409 - The Church In the World

The Church In the World
By E. G. Homrighausen

THE AMERICAN DREAM AND THE CHURCH

In 1976 the United States of America will celebrate its 200th anniversary. The President has appointed an American Revolution Bicentennial Commission, with authority and funds from Congress, to prepare for the event Progress is being made, but slowly.

Boston, which was regarded as the only candidate for the officially approved "Category I," has declined with thanks. Philadelphia, the other likely candidate, was rejected by the Commission by a vote of 23 to 4. Commission members thought the 600 million dollar federal contribution too expensive; one member doubted that the poor could afford to attend it; others thought that world's fairs are "obsolete, unpopular, and of dubious value." Philadelphians are faced with local poverty, racial tensions, critical environmentalists, and citizens who are afraid of the crowds that would jam airports and highways. All sorts of suggestions have been advanced as to ways in which the money appropriated for the Bicentennial could be put to better use, such as a new Maine to Florida railroad, emphasis upon civil rights, economic and social equality, projects relating to the ideals upon which the nation was founded.

None of these proposals, however, seems to be comprehensive and specific enough to stir a whole nation of 208 million people with an excitement which will unite them in a new spirit of patriotism, issuing from a fresh sense of national identity and purpose. Two hundred years ago, pioneering forefathers knew who they were and what they wanted. Today the whole situation in the United States has changed for both culture and the churches. A number of factors will have to be taken into account if there is to be a meaningful celebration of the Bicentennial in 1976.

There will certainly be parades, fireworks, commemorative medals, and historical pageants throughout the nation. There will be Bicentennial essay and poster contests in the schools. There will be reams of publications devoted to historic places and events. Dallas, Miami, Des Moines, Niagara Falls, New York, Washington, D.C., Boston, Philadelphia, and other cities are already planning events which will point up the American character, its varied facets and achievements. There is discussion about the government giving to each of the fifty states federal lands as sites for separate state celebrations, later to be used as state parks. Landscaping and architecture would express each states heritage and culture.

410 - The Church In the World

The theme of the Bicentennial is: "A Past to Remember-a Future to Mold." The President has asked Americans to put their minds and hearts to uniting in "an exciting and soul-stirring cause of peace, to ring up the curtain on the nation's third century with the promise of a better, healthier, happier life for all." He hopes that people all over the land will "sense the greatness of this moment, to participate in it and help us all discover what that great spirit (of '76) is."

Perhaps the major issue in celebrating the Bicentennial win be an evaluation of the American dream of two hundred years ago in the light of the current American reality. That dream animated the colonials who regarded themselves as divinely guided and destined to establish in this new world a true model of political and social life, a "holy commonwealth" based upon the Word of God. They felt providentially freed from European tradition and tyranny. And they lured others to the new land of freedom and opportunity. They were pioneers of God's new order in a fresh situation.

This dream was the inspiration behind nineteenth century expansion from the eastern to the western seaboards, in missions, in economics, in social reforms, and in self-confidence. Success was regarded as proof of divine favor. The American dream became a rich and powerful reality.

The twentieth century brought the American dream into crisis through two world wars. The first was entered into as a crusade to end all wars, to make the world safe for democracy. It was a larger phase of the dream. In spite of disillusionment following that war, Americans entered World War II as a crusade against tyranny. Emerging from the war as a great world power, the weight of heavy responsibilities and global commitments brought on a crisis that has produced divisions among the American people, made them question their ability or right to impose their dream upon others, and even question the legitimacy of the dream itself.

The American dream also faces a crisis at home. Blacks, Jews, Spanish Americans, and other ethnic groups long submerged have arisen to claim their part and share in the making and prospect of America. No longer is America the land of white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. The Puritan ethic has been challenged. Youth and its counter culture eschew the success standards and bourgeois ideals of American culture. The churches which inspired the American dream are no longer as influential in culture as once they were. A religious as well as ethnic pluralism has displaced the older religious monopoly and homogeneity.

This crisis on two fronts has already produced a spirit of morbid self-criticism on the part of many Americans during the 1960's. This could lead to a loss of nerve with disastrous results. On the

411 - The Church In the World

other hand, it may lead to a resurgence of hyper-patriotism that in its impatience loses its temper and uses destructive power to preserve itself. America has been called a "confused giant" that no one should make mad. A third alternative is wholesome self examination, repentance, and a new vision of the American dream in terms of a deeper commitment and a broader interpretation. Toward achieving this end, the churches have a crucial responsibility.

The churches are confused by the new situation in which they find themselves in American culture, and by the new theological developments within and among themselves. The Protestantism that inspired the older American culture and civic religion is bewildered by the revolutionary changes that are taking place in the culture in which it was once at home. Roman Catholics, who have "arrived" in American culture on the wave of their revolutionary development since Vatican II, find it difficult to know what to do with their new-found liberation. Conservative or evangelical Christians are trying to rehabilitate the old-time civic religion. Liberal or radical social Christians welcome the liberation of American life and culture from the old controls, and in the spirit of self-fulfillment, secular optimism, and enlightened humanism interpret the Christian faith in terms of personal and social well being. And in between these two poles the churches hold all shades of opinion about their relation to American culture and about the nature of the Christian faith.

It is quite obvious that the churches themselves are in crisis as much as is American culture. This is most unfortunate especially at a time when a new interpretation of the American dream is imperative. The churches are in cultural and theological crisis; they do not have the theological integrity that is essential in a time like this, an integrity that will keep them from trying to rehabilitate a theology of culture that is anachronistic or from sliding into a theology that is so acculturated that it has surrendered its essence.

For both church and nation the Bicentennial is a painful challenge. For the nation it is a kairos in which it is forced to reassess the American dream, repent of its arrogance and self-satisfaction, reflect upon its nature and goals with a view to their reconstruction. For the church it is a kairos in which it is forced to reassess its place and function in American culture, to recover its theological integrity, and to become a prophetic witness and priestly servant to a nation in distress. It is in a kairos like the present that real theology and patriotism may be born.

412 - The Church In the World

NORTH AND SOUTH KOREAN BREAKTHROUGH

After 27 years of separation between north and south Korea, conversations have begun between Red Cross leaders in Seoul and their counterparts in Pyongyang. Started in the summer of 1971 and continued through many talks during the past year, both in North and South Korea, these breakthrough have at last resulted in two large meetings, one in Pyongyang, August 30, 1972, and the other, September 14, 1972, in Seoul. Delegates agreed to hold their next meetings in Pyongyang, October 24, and in Seoul, November 22, 1972.

The first offer was made over the radio by the Red Cross of South Korea, August 12, 1971. A favorable response was received by radio. Preliminary meetings began at Pamnunjon, and a permanent telephone line was set up for liaison.

The primary purpose of this surprising breakthrough is "to satisfy the humanitarian need for reuniting separated families" which resulted from the civil war. It has been estimated that of the 50 million people in both Koreas at least 10 million people, one in five, have suffered separation of one kind or another. These unfortunate families were unable to receive any news about their relatives and friends. Many died; others remarried; still others became changed through conditioning to another style of life. In all the talks between the two groups this humanitarian goal has been kept in mind, although representatives from North Korea have tried to include political matters on the agenda, and sooner or later political considerations will have to be discussed.

Full support has been given to these talks by President Chung Hee Park in Seoul. In a memorable address in 1971, he said, "We feel the growing, sincere desire to unify the country by peaceful means, not by war. But however intense this desire may be, we should not peevishly fret, nor become recklessly impatient." And as regards the Red Cross talks, he said, "Our government and people are now rendering every assistance and fostering a spirit of cooperation, so that these talks may bear fruit soon." Besides the Red Cross meetings, there have been some secret visits by government officials of both North and South Korea on matters relating to possible unification.

At the latest meetings in Pyongyang and Seoul, a "document of agreement" prepared by negotiators on both sides was signed by the chief delegates, Lee Bum Suk of the south and Kim Tae Hui of the north. The two sides promised to "thoroughly realize democratic principles of freedom in settling all the problems of the agenda." They agreed that at the next meeting they would start the substantial discussions of the five agenda items: reloca-

413 - The Church In the World

tion of families and relatives separated by the division of Korea, mutual visits and meetings, mail exchanges, permanent reunion of the families, and "other humanitarian problems." There was no hint of political unification in the agreement. After signing the agreement the chief North Korean delegate said, "We are satisfied with the great result of the Seoul conference, which has achieved its objectives to further promote mutual trust." It is evident, however, that on every occasion North Korea delegates make the point that the division of Korea was the fault of the United States, the United Nations, and the imperialists.

The South Koreans have tended to keep their deep, anxious feelings under control. They are aware of the fact that North Korea launched an unprovoked invasion of the south in 1950, devasted their land, and has continued to threaten another invasion. They are quite aware that the north and the south are separated by more than an imaginary boundary guarded by military sentries; they are divided by an ideological gulf, as well as by a bitter and traumatic memory of four million Koreans killed and as many driven from the north to the south as refugees. They remember the hundreds of Christians including leading ministers of the church who were executed. They recall that Protestant Christianity before the civil war was most successful in the north, and that once Pyongyang was called "the Jerusalem of Korea." These Christian refugees from the north form the heart of the South Korean Christian community. And while they were surprised at the Red Cross talks, and wistfully cheered by the prospect of hearing from and seeing old friends and relatives, they approach these talks with guarded and cautious concern. Kim Kwan-suck, general secretary of the South Korean Council of Churches, said in a press interview, "We say 'aye' to this humanitarian proposal without reservation. But is there a humanitarian proposal that is not tangled with politics? Guarding ourselves against naive optimism and hasty pessimism, we should devise ways and means to extend the Christian mission to North Korea and to promote the spirit of freedom in this country."

The South Korean church will face a difficult time as it tries to meet with North Koreans. This is a critical and a creative time in its history. It is the most active church in all of Asia. It has evangelistic zeal, pious devotion, and growing theological integrity. Yet, because of its history, it has had to be protective of its life and fearful of a hostile government. It has been strongly anti-communist. And it has been evangelical, and in some cases, divisively orthodox. The Korean church will now be confronted with a new dimension of its mission toward the whole of the Korean people. What it does in face of this challenge to be a

414 - The Church In the World

reconciling and a witnessing force for the divided Korean people will be watched with prayerful concern and hope by Christians everywhere.

THE CHURCH AS SUDAN PEACEMAKER

The peaceful settlement of the armed conflict between north and south Sudan is one of Africa's greatest achievements in the 1960's. This civil war extended over sixteen years and resulted in destroyed property, human casualties, national division, and thousands of refugees forced into Ethiopia, Egypt, Kenya, Uganda, and Zaire.

The settlement has proven that Africans can resolve very serious differences. But the important aspect of this national reunion is that it was generated and conducted by three councils of churches: the Sudan Council of Churches, the All Africa Conference of Churches, and the World Council of Churches. The World Council, especially, played a major role in achieving the settlement.

Had it not been for the African desire for unity, prosperity, justice, and human dignity, the negotiations would not have succeeded. Today Africans want unity, but they insist that the basic rights of minorities must be safeguarded. Because of the differences between north and south Sudan in culture, language, religion, and historical orientation the settlement is of historic and prophetic significance for the African continent.

The Sudan is one of the largest countries in Africa. It encompasses one million square miles, and embraces over 15 million people, divided into 597 tribes. The north and the south have been conquered in the past and forced into a unity by the Turks, Egyptians, Mohammed Ahmed, and the British. The latter recognized the differences between the two Sudans and governed them accordingly. But by 1940 the south had become separated from the north and closely related to its neighbors to the east. An attempt was made after 1946 to unify the north and the south, but this resulted in great tension and suspicion. Then came the mutiny in the army of the south in 1955, which gave birth to the Anya-nya guerilla movement. After independence, the attempt of the north under different governments to unify the nation by military force made matters worse. In June, 1969, General Nemeiry of the north declared that the southern people had a right to regional autonomy within a united Sudan. As a result, the changed atmosphere made possible conditions in which the settlement was finally achieved.

The root causes of separation were fear and the social and economic insecurity of the southern Sudanese. The education of

415 - The Church In the World

the south was largely in the hands of missionaries; in the north it was led by Muslims. Arabic was used in the north and African tribal languages in the south. Islam was dominant in the north; Christianity in the south. While the south was against British rule, it did use the English language, and wished to preserve some aspects of British culture which were still influential in Uganda and Kenya.

The north was more unified and patriarchal; the south was more democratic and pluralistic. With such divisions and fears it was inevitable that the two Sudans drifted apart. The Sudan has been termed "a classic example of a divided nation." It is divided by religion, by ethnic kinship, by region, and by history. Like most African countries, the modem Sudan was created artificially by a colonial power. The north developed its largely Islamic traditions and Arabic culture; the south emerged as a Christian-based, English-speaking region.

The problem became too difficult and costly for the government of the Sudan to solve alone. And the burden of the refugees from the south became unbearable for the nations which had received them.

It is at this point that the World Council of Churches entered the problem, for it was involved in providing for thousands of Sudanese refugees. It became evident that the refugee problem could not be solved by charity; it was rooted in deeper issues. The secretary responsible for African refugees in the World Council of Churches stated that it was up to the churches in the Sudan to take the initiative, with the support of the churches of the African continent. This was an all-African problem, in which both the churches in the Sudan and the churches associated in the All Africa Conference of Churches must cooperate. Only in this way would the Sudanese authorities regard any approach as coming from Africans and not from outside sources.

So, the Sudan Council of Churches was organized in 1965, which for the first time included both Catholic and Protestant groups. Thereby, three councils of churches cooperated in determining what could be done unitedly to bring relief to the situation. The WCC urged its Commission on International Affairs to take all appropriate steps, including approaches to governments, so that there might be an end to suffering, and the exercise of religious freedom, in southern Sudan. The Sudan government was not favorable to this action, perhaps because of the reference to religious freedom since missionaries had been expelled in 1964. However, a delegation of AACC visited the Sudan at the invitation of the government to assess the situation and to offer any services that might lead to peace. This was the turning point in the total process of reconciliation.

416 - The Church In the World

Thereafter for eight months the AACC and the Sudan government held meetings in which many difficult matters were discussed and resolved. The Sudan government had to make sure that the churches' motives were concerned about the unity of the Sudan as well as the legitimate rights of minorities. But the churches represented, whether the Sudan Council of Churches, the WCC, or the AACC, also had difficult issues to confront. They had to find their way at every step of the negotiations. They had to determine the role of the church in dealing with these complex problems. How far dare they go into the political aspects of such a complex national situation? How can the churches prepare people in the south for this new autonomy in a united Sudan? How can the churches in south Sudan, but newly united, initiate discussions with government about the shaping of the new autonomy? All this involved more than engaging in relief work; this called for prophetic leadership. How do churches help a country to rebuild its unity while providing for the rights of its minorities?

Anyone acquainted with the bitterness and suffering involved in the Sudan situation will regard this settlement with real surprise and great satisfaction. That the churches were able to engage in action which resulted in a settlement indicates that their influence is felt, if properly led and conducted. The Sudan resolution tells us much about the spirit of African Christianity, its unity, its desire to act in a continental context, and its willingness to deal with political problems in a pastoral and prophetic way. National problems cannot be dealt with by separated churches in the nations; the unity of Christians in the nation, reinforced by the churches in council on a continental and world basis, is essential. But above all, when the motives of the churches are directed toward unity and human rights, national leaders may find in these churches a leadership that can be trusted to help them solve difficult problems. The leaders of the WCC offered their services to the Khartoum government as "a politically disinterested international humanitarian organization." The WCCs sole motive was to "best serve the people of Sudan, north and south, for which they understood a lasting peace was indispensable."

This agreement may be an event of large and prophetic dimensions, possibly for reconciliation in southern Africa, and perhaps in Northern Ireland. These situations are different, but perhaps the issues are the same. The words of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Sudan are appropriate when he indicated that the problem in the Sudan could not be settled by an old paternalism nor by erratic policies of successive governments. Rather, the problem needed a "fresh look, courage to admit past ills, charity of thought, and an amplification of, rather than an over-simplification of, root causes."

417 - The Church In the World

THE CRISIS OF MISSIONS

The great century of foreign missionary activity has not come to an end; it has moved into a new era. Perhaps its success has brought on the critical issues that now confront the whole church in the world with the next phase of the church's mission. Missionary statesmen of the so-called "sending" churches have for some time been concerned about the future of missionaries, mission boards and societies, and missionary strategy. They must now take into consideration the leaders and members of sister churches that have come of age and who wish to share in the total mission of the church in their situations and in the world. Much of the confusion regarding missions as well as much of the creative ferment in the churches about missions is due to: (1) the new situation in which the churches find themselves in a changing world, and (2) the new understanding of the Christian mission in the world.

Western ethnocentrism in missions has now become impossible. With it has gone a domination that is unacceptable to sister churches however weak they may be in numbers, leadership, and financial resources. The idea of "sending" and "receiving" churches, implying a paternalism toward the recipients, cannot be continued. The spirit of racial and cultural superiority in missions is highly objectionable. No longer is it possible to think of starting and developing western churches, transplantations of an alien culture and faith, into a community, thereby displacing a culture which was regarded as pagan and un-Christian. And closely allied with these factors is the influence of western political and economic expansion which provided a protective umbrella under which missions were begun and developed.

Missions were often set up on the western model of the institutional church. This pattern was unnatural to new Christians of other cultures and had the tendency to create rigid organizations which did not allow sister churches to function with freedom and indigenous character. The financial burden of such organizations required resources these churches did not have; as a result, they have been kept on a long dependency and forced to rely upon a standard of leadership they could not easily develop or support.

Most critical of all has been the concept of the church which missions have communicated. Granted, that in an alien society much emphasis had to be placed upon individual conversion and an exclusive church. But all too often, mission churches consisted of small minorities, communicants who belonged to ethnic groups or to an exclusive confession. Even the theological education of leaders of these church groups was conformed to these limited concepts of the church and its mission.

418 - The Church In the World

Not all missionaries carried on a deliberate strategy in missions which aimed at these sectarian, colonial, and provincial results. And even those who did were people of their time and generation. In spite of the criticism that may now be made of such missionary activity, the gospel was disseminated across the world by dedicated people. They made sacrifices, even unto death, in their obedience to the great commission. Today they would be the first to call for a new strategy in carrying forward that commission in the light of the present situation.

But the missionary movement has come to a new stage in its growth. The time of western expansion is past. The colonial era of the last century is history. Now we are living in a time of nationalist movements, indigenous churches, ecumenical reality, and the development of peoples. The church exists around the world. The church everywhere is now the mission.

Denominational loyalties must no longer be a barrier to unity in mission. The terms "sending" and "receiving" churches are out of date. Mission agencies must not talk of "our" work, but of "God's" work. Sister churches must be supported so as to become independent; and this support must give power to weaker churches to share in decisions regarding local mission strategy. The day of free-wheeling western missionary money dictating mission policy is finished. Strategies and decisions must be made in the local community. Equal partnership in mission is imperative. The total mission of the church is a joint enterprise in which new patterns and insights will be shared. And this mission of the churches may involve an advocacy on behalf of those who suffer injustice, which may lead to risks, misunderstanding, and suffering.

This new phase in mission has raised some serious questions among Christians on which there is serious difference of opinion. All will agree that older and younger, sending and receiving, churches are all part of the one church around the world, and they are both to send and receive from each other in mutual helpfulness. In fact, Asian churches now send over 200 missionaries to churches of other lands. In India, there are 100 evangelizing agencies now in existence. The concept of "foreign" missions is antiquated; there are foreign "territories" everywhere, and some of the most challenging are in older so-called Christian cultures where secular humanism is strong. Sister churches have become independent; in fact they are now equal fellow-members with their "parents" in the World Council and other councils of churches. They are regarded as missions in their own areas, developing their own ways of expressing that mission in freedom and creativity, and evolving theologies that are related to their own cultures. Sister churches share in God's mission for all mankind. And in their indigenous settings, they are engaging in a more intelligent

419 - The Church In the World

understanding of the religions they confront, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, animism, or ancestor worship.

There are several crucial issues upon which missiologists are divided. The first has to do with the change from "missions" to the "Mission" of the church. The strong emphasis in ecumenical circles on mission as the humanizing and liberating activity of the churches, often in collaboration with revolutionary movements, has caused many Christians to sense that this trend may de-emphasize the necessity for and the reality of a converting experience and a salvatory relation with Jesus Christ. Salvation in this sense of mission takes place on the horizontal level by which man is brought into the abundant life of human well being. The social aspects of man's redemption are stressed. The reality of the revelation in Christ is centered in God's action in history for the total redemption of man's life, personal and social. The uniqueness of Jesus Christ and the necessity of Christian experience are no longer primary. This does seem to cut the vital nerve of the older call to missions.

The second issue follows upon the first. If a strong emphasis is placed upon the mission of the church conceived in the sense described above, then what shall be done about the two billion people in the world who have never heard of Jesus Christ and his liberating and humanizing gospel? If the Christian mission is conceived in a largely social sense, then what about the great commission's command to "make disciples"? How shall these millions ever hear the gospel if Christians in their congregations and cultural settings confine their concern to fulfilling their mission in their localities?

It is most unfortunate that this kind of polarization should take place at this crucial period in the mission of the churches. It is imperative that mission be seen not in terms of personal conversion or social humanization only, when the gospel of Jesus Christ insists upon both depth and breadth. Such a distortion or fragmentation of the gospel is not in place at this time in history. Perhaps the major issue lies deeper. The churches today confront "the dawning age of universal history" and the imperious urgency of the personal. And in the process of relating its total gospel to their realities, it needs to go beyond the provincial in which both conservative and liberal are entrapped, and catch up with the ecumenical and eschatological Christ, who is both intensely personal and intensely human.