Page 5101 – Christianity Today (2024)

Surprisingly difficult religious concerns stalled the passage of any child-care bill during last year’s Congress, and as a new session convened last month, the issue got rolling again.

The need for federal legislation springs from the sheer magnitude of the issue. Until recently, most preschool children in America were cared for at home. That has now changed, owing to the increasing number of working mothers and the breakdown of the extended family.

Where less than one-third of all married women with young children worked outside the home in 1975, now well over half do. More than 10 million children under the age of six have mothers in the labor force, yet there are only about 2.5 million licensed day-care slots. These slots are getting increasingly expensive, exceeding an annual average cost of $3,000 per child.

These developments spawned three dozen different day-care bills in Congress during 1988. The leading Democratic proposal, called the Act for Better Child Care Services (or the ABC bill), was sponsored by Christopher Dodd of Connecticut in the Senate and Dale Kildee of Michigan in the House of Representatives. It attracted over 200 cosponsors and endorsem*nts from 130 national organizations, including the National Council of Churches and the National Education Association. The bill earmarked $2.5 billion for new federal day-care spending, and appeared to be on a safe passage through Congress when nagging church-state issues arose.

Nearly 40 percent of children in day care go to church related centers, and some questioned whether those centers could receive government aid. The original ABC bill dealt with this issue essentially by requiring all centers receiving federal funds to be nonreligious. Efforts to include church-operated centers in the funding inflamed groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which oppose any government aid for church-related day-care centers. Despite a push in July from Democratic presidential candidate Jesse Jackson, momentum for the measure faded.

Republicans, who had already questioned the high cost of the ABC bill, offered other solutions to the church-state problem, primarily in the form of tax breaks for parents sending their children to secular or religious centers. Rep. Paul Henry of Michigan proposed channeling federal funds through parents by “vouchers” redeemable at certain public and private centers.

Responding to concerns that federally funded day-care centers discourage mothers from caring for their children at home, the Republican presidential nominee, George Bush, endorsed a different approach. His plan calls for a refundable tax credit of $1,000 for each preschool child in low-income families with at least one working parent.

With Bush now President, Democrats in firm control of Congress, and no solution to church-state concerns in sight, enactment of federal day-care legislation appears further off than ever.

By Ed Larson.

Another major accrediting agency has issued a warning to trustees at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina, as a result of trustees’ efforts to change the way the seminary selects faculty.

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) has given Southeastern Seminary until December of this year to correct what the association maintains are procedural shortcomings. The Association of Theological Schools (ATS) in the United States and Canada previously noted difficulties at the school, but has yet to issue its final recommendations (CT, Oct. 7, 1988, p. 38).

Southeastern, one of six graduate theological schools affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), has been in turmoil since October 1987, when a new conservative majority of the school’s board of trustees altered the faculty selection process to ensure only biblical inerrantists would be appointed. The policy change led to the resignation of eight administrators at the school, including its president, Randall Lolley, and academic dean Morris Ashcraft (CT, Nov. 20, 1987, p. 46).

The Southern Association and the ATS sent investigating teams to the seminary in response to concerns about academic freedom and the governance of the institution. The Southern Association report concluded that Southeastern does not conform to accreditation criteria in three areas: faculty selection, academic freedom, and organization and administration.

At the heart of the conflict is the school’s implementation of the new policy on biblical inerrancy. Trustees, along with the seminary’s new administration, claim they have the right to set criteria for faculty selection. Faculty, as well as supporters of the seminary’s previous leadership, caution that changes must be accomplished through established, academically acceptable procedures.

The Southern Association report cites “changes in the makeup” of the SBC as the apparent source of trustees’ perceived mandate to change the seminary’s character. The report states that trustees have sought to bring about this change “by rather arbitrarily infringing upon the established traditions of the institution.” The report notes that the biblical inerrancy requirement “was adopted without consultation with the administration or faculty of the school, that there has been no formal board action, that the procedures for amending the bylaws have not been followed, and that published statements do not accord with present practice.”

Lewis Drummond, current president at Southeastern Seminary, acknowledged the school has problems that must be addressed. “There are some procedural questions,” he said. “We’re going to take whatever steps are necessary to correct those, provided they don’t violate our purpose, our documents, and the ultimate goals of the seminary.” Drummond called the Southern Association’s recommendations suggestions the school could “by and large meet.”

Robert Crowley, chairman of the seminary’s board of trustees, expressed displeasure with the fact-finding committee’s report, but said he believes the seminary will eventually be exonerated of any wrongdoing.

Mark Caldwell, one of the minority trustees still associated with the moderate wing of the SBC, is also skeptical. “The new majority on the board doesn’t understand the role of trustees,” he said. “They feel they have a mandate from the Southern Baptist Convention. They may have. Nobody’s questioning that. But they’re doing it in a reckless way. They’re simply moving ahead willy-nilly into a morass of accrediting and legal problems.”

By Mark Wingfield.

Japanese Christians joined their fellow citizens in honoring Emperor Hirohito, Japan’s longest-reigning monarch, who died on January 7. And early indications suggest the nation may not experience a rejection of religious freedom, as was once feared by Christians.

During the several months that Hirohito lay gravely ill, there was speculation that ceremonies surrounding an imperial funeral and a possible two-year period of mourning would unleash a flurry of nationalistic fervor.

Responding to those concerns, the Japanese Evangelical Association (JEA) issued a public statement prior to Hirohito’s death, saying “the government does not have the authority to impose upon citizens a uniform manner in which condolences must be expressed.”

The statement also expressed fears that the funeral ceremony might push the nation in the direction of its Shinto roots, but a Foreign Ministry official noted that the funeral, scheduled for February 24, will actually include two ceremonies: one conducted by the Imperial Household, with Shinto traditions, and a second ceremony without religious overtones. Observers feel the government will try to keep all the ceremonies surrounding Hirohito’s death distinct from previous ceremonies when Shinto was the state religion.

Still, the subtleties of honoring the former emperor and entering a new reign trouble some Christians. For example, Hirohito’s son, Crown Prince Akihito, was installed as the new emperor in a ceremony that reportedly drew criticism from some Christian leaders because it was held in the presence of government officials. Both Shinto and state ceremonies will most likely be paid for by the government, which further clouds the church-state issue.

Most observers, however, say it is still too early to determine just what effect the emperor’s death will have on Japan’s religious climate.

The tragedy of AIDS continues to challenge the church. Initially, many Christian leaders called AIDS “God’s judgment” against hom*osexuals. In recent months, many of those leaders have softened their rhetoric with statements of compassion and forgiveness. Often, such changes in attitude come when a close friend or family member has AIDS.

Last month, Scott Cox told the congregation of McLean (Va.) Bible Church that he was gay, a former drug addict, and has tested positive for HIV. Cox talked with CHRISTIANITY TODAY the week following his disclosure.

Tell us about your church background.

I asked Jesus Christ to come into my life in my teen years, and later I attended a Bible college where I was president of my class. Then, as a sophom*ore at Taylor University, I became editor of the university paper, and as a junior served as president of the student body.

When did you know you were a hom*osexual?

Around the beginning of my second semester at Bible college in 1978 I had a sexual incident with another student. He went to the dean to talk about it because he was afraid he might be gay. But when they found out about us, they kicked us out of college. My parents and I went back a week later to ask for forgiveness and help, but it was clear the school didn’t want to deal with me.

Did you continue with your hom*osexual lifestyle while you were a student at Taylor?

Toward the end of my time at Taylor I would drive an hour and a half to Indianapolis to go to gay bars. In fact, the gay bars in Washington and Indianapolis became my church because that is where I got fellowship, understanding, and camaraderie. But spiritually, I was trying to answer the question, “How can I be a Christian and be gay?”

When were you diagnosed as HIV positive?

After college I got a job as a law clerk working for a Christian attorney in Washington. One day he said, “You’ve got to go to the doctor, because your eyes are yellow.”

Tests showed I had hepatitis. At the same time, the doctor said I tested positive for the HIV virus. That was in 1983, when the AIDS problem started hitting the news. I told no one, and I never went back to see that doctor again.

How did you react to the news that you had AIDS?

I was scared to death. I was afraid to go to church because I had been kicked out of a Bible college—I knew how the church felt. From that point on, my life went downhill. I got involved in the drug scene, and of course had to find money to pay for the drugs. Somehow my mind kind of snapped and I was just doing anything to feel better—almost like I didn’t care. I went to California where I traded sex for money to buy drugs. I knew I was going to die, and I didn’t want anyone to know what I was going to die from. I just felt there was no way out. Eventually, I ended up in Richmond, Virginia, where I got caught taking money from my employer and was put on probation.

Had you completely turned your back on your faith?

My relationship with Christ was tied in to how I felt about the church. Because I felt rejected by the church, I felt rejected by God. To me, they were one and the same. I thought if the church wouldn’t help me, then obviously God wasn’t interested in me either.

What led you back to the church?

I knew I was in a mess and needed help. I wanted to get my life right with God. I resumed contact with members of my family and have been working daily to try to get my life right. I have decided it is impossible to live a gay lifestyle and be committed to the Lord. And if you really look at what the Bible says, you see that God renews the mind. He will provide a way of escape.

That doesn’t mean I don’t have struggles, but I can deal with them. My sin is no worse than others’, it’s just my sin.

From your experiences as a Christian young person who has struggled with hom*osexuality and who lives with AIDS what message would you give to other Christians?

Don’t say that hom*osexuality is right. It isn’t. But hom*osexuals are hurting people who need help and who need Jesus. If the evangelical community believes what the Bible says is true, then we need to overlook our biases and prejudices and really do what Christ would do.

Heavy Drinking: The Myth of Alcoholism As a Disease, by Herbert Fingarette (University of California Press, 166 pp.; $16.95, hardcover). Reviewed by James Alsdurf, forensic psychologist for the Hennepin County Bureau of Community Corrections, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

The concept that alcoholism is a disease first gained popularity in the early 1960s, and many in the Christian community—almost by default—widely accepted this notion along with the rest of society. Now, however, a leading expert on alcohol abuse proposes that alcoholism is primarily a behavioral disorder rather than a physiological disease, and that the very concept of “alcoholism” is simplistic and arcane.

“Almost everything that the American public believes to be the scientific truth about alcoholism is false,” writes Herbert Fingarette, a consultant on alcoholism and addiction to the World Health Organization and a fellow of the Stanford Center for Advanced Studies and Behavioral Sciences. In this controversial book, Heavy Drinking: The Myth of Alcoholism As a Disease, Fingarette writes that the disease model removes the problem from the realm of human responsibility and “denies the spiritual dimension” of alcohol dependency. For this reason, he charges, the church should strongly oppose the disease model for alcoholism.

No Scientific Evidence

Classic theory in the study of alcoholism holds that alcoholics cannot control their drinking and that the breakdown of self-control is the primary symptom of the disease. Yet Fingarette examines the body of experimental observation and asserts that there is no scientific evidence pointing to this loss of control. Fingarette writes that the very concept of alcoholism misleads us into believing that the condition is a medically treatable malady that follows a certain course.

There are “many kinds of heavy drinking that arise from many different causes and produce many different patterns of associated problems,” Fingarette asserts. The classic steps for developing alcoholism—which include social drinking; drinking in greater amounts; private, isolated drinking; and eventually periods of blackout and loss of control—do not describe even most heavy drinkers, according to Fingarette. He notes that many heavy drinkers with severe problems “mature out” of trouble and that the alcoholic’s descent to the “bottom” is not inevitable.

Fingarette traces the history of alcoholism-as-a-disease thinking and declares that cultural values, not careful observation or scientific evidence, determined the widespread acceptance of the disease model. As part of “collegial conviviality,” Americans drank much more alcohol from colonial days to the early nineteenth century than they presently do. But as social and cultural beliefs changed, largely affected by new scientific understandings of physics, chemistry, and anatomy, the concept of disease became a “touchstone in social thought,” Fingarette writes, and moral and social ills were “perceived as pathologies of either the individual or the body politic.”

The concept of alcoholism as a disease became entrenched when research physiologist E.M. Jellinek proposed an explanation of alcoholism in 1946 and 1952, which seemed to confirm major elements of the Alcoholics Anonymous view. This view held that some people have “a unique biological vulnerability to alcohol and they develop a special kind of ‘allergy.’” Fingarette reveals, however, that Jellinek’s nodal article slacked scientific foundation, as Jellinek himself apparently acknowledged in 1960. Furthermore, data were produced in the late 1960s that contradicted Jellinek’s paradigm and indicated that the disease concept failed to describe many heavy drinkers. Today, “no leading authorities accept the classic disease concept” for alcoholism, according to Fingarette.

Convenient Label

Although he rejects the idea of a “malign conspiracy,” Fingarette argues that political, economic, and health services interests have “actively promoted the scientifically discredited classic disease concept.” He also points to the general public as a major player in the prevalence of the disease model, because the public does not want to accept the limitations of science or technology. “We prefer not to hear that heavy drinking and alcoholism are merely labels that cover a variety of social and personal problems caused by the interplay of many poorly understood physiological, psychological, social, and cultural factors,” Fingarette writes. He does concede, however, that alcohol dependence lies on a continuum and that in scientific terms “behavior disorder” would often be a better semantic choice than the word “disease.”

Despite the fact that Fingarette rejects the disease concept of alcoholism, this enlightening and challenging book is a call to compassion for heavy drinkers. Fingarette’s bold message is certain to stimulate debate among those who have either a personal or professional stake in dealing with alcoholism, including Christians who minister to individuals with drinking problems.

Given the brevity of this clearly reasoned and well-researched book, and the ease with which both professionals and laypeople are able to grasp the issues presented, Heavy Drinking will no doubt become a seminal volume in the field of alcoholism treatment.

Land of Promise, Land of Strife, by Wesley G. Pippert (Word, 264 pp.; $16.99, hardcover). Reviewed by Elwood McQuaid, a conference speaker for Moody Bible Institute who has led numerous tours to the Holy Land.

As senior Middle East correspondent for United Press International from 1983 to 1986, Wesley Pippert moved among the foremost newsmakers of that critical region, gathering insights and impressions available to only a few chosen professionals. Pippert’s observations as an evangelical Christian journalist make this book on modern Israel’s first 40 years interesting—if somewhat controversial—reading.

The three-part work, which Pippert says “was shaped by almost every part of my life,” is an anecdotal analysis of Israel, Lebanon, and the occupied territories. Pippert portrays Jews and Arabs in conflict over the land, and he closes with a look at prospects for peace, “more as a hope than as a reality.”

Looking For Villains

Considering all the suffering on both sides, “neither Israeli nor Palestinian leaders work very hard for justice and peace,” Pippert writes. He devotes a full chapter to arguing the case that the real villain in the Middle East is the West: Britain and France take the first rap, and then America and the Soviet Union get their turn as “gun-slinging” military entrepreneurs.

Wars, terrorism, and internal battles among Jewish and Arab factions are traced from the 1948 War of Independence to the invasion of Lebanon—“Israel’s Vietnam,” Pippert calls it—and on to the traumatic Palestinian uprising. A brief historical sketch of regional developments since the late 1800s sets the background for discussing these conflicts.

The former bureau chief picks his way through a helpful, though at times repetitious, presentation of Israel’s people—Jews, Palestinians, and Christians—and sorts through some of the complexities regarding who these people are, where they came from, what they want, and the prospects for accomplishing their goals.

According to Pippert, the most explosive situation within Israel today is the controversy between ultraorthodox and secular Jews. “All other conflict, including that of Arab and Jew, pales into insignificance beside this,” Pippert writes. “It is a battle of zealots versus secularists, not dissimilar from the battles waged in Islam and Christianity. ‘Israel is fighting a holy war.’”

Israel’s 26 to 28 Messianic Assemblies (about 2,000 believers) live out their witness for Jesus in this turbulent environment. The author provides some snapshots of life among these congregations as well as the lives of missionaries and Arab believers.

Uneven Images

It comes as no surprise that most of Pippert’s journalistic peers are “more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause than to Israel.” And while he claims personal “affection for both the Jew and the Arab,” Pippert leaves the impression that he doesn’t really like Israelis very much. His uneven treatment portrays “brash” Israelis living in a country “in which there is inordinate laziness and sloppiness.” Because of this, Israel has become an inhospitable “Goliath,” which almost always hits first in order to “draw first blood.” Arabs, on the other hand, are generally depicted as courteous and dignified. “Nattily dressed” storekeepers exhibit consummate “savoir-faire.” An Arab pickman on an archaeological dig is described as an “aristocrat.”

Pippert also raises eyebrows with some questionable observations, such as, “There have been perhaps even more Arab casualties of Jewish terrorism than vice versa.”

One might excuse some slant for the sake of balancing a record that frequently has romanticized the Israeli side of the story to the exclusion of Jewish flaws and legitimate Arab interests. One cannot, however, dismiss the author’s handling of the Palestine Liberation Organization and Yasir Arafat. In one paragraph, Arafat is extolled in terms that stand in sharp contrast to his record. Pippert wonders why Israel doesn’t stop calling Arafat a terrorist, and he seems to enjoy prodding officials in the Israeli Foreign Ministry about why Israel refuses to talk to the PLO.

This aspect mars an otherwise informative book, which provides a good look at the emotional, military, and political quagmire that is now the Middle East.

Pippert ends his book by assigning common guilt (even the “West, Christians included, must accept a huge share of the guilt”) and by challenging Jew and Arab to commit themselves to seeking peace, equity, and justice. Certainly the constant use of the word shalom represents the yearning of people and governments in the Middle East. But peace is more than the absence of war; it is the fulness of life.” In that sentiment, all readers may join with Pippert.

The Anointed Community: The Holy Spirit in the Johannine Tradition, by Gary M. Burge (Eerdmans, 269 pp.; $19.95, paper). Reviewed by Charles S. Gaede, assistant professor of Bible and theology, Southwestern Assemblies of God College, Waxahachie, Texas.

When I read a book, I mark its interesting and significant statements; thus the depth of my interaction with an author becomes visible. The pages of my copy of The Anointed Community reveal a thought-provoking book. They are filled with asterisks, checks, brackets, and underlines.

Gary Burge, professor of philosophy and religion at North Park College in Chicago, offers a scholar’s book and an academician’s delight. Based on the research for his dissertation, The Anointed Community is extensively documented with a bibliography of almost 750 entries, with both author and Scripture indexes.

Set in the context of Johannine literature, the synoptic Gospels, and the Jewish and Greek culture of the first century, The Anointed Community powerfully affirms the life in the Spirit for Christians of all times. If you generally focus on Paul’s letters to learn about the Holy Spirit, as I do, then you may be surprised to find Spirit-living Christians in the literature of John. Burge calls these Christians a “pneumatic community.”

Inseparable Personalities

Burge’s description of the pneumatic community contains three significant aspects. The first, which he develops from the Gospel of John, is the relationship of Jesus Christ to the Spirit. Burge carefully avoids the statement that the Spirit is Christ in another form, yet he presents these two persons of the Trinity as inseparable personalities. Based on this analysis, Burge offers three insights: (1) “Any experience of the Spirit in the Johannine economy which is not also a Jesus experience is rendered inauthentic”; (2) “Any theology which separates salvation from the life-creating Spirit is inadequate”; (3) “But at the same time the reception of grace and the birth of a Christian cannot be devoid of pneumatic experience.”

The second intriguing aspect of the pneumatic community is Burge’s proposed setting for the dialogue between John’s gospel and epistles. Burge does not present 1 John as a defense against a heresy that questions the incarnation of the Son of God, a common interpretation of John’s purpose. Instead, he suggests that a tension has arisen within the church concerning two functions of the Spirit. As Burge sees it, this tension is rooted in the “recalling” activity of the Spirit (“He will remind you of everything,” John 14:26), and the Spirit’s “revelatory” function (“He will guide you into all truth,” John 16:13). According to Burge, some Christians had claimed that the Spirit revealed truth to them which others did not understand. This new truth, however, was inconsistent with the gospel message of Jesus, which John proclaimed earlier. Burge calls this reception of inconsistent truth an abuse of the revelation function of the Spirit.

The setting that Burge develops for this tension is significant for at least two reasons. First, it may establish some parallels to the Corinthian church, in which case we learn that the problems of living the life in the Spirit during the first century were widespread. We also learn that even though different Christian groups struggled with different issues, both Paul and John centered the functions of the Holy Spirit in Christ.

Second, the early literature of modern Pentecostalism (1906–08) shows that this movement experienced a similar problem. My observations of the literature and practices of the more recent charismatic movement suggest that this group also wrestles with the issue of inconsistent revelation. These groups and other evangelicals will find Burge’s work both timely and applicable.

Resolving The Tension

The third exciting aspect of Burge’s book is that he attempts to develop a solution to this tension. He searches the epistles of John and finds evidence of the apostle’s efforts to instruct his converts. The apostle, Burge writes, appeals to the historical record of the life and teachings of Jesus (recollection) as the basis for evaluating the new truth (revelation). The recollection work of the Spirit is the “control” of the revelation activity, and we are reminded again of Paul’s efforts to keep his converts faithful to the true gospel.

If Burge’s analysis of the setting of John’s gospel and epistles can be sustained, then Burge has broadened our perspective of the spiritual life of first-century Christians. In conjunction with Paul’s writings, we see that life in the Spirit is both desirable and subject to abuse. John the apostle, however, neither condones the spiritual abuses nor restrains the roles of the Spirit in the Christian life. Instead, John affirms the necessity of the Spirit and gives instructions for living a positive, exciting spiritual life. Consequently, Christians of all ages are encouraged to enter the life of the Sprit with confidence and enthusiasm.

“I want to astound Paris with an apple,” said French impressionist painter Paul Cézanne, born January 19, 1839. On the one-hundred-fiftieth anniversary of his birth, the luscious, fresh fruit in Still Life with Apples and Oranges (c. 1899) still lure us back for more. Yet it took Cézanne almost a lifetime to gain acceptance as a respectable artist, and just as long for this mystical artist to find hope in God and the church.

The Evil Demon

The young Cézanne shocked the art world with his violent, lustful, dark portraits of alienation. Although as a child he received traditional religious instruction, he did not latch on to much in the way of Christian hope and beauty. Instead, as his closest friend, Emile Zola, wrote concerning him, Cézanne was controlled by “the evil demon which beclouds his thought.”

As a youth, Cézanne delighted in sharing his own poems with Zola and another boyhood friend, Baptistin Bailie. Much of Cézanne’s poetry centered on the macabre, such as one poem that describes a family devouring a severed human head, which is served by the father. It is little wonder Cézanne’s early paintings depict scenes of sexuality, torture, and death.

Devoid of religion’s depth and understanding, Cézanne frequently used blasphemy as his instrument of white-hot expression: “If I didn’t hold myself back, I’d hurl some litanies of God’s Name, God’s Brothel, Holy whor*, etc., up to heaven.” As the years went on, he sank deeper into his neuroses. Nightmares haunted him and found their fruition in such paintings as The Rape, The Orgy, The Strangled Woman, The Courtesans, The Murder, and The Abduction. Such works earned for Cézanne the title of “the first wild man of modern art.”

Although preoccupied with sexuality, Cézanne could not find fulfillment with women. His alienation is expressed in A Modern Olympia (1872–73), which depicts a well-dressed gentleman (obviously Cézanne) gazing at a naked woman. For all its eroticism, there is no hint of a relationship between the two individuals.

Nevertheless, there was one woman, Hortense Figuet—initially Cézanne’s mistress, and when their son, Paul, was 14, his reluctant wife. She was anything but a beauty. Hortense was known as “The Ball,” referring to a prisoner’s ball and chain.

Afraid Of Death

Cézanne held that “outside potent and individual life there is only lie and folly.” He denied God and called the clergy deceivers who had relegated themselves to the periphery of society. He did not, however, hold a positive view of the Devil. “I saw the diabolic band of Satan,” he wrote at one point, “… there the hideous vampires, To get at me.”

Although there were many who could not even locate “a beautiful temperament” in the man, it was fellow painter Gauguin who stated in a letter in 1885 that Cézanne’s nature was essentially mystical; unfortunately, Cézanne spent most of his life searching apart from God. From time to time, glancing in the direction of the church, Cézanne maintained his disgust. “I think that to be a good Catholic, one must be devoid of all sense of justice, but have a good eye for one’s interests.”

However, as his few friends began to disappear—either through death or the artist’s purposeful rejection—he came to rely on the companionship of his mother and his sister Marie, both of whom were devoutly religious. Because of their faithfulness to worship, Cézanne began to attend church services regularly.

Why so? It has been said that he feared death and concluded that if there was anything to religion that could help him cross safely to the “other side,” he would rather be on good terms with it. Consequently, as Cézanne moved into his later years, he confessed, “It’s that I’m feeble. And … only the Church can protect me.”

Cézanne disciplined himself to begin the day attending early Mass. It was so common for him to give money to beggars at the church door that Marie often had to restrict his generosity so that he did not give too much of his money away.

REVIEW

Bombay’s Throwaway Children

For most Westerners, the face of Third World poverty is embodied in photographs of emaciated, brown-skinned children gazing hopelessly into the camera. These faces appear on the envelopes of bulk-mail appeals into which we guiltily fold a couple of dollars before trotting off to Pizza Hut.

Although the generic face of poverty accurately captures the despair of children on the edge of starvation, it ignores their dignity as image bearers of the Creator. Everyone, after all, has a life. Everyone has a story. In Salaam Bombay!, Indian director Mira Nair shows us the human face of street kids as they struggle to beg, borrow, or steal their daily bread.

Salaam Bombay! was shot entirely on location in Bombay, using shops, markets, and an infamous brothel as sets. The result is a visual spectacle so rich in texture as to be somewhat overwhelming. But the dirt and degradation are also over whelming. For North Americans, the thought of 600 million people crowded into a space half the size of Canada can be hard to grasp. Salaam Bombay! offers us a few weeks in the life of one of those millions.

Salaam Bombay! is not a film to watch lightly. Yet it does offer an unblinking look at the plight of the world’s children. Even in North America, the majority of the poor are children. Salaam Bombay! reminds us that each of these children is a special human being, deserving of love and a decent life. It might serve as reality therapy for those of us whose main concern is to lose the extra weight gained over the annual holiday binge of food and gifts.

By Stefan Ulstein, English department chairman at Bellevue (Wash.) Christian School.

Salaam Bombay! contains offensive language and situations related to prostitution and the drug trade. Viewer discretion is advised.

A Growing Sense Of Life

Is there a correlation between this interest in the Christian hope and a growing sense of life in his paintings? As Cézanne grew older, his canvases became more spontaneous and exciting, particularly the lush landscapes of his beloved Aix-en-Provence. By the time he died on October 22, 1906, Cézanne’s work revealed a master painter.

Interestingly, however, he barely noticed the acclaim his name began to attract. Instead, he abandoned himself increasingly to excellence while living quietly in Aix.

“I have caught a glimpse of the Promised Land,” he wrote a friend. “Am I to be like the great leader of the Jews, or am I to be allowed to enter it?” One would pray that, as he drew on the hope he had so long denied, Cézanne was permitted to enter.

By J. Grant Swank, minister of the Church of the Nazarene in Walpole, Massachusetts.

ARTBRIEFS

Coping with Success

How does the “definitive adult-appeal” Christian musician feel about fame and success? Listen to The Fine Line (DaySpring/Word), Wayne Watson’s latest album of introspective easy rock and ballads. With 15 consecutive top-ten singles on contemporary Christian radio and a 1988 Dove Award (Contemporary Album of the Year), Watson sees himself, in the words of the title song, walking the fine line between “contentment and greed / Between the things that I want / And the things that I need.” Watson reads the papers, watches TV, hangs out in lonely cafés, and tells us what he thinks through a variety of instrumental and lyrical moods. The only song that does not seem at home on the album is the revivalistic “We Belong to Him.”

Although he has two sons and a 16-year marriage, Watson does not want to write primarily about family themes; The Fine Line deals with issues such as AIDS, homelessness, p*rnography, and the nagging temptation to live without God—a temptation common to his thirtysomethingish audience.

ARTBRIEFS

The Crucifixion of the Homeless

Broken lives may best be described by broken poetry, such as the fragmented verse in Daniel Berrigan’s new volume, Stations: The Way of the Cross (Harper & Row). And the sufferings of Christ may be most clearly reflected in the broken lives of the urban homeless.

Jesuit priest, social activist, and award-winning poet, Berrigan portrays Jesus’ crucifixion mirrored in those who sleep under bridges and dig through garbage for food.

However, the backbone of Stations is formed by Margaret Parker’s 14 terra cotta reliefs of the stations of the cross.

“All the time in New York, you pass people who have fallen asleep on the street,” Parker told CT. “I realized I could show the shape of the city—the hard, sharp lines—and the people who have to find a soft place in it.”

The most striking rendering depicts scattered body parts hung on a chain-link fence. “To think of pulling a body apart and using it for a crucifix took a lot of nerve,” Parker said, “but I felt if you were actually dying on the street, the sheer disintegration—I feel I portrayed that in the piece.”

Parker, who was raised in the United Church of Christ, did not intend at first to create religious art. “My main point was to show the contemporary scene,” she said, “but when the religious aspect came together, it was startling.

“I hope the series picks up the spirit of redemption,” she said. “I, myself, have changed.”

By Daniel Coran.

This is a time of tragic irony for the right-to-life movement—for at the same time prolife activists are courageously escalating their fight for life, events and technology are conspiring to render such efforts moot.

Let me explain.

Last fall Operation Rescue hit the streets and television screens of America. During the last weekend in October, 2,212 prolife supporters were arrested for blocking access to abortion clinics in 32 cities, bringing to 7,000 the number of prolife arrests since the Democratic convention last July.

Why this sudden intensification of prolife commitment? This new willingness to sacrifice?

Some of the urgency may well come from desperation. After all the promises of the Reagan years, prolife forces have few victories to show for all their efforts. Few expect that George Bush will manage to get much of the social agenda that Ronald Reagan could not. Civil disobedience, for some, may vent years of frustration.

But from what I have seen of Operation Rescue, this is not the whole story. Their antiabortion sit-ins are not publicity stunts. They are attempts to save lives based on clear-cut beliefs. Christy Anne Collins, a prolife leader in the Washington area, has been jailed several times. As she describes her motivation, “The fact of the matter is, God said it’s a crime to shed innocent blood. I think we have to stop the killing. If we believe that abortion is murder, and I do, then I think we have to act like it is murder and try to stop it.”

Some Christian leaders have argued that Operation Rescue shows disrespect for the law. But to say that a law may never be violated under any circ*mstances is a form of extremism more disturbing than anything done by prolife activists. Certainly one could justly break a “no trespassing” law to save a child drowning in a lake; Operation Rescue, I believe, is the moral equivalent. Placing the value of a just law against trespassing above the attempted rescue of innocent lives is an inversion of Christian priorities.

It is a sad commentary that we live in a nation that puts such rescuers in jail. They are the most unlikely of prisoners. They are often intensely religious, both Protestant and Catholic. They have a deep respect for the law, though they value life more. They are nonviolent, but they are not easily intimidated.

These are, in short, the best of citizens—people who would be valued by any government under normal circ*mstances. But they populate our jails. It is a telling question: what kind of society would force its best citizens to violate the law as a matter of conscience?

But just as these principled protesters were indicting a calloused American conscience, events were taking place an ocean away that may soon render their protests impotent altogether.

On October 28, a day that saw a number of Operation Rescue arrests, the French government ordered a pharmaceutical company to resume distribution of RU 486—the abortion pill. Under pressure from prolife groups, the company had earlier withdrawn it; but France’s Socialist government ordered the drug back on the market, asserting that it was “the moral property of women.”

The pill, in effect, causes an early miscarriage. It means that a home abortion could eventually be as close as two tablets and a glass of water. It means fast, effective relief—like Alka Seltzer or Tylenol.

Certainly there are things that can and should be done to restrict the availability of RU 486 in the U.S. Experiments with the drug are already being conducted here, though it will be several years before it could be approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Prolife groups must make it clear to American politicians, health officials, and businessmen that this drug must not be legalized.

But the drug is already in use in China and Thailand. Populous Third World countries have made it clear they will be customers. Because it replaces surgery, the drug could easily be used on women who have little or no access to medical care.

And if RU 486 is used this widely, it would be impossible to prevent the creation of a black market. American demand would be high. Columnist Ellen Goodman comments, “Even if the opposition manages a legal ban, the abortion pill will become available. These pills are called in the trade ‘bathtub’ drugs; they are easy to make … Anyone who believes that we could control their importation hasn’t checked the cocaine business recently.”

Faye Wattleton, president of Planned Parenthood, gloats that “the right-to-life movement has seen its last gasp. If these drugs get to the market, the fight is finally all over.”

What response is left to us?

Of course we must fight for legal restrictions. But the effect of any law is bound to be limited, given the size of demand and the extent of legal distribution.

And of course we must continue to protest. But abortion clinics in the future may well be necessary only for the few. How do you intervene to save a life when an abortion is as near as the medicine cabinet?

What RU 486 will eventually mean, I fear, is a dramatic shift in the rules of the abortion battle. It will mean that our fight against abortion will no longer focus on the clinic, the dumpster, the Supreme Court steps. It will be relational and educational: Christians persuasively pressing the point among their peers that a life conceived is precious to God and must not be poisoned by a pill. The struggle will no longer be focused on legislatures and suction machines, but on people and the individual values they hold, the values that create their choices. What it means is changing the hearts and minds of a self-centered, callous generation.

That is a challenge perhaps even more daunting than the threat of a prison cell.

Evangelicals have been called the people of the Book. They are also the people of the annual convention, the weeklong crusade, and the two-day workshop. Not surprisingly, then, we at CT find an ongoing challenge in not only knowing which of these events to cover, but how best to cover them.

This month’s cover story showcases a writing style we hope to use increasingly as we report on the peripatetic activities of the modern church. Calling on the writer not only to report “the facts” of an event, but to describe graphically the sights, sounds, and smells in a first-person analysis, this style allows the reader to experience and understand an event without leaving his or her sofa.

In the months ahead, such reports will feature a recent meeting in Chicago (attended by about 5,000 theologians and biblical scholars), and a meeting in a small Michigan town (attended by almost the entire population of 400) to raise funds for international Bible distribution.

In this issue, however, the reader visits Buffalo, New York—an unlikely venue for a battle of world views. But for one week last August, that is exactly what took place. Billy Graham brought crusade evangelism to Pilot Field, while out at the Amherst Campus of the State University of New York (SUNY)/College at Buffalo the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) held its tenth world congress.

Needless to say, it made for an interesting week—a “battle” executive editor Terry Muck was eager to join.

HAROLD B. SMITH, Managing Editor

Billy Graham’S Example

Thanks for the exceptional issue on Billy Graham’s ministry [Nov. 18]. Not only has he shaped famous organizations and influential periodicals, he has also been a model of gospel preaching for numbers of nameless men and women. Both my son in England and I owe our gospel ministries in large measure to the example of Billy Graham, for whom we thank the Lord.

Rev. Wayne Detzler

Calvary Baptist Church

Meriden, Conn.

In his editorial [Nov. 18], Kenneth Kantzer tries to refute the charges that Graham was an opportunist in capitalizing on the celebrated “Puff Graham” order given by William Randolph Hearst. However, if such an order was ever issued, it was never really obeyed. Anyone who examines newspaper coverage during his crucial Los Angeles crusade will discover that the Hearst-owned papers gave Graham no greater exposure than the non-Hearst press. Hearst papers in other cities reported little or nothing about Graham until he was drawing huge crowds in New England and the South. The credit (in human terms) for Graham’s rapid rise since 1949 should be given to Graham himself, and to his co-workers.

Lou Shapiro

San Bruno, Calif.

I find Martin E. Marty altogether too shortsighted by limiting Billy Graham to time and space [Nov. 18]. I believe he missed the real genius of the man. Graham has a visioning ability that is rare indeed. It was this that enabled him to inspire others to follow Christ and to implement his farsighted projects.

Rev. Neville Peterson

Wolf Point, Mont.

Change and growth? Martin E. Marty is the one who has really changed and unmistakably grown.

Rev. Mark T. Gorgans

Elberta Alliance Church

Elberta, Ala.

Tangled Facts

Thank you for your coverage of Kathryn Lindskoog’s C. S. Lewis Hoax [News, Nov. 18]; I look forward to your full review. The book raises in a clear way, with carefully marshaled evidence, issues that need to be addressed. I’ve met Paul Ford and have regard for his insights. But I wish he had not dabbled in amateur psychoanalysis. I don’t think it’s fair to reduce the issues to “a struggle to determine who was more important to Lewis.” Lindskoog is to be commended for her commitment in pursuing the tangled facts and for charity in presentation (this is called hoax—as in prank—rather than fraud).

Terri Williams

Portland, Oreg.

Paul Ford has not even read the book. Yet he advised Multnomah and other publishers not to accept Lindskoog’s work for publication. This type of obstructionism will not help clarify controversies surrounding the Lewis estate.

Lloyd Billingsley

Poway, Calif.

Ford’s false analysis not only insults me, but also insults those luminaries who have believed in the book and encouraged me along the way.

Kathryn Lindskoog

Orange, Calif.

I was dismayed by the omission of a story commemorating the twenty-fifth anniversary of the death of C. S. Lewis. Instead, you ran a story on Lindskoog’s book, which stirs a controversy. I agree with Walter Hooper on one point: This is “a curious way to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of Lewis’s death.”

Terrence Neal Brown

Memphis, Tenn.

Prolife Concerns And The Arms Race

Charles Colson in his column “Seamless Garment or Straitjacket?” [Nov. 4] observes that to extend prolife concerns to the arms race is to “worship biological life.” He notes that such an approach “seems plausible” and that “this sweeping definition of the seamless garment leads some, logically indeed, to conclude that deterrence is immoral.” However, some of us evangelicals say there is nothing plausible or logical about striving for a “consistent ethic of life” that opposes abortion, the nuclear arms race, euthanasia, and economic exploitation. In fact, it is plausibility and logic that have brought on the devastation of these social problems. It is, rather, the Scriptures and faith that are the foundation for this approach.

Rev. Wayne North

Harrisonburg Mennonite Church

Harrisonburg, Va.

In spite of Colson’s quoting C. S. Lewis (from 1948—hardly fair in presuming what Lewis would say today), there’s no tradition in Christianity justifying the total annihilation of humanity on the grounds that loss of liberty would be a worse fate. Yet that seems to be what Colson advocates. Isn’t that the worship of liberty? At least Colson’s honest. For nuclear deterrence to work, there must be officials prepared to commit global suicide rather than surrender—if an enemy is willing to risk the same ends for conquest.

Dave Jackson

Evanston, Ill.

True justice is impossible apart from logical consistency—and frankly, the “seamless garment” theory is far more consistent than Colson’s militarism. Neither freedom nor justice would mean much in a postnuclear world fit only for co*ckroaches.

Mark Pettigrew

Springfield, Mo.

I was disappointed Colson could not accept that people who are trying to be consistently prolife could be an important voice in the Christian community.

William A. Fitzgerald

Kalamazoo, Mich.

One Of Us?

Why try to claim novelist Flannery O’Connor as “one of ours” (i.e., an evangelical; Books, Nov. 4) when she herself doubtless would have shunned such a label? Are we also to claim Mark Twain because he married a staunch Presbyterian before whom he bowed and scraped? O’Connor wrote about people to whom God was an ever-present reality, thus giving all of us a more honest and sharper focus on modern life than do many contemporary novelists. We can and should acclaim her profound insights and skills, as well as her remarkable courage and faith under great suffering, but please, let it rest there.

James W. Reapsome

Wheaton, Ill.

It’S About Time!

It is about time the largest, most influential Christian magazine in the United States recognized the largest, most influential Christian evangelical denomination in our country [Nov. 4]. Southern Baptists across the years have been a witness for Christ and have repeatedly shown that in spite of tensions, we are a creative, dynamic group of people, not bound either by our southern heritage or geography. I appreciate the clarity with which some of our best spokesmen expressed who we are. We ask you to pray for us as we continue to minister in the “entire United States.”

Dale G. Robinson

The Southern Baptist General

Convention of California

Fresno, Calif.

Dating the beginning of the Baptist church to the Puritans is somewhat obtuse and denies the true beginnings of the Anabaptists, thousands of whom died for their belief in the priesthood of the believer and salvation on faith alone, before and during the Protestant Reformation in Europe.

Donald C. Thompson, M.D.

Morristown, Tenn.

The last paragraph in the sidebar “How the Convention Works” is incorrect in saying: “The president of the SBC appoints the committees that, in turn, appoint the groups that exercise direct control over the mission boards, seminaries, and other convention agencies.”

The president of the SBC appoints the committees that nominate people for the mission boards, etc. These nominees are brought before the convention in session where others may be nominated. Then the boards are elected (or rejected) by the messengers at the convention. This process means that, though influential, the SBC president is hardly “… one of the most powerful ecclesiastical figures in America.”

Royce Ballew

Waco Baptist Church

Waco, N.C.

Missing Detail

An important detail was dropped out of my article, “How Important Is Preaching?” [Oct. 21], during the editorial process. I am distressed that the article appeared as if Bartlett Giamatti’s words are my own. The following should have been enclosed in quotation marks and attributed to Giamatti:

“Words were units of energy. Through words man could assume forms and aspire to shapes and states otherwise beyond his reach. Words had this immense potency, this virtue, because they were derived from and were images of the Word, the Word of God which made us and which was God. Used properly, words could shape us in His image, and lead us to salvation. Through praise, in its largest sense, our words approach their source in the Word, and, therefore, we approach him.”

Lloyd J. Averill

University of Washington

Seattle, Wash.

Lone Ranger Approach

I want to register our protest in the strongest possible terms for the Church in Action article “Rising Star at the Twirling Tomato” [Oct. 21]. In addition to statistical and geographical errors, the article encourages a “lone ranger” approach to ministry and potentially slights many fine Chrstian congregations in Utah. In fact, Pastor Les Lofquist has sent letters of apology to several area churches! Since the average attendance at Washington Heights Baptist Church (CBA) is almost 400, only by defining fundamental in its narrowest sense could anyone claim that there are only two fundamental churches with a total attendance of 300 in the Ogden area. The offense caused by this implication is magnified by the consideration of the values used to limit the “good” churches in the Salt Lake area to only 15! Perhaps CT could write another article about ministry in Utah.

Rev. James L. Wakefield

Utah Conservative Baptist Association

West Jordan, Utah

Pastor Pollster

Polls played such an important role in the presidential campaign that my church figured there had to be a way to Christianize them. So last fall, while neighboring churches were searching for Sunday school teachers and choir directors, our church hired a pastor pollster. What better way to measure whether our church was “on track”?

There was some resistance to the idea at first, since our planning and growth consultants (Joshua, Caleb, and Associates) pointed out that polls tend to reflect the will of the people more than the will of God. But 10 out of 12 members surveyed disagreed with this report, so we went ahead.

In the past few months, we’ve learned some interesting things. For example, one Sunday our exit poll showed that 45 percent of the congregation felt the pastor spoke too long; 43 percent felt he didn’t speak long enough; and 12 percent said they didn’t know he had spoken at all.

Another poll showed that the pastor’s “approval rating” was higher among inactive members than active members.

Unfortunately, our pastor pollster didn’t last long. He made the mistake last week of suggesting that the congregation, as well as the pastor, be the subject of opinion polls. He wanted to poll the community to determine our church’s approval rating.

A solid 97 percent of the congregation thought that was a bad idea.

EUTYCHUS

In a few days I will observe—though probably not celebrate—my fiftieth birthday. I still have much to learn, dream, and accomplish. On the other hand, one cannot reach a major milestone without some reflection and self-assessment; I am curious about the progress and present status of the people among whom I have ministered over the past 25-plus years.

One special group for me has been the New England congregation for whom I served as pastor in 1968. Affiliated with a “mainline” denomination, the parish dates back to the late seventeenth century, and the historic meetinghouse was the object of affection and pride for the small band of regular worshipers. Although few members understood or shared my evangelical convictions, all were unfailingly gracious to me and tolerant of my theology. I found it easy to love and appreciate these friends.

When I moved to another position, the church gave me a small flowering crab-apple tree as a farewell gift. The tree was planted in front of our now former home, where it has continued to grow, flourish, and bear an ever-more spectacular and bountiful display of blossoms and fruit.

In subsequent years, whenever I saw the tree and thought of that special congregation, I sought a report on what God was doing in their midst. What I learned often thrilled—and usually humbled—me.

When I left the church, a young seminary graduate whom I had seen develop fine ministry skills was called to serve as their minister. Thus began a bonding partnership in ministry that has now extended over two decades. In an era when the average pastoral tenure is becoming shorter and shorter, both pastor and people have exercised the patience and perseverance necessary to have not only a long ministry together, but an effective one as well.

Gradually the Holy Spirit brought renewal and revival to the congregation: solid, but not flashy. The redemptive power of the gospel captured first one, and then another person and family. New understanding and vision followed from clear biblical exposition. Men and women were nurtured through fellowship and prayer in many formats. Indifferent neighbors were galvanized by the vital faith coursing through the renewed people of God.

Additional staff were engaged. New ministries and programs were added to fulfill growing opportunities for expressing the love of Christ to those in need. Over the years attendance has grown more than tenfold. The budget for ministry and mission has grown even more—and the annual fund-raising fair is just history now.

Last month I was invited back to help celebrate the construction of a wonderful new meetinghouse. Reminiscent of the old historic building, long outgrown, the new facility reaches out to invite all those who need the Good News of salvation and who need help with the challenges of life in a thousand ways.

I think I understand how Paul felt as he thought fondly of his Philippian friends among whom he had ministered. I know why he began his letter to them as he did: “I thank my God every time I remember you” (v. 3).

Likewise, I identify with Paul’s heartfelt expression in his two letters to the Thessalonians. Like Paul, I thank God for all my friends, new and old, in that New England church. Regardless of how they are earning their living, their first vocation is the life of faith as disciples of Jesus Christ. Their efforts, often frustrating and sometimes exhausting, are prompted by their love in growing ways. And they have demonstrated a “sheer dogged endurance” because of the hope they have in our Lord Jesus Christ. Their tree is in blossom.

Even as I affirm them for this good report, I too long that their faith might become ever more complete. I know the Lord can enable them to expand their love and nurture for one another and for others yet to be reached. I boast about them now and will even more as the grace of God continues to invade their lives together.

Such memories are good. The hopes and dreams are even better.

Being 50 is okay.