid and control is a danger signal too obvious to ignore.
Many practical difficulties are involved in establishing Christian day schools, as for example, in financing and securing teachers. Some will say that they are divisive in respect to the community at large, and that they hurt the public school. But true community is realized only in Christ. The existence of different denominations is also divisive, but we do not recommend that we put an end to denominationalism for that reason alone. Our society itself is pluralistic, voluntary, and competitive.
Churches that have operated schools have experienced the blessings of their endeavors. They well know the evangelistic outreach which such schools can provide. And they have been pleased with the quality of their graduates who have been students mature in the understanding of their faith and deeply committed to their Lord and Saviour.
It is probably true that most rural situations do not need such schools. But the urban areas need them. In American Protestantism today there are some 3,000 elementary and 600 secondary schools enrolling over 350,000 pupils. We must seriously face the issue of whether or not these numbers are to be expanded.
END
Preacher In The Red
WHO PREACHES WHERE
I had exactly seven minutes in which to compose my mind before preaching in a North Dakota Presbyterian church. To my surprise there came in another minister all out of breath. He immediately proceeded to undo his suitcase. He hurriedly took out his robe and experienced great difficulty getting into it. I said, “May I ask why the preparation?” He said with a degree of authority, “I am preaching here today.” “I am afraid there is some mistake as I am preaching here today.” “Not today brother. I am here by appointment of my Superintendent,” was his answer. “But,” said I, “this is not the First Methodist church but rather the First Presbyterian church.”—The Rev. THOMAS B. LINDSAY, St. Paul’s Presbyterian Church, Emery, South Dakota.
Brooke Walker holds the BA. degree from Columbia University and is a graduate of Philadelphia Lutheran Seminary. He is seeking ordination in the United Lutheran Church.
- More fromBrooke Walker
Cover Story
Milford Sholund
Christianity TodayAugust 31, 1959
All is not well in America’s most cherished religious A institution—the Sunday School. The message of the Holy Scriptures is devitalized by teachers who are victims of competitive forces in the field of Christian education. Pastors and leaders need to examine the place and use of the Bible in their Sunday schools.
Statistical interests are more compelling than spiritual values. A common question is, “How many did you have in Sunday School today?” The inquiry is not, “Did Johnny relate himself to Jesus Christ through his study of the Bible?”
Organization, administration and methods are being fostered ahead of the spiritual, abiding influences of a dedicated teacher in whom Christ is seen.
Secular influences are at work in the Sunday Schools robbing the pupils of the privileges of learning to know the Bible that will make them wise unto salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. A student can go through Sunday School with honors for perfect attendance for 10 years and still not be able to use the Bible effectively for his daily life.
Growth And Decline
There is a paradox in the Sunday school. While the movement continues to grow in enrollment (recent estimates place the national enrollment over 41,000,000 scholars) many quarters reflect a deterioration in the quality of Sunday School teaching. There are many factors that account for the problems. Sunday School work is not as simple as it may appear to many people. Actually, the Sunday School is a complex product of many forces. Some of these pressures have historical, theological, educational, and practical implications. Throughout the 180 years of Sunday School movement, the Bible has been popularized and neglected. In order to understand and appreciate the place of the Bible and the problem of teaching it today, we must consider the development of curriculum.
The Sunday School movement has enjoyed unprecedented development in the United States. Started by Robert Raikes in 1780 in Gloucester, England, the Sunday School idea flourished in the Colonies. John Wesley did much to foster schools in America.
The earliest Sunday Schools included secular subjects in the program. Reading, writing, simple arithmetic besides the catechism and the Bible were taught.
As the number of public schools increased and assumed the function of teaching secular subjects, the Sunday Schools became distinctly religious.
Use Of The Bible
By 1820 the Bible supplanted the catechism as the essential text in the Sunday Schools. There were several factors for this change in content. The English evangelical movement of the eighteenth century placed great emphasis on the Scriptures. There was a widespread zeal in the Sunday Schools for Bible reading and memorization.
The disorganized use of the Bible in haphazard memorization led to the development of the greatest single asset and liability to the Sunday School movement—namely, the printing of lesson aids as a supplement to the Scriptures themselves.
Of the printing of Sunday School materials since 1820, there has been no end. The earliest publications were closely associated with Scripture portions but the lesson system developed order out of chaos.
There was much competition among writers and publishers to provide “the auxiliaries” or “some substitute” to help the teachers. Albert Judson developed “A Series of Questions on the Selected Scripture Lessons for Sunday Schools.” A rival system known as “A New Series of Questions on the Selected Scripture Lessons for Sabbath Schools” came from a Sunday School superintendent in Princeton, New Jersey.
Again the Bible faced neglect. It was only a matter of time until the “quarterly” and “Sunday School materials” took precedence. The place and use of the Bible itself was soon smothered by the development of competitive materials.
Frank Lankard in his authoritative volume, A History of the American Sunday School Curriculum writes of a semi-biblical commentary to be used by teachers in the Sunday School. There were lessons on the Bible, Canon, Inspiration, Division of the Sacred Scriptures, Meaning of Testament, Languages Used, Translations, and The Reason the Book Was Given to Man.
The introduction of extra-biblical materials into the Sunday School curriculum began to compete with biblical materials. The next 40 years (1830–1870) was a period of turmoil. The lessons were material-centered. The growth and needs of the pupils in relationship to Scripture was neglected. Out of this confusion, efforts were made to improve the curriculum.
A Teaching Ministry
There was a growing awareness among leaders that the Sunday School was more than an assembly of pupils. The Sunday School was to be conceived as a teaching ministry by the local church. The appreciation of the differences in abilities and interests among pupils of divergent ages was hardly significant. The child was still considered a “miniature adult.” Before the time should come when the child would be “in the midst of them,” the leaders conceived of the International Uniform Lessons. This is a type of lesson in which the same text is to be studied by all ages, children and adults, on a given Sunday.
Giants in the Sunday School movement finally agreed on a principle of developing lesson materials selected from the Bible as a whole. At the Fifth National Sunday School Convention (1872) in Indianapolis, the delegates enthusiastically accepted the Uniform system of lessons. Secretary Warren Randolph later wrote: “These lessons are largely in use throughout our land by Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Lutherans, Moravians, Friends, members of the Reformed Churches, Adventists—a mighty host, to be enumerated only by millions …”
Rise Of Graded Lessons
This enthusiasm for the Uniform Lesson system was challenged by leaders who were dissatisfied by lessons that ignored the interests, needs, and abilities of the pupils of various ages. The scientific method was beginning to impinge upon the Sunday School movement. There was a great deal of agitation to experiment with methods of instruction designed to help the pupil understand the relationship of the lesson to his life. There was a tendency to challenge the idea of “teaching the lesson.” Why not “teach the pupil”?
A leader in general education at the turn of the century was eager to take up the cudgel in behalf of the pupil. The experimenter was Dr. William H. Harper, first president of the University of Chicago.
Dr. Harper was elected superintendent of the Hyde Park Baptist Church in Chicago in 1899. He was assured by the church that he would have freedom to direct the Sunday School as he pleased. The first Sunday he dismissed all the teachers and pupils from the school. The following Sunday the pupils were re-enrolled and teachers were assigned to their classes. The organization of the school was closely graded.
Dr. Harper led his staff in the preparation of “appropriate” materials for each grade. The principal purpose of the school was to serve the pupils.
The crusade for grading had many supporters. A principal leader was Mrs. J. W. Barnes who advocated the principle that the general purpose of the “Graded Lessons” is: “To meet the spiritual needs of the pupil in every stage of his development.” An evaluation of this effort at that time indicates a heavy reception for the idea that extra-biblical materials were worthy of a place in the Sunday School curriculum. Thus, a 13-year-old pupil should study religious heroes of North America such as Roger Williams and Francis Asbury along with David and Elijah of the Old Testament.
The impact of the contemporary theories of science, education, and liberal theology had so fascinated the builders of Sunday School curricula that they practically eliminated the Bible from a significant place in their planning. By 1922, the year the International Council of Religious Education was formed, thousands of Sunday Schools had lost the message of redemption based on the Word of God. Methodology was a dominant concern. The Bible was secondary except in the camp of those who held steadfastly to the evangelical Christian faith.
One defender of the Scriptures was a Presbyterian minister, Clarence B. Benson, who refused to capitulate to the trend of the times. He insisted that the heart of the curriculum must be the Bible. He had a ready field for experimenting with his ideas in the slums of Chicago near the Moody Bible Institute where he served as director of the department of Christian Education. Dr. Benson lived to see the day when the Bible-centered materials were gaining ground.
Two thousand miles away in Hollywood in the midst of the “Roaring Twenties” another Presbyterian, Miss Henrietta C. Mears, was proving that the Bible taught in language that the pupils can understand builds better Sunday Schools. She prepared closely-graded Bible teaching materials that attracted thousands to the local Sunday School. The enrollment jumped in two years from 400 pupils in 1927 to 4,200 in 1929.
The Word of God was vindicated in schools throughout America. Perceptive leaders had a growing concern that biblical issues dividing Protestantism were also dividing the Sunday School movement. Local churches were increasingly exercising the right to choose materials producing results in Bible teaching.
The Sunday School movement was suffering from a schizophrenic frustration—a desire to be modern and a desire to teach the Bible. There was no alternative. The split was inevitable. The promoters of educational methodology in the Sunday School tried to salve the conscience of their constituency by jargon which sounded reliable, but a close examination of curriculum materials indicated that liberalism, neo-orthodoxy, higher criticism, the social gospel, naturalistic educational theories and the like had so emasculated the use of the Bible that the Sunday Schools were spiritually ineffective.
In contrast, the denominational and independent publishers who threw their lot with a “Bible-centered” philosophy found a ready response for their literature from millions of common people and thousands of local Sunday Schools in all denominations.
Enormous sums of money have been invested by producers of Sunday School materials. The contrast between the drab “quarterlies” of 50 years ago and the modern format, multicolored, functional styles of Sunday School books today is astonishing. But appearances are superficial. The test of the literature lies in the place and use of the Bible. Does the teacher get into the Scriptures to learn Christ of whom they speak? Are the students required to use the Bible so that they will become wise unto salvation by faith in Jesus Christ and effective examples of Christian living? Too often the answer to these inquiries leaves men and women of discerning hearts with difficult choices. Sunday School materials that once could be trusted are now suspect. What shall be used for teaching aids?
From the great variety of Sunday School materials which are available to local churches today, who is responsible for screening the “wheat” from the “tares”? What criteria should be used for the evaluation of materials?
The primary responsibility rests upon the shoulders of the pastor. He is the educational leader of the Sunday School and the local church. The pastor is the master teacher; he is the voice of God leading the congregation. He must answer to God for the teaching ministry of the church. The criteria for his judgments must be the Scripture.
As the pastor goes, so goes the Sunday School. The wise pastor will recognize that the Sunday School offers the greatest single opportunity for the church to teach the Word and to reach the community with the Gospel.
The issue is clear. In the maze of competing forces, the pastor must decide what his volunteer teachers will teach precious souls in the framework of 60 minutes on Sunday morning. They cannot teach everything. The challenge comes to the pastor to show more concern for this problem and to become competent to fulfill his divinely-appointed task.
END
Milford Sholund is Director of Biblical and Educational Research for Gospel Light Publications. He holds the Th.B. from Western Baptist Seminary, B.A. from Wheaton College, and M.Ed. from National College of Education, Evanston, Illinois. Formerly he was Dean of Education and Associate Professor of Christian Education in Trinity Seminary, Chicago.
- More fromMilford Sholund