The Role of the Clergy in Today’s Crisis

Are they builders of faith? Can you accept their leadership?

OVER a year ago Secretary-General U Thant of the United Nations declared that the world was still faced with “the political differences between great powers, still the awful implications of nuclear armament, still the intolerable inequality in the distribution among the people of the world of the benefits of scientific and technological development and still, indeed, man’s inhumanity to man.” Since that time the world situation has deteriorated even farther. Crime and violence are on the upsurge. We are truly living in critical times.

Faced with these worsening conditions, men and women of today need strong assurance that there is a God, one who has a sympathetic feeling for their sufferings, one who has specific arrangements in hand for the relief and blessing of worthy creatures. People today need to be reminded constantly of the hope that Bible prophecy inspires and of the excellent moral precepts contained in God’s written Word. But to whom shall they look for this positive and authoritative message?

Why not to the clergy, you may ask, since they are said to be dedicated to the service of God? Multitudes of people look upon them as occupying a position parallel to that of the priests of Israel, of whom the Bible declares at Malachi 2:7: “The lips of a priest are the ones that should keep knowledge, and the law is what people should seek from his mouth.” Of course, the knowledge of God and of his law is what is spoken about here.

Men who take up the clerical profession receive many material returns for their services. They are exempt from hard, toilsome work with their hands. Their shelter, their clothing and ample provision for sustenance are sure. Even a number of the luxuries of life are thrown in as payment for their services. They are thus free to give themselves exclusively to spiritual matters, to inculcating in young and old the fine principles of the written Word of God. They have time to study the Bible so as to heed the inspired entreaty: “Guard what is laid up in trust with you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’”​—1 Tim. 6:20.

Thus many persons expect that the clergy would prove to be champions of “the faith that was once for all time delivered to the holy ones,” as described by Jude at Jude verse 3 of his inspired letter. Are such expectations being realized in this time of crisis when selfish, atheistic views are rampant? Are the clergy defending the authority of the Bible?

CLERGY PERFORMANCE

Was it a professed atheist who said: “The Bible is a book just like others, and a lovely book. But one should not believe it”? No, that was reported of a Danish clergyman, the Dean of Holmen, according to the Danish newspaper Kalundborg Folkeblad of August 5, 1966. And was it an avowed anti-Semite who declared: “It is essential that our people be fed with food convenient for them and not with poison. There is so much spiritual junk in the Old Testament”? No, for these words were reportedly uttered by Church of England rector J. C. Wansey.

Catholic clergyman David Stanley is on record as claiming: “No reputable Catholic theologian today would argue that the earliest man was a preternaturally gifted human being who fell from grace through a sinful decision. If you accept evolution, Adam . . . was only a primate. The myth of a fall doesn’t fit at all.” And Catholic theologian Edouard Boné of Belgium bluntly states: “As an anthropologist the words ‘Adam’ and ‘Eve’ have no relevance for me.”​—Newsweek, August 22, 1966.

Concerning the birth of Jesus from the virgin Mary, clergyman E. W. Harrison of the Anglican Church in Canada impatiently declares: “It’s completely unimportant. I don’t know whether it’s a historical fact and I don’t care. . . . I can’t waste my time with it.” (Maclean’s Magazine, August 6, 1966) Then there is the position adopted by Professor L. G. Geering, principal of Knox Theological Hall, Dunedin, New Zealand. He claims that the resurrection accounts in the Gospels are not to be regarded as historically factual. To him the story of the empty tomb was a legendary, as were the physical appearances of Christ to his disciples after the resurrection. His views, as set out in an article in the Presbyterian magazine Outlook, call into question the authority of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

In the field of morals a strange laxity has appeared in the views of many clergymen. For example, not an agnostic sociologist but clergyman Robert W. Wood of England unburdens himself of this commendation of homosexuality: “We need more love in the world, and if these unions [of homosexuals] generate love, that’s all to the good.” And Catholic priest Lazure, director of the school of social sciences at Ottawa University, Canada, is of the opinion that “couples should be allowed to have trial marriages, including sexual relations. Such trial marriages should be legalized by society and the churches. And the minimum age of couples should be 18.”

Many more testimonies could be adduced to show the effect of the type of theological training received by clergymen in modern colleges and seminaries. It is admitted, indeed, that more attention is given to sociology, comparative religion and theology than to the Bible, the basic handbook of Christianity. Nor can it be claimed that these foregoing samples are but a few “outlaw” individuals. Do we hear of any general outcry by other clergymen against such anti-Bible views? When did you last hear of clergymen being ousted because of antichristian teachings?

CHRIST OR THE CLERGY

Each professed Christian must determine for himself whether he will follow the guidance of Christ and his early disciples or that of a clergyman who is not ‘with Christ’ in his view of God’s Word and its teachings. That these above-mentioned views are in fact opposed to those of Christ Jesus can be readily established. Instead of condescendingly referring to the Bible as being merely “good literature,” Jesus spoke of it as the reliable and true Word of God.​—John 17:17.

The apostle Paul did not advise people not to believe the Bible, nor did he characterize the Hebrew Scriptures as “poison” or “spiritual junk.” Instead, he referred to them as “the holy writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through the faith in connection with Christ Jesus.” He then went on to emphasize that “all Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness.” (2 Tim. 3:15-17) Clergymen who consider that their modern philosophies are far ahead of the Bible teaching do not agree with the apostle Paul.

Those clergymen, Catholic or Protestant or any other, who take sides with evolutionists to poke fun at the Bible and discredit its account of man’s origin have surely parted company with Christ and his apostles. Did not God’s own Son give full credence to the written Word, including the book of Genesis? If you are in doubt, why not read and compare his remarks at Mark 10:6-8 with what is written at Genesis 1:27 and Ge 2:24? The apostle Paul preferred to adhere to Jesus’ teaching and transmit it to others just as he heard it. In fact he warned: “Look out: perhaps there may be someone who will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ.”​—Col. 2:8.

Examine the entire Ro fifth chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans, and note the clarity of his argument. He believed in the authenticity of the Genesis record, and he accepted its account of man’s fall into sin and his urgent need of a redeemer. Compare his view on such matters with the modernist teaching of clergymen. Better still, compare his credentials as a “chosen vessel” of the Lord Jesus Christ with the credentials of clergymen who have graduated from a course in comparative theology and who deny the inspired Word of God.​—Acts 9:15.

Here we have instances of clergymen treating with disdain the Bible’s account of the miraculous birth and the miraculous resurrection of Christ Jesus. Because they cannot understand, because they have not been able to fathom the wisdom and wonder-working power of God, because these events do not conform to the findings of material science, they refuse to accept the message of the inspired Scriptures. Yet, inconsistently, they have been willing to profess belief in and teach other mysteries that are both incomprehensible and unscriptural, such as their doctrine of the “Trinity.”

Peter, an apostle of Jesus, was in a much better position to testify to the truth of the resurrection than modern-day clergymen, for he was an eyewitness. Note his testimony as recorded at Acts 10:40, 41: “God raised this One up on the third day and granted him to become manifest, not to all the people, but to witnesses appointed beforehand by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after his rising from the dead.”

Clergymen who condone and encourage fornication and homosexuality are speaking directly contrary to those who were with Jesus and heard his teaching firsthand. Gospel writer Matthew, for example, reports Jesus as saying: “Out of the heart come wicked reasonings, murders, adulteries, fornications, thieveries, false testimonies, blasphemies. These are the things defiling a man.” (Matt. 15:19, 20) And in full harmony with Jesus’ view the apostle Paul emphatically declares: “Do not be misled [by clergymen or anyone else]. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.”​—1 Cor. 6:9, 10.

Yet, despite the Bible’s unequivocal message, a committee of clergymen, educators and doctors established by the British Council of Churches recently concluded that no hard and fast rules on sex and immorality could be applied. It declared that not all sexual relations outside of marriage can be condemned as being wrong and that fornication was occasionally permissible. Which guide are you going to follow? The infallible Word of God, or the word of imperfect and uninspired men who may well have some selfish motive in promulgating their views?

LIFESAVING COURSE

The teaching you accept and countenance on all such vital matters has much to do with your future. Will it be one of life everlasting? Then you must heed Jesus’ warning: “If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matt. 15:14) Surely it is important for each one to consider, not merely the qualifications of his religious teacher, but also the nature of the organizational teaching that is being transmitted through such teacher. Is it not evident that this is not a matter of but one clergyman’s going wrong? It is the whole curriculum of seminaries that turn out graduates who are either ignorant of or contemptuous of the Bible.

One would think that clergymen who disagree with Christianity’s basic textbook, the Bible, should themselves get the point so well expressed by a spokesman for the National Association of Presbyterian Laymen in New Zealand, as reported in the Auckland Star of September 12, 1966: “A more honest attitude on preaching a stage of unbelief on vital issues would have been to withdraw from Christian service.” However, it appears that those men have no intention of voluntarily relinquishing a professional job or the salary that goes with it.

They are, in fact, priests of a vague religion, having no authoritative basis, but only their own say-so. Their role in these critical days is one, not of faith-building but of faith-shattering. Under inspiration Bible writer Jude warned followers of Christ of the danger to which they are exposed through false teachers: “These are the rocks hidden below water in your love feasts while they feast with you, shepherds that feed themselves without fear; waterless clouds carried this way and that by winds.”​—Jude 12.

What you need in this time of world crisis are friends who will engage with you in honest discussion of the Bible. Clergymen like the aforementioned Dean of Holmen do not believe the Bible and even charge that “Jehovah’s witnesses believe it [the Bible], and therefore they are not Christians.” Why not brush aside such twisted reasoning and investigate the Witnesses? Surely, like them, you are anxious to conform your life to the requirements of God’s written Word so as to gain the salvation promised all those who will ‘follow closely the steps of Christ’!​—1 Pet. 2:21.