Christian Chronicle (Austin, Tex.), Vol. 29, No. 13, Ed. 1 Monday, June 19, 1972 Page: 3 of 12
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Christian Chronicle and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Abilene Christian University Library.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Page 3
CHRISTIAN CHRONICLE
June 19, 1972
v
Advice
to the
5’“ I
Portals
Young Minister
i ’
n
4
YOU AFTER SERVICES
i, 'A
I
I
is to be ex-
rumored to
uality in the
he other out
'act, suggest
a few cases
Jan families,
'ter the origi-
witable trail? i
o respond to1
itical jargon, I
suggest they
in for advice
ich Christian
d integrity of
;r or motives,
r both Chris-
)f contention
ar) and make
fiscuss it with
lager
i Chalk,
ether Monday
1 class postage
tion should be
O. Box 4055,
at 6721 North
it the “prac-
ms 12:2. He
minds (God-
jrspectives,
bes men and
plan of God
and feel the
JAC
V-
Editor, the Chronicle:
Thank you for your excellent editorial on
“Unfaith in Religious Costume.” I had just spent
a couple of hours discussing this very issue with
a college student — when I read your article. I will
suggest that he read it also.
Keep up the good work. You’re doing a fine job
with the Christian Chronicle.
In brotherly love,
Jimmy Jividen
ned, distant,
id” in many
never effec-
)wing Chris-
is in continu-
len illness or
y of Christ?
i understand
) for 3 years. A<M
>oat-niail subscrip-
an rate is 30c Per
Dhange of address
dress. Include old
I
arly days as
ing the room
ho remarked
mcern being
see the love
ok and talk,
y, how they
||
There is a negative kind of social con-
cern. Some people are interested pri-
marily in patching, mending and heal-
ing; they are not alert to changing the
circumstances which require the
subsequent patching, mending, and
healing. For example, while they are
strong on jails, policemen, and “law
and order,” they may be slow to sup-
port orphans homes, church camps,
and day care programs designed to
make the jails less necessary. These
people would rush to build first-aid
stations at the bottom of the cliff,
but they may »be slow to see why
people keep falling off. —Allen Isbell
able with their task, try to justify themselves, and
in so doing, deceive themselves. The most effective
preachers, on the other hand, are good politicians
who admit that they are manipulating situations, but
who try to do it as kindly, fairly and honestly as
they can.
There are many risks involved in a truly prophetic
ministry. There will be times when the role demands
merely be and the political pressures cannot be accommodated
but in going to your
We read and enjoy each and every one of your
issues. Keep up the good work. We will be praying
for you in your labors there.
Very Respectfully Yours in Christ
Clyde V. Thompson, Evangelist
Prisoners’ Aid Center
Huntsville, Tex. 77340
X
W\
"We want to welcome all visitors
NOW, SINCE NO ONE MAY SPEAK TO
Dear Younger Brother,
Most of us are moved to become preachers by
our love for the Lord and other people and by our
desire to serve them. This is as it should be. But
such high motives, when faced by the practical
problems of surviving in local church work, have a
tendency to turn sour. It is hard to maintain these
ideals and to play the games one is expected to play.
We either become hypocritical and deny that we are
“playing games” or we become cynical pulpit drop-
outs. There is another alternative which I encourage
you to consider.
The first thing you need to realize is that the
church is corrupt. Yes, I said CORRUPT. The
church is full of sinners, like you and I, ergo, corrupt.
You cannot read Paul’s letters to the Corinthians
without being aware of the corruption in the church.
We probably wouldn’t even fellowship them today,
even though we are not much better. Realize this
and accept it. We are all a bunch of sinners, but
Jesus loves us anyway and the church is that par-
ticular bunch of sinners which accepts and shares
that love with others.
Now don’t get me wrong; I’m not justifying cor-
ruption in the church. The preacher cannot condone
this condition, but he must be aware of the limita-
tions it imposes upon him and be able to work within
these limitations. Of all the things I dislike about
the ministerial profession, few rank as high as the
stereotypical role models and pulpit politics. Still,
they are realities that have to be faced and handled,
not denied or avoided.
In the contemporary church, the preacher is cast
in a particular set of roles and to survive and do
a decent job, he must play those roles. Let’s face
it; you simply cannot avoid playing some games.
But, you should know what you’re doing. It is dif-
| ficult to be true to yourself and put on the masks
and play the parts, but you must try. Not a few
{ ministers have been spiritually destroyed by confus-
ing their souls with their masks. As long as you
' realize what you are doing when you put on your
masks and take them off, you have some control
over them. Try to shape your ministerial roles to
fit your own soul rather than vice versa.
I '
You must also face the political realities of pulpit
work. Idealists, as a rule, are poor politicians, but
it is also difficult to speak like a prophet when you
know who signs your paycheck. You will soon dis-
iis frequently cover that in order to get things done, you must
irity for most1 know the power structures of churches and be able
>o little allow-[< to work through them. Many preachers, uncomfort-
probably go
and be con-
□t be so. W
-st
Editor, the Chronicle:
The purpose of this correspondence is to request
that additional copies of Vol. XXIX, May 8,1972,
No. 10 issue be sent to us. It is our desire to obtain
at least 10 additional copies.
Editor, the Chronicle:
Over the last few years and more recently in the
last few months charges have been made that liberal-
ism is present in some of our Christian Colleges
via teachers who have gotten their degrees at various
universities where almost everyone agrees that
liberalism and neo-orthodoxy are indeed major
forces. These charges have been answered by defin-
ing liberalism as the religious world defines liberal-
ism: “A denial of such doctrines as creation, mira-
cles, predictive prophecy, the virgin birth, the bodily
resurrection and the second coming of Christ, the
blood atonement, the deity or humanity of Christ,
propositional and verbal revelation and the divine
inspiration and complete authority of the Scrip-
tures.”
The point is well made that this is indeed the way
the religious world has defined liberalism and I
believe this kind of attitude is only very very
minutely, if at all, present in our Christian colleges.
But, will this settle the question and leave everyone
satisfied? No, I believe it will not.
Let me first suggest that our various Christian Col-
leges and their Bible Departments were founded
because the Church had and has a commitment to
undenominational New Testament Christianity.
Our commitment was and still is to attempt to find
the pattern of the original church as set forth in
the New Testament and to order our congregations
to that pattern as much as possible. We have been
committed to the position that a restoration of God’s
original Church is the only pattern that is pleasing
to Him. Thus, all other Churches find their origin
in man-made traditions and are sects therefore
not acceptable to God. The original pattern has gov-
erned how we have worshipped and how we have
preached that a person accepts Jesus Christ. It has
been this plea for the Restoration of God’s One
Original Church and His condemnation of all man-
made religious bodies that has made us unique and
not a part of conservative evangelical Protestantism.
It was a natural result that Christian Colleges be
created which have this plea as one of their major
emphasis. (For documentation that this was the
stand of Thorp Springs Christian College, David
Lipscomb College and Abilene Christian College,
see pages 73, 83-4, and 172 of M. Norvel Young’s
A History of Colleges Established and Controlled
by Members of the Churches of Christ.)
A
Therefore, the real questions that Christian College
administrators, teachers and their supporters must
face and ask are, “Do we still accept this Restora-
tion Plea as valid?” “Do we still believe that there
is a pattern for the One Original Church in the New
Testament, and is it possible to restore it?” “Do
we still believe that denominations are of man-made
origin and not Biblically based—thus not acceptable
to God?” “Do we still believe the Churches of
Christ are God’s Church in the world today?” “Do
we still believe that the changes man has brought
into worship of God cause him to be unacceptable
to God and condemned on that last day?” “Do
we still believe that God’s Plan for man’s response
to Jesus Christ involves immersion in water for the
remission of sins and if one hasn t gone through
this experience, he is not God’s Child no matter
what the outward evidence might seem to indicate?
Yes, this is a narrow position, but I believe with
all my heart it is the most Biblical position available
in the world today.
Yes, the real issue is not liberalism as defined by
the religious world — but the unique plea of the
Churches of Christ. These are the questions that
need to be asked of our Christian College educators
by their supporters and everyone concerned.
Someone may cry, “Creedalism!!” “You are forc-
ing me to adopt or reject a creed.” One can then
well ask, “What was one of the major reasons for
the establishment of these institutions in the beginn-
ing?” One definition of creed is: “An accepted sys-
tem of religious belief.” Yes, the founders did start
our institutions with an accepted system of religious
belief that they found in God’s Word. When a Chris-
tian College educator can no longer accept this sys-
tem of religious belief (If it is too narrow for him
or he feels it is not Biblically based) let him be honest
and say so and be willing to accept the consequ-
ences. Call it “creedalism” if you wish, but it was
a major factor in the beginning of our Christian Col-
leges and their continuation. Therefore, lets’ not
cloud the real issue by saying, “There are no liberals
on our faculties.” That is not the issue.
The most obvious question and the reason why
this issue is now before the brotherhood is this:
If all our Christian College educators do indeed
accept the uniqueness of God’s Church and its vari-
ous Biblical positions, why do some of them lend
their support and influence to publications that call
this uniqueness and these positions into question?
This is a natural question to be posed and honesty
with this question is the least supporters of Christian
Colleges deserve.
M. Novel Young, in the above mentioned book
(page 33), well sums up the problem the Christian
Colleges and the Church now faces: “Two funda-
mental dangers recognized by students of the Chris-
tian College movement are these. The school might
be organically united with the church, which would
not be after the New Testament pattern, and thus
gradually dominate the church. On the other hand
there is the danger that there may develop too wide
a gulf between the schools and the Church and that
the schools may not be kept close to the fundamental
principles which the Bible teaches.
Tom D. Blake,
267 North Park St.,
Brantford, Ontario.
> be a part of
ot i
s but in going to your own commitment to the gospel. My advice
it sit serenely to you is “play the games,” do not let them play
o us. It hurts You. Try to be as real as you can, fully conscious
of what you are doing when you play the stereotypi-
v Dimensions Cal ministerial roles and engage in whatever political
Yhile addition maneuvering necessary. In order to save your own
interested io[ sou^ you will on occasion run the risk of being
e relationshipf Caimed, and I hope that you will continue to be
willing to run that risk.
God bless you.
----|| Your co-laborer,
Maurice Ethridge
Minister in Rockdale, Tex.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Chalk, John Allen. Christian Chronicle (Austin, Tex.), Vol. 29, No. 13, Ed. 1 Monday, June 19, 1972, newspaper, June 19, 1972; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1666409/m1/3/?q=%22United+States+-+Texas+-+Travis+County+-+Austin%22: accessed July 16, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Abilene Christian University Library.