The Protestant Picture

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 1]

     We live in a world filled with problems, tensions and fears. Our way of life is challenged as never before. Western civilization is being weighed in the balances of destiny. We are haunted by the grim specter of a godless ideology lurking in the shadows, scheming, planning, waiting, ready to crush out all we hold dear. Against such an implacable foe, the application of raw force in concrete and physical form will eventually prove unavailing. The philosophy of dialectical materialism, formulated by Karl Marx, must be met and vanquished by a philosophy of spiritual strength and power. It is the conviction of this writer that our hope of survival lies in adoption and implementation of the way of life exemplified, expounded and embodied by Jesus of Nazareth. But to whom can we turn for leadership in these times of crisis? Where is the Christian way now exemplified in such a manner as to exert a universal influence of sufficient power to offset the threat to our world?

     Last month we examined the claim of Rome to be the one holy, catholic, and apostolic church of God upon earth, and thus, the only source of hope in the fight against world Communistic domination. We offered certain proofs to demonstrate the fallaciousness of the first contention, and enumerated our reasons for rejecting the second. In this issue we scrutinize the Protestant realm in an endeavor to determine if we may rely upon obtaining help from that direction.

     Our task in this instance is more difficult. What is Protestantism? Is it capable of adequate definition? Even the origin of the term as currently used is not understood by the majority, who have a vague notion that it arose from the act of Martin Luther in tacking ninety-five theses upon the church door in Wittemberg. The notion is incorrect. The emperor Charles V. called a diet at Spire, in 1529. He had two purposes in mind. One was to enlist aid from the German princes against the Turks; the other to resolve the fierce disputes over religious matters engendered by Luther's opposition to the Roman Church. In this diet, Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria, in company with other papal princes, decreed that no Roman Catholic should be allowed to become a Lutheran, and no reformer should be allowed to speak contrary to the received doctrine of the church. Against this decree a solemn and formal protest was registered by six princes: John and George, electors of Saxony and Brandenburg; Ernest and Francis, dukes of Lunenburg; the landgrave of Hesse; and the prince of Anhalt. They were joined in the protest by the deputies of thirteen imperial towns. These were therefore called Protestants.

     The term itself has a negative bearing. It indicates a state of opposition to an existing order or condition. Webster de-

[Page 2]

fines a Protestant as, "Any Christian not of the Roman Catholic Church or the Eastern Church." Protestantism is not a church, and has never claimed to be the church. Because of the many divergencies and divisions among the various bodies ascribed to Protestantism, it is difficult to write a thesis which will do justice to all and render unfairness to none. It is our desire and intention to be as objective as possible in any appraisal of this nature.

     There have been great changes wrought in the Protestant realm in the last century, and tremendous alterations and adjustments are under way in these days. Unfortunately, those for whom we write are generally unaware of such re-alignments. Our readers are chiefly drawn from various segments resulting from the restoration movement which was promoted by the Campbells, Stone, Scott, et. al., in the first half of the nineteenth century. The splinter parties allied with this movement have insulated and isolated themselves from the great bulk of the religious world which they started out to unite in Jesus the Christ, and have occupied themselves chiefly with fighting among themselves, to the utter abandonment of their original noble ideal and purpose. So far have they drifted from their moorings at this time that one is looked upon with gravest suspicions if he even repeats the plea for the unity of all believers so eloquently voiced by the restoration pioneers.

     As a result of their confinement and entombment behind the monastic walls of their own construction, the majority are wholly oblivious of the present position of Protestantism. Notable changes have taken place since the days of Alexander Campbell. How much of this transformation may be traceable, directly or indirectly, to his influence, we have no way of knowing. But to use the same war cries and to make the same accusations as a century ago will only serve to demonstrate the ignorance and date the information of the opponent, and render his testimony futile and ineffective among thinking people.

     When Campbell launched his effort, men were contending sharply for their respective creeds, the party spirit was rife and intense, and doctrinal feeling was at high tide. He describes it thus:

     "While protestant hatred to the Roman pontiff and the papacy continued to increase, a secret lust in the bosoms of protestants for ecclesiastical power and patronage worked in all the members of the protestant states, and ultimately introduced a swarm of protestant popes, who gradually assimilated the new church to the old.... The power of religion was soon merged in debates about forms and ceremonies, in speculative strifes of opinion, and in fierce debates about the political and religious right of burning heretics.... After the protestants had debated their own principles with one another till they lost all brotherly affection, and would as soon have 'communed in the sacrament' with catholics as with one another; speculative abstracts of christian Platonism, the sublime mysteries of Egyptian theology, became the bond of union and the apple of discord, among the fathers and friends of the reformation."{1}

     The state of things described no longer exists. It is useless to rail against creeds, or to take great time and space in analyzing them, with a view to altering the perspective of the average Protestant. A contemporary Catholic scholar says, "Unfortunately, many Protestants do not know exactly what their particular church teaches, nor why it teaches it. They are baffled when anyone asks them what their religion has to offer that any other religion does not have."

     It is just as useless to talk about "warring sects," for they no longer dispute, debate and belabor each other. It is a source of pathetic amusement to hear some radio speakers denounce wrangling, warring sects in one breath, then in the next condemn their councils, alliances, and cooperative enterprises. There is more bitterness, strife and debate among "The Churches of Christ" than among all of the Protestant sects taken together, for among these last, hostility and hatred have practically vanished. They are still sects, but they are not "warring" upon each other. They are like neighboring tribes who have "buried the hatchet." Let

[Page 3]

us glance briefly at the historic changes in Protestantism since inauguration of our century, now more than half completed. At the close of the nineteenth century the theologians were basking in the "peace of their self content." Influenced more than most of them realized or would admit by the Darwinian theory of survival of the fittest and the upward trend of mankind, indocrinated in the German philosophic idealism of Kant, Schleierimacher, Lotze, Troeltsch, and others, it was believed that man by his inherent goodness and inborn qualities of moral strength, would build a world of social equality and ethical values. The kingdom of heaven would be attained on earth by application of the philosophic principles of humanism with the aid of science and technology. All that was required to make earth a paradise and to cause "the desert to blossom like a rose," was the implementation of a social gospel which would establish a true "brotherhood of man" as naturally as day follows night. The very titles of the books of that day reflect the ideal. There was, for example, Theology and the Social Consciousness, by Henry Churchill King, released in 1901; and Social Idealism and the Changing Theology, by Gerald Birney Smith, published in 1912.

     But the prevailing philosophy, which was styled liberal theology, was given a series of rude shocks which shattered the spirit of complacency and forced a restudy of the accepted formulae. The first of these was the eruption of World War I, which pitted most of the rest of the world against Germany, the very seat of philosophic idealism. Once more "man's inhumanity to man, made countless thousands mourn." While the world was still staggering from the impact of this cataclysm of carnage and sorrow, the economic realm was shaken to its very roots by the depression and virtual panic which resulted.

     Then came the next World War, and the fine spun theories of human behaviorism tumbled as did the burning buildings under the impact of "Block-buster" bombs. The depth of human depravity in the midst of a great cultural civilization was seen in the gas chambers and lime pits of Dachau and Buchenwald. The groans of the dying, and the agonized screams of the tortured, cried out for a new evaluation of God and man, of life and death, of human rights and responsibilities. Thus, out of the furnace of affliction, Protestantism has had to forge a new approach to the problem of modern man. In some phases, at least, this has amounted to a rediscovery of vital, but forgotten truths.

     First in importance is the realization that a united world cannot be achieved by a divided church. Whereas, in the days of Campbell, sectarian division was a cause of glorying and rejoicing, there has come a complete reversal of thought, and such division is almost universally regarded as sin. Never before in the history of the Christian faith has there been so much written upon the subject of unity as is being written today. Book after book is produced dealing with the ecumenical movement. Sermons are being delivered, forums conducted, symposiums held, class discussions inaugurated, in all of which the goal of a united Protestant world is held out as a hope. It is affirmed that "the ecumenical movement for a united church is the resurgence in Protestantism of the same undertaking which inspired the great Reformers, but which they were unable to consummate."

     The writer of those lines, strikes a note of urgency in the same book, with the following words:

     "Our civilization is in a state of collapse. The old stabilities are dissolving before our eyes. The old world of America and of historical Protestantism is passing away. Whether a new world will rise from the chaos of the present, and whether, if it does, it will be better or worse than the world we have known, no man can tell. Only faith in the God of history can enable us to ride the tempestuous waves of this universal unrest and uncertainty.... The thought of carrying our impotent sectarianism into such a scene as that toward which the forces of history may be taking us, should awaken us to realize that in this world convulsion, the destiny of Protestantism itself is involved. Either it will decay with the decaying significance of its sectarian churches, as some believe that it will, or

[Page 4]

a new Protestantism will emerge, emancipated from its anarchic sectarianism and competent, under Christ, to gather up the fragments of a shattered civilization and build a new world."{2}

     We rejoice in the recapture of certain concepts which commend themselves to our hearts as being right and proper according to the scriptures of the new covenant. We mention only a few.

1. The realization of the fact expressed in the prayer of Jesus that the one thing essential to getting the world to believe that God sent Him is to get those who do believe to be one. To state it in other words, the world will be won to belief in Jesus, when those who believe in Jesus are one! In conjunction with this view, it is interesting to read these words from Charles Henry Brent, late American Episcopal Bishop of the Philippines:
   "It is little short of absurd to try to bring into the Church of Christ the great nations of the Far East unless we can present an undivided front. For purely practical reasons we feel the necessity of the Church's realization of unity. It must be either that or failure in our vocation."
   
2. The recognition that denominationalism is a hindrance to the realization of God's purpose in one body. Charles Clayton Morrison refers to the true church as being in "bondage to the apostate denominational system," and says that the desired goal can only be possible "by the dissolution of the denominational churches." Archbishop William Temple declared, "In a sense it is required that every existing Christian communion should die in order to rise again into something more splendid than itself." The idea of the incompatibility of denominationalism with God's eternal will is a radical departure from the apologies offered in bygone days. The defender of denominationalism is now behind the times, a relic of the past, and completely out of step with current reasoning.
   
3. Charles W. Gilkey, one time instructor in homiletics at McCormick Theological Seminary and Garrett Biblical Institute, and member of the board of Union Theological Seminary, writes of one of his friends, who said, as he looked back upon a long career of preaching, "I have rediscovered the church." This is a phenomenon of these days. For years liberal philosophers scoffed at the church and at religious organization. They regarded the church as wholly outmoded and derelict. They spoke of it as a kind of poor and embarrassing relative. But the current literature is filled with what some of us have known all of the time, that the church is related to Jesus, as a wife is to her husband, and "what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." It is amusing to read of religious doctors and professors who think they have succeeded in bringing the church back home to Jesus, whereas they have never been separated. The professors have just been away from home, and have mistaken their absence for that of the church. It is refreshing to read the encomiums upon the church, so vigorously and eagerly given, by those who used to sidle off so as not to be identified with the "church idea."
   
4. There is a new appreciation of fellowship. Once more God's people are looked upon as a family, or social unit. The purposes of God are not to be fulfilled by "souls, like stars, who dwell apart, in a fellowless firmament." The judgment of God that "it is not good for man that he should be alone," is seen to be as applicable in the spiritual and intellectual, as in the physical sphere.
   
5. Baptism is being given a new emphasis. There is a turning away from in-

   [Page 5]

   fant sprinkling. Under the impact of current investigation, the Christian life is conceived of as one of total commitment, which to be total, must be personal and individual. It cannot, in its very essence, be the commitment of one person by another, but it must be voluntary and spontaneous. In such a recognition sprinkling of infants must go. When Alexander Campbell started his trek from sectarianism he faced his first major test at the birth of his infant son. The infant was not sprinkled. For generations, since the days of Luther, it has seemed that the question of infant sprinkling was settled, and that there would be no attempt to return to the primitive practice. Now the whole matter is again at the forefront of discussion, with such men as Karl Barth and Emil Brunner, affirming that infant baptism is wholly Out of focus with the biblical concept of the church. Those of us who have read "Studies in the Original Christian Baptism" by Johannes Warns, with the appealing introduction by his brother-in-law, Erich Sauer, know what great changes are taking place in our days. Truly the Spirit of God is still working!

CONCLUSION

     We ask our readers to bear with us a little longer. We have sought to portray for you significant trends in modern Protestantism. We must now express our personal conviction as to the place of Protestantism in the mammoth struggle for the minds of men. We make this statement very humbly, sincerely, and with godly fear. We have a very deep respect for all who sincerely seek to serve the Christ. We love all who are affiliated with the various branches of Protestantism. We do not question that many of them are children of our Father which is in Heaven, and are, by the same token, our brethren, divided and separated though we may be. We acknowledge every truth held by every one of them. We would not discourage any, but prefer to encourage them to greater love for God, greater zeal and study.

     However, honesty demands that in all candor, we openly declare that we do not accept the idea that Protestantism, as such, either united or disunited, is the answer to the problem confronting us. We believe that answer lies with the fellowship that is known in the scriptures of the new covenant as the church of God. The church of God was antecedent to Protestantism as it was to Roman Catholicism. To strengthen Protestantism is not, therefore, to build up the church of God. To unite the various sects and factions, of Protestantism, is not, thereby, to restore the church of God. We rejoice and thank God for every tendency upon the part of those in Protestantism to discover anew those principles and precepts which will lead in the direction of the restoration of the church of God, but Protestantism of itself is no more the church of God than is the Restoration Movement.

     If I may be allowed an opinion at this juncture, it seems to me that modern Protestantism is sending forth its knights in shining armor, searching for the "holy grail" of an adequate theology, from which all may drink to spiritual satisfaction. But, like Sir Launfal, these may overlook and pass by the Christ, in the intensity of their quest. The Protestant world seems to become enraptured with each new philosophy, and men like Paul Tillich, of Harvard, captivate the American segment, at least, with such words as "theonomy," and "ontology," and with such expressions as: "The message of Christianity is not Christianity, but a New Reality. A New State of things has appeared, it still appears; it is hidden and visible, it is there and it is here. Accept it, enter into it, let it grasp you." Perhaps the best reaction to modern systematic theology is found in the words of Jesus, "And they shall say to you, See here; or see there: go not after them, nor follow them" (Luke 17:23).

     We pray that the day may yet come when all sectarianism may be dissolved under the rays of divine love, when the party spirit may be crucified and interred as a part of the old man of sin, when it will no longer be a question of uniting

[Page 6]

the various denominations in a grand ecumenical movement, but the uniting of all who love the Lord as members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. To that end we will work and labor until the sunset claims us, to that task will we dedicate our feeble efforts "with malice toward none and with charity toward all."

    {1} Christianity Restored, by Alexander Campbell. Published by McVay and Ewing, Bethany, Virginia, 1835, page 4.
    {2} The Unfinished Reformation. Charles Clayton Morrison, D.D., Litt.D., LL.D., Copyright, 1953, by Harper and Brothers, New York. Page 47. By special permission of copyright owners.