The Editor of Grand Rapids’ only daily newspaper The Grand Rapids Press, was most courteous as he received me into his office on October 6, 1961. He read the letter I had written for The Public Pulse, thought a few moments, and then said that he did Dot think they could

print it. Here is the letter that could not be printed:

Dear Editor:

The articles in the Pulse on Sunday professional football amaze me. I had always been made to understand that the Press rejected letters of a religious character because of their controversial nature. Has the Press changed its policy? In view of what has appeared I ask you to publish my letter also. The issue ill this matter is not whether some people like football and others do not. Nor is the issue what some people like on Sunday and others do not. The issue is this: what is right before God? The moral law basic to Western civilization is the Ten Commandments. These include a requirement that the Sabbath day be kept holy. The main tradition of Christendom since Christ’s resurrection and the New Testament’s teaching on the Lord’s Day has observed the first day of the week as the day to be kept holy.

It would take no Philadelphia lawyer to demonstrate that a noisy, exciting, bruising football game is hardly in keeping with the holy, worshipful character of the day. Therefore we who seek to be a law-abiding, worshipping part of this community ask that this day be honored among us in the way our basic moral law requires.

Our nation has gained a reputation of being a crime~ridden nation. The latest FBI report indicated that our national crime rate is increasing four times faster than the population rate. What is the root of most of this crime? It is the putting of personal desire and interest above law, even above the law of God.

One of our great statesmen once said this: “He who rejects the laws of God must accept the tyranny of men.” Also in this matter we prefer to be under the laws of God rather than under the tyranny of men who call us “bigots” in our sincere efforts to maintain God’s laws.

Sincerely, EDWARD HEEREMA

GOD’S NAME NOT PERMITTED

The editor went on to explain to me why my letter and others like it could not be accepted for the reader’s opinion column. Rejected is any letter containing the name of God (in any of its forms) or containing any quotation from the Bible.

This started a train of thought. The coins we handle each day carry the slogan “In God We Trust.” But God’s name may not be used in The Public Pulse of this daily newspaper which comes into the homes of thousands who honor that name above every name.

And the Bible cannot be quoted in this column that is supposed to be open to all the readers of this newspaper. Imagine, think -the most important book in the history of Western civiJization cannot be quoted in this column of reader opinion. To what fantastic lengths secularism goes!

One has no difficulty understanding some of the reasoning behind such a set of rules. Such rules have been made to avoid the continuing recurrence in such a column of religious debates which are inviting pastures for devotees of religious cults and persistent religious crackpots. But surely here is a case of throwing the baby out of the window along with the dirty bath-water. Such rules cut the ground from under thousands of readers whose lives and convictions find their rootage in God and his Word. One is reminded of the penetrating remark about the public school made some years ago by Nicholas Murray Butler, former president of Columbia University. The influence of the public school, said Dr. Butler, is on the side of one part of the population, that part that has no religion whatsoever.

A SECOND LETTER

My feelings were mixed after the conference with the editor. But finally the decision emerged to try once more according to the rules laid down by the editor. Here is a second letter submitted by mail:

Dear Editor;

In this matter of Sunday football I should like to submit that the issue in this debate is Dot whether some people like football and others do not. Nor is the issue what some people like on Sunday and others do not. To my mind and in the minds of many of our citizens this is the question: What is right?

The answer to that question is found in that moral law that has played such a crucial role in the fonnation of Westcm civilization, namely, the Ten Commandments. These commandments include a requirement that the Sabbath day be kept holy.

It would take no Philadelphia lawyer to demonstrate that a noisy, exciting, bruising football game is hardly in keeping with the holy, worshipful character of the day. Therefore we who seek to be a law-abiding, worshipping part of this community ask that this day be honored among us in the way that our basic moral law requires.

Our nation has gained a reputation of being a crime-ridden nation. The latest FBI report indicated that our national crime rate is increasing four times faster than the population rate. What is involved.in most of this crime? It is the putting of personal desire and interest above law.

A song Americans used to sing much more than they do now has these lines in it: “Confirm thy soul in self-control, thy liberty in law.” It would be well if more of us would ask the question, “What is right?” rather than simply talk about what we like or don’t like. If more of the citizens would do this, America would once more move forward on the path of greatness.

Sincerely, EDWARD HEEREMA

To date (October 24, 1961) this second letter has not appeared. Presumably it will not appear. Is this the case because even this letter, without reference to God and without direct quotation from the Bible, is still too much for the secularistic press to take for its reader’s column of opinion? If so, then once more the true character of secularism has showed itself in the rejection of a reference to that moral code that has played such a tremendous part in the forming of our culture.

FRUSTRATION — OR?

One reaction to such an experience would be that of resigned frustration. One might say that such efforts are just a waste of time. Besides, only nuts and cranks write in such columns. But is that the proper response? Surely one should not be afraid to be a fool for God’s sake.

Anyone who has tried more than once to express himself positively and courteously in such 0r similar situations has discovered the strong and unbending arm of secularism. In 1950 at the Mid-Century White House Conference on Children and Youth the present writer, along with a Roman Catholic priest from Los Angeles, managed to win the as sent of their special group on the family to a statement on the important role of religion in the development of a stable family life. Did this statement appear in the final “findings” of the conference? Not at all. There was no semblance of it. The secularists had weeded it out.

At a regional meeting in preparation for the 1960 White House Conference the present writer managed to get his particular group to declare itself in favor of greater stress on the moral law in our homes in the effort to combat and prevent juvenile delinquency. Did this positive statement appear in the amalgam that emerged as the “findings” of the conference? Not at all.

That is the character of American secularism. A positive witness to those things, which we believe must form and undergird our lives at every point, is almost always ruled out. But this witness applies not just to our lives. It applies, we are persuaded, to all of life and culture. A part from God and his Word and his moral law our civilization is what so many have called it, a cut-flower civilization that must continue to wither and die, severed from the roots of spiritual and moral vitality. Secularism rules that our approach to all problems must be horizontal. Any vertical dimension is ruled out. That is the form of thought that seeks to blanket our lives and culture.

Today our nation is engaged in a titanic struggle with a hard and ruthless foe. That which our nation calls its “way of life” is fighting for survival. What kind of attack or defense do we have if the spiritual-moral center of our way of life is cut out? Don’t the secularists see that they are playing right into the hands of the Communists? No wonder our attack or defense against Communism so often lacks the carrying power of genuine conviction, and seems feeble and weak.

         

           

OR ACTION?

Resigned frustration ought Dot to be the reaction to such a failure in the attempt to bear a positive witness. Surely the history of the church would have been far different from what it is if resigned frustration had been the reaction to every such failure to gain a hearing. Resigned frustration only means that we shall let the spirit of secularism engulf us more and more while the faith that seeks to honor God in all things erodes increasingly. It seems to the present writer that there has been enough of such erosion already.

What is the alternative? Isn’t there an alternative that calls to the imagination and dedication of Christians today Christians who confess that they look at all things in the light of God’s Word and under the banner of the Kingship of Jesus Christ? Possibly men with such convictions can rise to positions of editorial influence in the newspapers of our land. This doesn’t look like a very hopeful Hue of attack, although it ought not to be wholly ignored.

Is the dream of having a Christian daily newspaper completely forgotten? Such a dream did capture the devotion and energies of some American Calvinists a few decades ago, but the effort to translate the dream into reality aborted. Roman Catholics and Christian Scientists have translated such high resolve into fact. Why not Calvinists? Surely the dream must still persist in the hearts and minds of some. What a blessing such a voice could be, hitting hard for integrity truth. and righteousness in the affairs of business, state, and society. In this age when secularism has often proved so weak, indecisive, and directionless in a dangerous and tempestuous world, the profound and sure light and insight of God’s Word is needed to guide man in his deepening darkness, And a culture grown lazy and soft needs a rebaptism of the courage of Christian conviction, a conviction that sees God’s law and love in the totality of life.

What is often vaguely called “the American way of life” has reached a fork in the road. Others would say it has reached the point of no return. That judgment may be correct. And yet, so long as the church and her membership can witness to this generation and call men to repentance, we should not assign civilization to the fires of final judgment. We must resolutely call our generation to leave the broad road of amoral secularism and spiritual deterioration down which it is traveling, and take the narrower high road of truth and righteousness on which the vision of the glory of God beckons.

At this point we who walk in the high tradition of truly biblical Christianity, the Reformed faith, must ask ourselves this question: Are we doing all we can to raise a telling witness to that truth which alone can make men free and spiritually strong? Or have we fallen under the spell of the spiritual dullness and apathy of this secularistic age to the extent that we can no longer rise to the call of great and heroic exertion for the glory of god and his eternal Kingdom?

How about the Back-to-God Hour? some one may ask. Indeed, we ought to be grateful every day for this clear and forthright witness over the radio in the several aspects of its ministry. But we are saying nothing unkind about this splendid ministry when we point out that it is limited. Its main effort, preaching the Word, is limited to a message of about twenty minutes in length once a week. It is not only limited in time; it is also limited in scope. The burden of this ministry is specifically to preach the Word of God. Such preaching has meaning and direction for the whole of life, of course; but it is not within the scope of such preaching to develop the implications of God’s Word for the many facets of life. There is one more limitation in that there are bounds to what one may say over the radio.

A Christian daily newspaper would not he bound in these ways. Rather, every day of the week except Sunday such a voice would speak the language of God and his ever-relevant truth in all areas of man’s cultural, social. economic, and political concern. Is it not just at this point that American Calvinism is confronted with its most glaring failure? Is it too late to confess our failure and in humble prayerfulness to take significant steps to correct our inadequate witness?