August - Sept ember 19 67
Subscription :
$3.00 pe r ye ar
Vol. XVI II , l' os . 8-9
ON PROPHECY AND TECHNOCRACY
by
Fr.
Paul
Ver ghes e
(Adap t ed f r om an addre ss de l i ve r ed t o t he Pr ogram Boar d of the Di vis ion of
Overs e a s Mini strie s of t h e Nat i ona l Counci l of t he Chur ches of Chr is t i n
t h e U. S .A ., Mar ch 10, 1966)
PART 1*
PROPHECY ,
TECHNOCRACY
AND
SECU LARI ZATI ON
Prophecy i s of t en a f firmed to be the authe nti c al l y b ibl ic al di mens i on of al l
Chr i s t ian t ho ught and act ion . It i s said to cons is t i n a r ad i c al cr i t ic ism of one ' s
own people , chur ch and nation. Though t h i s may be a l onely voc at i on , t h e pr ophe t
s pe aks and ac ts vi c ar i ousl y on behalf of t he whole people . He disce r ns the s i gn s of
t he comin g Ki ngdom, and by re di scovering the r ele vanc e of t he Word o f God i n the past
t o our t i me when t he fu ture i s al ready pres e nt, con nec ts t he pr e sent to the fut ure as
well as to t he pa s t .
I "woul d lik e t o quali fy t h is notion of pr ophe cy by l ooking at i t s Le ani ng in the
Ol d and New Test ame nt s.
Pr ophe cy i n the Ol d Test ament
I n t h e Ol d Tes tame nt, i t i s wel l known now t h at the pr ophet 's function was not
to f or etell t h e f utur e, but pr imar i ly t o bring the word of God to hi s people . But i t
i s a mis un der s tanding of pr oph ecy e i t h e r i n t he Old Te s t amen t or in the New Tes t ament
to say th at the pr ophe t s t udi es the pr es ent s i t u at i on or t h e fu t ure pos s i b i l i t i e s ,
and t he n br ings t he pa s t Word of God to be ar on that s i t u at i on . The f un damen t al di s­
t i nct ion of the pr ophe t i s t h at h e i s i n dire ct cont ac t with God, and t h e Word i s
~ i ve n to h i m, not f r om t h e anci en t Scr ipt ures , but imme diat ely.
The nabi of t he Old
Te s t ffi~e nt i s not an exege te of Scr ipt u re , but one who h as stood in t he counsels of
God and spe aks di r e ct l y i n the li ght of what he h as s e en and he ar d. Pr oph e cy i s di s ­
*Par t II foll ows i n t h e Oct ob er i s sue.
Sin gle copie s of thi s i s sue of the Oc cas i ona l Bulletin : 35¢. Or der s shoul d be ad­
dre s s ed : Mis s i onary Rese arch Li brary, P.O . Box 590 , ~l a nh a t t a nvi ll e Sta t ion , New Yor k,
I':ew York 100 27
2
tin ctly an a cti vity of t h e Holy Spi r it , who come s upon a man or a woman, po s ses s e s
him or h er , tr ansporting the posses sed to a tr ans cendent r ealm whe re h e " s e e s" or
"h e ar s " t he or i gi na l Word of God . The prophe t then sp eaks i t out wi t h ec s tat i c pow­
er.
I n t he boo k of Number s , l fo r e xampl e , we s ee s ev enty elders cho s en by t he people
gat h e r ed around the t abe rnacle , and t he Spi r it of God f alli ng on t he m. Ther e t hey
prophesy wi t ho ut ceas ing . Two who did not come t o the t abern acle, but were in th e
c amp wi t h t h e pe ople, also prophesy, ri ght t h e re in t he camp. It i s an explos ive in­
~r e s s i o n of power int o ordi na ry men t r an sformi ng t hem at l ea s t t empor ar i ly .
As
Samue l said t o Saul : "The Spirit of Yahweh sh al l fall up on Thee , you sh all be made a
prophet with t he m, even int o a di f fe re nt man." 2 Tho s e who are int ere s t ed i n s t udyi ng
further the conne cti on between the Sp i r i t of God and pr ophe cy ca n ex ami ne th e many
p as s ag e s whe re t h is i s ev i dent i n t he Old Te s t amen t (e .g . I Samuel 19:19- 24 , Numbers
2 1; : 2 , J oel 3: 1 -2 , Hos e a 9 :7 ) . The Spi ri t actua l ly t ranspor t s t h e pos ses s ed pe r son
into a tr anscen den t r e alm wh ere th e f uture i s p res ent . He does not get hi s message
f r om study e ithe r of t h e Sc r iptures or of t he actua l s i t uat ion . Elijah and Eze ch i el
wer e bot h be l ieved to h ave be en phy sic ally t r anspor ted out o f t h i s wor ld by t he Spi r ­
it . El ishah "inh er it s" t he Spi r it from Elij ah and t hus becomes a prophet .
Prophe cy i s a t ransce ndent phenomenon , wh ich we see but r arely in our t ime . We
h ave domesticated prophecy and made it me re radi c al soc i al and pol it i cal cr it ic i sm.
The prophet in t he Sc r iptur es is t he mouthpie ce of God.3 Hi s lip s h ave to be
cle ansed be fo re he can speak . 4 Too many h ave presumed to be prophets , and th e Old
Tes twlent i s full of their con demnation. 5 The au thentic pro phet i s al ways one who
has h ad a transcendent expe rience and vis ion . 6 He speaks not only by word , but also
by act ion . But the act ion i s always symbol ic or parabol ic , not effe ctive s ocial ac ­
tion. 7 It is pr escr i bed by God and not t hou ght up by t he prophet .
The word of the prophet was no t merely pre dict ive or exho rtative, but effica ­
cious , Vii t h almo s t "magic" power . The symbol and the word of the authent ic prophet
so on o e come hi s tori cal real ity . The symbol is an ac t ed parable, whi ch t he prophet
su b s e qu errt .Ly i nt erpret s.
Only i n a few ca ses did t h e prophet wr ite down h is prophecy . The r e cording was
u s ually l eft to an amanuens i s or a sofer (scr ibe) , t hu s prob ably gi ving rise t o the
nu cleus of what ha s come to be th e Old Test ament. Baru ch, J eremiah 's sc r ibe, i s t h e
tj~ ica l case .
The nabi explode s with t he wo rd; the so fe r, so to speak , picks up the
p i ece s and t r i es to put it t ogether. Prophecy doe s not come in neat, di s cursive ,
wel l -documented l ogic al arguments , but bu rsts wi t h a poetic t hu nde r t hat h a s i t s own
rhytrrn and l ogi c.
? r oph e cy in the New Te s t ament
The New Testament speaks of al l Old Te s t amen t propheci es a s fi ndi ng the ir f ul ­
f illment i n Christ. The se tt ing f orth of the will of God f or th e i mmedi at e si t uati on
of the people of I sr ael i s no l onger t he f ocus. Ol d Testament pr ophe cy f or the New
Te st ame nt wr i t ers i s primari ly predict ive and mess i anic . S Our Lord himself fr e quent­
l y dr aws att ention t o the Ol d Test amen t p r ed ict ions t hat are being f ulfilled in hi s
life and ministry . The Apostles recognize Pentecost as the f ulfi l lme nt of the proph­
ecy of Joel.
The New Test ame nt i t s elf i s full of predictive prophe ci es, pr i mar i l y r el ating to
t he l a st days .9 As a matte r of f a ct, J esus would appear to ca l l him self a prophe t . 10
But the New Te s t ame nt as a who le do es not r e gard h im as a prophe t , nor doe s he want
to be r e garded as su ch. l l The J erusalem crowds r egarde d him as a prophet , 12 but t hey
3
were wr ong , s ay s t he Evange Li.s t .13 The disc iples on t he r oad t o Emm aus r CI/2rc] c:r him
as h avi ng been "d emon str ate d t o be a prophet •.. befo r e God . "l!/ But t h at was be f'ore
their ey es h ad bee n ope ned . The Samar i t an woman at t h e wel l "s aw" th at J e s us was IJ
pr ophet,1 5 bu t obviously , the Evan el i s t tel l s u s , t he wor. an d i d not f ully unde r s t and
who Je sus was .
We see t ha t wh i l e ther e i s a mea sur e of cont i nu i t y between the pr ophe t s and
J c'su s , to r e ga r d him a s one of the prophet s i s to misunde r s ta nd him. The di s t inct ion
li e s pr e ci s ely i n the n atur e of t he ope ra t ion of the Sp i r i t i n the Old Tes t ame nt
prophet s and i n Chri st. In the Ol d 'I'e s t ame rrt the Spir i t came ann werrt , J t ook hold
of a man, spoke or act ed t hrough him, and then l eft him. A pr oph e t like J er emi.ah ot
s ome times s poke t he Word of God and at ot h er s banal nons e nse ab out. hims elf and. hi s
s ad pl ight . But J es us i s co nce i ved in the womb of Mar y by t he Hol y Spi r i t and 1
the Spirit i nto the wi l de r nes s f or t esti n[, and at bapt i sm the Sp i r i t comes t o r e st
on him pe r ma ne nt l y . 16 Thi s per manent. ab i di ng of t he Spi r it in Chr i s t i s wh at Jr,ake s
him t he He s s iah (th e an oint ed by the S;l i r i t) and not one of t h e many ano i nt.eo
pr i e s t s , pr of he ts and ki ngs.
He t hen p romi ses hi s di s c i ple s to s en d t h em t he S!Ji r i t .17 He pr om is ed t h at he
would be with t hem. Thi s prophecy was fu l f i l l ed at Perrt.e cos t , when " al l Co l ' S pe o ­
.nd i r. ~ r,e d i a t c; pl e " became prophet s f or the Holy Spi r it was pour ed out on all fl e sh.
l y t hey s poke t he Word of God wi t h bol dnes s .
I n t h i s wi de r s e nse al l Chr i stians sh are i n t he prophe t i c min i s t r y by v i rtu ~ of
t he Holy Sp i r i t gr ant ed to t h e chur ch , wh i ch i s the t emple of t h e Holy Spi r i t .
The New Tes t amen t , howev er , spe aks of a speci al cha r isma of _r ophe cy ~ i ven t c
spec i f i c members of the Body of Chr i st and not to other s. Obvious l y i t w?s a vo c a ­
ti on of hi gh honor , se con d onl y to t hat of t h e Apo st.Le s . St . Paul gi ve s at l e a st
three di f f erent l i s t s of the ic:if't s of the Spi r i t : Roman s 12: 6f f , I Cor i.rrth i ans
1 2: 28ff and p he s i an s 4 :10f f . "
­
Rom ans
1. Pr ophe cy
2 . Di akoni a
3. Tea ching
c:
Cons ol i ng
5 . Mana gement & ch ar i t y
6 . Lea der ship
7 . Act s of compas s i on
I
I Cor i nthians 12: 28ff
Eph e s i ans 4 : 10f f
1. Apos t l e s
2 . Pr ophet s
3. Evangel i s t s
4. Pa s t or s & t e acher s
There i s ye t anot he r li s t in I Cor i nth ians 12: 9ff, wh i ch is s l ightl y mo r e com­
pl ic at ed , but t he re also prophecy occur s in t h e lis t. I n I Corinthians 1 2: 2 ~3 , pr oph ­
e cy i s gi ven s e cond pla ce of ho nor ne xt t o that of the Apos t l e s . But nowhe r e i s i t
s ai d t h at pr ophe cy i s t h e cent r al fu nct i on of t he chu rch . On the cont ra r y, St . au.I
cl e ar l y asks : "Ar e al l apo s t le s ? Ar e al l pr ophe ts ? Ar e al l tea che rs? .. " ThE' i n ­
tent ion i s cl e ar . Prophe cy i s not f or all . He s ay s prophe cy is a superi or gi f t , out
even super i or to th at i s "love," whi ch surpa s ses al l othe r gi f t s and wi thout . wh i ch
t he oth er gi f t s are nothing. 18 This i s t he gi f t wh ich i s t o be s ou ght by al l -- not
pr ophecy .
4
It woul d be misle ading then to sugge st, as Pr of. Are nd Th. v an Leeuwen h as done,
that pr ophe cy i s t he ce ntral function of t he chur ch . An interpret ati on of the mis ­
s i on of the chur ch center ing on the concept of pr ophe cy i s bou nd to lead us i nto se­
r ious di ff i cult i e s .
But more s er i ous , it must be pointed out that t he re are ve ry few in st an ce s in
the New Tes t ament where pr oph e cy me ans to speak to the nation in terms of social or
pol i t i c al cr i t i ci sm. I n Reve lation 10 , the s e er i s asked t o e at up "the little book"
whi ch is i n the h and of the an gel. 1 9 In hi s mout h i t was sweet as ho ney , but i n hi s
be l ly it be c ame bitter. Aft er war ds he was told : "I t i s necessary that you pr ophe sy
to vari ed peoples and r a ces, li ngui sti c gr oups and kings ." Even here, the meani ng
c annot be too eas i l y as sumed to be that of s oci al , political or e conomic crit ic ism .
Of course the prophet s would speak aga inst injust ice and i dola t r y ; but their pr i mar y
fun ct ion would app e ar to be to speak about t he Ki ng of ki ngs, the Lor d of al l , Je sus
Chr ist .
In t he New Te s t ament , prophecy i s a di s t inct office of a ch ar i smat ic nature .
There we r e prophet s and prophetes ses in I s r ael , other than John the Bapt i s t , i n t h e
time of Chr i st . St . Luke ment i ons Anne the proph et e ss , Zach ar i ah t he f at her of John
t he Bapt i s t , and Simeo n t he aged . 20 The i r fun ct ion was cer t ai nl y not to speak to t he
people about soc ial just i ce, but r ather to wi t ness dire ctl y to t he person of Jesus
Chri st, though the prophetic empha s is on right eou sn e s s is not ab s ent in the ir words .
In t he book of Act s we h e ar of a sl i ghtly diff er ent genr e of prophe t s and proph ­
etesses . Philip the Evangelist, one of the seven deacon s, had f our vir gin daughters
who prophes ied at Caesarea . 21 The r e was another prophet in the s ame Ch r ist i an commu­
nity c al l ed Aga bus , a r e s ident of Judea . He spe aks in the manner of the t ypi ca l Old
Tes t ament pr ophe t , takin g Paul' s belt , binding h is own hands and f eet and prophesy i ng
the forthcom ing i mpri s onment of Pau l at Jeru salem.
In Mat thew 11: 51 , Cai aph a s , be ing t h e High Pr iest that ye ar , prophes i ed abo ut
the nece s sity f or Chri st to d i e on behal f of the people wi t hout h imself under standing
wh at h e was say ing . Agabus f or et old the famine that was soon to h it the empire . 22
I n the s e i nstan ce s the New Te s t ament emphas i s f all s heav i ly on s e e i ng the future
and fo r e tel l in it, through the Hol y Spi r it . It would app e ar th at the Sp irit puts
them i n touch with the future, or makes t hem transcend time in order to see eve nts not
ye t i n t ime . They wer e certai nl y not speaking to the nat ion about justice ; nor was
any of them in t h es e i ns t ances "a radical crit ic of hi s own pe opl e , of t h e ele ct ed
nation , of church and Chr ist i ani ty," as Dr. van Leeuwen as s er t s .
The central funct ion of the New Testament prophet i s be st i ndi c a t ed in St .
Pau l 's d i scus sion of t he office i n I Cor i nt hi ans 12-14. The church i n Cor i nt h s e emed
to ha ve had a ver itabl e sur f e i t of the mo re phenomenal char ismat a lik e pr oph ecy and
s pe aki ng i n tongues . But t he y could not decide wh i ch of the se two was the high e r
gi f t , so they wrot e to Pau l f or exp ert judgment . We fi nd hi s repl y in ch apte rs 1 2­
14. He fir s t s ay s al l gifts are for the whole body and not for each i ndividual mem­
ber . The highe r and t he l ower gift s are equal l y necessary f or the church . The h igh­
est 6i f t , indi spen sabl e to all , i s l ove (13) . But pr ophe cy i s higher t ha n sp e aki ng
i n tongue s (14 :5) . Proph e cy is a spe c i al gift e ar nes t l y to be sought. The prophet
speak s to men i n intelli gible langu age (14 : 3) . He bu i lds up, eXhorts, s t r engt h ens .
He bu ilds up the church (14 :4 ) , not himsel f or the nation . Paul h i ms elf spoke to the
Corinth ians r evel at i on , knowl ed ge , pr ophe cy and teaching . Prophecy i s a higher gift
t han to ngue s, be cau s e it builds up the chu r ch (14 : 13) . Prophecy i s not f or non­
Chr istians , but prec isely for the fa ithful (1 4: 22 ), though there i s no obje ct ion to
the i nt erested unb el i ever ' s listening to it (14 : 24) .
5
Thi s view of prophecy as inte nded to st r en gt hen and encour age and bu i ld up the
communi ty of the f aithful i s conf i rmed als o by the book of Acts . I n t he chu rch at
Antioch we find a whole gr oup of r en owned prophets : Barn abas , Simeon t he Negro,
Lucius an d Man aen ( f r iend of Herod ) and Sau l , J u de and Si las . These were men who ,
di re ctly under t he power of the Holy Spi r i t , bu i lt up t he Chr istian communi ty through
their teach ing . 2 3 They were not soc ial cr it ics .
Proph e cy be longs to t he ed i f icat i on of the chur ch . It is an i mp ort ant t ask of
the chu rch , but not the main poi nt of i ts mi ssion in the mo de rn world.
Theocr ac y, Ont oc r a cy and Techn ocra cy
We need ne xt t o exa mine the by now f amou s tr i l ogy of t he o cracy , onto cr acy and
t e chn o cr a cy in van Leeuwen' s Chr is t ianity i n Wor ld Hi s t or y .
Firs t a wor d abou t the pre cis e me aning of the thre e t r ms : t h eo- cr a cy, onto ­
cr a cy and t e chn o- cra cy.
(a ) Theo cr ac y . Van Leeuwen int e r pr et s th i s as the "re i gn of the Lor d." He fi r-a s
only one ex ample of t his in hi s t or y -- I sr ael. A~n i t i s not i n t he pat t er n of t h e
ac tual society in anc ient I sr ael, bu t in t he wi t ness of the pr oph et s t o the Lor d' s
reign , th at h e find s t h is t heoc racy . I n ot h er words, a the ocr ac y never existed; it
wa s onl y witnessed to a s an es chatolo gical re ality. The mai n emphas is i n t h i s p r oph ­
e t i c wi t ne ss was t he att ack on the Temple i n Je r u salem : And t he Chr is t ian wi t ness t o
t he ocr ac y t oda y h as pre sumabl y t o be al so i n terms of an attack on the church and on
ontology:
( b) Ontocracy . Thi s i s van Le eu wen' s new wo rd . I t denotes a gene r al patt er n of
k i ngsh ip ex is t i ng in al l anc ient soc iet ies , wh i ch s aw throne and al t ar as par al l e l
mani fe s tat ions of t he d ivine Cosmos . The kingship is s ac r ed , as is the Temple. He
develops thi s con cept at con s i de r able l en gth in hi s Chr i st i an ity i n Wo r ld Hi story.
~· ! o s t of hi s materi al s for i t come fr om that gr e at Ea st e r n Europe an who i s now teach ­
ing in thi s cou ntr y, Mi rcea Eli ade. El iade, with an enc yc lopaed i c knowledge of hurr uD
r el i gion fr om Shamanism i n Si beria t o t he "animi sm" of the Bant u s and the Papu an s ,
f ind s many elements common to al l r eligion s. He find s t hat for pr i mi t i ve men in Eu­
r ope or Asi a , Ame r i c a or Af r i ca, t he whole of cre at ion was r eplet e with the life of
God, wi t h en ergy , with Man a, with elan vi t al . ( Thi s is now in s ome quali fie d sens e
accepted al s o by modern phys i cs . ) For primitive man, the all, or t he Cosmos , was sa ­
cred. Thi s " sa cred" was specially manife s t ed at many po int s i n hi s life: in the way
h e con s t r u ct ed hi s temple or hi s res iden ce , i n th e way he re spe cted the k i ng or the
tribal ch ie f , and i n t he way h e coo ked, at e , drank , sl ep t , marr ied, initi at ed,
f OUght, di ed and s o on .
Fr om t hes e ge neral conclus i ons of Eli ade b as ed on wi de-r an ging evidence , van
Le euwen jumps to t h e nex t st ep to as sume th at all an ci ent civili za tion s were ont o­
cr at i c , or r uled by the Divi ne Be i ng of t he Co smos , by a cosmi c total ity r epre sented
by t hrone and al t ar .
(c ) Te chnocr a cy. Thi s van Le euwen de f i ne s as "the modern appe rcep t i on of a man-m ade
so c i e ty and a man-made un i ver s e . " Note wel l t hat it i s only an "app er ception, " not
ye t an ex i s t i ng r e ali t y. Only "ontocr ac y" ha s re ally existed in fle sh and blood .
Both tech no cracy and t heo cr acy are conc eptual r eali tie s.
Now the r el ation betwee n t h e s e i s that ( a) i s aga i nst (b) and ( c) , (b) i s
a ga i ns t ( a ) and (c ) , and ( c) i s aga i nst (a) and (b). Yet I do not know of a s i ngle
human soci et y t h at was not at onc e al l thre e -- theocrati c , ontocra t ic and t echno ­
6
cr atic. Even the most "primitive" Afr ican or Asi an r eli gion s wi tnessed to a " su­
preme" God. ( The anth r opo logist Father Smi t h t s works, Pr of. I dowu' s Olodumar e , Pr o f.
Danquah's The Akan Doct rine of God , ar e pa r t i al documenta tion f or this s tatement . )
I t is common knowl edge among Semiti c anthropolo gi sts t h at Isr ael i t self was bo t h
t heocratic and ontocratic , in the se nse t ha t thron e and al tar were b ot h sac red . Be ­
lie f i n a sacred ki ngship or wor ship in a sa cred t empl e i s in no way i n comp atible
wi th t h eocracy . Even t he propheti c wi t ness can ne ver be shown t o h ave so ught to de ­
sac r al i ze eithe r the ki ngship or t he t emple .
All human so ciet i es ha ve h ad a measur e of te chno cracy. Where t h e re was fir e, or
met als, or f armi ng, or the wheel, t he re was already techno logy . No soc iety ever f elt
tha t man cou ld live wi t ho ut do ing some work. No so ciet y ever bel i eved that man had
nothing to do with shap ing hi s soc ie ty . In our time techn ology h as undergone a sud ­
den boom, and as i n al l boom t imes we t end to exagge rate the centr ality of the bOOD1­
Lng c at egory .
I find t h at the s e di stin ction s are not helpful if t hey are me ant to cha racter iz e
socie t i es ; they may be helpful a s diffe rent ways i n whi ch man r e sponds to the re ality
th at surrounds him.
There i s a "de- onto cratiz ation" t aki ng pl ace i n our time.
th at l ate r whe n we comme nt on secular i za t ion .
We sha l l deal with
Secul ar iz at i on as Pr oce s s and Task
Secular izat ion can be vi ewed eithe r as a proce s s or as a task . I t is ce r ta i nly
not an ideology or a system of thought. Se cular ism, on the other h and, is an i de olo­
gy . We need not dwel l on i deologi cal secular ism here, s i nce most of us agree i n con ­
demnin g it.
As a pro cess , secular izat i on can be de f i ned as a ch ange t aking pl ace i n man' s
under st andi ng of , and r e spo ns e t o, the ul t imate r e aliti e s of life. Old re l i gi ous be ­
li ef s are i n cr e asingly coming under questi on. To the ext ent t o whi ch these reli giou s
beliefs are abandoned , and man becomes more and more s el f - r el i ant , beh av i or also
change s . As a pr ocess , secular izat io n i s at bes t ambiguous, depending on the new as­
swnpti on s on the na t ure of r e ali t y and of human ex istenc e on the b as i s of wh ich man
nov! operates .
As a t a sk, secularizat ion h as been defined i n two ways , one pos i t i ve an d the
other negative. Friedri ch Gogarte n's pos i t i ve de fin i t ion of secul ar iza t i on a s "the
hi stori ci zation of hurnan ex is tence " sho uld be i n gener al ac cept able t o all Chris­
ti ans, though Christi ans would se e hi story it s elf and t he refor e hi s t ori ci zation in a
di f ferent per spe ct ive from the non-Chri sti an' s.
The ne gative definition was of fe red at a conf erence on t h e s ubje ct at the Ecu­
meni cal Ins titut e in Bossey i n 19 59. This de f i ni t ion s ee s secular i zati on as the li b­
erat i on of more and mor e areas of human thought and life fr om the domina nce of reli­
gi ous and me taphy sic al or ontologi cal domin ation, and the attempt to live in t h ese
are as i n the t erms wh ich they al one offer.
This i s a l egitimate reaction of deep - rooted human fr e edom t o a pro ce s s wh ich
began with t he Byzant i ne Gr ae co - Roman Empire in the 4th and 5t h ce nt ur i es . It s ori­
gi ns go back f urther t o t he Apol ogi sts of the 2nd and 3r d ce nt ur ies .
7
Eu s eb i u s t he church h istor ian already sai d about t he IWlperor Cons t ant i ne in A.D.
336 :
" Inves t ed as h e is with a sembl ance of heavenly sovere i gnty , he di ­
re ct s his ga ze abo ve, and fr ame s hi s earthly government accord ing to t he
pat t e r n of t hat Divine ori ginal , f eeling strength in i t s conformity to t he
monar chy of God." (Ora t ion on t he Tri cenn ali a of Constantin e, 3:5 - 7) 2LI
Thi s view of a t heocrat i c-ontoc rat ic k i ngsh ip was furthe r de ve loped in t he By­
zant ine I~ pi r e and f ound i t s clin ax i n the development of t h e state church i n t h e
rei gn of Theodosiu s t h e Gre at (d . 395) . The Const itut ion of t he Church of t he Emp i r e
was de cr e ed uy IJrpe rial authority . A who le "hier ar chy " of counc i ls and of f ic ials
,·.' er e appoi nt ed , on a paral lel wi t h t hat of the state .
111eodos i us was t he fi r s t Christ ian r uler to effect ively deny t he p r i nci pl e of
re l i gious libert y. The pe rse cu ted Chr ist ians ' cry unde r t he h eat he n Roman empire ,
re l i gio non cogi pot e st, 25 was conveniently f orgot ten . Neither Chr is t ian here s y nor
pagan i sm was al lowed any l e gal s t at u s. The Reformation and t he Frenc h Revol ut ion
were at ~a se viol ent pr ot e st s against thi s decree of Theodosius centur ies be fo re .
The Theodos i an Code fo r eoade al l normal pr ivi le ges to pagans -- i n cl uding admi ss i on
t o t he army or appo i ntme nt to c ivi l posts -- exactly what i s happ ening t o Chr i stian s
tod~ y in certain Ea s t European count r ies .
Mani ch e ans and Mont an is ts h ad their prop ­
ert ies conf iscated and wer e sent t o exile. Pag an t empl es were destroyed and t he ir
prope rty plundered by t h e Chri stian cr owds . Respectable , cult ivated , re f ined pagans
like Hyp ati a of Al ex andri a, a gr e at ph i losopher and f ri end of t he provi nc ial governor
Orestes , was wayla id , murdered wi t h t i l es in a chu rch, and torn to pieces by "Chri s­
t .i an s . " 26
I n t he West , Donatists and Novat ians met wi t h s imi lar oppre ssion at t he hands of
the b i shops and k ings . Arcadiu s and Hono r i us sa id in t he ir ed ic t of 407 re garding
Western her eti cs:
"... It i s our wil l th at t hey be depr ived of e ve ry grant or success ion
f rom whatever t itle de r ived . In add it ion, we do not l eave t o anyone con­
victed of t h is crime t he r ight of givi ng, buy in a , se l l i ng or. f i nal ly of
lnaking a contract . The pr osecut i on sh al l cont i nue t ill dea th .... Let hi s
l as t will and t e s t amen t be inval id, whether he l e ave prope rty by testament,
codi cil, epistle, or by any so rt of wi l l , i f ever h e ha s been conv icted o f
be i ng a Manichean , Phrygian, or Prisc i l l ian ist ••.. "2 7
Al l t h is was based on a concept of jus d ivinum , a divi ne l aw h and ed over t o man
f r om he aven , t he l aw by wh ich God admi nisters hi s un ivers e . I t r emained t o t he medi ­
eval papacy t o pe r f ect t he doct r i ne of the t wo kingdoms and t he t wo swords , and to
c arr y r el igi ous domin at i on of human life to t he po int of denying human f r e edom at i t s
der ths an d t he reby imperiling f aith i t s elf.
The Ref ormat i on was t hus an outbur st of human fr eedom, but one t ha t did not go
deep enough . It r emained to t he Fr ench Revolut ion t o do a thorou gh job of overth r ow­
i n c t he Theodos ian emp ire i n t he We s t.
That was the true coll ap se of the anc ien r e gime, "a sort of atomic bomb of wh ich
t he fa l l - out is st i l l at work, " as Prof . Al ec Vidler says . 28 The chu rch was an i nt e­
gral par t of the system t hat col lapsed . 1789 i s t he begi nn ing of the re ign of s ecu­
l ari zati on.
The Fr en ch church that t umbled to t he gr ound in t he 1790' s was far f rom irrele­
8
va nt t o t he po l it i c al life of the nat i on. As a matter of f act , t he b ishop s , li ke
many modern t heol og ians, wer e mo re occupied wi th po l itics t han wi t h rel igion : someone
h as sai d that t hey administered more provinces t han s acr amen t s. The rur al priest
knew more abou t agr iculture t han about fa ith .
Rel igion was f ar from superstitious or t radition- bou nd . I t was quite rational .
The modern sc ientific kno wledge of t he encyclopaed ia , Volta i re ' s b i t in~ sat ire s on
tradit ional rel i gion , and Rousseau 's r omanti c de i sm, rathe r t ha n scho lbstic theology
or the Bible , const ituted t he educated layman' s mental diet , as i t did th at of the
aff luent pr iest .
The l ower cl e r gy were poo r, wh i le bishops and city priest s l i ved in l uxury. The
chu rch was neither p i et ist ic , nor irrelevant, nor ev en t otal ly corrupt . It was of
cour s e l uk ewar m, sp i r itua l ly t ep id .
~fue n t he Revol ution came, the church was f irst ne ither al ar med nor t hre ate ned .
Indeed th e clergy , t h e Fir s t Es t ate , j oine d f or ce s with the Third Es t at e (the f i nan­
c ial, commercial and profes s ional classes ) to ove rthrow t h e holde r s of power , t he
fe uda l ar i stocra cy .
The f i rst "Civil Constitut ion of the Cl e rgy " (July 1790) adopted by t he Fr en ch
Con s t i t ue nt Assembly s til l reco gnized t he Fr en ch church as part of the new na tion.
Theodos iu s was not yet blown to b its ; i n f a ct he was re instated i n a cur i ous way .
The dioce ses now becam e ident ical i n ext en t wi th the civil depart ments or count r i es .
The b ishop was given a di o ces an counci l, without wh ich h e could not ac t , el e ct ed by
al l t he ci t izens of the de pa r t men t (borough or county ) .
I f t h is 1790 con s t i t ut io n could h ave held it s own in France, t he prese nt process
of secular ization would h ave h ad a total ly di fferent hi st ory. As a mat ter of f act
t h is const itut ion was continuou s wi th t he Theodosi an con st itutio n , and a de f inite i m­
pr ovement on i t in t hat i t was f ully de mocratic . The bishop too was el e ct ed . He ha d
to i nfo r m the Pope t h at he ha d be en elect ed, but not seek conf i rmat i on . In f act, t he
authority of t h e Pope over t he Gal lican chu rch had been courteousl y and qui etly abro­
gat ed .
The King, Lou is XVI , a con sc ient ious Cat hol i c , approved t he civi l con st itut ion
of t he cler gy without kn ow ing tha t the Pope was t o condemn it. The Pope 's conde mna­
t i on of the cl er gy const itution was to draw forth the i r e of t he revol ut ionaries and
the dissent of h alf the clergy . The di ss ent i ng cler gy r efus ed to take the oa th of
al legian ce to the constitution; nearly al l the bishops belonged to t hi s gr oup .
As the Revolution grew mo re violent and the r eign of terror f ollowed , clergy who
refu sed the oa th (nonj uror s ) wer e r e ga r ded as counte r -re vol ut ion ar ie s st and i ng f or
t he an c i en re gime . Many were massacred . Others f l ed the country . Ther e was a strong
r eact i on aga inst t he chu r ch , le ading to the cult of the Godde s s of Reason . Juro rs
and nonjurors al ike we r e unde r attack . The church was dis establ ished . The magnifi ­
cent t h eoc r at i c empire which Theodo siu s bu i lt at the end of the 4th century at Istan ­
bul was mor t ally wounded in Par is at t he ripe ag e of 1400.
An attempt was mad e by some Catho l ic l i be r al s to wed re ligion and l iber ty, but
the off ic i al chur ch f ound t h em i ncomp atibl e. And men chose liber t y.
Even in 1848 , the new Revolutionary gove rnment was f riendly to t h e bi shops .
Liberty be gged fo r reconci l iation with the chu r ch , bu t was rudely re je ct ed .
And l i ber t y without f aith i nvar i abl y l e ads t o ch aos .
Spu r ned by the chur ch ,
9
li b e rty t u r n ed to an a r ch y . Me n bec ame t i r e d with l i be rty and Longed f or d ict ator ­
s h i p . And whe n i t c ame with loui s Nap ol eon , th e ch ur ch i ncluding i t s lib e r al wing
s a i d i n e f fec t t o men: "M, d id we not s ay, liberty i s no good? "
The once - li be r al Catho l ic Veui l lot Kel comed the d ictatorsh ip a nd t he c ons e qu e nt
los s of all lib erti e s with th e ve r y "piet i s tic" wor d s:
" Pr ov ide d one i s no t p reve nt e d f r om prov ing one s elf a Good so n , a go od
hus ban d , a good f athe r, a good c i ti zen, a good Cat h ol i c , we a r e no t co n ­
ce r ned ab ou t any o t h er lib erti es ."
Me n had to choo s e now 1J h le e n t he chu r ch and l iber t y . Fr e e dom, f o r int elle ctu­
als at l e a s t , coul d fr om now on b a s s o c i.at.e d onl y wi t 1l ant.i cLe .ri c a.l.i.sm, l a i ci s m,
s e cu l a r ism , and at h e i s t i c r at io nal i sm. Th e Cat h ol i c Cbur ch , dru r with it s powe r ,
f 'L una the g au n t l e t in t h e f a c e of l i b ert y , with the not o r i ou s Syll a bu s of Er r or s of
Dec ember 1861J, whe re i r Pop e Piu IX , \'Ij t tl the i n t r a n si ge n e o f t he arch -con s e v at i ve ,
condemned r ationali sm a nd. s oci al i sm, r el i g iou s l i be r t y and f re edom o f the p r e s s , com­
munism a nd separat ion o f church and s t at e .
.e d eni ed publi cly that "the oman Pon ­
tiff can and oug h t to r e con cil e hills el f and r e a ch agr e ement with progr e s s , li be r ali sm
an d mode r n c ivi li z a t io n . "2 9 It t oo k t h e Cathol i c Chu r ch a h undr ed yea r s t o r e edy
t he gr a nd error o f p r onounc i ng a Sy .l l ab u s o f Err or s , Some of t he p i- on ou ncemerrt s o f
t he Second Vatican Cou nci l h ave iJ ip.l i.c it.Ly a c cep t ed wh at h as b e e n p revious ly co n­
d emned as er ror .
c
Mu ch h a s h app e n ed i n th at hu n r ed ye a r s , whi ch expla i n s the curren t Chris t ia n
e nthu s i a sm about s e cul a r i z a t i on .
;d e
s h all only ment i o n h e r e i n qu i ck s ho r -thand fi v e d i f f e re n t e Lemerrt. s i n t h i s
pe r i od .
(1)
The Fi r s t Va't i c an Counc i l, ar d the developme nt o f a f ortre s s - and- j ud ge ment al i t y
ir: t he Catho l i c Chu rch b e si eg ed by s t ro r g se cu lar f orce s; s e eki ng t o find s ecur ity i n
the mi ci s t o f bew i ldermen t by r e t .rea t.Ln g behi nd t he wal ls , with s u e r i or omnisc i ence
c ond emni.ng e r r ors, an d i n Dostoi evsk ian l angua ge, bambooz l ing t h e b el i ev e r "li th mira ­
cle an d majesty .
( 2 ) The p rogress of s c i e nc e a nd the qu e st ioni ng o f sc i e nt i sl. soon aft e r t h e t u rn o f
t.h c c ent u r y ; the t reme ndous fill i p gi ve n t o sc i e n ce and t e chnology by t he t "IO world
wars ; e lectr icity, nucle a r powe r and space resea rch ; t he communic at io n explos i on .
(:3 ) Th e Soviet Revo lut ion , wh e re a nat ion t ake s ove r the c au se o f commun i sm, an d d e ­
clares pe rmane nt war ag a i n s t al l the c opi tal ist ic powe r s o f t he wor ld . The r ep lace­
me nt o f t he int elle ct ual by t he revol u t i ona r y in po li t ic al thinking.
(4) The r i s e of an ex is te nt ial is t philo s ophy in Euro e , r efle cting Eur op e ' s break
with t r adi t i on al onto lo:::y and l:let aph y s i cs , e v en wi t h h istory a nd commu nity , t o e s ­
rou s e a sub j e ct i ve d e c i s i on t o li ve br avel y vd th absu rd i t y .
(5 ) The d e ve l opme nt o f a Germano - .Ame ri c an the ology in oppos it ion to t h e "d ogma s, "
"v alu e s " and " f e elin g " of l ate 1 th a nd e a.r l y 20t h ceLt u ry t heology ; t h e neo- prophe t ­
i c moveme nt in the n eo - Orthodox t he ology - - L e . Rei nhold Niebuhr in the ba ck ground
of Bar t h and Br inn e r , Niebuh r gi ve s a n ew l e a s e of lif e t o Rau s ch e nbu s ch t.eup er e d b y
r eal is m; Bul t mann , i n r e a ction t o Bar t h , b r i n . s back p ie t i s t i c indiv i duali s m t h r ou gh
d emyth ol ogi z a t i on and t h e u nde r'p.l.ayi ng of hi s t ory, 'd i t h " sub j e ct i ve d e ci s i on " 2 S the
fi n al c r iter i on . Bonh o e f f e r , al s o i n r e a ct i on t o Bar t h , and also a Lu ther an piet i s t
r e a c t i n g a ga i n st t rad it ional pi eti s m, s eek s a p l a ce t o st a c1 in the mi d st o f Na z i op ­
10
pression . Barth and Barmen do not su ffi ce . Esc ap e into Switze r land is cowar dic e .
Sever e se l f -disc i pline , a bas i c German tra i t , proposed i n Cost of Di sc iplesh ip ; frus ­
tra ted i n jail; discipl ine helps to ke ep mental s ani t y ; but d i sgu sted with the
chur ch , with f ormal wo r sh i p , and with the fa l s e secur ity of the p iet is t who li ved i!~
two wor lds without inte grat ing them. Reads Suber's not es about " Conversi on fr om Re ­
li gion." Put s out a few feele rs about "religionless Chr istianity" f or a "world come
of age . " Di es without be ing ab l e to elaborate .
Post - Bultmannien s an d New- Bonhoe f fer ian s pi ck up the f ew s ente nc e s and de velop
ne w theology of t he secular . I t quickl y be comes popular amo ng a smal l e lite wh o f i nd
i t libe r ati ng i n the se ns e of absolving th errl from any compul s i on to pr ay or to go t o
chur ch or to obse r ve convent i on al mo r al ity; at t he s ame t i me tha t it gi v e s a relev ant
appr oa ch to the modern world, i t al so provide s a program whi ch f it s i n more with t h e
depleted resour ces of \<lestern Prote stant spi r i t ual ity . It " indi gen i zes the go s pel "
i n a We ster n world wh i ch i s fa s t los i ng i t s int e riori t y and sens e of t r ans ce nd ne e .
r
But secul arization as a co nc ept wi l l s i mply not do for our posit ive pro !ram i n
the mi s s ion of the church . I t i s in cont inu i ty onl y wi th the mi s s ionar y tr ad i t ion of
a spe cial br an ch of Cal vi ni sm, whi ch ha s wrought much havoc in Asia an d Af r i ca , and
ha s made evang el i z at i on ne arl y impos sible i n our co nt i ne nts .
I t s f i r st emph as is in miss i on was on pre dest inat ion . Al l you h ad to do wa s to
s en d evangel i st s to the dark une vangelized corne rs of t he wor l d . Thos e who s e na me s
a re wr itten i n the book of li f e wi l l be s aved . I t does not matte r wheth e r t he mi s ­
s i on ar y has any kn owled ge of cul t ur al an t hropology or of h i story . He ne ed not ev~ ..
h ave ve r y much of an education . The ele ct are s i mpl y wai t i ng to h e ar t he gospe l .
That ki nd of eva ngeli sm ha s burned out As i a and Afr i c a and made Chr ist ianity
su b j ect t o ri di cul e.
Then c ame the gre at Tambaram mis s ionary conference, wher e aga in a dry C a l v i n i s r~
tri umphed in the p er s on and t hought of my late l ament ed f r iend Hendrik Kraemer . Onl y
those who li ve in thes e culture s can real i ze t he damage Kra emerian t hinking has do ,.8
to t he cause of evan gelism in our count r i es . Ab s ol ut e dis cont inu ity wa s aff i rmen be ­
twe en the go s pel an d non-Chri sti an re l igions . Van Le euwen comes i n the same Dutch
Cal vi ni s t tradit ion .
I do not want to mi nce wo r ds . Thi s secul ar i za t i on i deology of some Chr i st ians
seems to u s a den i al of t he very foundat ion of the gos pel , and an affront to our d ig­
ni ty a s Asi an and Af'r Lc an Chr i st ian s . We Chr isti an s i n Asi a and Af r ic a wish to t ake
s e r i ous a ccount of se culari z at ion as a pr o ce ss with whi ch we h ave to come t o terrr:s .
We will gl adly a c cept t he pos it i on of Gogar t en that the chur ch has to be brought i r.t o
l i ne wi t h contemporary h i story i n every ge ner at i on . We wi l l also be in t he forefro nt
of tho se who we l come se cul ar iz a t i on as a way i n which old superst i t ions in Chr is ti an­
i t y an d i n other reli gions are fin ally ov er thrown .
But we sh al l be wa t chf ul about t hi s ide a th at God want.s a techno cr at i c , domi n(Jc r­
i nc, We stern civil izat ion , rathe r t han hi s chur ch , t o be t h e bearer of h is s av i ng
power i n t he world . Perhaps because s ome of us ha ve l on g h istorical memor i e s we ho ~ e
to be not too na i ve l y open to s u ch i de a s. The l a st Cru sade is s t i l l on .
11
Foo t not e s
1.
Iumbe rs XI : ;.. 4ff .
.
1 Samu el 10 : 6.
3 . 1 Kil gS 18: 12, I I Ki ngs 2 : 16, Ezec hie l 3 : 12,14, 23- 24 .
)
I sa iah 6 :6- 7 .
5. J eremiah 23 : 28f f .
6. I s ai ah 5: 1-7 ; Je remia h 1:11-1 5; Amos 8 : 1 - 3 ; Ezech ie l 37 : 1- 14 .
7 . I Kings 11: 30- 32, 12 : 21 , 22 : 10-23 ; J eremi ah 13 :1-7 , 8- 11 ; 18:1 - 6; 19:1 -13,
27 : 2f f , etc .
See e . g . Luke 4 : 16- a , 24 :25-27 ; 24 : l1l~ - 4 7 . Al so Joh n 1: 45ff , Mt . 1 : 2 ~ ; 2 :6 , 1 '; ,
17- 10, 23 e t.c . ; Act s 3 : 24 , 10: lj3 ; Romans 1: 2f f , pr acti cally the whole of He ­
b r ews , I Pet e r 1:10- 12 , etc .
9 · E . g.
10.
r~ .
13, II The s s . 1- 2 , II Pet e r 1:19, Revelati on 22 : 1- 19 .
Mt . 1 3: 57 i s not co nclus i ve . See howeve r Luke 13 : 33 . I t would seem t hat J e su s
ide nti f ies hims el f with "t hat rophet " predicted uy Mo s e s .
11 . Mar k 6 : 15; Mt. 16: 14 ff .
L: .
:'~b tth e·w
13.
Jvia t t hew 16: 46 .
1 )--1.
Luke 2); : 19 .
16 :11; , c'l : L.6 , Mark 6 : 1 5 , Luke 7 :16 ; 9 :8 ; John 6 : 14 ; 7 :40 .
1 5 . John 4 :1" .
See also John 9 : 17 .
16 . ;·iat t hew 3 : 16 , Ivla r k 1 :10, Luke 3: :22 , John 1 : 32 .
17 .
Luke 24:49, J ohn .
I Cor i nt h i ans 1 3 : 1 f f.
1) .
Revelat ion 10 :8ff.
-':' 0 .
Luke 2 :36 ; 1 : 67ff; 2 : 25f f.
A
t s 21 : 9f f.
Act s 11 : 27 .
Act s 13 :1 , 1 5: 32ff .
Engl i sh t r an slation i n J. Stevenson, A New Euseb i us, S . P .C .K., 1960, p . 39?
25. Reli 6 i on cannot be enfo r ced .
Socrat es , Hi st ori a Ecc les ia st ica , VI I : 15 (Mi gne 67 : 768 ) .
27 .
Cited i n Codex Theodo s i anus XVI 5 :40 (A.D . 407 ) .
The Church i n an Age of Revolution, Penguin (Pel ican Books ) , 1961 .
29 . Quoted by Vidler , op cit . , p . 1 51 .