This being the twenty-fifth anniversary issue of THE OUTLOOK (formerly TonCH AND TRUMPET), three articles on events and trends in church life during the past twenty-five years are being published at this time. Rev. Peter De Jong, pastor of the Christian Reformed Church of Dutton, Michigan, and recently elected as the president of Reformed Fellowship, Inc., writes on Events and Trends in Other Churches During the Past Twenty Five Years.

The life of the Reformed Fellowship and its magazine, TORCH AND TRUMPET and now THE OUTLOOK, spans roughly the third quarter of the twentieth century. While others have been asked to review what has happened in our immediate church family during these years, I have been asked to summarize events in the larger church world around us during this time.

The Christian World at Mid-Century – First of all it might be well to recall some of the church conditions at the beginning of this period. In a December 27, 1950 editorial entitled “Mid–Century Retrospect,” the editor of Christian Century reflected on the astonishing changes that had come over the churches in the first half of the century. From a general optimism that had been revealed in naming Christian Century the prevailing need had changed to an almost complete loss of faith in the inevitability of progress and a gloomy preoccupation with the “crushing and terrorizing” nature of the problems that appeared everywhere.

The stable world of the fathers had vanished. Monarchies had all but disappeared from the world, democratic republics had not gained ground and Communism had emerged as the most aggressive political and social factor in the world. Colonial structures had disintegrated, the League of Nations had failed in its aim to bring peace and order, and the future of the United Nations appeared doubtful.

The world was troubled by the Korean war. Men were losing faith in their ability to eradicate injustice, the worship of science had given way to hatred and fear of it as a destroyer. Movement into the cities and shorter working hours had not brought stability, homes were breaking down, and mental illness was increasing. Non-white races were becoming self-conscious and white rule was over.

Historical research had taken over the field of theology in “all but literalistic circles,” but the social gospel had lost much of its bright promise as men became more aware of man‘s capacity for evil. World missions had had their greatest years and young churches were gaining in influence, to face the same problems as the older ones. The Roman Catholic Church, declaring the dogma of the Assumption of Mary, had almost completely withdrawn from the mainstream of Christian life, but other churches were drawing together in an ecumenical movement which seemed to be the most promising development in an otherwise generally gloomy prospect. That is the way the church world looked to a perceptive observer a quarter of a century ago.

What changes has the passage of another twentyfive years brought in this picture? In some respects there has been little or no change; in others, there have been significant developments. The general loss of faith in progress and in the ability of science to solve our problems has, if anything, increased. Especially in the end of this time the world has awakened with a shock to realize that even the apparently unlimited natural resources were being rapidly exhausted and our inventions and industrialization were now threatening to poison the very air we breathe as well as the water we drink.

The Korean war gave way to the disillusioning experience of Vietnam, from which only the Communist movement emerges as victor. Talk of a cold war giving way to peaceful “detente,” an idea especially fostered by the liberal church movement, is currently being disturbed as militant Communists, while talking peace, take over Angola and a dominant place in Africa. World-wide inflation, as every country in the world more and more gives way to the popular temptation to outspend its income, further shakes up the economics of the world. And the Arab nations, discovering their economic power to charge the rest of the world whatever prices they choose for needed oil, further threaten the stability of the nations.

We are not so much concerned with the general, political, and social developments of the time as with what has happened in and to the churches. What has become of the bright ecumenical hopes which the writer at mid-century saw as about the only bright prospect in sight?

   

The Fading of the Ecumenical Dream – The decade of the fifties saw some church mergers taking place, especially among bodies that were liberal or becoming increasingly so. The Northern Presbyterians and United Presbyterians came together in 1958 to form the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. The American Lutheran Church in 1960 was joined by the Evangelical Lutheran with a Norwegian back. ground and by the United Evangelical Lutheran Church with a Danish heritage. A fourth body, also with a Norwegian background, the Lutheran Free Church, in 1963 joined this which was originally a largely German body.

The year 1957 also saw a merger of the Congregational Christian and Evangelical and Reformed bodies to form the United Church of Christ. These mergers, usually promoted especially by the Liberal elements who had little respect for doctrinal convictions or principles, did not seem to bring about any significant Increase in vitality and influence on the part of the churches involved, and enthusiasm, once high, for promoting such unions seems to have waned considerably.

The World Council of Churches too, the primary promoter of both cooperation and mergers in this ecumenical movement, has lost much of the vigor and support of a decade or two ago. While occasionally making an evangelical sounding statement to placate evangelical Christians involved in it it is dedicated at best, to joining orthodox believer; and liberal unbelievers in an unholy union, and, at worst, to advancing the interests of political and social movements that are avowedly committed to destroying the Christian faith. Cenerally eager to criticize social and economic inequalities, it is conspicuously silent about the inhumanity and tyranny of the Communist nations and has insisted on giving vast sums of money to support their guerilla movements. The transparent hypocrisy of such behavior on the part of what calls itself a council of churches has disgusted many in denominations which belong to it and cut drastically into its support.

Contributing to this ecumenical fiasco have been the developments in the area of theology. The so-called “neo-orthodox” or existential theology of Karl Barth was well-suited—I have sometimes observed diabolically well-designed–to serve the ecumenical movement. Orthodox Christians, hearing in it again the old orthodox words such as “sin,” “grace,” and even “election,” if they were not too discriminating, were apt to conclude that this was a return to the gospel which merited their welcome and support.

Liberals who, with their modernistic attacks on Christian doctrines had lost the public confidence, saw in this movement—which used the old terms but permitted one to “reinterpret” them in any way he pleased and really tied one down to nothing theological—a movement they too could support. The trouble with it was that this movement, despite its orthodox language, was not tied down to anything. The Word of God, of which it spoke so lowly, turned out to be anything a man might want to make of it.

It was not long before the leaders of the movement began to show their differences. Bultmann criticized Barth and some of his associates for retaining too many “myths” and set out to thoroughly “demythologize” theology. Since then more and more extreme leaders have arisen until some spoke of a “secular Christianity” and declared that “God is dead!” The result of such developments has been, as one writer observed, not the death of God, but the death of theology. Another spoke of the continuing “‘in today, out tomorrow’ tag–dance of theology.” Observing this development one is reminded. of the words of Scripture regarding leaders who oppose God’s truth; “their folly shall be evident to all men, as theirs also came to be” (II Tim. 3:9).

The breakdown of remaining doctrines in many churches was accompanied by a breakdown of moral standards so that abortion, homo-sexuality and adultery came to be accepted as part of the “new morality.” As the Bible’s requirements for office were rejected more and more churches began to ordain women to ruling offices.

Roman Catholic Crisis – A 1950 Christian Century editorial had observed that only the Roman Catholic Church was holding aloof from the mainstream ecumenical movement. In this traditional course of the Roman church there came a dramatic change with the meetings of the Second Vatican Council called by Pope John XXIII. Its meetings, beginning on October, 1962, were carried on it an atmosphere of open discussion radically different from the traditions of this authoritarian church body. They sought Christian unity with those outside of the church as well as “renewal” of the church by greater participation by the laity. The widely publicized meetings were hailed as promising a new future for this old church. After the council however, many were disappointed.

Although there were some changes—the liturgy might now be in the language of the people instead of Latin, the Index of forbidden books was brought to an end, the Church law book was to be reduced to a quarter of its former length, and more provision was made for conferences and discussions including clergy and laity—the complaint was that little had really changed. Church doctrines remained as before.

For evangelicals, as a news writer in the January 7, 1966 Christianity Today expressed it, “At least one special question remains . . . Did the Council, in failing to alter traditional Roman reliance on individual works, perpetuate implict denial of Christ’s completed work?” The hierarchical system of having everything subject to the approval of the pope remains. It is hard to see how this church body which makes such control from the top its principle of authority can abandon that principle without radically changing its whole nature.

Moreover, there is increasing unrest and revolt on the part of both laity and clergy against this authoritarian control. In this situation continued conflict seems inevitable. If this struggle and conflict should lead this great church body to a real return to the Scriptures as the authoritative guide to Christian faith and life, this might be the beginning of a real Reformation and Revival. It seems more likely that this revolt against authority is prompted by and is moving toward the modern liberal revolt against all authority. If Roman Catholics with their false beliefs merely join Protestant Liberals in their unbelief, this will be no real improvement.

A “New Evangelism” – A prominent feature of the religious life of this quarter century has been a movement toward revival and new activity among evangelical Christians. These twenty-five years have also been the years of Billy Graham and the “crusades” associated with his name. From him and his associates millions have heard the gospel in various “campaigns” throughout the U.S. and all over the world. Preaching a gospel that was Biblically based (“The Bible says . . . !”) Graham has called millions to repentance and faith in Christ. And untold thousands have come. This movement, while cause for gratitude to evangelical Christians, has also had its weaknesses. While follow-up of converts has been encouraged and many of them have found their way into churches, many of these “converts,” also as is usual in such “revivals,” have proved to be only temporary. The revival gospel tended toward Arminian theology, was apt to be doctrinally vague and not well-grounded. Seeking broad support from a wide variety of churches, it could not put much stress on sound doctrine and tended to promote loose views of the Church. The crusades were under pressure to compromise, at least by refraining from warning against the Liberal views of some whose cooperation was sought on their organization.

With and related to this revival movement there came a resurgence of scholarly and journalistic activity on the part of evangelical Christians. In October, 1956 Christianity Tod(JY appeared to challenge and outstrip the Christian Century as the most widely heard voice of Protestant Christianity in the U.S. There has been a great increase in the printing and reprinting of evangelical Christian books. Some of the same weaknesses as appeared in the revival crusades also seem to threaten this resurgent evangelical scholarship.

The editor of Christianity Today, in a survey at the end of 1959, observed “a change in the intellectual climate of orthodoxy,” moving from separation to dialog and to recognizing “the honesty and Christianity of those who hold views other than our own.” While we need to recognize that there is room for differences of views and insight among Christians (cf. Rom. 14) and that the Lord may in His grace save people with some erroneous doctrinal views, we must beware of letting such considerations divert us from the obligation the Lord gave us to proclaim “the whole counsel of God” and to oppose and warn against all false doctrines that attack that revealed faith. The polite academic “dialog” with unbelief with the tacit or expressed assumption that we are all Christians, together seeking the truth, has moved a long way from the Biblical example and injunction of a Jude “to contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints,” against the ungodly men who were denying it.

It is significant that Professor G. C. Berkouwer, dean of Reformed theologians, writing the first article in the first issue of Christianity Today (October 15, 1956) on “The Changing Climate of European Theology,” warned “that a theologian may fit his theology to the mentality of a given era and thus capitulate to it.” “When this happens a time in history is no longer viewed in the light of the Word of God, but rather the Word of God is interpreted out of the presuppositions of a given epoch. Thus the gospel is assimilated to the mind of the time. And finally, it is no longer the Gospel, but the temper of the time that speaks with authority.” He wrote those words thinking of what had happened to Modernism in the 19th Century. The saddening developments since he wrote them show Berkouwer‘s own later work and much of the “new evangelicalism” falling before or threatened by the same danger.

The “New Pentecostalism” – No survey of religious developments in recent years could fail to give some attention to what has been called the “charismatic movement” or the “new Pentecostalism.” “Pentecostal” churches which have placed special emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit have been in existence for a number of years. They arose after about the beginning of this Century as a reaction against the neglect of stress on holiness among the Wesleyans (Methodists) and they sought a deeper religious experience. The new movement, arising about the middle of the Century, although it has links with these older Pentecostal churches, has sprung up within a variety of other denominations including the Roman Catholic. It does not seek, generally, to organize a separate church but it does stress an ecumenical sharing of experience with others across denominational lines.

Emphasizing personal experience rather than careful biblical and theological study and direction, it does not build lip the churches in their faith or prepare them to oppose false and destructive doctrines. Although it emphasizes the Holy Spirit and His work, it tends to forget that He is the Spirit of Truth who inspired and speaks through the Word of God rather than through ones personal impulses and feelings. It does not encourage us to follow the Biblical directive to critically “try the spirits, whether they are of God” (I John 4:1). Sharing the weaknesses of traditional revivalism out of which it came, and adding its own peculiar experientialism often with such a phenomenon as tongues-speaking, it increases rather than removes the confusion in much evangelical Christianity. Recently there are indications that the apparent unity of spirit among many involved in this movement is beginning to break up and that the interest in and support of it is beginning to wane.

Revivals of Orthodoxy – Some encouraging developments, among many that are disturbing or depressing, have been the instances of militant initiative appearing among the older churches. Early in the 70‘s a majority of the Southern Baptist convention attacked the liberalism they found in their Sunday School Board‘s new Bible commentary on Genesis and determined that the view of the Bible it expressed must be rejected. Regrettably, their attempt failed when later conventions did not maintain the decision.

Much more successful was the effort among the Missouri Synod Lutherans to throw out the liberal views of the Bible that had become entrenched in their large St. Louis Concordia Seminary. The orthodox succeeded in driving the liberals (self-styled “Moderates”) out of most of the offices of the denomination. Up to the present, however, the president, Dr. Jacob Preus, has failed to execute the convention decisions that district officials who defy the denomination’s position on such matters as biblical authority are to be disciplined. Although many have deplored the bitter controversy that has arisen in this denomination, all who are concerned about church faithfulness in maintaining the truth of the gospel ought to rejoice and take heart at such a revival of orthodox Christian conviction in this age of confusion and indifference.

Similarly encouraging has been the very rapid growth of the new Presbyterian Church in America, made up largely of churches that have left the Southern Presbyterian denomination because of the liberalism that had come to dominate it, but including also congregations coming in from the United Presbyterians. Its third General Assembly represented 386 congregations. While the new denomination inevitably encounters some problems in feeling its way out of the decades of conflict with liberalism back to a biblical faith and life, all orthodox Christians ought to be heartened by this work of the Holy Spirit leading men back to the gospel and building a church that seeks to be faithful to it. Drawing interest in Calvinistic biblical doctrine is shown in the large and increasing enrollments of students at Westminster and Jackson’s Reformed Theological Seminaries.

Dr. J. L Packer in his little 1958 book entitled “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God (pp. 451f.) pointed out that, in the weakness and “ecumenical” confusion prevailing in the religious world in our time, we need to observe that “there are three distinct authorities to which final appeal might be made—Holy Scripture, Church tradition, and Christian reason; that is to say, Scripture as interpreted by itself; Scripture as interpreted (and in some measure amplified) by official ecclesiastical sources; and Scripture as evaluated in terms of extra-biblical principles by individual Christian men.”

These three views he saw held by (1) evangelical Protestant Christians, by (2) Roman Catholics and by (3) religious Liberals, respectively. He observed that we are being urged to forget this difference of starting pOint and to form a common front on the assumption that the difference is “small and trifling—unsightly little cracks on the surface of an otherwise solid wall. But this assumption is false.” “The wall is cracked because it is not all built on the same foundation. The more one probes the differences between Roman and Protestant, Liberal and Evangelical, the deeper they prove to be; beneath the cracks on the surface lie fissures which run down to the very foundations, broadening as they go. Nothing is gained just by trying to cement up the cracks; that only encourages the collapse of the entire wall. Sham unity is not worth working for and real unity, that fellowship of love in the truth which Christ prayed that His disciples might enjoy, will come only as those sections of the wall which rest on unsound foundations are dismantled and rebuilt. Till this happens, the question of authority must remain central in discussion between the dissident groups; and the best service one can do to the divided Church of Christ is to keep it there.”

Packer was right. Our authority must be God’s inspired Word. Our evaluation of what is happening in the churches and in the world around us must be based on that and our own course must be directed by it. That is bound to create a difference from and a break with the majority and with public opinion.

The Lord was never more popular than when he fed the 5,000 without it costing them anything and they in their enthusiasm wanted to make Him king. As soon as He refused to adopt a socialistic policy of continuing free lunches for all and insisted that men must receive Him as the Food of eternal life, went on to intricate “doctrinal” explanations which increased their irritation, and, worst of all, preached Predestination (negative as well as positive!) the crowds vanished as quickly as they had gathered. When His disciples were asked, “Will ye also go away?” Simon Peter answered, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.” Note that the Lord’s inspired words were the authority and therefore Christian conviction and experience followed: “And we have believed and know that thou art the Holy One of God” (John 6).

The history of our times continues on the course which the Lord has predicted. The movement of apostasy within the churches as well as in the world of which He forewumed us, emerges more and more clearly. At the same time He continues to gather, by His Spirit and Word, His chosen Church from every people and nation and language until the time of His triumphant return. May we, by His grace, pray and strive to be faithful members of that Church and sharers in that triumph.