Charles E. Stanton

J. GRESHAM MACHEN • EDITOR 1936.1937

VOL. 17. NO.5

- J. Gresha_ Maeben

March IO!' 1948

"Christ died for our sins, He was

buried, He rose again"-that, with all

that goes with it, with the whole saving

work of Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,

so gloriously set forth in the Scriptures

and so splendidly summarized in the

Catechism of our Church, that and

that alone constitutes the gospel.

•

•

Johannes G. Vos

•

C. VanTil

R. B. Kuiper

Edward J. Young

•

•

Contest with

Pharaoh

Robert S. Marsden

.?he ~~let!aILGUARDIAN

•

Song in Public

Worship

Guardiao News

COJUlDentator

Visit to Alitena

Christianity and

Crisis Theology

Glory of the

Christian Church

The Minister and

the Creedsr

88 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN March 10

Daily Bible ReadingsWeek of March 15Monday Psalm 2Tuesday Psalm 72:1-11Wednesday Psalm 72:12-20Thursday Daniel 7:1-14Friday Daniel 7:15-28Saturday Zechariah 9:9-17Sunday Colossians 1:9-22

Questions for Sabbath Meditation1. What is accomplished by man's

rebellion against God? How does Godlook upon the raging of the people?

2. In Messiah's kingdom described inPsalm 72, what sort of peace will therighteous enjoy? Is that peace their'snow?

3. Does Zechariah predict deliverancefrom political bondage for God's people?

4. Who are members of the kingdomof God's dear Son?

Christ Our King

How utterly futile are the attemptsof ungodly men to overthrow the king­dom of God! And yet no age of man­kind's history has lacked pretenders tothe throne of the universe. The blindwish to lead the blind and both rejectthe true King.

The prophets of old foretold the com­ing of the Just One that men might beprepared to receive their King andsubmit to Him. In their hearts theywere to honor Him and then surrendertheir substance and their lives. Butnone could acknowledge His kingshipuntil He broke sin's galling fetters andliberated the prisoner of sin. The king­dom would be established in the heartsof free men. And that freedom wouldcome when the King having first pur­chased redemption subdued the rebel­lious hearts of His people.

Many of those who wave palmbranches and shout hosannas will desertHim when they see the Savior's eyespiercing their souls and discoveringtheir sin. Many will look for a crownof gold upon the King of the Jews andseeing only thorns will set themselvesagainst the Lord's anointed, and thechains that bind them will tighten.

But will any question His right torule or His power to conquer? Has Hecapitulated' to the plotting rulers ofthe earth? Is Hutchinson right whenhe says,

"Ay, down the years, behold, Herides,

The lowly Christ, upon an ass;But conquering? Ten shall heed

the call,A thousand idly watch Him

pass."

Though only one be grasped fromsin's domain, the lowly Christ by theblood of His Cross and the might ofHis resurrection has conquered. Man­kind is saved. For even a raging Saulis to enter the Kingdom of Christ inchains - chains of love which wereforged in eternity but gently laid uponthis bondservant by the Christ he had

. despised. Ten thousand times ten thou­sand heed His call, for this King con­quers sinners by His Spirit.

Week of March 22Monday Mark 11:12-26Tuesday Mark 12:1-12Wednesday Matthew 24:1-14Thursday Mark 14:12-26Friday Mark 15:22-38Saturday Mark 15:39-47Sunday ./ Peter 2 :11-25

Questions for Sabbath Meditation1. Why did Jesus cast out the money

changers from the temple? Why didthe scribes and Pharisees seek to destroyHim?

2. Who are the wicked husbandmenin the parable of the vineyard? Whoare the servants who were sent by theowner to the husbandmen?

3. What are the provisions of thenew testament (covenant) that Jesusspoke of in Mark 14: 24? See Hebrews8. .

4. What explanation might be givenfor Jesus' refusal to drink the winemingled with myrrh offered to Him?

The Man of Sorrows

How true are the words, "Earth hasno sorrow that heav'n cannot heal."But true because heaven owns the Manwho bore our griefs and carried oursorrows. The afflictions that befall usare not to be compared with the suf­fering borne by the Lord Jesus Christ.We must confess with the penitent

thief who hung at the side of theSaviour, "We receive the due rewardof our deeds: but this man hath donenothing amiss."

Walk along the streets of Jerusalemwith Jesus that last week before theCross and behold His griefs. BecauseHe honored His Father's house enoughto indignantly cast out those who woulddefile it, schemers sought to destroyHim. In a parable He beholds Himselfon Calvary as He shows how Israel'searthly leaders had persistently rejectedGod's servants and now plan to killthe King's Son and Heir.

His heart is touched as He viewsthe persecution that will surely comeupon His people as woes will fall on awicked world ripe for judgment. Butthen He eats bread with His disciplesand not only is the. Betrayer revealedas among them, but this little bandmisunderstands the nature of the Sav­ior's kingdom and their place in it.How grieved He must have been tohear them quarrel about places ofhonor when in a matter of hours theywould forsake Him. Self-confident Peterbecomes a blasphemer and only repentswhen overwhelming love from sad­dened eyes draws forth tears.

Follow Jesus through Pilate's halland outside the city and see the thornsplaced on His brow, the nails pierceHis hands. But even then you will notsee His full suffering. For you haveyet to hear His words, "My God, MyGod, why hast Thou forsaken me?"And that cry will be only dimly com­prehensible. For as Abraham Kuyperhas written: To understand Calvaryone must stand at the foot of the Crossand ask the question, "What should Ihave had to suffer eternally, if I shouldhave had to bear myself the righteousretribution for all my sins and godless­ness." Then multiply that by all thesinners for whom Christ died. Onlythen can you form the faintest idea ofHis sufferings.

Week of March 29Monday Nehemiah. 13:1-14Tuesday Daniel 6:1-10Wednesday Deuteronomy 25:1-16

A prayer suggestion1. Pray that funds needed for the

work of Home Missions may be pro­vided through God's people.

LERoy B. OLIVER

....

The Presbyterian Guardian is published semi-monthly from September to July. inetu sive, and monthlY in August by The Presbyterian ~uardian Publishing Corporation.728 Schaff Building, 1505 Race Street. Philadelphia. Pa .. at the following rates. payable in advance. for either old or new subscribers In any part of the world. Postageprepatd ; $2.00 per year; $1.00 for five months: five or more copies either to separate addresses or in a package to one address. $1.50 each per yeaJ4; He per single COP'\".Enterel) as second class matter Marcb 4. 1937, at the Post Office at Philadel-orla, Pa., under the Act of l\larct! 3. 1879.

1948 T.~ PR~SBVTERIAN GUARblAN 67

"

..

'!he ~lititYL-GUARDIAN

1505 Race Street, Philadelphia 2, Pa.

EDITORNed B. Stonehouse

Leslie W. SloatManaging Editor

John P. ClellandArthur W. Kuschke, Jr.

Robert S. MarsdenContributing Editors

ADVISORY COUNCILRobert L. AtwellLeslie A. Dunn

John Patton GalbraithEdward L. Kellogg

Presbyterian Life

UNDER date of February 14, 1948,there appeared Volume 1, Num­

ber 1, of the official publication of thePresbyterian Church in the U. S. A.,Presbyterian Life. It is the first officialjournal of general interest that thatchurch has had for many years.

There is little of distinction aboutthe first number of the paper. Its for­mat is fairly attractive. The coverpicture of a presbyterian minister in aGenevan gown baptizing an infant, withthe caption-We dedicate this child ...-unwittingly presages the theologicalfuzziness that one finds within. Thepoint of the photograph seems to bethat as a child is baptized he is dedi­cated to the Lord, and that, in likemanner, the infant magazine is dedi­cated. But the analogy between thededication of a magazine and the'baptism of a covenant child is far­fetched, and probably rests on anerroneous idea, or at least on no clear­cut view, of the meaning of baptism,as the caption suggests.

The contents of the magazine areabout what one' would expect. Itsfrontispiece is a glowing tribute to thelate Robert E. Speer, in which Presi­dent John Mackay of Princeton Theo­logical Seminary characterizes him as"a Pauline figure among his contem­poraries". It has a number of articleson its thirty-two pages, but it lacks anydevotional material, and contains nostudy in the Word of God.

Time characterizes its feature articlesas "non-controversial", and that is put­ting it mildly. There is nothing in themagazine at which any good Modernistcould take offence, and there is nothing

approaching an earnest contending forthe faith once delivered to the saints.It gives a pat on the back to all offi­cially sponsored projects, and the nodof approval to all things that do notthreaten to disturb the status quo inchurch life. For instance, it tells usthat a book, Their Search for God,which blasphemously assures us thatthe "fundamental religious truths areuniversal", "will be a valuable sourcefor parents and teachers, and a reward­ing experience for mature readers"(p.27).

But are not the faults of PresbyterianLife characteristic faults (we almostsaid necessary faults) of all denomina­tionally authorized journals? Are theynot really inherent in the very idea ofa denominational paper? Does not adenominational journal necessarily fol­low the majority opinion in a church,or at least, the opinion of' those whoare in power? While the majority ofa denomination is true to the Word ofGod, the promotion which a denomina­tional paper supplies can be very valu­able. But when the majority is indanger of departing from the truth, adenominational paper cannot vigorouslycall it back to the truth. There area few conspicuous examples of success­ful denominational papers, but historyis strewn with great denominationswhich were shipwrecked upon the rocksof unbelief from which their controlledpapers failed to warn them. A de­nominational paper must cater to themajority which controls and supportsit; if it errs it is the majority that haserred, and there is none to call it toaccount.

A denominational paper might con­ceivably be a blessing if there were avigorous independent paper of rela­tively equal circulation within thechurch. Yet such a vigorous independ­ent paper, subsisting alongside a de­nominational paper, is a virtualimpossibility, for a denominationalpaper enjoys the financial subsidy ofthe denomination, and the prestigewhich official sanction gives it. Noindependent paper can compete withsuch a journal. A vigorous independentreligious journal will sometimes bewrong, but it can be brought to accountfairly easily. If, in the judgment ofthe readers, it errs often and grievously,it will lose its clientele. It constantlyinvites other journals into competitionwith it, and it has no weapon to impelreaders to buy it save the truth itself.A denominational paper can continue

even though it has lost the confidenceof the Christians in the denomination,through general inertia, and becauseof the virtual impossibility of gettingsomething stopped once it has gaineda following. Such a paper tends tocrystallize and solidify the errors of themajority; and to establish their respect­ability.

The non-controversial element whicheven the secular magazine Time de­tected in the first issue is anothernecessary characteristic of a denomina­tional paper. It must assume that thedecisions of the majority of the de­nomination are right, for it representsthe majority, and it cannot effectivelycriticize itself. It can engage in onlythose controversies that the majoritysponsors, and such controversies havenearly always been against any vigor­ously evangelical minority. We makebold to predict that this will be thecase with Presbyterian Life. It will notengage in controversy as long as nonein the church threatens effectively tochallenge any major policy of themajority. But when any minority seeksto bring the church back to its biblicalstandards, it will engage in controversywith such a minority, unless it canignore the situation. It will do so be­cause any religious journal whichdeliberately sets out to be non-contro­versial has as its basis a false ideaof the church. It assumes that theaffairs of the church are the concernof the hierarchy or of those who arecompetent to concern themselves withcontroversial matters, but not the con­cern of the average lay members. Thebiblical church is the people; theyhave a vital interest in all the churchdoes. If they are competent to be churchmembers they are competent to con­cern themselves with the controversiesof the church in so far as the Lordhas committed the settling of suchmatters to them. The interest of a non­controversial religious journal in keep­ing controversy from the ears of thelaymen is usually an jnterest in preserv­ing a peace which is divorced fromthe truth which it is the duty of thechurch to proclaim.

A journal of Protestant Christianity,as Presbyterian Life calls itself, cannotbe true to the Lord and be consistentlynon-controversial. One of Dr. J. GreshamMachen's favorite sermons was thatbased on Peter's sermon on the Dayof Pentecost. As Dr. Machen pointedout, Peter not only stated what thetruth is, but also what it is not, and

68 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN Mareh 10

that is controversy! None faithfullyproclaims the truth until he contrastsit with error, and that is simply an­other way of saying that no non-con­troversial journal will consistentlyproclaim the truth. To state the truthonly "positively" is not to be a faithfulwatchman, and no Christian journalthat is not a voice pointing men tothe truth and away from error is atrustworthy journal. The promotion ofa church, no matter how good thatchurch may be, when it is substitutedfor the promotion of the truth of God,cannot but lead to the building of anorganization for its own sake. Whenreligion centers itself in man and inhis needs, or in the church and itsneeds and ambitions, rather than inthe Lord, it ceases to be the Christianreligion. There is no evidence in thefirst issue of Presbyterian Life to leadone to suppose that it will be a faithfulwitness to the truth as it is in ChristJesus, or a force to promote anythingsave the schemes of an inclusivistchurch.

R.S.M.

A RefreshingApproach to ~hurch

Union

WE have the impression that Chris­tians are not nearly as concerned

as they ought to be with the questionof the possible union of churches. Thereasons for such lethargy are fairlyobvious, but none seems to afford agood excuse for our failure to workconstructively towards this goal.. We have allowed Modernists to runaway with the ball. Nothing is moredeplorable, indeed, than the mannerin which organizational unity has beenpromoted at the sacrifice of Christiantruth. On the basis of the barest mini­mum of belief, or even on a programof complete doctrinal indifferentism,We have been urged to give heed tothe injunction of Christ that we shouldbe one. The sheer pragmatism of theseendeavors is transparent, even in themodified plan of E. Stanley Jones fora federation of Christian churches. Itis little wonder that the term "churchunionism" has been devised by evan­gelicals to characterize such an ap­proach to unity.

It is highly unfortunate, however,that by and large evangelicals them­selves are doing nothing about thechallenge to express and promote unity

in the external manifestation of thebody of Christ. The two councils ofevangelicals have a disappointing rec­ord at this point. For all of theirrepudiation of Modernism and theirefforts to counteract its influence, theyapparently do not envisage activity topromote doctrinal unity and to effectchurch union as a definite aspect oftheir programs. One gets the impressionrather that, being satisfied with suchunity as is expressed through theircommon commitment to brief evan­gelical creeds, they devote themselvesentirely to cooperative efforts. Stressingthe spiritual unity of Christians, theyseem to minimize the significance ofexpressing that unity outwardly in con­formity with the ordinances of Christregarding the government and disci­pline of the church. On such anapproach, while traditional denomina­tional life is perpetuated, the right ofseparate denominational existence IS

subtly undermined.It is refreshing in this situation to

observe from time to time notableexceptions to this generally unhappystate of affairs. One such exception has

A visill0 Alilena

T H E Roman Catholic Mission atAlitena is of particular interest to

the work of our own church. Alitenais in the midst of the Saho-speakingtribes, being barely across the borderbetween Eritrea and Ethiopia. For onehundred years these French priests havecarried on their missionary work there.The larger part of the Romanist areais in Eritrea.

I wanted to know what had beenaccomplished, and especially whatprogress had been made, in the studyof the Saho language by these priests.For this reason I made a trip toAlitena.

The town of Alitena is much to theeast of the main Asmara-Addis Ababaroad which connects most of the chiefcenters of population along the easternpart of the highlands. I was able tomake the first thirty miles of the tripby machine-about, fifteen miles on themain road to Senafe and anotherfifteen miles on a dirt road through

The Rev. Charles E. Stanton is anOrthodox Presbyterian missionary servingin Eritrea, East Africa.

recently been brought to our attentionin the Proceedings of the 40th RegularConvention of the Evangelical LutheranSynod of Missouri, Ohio and otherStates, popularly known as the MissouriSynod Lutheran Church. For someyears this church has been exploringthe possibility of union with otherLutheran bodies, and particularly withthe American Lutheran Church. Themost impressive feature of the surveyof action presented in these 'Minutesis that, along with an unmistakablezeal for fostering unity and union, thechurch is determined to be governedin these proceedures by "unwaveringloyalty to the Scriptures as the inspiredand inerrant Word of God".

That this commitment is takenrealistically and earnestly is evidentall along the line. Appealing to I Corin­thians 1: 10, the Synod insists that"fellowship must be based on unity inall doctrines clearly revealed in HolyWrit". In contrast to the typical mod­ern efforts towards achieving churchunion, vague pronouncements of beliefand easy going by-passing of doctrinal

(See "Editorial", page 74)

By CHARLES E. STANTON

the fertile plains southeast of Senafe.It took five and a half hours of briskwalking eastward to rcachi,~litena it­self, located on the very edge of themain eastern escarpment.' We haddescended a considerable distance fromthe highlands, and the last part of thetrip was over glaring rock-strewn hills,the very sight of which made onethirsty. No place in Eritrea had I everseen such care taken to make the way

(See "Stanton", page 76)

Living Quarters of the Catholic mis­sion at Alitena, as seen from the Church.

,I

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN 69

(;hristianity and Crisis TheologyBy CORNELIUS VAN TIL

..,

•

T H IS brief study of Barthianism wasprepared by Dr. VanTil for publi­

cation in Cheng Yen Pao, the officialmagazine of the China Inter-VarsityChristian Fellowship. We publish it bykind permission of the editors of thatmagazine. Dr. VanTil is professor ofApologetics at Westminster TheologicalSeminary, and the author of thevolume, The New Modernism, whichis an extended appraisal of Barthianism.

I N recent times it has become quiteclear that Christianity and Modern­

ism are two mutually exclusive re­ligions. But a third party has appearedupon the scene. It is the Theology ofCrisis. Its chief exponents, Karl Barthand Emil Brunner, were trained asModernists. But they have been verycritical of Modernism and its greattheologians, Schleiermacher and Ritschl.Moreover, they claim the paternity ofLuther and Calvin. Their language isfrequently that of historic Protestant­ism. As a result, many orthodox Chris­tians seem to think that the old gospelhas found a new and powerful expres­sion through their mouths. We believethat this is not the case. Without inthe least presuming to judge the heartsof its exponents, we shall offer evidenceto prove that the Theology of Crisisis but a new form of Modernism.

The BibleBarth and Brunner refer to their

positron as being a theology of theWord. But both Barth and Brunneraccept the results of negative or"higher" criticism. Both oppose theorthodox doctrine of the words ofScripture as being identical with revela­tion. The words of Scripture are saidto become the words of God but notuntil they are accepted as such. Thusthe theology of the Word is after allbut a theology of experience, and nota theology of the Word at all. On thisbasic point we are back to the positionof the old Modernism. (Cf. Barth:Kirchliche Dogmatik I, 2, p. 590; I, 1,p. 105; also Brunner; Revelation andReason)

RevelationBarth and Brunner also speak of

their pOSItIOn as a theology of revela­tion. Bat they oppose the orthodoxidea of a finished revelation. Accordingto them revelation is always an act.And it is never an act until it isinteraction between God and man. Andto take his part in this interaction manmust become more than man. Throughthe Holy Spirit man's act of acceptingrevelation becomes God's act of receiv­ing His own Word. God can be knownby God only. Thus we are back to themodernist idea of 'God coming to self­consciousness in man and man comingto self -consciousness in God. (Barth:K.D., I, 1, pp. 313ff; Brunner: DieMystik und das Wort, and Revelationand Reason)

GodBarth and Brunner speak much of

the transcendent God. Yet they rejectthe orthodox doctrine of God. Forthem God is identical with His revela­tion. And as already noted revelationis a process of interaction of God withman made divine. Barth argues thatGod's transcendence means His free­dom to become wholly identical. withman and to take man up into completeidentification with himself. For Brun­ner, God is virtually identical withwhat he calls the divine-human en­counter. Both are vigorously opposedto the orthodox idea of God's self­contained intertrinitarian existence.Both virtually identify God's inter­trinitarian activity with His works ofcreation, providence and redemption.Thus we are back to the God ofSchleiermacher and Ritschl, a godmade in the image of man. (Barth:K.D. I, chapter on "The Freedom ofGod"; Brunner: Revelation and Rea­son)

ManBarth and Brunner speak of man as

having been created in the image ofGod and as having fallen into sin. Butthese ideas, they say, are not to betaken as orthodoxy takes them. TheGenesis account is not to be taken ashistorical narrative. There was no his­torical Adam. There was no paradise.There was no fall.

The notion of a state of perfectionis rather an ideal for the future. It

intimates God's intention for man, andtherefore by revelation as interactionis man's ideal for himself. But God'sintention may be thwarted by man;which by the process of interactionmeans that man never lives up to hisown ideal. So we are back again tothe level of Modernism. In the evolu­tionary process man forms for himselfhigh ideals but, because of the situationof which he is a part, he never fullylives up to them. (Barth: K.D. III, 1;Brunner: The Mediator, p. 146; Manin Revolt, pp. 85f)

ChristBarth and Brunner want to interpret

all things Christologically. And theirChrist, they contend, is the Christ ofthe Scriptures. This claim, too, mustbe denied. Their Christ is not theChrist of the historic Christian creeds.He stands for the process of inter­action between God and man. God isnothing but what He is toward man inChrist, and man is nothing but whathe is in Christ toward God. Identifica­tion with Christ is God's ideal forman and through revelation as inter­action, Christ is man's ideal forhimself. He is the true Adam. So weare led back again to the old modern­ist notion of a Christ who is naughtbut an idealized man. A Christ whois a mixture of a God who does notexist apart from Him and a man whodoes not exist apart from Him is notthe Christ of the Scripture. (Barth:K.D. I, 2; Brunner: The Mediator)

SalvationBarth and Brunner speak much of

God's sovereign grace. By the soundof the words they use, one would eventhink they were Calvinists. For tothem God's election is the source ofman's salvation. But election, they say,must be understood Christologically. Itis therefore a process. Creation itselfis taken up into this process of election.A man does not really exist except inso far as he exists in Christ. Self-con­sciousness presupposes Christ-conscious­ness. All men are reprobate, but theyare reprobate in Christ. Judas, saysBarth, "is not against Jesus" (K.D.III, 1, p. 508). He is not wholly forJesus. Neither is anyone else. All men

70 THE PRESBY~ERIAN GUARDIAN Mareh 10

The Contest with PharaohThe Power of God Manifest onBehalf of His Covenant People

are elect; they are elect as reprobate(Idem, p. 526). Judas represents theprinciple of evil that is found in allmen and Peter represents the idealperfection in Christ that is found inall men. Christ unites the reprobateand the elect; both are destined forparticipation in God's glory (K.D. II,2, p. 460). (For Brunner: Wahrheitals Begegnung, p. 52). Thus the sov­ereign grace of the Crisis theologianshas been made quite acceptable to thenatural man. It is but the auto-soterismof the old Modernism in a new dress.

The ChurchBarth and Brunner speak of election

as the heart of the church. But asthey reject the orthodox doctrine ofelection so they also reject the orthodoxdoctrine of the church. For them thechurch is identical with the process ofelection as both are identical with theprocess they call Christ. All men areinvolved in this process. As vessels ofwrath they are outside but as vesselsof mercy they are inside the church.As Scripture itself is full of contradic­tory systems and is but a witness tothe truth so no creed can be anythingbut an arrow pointing toward the truth.Thus we are back again to the levelof the old Modernism with its notionof the church as a local improvementassociation. (Barth: K.D. II, 2; Brun­ner: The Divine Imperative, p. 300;Man in Revolt, p. 78)

The CommandmentBarth and Brunner speak of inter­

preting ethics Christologically. Thereis no God apart from Christ as thereis no man apart from Christ. In Christthe commanding God and obedientman have coalesced. There is no othergood but Christ and there are noother duties but those to Christ. Christis the standard of good and evil. Thedisobedient disobey in Christ. God'sjudgment upon them is reconciliationin Christ. Men cannot know that theyhave sinned except in the light thatthey are forgiven in Christ; self-con­sciousness is identical with Christ­consciousness. Thus ethics is identicalwith the process of election. As Esausall men disobey but as Jacobs all menobey in Christ. What God wills of usis the same as that which He willsfor us and is doing within us. Thuswe are back to the old Modernismaccording to which Christ is the im­personation of ideals which men haveset for themselves in the course of the

evolutionary process. (Barth: K.D. III,1; Brunner: The Divine Imperative)

The Last ThingsBarth and Brunner deal constantly

with the last things. But for them thelast things have no connection withthe calendar. They are not pre or postor a millenialists. There was no crea­tion out of nothing. There was nohistorical Adam. God did not revealHimself directly in nature and history.The Virgin birth, the death and theresurrection of Christ did not takeplace in history, but in super-history.And super-history is not measured byhours and days of ordinary history.There is no difference of date betweenthe first and second coming of Christ.There is no difference of date betweenwhat Christ did, or rather does, for usand what He, through the Spirit, doeswithin us. In Christ God has time forus; in Christ He is buried with us,

As Moses prepared to go before theking of Egypt, he heard the word

of the Lord, "-I will lay my handupon Egypt" (Exodus 7:4a). It was acritical time. The people of God, theIsraelites, were in bondage to a hostileoppressor. During the time of theirservitude, they could not serve theLord as an organized body. Theirplight was hard, and they groaned fordeliverance.

The situation, however, was farmore crucial than appears upon thesurface. It was a critical time, becauseGod's people were in bondage, but itwas also a critical time for a far moreprofound reason. For the first time inhistory, the people of God, the descend­ants of Eve, the heirs of the promise,were to come face to face with theonslaughts of the adversary. The Egyp­tian people did indeed desire to keepthe Israelites as their slaves. Thatwould have been to their advantage.But behind the scenes of history, thereare spiritual forces at work. Satan, theadversary, would delight to keep thepeople in perpetual bondage. For, ifthe Israelites should be delivered and

with all men. In Christ our time be­comes God's time; we, all men, arerisen with Him. All revelation eventsare aspects of the one great Resurrec­tion Event, of which God and manare the two correlative aspects. Thuswe have virtually returned to the oldModernism, which reduces historicChristianity to a monistic processphilosophy. (Barth: The Resurrectionof the Dead)

* * * * *Our conclusion must be that the

gospel preached and taught by Barthand Brunner, though couched in or­thodox sounding terminology, is stillvirtually identical with the gospel ofthe old Modernism. It is an emascu­lated gospel, a gospel without God,without Christ, without grace, a gospelto the liking of the natural man andwithal a gospel of despair. It is anew Modernism more subtle and dan­gerous than the old.

By EDWARD J. YOUNG

leave Egypt, it would mean that theycould be organized into a nation. Thetheocracy could then be establishedupon the earth. The Temple of Godcould be erected. Israel could be alight unto the Gentiles to point themto Mount Zion, from whence wouldcome the Deliverer.

This must be prevented at all costs.Jerusalem must not be established;the Temple must not be built. Thetheocracy must not be established.Israel must remain as a helpless, un­organized group, for, if the Theocracybe founded, out of Zion will comeforth the Law and the Word of theLord from Jerusalem. This simplymust not be. To destroy Israel now;to keep her in perpetual bondage;this will be to preclude tlte comingof Jesus Christ. This will be to avertCalvary. Satan must work now, and hemust work fast.

There are always people ready andwilling to do the bidding of Satan.And such were the Egyptians. Ofcourse, they may not have realized thatthey were being made the instrumentsof a hostile power, but that does not

IJ

•

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN 71

,

til

lessen their guilt. All who fight againstthe Lord are on the side of the enemy.The Egyptians apparently thought thatthey were merely working for theirown interests; they were simply en­deavoring to prevent slaves from run­ing away. So the matter may haveseemed to them. However, the Egyp­tians were but tools. Behind them wemay see the prince of this world,prepared for battle.

It is for this reason, I believe, thatthe Lord now is ready to display Hissigns and wonders upon the Egyptians.We are now face to face with the firstgreat period of miracles in Biblicalhistory. God's people have known thatHe is a powerful God. They haveknown that He is the Creator, andthey are now to learn that He is aredeemer. But they are also to haveit impressed upon their minds that Heis a mighty Redeemer. His redemptionis an act of power; He has the sov­ereign control of all the forces ofheaven and earth. He will now displayHis great power in the contest withPharaoh.

The Purpose of the WondersWe must ever remember that a

miracle has a didactic purpose. Nomiracle is ever performed without somespecific end in view. Not only domiracles accompany revelation, butthey are in themselves acts 'of God'sspecial revelation. They are designedto teach. And so it was in the case ofthe contest with Pharaoh. "And Egyptshall know that I am the Lord whenI stretch forth My hand upon Egypt,and bring out the sons of Israel fromamong them" (Exodus 7: 5 ). In otherwords, it was necessary to performthese miracles in order that the peopleof the world-the seed of Satan-mightknow that the Lord was the true God.

In those days, as also today, therewas much confusion in men's thinkingabout God. There were those at thattime who bowed down to the idolswhich their hands had created, just astoday there are those who bow downto the idols which their minds havecreated. They think of God as likethemselves. They have created God intheir own image and according totheir likeness. They would limit Himand circumscribe His ability. They sayto Him: "Thus far mayest Thou go,and no farther."

These erroneous conceptions of Godmust be destroyed. The God of Israelmust be acknowledged by the nations

as a God that is unlike the divinitiesof the heathen. There is no God likeIsrael's God. This truth must be im­pressed upon the world, and it mustbe particularly impressed at the timewhen Israel needs to be set free fromthe oppression of a heathen nation.The miracles, therefore, are not meredisplays of power, but they are dis­pl~ys of power, performed for the pur­pose of proclaiming the superiority ofthe God of Israel to all other gods.

Analysis of the MiraclesThere are ten of these miracles, or

plagues. The number ten was chosenof design. It is often a symbol ofcompleteness or perfection. The Lordmight have performed more, or Hemight have performed fewer miracles.However, this number is sufficient. Itexpresses the thought that the Lord isspeaking and performing that which issufficient to accomplish His purposes.But the number ten is further dividedinto two groups of nine and one. Thefirst nine plagues were preparatory;they point toward the last. The lastplague differed from the first nine inthat it served as a climax. When thefirst born were smitten, there arose ashriek of anguish from each home ofEgypt. This was the final judgment ofthe Lord. Beyond this, there was to beno further hope for the Egyptians.

As we examine the first group ofnine plagues, we notice that it againis divided into three smaller groupsof three plagues each. Let us examinethe first group of three. We note firstof all that in these three plagues thereis no distinction made between theIsraelites and the Egyptians. Thus, totake an example, when the frogs cameover the land, they afflicted all theinhabitants. At the first plague, as wellas the second, a warning is given toPharaoh. This was not the case withthe third plague. Both the first andsecond plagues are announced before­hand, but not the third. In each oneof the first three plagues the rod ofAaron is used. Lastly, we should notethat at the third the magicians acknowl­edge the hand of God to be present."This is the finger of God" (Exodus8: 19a), is their cry. Of course thesemagicians did not know God in truth,nevertheless, they did at least acknowl­edge that a power was working thatwas above their own. Among many ofthe nations there has remained thebelief in a supreme Being, and themagicians evidently felt that this su-

preme Being was now at work. It wasnot, however, an acknowledgment offaith. It was not an expression ofadoration or of awe. It was merely acry of impotence and dismay, as thoughthe magicians had said, "A powergreater than ourselves is at work, withwhich we cannot cope." It is true that,since all men are created in the imageof God, they bear impressed in theirvery constitution the marks and evi­dences of His being, and in a certainsense thev know of Him. For the mostpart, bec~use of sin, men try to obli­terate or to suppress the knowledge ofGod which they have. However, deepwithin them, they know that Godexists. So, too, the magicians, thoseservants of Satan in ancient Egypt,now cry, "This is the finger of God."

When we look at the second groupof miracles, we notice certain similar­ities with the first group. In the fourthplague, the warning is given to Pharaohin the morning, and in the fourth andfifth warning is given beforehand, al­though this is not the case in the sixth.The rod of Aaron is not mentioned inconnection with any of these miracles.This group appears to be designed toaffect the comfort and health of man­kind. At the sixth the magicians an­nounce that they can no longer standbefore the face of Moses. There ishere discernible a progress, if such itmay be called, in the hardness of themagicians' hearts. When they acknowl­edge the finger of God to be present,they should bow down before Godand worship Him. It is wrong to con­tinue to resist Him. It was this thatthe magicians did. They refused tobow before God, and now they findthat they cannot even stand beforeHis servant. Herein it is proclaimedto all the world that God is indeedabove the men of this world.

In the third group of three we noteagain that in the seventh the warningis given to Pharaoh in the morning. Inboth the seventh and eighth, the plagueis announced beforehand, but not so inthe case of the ninth. Again, there isno mention of the rod of Aaron, butthere is mention of his hand. Thesethree seem designed to take away fromman the staff of life. We may notealso that beginning with the fourthplague and continuing throughout thelast two groups of three a distinctionis observed between the Israelites andthe Egyptians. There has been dis­cernible also a growth in the severityof the plagues, and an advance fromthe external to the internal. At last,

72 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN Mareh 10

Song in (he Pnbli~ Worshipof GodA. Study 0/ Committee Reports.

By ROBERT S. MARSDEN

considering this question,the committee had to con­question as to whether, in-

Irf

The Analogy of Songwith Prayer

The committee bases its argumentthat the singing of songs other thanthe Psalms is authorized in Scripture,in accordance with the regulative prin­ciple, first of all, upon the analogywith prayer. It is not to be disputedthat prayer is a part of worship, andthat our prayer must be consistent withthe regulative principle for worship.Yet, in our prayer, we are not confinedto any set form of words. Songs andprayers have a very close affinity inScripture; some songs are prayers, andsome prayers are songs. The Psalmsthemselves abound in prayers, and someof the Psalms are called prayers.

But, it may be contended, singingis one part of worship; praying is quiteanother. It may be contended that

deed, the Confession of Faith and theCatechisms are correct in enunciatingthis regulative principle. There were,in other words, three possible findingswhich the committee might publish. Itcould have come to the conclusion thatthe subordinate standards were incor­rect in stating this regulative principle,and then it would have been faced withthe task of recommending amendmentsto the subordinate standards. It couldhave come to the conclusion that theregulative principle as stated is Biblical,and that the application is correctwhich those, who contend for the sing­ing of the Psalms exclusively, make.In that event the committee wouldhave been compelled to recommendthat only the Psalms be sung in thechurches. Or it could have concludedthat the regulative principle is thattaught in the Bible, but that theapplication of the principle by thosewho sing other hymns is the Biblicalapplication. It is this last positionwhich is taken by the report of thecommittee, while a minority of thecommittee contends, in a minority re­port, for the second alternative men­tioned.

Since the committee was unanimousin its opinion that the regulative prin­ciple stated in the subordinate stand­ards is that taught in the Word ofGod, it will not be necessary to arguethat matter in this article. Doubtless,pastors have preached on this subject,and those who may be in doubt con­cerning it are referred to the first partof the committee's report which is con­tained in the Minutes of the ThirteenthGeneral Assembly, 1946.

The Regulative Principleof Worship

The committee began its work byconsidering the question of whetheror not there was a regulative principleof worship. In examining this question,the committee found, first of all, thatthe Scriptures teach, and the Confes­sion of Faith and the Catechismsenunciate such a principle. That regu­lative principle is succinctly stated inthe Confession of Faith, Chapter XXI,Section 1, as follows: "But the accept­able way of Worshiping the true Godis instituted by Himself, and so limitedby His own revealed will, that Hemay not be worshipped according tothe imaginations and devices of men,or the suggestions of Satan, under anyvisible representation, or any other waynot prescribed in the holy Scripture".

It was found that other parts ofthe subordinate standards presentedstatements on the subject consistentwith this principle. The principle issimply that we may do nothing inworship save that which is "prescribed"by the Lord Himself in His Word. Thequestion is simply whether the singingof hymns other than those containedin the Scripture is so "prescribed" inthe Word. There are some subordinatequestions as to whether there is Scrip­tural warrant for singing all the Psalms,and whether there is Scriptural warrantfor the singing of other parts of theScripture in addition to the Psalms.But the important question was whetheraccording to the regulative principlethere is Scriptural warrant for singingother than those songs indited in theWord.

Beforehowever,sider the

height of folly has been reached. Theywould turn aside from the miracleworking God; they would face a certaindeath. But God remains just; He re­mains true. His people know His powerand they may have confidence in Hisability to deliver them even from thehouse of bondage.

I N the Reformation period, and for150 years afterward, the Reformed

churches of Great Britain and theNetherlands sang chiefly the Psalms.At the present time there are relativelyfew churches that sing Psalms exclu­sively. It would appear from this thatthe question must have been ratherdefinitely decided during the course ofthese years. However, the argumentswhich have been advanced on eachside of the controversy leave rathermuch to be desired. There is a lackof reasoned argument based on Scrip­ture. There is much more argumentbased on expediency and sentiment.

When the question was raised in TheOrthodox Presbyterian Church of pre­paring an official church hymnal, thematter of Psalm-singing was imme­diately encountered, as there are thosewithin the denomination who hold thatthey cannot, in good conscience, in thelight of Scripture, sing other thanPsalms in public worship. The GeneralAssembly appointed a committee tostudy the question. The first part ofthe committee's report was presentedin 1946, and the second part in 1947.The completed report is to be con­sidered by the 1948 Assembly.

We present herewith a study of thereport and conclusions of the com­mittee, prepared by one of its members.This article is intended to encouragea consideration of the matter on thepart of all ministers and laymen. Thewhole committee was in agreement onthe part of the report concerning theregulative principle of worship and theStandards of the church. There wasdisagreement concerning the applica­tion of the principle in the practicalcircumstances of the church's life.

Pharaoh refuses any longer to see theface of Moses.

It is a tragic picture. God haswrought His mighty judgments. Insteadof hearkening to their warnings, Phar­aoh and the Egyptians stubbornlysought to resist the power of God. Atlast, they would take no more. The

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN 73

\

J

while the Scripture does not restrictour praying to a set form of words, itdoes so restrict our singing. But aresinging and praying two such distinctexercises of worship? Is not their com­plete distinctness a modern developmentarising from the great development ofmusic in modern times? Musical ar­rangement and notation were extremelysimple in Bible times, and there seemsto be evidence that the prayers weresometimes chanted or uttered in anexalted kind of voice, very closely akinto our singing. This chanting likelyconstituted the singing of Bible times.If the congregation joined in the prayerwhich Peter appears to have led (Acts4: 24-31 ), it appears that it was bymeans of chanting, or some kind ofresponse, for the prayer certainly ap­pears to have been spontaneous, yet"they lifted up their voice with oneaccord". It would appear that we arenot warranted in making a sharp dis­tinction between the work spoken andthe word sung. Sometimes, in theHebrew services, and, later, in theChristian church services, parts of theBible were sung, and at other timesthey were read or recited. Sometimesprayers were spoken in an ordinarytone of voice, and at other times theyprobably were chanted or sung. To saythat the prayers in the Psalms (andno other prayers) were sung, is an un­warranted assertion.

New Occasions Evoke New SongsThe committee finds its most cogent

argument for the use of other hymnsthan the Psalms in the public worshipof God in the fact that consistentlythroughout the Scriptures, new occa­sions call for the composition of newsongs. We have no record of whatsongs were sung in worship prior tothe time of David. The song of Miriamand the song of Hannah which pre­ceded this period were both songswritten for particular occasions, as weremany of the Psalms. With the com­position of the Psalms, some of themwere used in the temple worshipalthough there is no evidence that allof them were so used or that all ofthem were intended to be sung at all.

Even though the Psalms were inexistence, and probably were collected,when Hezekiah had been recoveredfrom his sickness, he wrote a song andcommanded that it be sung in thetemple (Is. 38: 10-20). The new ex­perience evoked a new song, and heused that song in the temple after the

Psalms had been provided.When we come to the New Testa­

ment we find several songs surroundingthe birth of Jesus (Luke 1, 2). We arenot told specifically that these weresung, yet they are in the form of song,and the introduction to the song of theheavenly host indicates that their"Glory to God in the highest" was asong of praise. The hymn of Mary(Luke 1: 46-55) known as "the Mag­nificat" was based upon the song ofHannah in 1 Sam. 2: 1-10, yet it is notmerely verbal repetition. The songs ofZacharias (Luke 1:67-79) and Simeon(Luke 2:29-32) introduce New Testa­ment elements.

The prayer, already cited, in Acts4:24-31, again uses Old Testamentelements from Psalm 2 as a basis, andintroduces in connection with thisPsalm New Testament applications. Ifthis was sung, as the expression "theylifted up their voice to God with oneaccord" would seem to indicate, it isanother evidence that new occasionsand new experiences of God's lovingkindness called for a new song.

In 1 Cor. 14 there appears to beanother evidence of this same thing.There we are permitted an insight intoa church meeting in which there weresupernatural spiritual gifts such asceased with the completion of revela­tion. The Apostle Paul is warningagainst the misuse of these spiritualgifts. He lists, in verse 26, some ofthe manifestations of these spiritualgifts. In that catalogue he indicatesthat sometimes a worshiper is given aspecial song which Paul calls a "psalm".There is no indication that this songis one of the .150 Psalms. Rather, thissong which was given as a special giftcould hardly have been one of thesePsalms which were the possession ofthe whole church. The "psalm" musthave been a new composition, suitedfor the occasion.

In the Pastoral Epistles of Paul(Epistles to Timothy and Titus), thereare five "faithful sayings". Some ofthese seem to be fragments of NewTestament songs. One is quoted in thereport of the committee, and it isappropriate here. In 1 Tim. 3: 16 weread, "And confessedly great is themystery of godliness:

Who was manifested in flesh,Was justified in spirit,Was seen by angels,Was preached in nations,Was believed in (the) world,Was received up in glory."

Most commentators agree that thisis a poetic passage, and there seemsto be real possibility that it was oneof the earliest of the New Testamentsongs. This song reflects the expandedrevelation which the Lord gave Hischurch in the New Testament.

In the Book of the Revelation (5: 9and 14: 3 ) we are told that in thecircumstances that obtain in heaventhere will be new songs sung to me­morialize the new experiences whichthe glorified saints will there enjoy.The expanded revelation of heaven willagain call forth new songs.

ObjectionsThe primary objection which has

been offered to this line of reasoningis that we have no evidence in Scrip­ture that there is warrant for singinguninspired compositions. The difficultyin dealing with this argument willimmediately be apparent. The fact thatwe have new songs in the Scriptureto memorialize new conditions does notsatisfy those who offer this argument.For, the fact that these new songs arein the Scripture makes them inspired,and, consequently what these brethrenwould ask is the impossible-that wecite from Scripture the use of an un­inspired song. The very fact that it isin the Scripture guarantees that anysong we cite from Scripture is inspired!Who could possibly find an uninspiredsong in Scripture, and would the Lorddemand the completion of so impos­sible a task before He would permitthe singing of uninspired songs to Hispraise? To be sure, theoretically itwould not be impossible to imagine thiskind of warrant i.n Scripture for suchsong. It might have been said that acertain disciple, not one of the apostoliccompany, composed a song which is notrecorded in Scripture, and that thatsong was sung in a public worshipservice. But even then it would beimpossible to prove that that song wasnot inspired. It would thus be im­possible to prove that uninspired songsare authorized in the Scripture, andto demand such proof before one canin good conscience sing uninspiredsongs is to demand the impossible!

What is to be Accomplishedby the Study?

What is to be accomplished throughthis study? Certainly no study of theWord of God, and of its bearing uponany phase of Christian conduct is inany sense a waste of time. But the

74 THE PRESBYTERIAN. GUARDIAN March If)

present writer makes bold to hope forsome concrete results of the study bythe committee.

The most salutary result would bethat our church might become unitedin its opinion that hymns as well asthe Psalms may be used in publicworship. It is to be hoped that all themembers of the church might be ablewith good conscience to sing thesehymns.

If this complete result cannot nowbe accomplished, then it is certainlyto be hoped that those who, in goodconscience, can sing hymns, and thosewho, in good conscience, find it im­possible to sing them may respect oneanother's consciences in the matter. Letnone seek to impose his conscienceupon the other. There has been atendency toward intolerance on bothsides. Both sides can cite ample historicprecedent for their position among Re­formed people. If those on each sideof the question will come to realizethat. both really and sincerely acceptthe regulative principle, and then seekto understand how, on the basis of thatbiblical principle, each could possiblyarrive at his conclusion, much will beaccomplished by this study. It is onething for a man to assert that he can­not with good conscience do a particu­lar thing; it is quite another for oneto assert that it is sinful for otherChristians to engage in that practice.Let none violate his conscience, but leteach in good conscience sing to theglory of God only such songs as he issure are prescribed by the Word ofGod.

ConclusionThe conclusion to which the com­

mittee comes in its report is carefullyworded. It concludes that the Psalmsare to be sung by the New Testamentchurch. It does not pass judgment uponthe question as to which Psalms areto be sung, nor does it pass judgmentas to whether all the Psalms are appro­priate for singing. The report gives nocomfort to those who would sing hymnsonly from reasons of expediency, norto those who would introduce into'the worship of God songs which arenot Biblical in their content. The songswhich we sing must be as clearly atestimony to the truth of God as thesermons which we preach and theprayers which we offer. The conclusionof the report is simply, "The contentof song, then, like the content of ourprayer, need not be restricted to the

very words of Scripture, although itmust be assuredly Scriptural in teach­ing".

This conclusion brings us back tothe place where we were at the timeof the general assembly in 1944. Atthat time, already, a committee hadworked a year on preliminary discus­sion which it was hoped would leadto the publication of a hymnal. If ahymnal was needed then, the need ismuch greater now. It is a fact thatthere is now no completely satisfactoryhymnal for The Orthodox PresbyterianChurch. In the opinion of this author,the Hymnal, Revised, of the Presby­terian Church in the U.S.A., while ithad some glaring faults, came nearestto fulfilling the requirements for ourchurch. Yet even this is now out ofprint and almost unobtainable, and itssuccessor, published in 1933, is in myjudgment generally unfitted for use inan Orthodox Presbyterian church.Other hymnals may suffice for the timebeing. The Psalter Hymnal of theChristian Reformed Church has manyexcellencies, but it lacks many of thebest hymns that are most familiar toAmerican congregations, and its tunesare generally unfamiliar to Americanaudiences. It would appear that fouror five years must, of necessity, go intothe preparation and publication of ahymnal, and it is to be hoped thatThe Orthodox Presbyterian Church willsoon be in position to proceed withthis necessary project.

Editorial(Continued from page 68)

divergences are repudiated. In a con­crete situation, for example, it wasinsisted that a single declaration offaith, "Scriptural, clear, concise andunequivocal", should be formulated andprove acceptable to both parties toassure progress.

One finds also a healthy recognmonthat responsibility rests upon the entirechurch. Isolated action of congregationsin establishing fellowship with otherchurches is opposed on the ground thatthe great goal must be "joint defenseagainst schism and sectarianism", inaccordance with Romans 16: 17. Andit is intimated that documents bearingupon union proposals were studied"throughout the length and breadth ofthe Synod, by individual members, by

pastoral conferences, in Bible classes,in meetings of our young people, andelsewhere."

It is also heartening to observe thatthe Synod's Brief Statement of its doc­trinal position contains the followingarticle: "The orthodox character of achurch is established not by its merename nor by its outward acceptanceof, and subscription to, an orthodoxcreed, but by the doctrine which isactually taught in its pulpits, in itstheological seminaries, and in its pub­lications. On the other hand, a churchdoes not forfeit its orthodox characterthrough the casual intrusion of errors,provided these are combatted and even­tually removed by means of doctrinaldiscipline" .

Our generally favorable evaluationof the approach of the Missouri Synodto the question of church union doesnot imply, of course, that we neces­sarily concur with every detail, andmuch less that we approve the dis­tinctive doctrinal position of the Synod.We reject as unscriptural, for example,its conception of "universal grace" andits declaration that "in the NewTestament God has abrogated the sab­bath ..." We express such disagreementwith the greater sorrow because of ourdeep agreement with this church in itsstand for the inspiration and integrityof the Scriptures. We also welcome theemphasis which falls upon the doctrinethat "conversion is wrought by thegrace and power of God alone", reject­ing as "apostasy from the Christianreligion all doctrines whereby man'sown works and merit are mingled intothe doctrine of justification beforeGod".

What we have been especially con­cerned to emphasize is the principlethat church union must be soughtwithout compromise of the truth. Suchzeal must, indeed, be distinguished fromdogmatism and ecclesiasticism. Fidelityto the Scriptures will demand that wesharpen our perspectives as to theelements in our faith and practicewhich are merely human traditions,and those which are clearly revealed.Efforts to achieve unity will prosperonly when a spirit of humility andgood will prevails. But the Scripture>,which enjoin the fullest possible unityamong Christians, must themselves beregulative of the practice of individualsand churches.

Shall we not put this principle intoaction?

N.B.S.

r

•

(

I

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN

The Glory of the ~hristian~horeh

By the REV. PROFESSOR R. B. KUIPER

73

VI

UNITY WITHOUT

UNIFORMITY

A FEW years ago Wendell Wilkiewrote a best-seller entitled "One

World". It was a plea for the har­monious cooperation of all nations. Mr.Wilkie's aim was most laudable, buthis book suffered from oversimplifica­tion and superficial optimism. He didnot reckon sufficiently with the de­pravity of human nature in general norwith the ungodliness of Marxian Com­munism in particular. Today the worldis exceedingly far from being one.Scripture tells us that it will not beone until God has established the newearth.

The plight of the Christian churchseems almost as sad as that of theworld. To all appearances it too is ahouse divided against itself. It re­sembles a beautiful vase that, fallenfrom its perch, lies shattered in athousand pieces. It is like a grandstructure transformed by an explodingbomb into a tangled mass of weckage.

One ChurchUnbelievable though it may seem,

the church of Jesus Christ is really one.This truth is presupposed in the

Apostles' Creed, which makes mentionof "a holy catholic church" in thesingular and defines this church as"the"-the one and only-"communionof saints". To be sure, according tothe same creed the church's unity is amatter of faith rather than sight, butthat does not detract a whit from itsreality.

The Word of God teaches the unityof the church unmistakably, repeatedlylind emphatically. It is no exaggerationto assert that this is one of the mostoutstanding teachings of the New Testa­ment. It tells us, for instance, that thechurch has one Head (E ph. 1: 22), oneSpirit (I Cor. 12: 13), one foundation(1 Cor. 3: II), one faith and one bap­tism (Eph, 4:5). Two whole chapters,

Romans 12 and First Corinthians 12,are devoted to setting forth the truththat all believers constitute one body,even the body of Christ. All of whichadds up to the fact that spiritually thechurch is one.

That being the case, the questionarises why Jesus in the seventeenthchapter of John's Gospel prayed for theunity of believers. Referring to theapostles He said in the eleventh verse:"Holy Father, keep through thine ownname those whom thou hast given me,that they may be one as we are". Andin the twenty-first verse, with the be­lievers of succeeding ages in mind, Hecontinued: "That they all may be one;as thou, Father, art in me and I inthee, that they also may be one in us".Surely, if the spiritual unity of be­lievers is a reality, it would seem super­fluous to pray that it may come to pass.

Many present-day advocates of churchunion take it for granted that Jesusprayed in John seventeen for the or­ganizational unity of His followers.Glibly they quote the Savior's prayerfor the unity of believers in supportof the wholesale wiping out of denomi­national boundaries. But even he whoruns may see that Jesus was thinkingprimarily of the spiritual unity ofbelievers. He prayed that they mightbe one as He and the Father are one.To be sure, He also desired that thisunity might become manifest, for Headded: "That the world may believethat thou hast sent me"; but that in noway alters the fact that the unity forwhich He prayed was specificallyspiritual.

Indisputably the Lord prayed for thespiritual unity of His church. And sothe question will not down how thisprayer may be reconciled with the factthat spiritually the church is one. Acomparison may help discover the an­swer. The Christian is holy. EveryChristian is a saint. It may even be saidthat in principle he is perfect. Didnot John assert: "Whosoever is born-of God doth not commit sin; for hisseed remaineth in him: and he cannotsin because he is born of God" (I John

3: 9)? And yet, how obvious that thevery best Christian needs to grow inholiness and has a long way to gobefore he shall have attained to thegoal of perfection. In much the sameway the spiritual unity of all whobelieve in Christ is indeed a presentreality, but its fullest realization andtloie attainment of the highest degreeof unity lie in the future. The spiritualunity of the church is both real andto be realized. .

The fact remains that the church ofGod, far from being a tangled heapof wreckage, is even now God's ownperfectly proportioned temple, builtupon the foundation of the apostlesand prophets, with Jesus Christ Him­self as the chief cornerstone, in whomall the building is fitly framed togetherand all believers are builded togetherfor a habitation of God through theSpirit (Eph. 2:20-22). God omniscientsees it thus. So does God's child withthe eye of faith.

Many FormsThat there is considerable variety

among individual Christians and alsoamong groups of Christians cannot bedisputed. There is no good reason whyanybody should care to dispute it.Uniformity among Christians is notnecessarily a good. When carried toextremes it becomes an evil. It can beshown that complete uniformity withinthe church would not enhance itsbeauty but rather detract from it.

Theologians often speak of the multi­formity of the church. By and largethey regard it as a good. However, fewhave stopped to define the term, andthat has led to confusion. Sad to say,the term multiformity has even beenused to cover a multitude of sins.

It has been made to include heresies,for instance. There are, no doubt,greater heresies than Arminianism,Modernism is far worse. But Arrninian­ism too is error. Let no one say thatthe difference between the Reformedfaith and Arminianism is merely oneof emphasis, the former stressing thesovereignty of God, the latter the re-

76 TD~ PR~SBYTERIAN GUARDIAN Mareh 10

sponsibility of man, and that thereforeit is desirable that there be both Re­formed churches and Arminianchurches. The fact is that Arminianismdoes great violence to both divine sov­ereignty and human responsibility. Itmay never be forgotten that error issin. To make sin look respectable bycasting about it the cloak of multi­formity is itself sin.

Again, the term multiformity hasoften been employed to excuse schismwithin the church. Schism is sinfuldivision. To leave one denominationin order to found another is an ex­tremely serious matter, and it may bedone only for compelling reasons. Todo so on the issue whether leavenedor unleavened bread and fermented orunfermented wine should be used atthe Lord's Supper is not merely ridicu­lous but extremely sinful. Such dif­ferences are much too insignificant tojustify division in the body of Christ.When division does occur because ofthem there is joy among the fallenangels. Multiformity and schism arenot synonymous.

If churchmen could make up theirminds to use the term multiformityonly for permissible differences andnot for sin, that would remove muchmisunderstanding and might well pro­mote the unity of the church.

It is not difficult to think of per­missible differences. In the interest ofuniformity Rome has adopted one lan­guage, Latin, for its services of worshipthroughout the world; but surely thereis room within the church of Christfor any number of languages. Threemodes of baptism are found withinthe church-immersion in water, pour­ing on of water, and sprinkling withwater-and, the Baptists to the contrarynotwithstanding, it cannot be provedthat one is better than another. Grantedthat the preaching of the Word is thechief element in public worship, therestill remains room for differences as tothe number of songs to be sung andthe number of prayers to be prayed.What does it matter whether a ministerwears a Genevan gown, a Prince Albert,a cut-away coat with striped trousers,or just an ordinary suit of clothes inthe pulpit? The Scotchman has thereputation of being stolid and usuallythere is something stolid about his wor­ship, while the African is more emo­tional and this too is reflected in hismode of worship; but instead of findingfault with each other for this difference

they should hold one another in highesteem.

Such multiformity does not obscurethe unity of Christ's church, but rathercauses it to stand out the more boldly.Unity that comes to expression inuniformity may well be, and usually is,superficial. On the other hand, unitythat constitutes the background ofmultiformity is necessarily deep. Forus to be at one with those who arelike us is easy; to be at one with thosewho are unlike us is possible only ifa profound unity underlies surface dif­ferences. Cicero, pagan though he was,made the wise' observation that lovesurpasses friendship in that, whilefriendship is esteem of one for anotherwho agrees with him, love is esteemof one for another who differs fromhim.

By the same token, multiformityshort of sin, instead of detracting fromthe glory of the church, enhances it.How much more beautiful is a buildingconstructed of stones of different shapesand sizes than is a structure of blocksall of which look alike. As the humanbody derives its beauty from the varietyof its members, so does the body ofChrist. It is when love rises aboveuniformity and embraces multiformitythat the greatest of Christian virtuescomes to its most glorious expression.

Crescent and disk, pagan religious sym­bolism, can be seen near the top ofthis obelisk, on a path in Eritrea.

Stanton(Continued from page 68)

easy for weary feet of travelers. Therein the midst of the wilderness ofgigantic barren hills, steps had beenmade up a hillside, and made so wellthat the storms of many years had notwashed them away.

We (Ahmed, a guide and I) were'hospitably entertained by the nativepriest who now has oversight of Alitenamission. He appeared to be an intelli­gent fellow who is able to read andwrite French, Italian and Amharic.Saho is his native language. He broughtus a large jar of fresh honey-water,than which nothing could have beenmore welcome or delicious. He said Iwas the first white man to visit Alitenafor years. The French priests had allbeen compelled to leave in 1936 whenthe Italians came. The native priestseemed pleased that I had come for avisit. That night I slept on a comfort­able bed with a mattress, and I hadan abundance of the best native foodI have yet seen or tasted.

The set of buildings that providedliving quarters' for the missionaries hasthe appearance of a fort, built on alarge projection of solid rock. Thewalls are of rock and well made. Acrossthe little valley is -thc church buildingwith the church yard and cemetery.The building is a large, fine structuresuch as one might see in the olderRoman Catholic section of Philadel­phia. It is really remarkable, for sucha wilderness spot, and far more elabo­rate than the living quarters. At the­front a large lovely chandelier wassuspended from the ceiling, and thepriest showed me an organ which forten years had not been played. Everypart of this fine building except thestones in it had been carried manymiles over the steep, hot hills by donkeyor mule, or on the backs of men. Icould not do other than admire thegreat and patient zeal of these peoplewho had worked so hard to constructin that wilderness spot a beautifulbuilding for the worship of God. Yetthis was not the first building theyhad constructed. A previous churchbuilding here had been burned to theground by Ethiopian soldiers in 1881,and the mission had been plundered.

The persecution that the RomanCatholic Church endured in the earlydays is the reason why Alitenabecamethe mission's chief station. Its asset was

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN 77

but they proved to be more limitedthan the material we have alreadyworked out. From some unseen librarythis priest brought out and gave to meto keep the small German grammar byLeo Reinisch on the Saho language,that I had heard of before but hadnever been able to find.

The past importance of the Alitenamission can be estimated by the factthat in 1930 the 1170 believers at thestation made up almost half the totalnumber of Catholic adherents in all theten Romanist stations established up tothat time. With the coming of theItalians in larger numbers, Asmaraand other larger towns became thechief centers of the. Catholic influence,but Alitena continues to be one of thechief areas of Catholic population.

Coptic Church at Asmara. Drawingson the front are thought to represent

its remoteness from the larger centersof population in the highlands.

The French missionaries had madea garden beside the stream at Alitena,a part of which still remains. A numberof sturdy luxuriant lemon and orangetrees were there, welI laden with fruit.The priest sent two donkey loads oforanges (180 pounds) back to Addi

Native priest at Alitena with three ofhis men. In the back there is a small

saints of the Coptic church. There arenumerous church buildings in the area.

Caieh with me, asking me to sell themfor him if possible. We sold them.

I was chiefly interested to know whatthe French missionaries had done inthe study of Saho. AlI the teaching,reading and writing had been inAmharic. Only one of the Frenchmissionaries had attempted any workin Saho. He had composed some notes,

chapel with bell. Structure of the wallsshows clearly in this picture.

New ArchbishopIn Baltimore

A large company of church digni­taries and a number of civil

officials were on hand for the officialinstallation of the Rev. F. X. Keoughas the 11th Archbishop of Baltimore.The ceremony took place in the cathe­dral of the Assumption, claimed as themother church of Roman Catholicismin the United States. The new Arch­bishop succeeds Archbishop Michael J.Curley who died last May.

WestminsterAuxiliary HearsWillis, Atwell

T H E Women's Auxiliary of West­minster Theological Seminary held

a feIlowship and get-acquainted meet­ing on Friday afternoon, February 6,at the BelIevue-Stratford Hotel inPhiladelphia. Sponsored by Mrs. FrankH. Stevenson, president of the Au­xiliary, the gathering was primarilyto provide an opportunity for mem­bers in the eastern Pennsylvania andNew Jersey areas to become acquaintedwith one another, and to hear messagesfrom the Rev. Robert L. Atwell andthe Rev. George J. Willis.

Mr. Willis, who was seriously in­jured in an automobile accident overa year ago, is now back in activeservice as field representative of West­minster. He took the occasion to speakof the excellence of the faculty of theSeminary, as scholars and teachers of

78 THE .RESBVTERlAN GUARDIAN Mareh 10

The Visihle Chur~h

Part 11: The Minister and the CreedsBy JOHANNES G. VOS

the Word. He called for devoted andsacrificial support of the work of theSeminary on the part of Auxiliarymembers.

Mr. Atwell, who is on leave ofabsence from the pastorate of the Cal­vary Orthodox Presbyterian Church,Middletown, Pa., in order to visit col­leges in the interests of Westminster,spoke concerning his trip of the pre­vious year, and the character of students

T H E question of the form of sub­scription to the doctrinal standards

of a denomination which should berequired of ministers is an importantone but too large to be taken up inany detail in this article. AmongChurches of the Presbyterian family inAmerica, the prevalent form of sub­scription has been one to the Confessionof Faith, or to the Confession and theLarger and Shorter Catechisms as con­taining the system of doctrine taughtin the Scriptures. The question as tothe meaning of the expression "thesystem of doctrine"-whether it meansevery proposition in the Confession, orthe "substance" of doctrine, or theCalvinistic system of doctrine-has beenthoroughly discussed in the past. Thefirst of the views listed cannot be de­fended, for it would amount to claim­ing infallibility for the Confession. Thesecond, which would define "system"as "substance", distorts the meaningof words, and would open the door toserious errors; a candidate for ordina­tion could reject the doctrines whichare essential to the system of Calvinism,and yet claim to hold the "substance"of doctrine taught in the Scriptures.The third view, namely, that whichdefines "the system of doctrine" asconsistent Calvinism as set forth in theConfession of Faith, is undoubtedly cor­rect and should be insisted on.

Something should be said aboutpreaching and teaching on the part ofministers in its relation to the corporatewitness of the Church. It is not neces­sary to state that a minister shouldfaithfully teach and preach the body oftruth set forth in the Standards of hisChurch. But what about the portionof Scriptural ground which lies beyondthe area of confessionally defined

who are interested in the work of theministry. He expressed encouragementconcerning the future ministerial supplyof the church, and emphasized thevalue of the training which Westmin­ster e;ives candidates for the ministry.

Following the talks by Mr. Atwelland Mr. Willis, refreshments wereserved and a period of fellowship wasenjoyed. Approximately 85 persons at­tended the meeting.

dogma? Is a minister limited to preach­ing truth embodied in his Church'scorporate witness? Must he refrainfrom handling matters on which hisChurch's Standards are non-committal?For example, maya minister in preach­ing advocate the "restitution theory"of the meaning of Genesis 1: 1, 2? Thetraducian view of the origin of thesoul? The Pauline authorship of theEpistle to the Hebrews? The viewthat the earth is to be destroyed as toform only, and not as to matter, orthe contrary view that it is to bedestroyed as to both form and matter?

With respect to this problem it maybe said, first of all, that a minister isordained to proclaim the whole counselof God, and therefore is not limitedto that portion which has already beendefined as dogma by his Church; in­deed, no doctrine would historicallyhave been defined as dogma unless ithad previously been preached by minis­ters and thus had come to be recog­nized as Scriptural by the Church. Yeta minister in his preaching and teachingmust never contradict anything whichhe had professed to accept in hissubscription to the Standards of hisChurch at his ordination. In the sec­ond place, he may never represent anydoctrine as an element of the corporatewitness of his Church unless it reallyis set forth in the Standards. Commonhonesty would seem to involve this,yet it is not infrequently violated inpractice; ministers who hold someextra-confessional doctrinal specialtywith great zeal sometimes preach itso fervently and so persistently that thepublic gets the impression that it is achief point of the denomination's tes­timony. When a minister preaches anextra-confessional doctrine he owes his

hearers a statement that what he isabout to preach is not a part of thepublic testimony of their Church, thatit is not in conflict with that testimony,and that he believes it to be a doctrineof God's Word. In the third place,preaching of extra-confessional doc­trines should be kept in strict sub­ordination, as to time and emphasis,to the task of preaching the doctrinesof the Church's corporate testimony.The main burden of every minister'spulpit work should always be the doc­trines which his Church holds as abody. The practice of some denomina­tions of requiring ministers to devoteone service each Sabbath to doctrinalpreaching following the order of theChurch's catechism has much to com­mend it. There could hardly be abetter safeguard against the exploita­tion of extra-confessional specialties inthe pulpit.

The principles just outlined cannotof course be applied to expositorypreaching in exactly the same way asto doctrinal preaching. In the nature ofthe case, much expository preachingwill deal with the historical and bio­graphical portions of the Bible. Itwould be absurd to expect a ministerwho preaches on the life of Joseph,for example, to explain to his hearersthat what he is about to say is taughtin the Bible, but is not mentioned inthe Standards of the Church. Churchmembers of ordinary intelligence under­stand that their Church's Standardspresent a formulation of doctrine, nota condensed summary of everything inthe Bible. Still it must be rememberedthat expository preaching, while notformally doctrinal, cannot be divorcedfrom doctrine. The doctrines which aminister holds will inevitably come tothe surface even in expository preach­ing. And surely if in the course ofexpository preaching a minister wishesto emphasize some extra-confessionaldoctrine, he should take care to makeits status clear to his hearers. Theminister is not merely an individualproclaimer of the Gospel; he is also anorgan of the visible Church, and thisfact involves an obligation to maintaina distinction between that which heholds and proclaims merely as a matterof personal conviction concerning themeaning of Scriptures, and that whichhe holds and proclaims as also thecorporate witness of the Church ofwhich he is a member, and in whichhe is a servant.

1948 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN

GUARDIAN NEWS

COJ'J\J'J\E~rr1-\r0 R

79

VIEWING THE NEWS FROM THE RELlGIOUS NEWS SERVICE AND THE RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR PRESS

Lutherans OperatePalestine Missions

A' N agreement has been reached withthe British government by which

the National Lutheran Council willassume complete charge of Lutheranmissions in Palestine. The Council isthe U. S. Committee for LutheranWorld Federation. The mission prop­erty is clustered in a small area inand near Jerusalem, and is valued inthe neighborhood of 20 million dollars.

Before the war the missions wereoperated by missionary societies havingheadquarters in Germany. They weretaken over by the British during thewar and have been supervised by theBritish Custodian of Enemy Property.At one time they required the servicesof at least 100 foreign missionaries.

Chureh-Sehools inNew Mexieo

CO N S I D E R A BL E attention hasbeen directed recently to the situa­

tion in certain communities of NewMexico, where so-called public schoolsappear to be controlled and operatedby the Catholic church, with nuns asteachers. Dr. J. M. Dawson, Secretaryfor Protestants and Others United ...has recently returned from a trip forthe purpose of investigating the situa­tion there. Dawson claimed that schools 'listed on church records as parochialare entirely supported by public taxa­tion. Textbooks pertaining to theCatholic faith are paid for by the state.Nuns in religious garb and priests areteachers. Protestant children weregraded in Catechism, and were pun­ished if they failed to attend Mass.Payment of teachers is in some casesmade directly to the order, rather thanto the individuals, and in a numberof cases no withholding tax was de­ducted from the salaries.

The community of Dixon, N. M., isparticularly involved in the situation.A Santa Fe attorney has promised to

file suit in the near future against thereligious encroachment in publicschools, and intirnates that the casewill probably reach the U. S. SupremeCourt.

Protestant CenterIn New York

P LANS are under way for theestablishment in New York City

of a Protestant Center, aimed atbringing together on a single site de­nominations which already have head­quarters in that city. Included wouldbe the Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptistand Congregational ,churches, and theFederal Council. Although a bill toapprove this procedure has been intro­duced in the New York legislature, itis not expected that the Center willmaterialize for a number of years.

This is the second proposal for areligious center. Proposals were madesome time ago for the erection of atemple of good will in Columbus, Ohio,where all American Protestant groupsmight have their headquarters. Thatproposal has been officially endorsed,however, 'by only one national de­nomination, and by the InternationalCouncil of Religious Education.

Protestant Men

A SURVEY of the protestant re­ligious constituency in Indian­

apolis has indicated that Protestantismlacks attraction for men, is failing toreach the low income groups, and isbarely keeping pace with the popula­tion growth of the city.

The survey showed that only 29.2percent of protestant church memberswere males. Laborers, who make up26 percent of the working populationgenerally, made up only 8.6 percentof church membership, and during aperiod when the population grew 15.6per cent, church membership increasedonly 16 percent. Only 31.4 percent of

Indianapolis Protestants attend Sundaymorning services, and only about sevenpercent Sunday evening services. Andsome 50,000 persons of the protestantfaith are unchurched.

We doubt that the Indianapolissituation is unusual. But when presentedin this fashion, it emphasizes the chal­lenge which confronts the Church ofChrist.

Paehomius to beHonored

EVER YO NE who has studied earlychurch history has encountered the

name of St. Pac homius, one of thefounders of Monasticism in Egypt. Hedied about 16 centuries ago, whichwould bring us to 348 AD. Plans arebeing made for the celebration of hisfeast day, by a number of religiouscommunions. Included are not onlythe Catholics, but several Eastern Or­thodox groups, Coptic groups, and theChurch of England.

I t is interesting to note the increas­ing contact which the Church of Eng­land is having with the churches ofEastern Orthodoxy. Both, while reject­ing the claims of the Papacy, holdto the ancient traditions and the trueecumenical councils of i:hristendom,and there is really more in commonbetween them than might at first seem.

Culbertson Presidentof Moody

D R . WILLIAM CULBERTSON hasbeen named the new president

of Moody Bible Institute, it was an­nounced on February 4th at theFounder's week conference. Dr. CuI.bertson has been acting president sincethe death of Dr. Will H. Houghtonlast year. He came to the institutionas dean of education in 1942.

Before going to Chicago, Dr. Cul­bertson was a bishop of the New Yorkand Philadelphia Synod of the Re-

80 THE PRESBYTERIAN GUARDIAN March 10. 1948

formed Episcopal Church, and rectorof the Church of the Atonement inGermantown, Penna. Dr. Culbertson iseditor-in-chief of Moody Monthly, andwrites the International Sunday schoollessons for that magazine.

Plans for AlnsterdamAssembly

P LANS are progressing for the firstAssembly of the World Council of

Churches to be held in Amsterdambeginning on August 22nd. Some 20Am e ric a n Protestant denominationshave already selected 137 representa­tives. Among these are Reinhold Nie­buhr, G. Bromley Oxnam, John R.Mott, Charles P. Taft, and John A.Mackay.

A review of the historical interde­nominational movements leading up tothe first Assembly will feature the firstplenary session on the evening of the22nd. Speakers will be Bishop G. H. K.Bell of Chichester, England, Dr. MarcBoegner of France, Bishop Brilioth ofSweden, and Dr. Mackay of the UnitedStates. For most of the sessions theAssembly will be divided into studygroups, considering reports later to bepublished in book form.

Yes or No?

I N Montreal one Charles Elvy, 22­year old member of Jehovah's

Witnesses, was acquitted in the Courtof the King's Bench by an Englishspeaking jury on the charge of publish­ing seditious libel, in a pamphlet en­titled "Quebec's Burning Hate for God,Christ and Freedom is the Shame ofall Canada". The jury took only 20minutes for. deliberation. It was thefirst time a member of the sect hadever been acquitted in this Province.

But just a few weeks ago a Frenchspeaking jury convicted another mem­ber of the sect, a woman, on the samecharge. So in Canada the languagethe jury speaks seems to be a matterof importance.

Meanwhile, under the direction ofQuebec's Catholic Premier M. Du­plessis, police officials padlocked thepublication office of Combat, CanadianCommunist publication. There weresome who saw in this the threat offurther use of the padlock, not onlyagainst Communist publications, butagainst anything out of agreement withQuebec's Catholic controlled govern­ment.

Moscow G;roupWins Cathedral

T HE right of the Patriarchal RussianOrthodox Church in America to

occupy St. Nicholas Cathedral in 'NewYork has been upheld by a justice ofthe New York State Supreme Court.The decision was rendered in a disputebetween the Moscow controlled groupand the Russian Orthodox Church inNorth America, the latter being themajority branch of the church whichhas declared itself autonomous, free ofMoscow control. The decision wasbased on a decision of the AppellateCourt in 1935 which gave possessionto Archbishop Kedrovsky of the Reno­vated Church. The American groupclaim that this was a schismatic group,not now recognized by anyone ascanonical, and that the 1935 decisionshould have had nothing to do withthe present case.

There has been for some time acontroversy between two factions of theRussian Orthodox Church in this coun­try. One group recognized the Moscowpatriarch as its proper head, but theother has declared itself autonomous,at least in political affairs. Efforts onthe part of Russian emissaries haveso far failed to heal the breach.

Japan Bible Societyto Besume Work

T HE Japan Bible Society, whichwas forced to suspend work during

the war, has announced that it willsoon resume publishing activities, withthe aid of a first shipment of paperbeing sent by the American Bible So­ciety. The announced schedule indi­cates that first publication will be ofNew Testaments and Psalms.

Denver ChurchBe-Organizes

AT a meeting held on Wednesdayevening, February 18, in the par­

lors of the First Orthodox PresbyterianChurch in Denver, Colorado, themerger of Colorado Boulevard MissionChurch, independent, and the FirstChurch was effected. The two organi­zations had previously voted unani­mously for the merger. The nameselected for the new organization isthe Park Hill Orthodox PresbyterianChurch.

The Colorado Boulevard MissionChurch has been in existence for some

25 years, and has been meeting in abasement chapel in a suburban area ofnortheastern Denver. The Superinten­dent of the mission work is Miss MabelC. Britton, who has labored faithful.lyand sacrificially for the maintenanceof a gospel work.

First Church was located in an areathat was deteriorating, and a move toanother locality had become impera­tive. Ten lots were recently purchasedhalf a block from the mission property,when it became obvious that the unionwould occur. With the combined re­sources of the two organizations, it isexpected a church building will beerected on these lots.

The new location is in a district thatis rapidly building up with modesthomes and apartment houses. It ap­pears to be one of the most desirableparts of the city of Denver, and sug­gests real promise for the future.

SUNDAY, SCHOOLPAPERS

Edited by Orthodox Bible Teachers

Bible Lessons in Bible OrderFlannelgraph Pictures

•Ask for Samples

CHRISTIAN REFORMED PUBLISHING HOUSEGrand Rapids, Mich.

College GraduatesChristian education on all levels andin all areas of knowledge will be­come a reality only when educatedChristians are united in the effort toformulate the principles of trueChristian education. You may helpby applying for membership in:The Inter-Collegiate Gospel Fellowship,

INCORPORATED464 Pequot Avenue New London. Conn,

GOWNS• Pulpit and Choir·

i Headquarters for

",'I'f. RELIGIOUS SUPPLIES

"~+\-

ijjlJl~l~l~':~~:o~' :nali~nal ;~~:~~ (~O:pDA\NY

ON REQUEST 821-]J AIlCH STRUT, PHILADEl~HIA 7, PA