Page 5482 – Christianity Today (2024)

God In Focus

O Come, Let Us Worship, by Robert G. Rayburn (Baker, 1980, 319 pp., $8.95), is reviewed by George W. Long, pastor, Lookout Mountain Presbyterian Church, Lookout Mountain, Tennessee.

Quickly establishing the importance of worship, “‘the Father seeketh such to worship him’ … Nowhere in all the Scriptures do we read of God seeking anything else from the child of God,” and lamenting the lack of attention to it in evangelical churches, Rayburn offers help.

Asserting that “worship of the true and living God … can be acceptably offered only by those who have been redeemed,” Rayburn examines its basis in both the Old and New Testaments, points to the rich (yet neglected) heritage of the church from centuries past, and becomes quite specific in offering suggestions, even citing passages appropriate for a call to worship and naming hymns that would be suitable for morning worship services, weddings, or funerals.

The author develops a philosophy of worship and offers specific help in implementing it. Rayburn’s specifics are not to be taken as “canned” programs, but rather as examples of what a thorough study of the nature and purpose of worship would produce.

At the heart of this book is a discussion of the objective and subjective aspects of worship. The worshiper is indeed to experience a blessing in his relationship with God, but God himself is to be the primary focus in private and corporate worship. His honor is the primary concern.

This work covers possibilities for glorifying God through worship that are exciting, and the author’s challenge to give as much time and thought to preparing for worship as to sermon preparation pricks the conscience.

If the evangelical community to which Rayburn’s book seems to be directed follows his counsel, many of its churches will have the content, variety, and quality of their worship enhanced. They may be able to capture something of the beauty of classical Christian expressions while using them sincerely and thoughtfully enough that they will not become empty repetitions.

Luis Palau, Man Of God

The Luis Palau Story, An Autobiography (Revell, 1980, 176 pp., $8.95), is reviewed by John E. Kyle, missions director, Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, Madison, Wisconsin.

The he author, a native of Argentina, has often been called the “Billy Graham of Latin America.” He has preached the gospel to nearly three million people in 37 countries.

This book reveals how God used many events in the early life of Luis Palau to mold him into the godly vet dynamic evangelist he is today.

Palau shares openly his rebellion as a child, his love for his mother, and, although he died when Luis was 10, the influence of his father upon his life. The account of his conversion in a summer camp at age 12 and the joy of his new-found salvation, which was followed by the loss of that joy in later teen years, is dramatically shared.

Palau’s career as an employee of the Bank of London, a national missionary in Argentina, an Overseas Crusade missionary to Colombia and Mexico, and finally as the president of Overseas Crusades is written in a manner that causes one to wonder at the preparation God gave this man to become an evangelist. Meeting his wife, Pat Scofield, while attending Bible college in the U.S. and their eventual marriage and gift of four sons is shared honestly, revealing his weaknesses as well as his love for Pat.

His struggle with a burden to give God the glory for everything continues. It is Palau’s belief that “if you attempt to steal away any glory from God, He’ll remove His hand, and that will be the end of your ministry.” One would never realize that this dynamic evangelist and godly man struggles with such a burden.

The evangelist Luis Palau will never be fully understood without reading this book from beginning to end. It is an important book since in all probability Luis Palau will continue to be greatly used of God around the world for many years to come.

Evaluating Ministry Today

Ministry in America, edited by David S. Schuller, Merton P. Strommen, and Milo L. Brekke (Harper & Row, 1980, 582 pp., $31.95), is reviewed by Donald K. McKim, assistant professor of theology at the University of Dubuque Theological Seminary, Dubuque, Iowa.

This encyclopedic study will undoubtedly become a standard source for assessing contemporary attitudes toward ministry. Originating in the Readiness for Ministry Project begun by the Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada (ATS), the data here are drawn from students in 200 seminaries and from some 5,000 randomly selected clergy and laity.

Over 12,000 people participated in some aspect of the project, many responding to 444 descriptive statements of what ministry is and should be. Using statistical and sociological tools, Drs. Schuller of ATS and Strommen and Brekke of the Search Institute of Minneapolis analyzed the data. They present the information through 225 figures and tables. Their report surveys 47 denominations, and interpretations by “experts” are presented for 13 denominational “families.”

Basic information forming the foundation for the analyses comes from 64 core clusters. These are concepts used by laity and clergy across denominational lines for assessing the quality of ordained ministry. The clusters are profiled in tables listing the elements of the cluster, how important each element was for delineating the cluster (“load”) and the “mean,” showing on a range how essential to harmful each element was for ministry. The figures accompanying each table show the differences between clergy and laity for each family and also how the denominations differ from each other in assessing the importance of each characteristic. One can note significant differences at a glance. There is much of interest and much to ponder by simply perusing the tables and figures.

For example, in which Protestant churches is there the greatest gap between the laity and clergy in terms of the laity’s higher expectation for an “Affirmation of Conservative Biblical Faith”? Answer: in the United Church of Christ and the Presbyterian-Reformed families.

The study found that “laypeople, as a general rule, place far less importance than do clergy on ministries outside of the congregation.” Sharpest disagreements between the two groups were found in the area of “ministry to community and world.” Also, laity “generally consider it of less importance that a beginning minister seek to be a theologian in life and thought. Their expectations fall well below those of their clergy in every denominational family.”

In terms of the positive and negative characteristics deemed most suitable for ministry, the study speaks clearly. People most highly desire their young ministers to have qualities grouped under the heading “service without regard for acclaim.” This cluster describes a person who is “able to accept his or her personal limitations, and who, believing the gospel, is able to serve without concern for public recognition.” The second highest factor is personal integrity, followed by Christian example, acknowledgment of mistakes, and building church community. The top four expectations thus have to do with one’s personal faith commitment.

The personal qualities that all groups agreed were the most detrimental to ministry were alienating activity, professional immaturity, and self-protecting ministry.

Seminaries, denominations, and local churches can profit highly from this book. Expectations may now be juxtaposed with theological understandings. The resulting harmonies or disharmonies will point us toward strengths and weaknesses in our preparations for ministry.

Shopfloor Faith

The Christian in Industrial Society, by Sir Fred Catherwood (IVP, 1980, 188 pp., £4.50) is reviewed by Harry Antonides, director of research and education, Christian Labour Association of Canada, Toronto, Ontario.

This is an updated and revised edition of a book first published in 1964. Many changes, some traumatic, have occurred in the interval, but the author’s original emphasis on bringing to bear Christian insight on everyday living is as urgent as ever.

Sir Fred Catherwood is a prominent British industrialist who presently serves as member of the European Parliament. He challenges his fellow Christians to apply their faith to their daily work, their professional ethics, their income and wealth, their views of politics, economics, taxation, and the stock market. Having spent many years in British business and industry, the author elaborates on the responsibility of big business and unions, shopfloor power, Christian employers’ attitudes toward their employees, and the functioning of large organizations. He rightly insists that Christians should be known for their integrity in dealings with colleagues, employees, and even competitors.

The author is at his best when elaborating on practical ways of personal interaction and on the Christian view of work and possessions. He proceeds from the biblical instruction that man is called to “have dominion” over the earth as an image bearer of God called to love and serve his neighbor. An appendix is devoted to the well-known Weber-Tawney thesis.

On the one hand, there is a healthy emphasis in this book on integrating faith and action. On the other hand, the author’s description of existing structures and practices is not sufficiently critical. For example, the strike weapon and the closed shop are justified too easily without sufficient attention to the need and possibilities for responsible alternatives.

Furthermore, it seems to this reviewer that Catherwood concedes too much to the humanists’ claim to autonomy. He writes that economics is about means and not ends, that it is not “concerned with the ethical standards used in deciding priorities for the satisfaction of wants,” and that “economics, as economics, is a science not concerned directly with morals or politics.”

I suspect that the problem lies in the author’s acceptance of an essentially individualistic concept of society. One of the consequences is that insufficient emphasis is placed on the need for Christian communal action outside the confines of the church organization. This relegates Christians to a position where they are forced to respond to given situations and societal structures without their having worked out an integrated, biblical world-and-life view of their own.

There is some sound, practical advice in this book, but Christians should be prepared to go beyond the point where Catherwood leaves off.

BRIEFLY NOTED

Various aspects of the church and its ministry are considered.

Church Ministry. The 1982 (57th) edition of The Minister’s Manual (Harper & Row), edited by Charles L. Wallis, is now available. Those who have used it know its value. The Revell Tarbell’s Teacher’s Guide (77th edition; Revell), edited by Frank S. Mead, is also ready for church school teachers using the International Lesson, KVJ or RSV. Beginning Your Ministry (Abingdon), by C. W. Blister, J.L. Cooper, and J. D. Fite, looks at 12 new pastors’ first five years. It is very helpful.

Five books view general matters of church life/ministry: To Dream Again (Broadman), by Robert D. Dale, shows how to make a church come alive; Congregations Alive (Westminster), by Donald P. Smith, offers practical suggestions on partnership in ministry; A Biblical Basis for Ministry (Westminster), edited by E. E. Shelp and R. Sunderland, offers excellent insight into the theology of ministry; Beyond the Barriers (Broadman), by W. E. Hull, is a study of reconciliation for the contemporary church; and Leading the Family of God (Herald), by Paul M. Miller, uses the family model as a basis for church ministry.

Church Growth.Growing Churches for a New Age (Judson), by Owen D. Owens, is a valuable look at 10 growing churches of various denominations. The Complete Book of Church Growth (Tyndale), by Elmer Towns, John Vaughan, and David Siefert, profiles the 100 largest churches and Sunday schools and adds valuable commentary, analysis, and theory. It is a most helpful book. George W. Peters offers a well thought-out Theology of Church Growth (Zondervan). Multiplying Disciples (Nav Press), by Wayland B. Moore, is for pastors and lay leaders who want a study of the New Testament method for church growth. The Pastor’s Church Growth Handbook (Church Growth Press), edited by Win Arn, is an interesting collection of essays, some general, some specific.

Pastoral Care. An excellent introduction to this subject is Mental Health Skills for Clergy: Evaluation/Intervention/Referral (Judson), by Dana Charry. Pre-Marital Counseling (Seabury), by John L. C. Mitman, is a manual for clergy and counselors. Restoring the Image (Paternoster) by Roger F. Hurding is a simple introduction to Christian caring and counseling. Resolving Church Conflicts (Harper & Row), by C. Douglass Lewis, is a case-study approach for local congregations, offering a guide through that thicket. The Private Life of the Minister’s Wife (Broadman), by Betty J. Coble, though not strictly pastoral care, is a caring book that should help pastor’s wives.

Discipleship/Witnessing. Ronald E. Griswold puts a good book behind an odd title in By Hook and Crook: Evangelism for the 80’s (Advent Christian General Conference, Box 23152, Charlotte N.C.). An exceptionally fine book on witnessing is Tell The Truth (IVP), by Will Metzger. Somewhat self-serving but helpful is Soul Winning (Harrison House), by T. L. Osborn. Pastoral Evangelism (John Knox), by Samuel Southard, is now revised to extend its usefulness. It is a good survey of the subject. Of Go Make Learners (Shaw), by Robert Brow, J. I. Packer said “Some books can be safely ignored, but not this one.” It offers a new model for discipleship in the church. Keith Phillips nicely covers the subject in The Making of a Disciple (Revell), and Walter A. Henrichsen offers helpful advice in How to Discipline Your Children (Victor).

But Christians are still working up a menu.

The advent of the decade of the seventies confronted theologians, and more particularly those regarding themselves as “liberal,” with inevitable shifts in theological focus. The preceding two decades were marked by the most serious attempts at reevaluation of “religious language,” these being the outcome of, among other things, the quest of theology for meaning. This quest was accelerated by the impact of current scientific and technological advances.

Theologians seemed to feel that the demand for precision in scientific expression in general made it necessary to restate traditional theological concepts. Behind this lay the conviction that modern man would reject traditional concepts out of hand as totally outdated.

This led, especially from the midsixties, to a mania among theologians of the trendy type to a new and seemingly inescapable coming to grips with secular culture. By the opening of the seventies, many felt that the basic groundwork of this process had been laid. Technopolitan man was glorified as the harbinger of a new day in which such questions as the normative quality of Christian faith for all of mankind were hopelessly anachronistic. The “secular man” whose thought forms and mores were drawn from urbanized life was proclaimed to be the model for the future.

Along with The Secular City, and broadly supportive of its thesis, came the “prophetic” words of Charles Reich’s The Greening of America with its siren song of the end of an era. Through the development of a new level of consciousness, especially among pot-smoking youth, there was promised an end of bourgeois life forms to which historic Christianity was allegedly bound.

A situation surfaced, however, in which it appeared that secular forms of life and the culture they fostered could not displace the lingering demands of the human spirit for the elements clustered around the broad subject of Transcendence. These centered in the conviction that there is One who stands above our affairs, a conviction supremely repulsive to the “theology of secularity.”

In fairness it needs to be said that one representative of the God Is Dead movement realized this in the early seventies. Paul Williams Van Buren wrote in Christian Century (May 29, 1974) that “Theology’s God can only be … the radically transcendent.” This suggests that the announcement of the end of belief in transcendence by the secular theologians was premature.

In the early seventies, secularism continued to offer challenges to historic Christian faith, but its ability to eliminate opposing forms of thinking seemed to offer decreasing promise. Rather, there came severe challenges to secularism’s claim to a monopoly on the pursuit of truth. It should be noted that some countercultural movements had already in the midsixties challenged the sweeping claims of many forms of the technological consciousness. It did, however, remain for new emergences of the 1970s to bring under severe fire the arrogant claims of the scientific method to see and describe reality. These newer challenges to the secular adulation of “technopolitanism” did not appear as head-on attacks. Indeed, many of those involved in presenting such challenges were probably not aware at the time of the significance of what they were advocating.

In any case, the most surprising factor that emerged on the religious scene in the seventies was the reassertion of “the spiritual,” of forms and institutions as well as ways of thinking that were supposedly dead or at least dying before the impact of secularism. This produced strong shock waves within liberal circles, waves that only recently have been calmed.

One of the most penetrating (and genial) analyses of this resurgence of “the religious” appeared in the April 29, 1981, issue of Christian Century. In “Theology for a Time of Troubles,” Langdon Gilkey notes that this phenomenon has not only occurred within our technological culture, but “as a conscious and relevant reaction to the tensions and dilemmas created by that culture.” It was this, of course, which was a source of embarrassment to the more radical forms of “secular theology” of the sixties.

It is not only the fact of the reappearance of religious concerns in the decade just ended that seems to have “caught theological as well as secular savants by surprise” (loc cit.), but the kinds of religious expression that have appeared. The spectrum is very broad, and in some of its aspects, frightening. Not only has there been vast extension of what Gilkey calls “fundamentalist religion of every variety,” but, as well, of far-out types of cultic and esoteric belief.

Many of these forms are basically congenial to some, at least, of the traditional elements in today’s cultural life, notably of middle America. But more surprising is the fact that elements and movements quite alien to our general culture find a home in the halls of academe. The occult, for example, seems no longer bizarre in university circles, but even seems to find acceptance as religious forms in these circles.

As a result, such questions as the meaning of religious language and the verifiability of religion’s claim, formerly regarded as all-important, seem to many to be trivial and irrelevant. This poses the most serious problem of adjustment for those who regard themselves to be the guardians of mainline and mainstream Christianity.

These questions relate not only to the theological scene, but touch also the entire range of values in the social order. The high visibility of “the religious” seems to modern churchmen to pose real threats to the smooth ordering of public process. Who would have dreamed a decade ago that mainline religious thinkers would feel threatened by “fundamentalistic” groups calling, for example, for the protection of the lives of the unborn?

How should evangelicals view and evaluate the surprising emergence of spiritual movements that challenge—with seeming success—the entire secularistic establishment? It is appropriate, first, to be grateful that the secular confidence has been shown to be a broken reed, and second, that the foundations for the contemporary plans to scrap the Great Commission, articulated with such vehemence at the Bangkok Conference in 1973, have been undermined.

On the positive side, evangelicals can rejoice that the “winds of the Spirit” still blow where he wills. While not all currents seem to be favorable, yet at the center of the assertion of “the religious,” Jesus Christ emerges as the towering figure he really is. Finally, the times offer an urgent challenge to “test the spirits” to discern which qualify as God’s indicators for our day.

HAROLD B. KUHN¹Dr. Kuhn is professor of philosophy of religion, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.

Have I told him lately that I love him?

The words of the song, “Have I Told You Lately That I Love You,” are ringing in my head. Though the song is for sweethearts, the words are haunting me in a different way.

Have I, as a member of your church, told you, as my pastor (lately or ever), that I love you and thank you for all you are and do? A more nagging question is, Have I said anything to help smooth out the rough spots you encounter day in and day out? Have I done anything to give you a boost? Have I ministered to you?

Last Sunday, just before you were to go into the pulpit, our eyes met and I said, “Talk ‘purty.’” How pathetic of me. You were within minutes of probably the most difficult sermon of your ministry and my flippant words could not have told you that I understood, I cared—that I thought it was wonderful that you had brought to fulfillment your prayer to bring together two congregations hostile toward each other over a vicious church split many years before you came to us. You were entering the pulpit to bring a loving message of reconciliation to people who had taken separate ways, some of whom carried bitter hatred. Couldn’t I have said that I appreciate your healing ministry—that I admired your courage?

If I were to say, “I’m sorry,” you would say, “For what?” You overlook our shortcomings and see more good in us than is there. Maybe that’s a part of your deep understanding of grace. You continue to love people when they block the path. You maintain a beautiful spirit in spite of obstacles, disappointments, and discouragement.

A newcomer mentioned to me that in your own church people don’t seem to know you for the great minister you are recognized to be throughout the nation. “The prophet is not without honor save in his own land.” We do take you for granted. You are even criticized sometimes for being away from “our” church. Your ministry fortunately is not bounded by the streets surrounding our building. Have I told you that I am proud you are sought after interdenominationally and that you can bring blessing on college and seminary campuses, in troubled churches, among discouraged pastors? I am glad you share your ministry with as many as your priority commitment to “our” church and your time and energy permit.

Your energy seems unlimited, and that is a concern. How can you keep up this pace? On Sunday, perhaps after a night on a plane, you teach a class of newly-weds. Then you give yourself totally to preaching that is biblically profound, made understandable and usable. More than likely you and your wife will invite to dinner a couple having trouble or some lonely person. You graciously attend the frequent recital, anniversary, or dedication, then it’s back to church for the evening Bible teaching and afterward for treats at someone’s home because you are fun to be with.

There is no letup through the week. Surely you get too much of committees, board meetings, telephone calls, “Mickey-Mouse” details, leaks in the roof, hurt feelings, staff problems, trifles. You don’t show your disgust.

Your brilliant mind, linked with the heart of a learner, wants to study, delving into the minds of other thinkers. While you must yearn for more study time and for the writing you want to do, you accept the interruptions. When I asked if you could see my brother, you gave up an afternoon to counsel this troubled stranger. You owed him nothing, but he owes you his new lease on life.

That is another of your skills. You give a hurting person a new lease on life—and, in a way, that is almost everyone you meet. You seem to assume that everyone carries a burden and you perceive what it is. In turn, people know you earnestly care for them and so they open up to you. You give wise counsel and steer a new course.

You have the gift of discernment. You are not to be duped or manipulated: you can spot someone trying to con you, and then you get tough. You almost missed on Walter, however! We’re still laughing about how you frightened him with your gruffness when he first met you. The receptionist had called you from your study because there was another “one of those” asking to see the preacher. You approached him with a stern, “I suppose you want money.” His trembling, “No, Sir, I just want someone to look after my two little boys while I find a job,” made you do a quick about-face. You listened, you discerned, you acted.

Walter, today, is a beautiful success story: no longer a victim of alcohol or tobacco, a faithful and skilled worker on the job you found for him, reunited with his wife, the oldest son now baptized and the new baby dedicated. Walter loves to tell of his belief in miracles because of the miracle that happened to him. Thank you for being God’s instrument for making miracles happen for those like Walter. Thank you for your compassionate heart for people.

Thanks for recognizing and answering God’s call to you to the ministry. No one can doubt that call! Thanks for your obedience and sacrifice in leaving the big church where everything spelled success to come to our torn and bleeding church where the need for you was the greatest. Thanks for believing after six years of struggle that you are where God wants you.

Your untiring spirit, your servant heart (you’ve been caught dusting the piano), your heart for people, your hospital calls and visits to the shut-ins, your ministry in crisis situations, your pastoral care of your flock, your sermons and Bible studies and prayer times—all these reveal Christlike attributes of one who humbly and openly recognizes his own feet of clay.

I’m glad you are neither pious nor sanctimonious. But you are kind and considerate, delightful company in varied groupings, interesting and fun to be with. In recognizing our need for models, you serve as one in your roles of husband, father, grandpa, citizen, friend.

Though in no way are you narrow in scope, confined by clerical draperies, or blind to the humanness of us all, yet permeating every ounce of your being is the one compelling desire to win people to Christ, to disciple us, to nurture us in the faith.

When the going gets rough for us, we turn to you. We know sometimes the going gets rough for you, too, and you are the only one in our church who does not have a pastor. While it would be presumptuous for me to offer to be a pastor to you, I can be your friend. I am grateful I have you as my pastor—and my friend.

Have I told you lately that I love you?

EDITH CLEMMONS COE¹Mrs. Coe, who lives in Wichita, Kansas, is a former high school English teacher.

Walker Percy stands in the literary tradition of T. S. Eliot and Flannery O’Connor.

The name Walker Percy is unfamiliar to most evangelicals. It is only a little better known among secular scholars. And yet, among those who do know the novels and essays of Walker Percy, he is highly appreciated. He is one of the few Christian writers who can hold the attention of a large secular audience.

Percy should interest evangelicals, for he stands in the Christian-literary tradition of T. S. Eliot and Flannery O’Connor. All three have exposed the sterility of modern secular life and recommended as an alternative the Christian gospel. Further, all three are insightful essayists; taken collectively, their essays make an enlightening commentary on the study of Christianity and literature.

Percy’s first publications were scholarly articles on the philosophy of language, the rootlessness of contemporary life, and the source of racism. Two novels were rejected before he found his natural style in The Moviegoer (1961), winner of the National Book Award in 1962. More followed: The Last Gentleman (1965), Love in the Ruins (1971), The Message in the Bottle (1975, essays), Lancelot (1977), and The Second Coming (1980).

Percy’s commitment to writing and to Christ is a fascinating study. Like C. S. Lewis, Percy went through a long, intellectual struggle with secularism before he became a Christian. Born in 1916 in Birmingham, Alabama, his youth was marred try his father’s suicide when he was 11 and by his mother’s death in an auto accident two years later. He and his two younger brothers were raised by their paternal cousin, Uncle Will Percy, author, friend of Faulkner, lawyer, planter, and civic leader. He guided his youthful cousins with the diligence of a father. The personal philosophy he passed on was stoic and non-Christian: he believed in duty to others, self-sacrifice, and determination to defend truth and goodness, even as the moral walls protecting a civilization, Roman or Southern, crumbled.

Walker Percy came under further secular influence at the University of North Carolina during premedical studies. He went on to Columbia Medical School, and interned as a pathologist at Bellevue Hospital in New York City. Of his education to this point, Percy has said, “My own development … has been a relationship to a … non-Christian humanism.… On the one hand there was science and on the other hand there was art, or play or emotion. I knew that wasn’t right. There had to be a more serious alternative than that.”

From examining the tissues of tubercular patients, Percy contracted the disease: “Then came the cataclysm, brought to pass appropriately enough by one of these elegant agents of disease, the same scarlet tubercle bacillus I used to see lying crisscrossed like Chinese characters in the sputum and lymphoid tissue of the patients at Bellevue. Now I was one of them.”

Two years of confinement in sanatoriums; the reading of existential writers, especially the Christians, Kierkegaard and Marcel; and a deep rethinking of his personal philosophy brought him to make several major changes in his life. He became a Catholic, and he changed his career from medicine to writing.

Concerning his growing unhappiness with secular humanism, he says, “An extraordinary paradox became clear: that the more science progressed and even as it benefited man, the less it said about what it is like to be a man living in the world.… What began to interest me was … the problem of man himself, the nature and destiny of man; specifically and more immediately, the predicament of man in a modern technological society.”

Percy’s essays help us to appreciate his novels. In “Notes for a Novel About the End of the World,” he discusses his role as a Christian novelist. His faith, he says, gives him a clear asset over secular writers. He and the secularists agree that contemporary man feels alienated or homeless, but he believes he knows why: man is estranged from God. One symptom of this estrangement is man’s sense of homelessness, and Percy’s novels amplify his belief in man’s homelessness apart from God. His protagonists feel rootless, displaced, and they search for meaning. As Binx Bolling puts it in The Moviegoer, “though the universe has been disposed of, I myself was left over.”

Binx searches for an authentic way of life that seems to end with his commitment to faith in Christ. Awaking one morning to begin another day as a New Orleans stockbroker, he suddenly realizes his hedonistic life is not satisfying, and he begins a search for something better. “Everydayness” is the symptom of alienation, Binx feels. He is always cheerful, witty, and pleasant, yet he is afraid he “should be lost, cut loose metaphysically speaking.… There is a danger of slipping clean out of space and time.” The richness of The Moviegoer comes from Binx’s ironic commentary: “all the friendly and likeable people seem dead to me; only the haters seem alive.”

Binx’s 14-year-old brother, Lonnie, a deyout Catholic confined to a wheelchair, is the Christian focus of the novel. He tells Binx that he prays for his salvation. When Lonnie dies, Binx seems to conclude his search with a commitment to Christianity.

Percy’s third novel, Love in the Ruins, is the one most outspokenly Christian. The story of Tom More, a nervous, troubled psychiatrist, but a sincere Christian and an avowed opponent of secularism, it is an unrestrained satire of behaviorist psychology, sex research clinics, selfish political conservatives, and naïve liberal protesters.

In presenting the Christian gospel as the solution to alienation, Percy is somewhat reticent, and so he is often misunderstood. Christians often are provoked that he is not more forthright in pointing to Christ.

But Percy believes Christianity restricts a writer with two liabilities: its language is not meaningful to the secular world, and its moral record is offensive to it. The first is the more serious to a writer. Percy believes Christian theological terms are devalued in the world’s ears, and such words as “God,” “sin,” and “salvation” are so commonplace and the ideas they express so defunct to the secular mind, that an evangelist “might just as well be shouting Exxon! Exxon!”

Percy believes the Christian novelist instead must be “cunning and guileful and must use every trick in the bag to achieve his purpose.” Percy is so cunning in depicting his religious commitments novelistically that they are often missed. Nevertheless, if a sincere messenger tells the good news to a modern castaway who has been waiting to hear it, then, says Percy, “the castaway will, by the grace of God, believe him.”

Pathology, Percy’s medical specialty, suits him novelistically as well. He is hesitant to prescribe the Christian cure for alienation, but he is brilliant at describing the nature of the disease.

RICHARDSON GRAY¹Dr. Gray is professor of English at Montreal-Anderson College, Montreal, North Carolina.

Who hasn’t, at one time or another?

Some people seem more prone to fall than others.

I recall one baby Christian (a grown man, but a baby Christian) who, if I believed in reincarnation, I would have said was the apostle Peter: hot-tempered, big-hearted, impulsive. The older Christians were waiting for him to fall.

And it wasn’t long before he obliged them.

He said later that the greatest stumbling block in the beginning of his Christian life was not his old drinking buddies, but skeptical Christians waiting for him to fall flat on his face so they could say, “I told you so!”

Many of us feel we have the gift of discernment when it comes to the faults and failures of other Christians—and on top of that, the gift of disapproval as well.

But even our Lord “came not to condemn” (we were already condemned) but to provide us a way out.

“If a brother be overtaken in a fault [a different way of saying ‘falling flat on one’s face,’ perhaps] you who are spiritual restore such an one …”

Who in your family or among your acquaintances do you most heartily disapprove of? Don’t you think that one is already eaten up with guilt? How can you show kindness? “The nicest thing we can do for our heavenly Father,” wrote Saint Teresa of Avilla, “is to be kind to one of His children.”

Someone once said, “The perseverance of the saints consists in ever new beginnings.” Having a proclivity for falling flat on my face, I find that encouraging.

When we see someone fall, we run to help, don’t we? Then let’s!

One former member calls it the “number one killer cult,” and says it has been responsible for more premature deaths than the horror of Jonestown. Its members, nicely dressed, go door to door offering literature and an invitation to “be in the truth.” They hardly look dangerous.

But William Cetnar, once a highly placed official, believes they are. Cetnar left the Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW) in 1962 and has since devoted much effort to leading others out of the sect. A Pennsylvania stockbroker, he now spends only about 5 percent of his time on that job—occupying the rest with conferences and lectures about JW and other cults.

Last month he was host to the third annual National Convention of Ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses, held in New Ringgold, Pennsylvania. At an interview before the conference, Cetnar said he believed the JW would continue as an unorthodox cult even after younger charges take over the leadership. Frederick Franz, JW president, is now 87.

Cetnar, who probably watches the organization more closely than any other person outside Watchtower headquarters in Brooklyn, believes it will stay an unorthodox cult “because a wolf cannot become a sheep.” He does, however, believe some substantial changes are forthcoming:

• The controversial ban on receiving blood transfusions will probably be lifted after Franz’s death, Cetnar thinks.

• A new date for the end of the world (JWs have previously predicted Christ’s return seven times) is likely to be announced, possibly 1988.

• By sheer mathematical necessity, some change will have to be made in the JW doctrine that Christ will return before an elect 144,000 Witnesses have died. The 144,000 places were filled by those living in 1914 and few remain alive today. But Christ is supposed to return before the entire generation has died.

The blood transfusion prohibition is an especially sore spot with Cetnar. Accepting the American Red Cross statistic that about 100 persons in every 1,000 need transfusions to survive at one time or another, Cetnar believes thousands of JWs have refused transfusions and entered early graves. “That’s bigger than Jim Jones,” he said.

Cetnar spent eight years in the Watchtower headquarters. Personally acquainted with Franz and other leaders, he left with the impression that many of Franz’s potential successors disagree with the transfusion ban. He said Colon Quackenbush, a writer for JW publications, Milton Henschel, and A.D. Schroeder (both translators of the JW version of the Bible, called the New World Translation) all believed blood transfusions were not forbidden by Scripture. (The doctrine is based on divine instructions to Noah in Genesis 9:4 that he not eat the blood of animals.) Cetnar said the influence of these three men will be sufficient to alter the doctrine after Franz—who favors it—dies.

Setting dates for the end of time is not new for the Watchtower. That has proven an effective recruiting device, with baptisms shooting up after each announcement of doom. In 1966, when the JW growth rate was especially slow, 1975 was set as the year of Christ’s return. Substantial growth followed until 1976, when the number of baptisms declined by a third.

Not many have left because of the failure of such quirky JW predictions as the 1943 pronouncement that rockets or airplanes could never penetrate the “air envelope which is about our earthly globe.” But Cetnar said altering the ban on blood transfusions will produce a backlash.

Cetnar said the organization loses converts out the back door almost as soon as they get in the front door. Tremendous amounts of energy are spent on proselytizing: for each person baptized in 1976, Witnesses visited 740 homes and distributed 1,650 copies ofjw magazines. Cetnar has consulted JW yearbooks on the number of baptisms and the number of active JWs. Since there are twice as many baptisms listed as active Witnesses, he believes there are more ex-JWs than present ones. It is difficult to determine just how many JWs there are because of the way records are kept. Estimates run around 5 million worldwide.

Leaving the sect may not be too difficult, but being “disfellowshiped,” or excommunicated, is. JWs who are believed to be leading others astray are disfellowshiped, then become nonpersons in the eyes of Witnesses. No JW will speak to a disfellowshiped Witness.

When family and friends actually pretend the disfellowshiped person does not even exist, the emotional pain can be great. Cetnar’s mother would not speak to him after he was excommunicated in 1962, and before she died, she requested a closed casket so her apostate son would not see her.

That is part of the reason for the ex-JWs banding together. They are encouraged to meet others who are in the same situation as they. At last month’s conference, the therapy was almost visible as one former Witness related her unhappy years in the sect. “1 hated every minute, every hour of being a Witness. But I thought it was the only way to survive Armageddon and live on paradise earth,” said Toni Jean Meneses of Kent, Washington.

Though unintended, another of her statements was a poignant comment on the evangelical church. “Many times over the years I would have left if someone had only presented the gospel to me.”

Moon Pleads Not Guilty In Tax Case, Cites Discrimination

Sun Myung Moon, leader of thousands of so-called Moonies, pleaded not guilty to charges of filing false federal income tax returns, and later declared he would not have to face such charges if “my skin were white and my religion were Presbyterian.”

A 12-count indictment was handed down on Moon and an aide, Takeru Kamiyama, alleging Moon failed to report interest accumulated on a $1.6 million bank account and $70,000 in payment of stock to himself and his wife.

After pleading not guilty to the charges, Moon shook hands with the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Martin Flumenbaum, then wagged an admonishing finger at him.

Moon was freed on $250,000 personal recognizance bond, and required to hand over his passport and promise not to leave the country. The judge made an exception for a three-week conference in South Korea, scheduled to begin November 1 (with Moon’s bond then raised to $500,000).

While Moon was making his plea, supporters demonstrated across the street from New York City’s Foley Square courthouse. They carried placards claiming, “America needs Sun Myung Moon,” repeatedly sang the civil-rights song, “We Shall Overcome,” and heard speeches declaring Moon’s innocence.

Mose Durst, president of Moon’s Unification Church in the U.S., compared Moon to Christ, Socrates, and Martin Luther King, Jr. He alleged the indictment sprang from religious and racial discrimination, a statement echoed by Moon when he joined the demonstrators outside the courtroom.

“I am here today only because my skin is yellow and my religion is Unification Church,” Moon said in a 26-minute speech, his first public address in five years. But he added, “I have confidence in the judge and jurors who will work on this case.”

Deaths

Brooks Hays, 83, president of the Southern Baptist Convention from 1957 to 1959, campaigner for racial integration, author, and confidant to Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson; October 11, at his home in Bethesda, Maryland, of natural causes.

Elsa Marty, 53, wife of theologian-author Martin E. Mary; September 28, at their home in Riverside, Illinois, of cancer.

North American Scene

Anti-Catholic crusader Jack Chick, whose comic books attacking the Roman church have angered numerous Catholics in America, continues to be a member of the Christian Booksellers Association (CBA). Chick’s possible expulsion from the association was not on the agenda of CBA’s October board meeting, although an official had said earlier it would be (CT, Oct. 23, p. 62). While it was not on the agenda, discussion of Chick arose at the meeting anyway. John T. Bass, executive vice-president of CBA, said the board voted to have a committee appointed to visit Chick. The committee will report back to the board by January 1 and “their report will be the basis of future action, if any, by the board,” Bass said. A CBA spokesman said expulsion is not a strong possibility.

God, according to a court decree, lives in Fresno, California. He was formerly Terrill Clark Williams, 42, a writer and broadcaster. Williams wanted to change his name to God because he believed “words are man’s most powerful tool, and by changing my name to God, I am demonstrating the power of God.” In the process of finding a court that would change his name to God, Williams lost his job, and had to sell his car and some furniture. Williams believes “the universe is God.”

“The Hour of Decision,” Billy Graham’s long-running radio broadcast, has shifted to a new format. The changes are intended to attract teen-agers and young adults to the program. Special features will include question-and-answer periods with evangelist Graham, missionary reports, reports on World Relief ministries, telephone interviews with Christians in a variety of ministries, and Graham’s messages. Graham assistant Cliff Barrows said traditional elements of the weekly broadcast will be retained to please Graham’s existing audience, and that the interviews and reports will “involve the listener in what is happening on the world scene of evangelism and missions.”

Abortions, a medical statistician believes, are on the increase, and the typical woman receiving them is young, white, and unmarried. Carl Tyler, Jr., assistant science director for the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, appeared before a Senate committee to testify on proposed constitutional amendments to restrict abortions. Tyler said there were 50 percent more abortions in the U.S. in 1978 than 1977. Abortion is proving to be one of the most popular methods of birth control; there are 30 to 35 million abortions performed annually worldwide.

Beset by theological dissension and accusations of plagiarism in the writings of founder Ellen G. White, the Seventh-day Adventist church (SDA) has taken the offensive against critics and set the optimistic goal of adding one million members to its ranks by 1985. This comes despite what SDA World President Neal Wilson has called “Satan’s subtle sophistiy and cunningness.”

Wilson made that comment at the 1981 Annual Council of Seventh-day Adventists, held in October. He had in mind the cases of SDA theologian Desmond Ford and former SDA pastor Walter Rea. The church stripped Ford of his ministerial credentials last year (CT, Oct. 10, 1980). Administrators were angered by his attack on the SDA doctrine of investigative judgment, which holds that Christ entered into a heavenly sanctuary in 1844. From there, according to the doctrine, Christ began passing judgment on each professing believer.

Rea, on the other hand, alleged late last year that much of White’s 53 books was taken shamelessly from non-Adventist authors of the mid-nineteenth century. Administrators have responded that not too much was taken from other authors and that White was no less a prophet for selectively using outside material—just as New Testament writers sometimes used segments from apocryphal literature.

These developments, president Wilson told the church at its conference, are ploys of the devil to sow seeds of discord and suspicion. But he happily noted that membership is increasing in America and overseas despite the problems. (Not all problems are theological—the church is also involved in an internal audit to determine how much money its agencies lent a prominent member who has filed for bankruptcy.) The 3.8-million-member denomination was challenged to add one million members by 1985. That drive, to start in 1982, includes the ambitious goal of attracting one thousand converts daily until the SDA gathers for its 1985 convention.

Other church officials at the October onference echoed Wilson’s suspicion of recent developments. Charles Hirsch, who heads the SDA’s educational program, stated clearly that academic freedom is not an absolute in the denomination. Hirsch’s statement was relevant to the cases of Ford and Smuts van Rooyen, an assistant professor of religion who was dismissed at an Adventist seminary last summer (CT, June 12, 1981).

Hirsch said Adventists believe academic freedom must be balanced by academic responsibility. “An Adventist teacher acknowledges his responsibility to conform to the church’s basic beliefs as well as the aims for its educational program when he accepts employment in … an [Adventist] institution.”

Richard Lesher, director of the denomination’s Biblical Research Department, addressed the issue of White’s authority. He said Adventists consider the Bible their ultimate authority and that the Bible’s unity makes it “its own interpreter.” Still, Lesher said in a telephone interview, White holds an important place in determining church belief.

He said the SDA has clearly affirmed the Old and New Testaments as the “only unerring rule of faith and practice.” White is looked to for “comfort, guidance, instruction and correction,” but does not stand above the Bible. Nonetheless, Lesher admitted “most Adventists would be more reluctant to disagree with White than Presbyterians with Calvin or Lutherans with Luther.” And he said it is “difficult” for an Adventist to say that White makes any errors in her interpretation of Scripture.

Only SDA officials, 300 in all, attended the annual conference, which is a significant indicator of the church’s direction, and largely determines its future agenda. SDA leaders are signaling their resolve to stand by traditional Adventism. The denomination has published and is heavily promoting Omega, a book seen by one nontraditionalist as “a convenient labeling and dismissal of the evangelical Adventist movement.”

Ford considers himself an evangelical Adventist, as does dismissed professor van Rooyen, who has contributed to Evangelica. That magazine is published by Adventists who seek more freedom to disagree with White and want to reaffirm such Reformation doctrines as salvation by faith alone. It used strong words on Omega, saying the book breathed a “spirit of religious McCarthyism” and “marks traditional Adventism’s rejection of the Christ proclaimed in the apostolic gospel and a retreat to the cult mentality which Adventism could have outgrown.”

Evangelica’s reviewer considers the book a feeble attempt to convince faithful Adventists they should not be “concerned with the overwhelming biblical evidence against the 1844 theology [including the investigative judgment] and the alarming discovery that the visionary was a plagiarist.”

Dissenters like van Rooyen claim most SDA scholars agree that the investigative judgment is doubtful and are skeptical of other pronouncements by White, but do not speak openly because administrators hold the traditional SDA views. The administrators say their view is that of most within the denomination and is biblically sound. The struggle within Adventism continues.

Did Adventists Discriminate?

Theological dissent and charges of plagiarism are not the only problems faced by the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA). Now a graduate of its top school, Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan, has filed a discrimination suit against the church.

The graduate is a woman, Carole Rayburn. She holds three degrees, including a doctorate from Catholic University, and a master’s degree from Andrews. A clinical psychologist, Rayburn says she applied for positions at two Maryland churches and was turned down. She believes she was turned down because she is a woman.

Denominational spokesmen say Rayburn has a weak case and that sexism is not involved. The suit, filed in federal court in Baltimore, will probably be heard in December.

The SDA church does not ordain women, but Rayburn was not trying to be ordained. She applied for positions as an associate pastor and an intern in pastoral care. A number of women hold such positions in the denomination. But Rayburn said she was denied employment and that a denominational official blocked her way.

Guerrilla defector seems to bolster the Guatemalan government’s claims.

The following report from correspondent Stephen R. Sywulka in Guatemala generally coincides with the government version of events in the case. Roman Catholic sources take vigorous exception to his conclusions, insisting that Pellecer’s kidnapping could not have been prearranged since he was bleeding and unconscious when abducted, that the government denied all knowledge of his whereabouts over the months that followed, that he showed signs of brainwashing in his few stage-managed appearances, and that he is still a prisoner.

It hit like a bomb blast, sending shock waves rolling through the social and ecclesiastical structure of Guatemala. At a surprise news conference called by the government amid strict security measures, Jesuit priest Luis Eduardo Pellecer Faena admitted he had served actively with the Guerrilla Army of the Poor (EGP), and asked forgiveness from the people of Guatemala.

Pellecer, 35, spoke with reporters, government officials, and diplomats for over two hours, recounting the steps that first led him to join the EGP, and then to his disillusionment and escape through a simulated kidnapping. “I ask your forgiveness, a thousand times forgiveness,” he said.

“I contributed to subversive actions which have sown violence in this country.”

It came as no surprise that members of the Catholic clergy have sympathized with the guerrillas. Pellecer charged that the Jesuits as a whole, members of several other orders, some prestigious schools, and the Catholic relief agency, Caritas, were implicated with the subversives. The priest singled out the theology of liberation as a major factor, saying it presented a new Jesus, a revolutionary rebel who opposed the capitalist system; a Jesus for the poor only, sent by God to establish a new kingdom on earth. “This kingdom which we Jesuits preach is a kingdom equivalent to socialism,” said Pellecer. “To arrive there, we obviously need to obtain power.” And power, he said, would be gained by hatred of the rich.

Along with the liberation theology was a strong Marxist orientation. Pellecer claimed that all the Jesuits “of my generation” were heavily exposed to Marxism-Leninism during the course of their studies.

He also said that in a meeting two years ago, the Jesuit order put first priority on work among the poorest levels of society. “It was decided that we should contribute toward the radicalization of Jesus for the poor,” he said. “We were able to get in with the people and give them the proper dose of Marxism appropriate to their low cultural and political level.”

Sent first to El Salvador to work with a catechist group known as “Delegates of the Word of God,” Pellecer and his companions taught the peasants that they should defend themselves against the “oppressive” landowners and organize “self-defense committees.” “We handed these groups over to [the guerrillas] on a silver platter,” he said.

Transferred to Nicaragua, the young priest helped organize cooperatives that served to channel funds to the Sandinistas, who were then struggling against the Somoza regime.

Sent to his native Guatemala in 1977, Pellecer began working with an urban organization to “consciencitize” the inhabitants of slum and squatter settlements. He also served as adviser to the Belgian School, a well-known Catholic institution for girls, for their “Operation Uspantan.” In this program, upper level students were sent for one to two months during vacation to five with peasant families in Quiche province.

All of these efforts, explained Pellecer, were part of a first stage designed to raise the level of consciousness. It was understood that this was preparation for a “second story” that would involve political and/or military action.

Impressed by his work, the EGP approached the priest in the summer of 1978. At that time, he did not want to join, he said, partly because he was planning to marry a Nicaraguan girl. But the marriage fell through, and in late 1979 Pellecer sent word through his contact, an ex-Jesuit, that he was available.

Pellecer emphasized that he was a “sympathizer,” not a “militant.” As such, he kept on with his regular job in Guatemala City and did not have or use weapons. His specific assignment was with the “National Propaganda Commission,” an attempt by the four main guerrilla organizations in Guatemala to coordinate publicity, especially outside the country, against the government and its security forces. The priest claimed that much of the bad press, which the governments of Guatemala and El Salvador suffer around the world, was directly due to the church and that the Jesuits had a direct line to Amnesty International.

Pellecer’s disenchantment with the guerrillas came as he began to realize that it was impossible to separate theory and practice, and that the Marxist practice was producing violence and suffering. When he was pressured to undergo military training and take up arms, he decided to pull out of the EGP. The problem was how to do it. Through a friend, he contacted the security forces and a fake kidnapping was arranged. It took place on June 8. Four months later, he reappeared at the press conference.

The priest insisted that he had been treated well and was telling his story voluntarily, though he predicted some people would claim he was talking under coercion. In fact, the archbishops of Panama and El Salvador reacted immediately to the news by saying Pellecer had been drugged and tortured, and by demanding his “release.” But observers in Guatemala noted that his presentation was unusually lucid and straightforward and he showed no signs of drugs.

Reporters were able to meet with Pellecer several times subsequent to the news conference, but otherwise he remained in seclusion. A government spokesman said that although he was being protected for his own safety within Guatemala, he was free to leave the country at any time.

Questioned by reporters, Pellecer said he estimated that 15 to 20 priests in Guatemala were collaborating with the subversives, including “all the Jesuits of my generation,” some Maryknollers, some from other orders, and a few seculars. There are currently 42 Jesuits in Guatemala. Only three are native born; the rest are Spanish. One of Pellecer’s most startling charges was that his superiors in the order were aware of what he was doing and had given tacit approval.

There was speculation that the government might expel the Jesuits, but Pellecer himself told the questioners he would not advise it as it would only heighten their sense of martyrdom. He advocated dialogue and stricter controls. (The Jesuit order has been thrown out twice in the history of the country: once in the colonial period, and again during the liberal reforms of President Justo Rufino Barrios in the 1880s.)

Another dramatic allegation made by Pellecer was that funds for the guerrillas were handled partially through European relief agencies, including Caritas.

The news conference, which was broadcast almost verbatim by the two major TV news programs and later rebroadcast on all radio and television stations in the country, sent the church hierarchy scurrying into closed-door consultations.

A statement released a couple of days later by the national bishops conference claimed that some of Pellecer’s allegations were “serious and false.” The bishops stated their “total support” for the insitutions mentioned by the priest, including Caritas, the Company of Jesus, and the Delegates of the Word of God.

“We profoundly lament that a priest has opted for the path of violence and subversion to solve the pressing problems of the country in contradiction to the very clear norms of the church,” said the statement. The bishops also defended the Latin America Catholic conferences in Medellín and Puebla, which Pellecer had linked with liberation theology.

While Pellecer is the first priest to defect from the guerrilla ranks, two others were killed recently in a shootout with police and another is alleged to be fighting with subversives in the jungle.

On July 25, police surrounded a guerrilla hideout in a suburb of Guatemala city. After a four-hour gun battle, eight bodies were found in the house along with arms, bombs, and leftist propaganda. Two of the dead were later identified as Catholic missionaries: Raoul Joseph Leger, a Canadian, and Angel Martinez Rodrigo, from Spain. They were known respectively as Commandante Miguel and Pedro in the guerrilla organization.

A leftist Mexican magazine, Por Esto, recently published an interview with Donald McKennan, an Irish priest who was allegedly serving as chaplain with a guerrilla group in the Guatemalan jungles. Photos showed him in uniform with a submachine gun over his shoulder. McKennan had served as a priest in Quiche province, an area hit hard by the violence.

Evangelicals in Guatemala have been watching the latest developments carefully. Some see new opportunities for evangelism as many Catholics become disillusioned with their church. Others are wary that all religious workers and institutions, including evangelical missionaries and schools, may come under suspicion.

World Scene

The Salvation Army has a new general. Commissioner Jarl Wahlstrom, 63, will assume the post being vacated by General Arnold Brown in mid-December at the mandatory retirement age of 68. A Finn, Wahlstrom has served the army since 1938 in his own country and in administrative posts in Canada (with Bermuda) and Sweden. Brown, a Canadian, has served as the top officer in the army’s worldwide force of 25,000 officers (full-time staff) for four-and-a-half years.

Bible sales in Nicaragua are the highest ever this year, despite a very tight economy, according to Ignacio Hernandez, director of the Nicaraguan Bible Society. More than 200,000 popular language New Testaments were to arrive in the country last month. They will be distributed mostly in rural areas as part of the United Bible Societies project to give Bibles to the nation’s thousands of new literates.

A backlash is developing in member churches over a World Council of Churches decision to boycott European banks that have business finks with South Africa, IDEA, the information service of the German Evangelical Alliance, reports that the Protestant (Lutheran) Church in Germany (EKD) issued a statement declaring that the WCC is “by no means a kind of Protestant Vatican,” and that it was not bound to abide by the WCC decision. The Swiss Council of Churches also registered opposition to the action, and the Protestant Reformed Church in the canton of Zurich served notice that it intends to cancel its $16,000 annual contribution to the WCC.

The largest printing job ever given to a single Swedish printing plant is under way there. It is a 500,000-copy edition of the first new translation of the Swedish New Testament to be made since World War I. Swedish Bibles have been financed by the government ever since the first version was printed in 1526. The 750-page Testaments are subsidized, and will cost buyers about $10. So far they have cost the government about $1.25 million.

Shades of Wittenberg! Five Greek Orthodox priests asked to discuss 40 theses with their superiors, and are being brought to trial by the Holy Synod of the Greek church. According to a Greek correspondent, the theses address such issues as electing archbishops by the priests instead of by the Synod of Bishops, allowing priests to marry, and adjusting their salaries. Two of the priests, Stavros Papachristos, 55, and Spiros Tsakalos, 40, who claim they speak for 8,000 priests, demonstrated in front of Athens University last summer to dramatize their cause. “Down with hierarchical dictatorship!” read one of their placards. Papachristos is under a five-month suspension of all priestly functions for having defended a deacon of “progressive persuasion.”

European evangelicals met to discuss and pray for revival in Haamstedt, The Netherlands, recently. In the September conference, 175 participants examined past revivals and learned about present-day movements in Scandinavia, Russia, and Czechoslovakia. Speakers included Philippe Decorvet and Claire-Lise de Benoit of Switzerland, and Peter Schneider of Germany. Western contributors included Richard Lovelace, J. Edwin Orr, and George Peters.

A reported apparition of the Virgin Mary is giving Communist officials in Yugoslavia fits. It all began in July when six girls from the mountain village of Citluk reported seeing a golden-haired Madonna floating over a remote meadow. Western diplomatic sources estimate that since then as many as 30,000 Yugoslav Catholics have flocked to the area. The state-controlled press began to ridicule the reported event as “scientifically impossible,” and Radovan Samardizic, secretary of the government’s Commission on Church Relations, saw it as “a publicity trick, an attempt to show strength.” Officials thereupon fenced off the meadow, barred journalists, and sentenced the local priest to three-and-one-half years in prison for spreading “hostile propaganda.”

More fallout from the Sadat assassination: Alarmed at the high incidence of allegiance to the Islamic fundamentalist societies among Egypt’s youth, the Ministry of Education has announced a campaign to counter their teachings. It says new Islamic curricula will be introduced in all public schools next year to explain the basic tenets of the faith and the role it can play in facing the problems of the age.

Christians are alive and well in North Korea, according to a native of Korea who recently visited relatives in Pyongyang, the capital of the Democratic People’s Republic. A Presbyterian minister who has served a Korean-language church in Los Angeles for 22 years learned from leaders of the Christian League that there are about 5,000 believers in the country, perhaps the most austere in the Communist sphere. In the capital city, he was told, some 700 Christians worship in 100 house churches. Before Korea was partitioned, the percentage of Christians was higher in the North than in the South.

When pastor Andy Lindo came to the Church of Christ in Poway, California, a town near San Diego, the church membership soared, especially among young people. Something else soared at the Poway Church of Christ: controversy. As Lindo’s ministry took hold, some parents of young members began picketing.

Lindo is a practitioner of a much-debated renewal movement spreading throughout local congregations of the Church of Christ across the country. For want of a better term, outsiders call it “The Crossroads Movement,” because it started with Chuck Lucas, pastor of the Crossroads Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida, in 1971. Lucas conducts seminars for other Church of Christ ministers.

The practices include discipleship, aggressive evangelism, prayer partnerships in which older Christians are matched with newer ones, and something known as “one-another Christianity,” a term that summarizes the emphasis on personal growth in the faith.

There have been some excesses that caused much consternation among Church of Christ members who are not part of the movement. At Lindo’s church in Poway, it was once a practice to discuss the personal problems of members openly in a “soul talk.” This is no longer done.

Ronald Brumley, an elder in the Poway church, said, “We have been overly strong in giving out advice” about how participants should live their lives, and people who wanted to leave the movement have been unduly ostracized. He and Lindo say they regret the division and controversy surrounding the movement, but they also feel the blame does not lie only with them, and say they are making efforts at reconciliation.

Some accusers attack the books used by Crossroads workers. Jay Adams’s Competent to Counsel is labeled “a Calvinistic book with incorrect relation to the Holy Spirit.” Stephen Olford’s Manna in the Morning is criticized as “an extra-biblical catechism.” (Olford and Adams are widely known authors in the larger evangelical sphere). The New International Version of the Bible has been called “a transdenominational version that cannot convert anyone.”

The Church of Christ has no denominational hierarchy or official spokesmen, but affiliated schools and publications are divided over the Crossroads movement. Jerry Jones of the Harding University Bible Department, James Lovell of Action magazine, and Reuel Lemmons, editor of the publication Firm Foundation, all support Lucas and Crossroads. All three reject the charges of cultism leveled at Crossroads, and say that news media sensationalism has blown things out of proportion. There have been numerous articles appearing in local newspapers in cities to which Crossroads has spread. The Gainesville, Florida, paper has written extensively on it, and with hostility. Ira Rice, editor of a Birmingham, Alabama, Church of Christ publication, Contending for the Faith, is critical, and has reprinted an investigative article on Crossroads from the Los Angeles Times. Rice believes the movement’s philosophy of total commitment amounts to a kind of salvation by works.

John Banks, a San Diego-area Church of Christ minister, regards Rice as a muckraker, but he said Rice has handled the Crossroads issue correctly. “Someone has to blow the whistle sometime,” he said. In conjunction with other San Diego ministers, Banks purchased an extensive, theologically detailed, newspaper ad that echoed many of the charges against Crossroads, and which dissociated the ministers’ churches from it.

Much of the furor has been on university campuses, pitting longstanding campus outreaches and Crossroads workers. William J. Teague, president of Abilene Christian University, states that his university does not permit Chuck Lucas or his direct associates to speak on campus. Otto Spangler of the Baptist Campus Ministry on the Gainesville campus of the University of Florida feels that after many efforts to cooperate, “there is no room for dialogue” with the exclusivist Crossroads workers. Said Spangler: “I could not begin to tell of the damage done to students whom I have counseled because of the practices of this church. I would warn anyone against involvement with this mindset.”

Brumley, of the Poway Church of Christ, was asked if the large numbers attending his church means that the Crossroads movement is valid. He said the numbers at least show that “something is happening.” It seems, though, that within and without the Church of Christ, there is little agreement on what this is.

An evangelical on camera in Dallas.

Last summer’s Southern Baptist Convention was attended by crews from all three commercial television stations in Dallas, Texas. That was unusual, since most TV news operations have neither the time nor the inclination to pay serious attention to religion. The Dallas coverage was even more unusual because the Baptist convention was in Los Angeles.

Television news coverage of religion in Dallas heated up this year when WFAA, the local ABC affiliate, became the first to use a full-time religion reporter, a 25-year-old evangelical Christian named Peggy Wehmeyer. The station management took a gamble on her even though she had never worked in television before. Some of her colleagues at the station, in one of the country’s top 10 television markets, were not accustomed to greenhorns starting out at the top. Some of them balked at working with her at all, although others were kind. She came to the station (first as a writer, then as an on-camera reporter) from Dallas Theological Seminary, where she was public information director.

Marty Haag, the program director for WFAA, said public response to its regular religion coverage has been good. “We were inundated with letters from people who appreciated it,” he said. The religion beat is an unusual one for television, Haag said, but it is a significant one. “This is the kind of beat where all sorts of trends and movements in society show up. It also gives us a chance to report good news stories in which people are doing things for others.”

Haag said Wehmeyer’s transition from print to broadcast journalism has been unusually smooth, given the suddenness, and he added that some reporters are not able to make it at all.

Her Christian friends thought Wehmeyer’s transition from the seminary to WFAA’s news was something close to a miracle.

But although her climb was fast, Wehmeyer knows it was not easy. She remembers fear that almost dried up her words the day she met Haag and asked if she could work for him. She remembers terror in facing that first morning on the desk after Haag had challenged her desire to work by saying, “You want to work here? Okay—come in tomorrow morning and manage the desk.” She didn’t even know what the desk was.

She remembers encouragement from some people, but also the hurt provoked by nasty rumors and the impenetrable chill of veterans in the newsroom who had worked too long and hard to tolerate inexperience. She remembers prayers for strength, and prayers of thanks for new responsibilities. She remembers facing the risk of giving up her seminary job to write news for anchorman Tracy Rowlett’s 4:30–5:00 P.M. show.

Even after surviving that year’s transition in the newsroom, Peggy Wehmeyer faces problems.

Her inexperience is one hurdle. “I need more time to smooth out some of the rough edges,” she said. “I’d like to get more of the basic structural things down well enough so I can be even more creative. I’ve learned pretty well how to put visuals and print together now, but you can never get good enough at that. It takes time and experience.

Integrating her faith and profession is another problem for Wehmeyer. One day she spoke at a Christian women’s club. During the speech she gave her personal testimony, but after the meeting could not shake an uneasy feeling about what she had done. Prior to her job with Channel 8 she had often spoken about her faith, but this time something didn’t fit.

Would she compromise her objectivity as a religion reporter by telling people what she believed? Could people in that audience respect stories she might write about religions not her own? Would Jews, Mormons, or atheists speak openly to her on the beat if they knew she tried to persuade people to become Christians?

The next day Wehmeyer discussed her uneasiness with one of her supervisors. He told her to cut the testimonies: he said they were bad for the station. He said she could speak about religion on television or on the beat, but that it would be wise for her as a religion reporter not to tell the public what she believes. Wehmeyer’s friends thought she was compromising.

But she made her own decision. “I don’t think at this point in my life I can be a good reporter,” she said, “seen and respected as objective, if I am also going out persuading people what they should believe. The two conflict. At least for right now I have settled with the idea that my job is to be a good reporter first.”

She added, “I don’t feel any less committed as a Christian, or like I have to hide my faith. I just feel that God has called me to be a reporter and that means, for the time being, that in other areas I must be subdued.”

Wehmeyer is subdued in public maybe, but not in the news room. She said she never goes around flying to evangelize or cram her faith down someone’s throat. But she is very open about what she believes. “I’ve been advised a number of times not to be so open,” she said. “But when people ask me why I believe what I believe—I tell them. Others have beliefs too. They just aren’t as open about them. Everybody has a certain frame of mind through which he sees things. There’s no reporter who is totally objective.”

Wehmeyer’s bias is a burden at times. “I’m sensitive to the fact that people know I’m a Christian,” she said. “Because I am a Christian I feel I have to prove that I’m even more objective than others in my reporting.”

Her faith has been stretched tight by the demands of Channel 8 reporting. “In this business you’re supposed to be a real skeptic,” Wehmeyer said, “but a Christian is someone who has faith and trusts people. I’ve had to live with the tension of being a skeptic and one who lives by faith.

“One person told me sooner or later I’d lose my faith here,” she said. “I think that’s a bunch of baloney. We ought to be skeptical about a lot of things that happen in religion.

“I’ve gotten out of my ivory tower since leaving the seminary,” she said. “I’ve seen where people hurt. Once I covered a car accident where a mother and her child were trapped in a car. I watched helplessly as they burned to death and asked, ‘God—how can you let this happen?’

“I have to admit,” she said, “the longer I work in the news room, the more I find out I don’t have all the answers. I used to have all the answers in black and white. Now I’ve had to accept the fact that I five in some gray areas. It takes a very secure person to live in the gray areas.”