Today is seeing thousands of churches across the nation marking the 440th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. The song of the day will be “A Mighty Fortress is our God,” the great hymn of the 16th century reformer, Martin Luther. It must be noted, however, that the revolt touched off against the Roman Catholic Church of that day is no longer the central theme of the observance. The lasting principles, though, are still in action. One of New York City’s leading Episcopal clergymen, the Rev. Dr. James Pike, says the word “Protestant” would be a negative and not a particularly honorable term if the occasion were considered merely the recollection of a time way back in history when Protestants broke with Rome. Dr. Pike adds that a truly Protestant church is not one that can look back to a Reformation, but rather one that recognized its need of reformation today. And, this reporter might add, few thinking people will be likely to disagree with that.
_______
Not the least of the many festivities in many places scheduled today is one which is not officially a part of the Protestant observance. This is the second annual NATO Naval Chaplain’s Conference being held in the United States. It includes chaplains of Catholic, Protestant, Anglican, and Orthodox faiths. Serving in Eastern pulpits as guest preachers will be 40 Navy chaplains from 14 countries having membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
_______
A church world service committee was told recently that critical repercussions are likely unless there is strong support for the United Nations relief efforts among Arab refugees. An internationally renowned churchman, Dr. Tracy Strong, said the whole Middle East situation could worsen dangerously unless the United Nations’ Relief and Works Agency is permitted to continue its food and distribution program among the more than 900,000 Arab refugees. Dr. Strong pointed out that the United States has pledged 70 percent of the money for a projected $23 million U.N. fund for Arab relief. Britain has pledged 20 percent and the other nations 10 percent. But Dr. Strong noted that a lag in payments by other nations might hold up the entire program since Congress has made U.S. payments contingent upon those of the other countries.
_______
Conviction was expressed this past week that a new kind of missionary is needed to fulfill the requirements of a new era in missionary work. The first Indian to be consecrated bishop of an Evangelical Lutheran Church in India, Dr. Rajah Manikam, made the pronouncement upon his installation as this year’s Harry Emerson Fosdick Visiting Professor at Union Theological Seminary in New York. He declared that the French and Russian revolutions are pale in comparison with the changes going on today in Asia and Africa. Never before, he said, have so many millions of people taken part in such a rapid and radical social upheaval. He called it a revolution of the masses, who are demanding political independence, economic justice, social equality, and religious motivation of life. Practically extinct, he declared, is the missionary of a previous generation who was a superintendent, a director, or a boss. He said the day has now dawned for the missionary who is a friend, a philosopher, and guide of a young church. This new type of missionary, he added, must be a man who is willing to get behind the cart and push it along rather than pull it from the front.
_______
One of the curious things about the mystics and revelators is that they claim to receive information from God that is superior to ordinary knowledge. They claim that this information is ineffable and indescribable. Then they write many books and make many speeches describing the indescribable. Does this make sense?
———
One point seems to have been overlooked in the prolonged discussion of the Little Rock debacle. Was it proper for the president to go over the head of the federal court and [?] with a governor who was violating a court order?
———
Some of you have taken issue with the opposition expressed on this program to censorship by self-appointed or officially appointed board of censors made up of lay people who pass upon whether literature offered for sale is obscene. This reporter has never advocated obscenity. On the contrary, he has opposed it, but has insisted that determination of what is and is not obscene was a matter for the courts to determine, and not for a bunch of neighborhood Madam Grundys who probably know little of what it means other than their own prejudiced definition. Comes now a report that the Rev. Irving R. Murray, chairman of the Pittsburgh Chapter of the ACLU, took issue recently with the widespread notion that so-called obscene literature fosters juvenile delinquency. He pointed to a study completed not long ago by the Colorado legislature showing that literature, decent or indecent, is without effect on juvenile delinquents, practically none of whom read anything. He went on to call upon the legislature to reject bills dealing with alleged obscene literature and to leave it to the home, school, and church to nurture wholesome taste and moral attitudes in the young.
———
Already the United States Bureau of the Census is preparing for its decennial enumeration of the population as required by the Constitution. Reports indicate that this time the bureau is planning to include a number of questions inquiring into the religious affiliations of the people. Now the nature of this reporter’s work is such that he feels keenly the need for accurate and complete data on this subject, data that does not exist anywhere. But he feels even more keenly that it is no business of government to inquire into the religious beliefs of the people. He personally, were it not for the potential evils that easily could result from such questioning, have no objection to replying to such questions. But the First Amendment makes it clear that religion is none of government’s business. As the law now stands, refusal to answer any question of a census taker is punishable by fine or imprisonment, but even if the law were changed to make response voluntary, there would still remain a violation of civil liberties. Even a factual inquiry, when made by a government official, might for some persons under some circumstances be an infringement upon freedom of religion. Again, the mere assembling of information about religious beliefs would aid some or all religious bodies and thus breach the constitutional wall of separation of church and state, for that Constitution clearly states that “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” If, then, you believe in this separation, it might be well for you to let the Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C., know about it. Also, write your congressman and let him know, for bureaus are peculiarly sensitive to congressional attitudes.
_______
And while on the subject of government, separation of church and state, etc., it is pertinent to point out that a Navy court martial last month convicted a young Seventh Day Adventist in Hawaii of “willful disobedience” for refusing to stand watch on Saturdays, his denomination’s Sabbath. The sailor maintains, quite logically, that his constitutional right of freedom of religion was violated.
_____
One of the essential elements of religion, any religion, it would seem, is to make practice coincide with precept insofar as possible. American business insists upon its belief in free enterprise (a term, incidentally, that never has been, is not, and never will be accurate or realistic). Nevertheless, business asserts its belief in democracy and free competition. Yet it has no faith in either. Sponsors turn pale when a bobbysoxer registers dislike of a program, and business trembles at the notion that any idea should appear on screen or be heard on the air that is in competition with any other idea. Only this week, for example, a sponsor is reported to have dropped a noted performer who has as a guest star another equally famous name. The trouble was that this guest appeared on another network for a sponsor who also sold watches. Out of this lack of faith in competition and in the practice of democracy, what does the public get on the air and screen? Mostly stupid soap operas, loud noise (miscalled “music”), inane continuity, neutral themes, and still more neutral plots and characters, whose time is severely limited by the lengthening commercials that try to impress upon the public the idea that this product is the newest, best, and only worthwhile product of its kind. How can those whose sole entertainment is to watch and listen to such piffle as an escape from reality improve themselves if they think of nothing but such bosh? On the contrary, how can they go on looking and listening if they do think? For then the discrepancy between practice and precept will become so apparent they probably will lose interest. Is not a matter of morality involved here?
_______
As emphasized here form time to time, any ideas expressed are put forth for consideration, not necessarily in the expectation, or even the desire, that all of you will agree with them. Indeed, if you did agree with all of them, I would consider the program a failure. What brought this all on is the comment by one of you that the Bible says “Judge not that ye be not judged,” and goes on to suggest that in one of my broadcasts I had indulged in judgment. That is a fine and welcome comment. It shows at least that you were listening and thinking.
My only reply is that the Bible is a large anthology. It contains many curious things, some wise and some foolish. Survival and progress of the race depends on judgment. In writing to me you passed judgment. He who is devoid of judgment is unable to maintain himself in a society and must be institutionalized. I am, like many students, intolerant of error. One can be tolerant of people and yet combat their ideas. I would defend the right to Billy Graham, for example, to preach his doctrines. Yet to me his message is ludicrously over-simplified and I would insist that we do not live in the kind of world he describes. Tolerance does not mean lack of disagreement. It doesn’t mean a “don’t care” attitude. It doesn’t mean everyone is right. It certainly doesn’t mean seeming to agree when you don’t. It doesn’t mean being a hypocrite. Tolerance means willingness to examine honestly evidence from all sources, looking hopefully for new truth. It does not mean embracing propositions that have small or no evidence to support them. In this process, judgment must constantly be exercised if one is to reach even tentatively intelligent conclusions.
_______
Today marks the beginning of the fourth year of this program. The temptation was great to fill the time today with reminiscences of the high points of the past three years. However, instead, I should like to use this last minute to express my appreciation to the owners and employees of radio station WJHL who have made their facilities and assistance available to me for the program. They have never told me what to say or what not to say. At times, I am sure that some of my materials have not coincided with their own beliefs, but it is testimony to their belief in democracy and free competition of ideas that they have permitted me to go on saying those things. I appreciate this liberal attitude deeply. Also, I wish to thank you who have listened to the programs and hope that you have not felt that it was listening time wasted. If the program has made you think, examine your own tenets and practices with a view of improving upon them, this reporter’s time will have been well spent, for that is what he most hoped for.