223 - The Church In the World

The Church In the World
By Elmer G. Homrighausen

RELIGION AND THE PRESIDENCY

A lively discussion is in progress on the question of electing a Roman Catholic to the presidency of the United States. But why be concerned about a Roman Catholic in the White House? Surely, Roman Catholics occupy high offices in city, state, and national government, with distinction and honor. The presidency, however, is a highly symbolic office since he represents all the people of the nation before the world. The discussion will become more intense if Senator John F. Kennedy is nominated by the Democratic Convention.

The debate will take on the character of a national forum in which a great many concomitant factors regarding the nature of the presidential office, the relation of religion to American life and history, and the relation of church and state will come in for vigorous consideration. This will not be a repetition of the 1928 campaign when Alfred E. Smith was a candidate for the presidency; a great deal has happened to the American people and the world situation since that time. Besides, Kennedy is not Smith; the situation of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States is somewhat different from that in the late 'twenties; and the mentality of Americans has been undergoing change in the last thirty years on a great many matters.

There are some people who fear the discussion of religion and politics just at a time when we have entered a period of tolerance and good will in the relation of religious groups towards each other. They fear a resurgence of sectarian bigotry which will blur the political issues involved and enhance our divisions. Nonsense! Jews, Roman Catholics, and Protestants ought to welcome a wide discussion of the relation of religion to society and the state. What an opportunity for adult religious education! We badly need to

224 - The Church In the World

clarify some dark points on the relation of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism to the state and American culture. This discussion should test the vigor and relevance of American religion.

Further, the possibility of a Roman Catholic in the White House must be faced sooner or later. If it is not now, it is to come. The presidency cannot be barred forever to a Roman Catholic or a Jew, lest they be regarded as second-class citizens. Roman Catholicism could hardly be represented by a more able or appealing candidate. An atheist in the presidency is another matter, upon which the Supreme Court would have to judge in the light of references to the Deity in our historical documents, the oath of office taken by the president, and the rulings of the Court affirming the religious character of the United States.

Popular opposition to a Roman Catholic president is based upon (1) a fear of the growing power of the Roman Church in the United States; (2) its traditional opinion that it occupy a preferred position in a nation where its constituency is numerically stronger than other religious groups; and (3) its policy of denying liberty to religious minorities. A Catholic president would give that Church great prestige; it might also impose the Church's ethical positions upon the presidential office. While some liberal churchmen of the Roman Catholic faith tend to accept the principle of religious liberty for all religious groups, the vast preponderance of traditional opinion still favors the limitation of liberty for minorities among which the Roman Church is the preferred religion. The manifest glorification of Roman Catholic ecclesiastical officials before whom the laity bow in respect is something quite offensive to non-Catholics. It is reminiscent of titles of nobility which our forefathers repudiated. Regardless as to how this act of homage may be interpreted, it is a symbol of power concentrated in a manifestly sovereign order centered in Rome and which claims for itself secular dominion over the state.

To be sure, a Roman Catholic president, schooled in the theology and ethics of the Roman Church, would take his responsibilities seriously. Mr. Kennedy has already declared himself rather clearly on many issues; indeed, he has been forced by his critics to take a stand that is altogether too secular, even for some Protestants!

We should welcome the forthcoming national forum associated with the candidacy of a Roman Catholic for the presidency. It will provide Protestants an opportunity to engage in widespread religious

225 - The Church In the World

education, to test the Protestant character of American life, to debate the religious aspects of church-state relations, to challenge Roman Catholic authorities on their position regarding religious liberty, to determine the relevance of our religious to public life, and to clarify our minds on many theological and ethical issues.

However, even though a strong case can be made for the election of a Roman Catholic to the presidency, a great many people are concerned about the freedom of the incumbent from ecclesiastical control. They are equally concerned about religious liberty for minorities, should the Roman Church hold a preferred position in the nation. And they are especially concerned about the separation of Church and state when traditional Catholic doctrine has regarded the state as the servant of the Church.

WHAT NEXT IN SOUTH AFRICA?

The question raised by Professor B. B. Keet, retired professor of Theology at the University of Stellenbosch, in his book, Whither South Africa?," now takes on a more serious tone. The eruption of pent-up resentment against the increased implementation of apartheid resulted in the March 21st tragedy which will be written indelibly into the pages of the world history. Regardless of the contributing causes which led to the Bantu march and the police action which resulted in seventy deaths, the event took place and it cannot be undone. It will be hard to get at the truth of the events, but it will be difficult to deny their tragic aftermath. Many discerning South Africans-British, Afrikaners, Colored, Asians, and Bantus-for a long time have feared such an eruption because they doubted the wisdom or the possible enforcement of the detailed policy of the Nationalist Party. One can only express deep sympathy for these discerning spirits who are weighed down with a deep sense of sorrow for what has happened. However, they may be somewhat relieved that at last the sincere but unwise policy of absolute apartheid has born its first fruits of bloodshed at home and of revulsion abroad.

The whole experience could be the beginning of a new tack in the racial situation in South Africa. Those who know the situation

226 - The Church In the World

are charitable in their judgment of the issues involved. South Africa is quite different from other nations.

The apartheid policy-which is shared by many English-speaking South Africans-is due to the desire of the Afrikaner to preserve his religio-cultural heritage which he has attained at great cost. He has no radical racial prejudice. He simply believes that it is unrealistic -and wrong-to integrate races and cultures that are so different from each other; and he is willing to tax himself heavily to provide housing settlements, health services, soil conservation, slum clearance, missionary projects, common schools and universities for the "separate but equal" development of the non-whites. And he cannot understand why anyone should criticize this generosity and concern and this desire to preserve unmixed the civilization and culture he cherishes. He thinks this method is right and operable in Africa.

The situation has caused a rift to develop between the Anglican and the Dutch Reformed Churches, resulting in the appeal by the Archbishop of the Cape to the World Council of Churches to consider dropping the Dutch Reformed Churches in South Africa from its membership. At present, a representative from the Council is in South Africa assessing the situation.

An "uneasy calm" has settled down over the Union. The spirit of the revolt has been suppressed by the arrest of non-white leaders and the ban on political activities. A state of emergency has been declared. The government, it seems, intends to hold the apartheid line, and it seems to have the support of its constituency. The moderates are small in number and influence. However, the basic causes of the revolt have not been touched. There is no way for non-whites to revolt because they lack both leaders and arms; furthermore, among them there is no middle class. They have suffered a set-back, but they have also achieved a measure of attention throughout the world. The Union confronts some serious consequences: world criticism, boycott of Union products, black nationalism to the north, the threat of industrial paralysis through general strikes, the growing ferment of discontent on the part of the masses (and even many whites) who may turn to Communist leadership if denied their rights, and the ever-present prospect of the extermination of the white man and his civilization in the face of rising African nationalism.

227 - The Church In the World

While progressive Nationalists and moderates would like some relaxations of the strict regulations of apartheid, it is a question whether the Party in power will make any concessions. The tension could be eased by surrendering the absolute color line and recognizing the rights of non-white intellectuals and their place in the government of the Africa which is their home. Unless this leadership is recognized, the future of the Union will be one of increasing violence. Dr. Keet, in his lecture, "The Ethics of Apartheid," regards such "group thinking" on race as unethical from the Christian point of view because it sacrifices the individual to a generalization. He does not see the alternative in South Africa as that between apartheid and integration, but as that between racial domination and racial co-operation. He regards enforced apartheid along racial lines as ethically untenable. It denies the fundamental rights that belong to man, the gifts of liberty and responsibility, The idealism behind the "separate but equal" development of non-whites does not deal with them on a just and equal basis. He concludes by saying, "It is becoming clearer every day that we have only one choice here, and that is to work together or prepare ourselves for the inevitable conflict in which the one or the other will be destroyed." There must be an extension of political freedom and opportunity.

In this period of peculiar calm, time is offered to the Churches to provide some prophetic leadership in the situation. This is no occasion for their representatives to engage in wild and recriminating accusations. The time is too short and the issue too serious for such uncharity. There are serious-minded men and women in all the Churches, whether white or non-white.

Professor Ben Marais, of Pretoria University, in his address at Rhodes University in 1957, called attention to the fact that the millions in Africa are in need of a sense of communion. Already Islam is drawing them into its communion. "What hope has a deeply divided and caste or colour-ridden Christian Church in the life-and-death struggle against Islam for the soul of Africa?" And he continues, "we have to face the fact of Communist infiltration, with its stress on community." And while granting that there may be a place for separated Churches because people do differ, he insists that there must be no segregation in the Church on the basis of race or color. He insists that Christians cannot accept the situation as it is without challenging it in the light of the Gospel. Nor can

228 - The Church In the World

Christians accept an idealistic fanaticism which may lead to chaos and disaster. In the tension, Christians in South Africa-and in the ecumenical movement-must act unitedly and responsibly.

"THE CHURCH DARE NOT BE SILENT"

The May 15, 1960, issue of Presbyterian Life contains an article written by the editors with the title-The Church Dare Not Be Silent. It is an affirmation that the Church must speak out on contemporary social problems. Written just before the 172nd General Assembly was about to convene in Cleveland, Ohio, and issue its annual report on social education and action, the article explains the procedures by which the Assembly drafts its statements regarding social action.

Why was such an article written at this time? Because there is abroad both in the United Presbyterian Church and in most of the other Protestant Churches an undercurrent of dissatisfaction not only with the content of the Church's social pronouncements but also with the methods by which they are formulated. However, beyond content and method is the contention of some rather prominent laymen and not a few ministers that the Church should confine itself to personal and ecclesiastical matters and not enter the complicated areas of political, social, racial, and international affairs. It has been pointed out that many business and professional people are withholding contributions from the Church because they do not agree with their Churches' social pronouncements.

The editors of Presbyterian Life carefully describe how social pronouncements are brought into being by the General Assembly. The process is quite thorough, and every pronouncement is subject to the severe examination of several responsible agencies of the Church before it reaches the standing committee of the General Assembly and finally the Assembly. The standing committee of the Assembly consists of twenty-two lay and clergy commissioners and a chairman. These commissioners of the Assembly are elected by their Presbyteries and represent a cross-section of the Church. They are "ordinary," uninstructed representatives of the Church who work hard during the Assembly on their committee assignments. The Assembly is "the finest example of a Republican form of

229 - The Church In the World

government ever conceived in the minds of men," according to a prominent Presbyterian layman. The commissioners gather in General Assembly to act for the whole United Presbyterian Church; they speak to the Churches, to the nation, and to the world. To be sure, the Assembly is not infallible! The minority has the right of voice and view. The dissenter has recourse to many ways of correcting or of even reversing the action of General Assembly.

The article in question seems to grant that the Church should not "invade" the processes of government, but that it should apply the Gospel to human affairs. The Reformers certainly dealt with social problems. A recent sample poll of United Presbyterians indicated that the majority favored the Church speaking on questions ranging from Sunday closing to birth control. Only on labor-management relations did those polled feel that the Church should be silent. The article also rests its case on the lordship of Christ over all of life, and on the fact that the "spiritual" and the "secular" life cannot be divided.

The Church is the conscience of the nation and not a "rubber stamp" for governmental power. And when the Church speaks on McCarthyism or better relations with Red China, the critic has no right to accuse the Church of being Communist. God alone is judge of the conscience. Assembly statements made on the basis of Scripture and prayerful reflection do not depend upon government officials for their validity.

The article concludes with a challenge that "the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and its General Assembly are not for sale. "

Other denominations as well as the National and World Councils of Churches have taken a similar position. In a recent release from the Vatican, the Roman Catholic hierarchy declares that it has "the right and the duty to intervene" in the political field to guide its flock. It rejects "the absurd split of conscience between the believer and the citizen." The release deplored the great confusion of ideas that is spreading among the laity. "The Roman Catholic religion is a force that commits and guides the entire existence of man."

This whole issue, publicized by Presbyterian Life, is one of crucial significance in the life of the Churches. It is related to the wide gulf that exists between the clergy and the laity on deep theological matters that have to do with the nature of the Church and with the

230 - The Church In the World

relation of the Gospel to the world. It should cause all Church judicatories, whether Assembly or Council, to examine carefully the end products of their best thinking on social issues to make sure that they rest upon solid Biblical and theological foundations. But equally important is the growing division between clergy and laity in all the Churches which can be overcome only by a more thorough adult education and the fellowship of both clergy and laity. The Church must not be for sale to any group! The Church must not be silent on issues that are related to the sovereignty of God, the lordship of Jesus Christ, and the redeeming work of the Spirit in life and history. Before the Church's pronouncements can become a powerful witness, however, they must be rooted in a deeper understanding of the human ramifications of the Christian commitment enlightened by reverent and expert thought on the part of clergy and laity alike.

SOUTH KOREA'S ORDEAL

During one history-making week South Korea passed through an unusual kind of revolution. Masses of students provided the dynamic of protest against the Syngman Rhee government; but, when they were assured of a change in regime, they manifested an extra-ordinary degree of discipline by taking over the policing of the city of Seoul. President Syngman Rhee was forced to resign under threat, yet, when he did resign, he was respectfully cheered as he made his way to Pear Blossom House and retirement as the "grandfather" of South Korea. A revolution that started ominously had very little in the way of violence in it; indeed, South Koreans are still clinging vigorously to their old ideals of liberty and justice, which is perhaps due to the unity of spirit generated through Communist opposition. The old lives on in the new, even though the old is no longer in political control. The two leading figures in the present situation, Acting President Huh Chung and General Song Yo Chan, are men of integrity; the former has no aspirations for the presidency or the premiership; the latter believes that the civilian government must always be superior to the military.

Word from an eye witness to the revolution states that the root of the trouble goes back to the elections held on March 15, 1960. President Rhee could have won the elections without the high-

231 - The Church In the World

handed methods and the intimidating fraud which were used. It was a questionable triumph for President Rhee with which he had nothing to do. Rhee may be inflexible on relations with Japan and Red China, but he is a man of principle who did not need this fraud to win. He may have relinquished too much authority to subordinates who were unwise and indeed unscrupulous. The opposition mounted until at last it exploded for one fateful week in late April.

The Party now in power is faced with a difficult task. Much housecleaning has been done in the way of eliminating corrupt officials who shared in the evils of the previous regime. Many are still in hiding, among them not a few of whom were not involved personally in any graft. The air has cleared. But the task of reconstruction will take time and wisdom.

But what about the position of Protestantism that was so closely related to the government headed by Dr. Rhee? "The first reaction," writes a trusted observer, "is to prophesy a decline in Protestant political influence and a rise in Catholic power." The leader of the opposition Democratic Party, John Chang, is a Roman Catholic. Yet, there is a "deep under-current of support for President Rhee, the hero of Korea's long fight for independence. This is particularly strong in the countryside. It was the cities that rose against him, and the cities have long been Democratic party strongholds."

The revolution marked a clear victory for the Christian conscience. Regardless of political or denominational loyalties, "Christians everywhere shared in the intense dissatisfaction at dishonesty in the elections, and sympathized with the students' cry for a clean-up."

Two students were killed among all the students who participated in the demonstration. All Christian schools joined in the affair. The Christian Broadcasting Station, HLKY, was the first to take to the air with honest reports of what was happening; as a result, it became the most popular source of news for all Korea.

No one knows what the future holds for South Korea. However, this revolution has cut deeply in order to remove an unhealthy condition in the national body. Many will express sympathy over the forced resignation of Dr. Rhee, whose name has for twelve years been synonymous with the South Korean determination to remain free. He is a part of Korean history that cannot be removed. The united

232 - The Church In the World

determination of South Koreans to fight for justice and liberty without lawless violence must be admired. It now remains for those in positions of power to go beyond the eradication of fraud in government to the positive business of building an order in which justice and liberty are implemented. To do this requires wisdom and courage.

THE CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE AND NUCLEAR POWER

So far, the Christian conscience has had little to say about the peaceful use of nuclear power. This new discovery provides a potential for human welfare which should be exploited responsibly. But, it does pose problems of control, production, and distribution which will involve the Christian conscience.

However, it is the relation of nuclear power to war that troubles the Christian conscience. And the problem of war is related to two major issues: (1) the nature of nuclear warfare which disturbs even those who formerly defended the just war; and (2) the possibility of total war in the tense and irreconcilable conflict of values between east and west which has resulted in the developing and stock-piling of nuclear weapons.

The Christian pacifist is even more convinced that his position is irrefutable. The nuclear pacifist believes that the nations must now disarm totally.

On the other hand, the militarists who believe that war is still the only way to resolve international conflicts which will not yield to negotiation regard nuclear warfare as simply the intensification of the use of force. Some of them believe that wars will increase in destructiveness unless there is mutual agreement on the rules and weapons of warfare on the part of combatants.

However, the vast majority of Christians are not pacifists or militarists. They feel themselves caught in a tragic situation regarding which there is no easy solution. They agree with the Amsterdam Assembly report that war is "a sin against God and a degradation of man." They realize that nuclear power challenges the whole tradition of a just war, since even a defensive war will be total and result in the destruction of centers of culture, the pollution of the earth's atmosphere, and the extermination of civilian life. The

233 - The Church In the World

Christian conscience has always sanctioned the righteous use of force; but even the righteous use of force in modern warfare entails the destruction of the basis on which that righteousness rests.

The cold war aggravates the problem of the Christian conscience. Two constellations of value confront each other in our time and the Christian cannot evade or escape his involvement in the ideological struggle. There are values in an open society which the Christian in the West must uphold; he gives reluctant support to the wall of armament which keeps this kind of society from being overwhelmed by a totalitarian regime. His loyalty is first to Jesus Christ as Lord; but even though the open society of which he is a part is impure, he is responsible for maintaining the things of value in his nation and in those allied with it. To disarm totally would be tantamount to surrender to the Communist order, unless mutually trustworthy agreements were reached. This truly tragic dilemma the Christian cannot escape.

The Christian knows that there is no absolute security in armaments. Indeed, he is aware of the fact that the competition between East and West in developing refined weapons of destruction is insane. The stock-piling of such weapons is a temptation to the military-minded and a danger which a miscalculation or an irresponsible act could set off. And it may be impossible to surpass Russia in the development of nuclear power. In addition, Communism is a going concern whose influence has increased among the uncommitted nations.

What, then, shall the conscientious Christian do? He will assess the complexities of the situation, acknowledge his absolute loyalty to the law of love, realize his involvement in humanity, and try to respond to the multiple requirements of the situation. He will have to eschew easy panaceas by which he seeks to escape the pain of the tragic situation.

He will not give way to hopeless despair, even though he may have to live in this "balance of terror" for some time to come. He will not regard history as a closed system, but rather as open to surprising possibilities. Although the doctrine of providence has been rudely shaken by man's discovery of nuclear power, the Christian will believe that God sets bounds to the wrath of men and makes it to serve his purposes. The conscientious Christian will resist the cynicism that believes war to be inevitable; he may even believe that this

234 - The Church In the World

balance of terror may grow so frightening that East and West may mutually turn away from the holocaust of total war. His future hope will not make him passive in the present situation, but it will give him that perspective which sees the fulfillment of life beyond history.

During this time of uneasy peace, bridges of understanding may be built which are more effective for peace than unilateral proposals for disarmament. Perhaps small agreements regarding the curbing or eliminating of nuclear weapons may become cumulative in effect. The exchange of visitors may help to dissolve the walls that separate us. Above all, the viruses of unholy impatience and national self-righteousness must be resisted lest they condition us for a holy war which may be regarded as the quick solution to the problem.

In such a complex situation, the responsible Christian will try to act faithfully and make his difficult and immediate decisions in the spirit of humility, knowing that whatever he does will need the forgiveness of God.