(!tnurnr~iu UJqrnlngirul flnutlJly Continuing LEHRE UND VVEHRE MAGAZIN FUER EV.-LuTH. HOMILETlK THEOLOGICAL QU A.RTERL Y -THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vo1. IV May, 1933 No.5 CONTENTS FUERBRINGER, L.: Die pel'soenliche Weisheit Got tes ... . l'aa:e 321 I GRAEBNER, THEODORE: Buchmanism ... . . . .... . 329V'i WOHLFEIL, L. T.: What is Meant by ".All Fulness." Col. 1, 19? 339 HEERBOTH. L. Aug.: Exodus 6, 3 h. W as God Kll O W ll to the Plltriarchs as Jehovnh~ ... . ... . . . . . . . . .. . 345 KRETZMANN, P. E.: Das Commll Iohanneum. 1 Joh. 5.7 349 XRETZMANN. P. E.: Die H nuptschriften L uthers in cbro- nologischer Reihenfolge .................. ...... ...... 354 FRITZ, J. H. C.: The Theme of the Sermon. . . . . . . . . .. . ... 355 Dispositionen ueber die altkirchliche Epistelreihe . . '" . . 361 Miscellanea. . . ... .......................... . .. .. . ....... 369 Theologicnl Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches ..... , 374 Book Review. - Literatur 389 £ 111 .Prf'di~er mU<:: 3 n icht allt!in welden.. r .. b t hE'in Din;.:. dQ.'· die L1..Ut4~ meh r 11 It ..1;1' t'r li ll Schafe wlI c""wpi,t'>. wit: 1ft'! del' Ki rehe Iwlt.wIt d l III tl il ~\lt, it! r. ,t'ht e Ch~ j- t t>n oIleli ·jll , somiern Pn . 1i:.{t. - .Jpo(f)!1ip . .. 4rt . ~~ . !'Oil· Ilil S C,' I;lte niC!itt .mgl~it '].I UIld ll1it I I t ll< I r 1111V· t Kh t ,I Tl unc·,rhin llmd. t~h('t.(>r L ·hr- ll'rfuehrlln und l rrtllll! eill· wilt) ,.:h:.Jl\ ph.'pan,' hilll ... elf tr) the battle;- til( hr,,". - -1 If 1 Cor. l~. S. Published for the Ev. Luth. Syn od of liIi.:i80tlri, Ohio, alld Ol-her States CONC ORDIA PUBLISHING HOUSE, St. Louis. M o. I Buchmanism. 329 m. 24.25. ;iDa§ )fiod 'l'1S~n fjeif3t eigenHidj freifen, mit @Odjmeraen gclJiiren; barum qat e§' ~'udj bie genaue gricdjifdje iioerfe~ung be§ 2rquila mit w/j",~{}'Y}" tlJiebergegelJenj bann fjeif3t e?' iloerfjaupt geoiiren, fjerbororingen, unb bie LXX iloerfeten e?' mit yevviiv. ~lle ~u?'fagen in m.24-26 tlJeifen fjin auf bie )fierfe be?' ~nfang?' unb beiS erften @3djiipfung§±agiS unb oe±onen auf§ ftiirfite unb in immer neuen ~(u§~ fagen ba§ @Oein ber 5illei§fjeit bor allen @3djiipfung§tlJerfen unb bamit ifjre @:tlJigre.it. 52. B il r 0 r i n g e r . • e I Buchmanisrn. Why should a movement that in many respects does not differ from the revivalism of the eighties and earlier decades cause as much co=otion as the activities of the Oxford Group, or Buchmanism? What is its message ~ What are its practises ~ vVhat, if any, are its merits? This article contemplates no detailed historical analysis of the movement, but would treat it as of 1933, reserving a more cor.1pletc discussion for a later issue, if it shall be deemed necessary. Dr. F. N. D. Buchman is a regularly ordained Lutheran clergy- man, a member of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania, U. L. O. A writer in the Lutheran of January 26, 1933, says; "The call to his first parish and his letter of acceptance happened to pass through our hands, as secretary of the Oonference Mission Oommittee, when it was decided to establish the Ohurch of the Good Shepherd in Overbrook, Philadelphia. He replied to the call, 'Yes, if it be God's will.' For what it is worth, we remark that he was not very successful as a mis- sionary. He undertook to combine what we Lutherans call Inner and Home Missions. It was not a workable combination in Overbrook. Pastor Buchman was then called to the Lutheran Hospice; but in 1907 he severed his connection with that institution, disagreements having arisen between him and its Board of Directors. In 1909 he came to State Oollege, Pennsylvania, as Y. M. O. A. secretary. The interval between 1907 and 1909 was partly spent in Europe, where hc made contact with thc Keswick :YIovement in England. One sus- pects that the convention of these Keswickians gave definiteness to his distinctive interpretation of OhTistianity. Russell 1) pictures Dr. Buchman as being primarily an individualist, the sort. of indi- vidualist that is endowed with a gift for organization and adminis- tration. He certainly was uncomfortable under the rules and regula- tions of church authorities. He is a member of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania and punctiliously sends an excuse annually fm being absent from the synod's conventions." 1) A. J. Russell, For Sinners OnZy. Harper. 330 Buchmanism. During the fall and winter months of 1932-1933 a large party of exponents of this movement, headed by Dr. Buchman himself, made a tour of Oanada and the United States. The :first party of thirty-two members - men and women - came to Montreal on Octo- ber 23. Later eighteen other members arrived from Oxford, under the direction of the Oanon of Liverpool, Dr. L. W. Grensted, professor of philosophy in Oriel Oollege, Oxford. The list of adherents includes notable persons from Scotland and London, Baroness Lilian Van Heeckeren of Holland, Mme. Lidi de Trey of Switzerland, Vice- Admiral Sidney Drury-Lowe of the British Navy. Among the no- tables from our own land are Hon. Oarl Vrooman, a Oabinet secretary under President Wilson; Dr. Philip Marshall Brown, professor of international law at Princeton University. They were officially wel- comed by the Prime Minister of Ontario, and their public meetings were attended by thousands of people. The meetings are generally conducted in the parlors of the best hotels. At Montreal they met in the Ritz Oarlton; in Ohicago, at the Drake; in Philadelphia, at the Bellevue Hotel; and in New York, at the new Waldorf. Prominent clergymen of all denominations have entered into its fellowship and call it the opening wedge of a great revival. Its growth in South Africa, in the English universities, in the cities of Scotland, in Holland, Germany, -and elsewhere, has been hailed as "one of the most gratifying manifestations of the working of God in these times of need." It is reported that about a thousand groups have been formed to date. The movement calls itself the First Oentury Ohristian Fellow- ship. That it exercises a profound appeal cannot be denied. It is hailed as a movement to put life into our ecclesiastical organizations, to convert the churches. As Mr. Vrooman said at Ohicago: "It is the most vital and hopeful religious movement of our generation. It is the only movement discernible to-day that seems capable of giving our generation that spiritual awakening which alone can save civilization." The Oanadian Ohurchman, official organ of the Angli- can Ohurch in Oanada, has given it unquali:fied support. The editor writes: "It would be a godsend to countless homes if the Oxford Group's message reached them. . .. Here lies the hope of our puzzled world. . .. H the apostles turned the world upside down in the :first century, this message of the Group is dynamic enough to do it again in the twentieth century. . .. We urge all parsons and laity alike to get in touch with the Group." A correspondent of the Pres- byterian (Philadelphia): ClThis Buchman movement is doing for the upper strata of life what Oommander Booth did for the lower strata of life and his Salvation Army is still doing." The Family Herald and Weekly Star, the most widely circulated family magazine in Oanada, devoted nearly two pages to letters of prominent Oanadian Buchmanism. 331 clergymen who are endorsing the movement. In a leading editorial this journal asks the question: "Is Oanada to take part in what seems to be one of the greatest religious movements of all time - a move- ment comparable with, and perhaps outrivaling, those of imperishable influence, for which Luther, Wesley, Augustine, and Booth are re- sponsible? Are we to see here and elsewhere a revival of first-century Ohristianity, giving purpose and direction to purposeless and mis- guided lives, setting aloft a fiery cross in every office, every farm- house, workshop, and institution, and really starting the Ohristian millennium of the twentieth century?" Though speaking with some caution, the reviewer in the Lutheran approves of certain features. "That the Oxford Movement has gotten a hold on thousands in a class admired for culture and often notoriously indifferent to practical Ohristianity is a fact convincingly in its favor." The dangers are too evident to be blinked at: "The 'mysticism' emphasized, while not without a legitimate sphere of action in Ohristian life, has within it the possibilities of exaggeration, occultism, and even fanaticism that have characterized 'illumination and direct guidance' in the past when they obtained a hold in minds more responsive to emotion than to calm reasoning. The moment the First Oentury Ohristian Fellow- ship finds the twentieth-century Ohristianity unfit for the Lord's use and demanding a new sect, it will have ceased to be productive of good and become an agency of enthusiasm creative of heresies." Nevertheless the writer holds "that Dr. Buchman's groups have a mes- sage and that he has a mission." The movement has no organization, no officers, no members, and no official title. By its adherents it is co=only known as "The Groups," "The Oxford Group," or "The Fellowship." Victor Star- buck, writing a defense of the Fellowship in the Moody Bible Insti- tute Monthly, May, 1932, states the main features, the doctrines and ideas emphasized, as an "entire surrender to God; the daily quiet time of Bible-study, prayer, and meditation; the guidance of the Holy Spirit; the confession of sin; the duty of bearing witness to our own experience of the saving power of Ohrist; and team-work." The adherents stoutly maintain that they are not a new denomination. They disclaim all intention of displacing, supplanting, or disparaging the organized church. "The Group is merely an aggregation of indi- vidual Ohristians with one great common purpose in life - to witness for Jesus." The Group takes the organized church for granted and therefore does not hold public preaching services, does not administer the Sacraments, does not exact acceptance of creeds. The members of the Group remain members of their own churches and answer to them, and not to the Group, for their confessional position. They are simply workers seeking "to apply in their own lives the teachings of the New Testament." 332 Buchmanism. The absence of any doctrinal emphasis is marked. No creed has been formulated. Mr. Starbuck says: "Most of us are Episcopalians, Methodists, and Presbyterians, with a few Baptists and Oongrega- tionalists. Our adherents also include one Oatholic, one Ohristian Scientist, and one Quaker." At Toronto the reporter of the Winnipeg Free Press asked one of the party, Mr. Reggie Holme of New Oollege, Oxford: "Does the Oxford Group believe in tl1e immaculate conception, the crucifixion, and the resurrection of Ohrist?" "What do you find?" asked Mr. Holme. "We would just leave it to your own self and what guidance Ohrist gave you." The movement does not have a form of worship. There is a method for conducting testimony and house-party gatherings. It does not administer the Sacraments, but advises its members to attend their churches. It has no corporate organization enabling it to take title to property, receive endowments, and so forth. It does not set up a budget, appeal for regular contributions, and report receipts and expenditures. There are pl'Obably expenses, but these are taken care of by voluntary contributions. The Lutheran remarks that some of these "must be fairly liberal: one does not circle the globe nor transport parties varying in size from three or four to sixty persons for nothing." In Hamilton, Ontario, one man gave a personal check for $5,000. Gifts are constantly brought in. The Group says that is God's way of providing for them in their work. In public meetings there is little to suggest a religious service- no hymns, Scripture, nor general prayers. All that belongs to the church, they say. All excitement is eschewed. There is no attempt to work on the emotions - just a plain, matter-of-fact witnessing. Each speaker gives his or her message quietly, naturally, earnestly. "They simply, humbly, and joyously narrate what the Ohristian life means to them; and herein is their power." The one absorbing pas- sion of the Group is to make "life-changers." Their characteristic mode of work is through the "house party" of from a week-end to two weeks, to which people come through friendly invitations, where the Bible is intensively studied daily, a "quiet time" of prayer and meditation is spent every morning, and personal approaches are made for surrendered lives. They "share" each other's experiences and accept without reservations what they believe to be the daily "gui- dance" of the Holy Spirit. "Guidance" is one of the strong features of the work. Mr. A. J. Russell in his book For Sinners Only describes "visions and flashes of revelation" by which he has been guided. They accept with literal- ness that, when a man is "changed," that is, when he has received the light, when he is inclined to say, "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do~" he will be told wherever and whenever a direction as Buchmanism. sss to his choice of duty is required in order that he may do his Lord's will. In connection with "guidance," both Russell and Shoe- maker refer to "the quiet hour." That phrase applies to a period of time which is devoted to a sort of mental introspection. It may be an hour daily devoted to "listening in on God," to quote Russell's rather irreverent term for it, or it may refer to the pause when some problem has arisen. Each individual regularly practises this "with- drawal" for guidance, and those associated in a project also use it. When persons are engaged in this pursuit of the divine will, they provide themselves with a pencil and paper, on which they write down the thoughts that occur to them. Sooner or later a course of action is chosen, and the decision reached is accepted as "His will" in the situation. Guidance is ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Shoemaker comments: "There are of course conditions of gui- dance." First there must be a surrendered will, then relaxation from tension, absence from self-consciousness, consciousness of faith (a leaning toward God), a regular time for waiting on Him, and active obedience. Under proper conditions, "guidance comes with an authority all its own," but with varied intensity. It is "sometimes the motion of a consecrated human mind mobilized to do the will of God and sometimes the clear shooting-in of God's thought above our thought, transcending human thought supernaturally." "Guidance must be tested by the Spirit of Christ. . .. Guidance if true will never be found contrary to the New Testament." Circum- stances sometimes make God's will clear. "But chiefly guidance must be tested by the concurrence of other guided people." Relations to the divine will, Shoemaker declares, do not resemble a line of com- munication between two beings, God and myself, but a triangle, God, myself, and another who depends on guidance. This prescription presents a difficulty in that the number of folk who are able to interpret and practise guidance is still small; therefore "you may have gradually to raise up your own group." "Do the members of the Group smoke or drink~" "If God guides them to," was the answer of Mr. Holme when asked this question at Toronto. "Under that rule, do any of them smoke or drink~" "Yes, some of them," said Mr. Holme. "God guides us, and I personally have never found that He denied me anything that was necessary to me so that I could carryon His work. We get our guidance in silent times, and we travel in perfect harmony. If that isn't unity in Christ, what is ~ It is just a matter of whether you guide your life or let God do it," he added. "Have you ever had an experience in Christ ~ Have you ever listened to His messages ~ What is your ambition, and what do you want to do with your life' If you would only have a quiet half-hour in the morning and listen to the voice of God, you would get guidance, too, and you would become a leader 334 Buchmanism. of our Group," he said. "You could begin to change lives then and would know the real meaning of life. You would get a different look, and when you went down to the office, everyone would notice it. They would want to know what had changed you. You would prob- ably say at the beginning, 'Oh, I have a cold,' or something like that. What you should say, and what you would learn to say, is, 'I have given my life to .r esus Christ.'" The other prominent factor in Buchmanism is "sharing," the term used for confession of sin. Starbuck gives it a somewhat wider meaning when he calls it the public or private relation of personal experience. "Sometimes it is one's guidance that is shared, some- times a problem or a temptation, sometimes a dcfeat or a victory, often it is a defeat which has been followed by victory through Christ. Sometimes it is for the benefit of the sharer and sometimes for the help of the person with whom one shares. Of course, it frequently involves confession of sin." It generally means that in the literature of the cult - the exchange of experiences in sinning and in gaining relief from sinning between one who has been "changed" and one who has not. In reports of this process some yeQ,.s ago, the term "con- fession" was used. The verse from St. J ames's epistle, chap. 5,16, is the Scriptural authority cited by Samuel Shoemaker for this prac- tise: "Confess your sins one to another and pray for one another that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." Russell, describing a meeting of Oxford stu- dents, wri tcs: "Young men were revealing their real selves, though saying nothing that offended good taste. Modesty, but no false re- serve. Young aristocrats of Oxford were showing a masked world llOW to be honest by removing their own masks. They told of their daily fight with sin, indicated some of their sins: pride, selfishness, ,dishonesty, laziness, impurity, admitted their slips, and showed how, through the indwelling presence of the living Christ, they were achieving victory." When Buchmanism first came to Princeton University, some ten years ago, reports were abroad implicating the sexual relations of the men in these private confession groups. These reports have not been revived during the present campaign, but critics of the movement llave expressed doubts regarding the wisdom of permitting the "sharing" of experiences or lapses in the sexual field. One of the defenders, Starbuck, has said: ,elf there be any special emphasis on the sins of sex, it has not come to my notice." Although the Presby- terian of February 16, 1933, reports a "broadside" from the wife of a clergyman in Canada which pictured the house parties as "pretty bad gatherings for anyone to attend," it seems that these objection- able features have been somewhat modified. It does not seem as if "sex confessions" are now a prominent feature of "sharing." Buchmanism. 335 The third characteristic is the Group. Those who accept the principles of Buchmanism form a fellowship locally, sometimes lim- ited to the congregation, at other times, more frequently, without any regard to congregational or denominational lines. Fairness demands that we permit one of the spokesmen of the movement to speak for himself. We have read The Oonversion of the Ohu7'ch, by Samuel M. Shoemaker, rector of Oalvary Ohurch (Episcopal) in New York. The book was published by Revell last year. Shoemaker's first chapter is entitled "Sins of the Ohurch." The unbiased reader must agree with much that he says. His thesis is that the Ohurch has forsaken the great function of "the cure of souls," so that this has fallen either in disuse or into other hands, while the Ohurch is busy with other things. He stands appalled at the amount of effort which goes into "investigations." "Anybody in religious work to-day is pestered with huge forms which he is requested to fill out and file in somebody's office. All this neat tabu- lation may be part of a diagnosis, but it can hardly be mentioned as a cure. The same thing is done with reference to religion in colleges," A similar amount of energy is expended in the huge number of organi- zations which the Ohurch must support and keep functioning. Again we will all agree. Next: "The Ohristian Ohurch has gone off the rails by the espousal of what is called the social gospel, as if this were something new and something different from the whole Ohris- tian Gospel of the ages." Another great mistake is made when people think they could set religion fOI'ward by mere intellectual defense of it. "The tragic thing is that a person can be intellectually persuaded of the truth of Ohristianity without knowing its power in all the recesses of his life." But the chief sin of the Ohurch of our time Shoemaker finds in its habit of "using people at the expense of developing them." It takes people where they are, lets them work for the Ohurch in various lines of effort, but cares not at all whether Ohristian characters are developed. "Here is a man of wealth. He will not come often to church, but he thinks churches are good things in co=unities and gladly gives five hundred a year. What does that do to us in relation to him? Does it tie our tongues? Does it muzzle us? Might it not challenge him to say that God wants 'not yoms, hut you' and to refuse his money? . .. How many well-to-do men sit on church, charity, Young Men's Ohristian Association, and mission boards, dry, sterile, spiritually inert, because the executive secretaries and other board members take them for granted, are willing to accept their judgment and their cash, to use them at the expense of developing them?" Underlying all this is the stressing of activity rather than the development of the Ohristian. The great word has become "service." 336 Buchmanism. We give money, we provide hospital care, we help people over diffi- culties, we show much human kindness; but "when we look a little below the surface, we :find that these remedies are painfully tempo- rary and almost never touch aught but the surface of the problem .... They are poultices on cancers, rose-water squirted at leprosy. . . . Modern America is all but gone insane with the notion that religion consists solely in this service. . .. And the fruit of these things is all about us. The effect upon the ministers is one of profound bewil- derment and discouragement. These directions in which the churches seem tending call for a combination of qualities few men can hope to possess, namely, those of an orator, an organizer, a social reformer, an economist, a business man, a philosopher, and a Rotarian. . . . And the effect upon the layman is slow secularization, paganization. It has become appalling what our ministers are content with in their people I" Yet there is "a stirring and restlessness among many of our laymen who demanded a deeper experience of religion." This demand is satisfied by the Oxford Group Movement. The lack of any reference to doctrine is notable in this chapter. Not only that, it is signi:ficant of the entire movement. The author has no complaint regarding' the weakening of doctrinal foundations which has become so startlingly apparent in the American churches. Among the sins of the churches he does not list the rejection of verbal inspiration, their departure from the historic creeds in such articles as the deity of Ohrist, the atonement, sin, grace, justi:fication. He finds fault with what we regard as the substitute for emphasis on doctrine, not with the loss of that emphasis. But let us proceed. The author has now demonstrated "how certain modern trends in religion have petered out and how religion has been betrayed by some of its own backers." (P. 65.) "The trouble with the Ohurch is not want of equipment, money, programs, or paraphernalia; it is want of personal experience of ,Jesus Ohrist and genuine faith on the part of her ministers and people." (P.35.) Possibly one must be an initiate to know what the author means by "experience of Jesus Ohrist," identified by him with "conversion"; but be it said that on this crucial point the book gives us no information. He seems to identify conversion with sanctification when he pleads "that our lives be dedicated to God's will in utter surrender and consecration." (P.29.) Quit.e immaterial is the "ecclesiastical point of view," by which he means the doctrines of the respective churches. Some, he says, mistakenly think that they are converted "because they have clung to an orthodox theory of the atonement." (P.33.) Now, to get a start with conversion, our :first step is made "by the sharing of these sins with another Ohristian who has found his way a bit farther than we have" (p. 35), when "some one else carries with us in sympathetic understanding the secret which lay like lead in our hearts." (P.37.) Buchmanism. 337 The next step will be addressing ourselves to God in prayer, especially with "the prayer which seeks to find, rather than to change, His will. This means that listening-prayer is much more important than asking-prayer." (P.41.) In this way we get "a real hold on God and a real knowledge of His will by genuine revelation." (P.63.) Examples of guidance: "A distinguished clergyman was preaching a series of sermons as a guest preacher and had clear guidance to leave the last one unprepared and trust God for His message at the last minute. The preacher obeyed His guidance and is convinced that God gave him a greater message than he could have prepared." (P.53.) A woman "had guidance to return a certain dress she had bought. . .. A man was guided one day to stop at a gas sta:tion, when he needed neither gas, oil, nor water." (P.56.) The minister will "write letters on guidance, preach sermons on guidance, deal with his session or vestry on guidance, make his personal plans on guidance." (P.58.) The practise is carried into the Sunday-school, where the little ones have a "quiet hour" and all the children "wait on God." They :find that "God speaks to them very clearly." (P.112.) "How different it is when the church-school is based not only on teaching, but on religious experience, when the classes begin with a 'quiet time,' the children share their real problem" and necds, get God's direction, work out their lives on the basis of an experience of God!" (P.71.) The points of contact for this Group movement are preferably the men's club, now addressed by some lecturer while the men "sit :fish-eyed and lifeless on the benches and wait for the coffee" (p. 90) ; the ministerial conference, now too often concerned with deliberately controversial questions, denominational doctrines, regarding these as a basis for fellowship. Shoemaker has little patience with this atti- tude. "I :find spiritual fellowship with surrendered, guided people in so many various camps that I seldom wish to obtrude a point of view which may be only divisive." (P.92.) The prospect is that such "groups" increase all over the world, and the great goal is Ohristian unity. Even now Shoemaker rejoices in the llews that an Anglo- Catholic bishojl in Africa laid his hallC1s in blessing upon the head of a Boer of the Dutch Reformed Church as he took his way to America to attend a Presbyterian seminary. (P.121.) Our attitude toward Buchmanism, what shall it be? As a criticism of a mechanical, institutional Christianity it ad- dresses itself to a real need. Its emllhasis on personal Ohristianity, on working with individual souls, is a rebuke to the social gospel and, in fact, to the modernistic conception of church-work. When this has been said, all that is really commendable about Buchmanism has been mentioned. There is in this movement no clear-cut state- ment of the deity of Ohrist and His atonement on the cross. It ac- 22 338 Buchmanism. cepts upon equal terms into its fellowship those who believe in Jesus as the Son of God and the Savior of the world and those who regard Him as the matchless teacher and dauntless martyr. The Ohurch cannot accept such a compromise. A Presbytcrian critic has aptly said: "Ohristianity is based upon certain doctrines of God, Ohrist, sin, and salvation. Any movement that offers to lead the Ohurch to new victories must be judged by its open and unswerving loyalty to these doctrines as they are revealed in the Bible. Acceptance of Ohrist is not enough. What Ohrist do you receive '1 The Ohrist of the New Testament or Jesus the teacher from N azareth~" Its doc- trinal indifferentism is our chief objection to the Oxford Group. As for the "sharing," James 5 does not contain the basis which is sought. The text speaks of the sick and their treatment. And while the Scriptures certainly demand of us that we confess to the brother the sins we have committed against him, it gives no such directions as are involved in the practise of "sharing." The practise is noth- ing new. It was one of the methods employed in the protracted meetings which were common in the eighties and in earlier decades in the United States. The practise of seeking "guidance," "direct revelations," from the Holy Spirit regarding matters of belief, attitude, or conduct sets aside the cardinal principle of the sole authority and sufficiency of the written vVord of God. "Listening in on God," where God has given no promise of immediate communication, is spiritual presump- tion and is the very essence of Reformed fanaticism (Schwaerme.rei). It builds Ohristian assurance, both as to matters of faith and of life, upon the quicksand of human emotion and is as far a departure from sound Biblical Ohristianity as rationalism. The uniqueness of Old and New Testament revelation is destroyed. No longer is the Word of the prophets and apostles our sole guide and authority in religious matters, but the inner voice, or urge, or impulse, which comes in the "quiet hour." The Ohristian Advocate (Methodist) in its issue of February 9 contains the following kcen criticism: "Some of the points at which the movement needs to be more closely studied are these: What does it mean by the forgiveness of sin ~ How nearly is its insistence on 'sharing' - that is, confession of sin - a thing for general applica- tion? and, "What weah.-ness or dangers are to be avoided in its prac- tise of 'guidance' - that is, the direct illumination of the mind by the Holy Spirit? . " Oonfession has its great values, but it has long-recognized limitations and dangers, which the Oxford 'groups' do not seem to take into account. And the daily, almost hourly, dependence on a direct word from God concerning such every-day choices of life as have little or no moral significance seems to cut under the truth that God has given us the spirit of love and of power What is Meant by "All Fulness," Col. 1, 19? 339 and of a sound mind. For what, if not to develop spiritual se1£- control? In point of fact, the doctrine of 'guidance' has greater mean- ing and dignity when we accept our God-given responsibility for the day's work than when we find it necessary to ask for instructions at every turn." One critic, quoted in the Lutheran, lists six "harmful features": 1) Oentering the thought on sin; 2) inculcating morbid introspec- tion; 3) overemphasis of sex problems; 4) insistence on listening for divine "guidance"; 5) substituting for intelligence emotional subconscious urging in relationship with our environment; G) a warp- ing of the personality of the individual. He thinks the Group dis- parages by implication the entire Ohristian ministry. The universal acclaim which the movement has received in the United States and Oanada is a token that the modernistic phase of church-life has lost its appeal. In a way it is a parallel to the Theology of Orisis,2) which has come as a rebound from the theology of the higher criticism. In both cases the cure may turn out to be as bad as the disease. THEODORE GRAEBNER. What is Meant by HAll Fulness," Col. 1, 19? The verse in question reads in the original: ~OTt tV aV'f1{> ,I;VOO"'1(J8Y niiv ,0 nJ.'!!!OJpa "a,ol"ijOai. The Authorized Version trans- lates: "For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness dwell," while the Revised Version renders it: "For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in Him should all the fulness dwell." The Vulgate eN estle, 5): "Quia in ipso cornplacuit, omnem pZeni- tudinem inhabitctre." Luther: "Denn es ist das TV ohZgefaZZen ge- wesen, dass in ilirn aZZe Fuelle wohnen soZZte." Moffatt modernizes: "FOT it was in Him that the divine :Fulness willed to settle with- out limit." vVhom has "it pleased"? This is not expressly stated in this verse if one translates as does the Authorized Version, the Revised Version, the Vulgate, and Luther. Moffatt answers: "The Fulness." Four different answers have been given by various exegetes. Some supply "Father," others "the Son" or "Ohrist," still others "God," and eome finally take n;{il' ,0 nJ.,7!!OJpa as the subject with ::iIoffatt. Accepting the second view, one would be forced to intCl'pret "at aI' ,avrov cho"a,aU&$al of y, 20 as meaning that it pleased the Son, or Ohriet, to reconcile through the fulness. That would be strange, to say the least, in the light of 2 Oor. 5, 18, according to which God reconciles through Ohrist. To supply "God" or "the Father" may 2) Dr. Brunner, the famous expounder of Barth, has accepted the :Buchman movement.