Qtnnrnr~tu
ml}tnlngital flnnt41y
Continuing
LEHRE UND VVEHRE
MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LUTH. HOMILETIK
THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY
Vol. IX July, 1938 No.7
CONTENTS
Page
A Course in Lutheran Theology. Th. Engelder . _______ .... _ .... _____ . __ .. _. __ .____ 481
Kleine Danielstudien. L. Fuerbringer ______________________ . __ . __ .. __ .. ___ ... . __ __ ... ..... 495
Sermon Study on Acts 5:34-42. Th. Laetseh ._ . . _ .... .. _ .. _ ...... ____ ._____ 506
Miscellanea __________ ._ . . ___ . ____ . _____ . ____ .._____ . _______ .. _____________________ . __ . __ . ___ __ .. _ .. _. __________ .. 519
Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-ZeitgeschichtIiches . . ____ ._ ._ .. _ ._. ____ 530
Book Review. - Literatur _ . _________ .. ______ .. _. ______ ... ____ . ______ . __ . .. .. ... . _ .. _____ . 553
BIn Predlger mUSII nleht aDeln lOel-
den, also d888 er die Schafe unter-
welle. wle s1e reehte Chr1lten 80llen
RIn, IIOndem auch daneben den Woe1-
fen lOeh1'4m, daM s1e dle Schafe nlcht
ansreifen und mlt faIscher Lehre ver-
fuehren und Irrtum elnfuehren.
Luthn
Es 1st keln Ding, das dle Leute
mehr bel der KJrche behaelt denn
die gute Predlgt. - Apologia, An. 24.
If the trumpet give an uncerta1D
sound who shaD prepare himself to
the batUe? - 1 COT.14, B.
PnbIisbed for the
BY. Loth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States
CONCOBDIA PUBLISIIIN'G BOUSE, St. LouJs, Mo.
.ARCI:I V
530 Theological Observer - .Ritc9lic9~.8eitgefc9td)mcgeS
Theological Observer - ~itdjndj~gettgefdjidjtndje~
I. Aml'rtim
Is the Bible the Word of God?-A manifesto issued by the Catholic
Advisory Council (an Anglo-Catholic federation) against the Report of
the Commission on Christian Doctrine (appointed by the archbishops
of Canterbury and York) states in paragraph 2: "The Church of England
has ever professed a profound reverence for the Bible as the written
Word of God, divinely inspired and authoritatively recognized as such
by the Church. The current easy rejection by some accredited teachers
of plain testimonies of Holy Scripture - e. g., to the occurrence of mir-
acles, the existence of an order of spiritual beings, both good and evil,
and the eternal pWllshment of the finally impenitent - is clearly incon-
sistent with that Scriptural and historic Christianity to which the Church
of England is irrevocably committed." Paragraph 3 points out that the
Church of England "requires all priests at their ordination to promise
that they will be 'ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive
away all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word' and
requires all bishops to renew this vow at their consecration." (Book of
Common Prayer, on the Ordering of Priests: "Are you persuaded that
the Holy Scriptures contain all doctrine required as ;pecessary for
eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ?" "Will you be ready,
with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away from the Church
all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word?" Articles
of Religion, Art. VI: "Holy Script1tre containeth all things necessary to
salvation." Art. XXXIV: "Traditions and ceremonies may be changed ... ,
so that nothing be ordained against God's Word.") The editor of the
Living Church (May 4, 1938) states: "It is only fair to say, however,
that there are undoubtedly many Anglo-Catholics both in England and
in this country who would not fully endorse every statement made in
the Anglo-Catholic manifesto. For our own part we find ourselves
perhaps 95 per cent. in agreement with the manifesto, which we gladly
hail as a timely and important document." He mentions and discusses
several paragraphs with which he is in agreement. But he does not
list paragraphs 2 and 3 among them. In fact, he refers to the six articles
published in the February and March issues, covering the Report of
the Commission, the concluding article of which series states: "The
significance of this section of the Report lies chiefly in its bearing upon
homiletics. As 'the method of direct appeal to isolated texts' is so
evidently liable to error, it is to be expected that preaching from isolated
texts will gradually give place to genuine expository preaching in which
the Word of God contained" (italics in original) "in the Scripture will
be sought, studied in all the light that modern scholarship affords, and
then applied to problems of the modern world. . .. In forceful terms
the Commission states its conviction that 'the authority of the Bible
must not be interpreted as prejudging conclusions of historical, critical,
and scientific investigation in any field.''' Paragraph 2 is one of the
parts of the manifesto with which the Living Church does not agree.
Theological Observer - .Rird)lid)·8eit\lefd)td)tIid)e~ 531
The historical and scientific mistakes of the Bible do not permit the
identification of Scripture with the Word of God. The best one can
do is to say that the Scriptures contain the Word of God. We, on our
part, are glad to note that the manifesto, wrong in many instances,
upholds the old Christian teaching that "the Bible is the written Word
of God, divinely inspired."
A similar pronouncement is made by the Allg. E.-L. Kz. (March 11,
1938), and we are glad to take note of it. "Die lutherischen Bekenntnis-
schriften sind sich uebereinstimmend darueber klar, dass letzte QueUe
und Autoritaet aUes Wissens urn Gott das Wort Gottes ist. Unter aus-
druecklicher Berufung auf Luther stellt daher die F. C. in der Solida
Declaratio von dem summarischen Begriff fest, 'dass alleine Gottes Wort
die einzige Richtschnur und Regel aller Lehre sein und bleiben solle.'
Dieses Wort Gottes ist ruer das lutherische Bekenntnis in der Heiligen
Schrift, oder wie es an andern Stellen heisst, in den prophetischen und
apostolischen Schriften Alten und Neuen Testamentes, 'dem reinen und
lauteren Brunnen Israels' enthalten." And the writer does not mean that
the Word of God is contained in the Scriptures. For later on he uses the
phrase: "Das in die Bibel gefasste Wort Gottes." And again: "Aus
den W orten der Bibel stroemt uns der Heilige Geist entgegen."
It is well to take note of such testimonies as these. The conditions
which evoked the protest of the Catholic Advisory Council confront
us, too; we, too, need to protest against the voices heard within the
Lutheran Church of America, discrediting the Bible as the very Word
of God, divinely inspired. We dare not keep silence when accredited
teachers of the Church write a New Testament commentary incorpo-
rating the liberal view of the miracles. We protest against the un-
Lutheran, unscriptural thesis proposed and c;lefended at the Washington
Debate by a spokesman for the United Lutheran Church: "As one
writer on this question says: 'It [the Bible] has carried with it the
husk as well as the kernel,' and in illustration of his meaning he quotes
some stories of vengeance, cruelty, lex talionis, polygamy, adultery, which
he relates." (See CONe. THEOL. MTHLY., p. 359. - Dr. Snyder is quoting
Dr. Alleman. See Luth. Church Quart., July, 1936, p.24O.) Dr. Alleman
tells us: "The Bible contains the Word of God. It is the rule of our
faith because it enshrines the Word." (Luth. Church Quart., 1. c.) Our
Confessions declare: The Bible is the Word of God. They identify
Scripture and God's Word: "Die Schrift und Gottes Wort." "To teach
men Scripture and that those admonished by the Word" (Apology,
Art. 24, § 3) . Men do not speak the Lutheran language who cannot state
definitely, The Bible is the Word of God, but when they try to say it,
stammer all sorts of restrictions and reservations: "The Bible, then, is
the Word of God not because of any theoretical explanation of the
method of divine inspiration, but because as one connected, harmonious,
authentic, recorded whole, from beginning to end, the Sacred Scriptures
of the Old and New Testaments are 'they which testify of Christ.'''
(Dr. G. Drach, in Luth. Church Quart., July, 1936, p.246.) Dr. Alleman
and Dr. Drach and the others say, "The Bible contains the Word of God."
The Catalog of Testimonies says in the Conclusion: "God's Word is
comprised in the Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles" (Trigl.,
532 Theological Observer - .Ritd)IidJ',8eit\1ejd)id)Hid)e~
p. 1149). But there is a vast difference between the two statements,
the difference between saying that parts of the Bible are not God's
Word and that all of the Bible is God's Word. No, these men cannot
speak Lutheran on this point. The best they can do is to say: "The
Bible is the Word of God because it contains the Word of God."
(J. A. W. Haas, in What Is Lutheranism, p.176.) And we protest against
such a statement as being an attempt to speak the language of the
Confessions without uttering the full sense of the Confessions as to
the full reliability of every part of Scripture. The present time demands
a firm reaffirmation of the truth confessed in the Old Protestant
standards, in the Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer and in the
Lutheran Book of Concord, as quoted above. E.
A Voice from the Augustana Synod. - In the Lutheran Companion
of April 28, 1938, we find an article by George Stephenson, of the Depart-
ment of History, University of Minnesota, having the title "Whither
Augustana?" He lists the forces that bind the synod together and
enumerates them as follows: 1. the lingering and still potent spirit of
nationality; 2. the point of view and influence of the older leaders in
the Augustana Synod, to whom Swedish is the language of childhood;
3. vested interests - schools, hospitals, orphan homes, even the synod and
conferences themselves; 4. the liturgy of the Augustana Synod, which
is different from that of other Lutheran bodies; 5. the natural inertia
in the great body of the synod's membership.
Next he lists forces that work for Lutheran unity. 1. The virtual
cessation of immigration from Sweden. As a result the Augustana
Synod has become an English Lutheran body. 2. "With the exception
of a single large and powerful body there are no formidable doctrinal
walls that divide the Augustana Synod from sister synods." 3. Intra-
and extramural proselyting in the Lutheran Church has almost entirely
disappeared. 4. Controversies that form~r1y raged over certain ques-
tions - secret societies, amusements, the puritanical Sabbath, and the
like - have largely vanished. 5. "Institutionalism is in the ascendency
in American Lutheranism, and in the Augustana Synod High Church
tendencies are unmistakable. Vestments, gowns, and choir robes are
among the adiaphora." 6. "The activity and influence of laymen in the
Augustana Synod is a twentieth-century phenomenon, and it will in-
crease. Many surprises would be in store for pastors in the Augustana
Synod if they made a systematic effort to plumb the doctrinal depth
of their parishioners. 7. There is not much interest among pastors and
laymen in the history of the Augustana Synod. 8. Through the depres-
sion and the resulting financial difficulties of the synod and its con-
ferences the desire has been strengthened to avoid duplication in edu-
cation, in Home and Foreign Missions, etc. 9. "Events at home and
abroad are moving with cataclysmic swiftness; the spirit of change is in
the air. A feeling of instability permeates every branch of human
activity. Can the Augustana Synod by erecting and maintaining walls
shut out this nation-wide spirit?"
The last paragraph is arresting: "The Church needs Conservatives
as well as Liberals. It is in even greater need of animated Conserva-
tives and Liberals who have the courage and the intelligence to differ
Theological Observer - ~itdjlidj~.3eitgtfdjidjmdjes 533
from their fathers as well as to withstand what may appear to be an
overwhelming majority of their contemporaries. Of such persons it may
be said that they are the salt of the earth." The author should have
pointed out that in matiers of doctrine we have to insist on loyalty to
the truth. In adiaphora it is well enough to have Conservatives and
Liberals. A.
Dr. Leander Keyser's Defense of Biblical Inspiration. - In 1935 the
late Dr. Leander Keyser of the Hamma Divinity School (U. L. C.) pub-
lished in Christian Faith and Life a sharp criticism of the Presbyterian
Auburn Affirmation, under the title "That Famous Auburn Affirma-
tion." The article is now being spread in pamphlet form by Funda-
mentalistic Presbyterians, since it briefly but strikingly proves the
Unitarian character of the Auburn Affirmation. Among other things
Dr. Keyser takes issue with the modernistic authors and signers of the
Auburn Affirmation on account of their repudiation of Biblical inspi-
ration. Dr. Keyser writes: "Let us note what they say on the question
of the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures. The General Assembly of the
Presbyterian Church made this clear pronouncement in 1923: 'It is an
essential doctrine of the Word of God and our standards that the Holy
Spirit did so inspire, guide, and move the writers of Holy Scripture as
to keep them from error.' Against this statement the Affirmationists
protest. They do not believe in an inerrant Bible. Note what they say;
'There is no assertion in the Scriptures that their writers were kept
from error. The Confession of Faith does not make this assertion, and
it is significant that this assertion is not found in the Apostles' Creed
or the Nicene Creed or in any of the great Reformation Confessions.
The doctrine of inerrancy, intended to enhance the authority of the
Scriptures, in fact impairs their supreme authority for faith and life
and weakens the testimony of the Church to the power of God unto
salvation through Jesus Christ. We hold that the General Assembly
of 1923, in asserting that "the Holy Spirit did so inspire, guide, and
move the writers of Holy Scripture as to keep them from error," spoke
without warrant of the Scriptures, or of the Confession of Faith. We
hold rather to the words of the Confession of Faith that the Scriptures
"are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life"
(Conf. I: 2). Let us analyze this manifesto to see whether it rings true.
They declare that the Scriptures make no claim that their writers were
kept from error. Well, Paul's First Epistle to Timothy is a part of the
Holy Scriptures, is it not? Paul, in speaking of the Old Testament, said:
'All Scripture is given by inspiration of God,' 2 Tim. 3: 16. That is, it is
God-breathed. Would God inspire men to write error? What kind of
divine inspiration would that be? And remember Paul said: 'all Scrip-
ture.' Peter's Second Epistle is also a part of Holy Scripture. Let us
quote him again: 'For the prophecy came not in old time by the will
of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost,' 2 Pet. 1: 21. If the Holy Spirit moved those prophets, is it not
clearly understood that He would have kept them from error? Why
would their utterances be attributed to the Holy Spirit if they con-
tained human errors? But the Auburn Affirmers contradict themselves
in the paragraph quoted above. They hold that the General Assembly
534 Theological Observer - ~itcf)Hd)<3eitgefd)id)t!id)e!l
was wrong in saying that the Biblical writers were so inspired as to be
kept from error; yet, in concluding their paragraph, they hold that the
Scriptures are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and
life. What kind of logic and theology is that? If Holy Scripture is
given by inspiration of God, must it not be inerrant? Would God inspire
men to write error? And here is a most serious consideration. If the
Bible contains both error and truth, who is so wise as to tell us what
is true and what is not true? In that case we would have to fall back
on fallible human reason, and that would be the old rationalism of fifty
to a hundred years ago, which has proved itself to be such a dismal
failure. Moreover, this view is Modernism out and out. It is not evan-
gelical and historical Christianity. An errant Bible leaves the human
family in the mists of uncertainty. If the Bible is to be the rule of
faith and life, it must speak in no precarious tones."
What Dr. Keyser argues so convincingly in this article is certainly
correct. It is a strange thing, however, that, were Dr. Keyser alive
today, he would have to argue this truth not merely against the Auburn
Affirmationists in the modernistic Presbyterian Church, but also against
prominent theologians in the United Lutheran Church, of which he him-
self was a member. As has been shown in these columns repeatedly,
these liberal Lutheran theologians have adopted the modernistic views
of the Presbyterian Affirmationists, denying the inerrancy of Holy Scrip-
ture. For this reason also what they teach on this point is not evangelical
and historic Christianity but "Modernism out and out." J. T. M.
Lutherauism or Revivalism?-From an article by Pastor John
Milton which appeared under this heading in the Lutheran Companion
(Augustana Synod) of April 21, we quote the following: "Recently the
following question was received by the Question Box department: 'Is
not revivalism beginning more and more to be looked upon as a means
of grace in our Synod? Or how do you explain the fact that Holy Bap-
tism is so seldom referred to?' Answer: 'From the viewpoint of a sound
Scriptural exegesis I do not see how Baptism as a means of regeneration
can be set aside without doing violence to the whole plan and purpose
of God with regard to the making of disciples. The choice of language
in Matt. 28: 19, 20 is decisive. It is one command with two parts to it:
to make disciples by baptizing and by teaching to observe the com-
mandments of Christ .... There has been a tendency, and we see it still,
to consider a man a Christian just because he has been baptized, regard-
less of whether he today with his lips and life confesses Christ as his
Savior. It almost seems that some Lutherans hold to the slogan that
'once saved, always saved,' if applied to the experience in baptism ....
It is inevitable that such an extreme should invite a swing to the other
extreme, to an emphasis on present life and experience which comes
dangerously close to denying all spiritual experience to baptism. There
is such a tendency today within Lutheran circles. To a very considerable
extent it clothes itself in the forms and methods of Reformed revivalism.
It so quickly assumes that a man is not a Christian unless he can point
to some definite moment of 'conversion.' At the very least, it assumes
that a baptized person is more likely to have fallen from the baptismal
covenant than not. . .. Worst of all, in my judgment, is the amazing
535
self-confidence with which some within this group presume to tell at
a glance whether a man is saved or unsaved. . .. Let us remember that
final judgment as to any man's relationship to Christ belongs to Christ
alone. He is the Judge, not we. Some glib lip confessions of Christ may
mean less than those which are more hesitant, just because they are
more sincere. I confess that I don't care much for that brand of piety
which can pray and testify of a definite conversion but which cannot
forgive a sin or show ordinary charity or courtesy towards those who
have come to a conscious faith in Christ by a quieter process than that
of the sudden or violent conversion. . .. Christians need to be quickened
and awakened; yes, they need even to be converted in the sense of the
daily conversion, which consists in a daily renewed penitence and faith.
Let us learn not to speak as if all men must pass through a violent
spiritual crisis before they can be called Christian. . .. We need to be
revived, all of us, continually, some more, some less; but may God help
us to see the difference between such a 'reviving' and the artificial tech-
nique of a 'revivalism' which counts souls as if they were passing through
a human turnstile into the kingdom of God.' "
In the May issue of the Journal of the American Lutheran Con-
ference Dr. K. Ermisch states: "It seems to me that the great issue in our
American Lutheran Conference is just the question of piety vs. pietism."
(P. 22.) In the article "Additional Thoughts on Piety and Pietism"
(p. 24 ff.) Editor Dell discusses revivalism, the editor of the Lutheran
Messenger, of the Augsburg Seminary faculty, having found fault with
his views on revivalism. We quote a few paragraphs. "I want you all
to know exactly why I am not keen on revivalism in the Lutheran
Church, and I want you all to believe that I am nevertheless a Christian.
Note that it is revivalism I oppose and not revival. Revival is 'bringing
back to life,' and it is the work of the Holy Spirit. Revivalism is a
human technique, a system of methods by which men think to make the
success of the Holy Spirit more probable. That original editorial of
mine said: 'Any revivalistic (not revival) tendency in the Lutheran
Church gets short shrift from me.' . .. There are other things I dis-
like even more [than "the revival type of hymn"]. For example, iL"
unrestrained emotionalism. Please do not think of me now as a 'stolid
German' who is incapable of emotion. And do not conclude that I am
a cold intellectual who thinks of religion only as a set of propositions
to be intellectually apprehended. I teach my classes in religious educa-
tion that intellect, emotion, and will are inseparable in the soul. . . .
What is it, then, that is objectionable in the use of the emotional tech-
nique in the Bible camps? For one thing, it takes no account of the fact
that these are young people we are dealing with. And young people,
though they feel deeply, do not wish to make public display of their
feelings. It is unnatural for them to do so, and to force them to do it
against their will only awakens resentment in them. The very ones
whom religion has touched deeply are the ones who will not bring out
those deep inner responses of their souls for you to finger and handle
in public. Those feelings are too sacred, and the souls are too shy ....
For another thing, this emotional technique at the Bible camps takes
no account of the fact that these are fine Lutheran young people we are
dealing with. One of the questions asked me above was: 'Do you not
believe it possible for a person baptized as an infant to fall away from
Christ and become as a lost sheep which must be brought back?' I an-
swered, Yes. But the point is that sometimes it seems to be taken for
granted that all of our Lutheran young people who were baptized as in-
fants have fallen away from Christ and need to be converted. . .. The
normal Lutheran way for baptized children to develop into Christian
maturity is for them to grow up in the Christian life as uneventfully as
a bud expanding into a flower. Testimony is not wanting that this is
a better way than the way of storm and stress. . .. These four non-
Lutherans describe the normal experience of a Lutheran child baptized
in infancy. Ours has been the technique of religious education, not that
of revivalism. Now, when non-Lutherans are recognizing the superiority
of our methods, should we Lutherans abandon our methods and reach
out after those which they are discarding? In our view those children
have been God's children since God received them in Holy Baptism in
infancy. We believe in baptismal regeneration; sects that developed the
revivalistic technique did not. Here is a difference that runs clear down
to basic doctrines. . .. Again I ask, How shall we attain the desired end
of more sanctification of life? By demanding of our young people that
they testify? By working on their emotions with revival hymns? By
calling on them for public prayer? That would be demanding the
harvest before having sown the seed, would it not? That is not a way
of bringing people into contact with the grace of the Spirit; that is
a jmit of the Spirit. The means by which the Spirit wo~ks is the Word.
Neglect of the means of grace is bound to result in a lessening of the
influence of the Spirit in our lives. A part of Jesus' prayer for His
Church is: 'Sanctify them through Thy truth; Thy Word is truth.'''
E.
The Wesley Bicentennial. - On May 24 two hundred years had
elapsed since Wesley had his remarkable experience in a meeting in
Aldersgate Street, London. It is proper that we should record here how
he himself in his Journal wrote about this experience.
"I think it was about five this morning that I opened my Testament
on those words: 'There are given unto us exceeding great and precious
promises, even that ye shall be partakers of the divine nature.' Just
as I went out, I opened it again on those words: 'Thou art not far from
the kingdom of God.'
"In the afternoon I was asked to go to St. Paul's. The anthem was:
'Out of the deep have I called unto Thee, 0 Lord; Lord, hear my voice.
o let Thine ears consider well the voice of my complaint. If Thou,
Lord, wilt be extreme to mark what is done amiss, 0 Lord, who may
abide it? But there is mercy with Thee; therefore Thou shalt be feared.
o Israel, trust in the Lord; for with the Lord there is mercy, and with
Him is plenteous redemption. And He shall redeem Israel from all
his sins.'
"In the evening I went very unwillingly to a society in Aldersgate
Street, where one was reading Luther's preface to the Epistle to the
Romans. About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the
change which God works in the heart through faith in Christ, I felt my
Theological Observer - .Ritd)Hd)'8eitl1efd)id)tlid)ell 537
heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone, for
salvation; and an assurance was, given me that He had taken away my
sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death."
Strange to say, a little more than half a year later (January 4) Wes-
ley made this entry in his Journal: "Though I have given, and do give,
all my goods to feed the poor, I am not a Christian. Though I have
endured hardship, though I have in all things denied myself and taken
up my cross, I am not a Christian. My works are nothing; my suffer-
ings are nothing; I have not the fruits of the Spirit of Christ. Though
I have constantly used all the means of grace for twenty years, I am not
a Christian." An editorial in the Christian Century points out that after
this lamentation, written in January, 1739, the Journal of Wesley con-
tains no similar note any more. In answering the question, how it hap-
pened that Wesley now ceased that morbid self-examination to which he
had been given, the editorial replies: "The answer seems to be simply
that Wesley suddenly lost himself in service for others, in his mission,
and he never had time to fall back into his former introversion. For
in that early spring of 1739 George Whitefield, having raised congrega-
tions of thousands of brutalized miners on the hillsides near Bristol, sent
for Wesley to come down from London to help him. Leaving London
took John Wesley out of the hothouse atmosphere of the Fetter Lane
society into the open air. It proved the beginning of the marvelous
ministry which was to carry him more than two hundred and fifty thou-
sand miles over the roads - or what then passed for roads - of England,
preaching on the average three times a day and bearing administrative
burdens beyond reckoning. No wonder that William T. Stead wrote of
this once tubercular little man as one who gave the impression of hav-
ing a 'marvelous body, with muscles of whipcord and bones of steel,
with lungs of leather and the heart of a lion.'''
A few more of the points which the editorial raises must be men-
tioned. We are told that for a number of years Wesley and his brother
Charles, "remembering their own experience and seeing the evidences
of sudden conversion among the sodden or brutalized masses to whom
they were preaching, insisted that all their converts could enter the
Methodist ranks only after passing through the same sort of sudden,
dramatic crisis. In the case of many of the desperate men ond women
with whom the Wesleys had to deal, there was sound psychological rea-
son to expect an experience of that cataclysmic nature. But as he grew
older, Wesley's appreciation of the varieties of religious experience grew
broader; he confided to one of his ministers his wonder that he and his
brother had not been stoned for their stiff insistence on one mode of
conversion in their younger days."
The editorial further remarks: "As Wesley's sympathies for other
varieties of religious experience broadened, his reticence toward his own
deepened. In later life he could rarely be induced to say anything
about it. While his Methodists were not slow to claim all manner of
spiritual achievements, ranging up to 'entire sanctification,' Wesley never
made any such claims for himself. Once, when his intimate, Samuel
Bradburn, pressed him for a testimony as to his spiritual experience,
Wesley shyly answered that it was most nearly suggested by the lines
538 Theological Observer - .Ritcl)licl)~2ettgefd)id)md)e~
of one of his brother's hymns: '0 Thou, who camest from above.' Be-
yond that, he would not commit himself. Many entries in his Journal,
together with the minutes of his conferences, show with what reserve-
and indeed skepticism - he regarded the extravagant spiritual claims of
many of his followers."
In thinking of Wesley's work, facts such as those mentioned above
should not be overlooked, in order that our judgment of his activities
do not become one-sided. A.
The Meeting" at Utrecht. - From May 9 to 13 the eyes of the re-
ligious world were focused on Utrecht, where eighty men represent-
ing a large number of denominations were gathered "to confer upon
a plan for a world council, to be submitted to the churches, and to
determine upon an interim organization wherewith to carryon the work
of the Commission on Faith and Order and that of the Commission on
Life and Work." As these words indicate, the meeting was intended to
continue the work of the two large interdenominational conferences held
last summer, the one at Oxford, the other at Edinburgh. Besides Prot-
estant bodies the Old Catholics and the Greek Orthodox churches were
represented. From the United States there had come a delegation repre-
senti...'1.g Episcopalians, Baptists, Congregationalists, Disciples, Lutherans,
Methodists, Presbyterians, Friends (Quakers), the Polish National Cath-
olics, and Negro churches. The large "alliances" had sent delegates-
the Baptist World Alliance, the Lutheran World Convention, the Prot-
estant World Alliance, the World Student Christian Federation, the Y. M.
C. A., the Y. W. C. A., the World Sunday-school Association, the Ecumen-
ical Youth Commission, and the European Central Bureau for Church
Aid. What an imposing list of orgcmizations! It seems that three lan-
gUe:: =8 were used, English, German, and French. Spe2ches, after a sub-
ject had been introduced, were limited to live minutes. The Archbishop
of York, Dr. Temple, presided. "There was by re801uticn no balloting, no
counting of support and opposition, no lobbying, no attempt to coerce or
control- only free discussion, which led finally to practical unanimity."
The request of Unitarians and of the Vi! arId Alliance the.t the meeting
should not declare belief in "our Lord Jesus Christ as God and SaviOlo"
was rejected, we are glad to say. Thi.s statement points to what is
called "the one great and primary and central and most significant de-
cision" ino.smuch as it represents the adoption of a doctrinal base for
the plan for a world council to be submitted to the churches. This
doctrinal base is included in the brief statement that vvhat is contem-
plated is "a fellowship of churches which accept our Lord Jesus Christ
as God and Savior." The writeT whom we are quoting, the Protestant
Episcopal Bishop of Chicago, Dr. Stewart, says: "We know that only upon
a solid foundation of a common faith can we realize unity. There is not
a Church on ';he continent that is one bit interested in a federation of
churches for social service. They all agree that such a plan is super-
ficial. There must be rooted faith in God Incarnate." One wonders
whether the bishop's favorable judgment on the attitude of the Con-
tinental churches is not an exaggeration.
The planned world assembly is not to have any authority over the
various constituent churches. Besides, provision has been made for
Theological Observer - .Ritdjndj~8eit\lefdjidjt!idjes 539
letting at least one fourth of the assembly members be laymen (or lay
women). The work of the World Conference on Life and Work and of
that on Faith and Order is to be continued. A fairly large committee
will be established for this purpose. Weare told that the question of
intercommunion was not discussed. However, joint services were held,
in which the spokesmen were taken from the various denominations.
It is clear that we are here dealing with a grossly unionistic venture.
How the American Lutherans that participated can continue being con-
nected with it, unless they have protested and continue to protest against
the many features of doctrinal indifference which characterize it, we
simply cannot understand. A.
Unicn of Methodists Assmed. - When the Southern Methodists in
May met in Birmingham, Ala., the decisive vote on the union of the
three Methodist bodies that have been negotiating with each other to
amalgamate was taken. It was overwhelmingly in favor of the plan
of union, 434 of the delegates voting affirmatively and only 26 negatively.
The three bodies in question are the Methodist Episcopal Church
(Northern Methodists), the Methodist Protestant Church, and the
Methodist Episcopal Church South. The first two of these bodies had
previously voted in favor of the plan of union. Among the arguments
that were offered against union the race question was given a promi-
nent place. One is surprised to see that in the reports on the debate,
which lasted a whole day, the ultramodernistic character of much of
the teaching in vogue among Northern Methodists was not stressed.
The South is known to be conservative, and we suppose that Southern
Methodists share in this conservatism; but if they used this laudable
tendency to remain true to the old message as a weapon against the
advocacy of union with Northern Methodists, the reports we have seen
fail to make mention of it. The new church-body formed by this
merger will number almost eight million members living here in America.
If size is to be aimed at in church-work, then we are here viewing
a commendable achievement. But we may well say that just as little
as the kingdom of God is meat and drink, Rom. 14: 17, so little is it depen-
dent on the outwaxd size of church-bodies and their seculax wealth
and influence. A.
What is Meant by "the Son of God"? - The Stmday-school Times
(JlJIarch 26, 1938) under this heading quotes for the orthodox interpre-
tation of this expxession against that of Unitarian Liberalism, the un-
biased testimony of the late Don Marquis. In introducing this clever
and often profound writer, it declares: "Toward the end of December
[1937J, three days before the new year began, a bxilliant journalist,
poet, and playwright, Don Marquis, died. Though not apparently a pro-
fessing Christian, he published a statement some years ago that is
a remarkably significant answer to the question that heads this edi-
torial. It is the answer of an open-minded literary man of the world.
It was part of an author's note at the end of a play Don Marquis had
·written, The Dark Hours, which is a dramatic setting forth of the last
twenty-foul' hours in the earthly life of Christ, culminating in His death
on the cross. The extended newspaper accounts of the death of Don
Marquis mention his famous newspaper columns in the New York Sun
540 Theological Observer - .!titd)1idd:leit\lefd)id)m~~
and the New York Herald Tribune, his poems and another book, but
made no mention of the The Dark Hours, which a literary critic has
called 'one of the few great dramas ever written in the United States.'
Another critic said: 'He has published a drama of poignant beauty
and memorable reality on the betrayal, trial, and crucifixion of Jesus.
Whether any other poet in America could have approached his achieve-
ment on this theme I do not know. No one has.'''
What Don Marquis discovered when he read through the four
gospels, and this contrary to his expectations (as he expressly tells us),
he strikingly summed up in the following antimodernistic witness con-
cerning the "Son of God" of the four gospels: "I believe there is a con-
temporary school of thought which holds that, when Jesus spoke of His
Father, He meant that God is the Father of all of us - the Father of
Jesus and of you and of me and of everybody else in much the same way.
And I rather inclined myself to the opinion that such was the meaning of
Jesus. But the careful and repeated examination of the Bible necessary
for this play has convinced me that it was not His meaning. I cannot
escape the conviction that He intended to convey that He was the Son
of God in a sense special and unique, that He differed from other men
who might call God their Father not merely in the degree of His spir-
ituality but also in the character of His relationship to His Father. You
mayor may not believe this; I mayor may not believe it - but I cannot
evade the belief that Jesus Himself believed it. He seems to me to
have been as explicit as possible in this claim. Either the four gospels
have not reported Him correctly, or He meant just that. At least I can
make nothing else out of it, and I began an examination of the Bible
with a contrary view. It was for this assertion, that He was the Son of
God, that the Sanhedrin condemned Him, for the Sanhedrin considered
it blasphemy. If He had meant anything else or anything less, He would
have answered otherwise when the question was discharged at Him
pointblank by Caiaphas and His life or death hung upon the answer.
He died for that belief because it was His belief. To think of Him
as dying for some belief that He did not really hold, seems to me to
be merely idiocy. You or I may hold what opinion we will, but I do
not see how, if we accept His reported utterances as evidence, we can
have any doubt as to the opinion of .Jesus Himself. My intention is
nothing exegetical, but only to present my view. And I make this note
merely because I think His claim to be the Son of God in a special
sense is the central knot of the drama of His closing hours on earth.
When Caiaphas, the high priest, heard this claim from Jesus' own lips,
he rose and rent his garments, crying, 'Blasphemy!' and the Sanhedrin
condemned Jesus to death."
This certainly is a most weighty witness to the fact that the Christ
of the Bible is the divine Christ, God's Son in a unique sense, as the
Christian Church has ever confessed Him. J. T. M.
Conditions at American Theological Seminaries. - The following
letter appearing in the Presbyterian of April 14 should be pondered:
"In your issue of February, 14 I was interested in the article 'Do
We Need Trained Ministers?' by the Rev. Dr. H. S. Brown of Princeton.
In this article he calls attention to the falling off in recent years in gifts
Theological Observer - .Ritd)lid)~.8eit\lefd)id)md)e§ 541
to our theological seminaries. These gifts being so small in comparison
with those to other educational enterprises, the question naturally arises,
What are the reasons? Why are the givers in our churches so reluctant
to support so worthy a cause? It is an open secret that many who
would be disposed to remember these schools of the prophets are held
back in doing so because of the perversion of trust funds committed to
their keeping by our fathers in years of the past. I do not have in
mind any of the seminaries mentioned by Dr. Brown in his article but
many such schools in our and other denominations. I have just read
again the chapter on the 'Looting of Andover,' by Ernest Gordon in his
Leaven of the Sadducees. That once great citadel of orthodoxy, founded
and endowed at a great sacrifice to offset Unitarianism and Universalism
and to promote evangelical Christianity and which safeguarded its creed
by every possible device to hold its teachers to their covenant vows,-
nevertheless we find its directors. who were the custodians of her trust
funds as also the guardian of the doctrines taught by her professors,
shamefully violating their solemn oaths and handing over her endow-
ments and property to the keeping care of Unitarian Harvard. Read
also the chapter in this book of Gordon's on 'The Apostate Seminaries.'
What a blight it reveals on American Christianity! Professors holding
down chairs endowed at a great sacrifice by godly people in past years
to teach evangelical doctrines, but teaching that which would be accept-
able in any Unitarian school in the land. These revelations are cer-
tainly an eye-opener. Look at Union Theological Seminary, once so
famous in the days of Shedd, Schaff, Robinson, Smith, and Adams but
now sending forth young men who are acceptable in any heterodox
church in the land.
"The writer is a graduate of what was once one of the soundest
Calvinistic seminaries of the Congregational body - a school as true to
evangelical doctrine as Princeton ever was, a school founded and en-
dowed to teach the tenets of the Christian faith; but if it keeps on
degenerating in the next ten years as it has in the past twenty-five,
an agnostic wanting a position on its faculty to teach agnosticism could
have it. These remarks are not aimed at the seminaries listed by
Dr. Brown, for, as far as I know, they are teaching what our General
Assembly would have them teach and, so far as I know, are worthy of
the confidence and support of our churches. Yet, nevertheless, the great
body of intelligent givers are well aware of the unsavory history of the
dishonest use of funds entrusted to the care of those who have the
management of the funds given to perpetuate the faith of the Church.
Such a history is unfortunate for the seminaries that are worthy of
support; nevertheless givers are slow to open their pocketbooks because
of the suspicion that history may repeat itself. I put this forth as one
of the reasons. My years in the ministry in dealing with people con-
firm it." A.
The Same Old Intolerance. - According to the Christian Century
Cardinal Villeneuve of Montreal delivered a speech in which he laid
down the following points:
1. The granting of freedom to various religions and even to areligious
542
sects is perverse Liberalism, the effort of eighteenth-century rationalism.
States should not be neutral in regard to God.
2. True freedom is freedom to believe and practise the truth. The
Homan Catholic Church has the truth.
3. All other churches are false and their teachings are false, except
in so far as they coincide with Roman Catholic teaching. They are to
be tolerated only in so far as they are willing to cooperate for the
common good in conformity with natural morality and Christian
revelation.
4. It is a false conception of liberty and of the role of the State to
put the divine Law and the authority of the Church on a common footing
with all other systems of doctrine and all other religious denominations.
"As if society could in principle and of deliberate purpose consent to
allow some to serve the Lord and others to deny Him their service, or at
least to serve Him badly."
5. Human rights are not absolute. "It is never permitted to argue,
to defend, to grant, freedom of thought, writing, or teaching and the
indifferentiated freedom of religions as so many rights which nature
has given to man." These liberties may be tolerated only if "a chaste
temperament prevents them from degenerating into license and dis-
order."
6. Democracy, considered as the rule of the majority in a State,
is necessarily rejected in favor of rule by those who have "the truth."
"I do not want any kind of democracy; I want an aristocratic democ-
racy." "The most libertarian democracies, arrived more or less at the
term of their dissolution, can be saved only if the most penetrating
authority . . . recovers possession of them and preserves them. It is
thus they have risen in Italy and elsewhere."
Rome cannot see that opposition to error must not include an attempt
to employ the powers of the government in such opposition. Its con-
ception is that the kingdom of Christ is of this world. The above sum-
mary shows that Cardinal Villeneuve stands on the platform of Pius IX
and Leo XIII. A.
'b.~ 'Cor 1 .:~ 3 'l' Cdg~. - Dr. H. L. 'Willett (prafc3sar
emeritus, University of Chicago) is a thoroughgoing higher critic. He
is recognized as a leader in the realm of higher criticism. The Christian
CentuTY, Jan. 26, 1938, states that "Lyman Abbott once declared that no
man in America has done so much as Professor Willett to open the new
Bible of the historical criticism to the popular understanding." 'Well,
the Question Box of the Christian Cent1LTY of March 2, 1938, conta.ined
this question: "What is the 'Q' or Matthean 'Q' on which the gospels are
said to be founded?" and this answer by Dr. Willett: "In the textual
criticism of the gospels one of the documents which scholars have as-
sumed as a source used by the first and the third gospel along with the
gospel of Mark was a writing, perhaps in Aramaic, dealing with the
teaching of Jesus, and possibly from the hand of Matthew himself. It
has been given various names by different authorities, such as the 'Logia'
or 'sayings,' or the 'QueUe,' or 'source,' often referred to as 'Q.''' Please
underscore the words "have assumed," "perhaps," and "possibly" and
read Professor Willett's statement once more. Question: Did Matthew
Theological Observer - Rir~li~~Seitgef~i~tli~e~ 643
write "Q"? Answer by the higher critic: We do not know. Question:
Did he write it in Aramaic? Answer: We do not know. Question: Was
this "Q" one of the sources of the first and third gospels? Answer: We
do not know. Question: Did this mythical writing affect the writings
of the evangelists? Answer: It certainly did; that is one of the assured
results of higher criticism.
The higher critics certainly know on what flimsy foundations their
theories rest. If they do not know it, their leader is here telling them.
And still they keep on declaiming on the "established results of higher
criticism" and protesting that they cannot conscientiously accept the
doctrine of verbal inspiration. The Report of the Commission on Chris-
tian Doctrine (Church of England) asks us to accept the findings of
higher criticism with a firm faith, and on the basis of this Report a writer
in the Living Church proclaims that the days "when higher criticism was
undreamed of" are happily past and "scholars engaged in scientific Bible
research read in its [the Report's] recognition of the legitimacy of their
work and its insistence that the freedom for carrying out their work be
not denied to them the Magna Carta of their liberties" (see CONe. THEOL.
MTHLY., May, 1938, p.384). Dr.E.H.Delk, a leader of the liberal wing of
the U. L. C., tells us that he can no longer believe in the verbal inspira-
tion of the Bible because of the assured results of higher criticism and
is glad that "higher criticism has set theology free from that tyrannous
literalism and false idea of inspiration which," etc. (Luthemn Quarterly,
Oct., 1912, p. 568. Lehre u. We/we, 1913, p. 154.) Dr. Willett himself
states: "If it has been proved in the process of critical inquiry that ...
Moses is only a common denmninator for the legislation of Israel rather
than the lawgiver which later Hebrew tradition made him to be ... ;
that the four gospels are anonymous ... ; that the relation of the Apostle
Paul to the Pastoral Epistles is improbable ... ; if, let it be repeated, it
has become evident that these are among the conclusions to which pains-
taking and accurate scholarship has been led, the result is not the dis-
crediting of these portions of the Bible but rather a closer approach to
their true origin and purpose." (The Bible thTOUgh the Centuries,
p. 2G!J L) - The New Testament Commentm·y, Alleman, uses similar lan-
gunge.
'51 e are wondering how much of this "accurate" scholarship is made
up of cissumeds and perhapses and possiblys. As for us, we are not going
to exchange our verbally inspired Bible for the "new Bible" advertised
by Willett and Delk and Alleman and the RepoTt of the Doctrinal Com-
mission. We do not want a Bible built upon assumed and perhaps and
possibly. E.
r"'i(()dn·:'.isrn - Sp2aking of church services during
Holy Week, the Loadon correspondent of the Living Church, after de-
scribing some of the services using the old liturgy, says: "Contrasted
with these ancient and beautiful rites is the conduct of services in the
Birmingham parish of HarbOl'ne, in which the Modernist Bishop Barnes
resides. The modernist vicar Canon Richardson has rewritten the Gloria,
has invented two creeds more to his satisfaction than the Nicene and
the Apostles', and has made a variety of interpolations in, and abstrac-
tions from, the Communion service. His Communion service was cele-
544 Theological Observer - .Rhd)Hd)~3titgefc!)idjtlid)e~
brated in his church on Maundy Thursday evening, the chalice being
administered by a Methodist minister and the sermon preached by a Sal-
vation Army lass - a member of a body ·which condemns Holy Com-
munion and all other sacraments. The Church Times insists that this is
a flagrant act of fantastic lawlessness, which calls for interference on
the part of the archbishop of the province." Yes, indeed. The bishop of
the province, Dr. Barnes, will, of course, not interfere, because he is an
arch-Modernist himself. A.
A Beautiful Tribute to Missionaries in China. - George E. Sokolsky,
the celebrated author and newspaper man, in an article published re-
cently in the New York Herald Tribune, paid splendid tribute to the
missionaries in China who are continuing sturdily to do their work in
spite of all difficulties and danger. He writes:
"The most significant job done by Americans in China is neither the
buying nor the selling of goods. It is so great a work that it is alto-
gether misunderstood by small minds and even smaller hearts. That is
the tremendously important and valuable services of the American mis-
sionary.
"These men and women have gone to town and village, bringing
with them not only the many varieties of Christianity but a new cul-
tural pattern-in my opinion, a nobler cultural pattern than the Chinese
retained amid the disintegration of China's indigenous social and intel-
lectual establishments during the last century ....
"These missionaries brought medicine and hospital and nursing and
child welfare to China. They brought a new conception of social rela-
tionships,-not man for his family but man for society,-a broadening
of viewpoint.
"They planted the seeds of a social revolution which, if it did not
quickly make China strong, at any rate produced in China a forward-
looking, progressive, non-opium-smoking, monogamous leadership ....
"It is impossible to overemphasize the great value to China of the
American missionary, of the American school and hospital situated in
that country. And it is something to note in these days of collectivist
materialism that there ha::; been no return to the United States for this
service. It has cost us more, over a century, than we ever earned out
of our trade with China. It was the contribution of a well-off people
to those who needed our help and assistance.
"And it is to be noted here that in a measure we did as well by
Japan. It is true that the Japanese, sooner than the Chinese, were ready
to take over many schools and hospitals which American good will had
established in their country. But for years our missionaries labored
there as in China - not forcing anything down unwilling throats but
offering help and service to those who were willing and eager to receive.
"I have known the American missionary in China well. He has been
my friend. I have lived at his house. He has dined at my table. I know
of no human beings who are more self-sacrificing, more loyal to the
people among whom they live, more generous, and less materially re-
warded for an arduous life than most American missionaries. No matter
what happens to China, most of them will remain at their posts, valiantly
laboring for the simple people who love them." - N. L. C. Bulletin
Theological Observer - Rtrd)lid).,seitgefd)id)tHd)es 545
A Surprise. - We have all become accustomed to seeing Modernists
endeavoring to bury all polemics in the work of the Church and urging
that there should be no more doctrinal controversies. Imagine, then,
the surprise we experienced when a recent article of the Christian
Century, written by its editor, Dr. Charles Clayton Morrison, in New
York, not only bore the caption "The Return of Controversy" but stated
very definitely that doctrinal controversy is unavoidable. He says there
are three strong convictions which are held widely by the leaders of
the Church: that Christianity is true; "that its responsibility for civiliza-
tion is more clear and vastly greater than the churches ever before
realized"; and that "the inherent nature of the Church as the body of
Christ, together with the faithful exercise of its function in the world,
requires that its sectarian divisions give place to a new organic expres-
sion of the Christian community in which the spiritual treasures and
powers of each part shall become the treasure and powers of the whole
body." Explaining his position, Dr. Morrison continues: "It is because
these three affirmative convictions are taking form in the mind of the
Church that the old-fashioned subjects of Christian controversy are
coming to life again. These subjects constitute the obstacles which
must be removed if these convictions are to be translated into action
and living organization. Questions of Baptism, the Eucharist, ordina-
tion of ministers, liturgy, polity, as well as questions of creed, these are
all bound to emerge when the churches begin to talk to one another
in terms of their common faith. Such subjects are the given elements
of the problem of a united Christianity. One may take a top-lofty atti-
tude toward them. One may be highly impatient with any discussion
of them - but they are there! They cannot be solved by ignoring them."
That certainly is refreshing. We do not agree with Dr. Morrison
when he, continuing, says that these matters are not of vital importance
and that, if the Church were united, it would be unjustified to start
divisions on account of a difference of opinion on the points enumerated.
But one must give him credit for recognizing that thc widely advocated
policy of forgetting the doctrinal differences now dividing the churches
will not solve the difficulties Christianity is facing. It is true that
Dr. Morrison insists controversy must take on a different character from
that which it had years ago. We quote: "The old controversies differed
from the new in that they proceeded from a fundamentally different
motive. All our old-fashioned controversies over polity, Baptism, the
Lord's Supper, ordination, and doctrine were motivated by the need of
providing an apologetic for the existence of this denomination or that.
This is the case no longer. No one cares now about the apologetic
which any denomination can give for its separate existence. Its Chris-
tian right to a separate sectarian existence is under challenge, and that
not alone by its neighbors but by itself! A wholly new kind of interest
in these denominational differences has emerged. We are interested in
them because they stand in the way of the Church's unity and catholicity.
The new controversy arises in this perspective. The aim of the old
controversy was apologetic; the aim of the new is irenic. In the old
controversy the rig:lt of schism ~as taken for granted; in \he new the
fact of schism is deplored in humility and penitence: The old contro-
35
546 Theological Observer - .Ritd)1id)~8eitgefd)id)tIid)ell
versy was an attempt to justify differences and divisions; the new is an
attempt to heal and transcend them. To this fundamental distinction
between the old and the new controversy we must add another. The
subjects are indeed the same, but new criteria have emerged, by which
conclusions are to be judged. Our thinkers and leaders return to these
old-fashioned differences emancipated from the legalism and literalism
which characterized the old-time type. . .. No issue between the
churches can now be settled by the quotation of a Biblical text, as our
fathers used to assume. No issue will be settled by reference to an
authoritarian standard, whether doctrinal or ecclesiastical," etc.
We shall not take the time to differentiate between what is true
and false in this passage. It must suffice that we say that in our opinion
Dr. Morrison does cur ancestors a cruel wrong when he thinks that
in their controversies they were actuated exclusively by the motives
which he assigns to them and that they did not have the desire to bring
about peace and harmony in all Christendom, and that his position as to
the authority of one Bible-text certainly is not in keeping with the
recognition of the Bible as our supreme authority in matters of faith
and life. But we are happy to see that there is at least one Modernist
who is wise enough to perceive that a united Church cannot be built
on a foundation of disunited creeds. A.
Brief Items. - A writer in Vienna declares that Roman Catholicism in
Austria capitulated to Hitler. Speaking about the audience which Car-
dinal Innitzer sought with the Fuehrer, he writes this striking sentence,
"A cardinal had gone to Canossa." Developments will have to show to
what extent this view is justified.
It seems that in Georgia a new sect calling itself the "Kingdom of
Jehovah" has made its appearance. It was given publicity when in
Griffin, Ga., one of its members was arrested for distributing tracts and
a magazine issued by the sect. The Supreme Court of Georgia, after
the Court of Appeals had upheld the Griffin authorities in their action,
reversed this decision, declaring that in the interest of religious freedom
the city ordinance of Griffin, Ga., which was responsible for the arrest
mentioned, would have to be held invalid. One wonders whether this is
the same sect as "Jehovah's Witnesses" (Russellites)?
From 1920 to 1930 120,000 suicides were reported in the United States.
It has been correctly stated that here we are facing one of our country's
most alarming problems. Indications are that the number of suicides
from 1930-1940 will be vastly larger than that of the preceding decade.
The Episcopalians here and abroad are having their troubles, and
deservedly, because the denomination does not resist the inroads of
Modernism as it should. In England the so-called Catholic Advisory
Council, which is backed by two thousand Anglo-Catholic ministers and
fifty thousand Anglo-Catholic laymen, makes an attack on the State-
ment of Doctrine, which was issued by a special committee of the Church
of England some time ago. What is criticized is the doctrinal laxity of
the report of the commission. Besides, there are other things in the
t.'aching 2nd practise of the Church of England to which exception is
taken. lor instance, the communing of people who are not members of
Theological Observer - .Ritd)Hd)~.8eitgefd)id)tlid)e~ 547
the Church of England, the recognition of the office of the ministry in
Protestant denominations other than the Episcopalian (an error on the
part of the critics), the remarriage of divorced persons, the assistance
given by bishops to movements for union in India and elsewhere. In our
own country 1,406 clergymen of the Protestant Episcopal Church have
signed a statement which is directed especially against the practise of
letting people commune who are not members of the Protestant Episcopal
Church. These people very correctly state that the tendency they criti-
cize will not accelerate union but rather hinder it.
Recently Karl Barth visited in London. Naturally, he was asked
about the situation in Germany. When the inquiry was placed before
him whether the Gospel can be preached in that country without inter-
ference, he is said to have replied: "Yes, if the message consists of 'in-
nocuous sentiments.''' He is quoted as saying that a "spiritual Gospel"
is not opposed, but it must not affect the lives of people here on earth.
To what extent he is reporting actual facts will have to be determined
by those who have first-hand knowledge of the situation. Very alarm-
ing is a certain tendency of the German government, if he is quoted
correctly and states facts. According to his view, the German Govern-
ment has the intention of cutting the youth off from the Church, so
that the latter will become an association of old men and old women.
It will mean that the Church will be immeasurably weakened. Barth
charges that men are made professors of theology who are without ex-
perience and other necessary qualifications and whose lectures as a result
are poorly attended.
How conditions affecting the churches may change is illustrated by
what recently happened to a Presbyterian church in Manhattan and
another one in the Bronx, New York. The influx of Negroes and Puerto
Ricans into their territory was so strong that they closed their establish-
ments and their members joined white congregations in a different neigh-
borhood. One of the two churches which are now empty may become
a Negro church.
We often forget that people are influenced far more by considera-
tions of the heart than of the head. The Christian Advocate (South)
makes a statement which deserves being pondered. It reads: "The
stately and elaborate arguments of Butler's Analogy made no impress
on the masses. The convincing answer to unbelief and wickedness of
the day was made by the revival under Wesley and Whitefield, when
the lives of men and women were transformed by the Holy Spirit, when
a new hope and strength came to despairing lives and blasphemers be-
came saints and drunkards became heralds of the saving power of Christ.
The Church of today cannot but meet the cynics and scoffers by the
same irrefutable logic of lives transformed by the power of the Gospel,
the logic of unearthly living amid the sense-bound materialism of a self-
indulgent generation." While not Christian lives, but the power of the
Gospel melts sinful hearts, the importance of the testimony rendered by
a Christ-centered life needs continual emphasis.
About the first of the year Bishop Arthur J. Moore of the Methodist
Episcopal Church, South, cabled that the disaster to Chinese churches
548 Theological Observer - .ltitd)lic9<.8eitgefc9ic9tlicgel!.
could not be overestimated. Nevertheless, missionaries are showing mag-
nificent faith, courage, and persistence. The Christian Advocate (Nash-
ville) quotes the following from a letter written in Shanghai by Dr. J. C.
Thoroughman, superintendent of the Soochow Hospital: "We on the field
think there is only one course to pursue. That is, to get back and re-
build and to face the future in a spirit of Christian service that will
attempt to meet the need of the people of China in this darkest hour
of their modern history. We believe this will be the wish of the Church
in America when it learns the full extent of the catastrophe that has
overtaken us." - The Presbyterian.
Four synods of the U. L. C. belonging to the six U. L. C. synods in the
State of Pennsylvania have made preparations to merge. They are the
following: The West Pennsylvania, the Susquehanna, the East Pennsyl-
vania, and the Allegheny synods. The name proposed is: The Central
Pennsylvania Synod. Committee reports are ready which, if adopted,
will bring about this union.
A minister living in Czechoslovakia states, as the AUg. E.-L. Kz. re-
ports, that his congregation is woefully in need of Bibles, that in every
group of ten families, on an average, merely one owns the Holy Scrip-
tures. The reason, he says, is that many of his people have become
Lutherans through conversion from Roman Catholicism; that while they
were Roman Catholics, they did not own a Bible; and that now, finan-
cial difficulties being universal, there is very little money for the pur-
chase of Bibles.
One of our exchanges reports that Dr. Purd E. Dietz of Yale Uni-
versity will be inaugurated as professor of pastoral theology at Eden
Theological Seminary.
The editor of the Living Church complains: "Another church-school,
St. Albans, Sycamore, Ill., has gone under. The reason is the usual one-
lack of support by church people. The neglect of church-schools and
colleges is one of the most amazing phenomena of the Episcopal Church."
Unfortunately, Episcopalians are not the only ones that have reason to
voice such a lament.
Crime among America's youth and adolescents continues to grow.
While the attempts to reform the movies were not entirely in vain and
standards have been raised, the radio is becoming a very serious menace.
The Lutheran Companion writes: "In the opinion of many, the radio
has taken up the business of educating children in crime where the
cinema left off. Thrilling detective stories, reeking with every human
instinct of cruelty and cunning, have captivated the imaginations of mil-
lions of children and hold them spell-bound from day to day. Sex prob-
lems, love triangles, domestic unfaithfulness - these and many other
sordid themes are being presented to the youthful mind, and in many
instances this type of program is arousing increasing interest among the
children, since it appeals to their natural curiosity."
A layman in the Church of England is sensible enough to see that,
before the Anglican Church endeavors to unite with the Non-conformist
churches in England, it ought to achieve a higher degree of unity within
its own ranks. The layman is Lord Hugh Cecil. He believes that there
Theological Observer - Rttd)ltd),,Beitgefd)id)tHd)es 549
is a growing sympathy and understanding between Evangelicals and
Anglo-Catholics, that is, the Low Church party and the High Church
party. As to the Broad Church party, the Modernists, he seems to think
that it will be impossible to achieve an understanding with them. More
power to men of this type, we say.
In France Reformed groups have united. These bodies are the Evan-
gelical Reformed Church, numbering about 400 congregations; the Re-
formed Church (a liberal body), with about 160 congregations; the Free
Evangelical Church, with a few more than 50 congregations; and the
Methodists, with 26 churches. These four bodies now form the Protestant
Church of France. Baptists and Lutherans are not included in this union.
In an article in the Christian Century, headed "Japan Invades China
with Drugs," the writer has this disquieting paragraph: "When the new
Peace Preservation Council was set up in the largest Japanese-occupied
territory last August, it was announced that the Nanking Law no longer
applied. The drug habit reassumed its tyranny. Antinarcotic hospital
work was stopped. In the old Japanese concession is a street in which
about fifty per cent. of the houses are drug joints. They are not allowed
to sell to the Japanese; but foreigners and Chinese, men and women,
are offered the stuff openly as they walk through the streets." In justice
one ought to add the following sentences of the writer: "No trade was
apparent, however, when I visited the street (February 3); the shops
had been temporarily closed the previous day. It was reported that
coolies employed by the Japanese were paid part of their wages in drugs;
but I was not in a position to get evidence of this."
To do their work more effectively, the press committees of eighteen
Catholic societies have formed "a united Catholic front in the press and
magazine field." The leaders in this movement are Jesuits voicing their
views in their well-known journal America. If this new agency should
succeed in influencing, for instance, every one, or at least the great
majority, of the 1,733,954 Roman Catholics who are said to live in New
York City, what power it could wield and what a menace it might be-
come to free speech in opposing all papers and journals which fearlessly
criticize Roman Catholicism and its pretensions! A.
"Eccentric Services in the Church of England." - Using this caption,
the Manchester Guardian of Jan. 28, 1938, has some illuminating remarks
on conditions in the Anglican Church. The writer says: "A belief that
the present disorders in the Church of England were exaggerated was
expressed by the Bishop of Winchester, Dr. Cyril Garbett, last week,
when the Upper House of Convocation of Canterbury resumed discus-
sion of the Joint Committee's Report on Relations between Church and
State. He said that there were variations in the services in different
parishes, but they were quite minor and there was nothing like general
disorder. 'There are services which are eccentric and even fantastic in
different churches,' Dr. Garbett went on. It ought to be made perfectly
plain that the bishop is the authority, and the proposed declaration
will, I think, make it plain that, when the bishop gives directions, he is
550 Theological Observer - .Rircf)licf):8eit\Jefcf)icf)tlicf)es
speaking in the name of the Church and that he has authority over
additional services as well as over the liturgical services. I think the
way we could strengthen order in our Church is from within. We shall
not get it from legislation or coercive action in the courts.
"The Bishop of Coventry, Dr. Haigh, supporting the proposed synod-
ical declaration, said: Any regulation designed to reduce disorder in
the sphere of public worship would command very great respect from
many priests who at present either believed that the Church of England
had no mind in regard to the questions at issue or thought they knew
much better than the Church itself.
"The Bishop of Birmingham, Dr. Barnes, said he did not approve
of the report. 'I speak with reluctance,' he added, 'but I am weary of
the endless sacramental controversies, of which the present proposals
are but another stage. I am resolved to administer the law as I can
see Parliament would desire it. So I have during these last years re-
fused institution to any man who was not willing both to have no reser-
vation and also to obey the law when I directed it. I think I can say
the result is that Birmingham, which, when I went to it, was the most
disorderly diocese in England bar one, is now quite orderly save for
a few surviving rebels.'
"The Archbishop of Canterbury said there was now less bitterness
and party spirit in the Church of England than he had ever known. The
time had come when, in the interests of rightful worship, the Prayer-
book should be restored to its central position in the Church and any
alterations which might be permitted should be made by the authority
and command of the conscience of the Church. It was impossible to
say that it should be left to Parliament to order proper public worship
in the Church. Further discussion of the report and an amendment by
the Bishop of Norwich were adjourned until the next meeting of Con-
vocation."
That the institution of the episcopacy is not a panacea for all the
ills which afflict the Church is quite evident from this report. A.
S)ie Weftfttdjen auf bem Well nadj mom. ~uterft !Didjtig ift, !Da£l P. D.
&ert in feinem &emeinbeolatt ,,~ur feIigl" in ocaug aUf bie fet;}tc jillert"
firdjenfonferena in D1;forb fdjreilit: "SEler @iraoifdjof bon ~anterourt) bon
ber engfifdjen Si'itdje ~at fein ~ebauern aU£lgefprodjen, bat ber riimifdje
llSapft an ber jilleItfirdjenfonferena in Dt;forb nidjt teifgenommen ~at. 3u"
gleidj ~at er aoer mit ~eftiebigung ~erborge~oben, bat riimifdHat~onfdje
5t~eologen au ben !Didjtigften IDlitarbeitern an ben @{rbeiten unb mefdjIiiffen
ber jilleTtfirdjenfonferena ge~iirt ~aben unb bat bie ,!DunberbolIen' @inat)fiifen
(Si'unbgeoungen) ber llSaPfte 2eo£l XIII. unb llSiu~' XI. fUr bie aUf ber Si'on:
ferena in D1;forb gefatten ~efdjIiiffe liber bie 2e~re bom ftaatIidjen unb
iOilialen .2eocn fe~r !Dedboll ge!Defen linb. SElann fdjreiot ba~ mlatt be~
riimifdjen llSapftes, ber Osservatore Romano in mom, bat bie fat~ofifdje
$Hrdje nidjt olot lmitarbeiterin an ben Shmbgeoungen unb ~efdjIiiffen ber
D1;forber Si'onferena ge!Defen ift, fonbern i~r eigentridjer Ur~eber [?]. Unb
biefe bon riimifdjem &eift burdjitiinften ~efdjIiiffe bon D1;forb !Derben nun ben
~9riften in SEleutfdjlanb bargeooten ar~ groBe unb ~errIidje Si'unbgebungen
ber allgemeinen ,iimmenifdjen' SHrdje ~rifti, bie angebfidj ber )!Bert ba£l
.\;leU oringen forr. SEla~ ~ratt be~ $apfte~ fagt gana mit medjt: '!lie etlan"
Theological Observer - Rird)lid),,8eitgefd)id)tnd)es 551
geHfdjen m3ertfirdjen, Me fidj veim ~apft Hire m3ei£:~eit vorgen muffen, foII~
ten l.lOdj Helier gleidj tijmifdj~fat~oIifdj roerben unb fidj offen baau !ie~
fennen. ftvrigens ~aven bon ben ca. 25,000