520 - The Church In the World

The Church In the World
By E. G. Homrighausen

HROMADKA REACHES SEVENTY

During the past year, the seventieth birthday of Josef Lukl Hromdka of Prague was observed in Czechoslovakia and Hungary with appropriate festivities. A special convocation was held last, June at the Comenius Faculty of the University of Prague. The Deputy Dean, Professor Soucek, welcomed civil and church representatives. Friends and even critics sent greetings from East and: West Europe, Asia, and America. The Ecumenical Council of, Churches in Hungary observed the anniversary with enthusiasm. Special editions of various publications carried articles praising, Hromadka's work as a theologian, peacemaker, and ecumenical leader.

Born in Hodslavice, Mahren, on June 8, 1889, Hromadka studied theology from 1907-12 in Vienna, Basel, Heidelberg, and Aberdeen. He served as vicar and pastor at Vestin, Prague, and Sonov. He was awarded the Ph.D. degree in Philosophy by Karls University in Prague. In 1920, he became the first professor of systematic theology in the newly-established John Hus faculty in Prague. As the Nazis were about to take over his native Czechoslovakia, he and his family made their dangerous but miraculous escape. During, his "exile" he taught ethics and theology in Princeton Theological Seminary and lectured extensively on theology, ethics, and the religious aspects of Western culture. After the War, he felt it his duty and desire to rejoin his people, who had urged him to go into exile, and return to help them rebuild. He returned to teach in the John Hus faculty and later, in 1950, to be appointed the Dean of the newly-organized Evangelical Comenius Theological Faculty of Prague. He has been actively associated with the ecumenical, and peace movements, as well as with Church and social affairs in. Eastern and Western Europe. He has traveled and lectured in East and Southeast Asia, Australia, Russia, Europe, and most recently in

521 - The Church In the World

Latin America. He is the most widely known Christian leader in Eastern Europe. He was recently awarded the Order of the Republic by the Communist government for his work for peace and the up building of his country. He has served on the Executive Committee of the World Council of Churches, as Vice President of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, and on the Executive Committee of the World Peace Movement.

Hromádka has written many books and articles, since his Christianity and Scientific Thinking was published in 1922. Many subjects have been of concern to him: Catholicism and the struggle of Christendom; Jan Karifiat; Placky's personality and meaning in the national awakening; Masaryk; Dostoievski; Luther; Calvin; Don Quixote; theology and the Church; the Church and theology in the upheaval of our time; theology between yesterday and tomorrow; and doom and resurrection. His most recent book is entitled, The Evangel for Atheists (Unterwegs, Berlin). Hromidka's writings are sensitive to the changing social situation and they endeavor to grapple with it in the light and spirit of the living Gospel.

Hromádka has been a controversial figure in the Christian world since 1948, when he sympathetically interpreted the Communist coup in Czechoslovakia and tangled with John Foster Dulles at the Amsterdam Assembly of the World Council of Churches. Ever since that time, he has tried to impress upon the West that the whole situation of Christianity, particularly in that part of the world affected by Communism, has radically changed, and that a new relationship must be established by Christian forces with the new order which in some measure is here to stay. The Church must reexamine its theology, nature, structure and function in a changing cultural climate and amidst political and social institutions which are no longer what they were at the beginning of the century. The Church and theology are "between yesterday and tomorrow." The Gospel must be interpreted to and in an order that is radically affected by scientific technology and atheistic philosophy. Hence, the relevant question of his latest book, "How to proclaim the Gospel to atheists?"

Hromádka's vocation has caused some to regard him as a "dangerous man," since his sincerity of Christian conviction, his warmth of personality, his acceptance by many Communists, and his genuine attempt to understand Communism, may innocently provide a de-

522 - The Church In the World

ceptive front for Communist aggression. On the other hand, there are friends who appreciate his witness to and interpretation of the Gospel in the face of a new order. They appreciate his witness to leaders of the Communist order who have seldom encountered a Christianity freed from the trappings of an old reactionary order. Between these critics and friends are many who are seeking to understand Hromadka's pioneering position.

In an interview with the press last summer in Brazil, Hromádka maintained that he is not a Communist, but that he has "a certain understanding of and sympathy for the Communists." Communism "weakens the Church," says Hromádka, but it also challenges churches to "purify themselves." He finds that many younger people in his country are returning to their own beliefs which the State once tried to destroy. Says Hromádka to these youths, "One day you will be looking for a little moral relief, and more fullness for human life even while you enjoy the comforts which material life offers." Hromádka finds that Communists are confused and surprised by a Christianity that is devoid of reaction and obscurantism. As a result, they are revising their attitudes towards religious people. "It will be a long, slow process, but there will be a happy ending as far as we are concerned."

Regardless as to our opinions of Hromádka, his name and activities are being written into the exciting and agonizing annals of contemporary Christian history. In many ways, his seventy years of Christian life and work symbolize the theological developments and the church-cultural relationships of Christianity in one of the most crucial half-centuries of human history. Critic and friend alike must be grateful for the interpretation of the Gospel in these times which he has given through his life and thought at the frontier where East and West meet.

CHARLES VAN DOREN: SYMBOL OF SOCIETY

On November 2, 1959, Professor Charles Lincoln Van Doren, thirty-three-year-old assistant professor of English in Columbia University and son of a distinguished line of American literary critics, confessed before a Congressional investigating committee in Washington, that he had lived a lie for three years. A letter from an unknown woman admirer told him that the only way he could ever

523 - The Church In the World

live with himself, and make up for what he had done, was to admit openly, clearly, and truly that he had been given the answers to questions in advance on TV programs by which he had won $129,000 and a $50,000 job with the National Broadcasting Company.

Van Doren started innocently enough on a small scale, but he became increasingly uneasy about his involvement in a rigged program of mounting national interest until he was finally "permitted" to be defeated by another contestant.

There are three elements in our society which are involved in this national event: the Van Dorens, the TV industry, and the public. As for Van Doren, his own confession offers a clue to his motivation in following through on the TV program. He acknowledges that he was the victim of forces which he was too naïve to detect. He asked to continue on the program "honestly", but he was frankly told that this was impossible. He was also told that receiving help was common practice, and that his appearance on a national show would be doing "a great service to the intellectual life, to teachers, and to education in general by increasing public interest." He had supposed he would win a few thousand dollars, and be known by a small TV audience. However, he was surprised when he became a national celebrity, receiving thousands of letters and requests for speaking engagements. Even an appearance in the movies was offered. Thousands of letters came from students and school children who found in Van Doren a symbol of the life of scholarship. "In a sense", he confessed, "I was like a child who refuses to admit a fact in the hope that it will go away." He soon came to realize that he was running away from himself. Then it was that the letter from an unknown woman made him decide that whatever the consequences, he would tell the truth. This is the story of an intelligent but naive man, subtly corrupted by pervasive forces in our secular world which he was not able to discern clearly or resist firmly. A superior education does not guarantee moral integrity or even the ability to discern ethical issues.

But the TV program producers are even more culpable than the Van Dorens. The perpetration of a rigged program with all the trappings of an honest procedure is deceitful entertainment. It lacks moral integrity. The main objective of the producers is to keep the program interesting and the people viewing. Anything to maintain high ratings, even if it means using the academic world

524 - The Church In the World

and hiding its true intent skillfully behind the facade of a revered profession! And the two program makers are not to be singled out as most reprehensible; from the investigation it is evident that "guilt can be spread around among so many," to quote Jack Gould of the New York Times. Those in responsible positions on the networks cannot escape blame, since dark rumors had circulated about rigged TV games for some time. The whole TV business is such that it is hard to believe the higher "brass" did not have some inkling that the popular quizzes were so arranged that maximum suspense was being maintained by using dubious methods to get and keep high audience ratings. Even the Federal Communications Commission must share some of the embarrassment in the situation. Again, the scandal is a symbol of something that has happened to old-fashioned values; they have been subtly corroded by using even education, the university world, and a venerable family name for commercial ends. If the sponsored TV program is to keep the sponsor contented, and the sponsor of a program wishes only to sell his product, then the use of this powerful mass medium may well be prostituted to the selling of things.

And the public? Many were upset by the exposure of deceit in these programs. But more saw little or no wrong in the whole procedure. After all, it was a good show while it lasted! And how many would have done what Van Doren did, had they been given the opportunity? It is doubtful whether the public applauded Van Doren because he was a symbol of scholarship. After all, it was a contest. The result rested not upon the ability of a scholar to think creatively and judge wisely, but upon the contestant's ability to remember facts. The public in its craving for excitement supported the show. After all, the quiz show reveals more about the viewer than the producer. It remains to be seen what the public does with the Van Doren symbol: sentimentally lift him to a new height or rudely curse him as a national scapegoat. The columnist, Max Freedman, suggests a harder but a more honorable choice: "The nation might look at its own symbols and values. It might grow ashamed of what it has honored."

There is a rising tide of opinion in this nation that more and more controls must be placed on communications. Censorship is the only answer, say the morally indignant. There is talk in Washington that new legislation must be devised to deal with such scandals.

525 - The Church In the World

Jack Gould is quite right in replying that "Men, not laws, are determining in matters of environment and conscience." At least, the hearings have given the Van Dorens, the TV industry, and the public, an opportunity to take a good look at the secret image which is all too dominant in our national thinking.

WORLD REFUGEE YEAR

This is World Refugee Year! It all started with a suggestion of three young men in an English journal, entitled, Crossbow. They were distressed by the appalling human waste and the wretched conditions found in refugee camps. Impressed by the way in which the International Geophysical Year had captured the imagination of people and stimulated interest in scientific investigation, they raised the question, "Why couldn't a similar period be made as effective in humanitarian accomplishment?"

The British government took notice of the appeal and voted $5,600,000 toward the purpose and sponsored the project in the United Nations. The United Nations responded by a vote of 59 to 9 (Communist bloc), with 7 abstentions (Arab countries).

The United Nations urged nations and specialized agencies to co-operate, in accordance with the national wishes and needs of each country, and from a humanitarian point of view, in promoting the Refugee Year. Two aims were stressed: (1) "to focus interest on he refugee problem and to encourage additional financial contributions from Governments, voluntary agencies and the general public for its solution," and (2) "to encourage additional opportunities for permanent refugee solutions, through voluntary reparation, resettlement or integration, on a purely humanitarian basis and in accordance with the freely expressed wishes of the refugees themselves." The United Nations has released a special emblem to symbolize the Year. Within the United Nations laurel wreath stands a refugee protected by praying hands. Over sixty nations have set up commitees to coordinate campaigns for information and funds. The major religious groups have endorsed the Year.

The number of refugees who have suffered since the end of World War II is estimated by the United Nations at 40 millions. In 1959, here are still 15 million refugees and displaced persons "challenging the conscience of mankind." They are found in Austria, Germany,

526 - The Church In the World

Greece, and Italy; in China (10,000 White Russians); in North Africa (180,000 in Tunisia and Morocco); in Hong Kong (perhaps a million); in the Near East (a million refugees live around the borders of Israel); in India (15,000 Tibetans). Many are aged, chronically sick, and handicapped. One-third of the children among some refugees have known no other home than the camp. Many of the older people have made new friends in camp and do not wish to be moved.

It has been said that the symbol of our age is not the soldier or the scientist, nor is it Mr. Ford or Mr. Ghandi. The symbol of the twentieth century will prove to be the refugee. He is the symbol of the instability, the anxieties, the suspicion, the racial prejudice, the rampant nationalism, the power struggle, the devastation of total war.

Eleanor Ellis of the United Nations, long associated with refugee work, has written, "Nothing short of a full scale and continuous attack on an international level can keep us from fighting a losing battle. We have, and we are still condemning a sizable portion of the world's population to a life of lethargy and despair, to a life without a future. . . . International efforts to protect and care for refugees date back for a number of years, but there is much more that can be done. We have left too many old people, too many ill and handicapped, too many children, and too many fully able-bodied people to years of useless wasting, to existence in overcrowded barracks, huts, tents, caves, and even in the streets. We have left too many to live a life without hope of ever having a country and a home of their own."

The story of the refugee, the life and the problems of the camp, the human interest stories of placements, and the wonderful services rendered by the volunteer Church personnel and agencies still remains to be told. Any visitor to a refugee camp will never be the same. We have nothing but praise for those who have become involved in the sufferings of refugees of our time.

The statement of the World Council of Churches regarding the World Refugee Year speaks of the refugee and his family as a challenge for more than a decade to our confession and compassion; he must be a first-call on the ministry of those whose Lord "had nowhere to lay his head." Our ministry to the refugee is the result of Christ's compassion. Because the governments of the free world have not

527 - The Church In the World

always concerned themselves sufficiently with this human tragedy, and with its constant threat to peace and security, the Council welcomes the decision of the United Nations to proclaim the World Refugee Year.

One warning has been issued by Dr. Elfan Rees, refugee expert of the World Council of Churches: The Year could "begin with fanfare in June and fade away in the dog days of August." Rees warns that "We who care for the refugees know this cannot be a year of solution for every refugee. But if we cannot solve the refugee problem in a year of special endeavor, we can at least solve the problems of more refugees than is possible in an ordinary year." There will, of course, be an aftermath, a kind of hangover, in the tragedy of the disappointed refugees, who will be more disillusioned in July, 1960, than ever before.

THE CHURCH LOOKS AT THE FAMILY; THE FAMILY LOOKS AT THE CHURCH

The United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America has published the results of a research project on the family. The purpose of the study was to learn as much as possible about Presbyterian families and how the Church can effectively minister to this crucial unit of society. The Board of Christian Education sponsored a widespread inquiry which involved interviews with parents representing various types of Church, questionnaires to pastors and parents, consultations with theologians and professionals in various fields, and research into the literature of theology, social psychology, social work, and history. It included observation and evaluation of significant work in family education, pilot experiments in new programming, and the amassing of findings about the changing American family. On the basis of the results, it is hoped that the Church will not only discover its failures in ministering to its families, but that it will gain a new insight into one of its major vocations: home building.

Some 93 percent of Presbyterian spouses are still living with their original partners; only 5 per cent are divorced and remarried; 1 percent are widowed and remarried, and I per cent are widowed or divorced and living alone. The average family has 2.4 children, with 36 per cent having three or more children. The study reveals

528 - The Church In the World

that the number of Presbyterians in professional and managerial positions is far above that of the national average.

Quite significant, however, is the revelation of the views of the Church which Presbyterian families hold. Dr. Roy W. Fairchild, director of the project, is concerned about the utilitarian conception of the Church held by many parents. Church membership, for instance, promotes social status, mental health, job advancement, and the building of a better community. The Church is valued as an influence to fight Communism or to preserve the American way of life. The Church is regarded as another character-building agency. Some parents send their children to Church because it is good for them, although they-especially the fathers-may not attend.

Another finding in this study is the institutional view of the Church held by many parents. The Church is an organization to which one belongs, and which one supports and attends. Parents criticized the over-organized Church which is described as a "three-ring circus." The numerous specialized groups, often meeting at different times, separate members of the family. Parents pleaded for the reduction of "all this hyperactivity." In some instances, organizations that once served a useful purpose now require a lot of energy just to keep going. There is a growing resentment among parents against an over-busy Church schedule. The institutional structure is substituted for the redemptive fellowship.

Dr. Fairchild, writing in Presbyterian Life, is also concerned about the identification of the Church with the clergy, especially in rural areas and small towns. Many complained that ministers were too busy to be good pastors. Yet, this study reveals that 72 per cent of Presbyterian ministers work at their ministries without any staff help. They, too, complain of insufficient time for family life, of work tensions spilling over into the manse, of having no place to be themselves, of irregular work schedules, of difficulties in making both ends meet. They find it difficult to be a pastor-director of the people of God when the minister is required to be a "one-man band." These ministers want more training in counseling, inter-personal relations, self-understanding, personality development, and the sociology of family and culture.

Perhaps the most significant finding in this project was the "vagueness and confusion about the Church and its faith" held by so many parents. Some parents had faith in faith itself; some regarded faith

529 - The Church In the World

as a confidence that things will work out all right; and some related faith to discipleship and love. Parents long for fellowship from the Church, even though they may not distinguish it too much from "togetherness."

And yet, in spite of some of these somewhat negative findings, it is heartening to know that three out of four families pray at mealtimes, even though less than one in six read the Bible together. Eighty-seven per cent of Presbyterian families attend Church services of worship at least twice a month. Twenty-nine per cent of these parents teach in the Church School whether regularly or part time. Most parents want more informal education on the Christian faith, the Bible, contemporary culture, and parent education. They want stronger leadership in youth work. They have a high regard for the industry. And they thought well enough of the Church to reply to the questions of this study!

If this project gives us an "image" of the Presbyterian family, it also gives us an "image" of the Church to which these families belong. Church and family are allies; they need each other; the problems of the one are the problems of the other. This study shows that the whole family must be more closely incorporated into the nature and task of the Church. And the Church must clarify its theology of marriage and Christian family life. Very few Churches are working at the business of inspiring and cultivating Christian living in families. Most Churches are busily engaged in making their institutions successful. As a result, they may exploit the family, and perhaps unconsciously contribute to its disintegration.

But, the Church must present and teach a clearer image of itself to its families. Before that can be done, it will need to clarify its own mind on its nature and mission as the people or family of God.