Christian Ethics Not Enough

WHAT is wrong with the world? Why are the nations in such a hopeless muddle? Why are countless millions so afraid of the nefarious power of communist dictatorship? Why are the people lovers of pleasure—sinful selfish pleasure—more than lovers of God? Why is civilization falling apart with no hope in sight of a better world to come? The British author, Fredrick A. Voigt, himself a member of the Church of England, but writing in the British Roman Catholic Magazine, The Month, says that the illnesses of the times are due to the fact that the Protestant world has adopted what he described as:

“Religion without God; Christianity without Christ; Christ without Antichrist; heaven without hell; works without faith; a God of love but not of wrath; a church that can bless but cannot curse. We believe that God, almighty and incarnate, is but a benevolent Spirit; that Satan does not exist; that Christ was the Author of the ethical code, but not the Godhead crucified. We profess to believe that he existed, for agnosticism is no longer the fashion. We believe that the Gospels must conform with our time and not our time with the Gospels. … All articles of our creed can be summed up in one phrase: ‘the Christian ethic.’ The Christian ethic is the Antichrist of the Western world. It is the most insidious and formidable corruption that ever afflicted that world.”

This is a remarkable statement, which in many respects is true, but from the standpoint of what the writer has in mind is as “antichrist” in its entirety as the writer claims for what he describes as the “Christian ethic.” But let us examine it from standpoint of its face value. It is true that throughout the Protestant world, the moral code, or what Mr. Voigt describes as the Christian ethic, has taken the place of doctrine and dogma. The creed of modernism is that it doesn’t make any difference what we believe as long as we live right. Barring a little stretching here and there to make it conform to the liberalism of conduct which is so prevalent in the world’s social structure today, modernists profess to accept the moral and ethical teachings of Christ. But they do not accept the Bible with respect to the great doctrines of the divine plan, such as the resurrection, the judgment day, the second coming of Christ, and his thousand-year reign.

True, there are exceptions to this. There are small groups of professing Christians who have not been brought under the spell of modernism. For the most part however these hold tenaciously, not to the true doctrines of the Bible, but to those dogmas which were formulated in the Dark Ages, such as eternal torture for the wicked; the literal destruction of the earth at Christ’s second coming, and in a very literal sense the “wrath” of God against all who do not agree with them. Although these do realize that there is much more to Christianity that ethical teachings, their misconceptions of the plan of God hinder them from knowing him as otherwise they might.

But there is a still smaller minority who have not succumbed to the modernistic and liberal viewpoint described by Mr. Voigt as the “Christian ethic.” These continue to rejoice in the simple and understandable teachings of the Word of God pertaining to the divine plan for the blessing of all the families of the earth. They not only believe the promises of God which give assurance of the second coming of Christ to establish the messianic kingdom of peace, but they accept the testimony of the prophecies which describe the peculiar characteristics of our day, and recognize it to be the time of Christ’s second presence, and that he is here destroying Satan’s world preparatory to blessing all the families of the earth through the administrative agencies of his kingdom. Those who are truly rejoicing in this understanding of the Bible are not saying that what they believe is unimportant.

Thus we find that while Mr. Voigt has made a good effort to point out the erroneous position of modern liberalism, the unfortunate part of it is that he recommends that which is equally injurious to take its place. For example, when he charges modernism with having “religion without God,” and “Christianity without Christ,” he is of course speaking of the Catholic God and the Catholic Christ, or perchance the Episcopal God and the Episcopal Christ. In either case he would substitute for liberalism a God of torment—not the loving and true God of the Bible. He would substitute the erroneous idea of a Christ which in reality is God, the third part of an unscriptural trinity.

Mr. Voigt speaks of Christ without Antichrist; but fails to realize that the very system of religion for which he is arguing is in fact the great Antichrist pointed out in the Word of God—the system that united with the state and thereby attempted to establish the kingdom of Christ contrary to the teachings of Christ and contrary to the divine plan for the return of Christ and his thousand-year reign at that time.

Mr. Voigt laments further that modernism has a heaven but not a hell. This is a misleading statement when viewed in the light of God’s Word. In Mr. Voigt’s mind it means that for all believers who are loyal to the church there awaits a heavenly reward, and that all others, as stated by the poet Whittier in describing the Dark-age view, “are doomed to eternal torture, and held in the way thereto.” This viewpoint is wholly unscriptural. The Bible does make it plain that there is a just punishment for all willful sinners against God’s laws, but that punishment is death, not eternal torment. Eternal life and eternal death are the alternatives set forth in the Bible.

For members of the true church of Christ—that is, those whom the Lord accepts as his own because of their individual faithfulness to him, and not because they belong to some particular denomination—eternal life on the divine, spiritual plane, is promised. They are to be with Christ, and will live and reign with him. For all others the opportunity will be offered, during the thousand years of Christ’s reign, to live on the earth forever as human beings. God created the earth for man, and according to the Bible he created man for the earth; and when the divine purpose in creating man is complete the entire human race, restored from death, will have the privilege of living here throughout eternity.

We can sympathize with Mr. Voigt in his lament that modernism has made such inroads among the adherents of denominational churches. But one of the reasons for this is the revolt against the God-dishonoring creeds of the Dark Ages. For this reason, it is unlikely that the trend away from creedal theology will be halted. As a matter of fact, this may well be the first step toward an understanding of the true God of the Bible and of his loving plan for the blessing of all the families of the earth. One must lose faith in his false gods before he can believe in the true God and appreciate his loving designs for his creatures.

The God whom we worship is represented by the things which we believe concerning him; and when one realizes that what he expected of his “god” is not working out, then he loses faith and is bewildered. Those who have believed that God wanted them to convert the world, for example, must now know that something is wrong. Not realizing that the fault was in their mistaken viewpoint of God’s will for his people they are confused. This does not mean that they are “lost” and will be tortured forever. It simply means that they are approaching the point in their experience when they will be ready and glad to accept the truth of the Bible with respect to the divine plan for men and nations—the divine plan of salvation centered in the redemptive work of Christ, and to be consummated during the thousand years of Christ’s reign. As an example of the bewilderment in which the modernist world finds itself today, note the following from an editorial appearing in The Christian Century:

“If man’s necessity is God’s opportunity, then the hour seems to have arrived for a historic display of divine initiative. Whether or when this takes place is of course not for us to determine. But we can contribute something by refusing any longer to pretend that we know the answer, by acknowledging humbly that we are in great trouble, by falling back on the Eternal in penitence and hope. We can contribute something more by joining in simple faith with others in like need to gain a wisdom not our own by pooling our admitted ignorance, by drawing upon the divine power which is made perfect only to those who are utterly convinced of their individual and collective weakness.”

The Christian Century editor who wrote this expression of admitted ignorance concerning God and the divine plan is a modernist. He gave up his belief in the god of the Dark Ages. To him the idea that if there is no place of torment there can be no heaven, became properly repulsive. He denounced the idea that the Roman Catholic Church, or any other humanly constituted religious organization has the sanction of the Creator to exercise authoritarian control over the consciences of men.

Rejecting these dogmas of the nominal church he sought refuge in what Mr. Voigt designates the Antichrist of “Christian ethics.” He doubtless reasoned that what was wrong with the churches, causing their failure to conquer the world, were their grotesque and conflicting creeds. He joined with millions of others in an effort to “convert” the world through the power of moral ethics. He doubtless believed that if the moral teaching of Christ, the great precepts of the Master’s Sermon on the Mount, could be brought to bear upon society through the channels of government and otherwise, we would have peace on earth and good will among men; and thus would the kingdom of God become a reality.

But now he knows better. Now he knows that more than the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus are needed to reform the world and cause the nations to love rather than hate one another. Vaguely he realizes that the only solution is divine intervention, but the only authority he can summon in support of his weak conviction is the old adage that man’s extremity is God’s opportunity. Realizing how great is man’s extremity today, he reasons that there may be a possibility that God will do something about it.

Thus through trial and failure the modernists are gradually being prepared to accept the real truth of the Word of God; namely, that there will be divine intervention, that this intervention will be manifested through the establishment of the messianic kingdom. True, probably the vast majority will not recognize this until the kingdom agencies are in actual operation, and the foretold blessings of God are flowing out to the people. But then they will be glad that divine power did intervene. They will be happier than ever to realize that the creeds of the Dark Ages did not represent the true God of the Bible, but they will also rejoice that the divine plan for the people embraces more than merely ethical teachings, that in addition, the opportunity will be given for all the families of the earth to accept the provision of life everlasting made for them through the shed blood of Jesus Christ; and that by accepting this provision and obeying the laws of the kingdom, they will live forever.

They will then learn that the will of God is indeed to be the supreme law of life; also that the divine will is not expressed through the Roman Church, nor through any other of the present denominational organizations of men, but through the divine Christ—Jesus, and associated with him, his faithful followers, who then shall have been raised from the dead and glorified with him as the spiritual rulers in the new world. Thus will God solve the problems of an unbelieving world, and it is our privilege now to tell the whole world these blessed tidings.

Church Union in Canada

TWENTY-FIVE years ago, on June 10, the United Church of Canada officially came into being. It was a union of Presbyterians, Methodists, and Congregationalists. At that time a magazine in Great Britain, The British Weekly observed that it was the “most important step in the history of Christendom for many centuries.” In an article appearing recently in The Christian Century, Mr. R.C. Chalmers explains and I quote, that “the call of God that brought the United Church of Canada into being twenty-five years ago—namely, to fulfill our Lord’s prayer ‘that they all may be one … that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me’—is still an urgent one. Man must believe if he is to be saved.”

It is probably safe to say that practically all the efforts being made throughout the world today to unite denominational churches have as their motive the hope that by the strength of numbers, influence, and finances which should result from union, the world can be impressed sufficiently to stem the rising tide of unbelief, and eventually to induce all to become believers. Since, therefore, the forming of the United Church of Canada was so important a step along the road of union, it is both interesting and revealing to observe just what has resulted from twenty-five years of effort through this pooling of the resources of three major denominations. Mr. Chalmers’ article gives us a fair appraisal of results. On the matter of increasing membership, he writes:

“We have grown with the years until at the close of 1949 our membership stood at 806,167. However, we are not increasing as rapidly as the Canadian population. Among French Canadians, who have a high birth rate, we are making little advance. We are winning a relatively small number of non-Anglo-Saxons. We are not reaching the economically less favored group in a manner that is commensurate with our responsibility. The danger facing the United Church is that of becoming a middle class communion.”

“We are not increasing as rapidly as the Canadian population”—this frank admission of failure should awaken the officials of the United Church of Canada to a realization of the fact that there is something radically wrong with their understanding of the Lord’s purpose for this age. And what is true of the efforts of the United Church of Canada is true of all churches, and in every country. The stark fact is that the population of the earth, even in professed Christian countries, is increasing faster than total church membership.

Professedly, as Mr. Chalmers points out, the United Church of Canada was formed in order to induce the world to believe. Presumably a believing world would be a morally upright world. Having failed largely in converting unbelievers, the church has therefore failed to hold back the upsurge of unrighteousness in Canadian life. On this point we quote further from Mr. Chalmers’ article:

“The United Church of Canada has made a splendid contribution to the moral and social life of Canada. It has been in the forefront of many movements that lead to the abundant life for all. But in spite of these efforts we must face the fact that on the moral front Canadian life has suffered a decline. Secular trends are gaining ground, one evidence of which is the increasing commercialization of the Lord’s Day. Alcoholism and the per capita consumption of alcoholic beverages have increased rapidly during the last decade. Gambling, divorce, juvenile delinquency and other evils have caused alarm among communal and national leaders, as well as in church. A stronger Christian witness on the moral front is an imperative in Canada today.”

It is still true that “in unity there is strength,” but the strength represented in the United Church of Canada has not been great enough to reverse the trend toward unrighteousness and unbelief that is sweeping over the whole world. However, instead of re-examining their viewpoint of what the Lord wants them to do the churches everywhere keep trying, hoping that eventually their efforts to convert the world will be crowned with success. With this thought in mind they use their failures as an excuse for appealing to the public for more help, financially and otherwise.

“To make the Gospel count in the world of tomorrow,” writes Mr. Chalmers, “we need more ministers.” “Also, we need more money.” “There must also be a revival of theological awareness,” he writes, “and of spiritual hunger.” He closes his article by saying, “The Lord hath done great things for us, whereof we are glad.” Perhaps he has, but when we consider the hope of the United Church of Canada to bring about the conversion of Canada, in the belief that this was what the Lord wanted done it would seem that he had failed them. And again we say that what is true in Canada is true all over the world. The denominational churches, either Catholic or Protestant, are not winning the world for Christ and for righteousness.

The United Church of Canada does not represent as complete a union of denominational interests as desired. Continuous efforts are being made toward merging the United Church with the Church of England in Canada. It is claimed that while negotiations toward this end have been productive of a larger measure of cordiality between these two groups, the chief difficulty in the way of organic union still remains. This difficulty is clearly expressed by Dr. Gordon Sisco, secretary of the General Council of the United Church. He says:

“It is no secret that standing in the way of past proposals … is the doctrine set forth by at least some Anglo-Catholics, that the authority and commission of the church reside in the episcopate alone and that therefore the church which fails to believe this truth, and to rely exclusively on its authority, is not a church.”

What Dr. Sisco refers to as the authority of the episcopate is otherwise known as the claim of apostolic succession. The Church of England in Canada, even as in Great Britain and elsewhere, claims that its priests and bishops get their authority as servants in the church through an unbroken line of succession all the way back to the original twelve apostles appointed by Jesus. To them this is a dogma of fundamental importance. As they see it, there is no salvation outside of the church, and unless their priests officiate in a congregation, it is not a church, hence all but Episcopalians are outside of God’s provision of salvation.

However, the Roman Catholic Church makes the same claim, and this is also a strong church in Canada. So if we consider the Canadian church field as a fair sample of what holds true throughout the world—and it is—it means that even though the United Church, the Church of England, and the Catholic Church, should finally succeed in bringing all Canadians into one or another of their folds, we would still have each of these large groups of people in the unhappy position of theoretically claiming that the other groups were not Christians at all.

In view of these conflicting claims, is it any wonder that Canada is not converted? Is it any wonder that the people of every country are placing less and less confidence in the churches? The wonder is that more people are not caused to inquire why this situation has developed, and where along the line the churches in general left the path of truth with respect to the plans and purposes of God; why the efforts of centuries to convert the world have continued to result in failure, leaving the world today in the grip of atheism and unrighteousness, and why this ungodly world is fearful lest in its selfishness it will destroy itself in a raging fury of hate.

No wonder so many millions of sincere church members are beginning to question the claims of Christianity. But there is no need to doubt that the real purpose of God in the earth will be accomplished. The great mistake made by all the denominational churches has been in losing sight of the fact that God has set aside a thousand years in his plan during which the world will be reconciled to him, and that his will prior thereto has been their preparation for this great future work. God’s plan is that the world will be’ converted by the church. Not by the church in the flesh, however; not by the United Church of Canada; not the Church of England; not the Roman Catholic Church; not the Lutheran Church; not by any of the denominational churches, either in Canada or elsewhere in the world, but by the church which will be united with Christ in heavenly glory in the “first resurrection” to “live and reign with him a thousand years.”—Rev. 20:5

The New Testament clearly reveals that the disciples of Christ were not sent into the world at that time to convert everybody to Christianity, and that such a program represented the final effort of God to save the people. James explains the real purpose of all divinely authorized missionary efforts of this age saying that “God at the first did visit the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name.” (Acts 15:14) He explains that “after this,” that is, after the people for the Lord’s name are called out of the world through the power of the Gospel, the Lord was to return and that then the “residue of men” might seek after the Lord.

Soon after the apostles died the nominal church lost sight of the glorious hope of Christ’s return and of the promises that then he would set up his kingdom to rule and bless the world, and that all his true followers throughout this age—those who were willing to suffer and die with him—would then be raised from the dead to live and reign with him. Instead of continuing to cherish this “blessed hope” the church nominal began to court the favor of the world. Instead of waiting for Christ to return and the establishment of his real kingdom in power and great glory, they united with earthly rulers, forming the church-state systems of Europe.

And the basic concept of church-state unionism corrupted the thinking of practically the whole professed Christian world. It robbed church people of the glorious hope that Christ would return to bring about the consummation of the divine plan in the blessing of all the families of the earth, and caused all to adopt the philosophy that whatever God accomplishes in the world is to be done through the feeble efforts of frail and imperfect human beings. So today, look where we will, we find no other viewpoint than this erroneous one which was adopted when the church forgot the great purpose of God as represented in the hundreds of kingdom promises recorded in both the Old and New Testaments.

Some are trying one method, some are trying another. In America the church-state idea is tabooed by Protestants, but these same Protestants work feverishly to bring in the kingdom by influencing lawmakers, locally and nationally, to enact laws which they think will establish righteousness. “If we can do this and if we can do that,” they say, then Christianity will finally triumph. This is one of the great fundamental errors of Christendom today. Man has taken upon himself the task of accomplishing the divine purpose, and of course is failing. Not until we recognize, as the prophet declares, that “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this,” will we be prepared to understand the meaning of present world events, and be able to rejoice in what the Bible assures us will be the real world of tomorrow, that it will be a world wherein will dwell righteousness, because the kingdom of Christ will manifest itself in power and great glory for the reconciling of the people to God and for the blessing of all the families of the earth.

| Home Page | Table of Contents |