SOME THINGS WORTHY OF PRAISE

My students at the university where I teach are always impressed with the moral dictum laid down by Immanuel Kant, the German philosopher, to the effect that our conduct should be guided by the desire to do that which is worthy of praise, whether it in fact is praised or not. Is it praiseworthy? is the question we should ask, Kant tells us, and not Will it be praised?

At this point many of us have our values confused. We desire the applause of the crowd. We want to be praised and honored. We sometimes do things if we can believe it will in some way bring us honor. And yet much of what we do is not really worthy of praise to begin with. Surely many things that are done for the sake of praise and not praiseworthy, while the things that are really praiseworthy are seldom praised. It is a fact of life. Jesus spoke to this when he said: “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts; for what is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God.” (Lk. 16:15)

Some of the testimonial dinners I read about may illustrate the point. They can hardly be proper for the Christian, for if one is really worthy of praise, the lavish outpouring of it would be distasteful to him. And there is the risk that his life has not really been worthy of praise, but of blame, and thus it would be a farce. One old brother was recently honored by a gathering of the Establishment to a testimonial dinner, where they competed with one another in squandering praise upon a man who has done more to carnalize the Churches of Christ with hate and strife than most anyone of our time. It was his reward for being a good party man. Leading ministers mouthed epithets that they could not have possibly believed, for it had been only a short time before when the object of their praise was the object of their scorn, when the side he was going to take was still uncertain. It was the most disgusting manifestation of rank sectarianism I had seen in many a day. It would have been as shocking as Belshazzar’s handwriting on the wall if some angelic voice had spoken judgment on the man’s real character, his rudeness, his carnage, his egoism.

This is why it is just as well that we not indulge in this kind of thing, for if one is worthy of praise, let God reward him in his own magnificent way. If he is not worthy, it is an insipid experience for all concerned.

I do not mean, of course, that there is never a time for praise, for after all the Bible tells us to “Pay honor to whom honor is due.” My readers sometime complain that my editorials are too critical. “Why don’t you ever praise the Church of Christ?” I am asked. The question is a fair one, and I accept the criticism as valid. There is, however, more positive notes in my writings than my critics realize. Yet my writings have hardly been full of praise.

I have, therefore, been in search of those things worthy of praise among us, and I have come up with several that I want to pass along to you for the sake of encouragement. These do not take the form of growing budgets, real estate holdings, or even for being “the fastest growing church in the United States” (which I doubt). In fact, the praiseworthy things that I see are not receiving much, if any, praise from others. It confirms what I have already said: the praiseworthy things usually go without praise, and they are often criticized and opposed.

Here is my list, which I number for convenience, though not necessarily in their order of importance.

1. Moving Nearer to the Christian World.

I trust the term “Christian World” will not prove offensive, for I am implying that what we call the Church of Christ is but a part of the world of Christians. Even more serious is the tragic fact that we have long been a separated part, with almost no contact with the rest of Christendom. We have read its commentaries, sung its songs, patterned our buildings and institutions after it, but have otherwise ignored the Christian world, except to attempt to evangelize it as if it were completely alien to the gospel. Indeed “the outsider” has meant in our glossary of terms a devout Baptist and pious Presbyterian as well as a rank sinner of the world.

I happily praise the overtures being made to correct this narrow and erroneous attitude. A few examples will serve to encourage you as I have been encouraged.

Last month in Uppsala, Sweden, there was a great gathering of Christians from all over the world, representing most denominations. It was another convocation of the World Council of Churches of Christ. This has of course been going on for a long time, but insofar as our people have been concerned it might never have happened at all, for we ignored it as if it did not exist, despite all the important things that happen through the organization. Well, at Uppsala it was different. For the first time there was some effort to provide Church of Christ representation. Quite appropriate, I would say, for a World Council of Churches of Christ! A sound (or rather sound), loyal, bona fide minister among us was on hand, and he reported his impressions in one of our publications, and it was all well done, positive and helpful in its approach. At last we were there in history and making history. This is good. While no one can officially represent us, I suppose, this brother was sent by numerous brethren over the country raising the money for his trip. Its purpose was to put one of our men in Uppsala as an observer. And we did!

Part of the Christian world we have ignored is other wings of our own Restoration Movement. Many of us are still unaware that there is an Independent Christian Church, which is separate from the more liberal Disciples of Christ, and which is strikingly similar to our own Churches of Christ in attitude and practice, except that they use the piano. I regret to add that the similarities are in respect to our weaknesses as well as our strengths. Anyway, we have had almost nothing to do with each other, despite our brotherhood. Last month the North American Christian Convention, representing these conservative churches, invited a prominent Texas minister of the Church of Christ to take an honored place on its program. That he did a bang-up good job surprised nobody, and that it was reported to be the most esteemed of all the presentations is secondary. What is important is that they invited him and that he accepted! It has been only a short time back when the same minister was invited to take a similar part on a Baptist program, but backed out of it when pressure was applied by the keepers of orthodoxy. Things are changing.

When the editor of the Firm Foundation goes up East on his own volition and enters a meeting with “representatives of the leading denominations of the land,” and then comes back home and tells it on himself in his own paper, we do indeed have reason to be encouraged. When Rome started changing I found it delightfully incredible. Now that Austin is changing I find it almost too good to be true. I am well aware that the editor, when writing of such events, shows that same old attitude that they are the sectarians, and they are hindered by “a power structure” from denying their denominationalism, while we are free of such restraints. Still I praise the editor for venturing into a den of Daniels, and I thank God for this new insight into what might be.

A few months later the same editor wrote of his unusual experiences in Chicago where he did such wild things as to have dialogue with students and faculty of a Roman Catholic college (of all places!). He mixed this with sessions with Negro brethren, Christian Church leaders, and non-cooperatives of the Church of Christ. These were not debates, or one man haranguing the others, but armchair discussions with an honest effort to understand each other. He came back to Austin and wrote this concerning his contact with Negroes: “There is no respecter of persons with God; all look alike to him. And they must to us. For one child of God to refuse another fellowship on the basis of race or any other prejudicial matter is intolerable to God and must be to us. Negro brethren are caught in a cruel predicament.” This is eminently Christian and we commend the editor for such noble sentiments. That this comes from the heart of a Christian editor is important, and that it comes from the heart of Texas is encouraging.

2. Efforts to Communicate with Church of Christ Negroes.

We have virtually ignored the black Church of Christ, with its separate leadership, lectureship (which is attended by thousands) , publications, schools, and theology. As with American culture in general, there are two distinct Churches of Christ, one white and one black.

Apart from what might be called “the Marshall Keeble syndrome,” the white church has had almost no contact at all with the black, and it most certainly has made no effort to make of the white and the black “one New Man.” Through the years the white leadership coddled brother Keeble, bestowing upon him unnecessary honor and attention, thus proving to itself that it was not prejudice. “After all, look at the way we treat Marshall Keeble!” seemed to have made invulnerable a practice that was nothing more than warmed over Jim Crowism. It is an ugly fact that the white, southern Church of Christ has been, and still is for the most part, racist.

Unfortunately Marshall Keeble did not have the convictions, or perhaps the courage, of a Christian Church black minister that I heard recently. He minced no words in telling the white people how unchristian they have been in the way they have treated the blacks. “We meet only a few blocks from you, but you act as if we did not exist. It is obvious that you do not accept us as equals,” he told them.

But brother Keeble enjoyed his haven among the whites. He royally entertained them with his unique style of preaching, and in some cases the entertainment may have been similar to the way Paul Robeson entertained with his fancy tap dancing. The whites who crowded to hear brother Keeble would not have been entertained by the kind of talk they would have heard from this Christian Church brother, who spoke to the whites about their sins against the black man. Instead brother Keeble preached baptism, giving illustrations that kept his white brothers in stitches.

Along with the glory, which I readily admit, there is the tragedy in Marshall Keeble’s life. He lived to see his school stolen by the very whites who presumed to honor him. He lived to see his own white brethren, who had allowed him to sit at their right hand in high places, fail to make any contribution at all to the civil rights movement. For years he allowed himself to be “the pet nigger” in the Church of Christ without ever raising his voice against the white church’s most cruel sin. He was an Uncle Tom who allowed racists to ease their consciences by accepting him when he knew they would never accept his black brothers. The same Church of Christ colleges that featured him on their lectureships would not even allow a Negro to enroll as a student! What a shame and a disgrace! Marshall Keeble was surely a good and noble man, but he was not a prophet. Before a white audience he was insensitive to the sins that matter most. Had he been sensitive, he would not have enjoyed a half-century reign as our pet nigger.

It is therefore particularly encouraging that out of the south and in the south there should emerge a sincere effort to communicate with the black church. Back in the summer some fifty brethren assembled in Atlanta to discuss ways to improve race relations in the Churches of Christ. Both blacks and whites prayed together, talked together, and concluded by drafting proposals for better race relations. They called on the colleges to enroll more Negroes, and suggested that congregations integrate. They proposed that all our institutions be fully integrated, homes for aged, Bible chairs, camps, schools, workshops—everything. They asked the colleges to hire Negro teachers, and proposed that publications include articles by and news of the black church.

Their attitude seemed to be that there should be no white or black church, but simply the church, with all. God’s people one indeed.

The white minister who told a black brother that he was quite willing for his daughter to marry his son may have been overenthusiastic. That is about like one venturing to ride a bucking bronc who has never yet been on a horse.

But we are encouraged, and we praise this noble effort. It was eminently Christian, and I am pleased for us to be really like Christ for a change. The conference has not received wide acclaim; but even if it be not praised, it is praiseworthy. Such as this will make us a great people.

3. Serious Effort to Face Up to the Issues of the Times

Here I have in mind many individuals among us who have awakened to the need of living in the twentieth century. I see it in the mail that comes to my desk. It is evident in the ministry of preachers who are trying to relate their messages to the times. Thousands are tiring of the old cliches, of answering questions that no one is asking, and of ignoring the world aflame. They are moving out onto the frontiers. They want their lives and preaching to make a difference in the world tomorrow.

Our people are becoming more conscious of problems related to social justice, of the starving millions, and of half a world that can neither read nor write. They have grown weary of sermons that denounce “the social gospel” and confine the church to centuries past. We have tasted the thrill of growth. We have a passion for maturity. The obscurantists among us had better get out of the way or they’ll be run down by those in search for relevance.

4. Missionary Zeal

I have criticized our missionary endeavors as too often efforts to build up our own party, and I still believe this a valid criticism. Yet there is much to praise. I am especially impressed with the many young missionaries that desire to bring Christ to the people, and not simply a Church of Christ version of Christianity. As I have already suggested in this journal, there is reason to believe that these men may in turn “convert” the church back home as to the real import of the gospel.

5. A Better Grasp of the Concept of Gospel

It sounds reckless to say that our people do not know what the gospel is, but the criticism might well hold up if one takes the trouble to hear and read what we have been saying. In a moment of candor one of our leading ministers said at a unity meeting: “Our preachers have a better concept of the gospel than their preaching would indicate.” The preaching does generally reveal little understanding of the grace of God. We dwell too little on the great themes of redemption and forgiveness.

But there are signs that this is improving. The influence of the Holy Spirit in the lives of so many of our people is working this change. We are speaking more of God’s grace. We are praising God more. Many of our people are becoming sweeter, more loving people. They pray more, study more, associate with others more, and enjoy life more. God has come alive to them. Christ is real in their lives. This is the gospel.

6. Lively Publications

For years our leading journals have been dead, if ever they were alive at all. It has been unkind to allow them to go unburied. I have long been convinced that they are little read, even by those who habitually subscribe, except perhaps to page through them or to scan news items. Nor have they deserved to be read. They are dead—irrelevant, superficial, obscurant, sectarian, snobbish, and anti-intellectual. Sunday School literature is little better.

But there are important signs that we are coming alive in respect to what we write. One vital area is church bulletins. Here the writer seems to be freer. It is almost as if he were selecting a group of friends to whom he was writing a personal letter from the bottom of his heart and from the best of his mind. I have been collecting some of these bulletins from everywhere, with their daring editorials and their lively ideas, thinking that I might someday devote an article to what they are saying. You would be encouraged.

Out of the mission field is coming a few journals that give evidence that the church of tomorrow is going to have a different literature. From South America, especially, we have evidence of men thinking new thoughts and entertaining new ideas. They seem to believe that we are morally obligated to be intelligent, and to speak and write like intelligent people.

Especially encouraging are the noble efforts of a rapidly growing Church of Christ publishing house in Austin, which is, on nearly all fronts, endeavoring to issue respectable reading material. Its news weekly is aware of our larger brotherhood of Christian Churches and Disciples of Christ, and its news items are reflections of maturity rather than cheap sectarianism. It has ventured to publish books that really speak to our time, and even to issue a multi-volumed commentary that comes to grips with the real problems of biblical studies. Its Sunday School literature has a new look, which seeks to be honest with the problems raised by science and technology and to deal with the social problems of our time.

That the publisher is on a perilous mission is evident enough. There are a few signs that sectarian pressures may be causing him to have second thoughts, but we hope he remains steadfast. The contribution he is making is incalculable. Our historians of tomorrow will recognize what he is doing now. It is indeed praiseworthy even if it goes unpraised.

As for his going unpraised, I might illustrate from an Oklahoma church newspaper that has come my way since beginning this article. The editor is alarmed over some of the Sunday School material published by the Austin firm, especially because of some remarks made about evolution. The material does not, of course, advocate evolution, but it simply makes no big deal of it as obscurant writers among us usually do. In short, the Oklahoma editor wants “the new Austin” to be as superficial and anti-intellectual as “the old Austin.” He thinks it a huge error for the new Austin to say: “Evolutionists are concerned with the ‘how’. Genesis tells about the ‘who’. The Bible does not tell how God created the world.”

For these terrible sins coming out of Austin, defiling the whole state of Oklahoma, the editor announces that he will henceforth accept no more advertisements from the Austin publisher, nor will he purchase any of the firm’s publications. Moreover he calls for a boycott. He calls on all his readers, congregations and bookstores included, to henceforth do no business at all with them. And he assures them that this would be courageous on their part. The truth is that the editor is himself a coward. He is afraid to think, afraid of exposure, and afraid of questions that he might not be able to answer with the same old shallow replies.

All this gives support to what Prof. Reagan dares to tell us elsewhere in this issue. It shows what we are up against. But as for ultimate victory I have no doubt. The signs that are beginning to appear are sure.

And so it is in my heart to praise the praiseworthy.—the Editor

He drew a circle that shut me out — Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout. But love and I had the wit to win: We drew a circle that took him in.                                —Edwin Markham