Lester Start’s Works

1Thoughts on the Atonement

paper by Lester Start

This study is an attempt to clarify the writers thinking on the interpretation of the Christian doctrine of Atonement. The scope of the paper does not permit of a comprehensive treatment of the topic, nor is the method of investigation rigidly systematic, because the purpose behind the study is to clear up certain questions of particular concern to the writer.

In general, the problem to be examined is the meaning of the sacrificial terminology by which the Atonement is explained in the writings be Paul.¹ It is recognized that the sacrificial interpretation of the death of Jesus which appears in Paul is largely meaningless to us today who have long since ceased to think in terms of Old Testament concepts. Thus the modern reader cannot understand the language Paul uses; although the ideas were familiar to his hearers, they are foreign to us today. Traditional interpretations of the Atonement do little to help the modern student because they are merely commentaries on the sacrificial ideas involved, lengthy explanations which remain in the same Old Testament frame of reference. Therefore we are still likely to be puzzled, for although we may now know the theory of the Atonement in this context, it still has little relation to our thought and experience today. Modern interpretations have more and more inclined to explanations which avoid this sacrificial frame of reference, emphasizing the moral aspects of Paul’s teaching instead of the sacrificial legalistic. It is the thesis of the writer that such a procedure distorts Paul’s teaching in the sense that it does not do justice to the full implications of the atoning death of Jesus, which can be understood only in the context of the sacrificial system of which it is an outgrowth.

Interpreters of the Atonement have often been guilty of the genetic fallacy in discussing it in terms of sacrifice, in that they reduce the Atonement to the most primitive kind of propitiatory sacrifice. That is why modern writers have avoided this method, and properly so. And yet it would seem that the sacrificial explanation contains elements of value for a full interpretation, and that these elements are essential. But instead of reverting to primitive sacrifice as the proper frame of reference, this study will attempt to point to a more adequate frame of reference, that is, sacrificial theory as it had developed through the thinking of the great prophets to a point where it was greatly different from its original nature; this method of explanation is followed with the hope that certain clues will be found pointing to a more adequate theory in terms of basic and therefore common religious experience which may be comprehensible to us today.

With this outline of the basic point of view presented we proceed to discuss the sacrificial aspect of the Atonement in some detail. In Romans 3: 23 - 25 we read: BV<J,H (D »:”DJ@< 6″ ßFJ,D@.<J”4 J.H *.>0H J@. 2,@., *46″4@.:,<@4 *TD,< JZ “ÛJ@d PVD4J4 *4 JZH •B@8LJDfF,TH JZH ¦< OD4FJj 30F@d Ô< BD@X2,J@ Ò 2,ÎH Ê8″FJZD4@< *4 B\FJ,TH ¦< Jj “ÛJ@d “Ë:”J4 . . . (for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and it is as a free gift that they are being declared righteous by his undeserved kindness through the release by the ransom [paid] by Christ Jesus. God set him forth as an offering for propitiation through faith in his blood. . .) This passage is a crucial one for Paul’s idea of the Atonement: it contains the basic concepts which he uses over and over again in other connections. It is cited to show the sacrificial terminology used, especially with regard to the term Ê8″FJZD4@< (propitiatory).

Since this idea of propitiation is central in the teaching of Paul, and since it is a term dealing with sacrificial practice, it would be well to trace its meaning in other, earlier connections in order to understand its meaning here. The idea of Jesus propitiating for us, expiating our sins, is the puzzling and difficult concept to be examined.

It is interesting to note that Ê8″FJZD4@< and not Ê8″F:l² is used. The latter is the stem noun from which the former is taken; the usual interpretation³ is that the former means the act of propitiation while the latter means the place of propitiation. This is born out by the fact that the Septuagint uses Ê8″FJZD4@< in the sense of the “mercy - seat”, covering of the Ark in the Holy of Holies. In Ex. 25:16 we read: 6″ B@40F,4H Ê8″FJZD4@< ¦B.2,:” PDLF\@L 6″2″D@d . . . (And you shall put into the Ark the testemony which I shall give you.) The lexicon⁴ would translate Ê8″FJZD4@< in Romans 3:25 as propitiatory gift, but there seems no need to change the meaning here, no reason for it. The lexicon cites Ezekiel 44:27 (And on the day that he goes into the holy place, into the inner court, to minister in the holy place, he shall offer his sin offering, says the Lord. God) in support of this meaning, but according to the best sources \8″F:`l is the word used, not Ê8″FJZD4@<. Thus Ê8″FJZD4@< may properly be understood as the place of propitiation, the passive means, rather than the active agent of the act. This usage is found also in Leviticus 16: 2 - 3: ¦< (D <,NX8® ÏN2ZF@:”4 ¦B J@L Ê8″FJZD4@< (and the Lord God said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at all times into the holy place within the veil, before the mercy seat which is upon the Ark, lest he die; for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat. But thus shall Aaron come into the holy place; with a young bull for a sin offering…). It seems clear, therefore, that the term is used in the Old Testament in the meaning of “place of propitiation,” or “mercy - seat”.

The word is probably related to the same sort of concept as that contained in the Hebrew sacrificial terms from the root “6D<”⁵. The root meaning of this verb is not entirely clear. According to Robertson Smith (quoted in Oesterley’s Sacrifices in Ancient Israel, page 92.) It means “to cover” (after the Arabic); but in the Syriac the sense of the simple stem is to “wipe off”, or “wipe clean”. . . “The most important point is that. . . it is God, not the priest, who… wipes out sin, or… regards it has covered.” It is clear how from this stem come terms meaning “appease”, “propitiate”, or “make atonement”.

The terms “kipper”, “kofer”, etc., go back to this root, and they all refer to the sacrificial practice in the ancient Hebrew religion for the purpose of “covering” a sin, “providing a ransom”, “wiping away” sin, or “making propitiation” (depending upon the term used). But do these ideas fit the primitive idea of sacrifice? The original purpose of sacrifice is not easily determined. According to Oesterley (ibid. pages 11 - 24) there are three theories as to the origin of sacrifice: the gift theory (by which primitive man makes an offering to the god as from a child-like impulse); the communion theory by which the worshiper attempts communion with the god by means of sacrifice; and the life theory by which the worshiper hopes to attain the principle of life. All of these aims are present in various degrees in sacrifice and perhaps other elements are included, according to Oesterley.

There seems to be a contradiction here between the theories as outlined by Oesterley and the purpose as implied in the original root meanings of the sacrificial terminology. I hesitate to go counter to the authorities mentioned by Oesterley, but it would seem that these are of the armchair variety; and a theory based upon the meaning of the terms used might merit at least some consideration. These theories (except for the first one) seem to be looking in the wrong direction in that they concern themselves with some future state to which man wishes to aspire by means of sacrifice (assuming a higher state of intelligence than one would safely credit to primitive man, moreover) instead of concerning themselves with the immediate condition which gives rise to the impulse to sacrifice. In other words, it would seem that primitive man makes sacrifice because of some impulse or urge caused by a vague awareness of his own insufficiency in the face of very real supernatural powers which seem terrible to him, rather than because he has a conscious desire or intention to gain communion with or life from this power. This latter interpretation reflects a much more advanced state of thinking. The gift theory seems to be a possible one; it is easier to think of man more or less blindly offering something to a power which he feels is so much greater than himself, without necessarily considering how the power will use the gift, much as a little child solemnly offers bits of sticks or dirt to his mother. Next in the stage of development, it would seem that the man who sacrifices, becoming more self-conscious, analyzes to some degree his impulses, recognizes his insufficiencies and weaknesses in the face of this power (later developed in the concept of sin and guilt) and sacrifices in order to “cover up” or “wipe away” these insufficiencies. This explanation in turn is largely theoretical, but it has the virtue of fitting more closely the root meanings of the sacrificial terms employed. It would seem strange that the theory of the original purpose of sacrifice reflects a later stage of development than the root meanings of the terms imply.

This theory would seem to be supported further if we consider examples of primitive sacrifice as reflected in the Old Testament. In a sense every sacrifice is a “kofer”. Consider Leviticus 9:7: 6″ B@40F@< J *jD” J@h 8″@h 6″ ¦>\8″F”4⁶ B,D “bJj<… (Then Moses said to Aaron, “Draw near to the altar, and offer your sin offering and your burnt offering, and make atonement for yourself and for the people…”) Note the root of the verb used.. This is the translation of the Hebrew, meaning to “make atonement, or propitiation”, or to “cover” or “wipe away”. And again, in II Samuel 21:3, the same verb is used in the same sense; also in Leviticus 10:17. These passages could be multiplied. The suggestion is, however, that the meanings of these terms relating to Atonement never vary far from the original root meanings, and that the developing religious consciousness is reflected in an increased awareness of what it is in man that needs atoning, that is an increasing awareness of sin, developing from the vague awareness of insufficiency.

It is recognized that this theory is not established as fact by these few references and that a study of sacrifice shows many other elements and purposes. But it is the contention of the writer that all sacrifices imply this element of gift offering as a basis for getting right with God by “covering” some kind of inadequacy which hinders man from facing his god. This condition is a prerequisite for gaining favors from God; even the primitive man feels a need for providing a basis which would make his god look upon him favorably. Thus it is a feeling of estrangement which prompts man to offer propitiatory gifts; the sacrifice is made to not only to appease the anger of God but to put man in a new relation to Him.

It is significant that moral considerations enter into the sacrificial idea quite early. Leviticus 5:5 and 16:21 point out that “confession of sins” is required during the sacrifice. This is a development which seems to follow when man becomes conscious of the cause of his estrangement from God and tries to remedy the situation. The early blind impulse to offer a propitiatory gift is now being refined and supplemented. Through the writings of the prophets this refining process goes on increasingly so that more and more emphasis is placed upon confession and repentance of sin rather than the formal sacrifice as an ex opere operato ceremony. Hosea (14:2) writes “say unto Jehovah, Take away all iniquity and accept us graciously, so will we render as bullocks [the offering of] our lips.” And Amos (5:21 - 24) insists that the Lord hates sacrifice but wants justice and righteousness. And Isaiah (1:13 - 17), says God finds empty ceremonial an abomination and wants the people instead to cease from evil and learn well-doing. Ezekiel hangs on to a rigid ritual (40 - 46), but he insists upon spiritual purity (18:31). Micah’s words are well-known (6:6 - 8) in which he shows God wants righteousness and not just sacrifice. Other examples could be found in Psalm 51: 17 and Isaiah 55:7.

It would seem, therefore, that by the time of Jesus, sacrifice, at least for the great Hebrew thinkers, had taken on an entirely different aspect, although the basic nature remains the same. Man is still conscious of an estrangement, but he recognizes now that sin is the obstacle and that sacrifice alone is not sufficient to overcome it. But the old forms survive with new meaning put into them.

Within the development to this stage enter the other elements or aims mentioned by Oesterley. As man loses his primitive fear of his god, he wants to commune with him and partake of his life-giving power. The use of living sacrifices points to this interest. Life in Hebrew thought is associated with blood (Leviticus 27:11) and by the logic of the primitive the living sacrifice will release this power of life. This close association of blood and life-power probably explains the retention of the idea in the New Testament where the power of God is associated with Jesus’ blood (Hebrews 9:22, Romans 3:24). How this can be fitted in with the doctrine of the Atonement will be explained later.

A further development in the sacrificial idea should be noted. It is clear that the passage in Romans 3:19 - 26 has reference to Isaiah 53, especially when we trace out the same ideas in other places in Paul’s letters (vid. Romans 4:25, Galatians 1:4, Ephesians 1:7, Romans 5:6 - 9, 8:32, Galatians 2:20, I Corinthians 15:3, etc.). This idea of vicarious suffering as it is called is unique in the Old Testament. Since it has so obviously influenced the New Testament thought, it must be examined to see its relationship both to the New Testament doctrine and the theory of sacrifice of the Old Testament. It is the conviction of the writer that the ideal developed in Isaiah 53 is a further development of sacrifice as generally understood by the prophets.

We have noted that sacrifice is prompted by an impulse in man to offer a gift to God as a propitiation to remove the estrangement he feels. This is at first unconscious, but with developing self-consciousness man recognizes his sinfulness and implements and supplements his propitiatory gift-offering with confession and repentance. Here we have an even nobler sacrifice: the “suffering servant” offers his life as his gift-offering for the glory of God and remission of sins. He does not merely confess and repent; he lives the repentance, or rather shows the true meaning of repentance. Here suffering is shown as propitiation. Instead of offering something external to God as propitiation, one offers his own life, by turning from sin and living the life acceptable unto God, even though it means suffering and “sacrifice”. The servant described here suffers and pays not only for his own sin, but for the sins of all mankind which pile their weight upon him. The social nature of sin, the way in which it affects not only oneself but others, is indicated here. But the man who would get right with God pays for these sins by bearing them patiently and not giving up to them, by persisting in right living, trusting in God.

This passage probably refers to Israel as the suffering servant who must bear the sins of the world and still retain her proper relation to God, but it can refer to any individual who leads such a life. Such a servant “bears the sins of many” and suffers for the transgressions of others in the sense that he must suffer because of them. He “bears” the sins of others and atones for them in the only way propitiation can be made, by paying for them, by enduring the suffering which is the result of sin, by paying this penalty and thus clearing away the obstruction which forms the estrangement from God. In such propitiation, it may be said that “by his knowledge shall the righteous servant make many righteous” (Isaiah 53:11)⁷ and “bear the sin of many and make intercession for the sinner” (Isaiah 53: 12). This is done by paying the penalty and thus making the necessary atonement, in a deeper sense than by confession and repentance. But there is implied also a further explanation: the example of such a servant works some change in the heart of the sinner as he sees someone else suffering for his sins, and inspires him to make the same sort of atonement. (This is not implied directly, but if we reach this chapter in the context of II Isaiah, we see the purpose of the writings is to inspire such action in all of Israel so that she may be the means whereby all the Gentile world may be turned from sin and brought to the true God.) Israel is to be the propitiation as the servant who will bring about this great missionary enterprise.

We are now in a position to discuss Paul’s theory of the Atonement as applied to Jesus. It is the thesis of the writer that the basic sacrificial idea lies at the heart of Paul’s explanation, the ideal as refined and transformed in the Isaiah 53 passage, but further changed because of the unique personality of Jesus experienced by Paul. The Isaiah passage is obviously in Paul’s mind as he discusses the Atonement; thus it seems a complete perversion of the record to ignore this passage in interpreting Paul as so many modern interpreters do. The Isaiah passage, and the basic sacrificial idea are the key to Paul’s interpretation.

First of all, we must understand the basic conditions, as Paul understood them, which makes the Atonement necessary. Paul tells us (Romans 3: 23) that “all men have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” There is a complete estrangement between man and God which is caused by man’s thorough sinfulness in the face of God. Man is therefore in need of reconciliation - some sort of sacrificial atonement must be made to clear away this enmity between God and man, to avert the wrath of God and find a basis for facing him with impunity. We are the enemies of God and thus must be reconciled (vid Romans 5:10). As Karl Heim states in Jesus, der Weltwollender (page 81) “Wenn ich mit jemand versohne so muss dieser mein Feind gewesen sein…jede Schuld ist nicht eine gegen Menschen, sondern gegen Gott gerichtete Bewegung…[und es kommst als] die teublische Macht der Gottlosigkeit.” To the end of making a reconciliation Christ was sent to destroy this work of Satan. Paul is clearly impressed with this sinfulness of man which separated him from God, and made him an enemy of God. This is the basic evil condition which must be overcome. It may be noted here parenthetically that this is similar to the condition which inspired man first to sacrifice as he became vaguely aware of it. But now the condition is understood clearly for what it is. “Wir stehen alle vor Gott nicht rein da”.

But how is this reconciliation to be made? How can we make propitiation? It seems clear from Paul’s thought that man is powerless of himself to do this (vid Romans 7 et al) because of his sin. We cannot forgive ourselves, first, because our sin is so strong and secondly, because our sin is not restricted to ourselves alone, but spreads its influence over others. (This is the character of sin recognized in Isaiah 53, in which we find the servant must bear the sins of others.) To quote Heim again (ibid., page 78): “Der Schuldvorgang abspielte sich nicht innerhalb der vier Wande meines eigehen Ich, in denen ich mit mir selbst allein und nur mir selbst verantwortlich bin.” Thus, (in answer to the first condition). Christ is needed to make propitiation because he is completely innocent of sin. This shows why Christ’s death is different from that of any Christian hero, different from the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53. Such a person is needed to conquer the evil forces of the powers of darkness. In answer to the second condition, a sinless person is needed who is not responsible for any of the aggregate sin another may have to carry; he is free to be the propitiation, being guiltless himself.

Man cannot free himself from the bondage to sin (Romans 7); it requires the sinless man, himself clear of guilt, to be able to form the basis for reconciliation. The sinless man is the God-man, who is sent forth by God “to be a propitiation” (Romans 3:25). Thus we are saved through God’s grace (Romans 3:24).

But by what means is this atonement made exactly? How does Jesus atone for our sins? The clue to this, as has been indicated earlier, is found in the writer’s interpretation of Isaiah 53 which clearly is the formula Paul follows. Paul’s Judaistic legalistic mind is satisfied by seeing that Jesus’ suffering “pays for” the sins of others. Instead of the individual sinner reaping the reward of suffering for his sins (always a fundamental Jewish belief), - and he cannot gain reconciliation even when he does because of his deep sinful impulses, too strong to break, - the innocent man bears these sins, takes on himself the suffering ill-will causes, and by enduring this, makes atonement, pays the wages of sin. He suffers for the sins of man in the sense that he suffers because of them in making himself a part of humanity.⁸.

But this is not the complete story. Jesus does not make the propitiation for us, absolving us of all guilt with no effort on our part. Paul always emphasizes that we are saved through faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25, Romans 5:1); this implies some endeavor on the part of the sinner in the act of Atonement. Paul constantly warns that man must lead a new life through faith in Christ; he must turn from sin and lead the “life of the spirit”, the Christ-like life. How does the atoning death of Jesus accomplish this transformation? It is the conviction of the writer, that as man sees the death of Jesus, and His suffering for man’s sins while innocent, something happens within him making him see that the good life is possible and the only life man should seek. He feels he must dedicate his loyalty to the suffering servant who is paying for his sins; he wants this life naturally when he is freed from sin, and he sees this atoning death as the basis by which he may be forgiven and seek the life of the spirit. How exactly he feels this freedom and new sense of power cannot be adequately explained as it is a matter of experience. The life and death of Jesus open man’s eyes to his sin. The weight of this sin bears him down and he feels powerless to escape. But he sees Jesus, an innocent man, suffering under sin and giving his life. He sees that it is his own sin Jesus is suffering for; he sees further that since Jesus is innocent completely his sin is truly against God. This inspires him to repent of his sin to such an extent that he can put it behind him entirely, so powerful is the effect of this act of sacrifice upon him, and the example of the sinless man. This shows man the way to salvation with God and excites a love which inspires man to seek this way and avoid sin. He feels his sins cleared away as he sees the consequences of his sin taken on by Jesus, endured, and suffered. He sees the God-man suffering because of his sins and thus feels obligated to lead the same kind of life; he sees the love of Jesus enduring the suffering, and thus senses that the consequences of his sin are being covered, freeing him from the wrath of God, the natural consequences of a sinful life.⁹.

Thus the Atonement is not so much a matter of Jesus providing a sacrifice to placate God, and provide once and for all of a relation of harmony between God and man by vicarious sacrifice. This idea is involved in a sense, but the deeper meaning is that man makes his own atonement through the power of Christ’s life which he experiences as he understands the life and death of Jesus. Man atones by forsaking sin, repenting and leading the life of the spirit, he is enabled to do this only through faith in Christ, the power of whose life gives him the strength to forsake sin and follow Christ. That is why the term Ê8″FJZD4@< instead of Ê8″F:l is used in reference to Jesus, (by way of tying up another thread),: Jesus is the means of propitiation - through faith in Him man can attain reconciliation with God. He is not the propitiatory gift of God by which God reconciles man to Him without any effort on man’s part, (although it is understood that the propitiation would not be possible unless by the grace of God He sent His Son to provide the means of reconciliation; nor would it be possible unless the sinless man provided the propitiation). The Ê8″F:l must be man’s own repentance and new life as the propitiatory gift.

The Atonement according to Paul thus involves an active participation by man through faith in Christ. This participation comes about through a mystical union with Christ in the Atonement. An attempt was made to explain the nature of this participation in the preceding pages, but in the last analysis no theory of the Atonement derived from Paul is adequate, because the heart of the Atonement according to Paul lies in the mystical experience of the believer, which defies a complete rational explanation. Paul is obviously using his own experience on the Damascus Road as a pattern for the believer. Because Jesus unites Himself with humanity out of His love, man through faith in Him, comes into communion with Him in the experience of the Atonement. This union is reached by a mystical faith, by which man becomes identified with Christ and Christ with man. Thus man goes through the Atonement with Christ mystically, dies and rises with Him. (This indicates the part man plays in the Atonement as shown above, and points how Jesus’ paying for our sins is not far removed from our own actions). In Romans 6:8 we find perhaps the best description of this mystical union of the believer with Christ in the Atonement; we would note also Romans 8:12 - 17, I Corinthians 6: 14 - 15, II Corinthians 4:14, Romans 12:1 - 6, Galatians 5:4 - 6, 4:4 - 6, etc.. Through faith man enters spiritually in the death and resurrection of Christ, wherein he becomes dead to sin and rises in the new life of the Spirit of Christ with which he unites. It is this power of Christ which the believer feels in contemplating the Atonement and entering into it mystically which gives him the new strength to “walk in the spirit.” How this power comes is inexplicable from a purely logical point of view; to this day man understands completely only as he experiences the significance of the Atonement by participating himself.

The fact that the resurrection of Jesus is all too generally ignored by interpreters of the Atonement; they point to the suffering but fail to see the importance of His victory. It is interesting to note that Christian Science “theology” stresses the resurrection above all and tones down the suffering of Jesus.¹⁰. This church celebrates the breakfast scene after the resurrection instead of the Last Supper. This emphasis might well be pointed out in Paul’s writings. Passages such as Romans 5:10, II Corinthians 4:10 - 11 point to a salvation through the power of the risen Christ with whom the believer unites himself mystically by faith. It is this conquering power of Christ which provides the dynamic which makes the whole Atonement possible.

It remains to point out that there is an eschatological note in Paul’s writings on the Atonement also. Passages such as I Corinthians 2:6 - 8, Colossians 2:15, Galatians 1: 4, Romans 8:18 - 39 indicate that Paul believed in a final “atonement” when at the appearance of the Lord all the forces of evil will be destroyed and the reign of the kingdom of glory, free from all taint of sin, will come on earth.

These final points are not elaborated, for the main purpose of the paper is to explain the sacrificial terminology used by Paul, these being included only to round out the theory of the Atonement as it appears in Paul. It is recognized that the thesis presented is not adequately supported and defended, but the scope of this paper does not permit a complete defense. By way of apology, it should be stated that the thesis taken is an honest conviction based upon a careful study of the sources; there is no attempt made to be original for the sake of originality or to defend any accepted doctrine. The point of view taken is not borrowed from any other interpretations.¹¹ The thesis that the sacrificial terminology used by Paul must be understood in the light of the developing sacrificial theory in Judaism, seems justified, not only because Paul obviously uses this frame of reference, but also because this sacrificial ideal gives a deeper meaning to the Atonement. Without it the Atonement is impoverished. With it, if it is understood in its highly developed stage, instead of the primitive, the Atonement takes on a deeper significance. If the interpretation is not clear, if the meaning of the sacrificial terminology is still a mystery, it is probably due to the fact that the explanation was not clearly made, but it may very possibly also be due to the fact that the connection between Jesus’ sacrifice and the forgiveness of our sins can be apprehended clearly only in the way Paul suggests - by faith and mystical experience. A sincere attempt has been made to explain it, however, according to the writers understanding of it. It is his hope to develop the thesis more adequately at some future date when other papers are not clamoring for attention.

1The Pauline epistles are the only New Testament sources considered for the purposes of this study.

2 Both from the stem

3 See Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon

4 Still Liddell and Scott

5 The connection will be made clear later

6Clearly related to Ê8″FJ6@:”4

7 By my own translation from LXX

8 Rashdall in Idea of Atonement in Christian Theology (pages 445 ff, pages 493 ff) contends that this idea involves an impossible or difficult doctrine of God. The writer contends that Jewish thought held to a God that ruled that suffering follows sin, and someone must always pay for it.

9 Luther insisted that only God could loose the bonds of sin; man cannot open his own eyes to the sin we are guilty of…dann es auch mit muglich ist/dasChristus leyiden von uns selber mug bedacht werden grundlich/Gott sench es dar yn unser hertz.”

10. See Science and Health by Mary B. G. Eddy, chapter on atonement

11 But no doubt someone thought of this before.

1The Trust for You to Hold

Text: I Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust.

We are going to think this morning about our responsibility and duty with regard to the peace after the war. It is very easy to think that our soldiers and statesmen are the ones to whom the responsibility comes for making a better world, but without the help of all of us their efforts are doomed to failure. It is unfortunately true often that in fighting to preserve something we lose by the very struggle those things we are striving to preserve.

We are fighting a war to preserve justice and equality for all men, and yet we can see that we must be unjust to win ultimate justice. In order to win a military victory it seems necessary to bomb innocent civilians, kill women and children, to set aside for a while our ideal of mercy and lobe in order to do that which is necessary to clear the ground for the construction of a better world. We are in the position of the Jewish soldier who was worried because there was often nothing but ham to eat for dinner in the army. When he asked the rabbi’s advice he was told that he would have to eat the ham if there was no alternative offered but he was warned not to eat the bones. And so we have no alternative but to harm innocents in the process of gaining a military victory, but we must not lick the bones, exult in the destruction and carnage being inflicted. There is danger of being pleased at destruction. We must keep a light burning in our hearts that shows us the true way of Christ, that will indicate our duty in helping to create and preserve a better world after this storm of war.

A few weeks ago the young people of this church were privileged to hear an account of life in a Marine training camp by one of our number. Many of us were particularly impressed by his statement that they are being taught things that are contrary to their Christian teaching, especially that they are being taught to hate, because such an attitude makes the best soldier. He then pointed out that our duty was to help retrain the soldiers after the war in the common Christian teachings that must be the basis for normal peaceful living.

When Paul was writing to Timothy encouraging and exhorting him in the performance of his duty as a missionary and minister of the teachings of Jesus, he concluded his first letter with this plea: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust”. This is a call that all of us might well keep in mind these days, not only the minister but also every man who professes to be a Christian. We must retain and preserve that which has been committed to our trust, the Christian heritage and teachings which can survive only if we are willing to keep them ourselves.

We owe the very survival of Christianity to individuals who accepted this trust of preserving spiritual truth at all costs. Especially in the early days of Christianity only the apostles and a few like-minded men preserved and spread the teachings of Jesus in the face of the opposition of an indifferent and hostile world. We must remember that countless loyal Christians gave their lives in their efforts to preserve that which they loved more than life, knowing that those who lose their lives for His sake shall find eternal life. Paul tells us in his letter to the Corinthians the persecutions that his Christian work has brought him, stonings, beatings, hardships of all kinds in his efforts to preserve the faith that was entrusted to him. Our history is full of accounts of great Christians such as Savanorola who would rather die than betray the trust of the spirit of Christ in their souls. The Bible that we use is very cheap in a sense; you can buy a New Testament for a nickel. But we must remember that in another sense the Bible is the most priceless heritage that we have; we must remember that it contains the teachings of a faith bought and handed down to us at a great price. We must not value this heritage too lightly, then; it is in truth our most priceless possession for it can show us the way to our salvation. The Christian teaching available to us all involves an obligation on our part to treasure in our own hearts for others that truth which alone can redeem us. And especially today when our spiritual Christian heritage is being threatened and we are forced to defend it, we must keep alive the spirit of Jesus in our hearts and not fail the trust that centuries of devotion have handed on to us.

Keep that which is committed to thy trust. To keep that which has been entrusted to us, we must first of all make it a part of ourselves. We cannot keep that which we do not have ourselves first. T. S. Elliot, the English poet and thinker, once said that when we call ourselves Christian people all we mean is that we can profess belief in Christianity without being persecuted. Too many so-called Christians are like the Christians Elliot is thinking of. They have never made the teachings of Jesus a part of their lives; they have never taken on the trust that is implied in being a Christian. Jesus does not tell us to witness and admire his teachings. He says instead, “Go thou and do likewise.” We should do more than admire Christ in our churches; we must take on the spirit of Christ, put on the new man, as Paul says, and by the strength of our faith in him, do that which we should do, lead our lives as Christ would have us. It is the living water of the spirit of Christ which gives us the power to be Christians. Most of us know what we should do, but we don’t have the strength to do what we should do. Here is where the spirit of Christ gives us aid by giving us the power to do what we know is good. But we cannot partake of this power, we cannot be true Christians and take on the trust of preserving our Christian heritage, if we do not have the spirit of Christ in our hearts. If we are to keep something we must first have it. Our first duty then is to make Christ a part of us to such an extent that it is his will and not ours that rules our actions. By taking the spirit of Christ into our hearts we can best fulfill the trust of preserving that for which we are fighting.

Keep that which is committed to thy trust. To preserve something from danger one must make it so strong that it can withstand any threat. Our best guarantee that we will fulfill the trust committed to us is the strength of our faith. “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven,” Jesus tells us. Let us be so full of the spirit of Christ that our influence may be felt by those about us. This is the strength that is not destroyed, that holds its own in the face of a world in which external forces rule.

When Napoleon was in exile after his final defeat at Waterloo and was living his last days, he had ample opportunity to review his life and conquests and figure why he failed. We would expect him to think how he might have altered his military campaigns to achieve victory, but according to one biographer, he concluded that his ambition was doomed to failure, that no man could conquer the world by force of arms. He said, “Alexander the Great, Cyrus of Persia and I built and lost great empires. But one man, Jesus of Nazareth, through love has conquered the whole world.” The strength of the spirit conquers where armed might fails; it is the most potent force there is. But this force cannot exist by itself; it comes into being and acquires its power only when it enters our lives and rules them.

The strength of our faith by which we attain our happiness is attained through prayer through the constant realization of the spirit of God that lights each man if he will but look within to find it there. Pray without ceasing, Paul tells us. He does not mean that we should spend all of our time in prayer; rather we should so act that we are always conscious of the still small voice within, that we remain always aware of the power and source from which our strength and guidance comes. We must develop a single-mindedness of purpose so that our vision may remain clear and focused upon the true values in life. We must not become confused and distracted by a world whose activities have lost sight of the deeper, more satisfying things in life. It is so easy to become confused by the confusion about us, to become discouraged and seek our happiness in forgetfulness that the diversions of the crowd may provide. But the stability and comfort that we require can come only by a deep sense of our relationship and dependence upon God, who will come to us in prayer if we but seek him earnestly enough. A farmer was once asked why it is that the country people seem to have a deeper faith in God than their city neighbors. This man replied that when the farmer is alone in his fields all day he can’t very well miss seeing God. And so it is: the distractions of a busy crowded life sometimes prevent us from seeking and finding the spirit of God that comforts; instead the people seek in amusements forgetfulness of their cares. And yet this is a sort of desperate and unsatisfying way, for at some time we must be alone with our thoughts, deprived of the means of forgetfulness and may truly say of God, “Whither shall I flee from thy presence?” The inner spirit can not be denied even if we try. And the inner spirit becomes the source of happiness when we put our faith in it and thereby make it strong. With singleness of heart let us follow Jesus’ first commandment, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. We can fulfill the trust committed to us by taking into our hearts the teachings of Jesus and the spirit of Christ, and then making this strong by wholehearted devotion to this spirit of God within. Then will our light shine afar, and spread the glory of God.

Today our statesmen and thinkers are concerning themselves with the problems of the peace, and many remembering the last war are frankly skeptical about the possibility of making a peace instead of another armistice. We are planning to guide the forming of new governments in which minorities will be protected, but here at home our Negro minority creates a problem we haven’t been able to cope with. We are beginning to see the difficulties involved in gearing our lives back to a life of peace. The government is working through legislation to lay the foundations for a better world, but the efforts are to no avail unless they have the spiritual basis with which to work. Aristotle once said that if the people be good a nation or society could not be bad. The early writers on political theory all stressed the importance of proper education for a better world. This is where the true and loyal Christian should make his influence felt, by living those principles taught us by Jesus and handed down to our keeping. Our duty is to guard the sacred things, keep the spirit that has guided our civilization through the centuries.

Teach man that states of native strength possest,

Tho very poor may still be very blest;

That trade’s proud empire hastes to swift decay,

As ocean sweeps the laboured mole away;

While self-dependent power can time defy,

As rocks resist the billows and the sky.

The kingdom of God is within; the source unfailing for strength and comfort. Illustration of the well

Keep love so that the spirit of destruction may be curbed and hate destroyed.

1The Star of Hope

Text: Matthew 2: 16 - 2 … “Behold there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem. Saying, where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the East, and are come to worship him.”

The wonder of Christmas is that wonder of the Incarnation. That God should appear on earth in the form of a humble baby, born of a lowly mother, in the obscure fringes of a vast Empire. How differently the Christmas story would appear if we had written it. Blare of trumpets, fanfare, role of drums, marching legions. Enter the King! But God judged otherwise. He could bring Himself to be known and loved by men, only by becoming like the humblest, like a little babe. What wonder that few recognized the Son of God. Most were like that innkeeper of long ago, shutting out the simple carpenter and his wife, reserving room for more honored guests. And we must confess, most today are like that same innkeeper, opening the inns of our hearts to the more important guests of power, wealth, influence.

There were those however, on that birthday of the King who recognized His true importance. The shepherds of course. And the wise men who followed a star in the heavens through the darkness of earth till they came to where something new lay. This was the mark of wisdom - in the world of Caesar Augustus, - . . . , to follow the star of hope in heaven, until they found something revealed by God. This the mark of wisdom - in a world of force and power to realize that: “yet in thy dark streets shineth, the everlasting Light: the hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.”. This is the mark of wisdom, to kneel with the wise men before the infant Jesus, to turn to the purity, and love, and gentleness reflected there, and find the very power of the living God. This is the mark of wisdom to join in the Christmas song - “O holy child of Bethlehem, descend to us we pray; cast out our sin and enter in, be born in us today”.

Such are the marks of the wise men of any age. Let us now try to see the important parts of this wisdom, and apply it to our lives on this Christmas season 1951. First of all, they were wise in that they found the star of hope in God’s heaven when the world was filled with hopelessness.

The wise men believed in a baby - not Herod, not the noisy - they believed in a newborn thing. This is a parable of all true wisdom. All great ideas begin small. The wise man sees this. The greatest began with a babe in a manger in a world darkened by sin. The hope of Christmas is the hope of the star and what it portends. For us in this Christmas season, it means if we are wise, that we will see the star shining above the darkness of the earth, follow it to the babe in the manger, and with the wise men, believe in this small thing, this baby, as the power of goodness. Hopelessness turns to hope when we realize that great things begin small, and that here is the beginning of light and power for us, if we believe in the baby of Bethlehem. If we can catch the wonder of the Incarnation, and realize the power of God in the gentle forces of love and service, - in short, if we can believe in the importance of the babe of Bethlehem.

Moses - Lincoln - Columbus

The forces of power and evil, impress us. 1809 - Lincoln, Darwin, Mendelssohn, Oliver W. Holmes, Tennyson, Poe, McCormick were born.

2. Our strength and responsibility.

“Fullness of time” “make straight the highway”

“Though Christ a thousand times in Bethlehem be born

If he’s not born in thee, thy soul is still forlorn”.

1The Role of the Church or Why We Have the Church

Lester Start

First of all I want to tell you how pleased and honored I am that your pastor and my friend, Otha Gilyard, has asked me to be here tonight on the occasion of your church anniversary celebration. This is a happy event. Imagine 59 years serving this community - but more importantly, - look how you are growing. Soon you will be in your new church and prepared to carry on the work of the church in even bigger and better ways so that Mount Zion Baptist Church will have even more reason to stand proudly as a leading church in the Kalamazoo community.

Now you don’t need me to tell you why the church is important. Your presence here indicates you know it is. But it helps sometimes, I think, to stop to consider what kinds of jobs the church does in a community. I don’t mean just the preaching and counseling, the marrying and the burying in the busy life of the church. But what are the big jobs, the real of roles, the basic functions the church performs beyond the busy details of church life?

First of all the church has a social role. What I mean by this is that the church doesn’t represent only individuals. Church activity is something we do together. Church brings us together as a people and unites us as a people. And this is always the way with religion. Way back in the Bible, Abraham led a people, not some individuals. And Moses spoke for his people and he led his people out of slavery in Egypt across the Red Sea, through the wilderness to the promised land. And through Moses the Lord God made a covenant with his people, promising them he would be their God if they would follow his righteousness. And through the history of the Old Testament, we read about God and his people Israel. And in the New Testament the Gospel of John shows how we are all branches of the one true vine which comes from God, even Jesus Christ. And Paul tells us in the book of Romans, as the Scripture lesson tells us, we are all one body in Christ.

What does this mean? One thing it means is this. There is no such thing as a private religion. Don’t let anyone tell you he has a private religion. If your religion doesn’t make you associate with other people, relate to others as children of God, it isn’t worth very much. Another thing that means is this. Sheer sociability is a value, and it as a religious value. There is a value in the sociability found in a bowling club, a dance club, playing golf with friends, playing cards, or playing games - if there weren’t a value people wouldn’t be interested. Sharing activities that people enjoy mutually is a basis for sociability. That is why the social activities centered in the church are so important, because sociability at its best is a religious value. And the church is interested in organizing social activities to develop this value and to show that it reaches its highest value when the social activities are organized under the principle of mutual devotion to God and His church. The better the activity, the better the sociability. And it is in Church activity that the good feeling of working together as a people is best developed, for it is aimed at the highest. The church should not scorn social activity, and I am sure your new church will have excellent facilities to foster social activities. Doing things together is a social, a religious value. It is the highest value when done in the church to the glory of God and for the social consciousness of the church members as a united people, under God. Yes, the church has a job to do in providing the best social experience in the community.

There is another job the church does, that most people would perhaps think of first. That is the church acts to teach us and remind us of God’s commandments, God’s demand of righteousness as our part of the covenant He has made with us. And this is a terribly important task of the church. Times change, all kinds of pressures grow. The world today looks so different from the world of yesterday, that people question the old rules, the old commandments, and wonder what is right or wrong today. Here is where the church has a role to play, because most are unhappy when they are confused about right and wrong, and there is nothing in the world about us to give us answers to our doubts. And when we look to our religion, our Baptist faith in free inquiry into the Scriptures, when we look into our Bible, we know in our hearts that righteousness is still demanded of us by God. We know that God requires us to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with Him, that as we sow, so shall we reap, and that love, not hate must be the rule for our lives if we are to live as children of God - rather if we are to live at all; if we are to live at peace with our fellows and ourselves. When we are in doubt, the church is here to remind us of the rule of righteousness and more over to remind us of the promise of a life lived according to the will of God. There is the promise in the beatitudes spoken by our Lord, in the Sermon on the Mount. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are the merciful, Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. And whosoever shall do and teach these commandments shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. It is the goodness of God which through the love of Christ evokes a sense of goodness and decency in men that makes possible the hope of a better world where old men shall dream dreams and young men shall see visions, and the daughter’s prophecy - where swords shall be beaten into ploughshares and men will no longer learn war anymore, or hate; where they shall sit each man under his vine and his fig tree, and none shall make him afraid. This is the hope, the dream of the kingdom of righteousness, and we need the church to keep this dream alive, to make it grow, until its truth embraces all mankind.

There is a third job that the church does, a third function that is more and more important in our day. And that is what I call the intellectual function. There is the call to righteousness in the Bible. But there is also an appeal to wisdom, too, the wisdom that knows that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. There are many aspects of this intellectual function. The church is there to give us answers to the hardest questions we can ask about the meaning of life, the nature and destiny of man. More importantly perhaps, the church is there to interpret for our own age the eternal truths that are revealed in the pages of Scripture. It is hard, sometimes, to see how the ancient histories of the Bible relate to the modern world, what exactly leading the life of a Christian entails today, how we are to understand some of the wondrous stories of miracles, and especially what the cross of Christ means as a challenge, a burden, a promise and a victory. And the church has on important role here from the youngest Sunday school class to the inspired and inspiring sermons of your pastor. It takes intelligent and dedicated people to run the church school properly. It takes a very smart man to be a successful teaching and preaching pastor in the troubled world of today. And you can be grateful you have just such a man in Otha Gilyard. The intellectual function of the church consists not only in interpreting the Scripture, but also in inspiring the people in the church to seek out the highest excellence, the highest education they can find in order to learn the skills that will make them leaders in the wider community as teachers, preachers, lawyers and doctors, engineers and shopkeepers - computer specialists and good mechanics. It is no accident that the church has founded most of our nation’s schools of higher education, and it is no accident that this church with its pastor committed to education is having a growing influence for good in the larger community. You shall know the truth, said Jesus - and the truth shall make you free.

There is a fourth job of the church. And this is fundamental to all the others. It is the deepest religious function - I call it the mystical function. It is that which brings us to God through Christ. It works through public worship and private meditation and prayer to teach us all what it means to have on encounter with God, to experience presence of God in Christ, and through Christ have a sense of a new being, a new life, a new spirit. This is the unifying vision that makes the social value possible, that evokes the earnest desire for righteousness and love, that inspires us to learn more and more the truth about God and His creation. This is the job the church does in worship. That is why it is so important to participate in it. It is by prayer that we come closer to God; it is through worship together that we feel ourselves united as one in the body of Christ, which is the church. When we feel ourselves so united, we see that there is no one without dignity or worth, that we can call no soul cheap for whom Christ died. One part of this great body of Christ cannot say to another, I have no need of you. Nor can one part of the body of Christ scorn another. Just as all the parts of the body work together, depend on each other, and thus all have worth, so it is with the body of Christ. So it is with us, if the Spirit of Christ be in us, if we be the body of Christ - we are all united in God through Christ who came to save us all.

How do we sense this Spirit? How do we learn it? We catch this spirit, we sense it in worship, in prayer. You are about to enter a new era in this life of Mount Zion Baptist Church as you enter a new sanctuary. You will take with you a proud history in this church and on old spirit of dedication and commitment with proven results. Now with the ever renewing spirit of the grace of God, we pray this church will develop into an ever larger expression of the Spirit, the body of Christ.

May God be with you and bless you in the years ahead.

1THE MEANING OF PRAYER

Text: Luke 11:1. And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto him, Lord, teach us to pray . . .

We are always hearing exhortations to seek God and follow his will from our churches and from our own sense of inward need. We feel a need for God and want to seek him, at least in our better moments when we stop to think about the deeper meanings in life, but many of us are sincerely puzzled and baffled as to how we should seek him, how we can find that power which others feel and use in their lives. We see the strength and the serenity of those people with a simple but firm faith in God and wish we could find that same power, and wonder how it can be acquired. So often when we seek help from a church we do not find it; we are told that we should seek God but we are not told how, There is little point in feeding a man vitamins when he has a sore toe; some specific medication is required. That is why it seems good to think together today how we can find God, how we can feel his presence in our live through prayer. We all know that we should pray. (and there is no need to talk about that part of it) Let us think together what prayer is and how to pray. Let us join in the heartfelt desire of the disciples, as they turned to Jesus and said, “Lord, teach us to pray”.

We cannot learn how to pray until we have a clear idea of what prayer is, and understand why we should pray. First of all we must recognize that prayer is instinctive, a common feeling in all men, whether they are conscious of it or not. Carlyle once said, “Prayer is and remains the native and deepest impulse of the soul of man”. We may ignore this impulse when things are going smoothly but whenever in life a time of great stress comes, men, no matter how skeptical they think they are, feel the common impulse to pray. A soldier, serving with the army in the Pacific was asked by the chaplain if he ever prayed. “Sometimes”, he answered; “I prayed last Friday when the enemy made that counterattack, but I guess everybody prayed then.” Consider how inevitably the impulse to pray asserts itself whenever critical danger comes suddenly into any life. Prayer is always underground in the consciousness of man waiting to assert itself, even in the most skeptical.

But as we recognize this fact, we must realize that this is not the real use of prayer. [not the prayer life of Jesus] Prayer must not be merely a tendency, spasmodic and untrained; we must not pray only occasionally when we are in pain or when we need something; we should not pray after the manner of little boys on Halloween who ring doorbells and then run away. We do not hold a high opinion of the kind of son who looks to his father only as a last resort in time of need, who turns to his father only when he needs money or gets into trouble. A true son will constantly seek his father’s advice, and make of him his confidant. So we in our relations to God, our Father, should not turn to him only when we are in difficulties, but constantly seek his advice and guidance. Prayer, then, is a deep, impulse lying in the hearts of all of us; but if we recognize this impulse only occasionally it becomes only a selfish sporadic cry of need. Prayer is more than a cry to God when we are distressed. It is a steady feeling of relationship to God felt at all times. [Confucius - my life has been a prayer]

Prayer is not an occasional begging for a favor like ringing for a spiritual bellboy. It is a spirit of communion with God, the loftiest experience within the reach of the soul. Through prayer we speak with God and find his presence in our lives. It is only as we seek him out in prayer that we find him real and vivid in our lives. Some say that they do not pray because God is not real to them, but it would be truer to say that God is not real because they do not pray. If we have the belief that God is, then the practice of prayer will turn this idea into the experience of a real presence in our lives. Praying to God should mean in a very real sense coming into communion with the power of God’s spirit. By it we can focus our attention and our energies toward what we feel is right to do, and thus charge the batteries within us which are too weak to start us off of their own power, by aligning ourselves with the spirit of God.

Prayer as communion with God involves the vivid consciousness that God is ever present, that we can enter into fellowship with him as we do with a friend, and think out our problems to find the right solution. But even when we recognize that true prayer is of this sort, we must recognize that there are often real difficulties which prevent us from practicing it. For example, a man may believe firmly that God exists, and may desire very sincerely to speak with him, and yet fail to feel the presence or God. The practice of communion with God is sometimes not so simple as we are led to believe, because so often people have the feeling when they pray that they are talking to empty space. Although we realize that people have been praying to God since the time when man first began to think, and recognize that. it is inconceivable that man has been praying for so long to someone who isn’t there, sometimes when we try to put prayer into practice we find it hard to feel the presence of God.

There are several reasons for this. Perhaps the greatest of these is the fact that in our everyday lives we are so concerned with the earthly and mundane that we go along for days without ever considering the evidences of God in our lives. Thus when we stop and try to pray we find it hard to find God because we are unused to thinking about him. It requires practice and training and a sensitivity to God’s presence at all times to make our prayers real. We cannot ignore the presence of God until we feel we need him and then expect to find him. We must become aware of his presence in the beauty and order of the world he has created and in the stirring of our inner conscience which speaks to us the word of God. There are those of us who seem blind to beauty in the world in any form; their minds are so geared that beauty is a foreign element. Show them a beautiful sunset and they see only colors, meaningless. They climb a mountain and look over the glorious panorama and wonder where the wonderful view is everyone raves about. I know a man who finds music so meaningless that the only way he can tell that, the National Anthem is being played is by the fact that people stand up. A man once said to Mr. Turner, the great artist: I never Bee sunsets like those you paint. And the artist answered grimly: Don’t you wish you could? And so many of us say to ourselves: I never see the real presence of God as others seem to, but we wish we could. And we can if we but make ourselves sensitive to the evidences of God in the world about us. Remember, God is seeking us as we seek him. Just as beauty is everywhere present ready to move into our consciousness if we but open our eyes to it, so God is ever at hand to move into our lives if we but open them to him. [Jesus and Nature]

Another way in which God gives us evidence of his presence is in the inner promptings of what we call conscience. There is a core of the eternal within each man through which God speaks if we but hearken to his voice. This center is seen by the inner feelings and convictions that tell us what is right and wrong. As we recognize this fact, we see another cause which sometimes makes our communion with God difficult. We can not expect to meet God if we are unprepared to receive him in our hearts, if they are not fit for his presence. Jesus tells us that the pure in heart see God, not these who harden their hearts by impurity or harsh and unkind thoughts. We cannot be right with God if we have the wrong attitudes toward our fellow men. If we cherish feelings of hate toward someone in our hearts, we cannot expect to find God there.

This fact points to another important consideration. Because we feel the presence of God in our inner feelings, it is a mistake to look for him outside somewhere. If we think of God as some power enthroned on high, it is hard to feel a sense of communion with him. But if we recognize that he speaks in our hearts, that we need not seek him outside, we can find him much more readily. The kingdom of God is within you, Jesus tells us. The presence of God can be experienced only within our own hearts. All the best in us, the noblest thoughts, the loftiest ideals, the most generous and loving attitudes, is the voice of God in us. If we think of the voice of God in this sense, we have no way to distinguish between what our beat conscience tells us, and what God is speaking through us. But it seems to me that the two are not to be distinguished; our own best ideals and conscience is the voice of God mediated through our finest endowments. This does not humanize the wisdom of God;, it does not reduce it to mere human thought. Rather it recognizes that we hear God according to our capacities to understand and appreciate him, and that as we improve our understanding we learn more and more about him. That is why it is so necessary to improve ourselves, to make our consciences more sensitive, to live according to the best we know instead of the second best or the worst, for only as we sharpen our spiritual vision can we gain a better understanding of God’s presence and enter into closer communion with him. Our hearts are like windows through which God flows as the rays of the sun. If our windows are dirty we see less light, and it is possible to let them get so dirty that no light can possibly shine through. But as we clean them more and more of the light shines through; and the light comes not from the windows but through them from God. No one, then, should make the mistake of groping outside himself to feel the presence of God. He should rather seek the God who is speaking to him in his best self. This is .what Jesus tells us, I think, when he says “The living water which I shall give him shall become in him a well of water springing up into eternal life”

When we recognize that God speaks in us through our best selves we can understand why it is that sometimes we fail to feel the presence of God when we pray, why we fail to hear his voice in our hearts. The reason is that many of the speeches we address to God are not really prayers at all because they do not spring from the best that is within us, with the force of a dominant desire. James Montgomery in his poem “What is Prayer?” tells us: “Prayer is the soul’s sincere desire., uttered or unexpressed, The motion of a hidden fire that trembles in the breast”. Prayer to be effective must above all be sincere.. We must really desire what we are praying for. So often we are like the Pharisee at prayer. We pray that God may help us lead better lives, when we are really quite content to remain as we are. Any lazy student can pray to be learned; any loafer can pray to be rich; any irresolute and weak person can pray for a strong character, but unless this is really what he desires in his innermost self, his prayer is of no avail. Jesus always emphasized the need for sincerity in prayer. His criticism of the prayers of the Pharisees was not because they prayed for unworthy things, but because their prayers did not represent what these men really wanted. Their habitual ambitions did not tally with what their spoken petitions asked. When Jesus tells us to pray to the father who seeth in secret and to use no futile and repetitious formula he is making a plea for sincerity. When we pray to God to make us good, we must mean it if our prayer is to have any force, if we are to feel God answering our prayer.

As we turn to the life of Jesus and seek from him the answer to our petition, Teach us to pray, the answer seems fairly clear. Prayer springs from the heart, from a deep desire that reaches out toward the highest which we know. It is not merely asking God for favors, but a sincere wish to come into communion with God, to develop our abilities toward that which we know is right. It not only gathers our energies toward a worthy object in life, but it provides the means whereby we can tap the inner resources of the power of God in our hearts when we seek his will and work and live accordance with it. In the words of Fosdick: “It is no affair of hasty words at the fag-end of a day, no form observed in deference to custom, no sop to conscience to ease us from the sense of religious obligation unfulfilled. Prayer is the central and determining force of man’s life.”

Prayer thus understood and practiced is a dominating force in life, It strengthens us when the path is rough and fills us with the courage that if we are on God’s side we cannot be overwhelmed. It teaches us also to understand what we call unanswered prayer. I have a feeling that the hymn which says “Teach me the nature of unanswered prayer” does not put the situation quite correctly. I don’t believe there is any such thing as unanswered prayer. What we call unanswered prayer happens when God answers by saying no. It seems hard for some of us to realize that God can say no to our requests; we feel that when we sincerely pray God must do as we say. But this is the primitive idea of a man with a wooden idol who feels he can control his god because he can control the idol. When we stop to think about it, we must agree that it is a good thing God does not grant everything we ask f or, because so often we pray for things we should not have. And if God granted everything we prayed for there would be no occasion to labor or develop our intellectual powers to use in improving ourselves. And quite often we pray for things we are not ready to receive, things which we must labor ourselves to possess. For centuries we have prayed in the Lord’s prayer “Thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven” and the kingdom hasn’t come. And yet as the years go by more and a more we see our duty in laboring to build this kingdom through our own efforts instead of asking God to do it alone. More and more we see the need of developing brotherhood and mutual understanding and equality.

True prayer constant and practiced is always answered, and the more we pray the more we become aware of the power and goodness of God as he enters more and more into our hearts. Of such prayer it is true that: More things are wrought by prayer than this world

1The Love of God for Man

Lester Start

Some have come to the conclusion that either God is not a God of love, or else He has little power to make His love realized in the world and either alternative results in a loss of faith in God. It seems to me that those who thus lose faith in God are suffering from a misconception of what the love of God means. Instead of thinking of it as a source of power and strength, with whose aid we are enabled to endure in the midst of trials, we look to the love of God as a sort of shield which prevents any evil or suffering from touching us. This idea of God’s love works very well when everything is going smoothly, but when we do run up against suffering, we must either revise our idea of God, or lose faith in His power if He does not do what we expect of him. Too many of us have changed our idea of the Fatherhood of God into what might be called the Papahood of God. God becomes a sort of Daddy who watches over us with a doting care, instead of the understanding Father, whose loving interest guides us in the proper paths of activity.

The idea of God’s love as a shield to us from the harsher aspects of life is a carry over from our childhood training. When we teach little children the meaning of God’s love, we liken it to the tender love of a father for his child, the love which watches over the child and keeps him from harm. And it is altogether proper and fitting that we do, for this is the only way a child can understand the meaning of God’s love. He understands his father’s loving care and can picture easily a similar love of God. But as a child grows up the situation changes. His father or mother does not keep the same close watch and care that they did. As the child grows and learns, he can do more and more things for himself; he is more on his own. There is more opportunity for him to bump against some of the less pleasant and agreeable situations in life. But the parent is not alarmed, for if he is wise, he will understand that this is all in the process of growing up. In order to learn to walk, the child will have to tumble many times first, and suffer many skinned and bruised knees. The father can teach him and guide him the best he can, and his love is still present, but he understands that it is impossible and unwise to try to shield his child from all the hard knocks he will meet. We all know the unfortunate result of shielding a child from all unpleasantness; we call such a child spoiled and he is spoiled because he finds it almost impossible to adjust himself in a world that does not always suit itself to his particular interests.

We can understand this in the case of a child growing up. But when we think of God’s love for us we too often hang on to the old childlike idea that it will shield us from all experience of suffering or unpleasantness, as the doting parent shields his child from the world. Like the spoiled child who wails when his playmates won’t let him have his way, we, when suffering enters our lives, cry to God and say He does not love us anymore because He doesn’t make our path easy as we could would have it. If we have this idea of the love of God, it is easy to lose faith in Him, especially today, as we see and experience so much that is evil.

This idea of the love of God simply does not work if we face the world realistically. Unless we are extremely favored we are bound to face up to unpleasant suffering at some times in our life. And if our idea of God’s love implies that He protects us from suffering, our faith is due for a shock. We can pretend that the evil doesn’t really exist as one prominent Protestant sect does, but this does not seem very satisfactory. We can lose our faith in God, as some do, because He does not run the world as we would have Him do it, but this leaves us in despair with no hope. We could blame all the evil on some power of darkness such as Satan, and wait for the ultimate triumph of good in a fatalistic manner, but this does not solve our problem. Besides, it is more honest to put the blame where it belongs, upon ourselves, for most of our suffering is the result of our own doing. If this were not so, there would not be so much point in leading better lives. We suffer not so much for our sins but by them. The true ruler of the powers of darkness and evil, the true ruler of hell is we who raise it.

We need to get a deeper, more satisfactory idea of the meaning of God’s love for man, one that will help us when we meet suffering. If God’s love does not always shield us from suffering, it does always furnish a sustaining power that will enable us to endure. It may not always protect, but it always sustains us. The consciousness of God’s love for us, gives us a strength and courage that enables us to put on the armor of God and overcome the evils we meet. It gives us the power which Paul felt when he said, “If God be for us, who can be against us?” It is the power we feel when we turn to God for comfort and strength in prayer at those times when our tasks seem too great for us to bear, and our sorrows too heavy to carry. We feel somehow at these times when we talk to God, that everything will turn out all right, that God’s love will carry us through; even though the path is rough and stony, there is a guiding hand that will sustain us and help us over the obstacles even if it does not sweep them away. The obstacles are put in our path for a purpose; that is why God does not clear them from our path when we ask Him to.

Let us see how this idea of the love of God works out. If anyone were to feel the power of God’s love, it would be His only Son. Let us consider for a minute what God’s love meant in Jesus’ life. Did God’s great love make the life Jesus led an easy one? Did it remove the obstacles and sufferings He met in life? Jesus’ whole life was a series of trials and hardships. As a child He had to be hidden from the wrath of the King; He was persecuted by the Jews for His teachings, and finally condemned to die as a criminal, deserted by His followers and betrayed by one of His disciples, He died on the cross. If God protects His children from suffering, He could not have asked Jesus to do what He did. God’s love was certainly with Jesus - and we can see how it was manifested in Him. Through God’s love Jesus was empowered to do what He had to do - through the power of God’s love he triumphed over evil and could say, “I have overcome the world.’

Think of the life of Paul, the great apostle who was so conscious of the love of God. His life was certainly not free from suffering; he tells us of the stonings, beatings he suffered. And yet he found in the love of God through the Spirit of Christ the power to travel all over the Roman empire spreading the teachings of Christianity.

When we think of the great Christians of history, we find very, very few who had smooth lives unobstructed by evil. These great men found in God’s love the sustaining power to overcome the evils about them and to grow in strength of spirit. This is what makes them great; this is what makes any man great, this sustaining power, which comes from God and enables him to endure in the midst of suffering. [Illustration badly needed here. The church at Rome at the time Mark was written?].

The love of God for man is seen in our lives in another way. God sustains us and gives a strength to overcome the evils in the world as we meet them. But He does more. His love acts as a summons to us, it imposes an obligation on our part to follow His Spirit of Love in our everyday actions. As God loves us, so should we love our fellow man, and by our love to Him, help to bring about the Kingdom of God. The man who loves God so much that he cannot see the plight of his fellow man, and does not share his burden,does not follow the commandment of Jesus. God’s love for us is best found as we love others. Dr. Wilfred Grenfell, the man who spent his life helping others in Labrador once said, “This is what makes life wonderful - this is what makes life worthwhile - to know that you are in a world that needs you, and that with God’s help, you can meet that need”. This is truly what makes life worthwhile,for this expresses our function in life, to love others as God loves us and to show our love by deeds of service to our fellow man. Through love to our neighbor, we will be able to overcome the evils that exist in the world, those evils of our own making, that violate the commandments of Jesus. We must not forget this obligation that the love of God imposes upon us. As we gain strength and power from His love, we should use this to help the lot of our fellow man. “Go thou and do likewise”, we are told. And if we but try to live the commandment of love, we will find the surging power of God’s love, sustaining us.

This is the meaning of God’s love that we must recapture, if we are to build the world in which the teachings of Christ may rule. We have lulled ourselves too long with a false sense of security in our righteousness. We have listened peacefully in our pews to pious sentiments from little ecclesiastical janitors, thinking that “God’s in His heaven, all’s right with the world” and neglecting our responsibilities to live the life of love and service in the world about us. We have been forced to awaken from the spell, rudely forced to understand that God’s love will not keep the world running smoothly while individuals and peoples pursue self interest instead of service, greed and hate instead of brotherly love.

But how can we speak of brotherly love in the world at war? we ask. How can we speak of Christian service while nations fight each other? We are in the sad position of the Jewish soldier who found that certain aspects of Army life conflicted with his religious teachings. This fellow became so worried about the situation that he went to his rabbi to talk over his troubles. In the first place, he was required to march on the Sabbath, the day of rest and worship. When he told this to the rabbi, the rabbi said, “If they give you no alternative, and require you to march, you’ll have to march, I guess”. “But that’s not the worst of it”, the soldier went on. “Often after a hard day’s training when we come to supper the only meat to be had is ham. I get awfully hungry and need the meat, but should I eat it?” The rabbi thought for a long time. ” Is there no alternative then? No other meat?” The soldier said “no”. “Then”, said the rabbi, “you must eat the ham but remember, don’t lick the bones.”

Today, we find that the ideals of Christianity are forced in the background from grim necessity. It is a terrible situation which we must face. But if we must do, in some instances, that which our Christian teachings tell us is wrong, because we have been unable to find an alternative, let us not lick the bones, and find enjoyment in what we have to do. If it has been found necessary by the army to bomb civilian populations, let us not exult in the destruction and gloat over the carnage being inflicted upon a part of suffering humanity, and lick our lips over the bones of the news. But let us keep our hearts free from hate and keep in mind the ideal of Christian love we must follow in order to build the world to come; the ideal that Lincoln felt in the midst of the Civil War, in his second inaugural address when he said, “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan - to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.”

This is the ideal we must keep alive today - the spirit of brotherly love and service cannot be forgotten, for it is only through this love that we can build the peace for which we pray. Love never faileth. God’s love for man is with us at all times. But it must work through our own hearts in acts of love and service to our fellow man, if we expect it to destroy the evils and suffering of our world. God’s love will not solve our problems automatically, but through His love, although we may suffer trials, we can overcome the evils of the world. With God all things are possible; His love will empower us, if we follow His summons.

A poem by Angela Morgan gives us this sense of God’s love as a summons. The poet prays to God, asking Him why He does not help His people in their suffering and bring them peace and happiness.

Last night I tossed and could not sleep

When shattered heavens weep and weep

As they have wept for many long days.

I know at last tis God who prays.

The Lord God whispered and said to me

“These things shall be, these things shall be,

Nor help shall come from the scarlet skies,

Till the people rise!

Till the people rise, my arm is weak.

I cannot speak till the people speak;

When men are dumb, my voice is dumb.

I cannot come tll my people come.”

And the Lord God’s presence was white, so white,

Like a pillar of stars against the night.

“Millions on millions pray to me

Yet hearken not to hear me pray;

Nor comes there any to set me free.

Of all who plead from night to day.”

So God is mute and heaven is still

While the nations kill.

Help them to stand O Christ, I prayed.

Thy people are weak and sore afraid.

“My people are strong”, God whispered me,

“Broad as the land, great as the sea.

They will tower as the tallest skies

Up to the level of my eyes,

When they dare to rise,

If the people rise, if the people rise.

I will answer them from the swarming skies.”

1The Lost Song

There is a famous fairy tale written by Hans Christian Andersen and said to music by Stravinsky in the well-known Firebird Suite, which is a suggestive parable for the modern day. The story goes like this: Once upon a time long, long ago there lived an Oriental prince who treasured a beautiful nightingale. This bird sang so sweetly for the emperor that she was kept at court and held in great honor. Her sweet and melodious song seemed to strike a chord of harmony for all the people in the kingdom.

Then one day, a packet arrived from a neighboring prince containing a wondrous gift, a marvelous mechanical bird whose song was an almost perfect imitation of the live nightingale. All the court was intrigued and fascinated by the mechanical bird - all but the real nightingale, who, after the first performance of her arrival, sadly flew away.

But no one really cared, for as the music master said, “With the real nightingale we never knew exactly what the song would be, but with this bird, everything is known. We can even open it up and by showing the mechanism make the people understand exactly how the songs are made.” So, everyone was happy with the new mechanical bird.

Finally, when everyone knew the mechanical songs by heart, something happened: a cog snapped, the spring whirred, and the music stopped. The emperor scoured the kingdom for the experts - but no one could fix the bird.

And then the emperor fell ill; he called upon the music master to provide a song to charm away the specter of death which was hovering closer and closer - but the real nightingale had flown away - and the mechanical bird was still. There was no song.

This story is a grim parable for our day. Somehow the living song has left us as we turned to embrace a mechanical civilization. This in turn has broken down after we felt we knew all about it. And no one seems able to fix the complex mechanism. As we wait perplexed, the specter of death hovers above us all, and no artificial music of our own making can charm it away. Thus we look at the crisis of our times, the decline of the West marking the end of an era - leaving us with the Predicament of Modern Man - man in a world of power, seemingly powerless to make peace; having controlled his natural environment, unable to control himself, having pushed his god science into control, now finding himself controlled by it. And so, beset by fears, he embraces science in a death clasp - turning to psychology for his Peace of Mind - Peace of Mind of the name of the current nonfiction bestseller. And so the specter of death comes closer, carrying in this modern scene, instead of a scythe, a bomb.

There is a grim lyric by A. E. Houseman which reads: “If by chance thy eye offend thee, pluck it out, lad, and be whole - but play the man, stand up and end ye, - if your sickness be your soul.” Modern man is beginning to suspect that his sickness is his soul - and by playing the kind of man he is - will soon end himself. He will lose his life in spite of his best efforts to save it. With the specter armed as he is life will end with a bang, not whimper.

We vaguely sense the cause of our ills in our modern mechanical life, in the rapid secularization of our society. We can lament with Carl Van Doren that man no longer believes in angels - for then he seemed to be capable of loftier visions of his role on earth than now when he studies rats in the laboratory for behavior patterns. We see the failure of the easy optimism of the old liberalism. We used to think we could swing the world around our head by its tail - but now, it rests heavily, Atlas fashion on our shoulders.

We can see the mechanism broken and explain the presence of the specter - but how are we to recapture the lost song which might chase the specter away? How are we to put the pieces together which form our broken world?

The story is told of a father who gave his child a jigsaw puzzle which when put together pictured a map of the world. The father was amazed to find that his son put the pieces together in an incredibly short time. When asked for an explanation, the boy replied, “I noticed that on the back of the puzzle there was a picture of a man, so I turned the pieces over and all I had to do was put the man together properly and then the world came out all right.”

This is what I would suggest today - it is necessary to put the man together before the world will turn out all right. And the song needed to charm away the specter of fear and death is to be found where it has always been found when it is found at all - within man.

Man can pick up the broken pieces of his society and put them together only after he puts himself together. In an age under the shadow of collectivism the individual must emerge. Rousseau, one of the forefathers of our democracy, insisted that the good society can come only when men undergo a moral conversion and let their true selves appear. It is just such a conversion which is needed today, a new dynamic coming from within man, forming the lost song needed to save man from his fears.

This new beginning must include, first of all, an intellectual awakening, an intellectual awareness of the real issues in life coupled with the intellectual honesty, courage and freedom essential to face them. You who are voluntarily seeking a college education should have the least need of such a reminder - yet the danger is great that because of your preoccupation with the knowledge necessary to prepare for a vocation, you may neglect the wider questions of the meaning of life.

There must be a new emphasis on hard, deep thinking to counteract the prevailing indifference and superficiality of today. It has been said that the only thing we learn from history is the fact that we do not learn from history. We do not learn, because we do not want to - because we are too preoccupied with our petty desires and interests, because we are blind to the deeper meanings in life. We are like the little boy who was taken to church for the first time. After the service as parents asked him what he thought of it. The little boy answered - “the organ was nice - and I liked the singing - but the commercial was too long!”

We can sympathize with the little boy - he can’t be expected to appreciate the commercial. But to how many people are the serious values of life mere commercials to be endured! Interruptions of the main program of life the satisfying of one’s desires!

We must wake up and think - realize that the deep and difficult questions concerning man’s nature and destiny cannot be ignored. It takes more than science to make better things, for better living! It takes ideas and values. An unexamined life is not worth living, as the sage Socrates wisely taught. If man does not know what he is living for, he does not know how to live. And if ever a civilization needed wisdom in leadership, wisdom to rethink our values, it is ours.

Toynbee, the historian, has pointed out that civilizations are never killed or murdered - they commit suicide - because they no longer have anything worth living for. Thus a civilization has only itself to fear. Our forefathers knew they had a civilization worth living for - it contained values - definite moral and religious ideals concerning the worth of man - preserving the freedom, dignity and integrity of the individual. “We hold these truths to be self evident,” they wrote, “that all men are created free and equal, and are endowed with certain inalienable rights; among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” And on the basis of these ideals scorned by the Neros and Hitlers and oppressive monarchs of the centuries - this democracy was founded.

The important fact for us today is this: our strength is founded on moral values - the fruits of democracy have basic roots reaching far back into the Hebrew Christian stream of thought. Without these roots, the fruit will wither and die.

This is the grave danger of today. In our preoccupation with the superficialities of a gadget geared civilization, we forget the deeper values of life. In our struggle for worldly success individually and nationally, we lose sight of the values that give life meaning thus run the risk of committing suicide. In our struggle to save our life, we run the risk of losing it because we forget the values and ideals of that undergirds our civilization. A new awareness of the values of justice, freedom, cooperation, decency must be found. This is the lost song to be recaptured

Thus the necessity of thinking - hard thinking. And hard thinking is the most difficult thing to do. That’s why so few people do it. They are perplexed by the problems of a torn world - and push the problems aside because they are weary with thinking. The danger, however, of this attitude is clear. In a world geared for power there is always someone ready and able to do the people’s thinking for them - as we have seen.

If we are impressed with the cycle of the rise and fall of civilizations, we can see also a linear development through the cycles. Men have moved falteringly toward a higher goal of life through the centuries. They have done so because of their vague awareness of a truth dimly seen, which is the true polestar in man’s voyage through life. It is this truth proclaimed by the wisdom of the ancients - the truth that shines all the brighter as the night grows darker - that we must find today, by which we must live. We must find that truth which dares to say that what is highest in man’s ideals is deepest in his nature. If this seems visionary, let us remember that the so-called realists have made a pretty thorough mess of things, - it is the visionary who catches a dream and communicates it to the people who contributes to man’s development. Perhaps it is time to give him a chance. We need an Augustine not a Bismarck. We need a world in which the old men can dream dreams and the young men see visions, for without vision the people perish. We need intellectual awakening to dispel the specter hovering over us.

What does this mean specifically? It means that the thinking man will look beneath the surface of things instead of skipping around on top with a water-spider mind. He will stand on the side of truth; alone, if need be, and not follow the suggestions of the mob. He will follow truth wherever it to may lead even into the unknown. He will develop a respect for facts and reasoning that will enable him to weigh properly the screaming headlines in our newspapers. Instead of becoming confused with conflicting opinions he will be able to evaluate them independently.

He will be wise enough to look in all directions, so that if everyone’s attention is directed toward a fear of communism, he will be awake to see the threat of a fascism striking from behind. He will see that some of the organizations most violent in their warnings of the red menace have not been conspicuous in the preservation of our bill of rights. He will be awake to preserve the basic values against any foe.

He will develop the serenity of mind that rules out hysteria. He will think with his brain, not his viscera; judge by reason, not emotions.

He will see above all that fear of subversive activities, that fear of the overthrow of our way of life by a foreign ideology is a tacit but frank admission of lack of faith in our own ideals

He will see that it is can be met only with ideas, that suppression by force is weakness - that shrill strength lies in intelligence, freedom and honesty. He will see that if we reach the point where we feel we must restrict the expression of ideas, it will mean we have lost the ideals of our democracy. We will then have admitted that the ideals framed in the Constitution are no longer strong enough to defend themselves because we no longer believe them. The faith of Jefferson in the common man, and Lincoln in what he called the ultimate justice of the people will have given way to fear and force and failure.

The thinking man will see all this and realize that his hope and the hope of civilization lie in a reawakening of the belief in the basic values of our civilization - faith in the brotherhood of man, in the ability of man to live a little lower than the angels, rather than a little higher than the beasts - faith that man’s inhumanity to man can change to peace, faith in the ultimate justice of the people.

This reawakening, this intellectual awareness of what is really worthwhile, is the lost song needed to charm away the specter of death. It is our task to contribute to this reawakening.

Much more than an intellectual awakening is needed. This will help to clear our minds and make us realize that there is more to life than what we see with our senses, that there is a deep undercurrent of ideas and values which are paramount. But this is not enough.

There is an eye for the heart as well as an eye for the brain - another light which we sometimes call the light of conscience. This must be rekindled in men today. We must return to the moral consciousness which is our true guide and strength. We must relearn the old lesson that no man is an island unto himself, and remember the folly of asking for whom the bell tolls. As Dostoevski put it in his novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, “There is only one means of salvation, to make yourself responsible for other men’s sins. . . . as soon as you make yourself responsible for everything, for all men, you will see at once that it is really so and that you are to blame for everyone and for all things.”

We fear the danger of political isolationism - it is moral isolationism that is to be feared. It is the callous smugness that can look at others’ misery calmly - the greed while others starve that grasps, the complacency that thinks it can’t happen here - these must be eradicated.

A moral reawakening is a difficult task, for the voice of moral cynicism is strong in our midst. Two world wars have shaken our faith in man. It is the fashion, therefore, to be tough, realistic, and cynical - to reorient our morality on the basis of self interest - to “do unto others before they do you”. It is fancied that this is the only strong-minded view possible.

We must realize however, that moral cynicism is not being realistic or tough-minded. Moral cynicism is defeatism of the basest sort. It is easy to be cynical; it takes real strength to believe in the possibility of the goodness of man. The weakling is the cynic; the strong man has a will to believe.

There is a real strength in morality, which has been proved through the centuries. The ideas of Plato and Christ push the Alexanders and the Napoleons of our history into insignificance.

The moral ideals of a tiny band of freedom loving people have pushed aside the strongest rules of oppression. There is a power in moral ideals that captures the loyalty of people, kindling them with an inspiration which cannot be extinguished. It is this moral fervor which explains the miracle of our democracy, it is this power which is the real force for progress in history.

This is the fact that must be seriously considered, for leadership in the world depends today, as it always has, upon moral leadership. If we fail to provide this leadership, popular support will move in another direction.

If we are to provide the moral leadership the world needs, we must reawaken it in our own hearts and in our national life. This means, specifically, we cannot very well insist upon free elections throughout the world when we have a poll tax at home - we cannot expect free elections in the Balkans when we do not have them in Georgia - this is not the same as saying that if things are wrong in Georgia, USA, they are right in Georgia USSR - it does mean, however, that an awakened moral honesty is needed, if we are to win peoples to our way of life. It means also that if we are to promote the interests of freedom loving peoples and gain their respect, we must be careful to show we are interested in freedom more than in oil. We cannot enlist the respect of colored people’s when we cannot guarantee on FEPU.

Moral leadership is the need for today. An awakened conscience individually and nationally is the best strength for our society, and the only hope for the future. Moral power - not strength of arms - will decide the future.

These will restore the lost song of our civilization - an intellectual awakening and a moral fervor. This alone will drive away the specter.

The task is difficult but the alternative is intolerable - a civilization committing suicide because it has lost sight of its true values.

When the first atomic bomb exploded in New Mexico, the desert sand turned to fused green glass.

This fact according to the magazine “Free World,” has given certain archaeologists a turn. They have been digging in the ancient Euphrates Valley and have uncovered a layer of agrarian culture 8000 years old, and a layer of herdsmen culture much older, and a still older cavemen culture. Recently, they reached another layer. . . of fused green glass.

Whether this is the remains of another atomic age or not - we would not want future archaeologists to find this as the culmination of our age.

The only alternative to this is a moral and intellectual awakening on the part of all of us. It can come only from within each man.

The ancient Greeks had a theory that all learning was a process of remembering things once known but long ago forgotten. This is the basis for the old adage “Know thyself”, and for Socrates’ strange insistence that he could not teach, but acted only as a midwife to bring out the truth already within man.

The suggestion is that we have but to look within, and remember to find that intellectual and moral awakening we so sorely need. We need but to recall the song that once was ours.

There is more to that story about the emperor and the specter. The emperor did not die. Just as he was about to give up the struggle in despair, while the useless mechanical bird lay neglected and forgotten - the real nightingale returned. She sang so sweetly of death’s garden that the specter longed to return, and disappeared like a mist in the morning sun.

And so the living song returned - but the nightingale remained in the garden and would not stay in court, for, as she said to the emperor, “I love your heart more than your crown.”

Thus ended the parable. - It is not too late. Let us remember this - the living song can return to our hearts. Let us look within to find it there as we turn to our churches in this holy season. May God help us remember the lost song of the soul.

1The Future of Liberal Religion

The subject of my address and as printed in the program looks overly ambitious. To began, I want to make it clear that I am not going to try to be a Mr. Pearson and give amazing predictions of the week of things to come. I haven’t any crystal ball - and the present scene is too complex to evaluate adequately in the few minutes.

What I should like to do is to think over with you a subject of interest to all of you - the position of liberal religion in the present world scene in an attempt to evaluate its true nature and function today.

There is no need to tell you what is meant by liberal religion. As members of this church you share in a glorious tradition of free, progressive liberal thought, a tradition which I am sure you are aware of, which you remember with pride. But perhaps you are not so well aware of the general attitude toward liberal religion coming from the outside. I am referring not to the irresponsible criticisms of misinformed people, but to the serious criticisms made by those who have honestly evaluated liberal religion from a philosophical point of view and found it wanting.

We must realize that today not only liberal religion but liberalism in general is facing a hostile world. Conservatism and its extreme reaction always have their innings in times of crisis. The decline of interest in liberal religion can be seen from a study of enrollments in theological schools. The liberal schools of the nonconformist churches are not filling their classes while the conservative schools are full. The growing popularity of revival programs on the air attests to the nostalgic longing for the good old religion and a weariness with problems of modern society.

This is happening, the critics of liberal religion tell us, because it can no longer meet the needs of our day.

Let us face this criticism honestly and see how we can meet it. Only in this way can we see the future of liberal religion. The most serious criticism from the point of view of the philosophy of religion is this: the teachings of liberal religion concerning the nature of man are false. They are naive, overly optimistic, unrealistic. Liberal religion teaches that man is essentially good. He is a little rosebud that needs only to unfold and scent the air with his sweetness. Two world wars have shown us, the critics go on to say, that man is essentially evil - when the little rosebud opens we find the heart of the rose blackened by an evil blight. The sadism of Buchenwald, the cruelties and atrocities of men, show beyond any doubt that man is essentially evil, full of sin and guilt. He is motivated by a blind pride and ruthless egotism that make it impossible for him to be moral by himself. Man is a monster who can be saved from his monstrous actions only through the divine intervention of the God-man, who intercedes to carry our guilt and save us from sin.

This is the criticism - and I think it is well made. Liberal religion has tended to be overly optimistic with regard to human nature - not only liberal religion, but liberalism in general. The economic and political developments of the last century show the same error. Laissez-faire in economics and the development of the sovereign, national state show the same mistaken assumption that man is all good.

In defense of liberalism, we can say the error is due to overemphasis. This emphasis was needed to free men from the negative dogmas of a conservatism which hampered progress. But, more important, this criticism of liberal religion is guilty of the same error which it charges - the error of overemphasis. In stressing the sin of man, and the complete dependence of man upon God for his salvation, man is in a subtle way excused from his share of the guilt in making the world the mess it is today. The Neo-orthodox religious thinker takes great pride in laying bare his pride - he makes a picture in vivid detail of the loathsome worm that is man while the groans of a suffering humanity and the explosions of wars and rumors of wars provide the sound effects. But notice the subtle excuse - if man is so corrupt that only God’s mercy through the Atonement of His Son can save him, man cannot be held morally responsible, and can do nothing to salvage the wreck he has made of the world, but pray for divine intervention.

Let me illustrate this by reference to a famous sermon called “Of Guilt and Hope” written by Niemueller. (I think this name is of more than casual interest to you assembled here.) Niemueller represents the evangelical church in Germany under the influence of the modern Neo-orthodox theology. The sermon seems designed to ease the conscience of the Germans. One sentence, in particular is hard to swallow. It reads “You know our Lord Jesus cannot ask us what we cannot do, for He bears our burden and our guilt.” Without making any judgment on the intention of the statement, I would like to point out the danger of such ideas being used to wipe out moral responsibility. The conclusion may follow: if man is this vile worm unable to help himself, why should he bother to try, why should he fret himself about the guilt he cannot eliminate?

If liberal religion tends to have a naive view of the nature of man, the other emphasis is defeatist. The nature of man should be re-evaluated today, but not at the expense of destroying the moral activism which is his essential characteristic. Liberal religion should recognize the evils in man - his greed, egotism, and hates, - but must reaffirm in these difficult times the hope of man’s conquering his inhumanity through moral action. Certainly the liberal religious spirit which lies at the roots of our democracy recognized the egotism and selfishness of man, but it had the courage to envision a moral man living under mutual obligation in a society to promote the good of all.

We need not be crushed by this criticism, then. Liberal religion’s future will depend on its ability to keep the vision of moral man in society and to make constructive suggestions on how the ideal can be realized. This is not the time for a gloomy defeatism, which in effect sanctions existing evils. The peoples of the world caught in the despair of a war-scarred civilization need the bright hope of a better world of better men. No need to tell them men are evil - they know all too well. What is needed is the moral conviction that men can be good. This is the real task. It is not naive optimism, but a stubborn will to believe the highest ideals of our religious faith, what is highest in thought, deepest in nature. The task of liberal religion is to supply this hope - I see no other source for it.

The second serious criticism of liberal religion is often stated in this way: In throwing aside the basic theology of Christianity, the liberal church is left with no symbol of loyalty powerful enough to attract allegiance. When the old symbols are destroyed, spiritual force is dissipated like water poured into a desert. Liberal religion finds itself in a state of deterioration in which religion becomes the equivalent of good citizenship. What people really want and need from religion is a basic faith and comfort, not the raising of intellectual problems on current affairs which serve only to augment anxiety. [Story of little boy.]

This is the criticism. It is this which has frightened many liberal churches back into the right-wing of their denominations. And so we returned to formalized religion. The church is redecorated - the communion table placed in the back of the chancel to form an altar. The minister studies the new theology. Everybody is happy - especially the people, for now they will be freed from the obligation to think, but can depend on the comforting faith to solve the world’s ills.

This, then, is the kind of solution being offered. It is based on the simple fact that in times of crisis man naturally turns to the old loyalties; when the mind is burdened with the troubles and fears of the world, he does not want to have to think about them - he wants to be told what to believe. This is why conservatism emerges after every period of crisis. This is why liberal religion is criticized and threatened today.

The return to the old ways is, of course, no solution to the weakness of liberal religion, but a recognition of its defeat. We should not make this admission of defeat and we need not, if we can strengthen liberalism where it is weak. This can be done - we can reevaluate the nature of man and save religion from a secular deterioration by reaffirming the essence of liberal religion which is a fervent, honest faith in the possibility of moral man.

This seems to me to be the task of liberal religion today - to reawaken the moral consciousness to a dynamic faith. This is the need today and liberal religion’s future lies in filling that need. If it cannot, it is doomed - along with liberalism - and civilization.

It is this moral earnestness which has made liberalism great in the past and which is its strength today. The task is great.

We live in a society weakened by cynicism, defeatism and fear, a society which is tired of thinking, tired of trying, content to be told what to do. We are standing at the threshold of a new world, but we stand trembling - instead of moving forward in confidence; we are insecure, and so we seek to preserve the status quo, preferring the known to the unknown. Moral leadership!

We stand a favored nation in a world of suffering and want - but our moral conscience is dumb - while thousands starve our papers report record earnings in our industries. We become wakened to our duty only when we see that our blindness is forcing peoples to turn to a rival foreign power. And then our dollars are spent to preserve the status quo. When will we learned that the enemy of freedom is poverty and oppression!

Our papers see red and scream about our threatened liberties - while we watch, a quiet Supreme Court decision threatens our treasured freedom in education by providing funds for transportation to parochial schools. We huddle together in our insecurity pointing out demons while our real enemy is a lack of honest moral consciousness.

This is the task ahead -

Moral leadership in individual life.

Moral leadership in political life.

- Reach behind headlines -

- Don’t be afraid to think -

- Avoid hysteria -

- Honesty of thought -

- Don’t move with the crowd -

1The Beauty of Holiness and

the Holiness of Beauty

Lester J. Start

There is a delightful new tradition in our church - the annual celebration of morning worship in the beautiful surroundings of the Nature Center. Many of you will remember the last such occasion. It was a bright and warm June morning -we walked along dew-drenched grass on a path to a high ridge - near the maple sugar shed. And when we were settled (after some minor disturbance when someone in the choir complained about some poison ivy) - there we were looking over the serene and lovely landscape of Cooper’s Glen and were invited by our pastor to meditate on all this. This is when the words of the Psalmist come to mind: “Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness.” So we sit and gaze at the beauties of God’s world and we worship the Lord - but not with a sense of the beauty of holiness. Rather, it is a sense of the holiness of beauty.

How does this come to be? How does the beauty of holiness shift into the holiness of beauty? What do we celebrate? Holiness or beauty? What is the difference, the relation between the two? As a philosopher, I am interested in such a puzzle - and I want to share my thoughts on this with you.

First of all, holiness is a different thing from beauty. And the Bible is chiefly concerned with holiness. As a matter of fact, beauty is rarely mentioned - almost never in the New Testament. To be precise, using the King James version, it is mentioned three times: once, in Acts as part of a place name; once in Romans as an Old Testament quotation, “how beautiful are the feet of him who brings good tidings”; and once by Jesus in a passage I shall cite later. In the Old Testament the term is little used. When found, it is either used neutrally as Absalom was famed for the beauty of his countenance, or disparagingly as “beauty is vain” or “he had no beauty that we should desire him,” except for this phrase, the beauty of holiness, where the focus is clearly on the holiness.

As a matter of fact, there is a prophetic protest against mixing the aesthetic with the religious. Amos thunders in the name of God - “I despise your ceremonies - take away from me the noise of thy songs for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. But let judgment run down as water and righteousness as a mighty stream.”

Holiness, righteousness, justice, obedience to the will of God, following the covenant and the commandments: this is the Biblical view of the true way for man to go. The true is the faithful for the Hebrew. It is the word “aman” (”amen” is related to it). The true is the faithful, that which endures, which is steadfast, and this view is carried over in our Puritan tradition whose Calvinism is so deeply rooted in the Old Testament. Earnest morality, strenuous discipline, obedience to God’s will block out all concerns of beauty or the search for happiness. And so the Puritan broke out the stained glass windows of the churches and worshipped in the spirit of holy obedience.

I remember my mother telling me that when she was a little girl she was concerned to know whether she was pretty or not. So she would ask her grandmother, who had charge of her care, and her grandmother who was a Puritan would answer always - “handsome is as handsome does.” How my mother disliked that old saw! But this is the spirit of Puritanism in the Biblical tradition.

Beauty is a Greek ideal. Its culture gleams in the beautiful statuary and temples of that ancient land. Truth for the Greek was alethea, the unhidden, the revealed. And their artists’ skill revealed the possibilities of beauty in their world. Their gods took on the aspect of human beauty and the vision of the happy life guided their ethics. Theoria, seeing, is closest to knowing so sight is the highest of the senses. And as a matter of fact, in the Greek, “to know” means literally to have seen. The knower is the seer and the seer seeks a vision of truth as beauty.

There is a division, then, between our Biblical and Greek heritage. The Bible is concerned with holiness; the Greeks are concerned with beauty. A more fundamental difference underlies this one. The Biblical mode of approach to the true as the faithful is to hear the word of God, to be obedient to his commandments. The Greek approach to the true as revealed is to see the wonder and beauty of the world. The prophets tell us to hear the word of the Lord; the Greeks invite us to see the beauty of the earth. Greek truth is spatially oriented - that which eternally is, the abiding real. For the Bible, truth is temporally oriented. Truth is the pattern of the purposes of God in history; the truth is the way, the life. The Greek turns to objects; the Bible to events.

So far we have succeeded only in separating beauty and holiness. How do we get them together? I want to suggest a classical dialectical solution–each of these approaches taken alone breaks down and moves into its opposite. Then we will see how holiness requires beauty and beauty requires holiness to be true beauty or true holiness.

Consider the beauty of holiness: holiness expanded as subjective feeling becomes the sanctimonious spirit. Consider the spirit of righteousness: righteousness intensified becomes self-righteousness. The good conscience exaggerated becomes an evil conscience. What is the spirit of fanaticism but conscience intensified and frozen in position? Santayana says it occurs when we have forgotten our aim and redouble our efforts. The Pharisees whom Jesus condemned were the good people of the age, obedient to the law, devoted to preserving the rules of righteousness and opposed to any deviations from it, or short-cuts through it, let alone any substitutes for it.

Jesus complained that they strained out gnats and swallowed camels. They were punctilious in outward observance but they were blind and dead within. They were like whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but are within full of dead men’s bones (incidentally, this is the only use of the word beautiful in the gospels). This is what happens when one hears the commandments of God but cannot see anything else. This is the harsh spirit of the Puritan conscience. Calvinism, as Santayana once pointed out, consists of three propositions. One: sin exists; two: sin is punished; and three: it is beautiful that sin exists and is punished. The self-righteous expect the suffering of the sinful. If they don’t exactly enjoy it, or find it beautiful, they certainly resent it, and find it unjust when the sinner goes unpunished. And how the Pharisees resented Jesus for going to the sinners and publicans! Holiness become sanctimonious, righteousness inverted to self-righteousness, results in the insensitive, ungenerous spirit that feels a glow of satisfaction at the sufferings of others which it is spared momentarily, and a resentment at the joy of others it may not momentarily have. So the mode of hearing of the Hebrew way fails - when one has heard what he wishes and hears no more and does not see what he is doing.

What of the holiness of beauty? Love of beauty can be unholy as well as holy. This can happen in diverse ways. One can cite the aesthete who proclaims he cares not how many thousands of lives or sufferings and agonies went into the building of the pyramids. The important thing is their beauty and his enjoyment of their beauty. One need not cite the extreme; for example, Mussolini’s son’s description of the beautiful, colorful patterns created when he dropped bombs on crowds of Ethiopians. Many are the examples of the exploitation of people for the sake of beauty enjoyed by a few. This is what made Tolstoy bitter about the arts.

It is the very enjoyment of beauty that perverts it, because it turns it into something to be seized, ingested and used - rather than something to respond to in wonder and awe. And it is the very beauty of the earth that invites its exploitation, its manipulation for the interests of another. We know how human beauty can awaken a sense of reverent awe or the prurient interest - Kenneth Clark distinguishes between the nude and the naked by showing how the latter evokes the exploitive interest, and maybe it is in the very nature of seeing that the other is viewed as an object, and thus as an instrument.

Jean-Paul Sartre has called attention to the way the look of another affects one. How uncomfortable one feels when someone is staring at one! This is because one then feels like an object, an instrument for the purposes of another. Vivid examples can have lasting consequences. Sartre tells how the French writer Genet as a little boy was surprised in the act of going through his mother’s purse. The accusing look impaled him; the verbal label - “you thief” - assaulted him; and so he became a thief. How intolerable to be defined, condemned by another. And yet the look may do precisely this, by turning one into an object. So the mode of vision of the Greek way fails as beauty when one uses seeing as a mode of exploitation and appropriation.

The separate modes of hearing and seeing both fail. For each requires the other. The beauty of holiness emerges from the perversion of self-righteousness when one sees the vision of the kingdom of righteousness. And the holiness of beauty emerges from the perversion of exploitation when one hears and responds to the being of the other. We require ears to hear the will of God and eyes to see the vision of God. Thus the beauty of holiness and the holiness of beauty converge. Our problem is, as Jesus said, “having eyes, we see not; and having ears, we hear not.”

And when we look again, the Biblical focus on holiness, with its emphasis on hearing, does culminate in a vision of beauty, the prophetic vision of peace on earth and good will among men. What is more beautiful than the prophetic vision of the kingdom to come when “righteousness flows down as water”? Micah says, “they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree, and none shall make them afraid. When they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks - when nation shall not lift up sword against nation”? Or the vision of Isaiah when righteousness prevails, “the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb and the leopard lie down with the young goat and a little child shall lead them”? And the beauty of the life of faith and faithfulness is reflected in Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount - where we are invited to put aside anxiety, consider the lilies of the field, and trust in the love of God. And the beauty of the grace of God is reflected in the graciousness of the love of Christ. And, of course, the metaphors are strained to try to capture the final vision of the revelation of John, “when God shall wipe away all tears.” The beauty of holiness emerges in the vision of the kingdom of God.

When we turn to the Greek vision of beauty we should remember how Socrates listened to his inner voice of conscience and how, in the philosophy of Plato, beauty becomes one with the idea of the Good. The beautiful is such only because it participates in the ideal of the Good. And truth, beauty and goodness all become one when the highest emerges as a kind of revelation. And to climb the ladder of love of this beauty, this truth, this good, is the way to salvation. And those ancient mathematicians, Pythagoreans, with their mystical reverence for the mystery of numbers, formed a religious brotherhood stressing a purity of life. So there is a holiness of beauty, too.

The truth is that we need both - ears to hear, and eyes to see, to find that the beauty of holiness and the holiness of beauty are properly confused and merged in one.

Those caught in the spirit of righteousness must see the gracious revelation of Christ’s redemptive love. Those caught in a sense of the necessity of earning their way to redemption must be open to the grace of the love of God. How gracious it would have been if my great grandmother had said to my mother just once - “of course you’re pretty, child” - and then she could have said: “but remember, ‘handsome is as handsome does.’” Those caught in the spirit of

religion as a system of negative commandments need the vision of the liberating power of the love of God - we need to remember the promise of Jesus: “you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” We need, too, to believe in the goodness of God in the land of the living, to trust our dreams, believe in our visions, as the prophets taught. As Joel said, “your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions.” And where there is no vision the people perish. And so holiness, righteousness, flowers into the beauty of the kingdom. This is to worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness, to be open to God’s grace and sensitive to His spirit.

And those caught in the aesthetic vision of life, who see the world as their oyster, to be enjoyed and exploited; who see others as objects to be used and perhaps abused, must learn to listen, to hear, to respond to the being of the other. “Speak to me that I may better see you” was a favorite comment of Martin Buber. To see another, really, is not to impale him on your glance, but to sense his person, to listen to his concerns, to feel him as a subject and not as an object, and as such, one of God’s children. And as such, all have a beauty. To see the beauty of this world is not to view it as an object of enjoyment but to respond to it as a living presence reflecting the harmony of the purposes of God. That is why we see the beauty of nature best when we listen in the stillness.

That’s why the beauty of Cooper’s Glen attracts us so; why we can find His presence when we “take the wings of the morning.” The beauty of nature speaks to us in some sense of the presence, and in some mysterious way of the purposes of God. This is the sacramental view of the world as taught in the scriptures. It is the material for the presence and purpose of God. And in our relationship to it we must be stewards, preservers, not exploiters and despoilers whether we think of the being of nature or the nature of another being. All nature is an instrument of the purposes of God and all people are part of his purposes, and all merit our reverence.

So Biblical hearing moves into vision and the vision of beauty requires sensitivity to, hearing, the moral purposes of God. Our intuition that the beauty of holiness moves into a sense of the holiness of beauty was correct.

Finally I come to my text for the morning. From that most Greek of New Testament books - John: “In the beginning was the Word” - that beautiful order of reason the Greeks reverenced - “and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” And the message I would leave with you is this. The grace of our Lord Jesus reflects both the beauty of holiness and the holiness of beauty - that can make our lives a thing of beauty, too.

1THE BALCONY OR THE ROAD?

Judges 9: 8-15

The story which was read in the scripture lesson is an interesting one. It is a fable that has an immediate appeal because of its picturesque style and the clear lesson it points out. Jotham tells this fable to the Shechemites to show what he thought of the king whom they had just chosen. Abimelech had just gained the kingdom by killing the rightful heirs to the kingship, all but Jotham who escaped to express his indignation at what had been done. It is clear that the bramble in the fable is Abimelech, and that the trees who stood aside in indifference when the forest was seeking a king refer to the rightful heirs who did not take their proper position in the kingdom.

The story has, however, a wider application that goes beyond this event in the ancient history of the Hebrew people. It contains a lesson which speaks to us today perhaps even better than in that day, for we have had centuries to watch it in evidence. The fable points out a common temptation and failing in man, a tendency to sit on the side lines, as it were, and view life as a spectator instead of entering into the important issues of life in an active manner. The temptation is to be a spectator in life instead of a player, to sit on the balcony and watch the drama of life instead of taking the road and playing a part in that drama. Like the trees in the fable who were so content with their lot that they could not be troubled to take on the responsibility of ruling over the forest, we are all too likely to sit back and watch life move on around us without doing anything to change the course of events. We sit as spectators; quite frequently we will find something wrong with the drama as it is played, and we agree as we sit in the balcony that “something should be done about it” but we do not seem to realize that we must get down to the road to change the course of the action. And when the trees of the forest stand back and are reluctant to rule over the forest, the bramble is all too willing to be king. So it is in life: when people with vision and ideals sit on the balcony and watch instead of acting, the events which do take place will be arranged by the brambles among us.

Nowhere in our lives is this tendency to sit on the balcony and live merely as a spectator more evident than in our attitude toward religion. We have our religious ideas neatly pigeonholed in some convenient niche in our minds to use on occasion perhaps, but for the most part to keep separate from our everyday living. There are several reasons for this; chief among them is the fact that it is so hard to follow strict ideals in a world which does not always seem to run according to the ideal pattern. It is so hard always to be honest and fair, to return good for evil, in a world in which evil seems to have more power and prestige than good. But religion has never pretended to be easy, and any religion throughout the years that has not demanded great effort and loyalty on the part of its believers has never lasted for long. The Christian Church has always been strongest in times when it required great sacrifice and effort to be a Christian. And it becomes weakest when it becomes merely a tradition and habit, and people cease to use it and make it work in their everyday lives. The reason for this seems clear. Our faith is not intended to be just an exercise for the mind to be thought of for only a few hours out of the week. It is a way of life whose fundamental spirit should be a constant guide and source of power and inspiration in actual living. When we cease to live our religion, it ceases to have any function or purpose or meaning in our lives. If it is not used, it becomes useless, just as any tool becomes dull and useless and corroded when it no longer is put to use. If, then, we become spectators with regard

to religion, if we sit back and watch it without making it a part of our lives, without taking it on the road with us, we will rob religion of its function, the reason for its existence.

The spectator character of our religious living is seen in the way we become aware of the need for religion in our lives, but are reluctant to put it to work. We feel a sympathy for what it stands for, but not the conviction that is needed to put it to the task. This attitude is well illustrated by a classic remark of Montaigne, the famous French writer, when he was called upon to be Mayor of Bordeaux and combat the political and social evils that were rampant at the time, he answered, “Gentlemen, you have my heart, but not my hands”. This same answer is made all too frequently by our general religious attitude. We view the evils and abuses in the world and feel a profound sympathy, but that is all. It does not occur to us to do any more. We lend our hearts but not our hands. We keep our religious motivation on the balcony and stifle it, and become merely spectators. We have felt a profound sympathy for the Negro for years, and still his lot is inferior; we view the existence of rotten politics with concern, but it still leads us to folly; we view with alarm the increase in juvenile delinquency and agree that “something must be done” while we let the unifying agency of the home disintegrate and fail in our responsibilities to teach the proper ideals of conduct because we are reluctant to show them in our own lives. We remain spectators with as little power and interest to change the course of the action as the audience at a motion picture show. As in the theatre we observe and sympathize and condemn, but it does not occur to us to do anything about the drama that is being unfolded. We lend our hearts but not our hands. We cannot build the better world by thinking about it or wishing for it, any more than we can grow a garden without doing the spade work. And when we refuse to do this, when we become indifferent to the need of sowing the seed of right conduct, we must expect to find weeds and brambles inheriting the place. A parable of Jesus gives this very same message to us. You remember the parable of the house swept clean of an unclean spirit only to be filled with seven more spirits more wicked than the first. This story illustrates the positive nature of religion. It is necessary to develop and practice what is good to replace the undesirable, if the evil condition is to be remedied. It does no good to rid your house of an unclean spirit if then it is not filled with a good one. For an empty house is open to the inroads of other evils which may be worse than the first. A bad habit must be replaced by a good one if it is to be eradicated. The evils in life must be counteracted by positive actions of good if they are finally to be defeated. This is why the spectator attitude to religion robs it of its function; unless it is actively practiced and put to use in actual life, it has no part to play in what is going on, no meaning or purpose in our everyday life. By its inaction the weeds and brambles and evils are free to inherit the earth. The ideals of religion cannot rule unless we put them to work in our own lives.

The spectator attitude toward religion, in the second place, robs it of its relevance. If it is not applied to the needs of our times or used in our daily lives, it becomes something completely irrelevant, unreal. Unless the spirit of the teachings of Jesus is actually experienced in life, it becomes unreal to us. The person who does not experience his religion in actual life is in the position of the blind man trying to understand light. It is possible for a blind man to know all about light. He can study the various theories of the nature of light, how it is transmitted by wave motion in the ether; he can learn all of the many complicated laws of optics dealing with the behavior of light rays as they are reflected and refracted;- he can know all about light. But if he cannot see it, if he does not actually experience it, all this knowledge is irrelevant. Similarly we can study about our faith, learn what we believe, what Jesus taught us and what the spirit of Christ can mean in our lives. But unless we experience this spirit of Christianity, unless we make it actual and real in our lives, all this knowledge that we gain from the church and our own studies remains irrelevant, without meaning, because we do not use it in our lives.

The danger of living on the balcony so far as religion is concerned is just this; religion in such a way of life can never be real and relevant to our actual existence. This is true, of course, in relation to all of our experience. Nothing can be real and important and significant to us until we experience it. That is why the advice of older and wiser heads to youth so often goes unheeded. It is not because the child willfully disobeys his parent when he does not seem willing to take his advice; nor is it because he thinks his parent doesn’t know what he is talking about. It is because the advice warning about an experience to come can have no meaning until the child has gone through that experience. We cannot take anything seriously unless we see through actual experience its relevance and importance. We often hear some of our military or political leaders bemoaning the fact that the American people as a whole don’t realize that we are at war. There are too many people enjoying the benefits of increased wages who do not realize the importance and seriousness of the situation. We don’t realize we are at war because we have not experienced what war means, as have countries like England, Russia and Germany. At the time of Pearl Harbor we got a little idea and it is interesting to note how many of the able bodied young men of the country rallied to the threat and enlisted. And every day more and more individual homes realize the seriousness of war as the casualty lists grow. But many seem completely unaware of the situation because they have not experienced it. I often think it would be a good thing if just one bomb were dropped in this country to wake the people to the reality of the situation. A bomb, on the Chicago Tribune, for example, would do a great deal of good.

When we see that actual experience is needed to prove the reality and relevance of a thing, we can see the acute danger of living our religion on the balcony as a spectator. In so doing we rob it of its relevance in our lives; it becomes completely useless, a tradition to hang on to for old time’s sake. This is not the kind of religion which Jesus taught us. If ever he showed impatience and hatred toward anything, it was toward the kind of religion practiced by the Pharisees and Sadducees who kept religion a mere form empty of any relevance to actual life. Jesus taught us how to live our faith in positive action. Do good, even to those who despitefully use you; love your neighbor; feed his sheep. Jesus did not invite us to a spectator type of religion. His is a religion of service in actual life to one’s fellow man. These teachings of Jesus remain mere empty abstractions with no meaning unless they are lived in actual life. We can discuss all we like as to whether these teachings can be a practical guide to life or not. But we can never know what the religion Jesus taught means until we live it. Unless we do this it will re main irrelevant and meaningless to us.

We have seen how the spectator way of life robs religion of its function and its relevance; finally let us consider how it robs religion of its power. The power of faith which we find in religion, faith in the power of God and the spirit of Christ can never be felt by just thinking about them. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the actual under girding which makes reality out of a dream. We can not experience it, however, unless we give it a chance to work in actual experience. We can never know if the power of God will sustain us unless we give it a chance in actual living. It requires a commitment on our part, a choosing to trust in God, and reliance in His power, which can be found only through experience. Let me illustrate what I mean this way. Suppose you are trying to cross a stream without getting your feet wet. There are stones and rocks lying in the stream which jut out and afford stepping stones for you to cross. Suppose it is one of those slow, swampy streams that has a number of mounds of soft muck sticking out too, mounds which resemble the rocks. As you cross from stone to stone, you come to one that looks like a mound of mud, and yet it may be a rock. You can stand there as long as you like trying to decide what it is, but the only way you will know whether it is a firm stepping place is to step on it and see. So it is with the power of faith in religion. We can wonder as long as we care to whether it is real or not; but we will never know by wondering. We must step out and test it in actual experience, put our trust in God before He can have an opportunity to show us His power in our lives. This illustration is not a very perfect one, for in crossing the stream we may be fooled in our confidence in the stone, but when we put our trust in God and make a commitment to Him we are never disappointed, for His is a power and love that never fails. You need not take my word for this or the word of the Bible; just look around you at those people who do make religion real in their lives, who think of God as a constant companion; you will find all the evidence you need that He is a never failing source of power. Do not neglect to notice, however, that this power is felt only when it is believed and lived. We often think as we look at someone radiant and confident with faith in God even in the midst of troubles, “Oh, if only I had your faith, how happy I would be”. It is not a mysterious gift, this faith. Use it in your actual life; bring it down from the spectator realm of the balcony into the road of life, and you will experience it. Try it and see.

The need for bringing God into our actual life, the fact that He brings us His power as we bring Him into our experience, is shown in the way people come into a deeper realization of the significance and their need of religion as they pass through the deeper experiences of life. It is the man who has lived much and suffered and experienced much who has the deepest sense of the power of God. It is interesting to note that Plato, that famous Greek thinker, stated in his educational plans that a man should not study philosophy and religion until he had spent years of just living and experiencing what the lessons of life have to teach us. It is truly in those deeper experiences of life that the consciousness of God’s power comes to us most vividly, in those experiences when we are forced to look beneath the superficial thought patterns of our every day life to something which we can consider permanent and true and good. In the wonder of a seedling, in the beauty of a child, in the changing of the seasons, and especially in the mystery of birth and of death, we see the presence of God. When we feel absolutely forsaken, and the usual supports and props are denied us, when we are forced to look to God for strength if we are to endure, then we find the power of God; for then we must of necessity bring Him into our actual life.

A Navy chaplain told me this story last week. He was serving at a Naval base on the south Atlantic coast. A sailor came in to see him one morning to talk about his insurance. This is usually the way a sailor who wants to talk about religion approaches the chaplain. Finally, however, when the business had been transacted the sailor told his story. This is the first time I ever talked to a minister, he said, I don’t know anything about religion and I have never been inside a church. That’s why I am here; I want to learn about it. The last time I was at sea, a tin fish got our boat; I grabbed on to something and kept afloat somehow. But I floated around in the sea for twenty hours wondering what would happen. And, chaplain, I prayed, at least I tried to. I didn’t know how to exactly; all I could say was, “Old Man, help me; old man, help me.” And somehow, some way, for some reason He did. They can say it’s just luck; that my number wasn’t up, but I know He did it and I want to know more about Him.

Was it a coincidence? You couldn’t convince this boy that it was. For he had experienced in one of those experiences in which life is stripped of all its superficiality stark reality, and in it he found God. This is the way to find Him, in actual experience. Let us turn from the balcony to the road, cease viewing religion as a spectator and live it, lend our hands as well as our hearts to what we believe is true, and we will find God in our lives. And as more and more do so, there will be no room for the bramble to rule over the garden which is the Lord’s, but the noblest in man will reign for the glory of God.

Pastoral Prayer.

O Thou Eternal and Loving Spirit, who remainest the same though all else fades, who changest not with our changing moods, who leavest us not even when we leave Thee, Thou art our Father and our God. We turn to Thee O God in thanksgiving for Thy infinite mercies to man. We thank Thee for the glimpses of nobility in human life which redeem it from sordidness and reassure us that thy image is in the heart of man. We are grateful for the ties that bind us to our fellowman; for the love of beauty and goodness and truth by which we transcend the chasms of race and nation; for the faith of our fathers by which we gain kinship with the past and gain strength for the present. We pray, O God, that by the inspiration of thy Spirit, we will be enabled so to purify arid cleanse our hearts and minds that we will be able to come into a closer relationship with Thee, for only the pure in heart may see God. Deliver us, we pray from selfishness, the blindness of vanity, the madness of hate and hardness of heart. May we grow in the love and grace and wisdom of the Master who taught us to love our neighbor. Help us to see that a closer relationship with Thee means a closer relationship with thy children. Help us to see and serve the needs of our fellows. We pray O God for those loved ones who have gone away into the warring night. May the light of Thy love keep them from harm. Fill them with the consciousness of Thy protecting care. And God forbid that we at home should sin against them by ceasing to pray for them. May we be Thy true children by receiving into our souls more of the Spirit of thy Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, in whose name we pray.