FOLLOWING the recommendation of the Standing Committee on Christian Education the moderator of the 144th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. appointed a committee of five to “cooperate with the Board of Christian Education in the preparation of a communicant's manual." With the approval of the Board of Christian Education the committee “decided that the manual should be interpretative of the 'Brief Statement of the Reformed Faith'" adopted in 1902. Dr. Hugh Thompson Kerr was requested to prepare the manuscript, and it is his work which appears in the little volume under consideration.
It is with a feeling of sadness that we consider this book. In the preface we are told that the "manuscript so prepared has been carefully reviewed by the committee, approved by it and by the Board of Christian Education.” This means that the committee approves the work—and one of the members of the committee is Dr. David D. Burrell, a man whom we had always considered a staunch conservative.
The first thing which this little work reveals is the fact that the "Brief Statement" of the Reformed Faith is used as a basis rather than the Confession of Faith or the Catechisms. We are at a loss to understand why the committee did not desire to have this communicant’s manual based upon the Shorter Catechism, or even upon the Confession of Faith. The "Brief Statement," in our opinion, is inadequate and, to speak mildly, tends dangerously close at points to Arminianism.
There is much about this manual that is admirable. The inclusion of selected Scripture readings and hymns is an excellent idea. With one or two exceptions the hymns chosen are Scriptural and worthwhile. We are pleased to note this fact. Furthermore, Dr. Kerr has an attractive method of statement. Much that is said in this book is good and true, but as a communicant's manual we fear that it is exceedingly dangerous.
This danger is chiefly due to the fact that our author is confused in his own mind regarding many of the doctrines of Scripture. Clear-cut definitions and statements are not to be found at the point where they are most needed. This results in a haziness which will probably please everyone in the church, be he evangelical, middle-of-the-roader, or avowed Modernist.
As an illustration of this vagueness we may consider the chapter on the "Grace of God." If there is any one thing that the communicant needs to understand aright, it is this. What, actually is grace? We fear that the Biblical answer cannot be found in this chapter.
First of all, we are told that grace is the opposite of law, and to substantiate this John 1:17 and Romans 8:3, 4 are quoted. Then follows the extremely dangerous statement, "There is a religion according to merit." Well and good. There are, in fact, many religions of merit. But the essential thing to notice is that there is no religion of merit taught in the Bible. There is only one religion taught in the Bible, and that is a religion of grace. This fact does not seem to be grasped by our author, for he immediately says, "The Old Testament sets forth the law, whereby, through obedience, men may find salvation. But men failed in finding salvation by means of the Law." In contradistinction to this it is said that the "New Testament sets forth the gospel of the grace of God.”
Nor do we find any clearer statement of the law in the chapter entitled "The Law of God." In this chapter it is said that: "The standard by which life must be judged is the life and teaching of Jesus Christ. Whatever is contrary to his Spirit is to be shunned. Whatever he would approve must be sought after" (p. 81). This "mind" of Christ has been revealed to us in the Scriptures, being expressed in laws of universal validity, and Micah 6:8 is quoted as a summary of the moral law. It is to be feared that the communicant who studies this book will never discover what the true function of the law is.
Turning to the statements about grace, we find much that is good and true. "Grace is free. Grace is unmerited favor. It is a gift. It is not dependent, nor conditioned on, what we are or do… It does not depend upon man's goodness or good works. We do not merit grace. We cannot deserve it… Salvation is not the gift of the Church, nor the sacraments, nor of any priest, nor of a good life well lived. It is the gift of God." These are excellent words. We do miss, however, any really definite statement in this chapter about the saving work of Christ. Surely in a chapter about grace, the supreme manifestation of grace should be clearly set forth. The words “gospel" and "salvation" are indeed used, but is it not imperative that the communicant have not merely a vague and general notion that grace is manifest in salvation, but a clear knowledge of the fact that the grace of God was supremely manifested when our Lord shed His precious blood upon the cross, offering Himself in our stead, that He might once and for all satisfy the divine justice and reconcile us to God? Can we really talk about grace and omit mention of the atonement?
We furthermore miss in this chapter any clear statement of the depravity of the human heart. The background of human sin upon which the divine grace is manifested is practically ignored. In other words, while much that is true is said, the really important things, those that it is imperative for a communicant to know, are omitted. Our criticism of this chapter may be summed up as follows: 1) It presents a wrong conception of the function of the law. 2) It does not mention the supreme manifestation of grace—the atonement. 3) It does not present the background of human sin which renders necessary the free grace of God for the sinner.
We have discussed this chapter because it is fairly typical of the whole book. Some chapters are better than others, but the volume cannot truly be called Calvinistic. In so far as it is evangelical it is, we fear, Arminian in its tendency. Throughout appears the vague, non-doctrinal language so dear to the modern churchman. After all, the pseudo-Calvinism which would be acceptable to an apostate church is not the Calvinism of Scripture.