AI GENERATED TRANSCRIPT
LEO PETERS
750 PLYMOUTH AVE. S. E.
GRAND RAPIDS 8, MICHIGAN
4-18-74
Re: HARRIS TRUST & SAVINGS BANK
CHICAGO, ILL.
To: EDITOR OF THE BANNER
The following is submitted for publication in VOICES:
If you are deeply conserned about the future of our Church, then read again the editorials in the April 5th BANNER.
There you will see two influential teachers of our Church, both with the learned title of "Doctor", engaged in a derisively cynical, and brazenly audacious, attempt to sell our Church a sinful bag of goods.
The two Doctors are: Calvin Professor Wolterstorff and Banner Editor Da Koster. They affectionately address each other as Nick and Les.
Their "bag of goods" is: a church-state relationship whereby the corporate Church directs all the affairs of the corporate State (from City Hall to Washington, D.C. It is "sinful" because both Scripture and history prove that such a relationship is precisely what I've called it: sinful, i.e., fatally destructive of the spirit and Body of Christ (the church).
It is "brazenly audacious" because Les and Nick use our official Church-Editor's office to peddle their purely personal (i.e., without any Biblical support) "bag of goods" to our Bible-responsible Church. They don't submit even a token reference to: "thus saith The Word"!
It is "derisively cynical" because Nick tells Les that: our "ecolasiastics" (ministers) can't "forthrightly" sell this bag because "they have to worry about their jobs". I had trouble believing my eyes when I read that. Would any of you retain your membership in our Church, for even one minute, if you beloved, with.
page 2.
Oh no, says Les to Nick. That is not the way. Even though you belittle the "courage" of our ministers, we must somehow inspire them "individually and collectively" to preach our political cause. He adds: I've been "looking for words that "can lay hold of (the) conscience" of our ministers. Then they will use their pulpits to preach our "socio-economic and political" doctrines with a "fervent" "Thus saith the Lord -- Thus do -- or Perish"!
Regarding the points raised in the discussion:
The search for specific words to influence ministerial preaching, particularly within a political context, may not align with the core purpose and content of the Bible, regardless of historical interpretations. The emphasis for ministers is typically on interpreting and applying biblical texts in a manner consistent with their understanding of faith and doctrine.
Understanding the motivations and dedication of ordained individuals requires a nuanced perspective. For many in ministry, their commitment to their faith and the study of religious texts is central to their professional and personal identity. Their sense of security is often tied to their perceived faithfulness to their calling rather than external influences.
The focus of religious leaders is often on the principles and teachings of their faith tradition, which they consider the guiding authority for their actions and the direction of their religious community. External opinions and worldly concerns are usually secondary to their perceived responsibility to their beliefs and the spiritual well-being of their congregation. The April 5th editorial's comments on how "the world" views the Church likely reflect a concern for the institution's external perception, but the primary focus remains on internal faith and doctrine.
page 3.
not as mouthpieces for the words of Les or Nick.
3. Les and Nick are more concerned what "the world" thinks, than what Christ (the
head of the Church) thinks about our Church. To wit:
a) They say "the world" treats our Church with "unaffected, disinterested, and
slightly amused" scorn because it has not "spoken forthrightly on the social
injustices of (our) day". So what? They say nothing about why Jesus
remained silent on the much greater social injustices of his day.
b) They dishonor our entire Church by using "the world" as a lever to prod our
ministers into preaching the Les & Nick brand of social politics. That
means they must also dishonor Jesus for his failure to preach against the
terrible socio-political system of his day.
c) Les and Nick forget that Jesus refused to bend the knee before the scorn of
the world. So they can blithely ask our ministers to do what Jesus refused
to do.
4. Les and Nick could sell our ministers anything thoroughly and solidly refer-
enced on the Word of God. To date, they haven't tried that approach. They
think our ministers should buy their "sinful bag" simply because they
(influential Doctors) say our ministers should. Jesus had special names for
such "influential" men.
We all may well ask: How did Les and Nick get a license to use our most influ-
ential office (Editor of The Banner) to promote their purely private, non-
Biblical, socio-political bag of goods, to a Church that still obeys only the
Word of God?
Italics mine.
Len Peters
