Frank! — Surely it is one of the tragedies of the ministerial profession when, one of its members earns and deserves the name of being smooth, sharp, long-headed, tricky, double. Let angels weep, while the church suffers! If any man on the face of the earth ought to be frank, faithful, fearless, straightforward, open, and sincere, it is a designated spokesman for God. Let us smite all vicious perversions.
Standards! — Has not the hour come for a new standard for the ministry, educationally, spiritually, and in soul-winning results? Doctors constantly take " post " work; teachers take special courses. In nearly every line, special periodic advanced study is recognized as imperative to keep pace with the times. Departmental men have yearly conventions or institutes. The evangelistic ministry alone seems to be exempt. Has not the hour come for a change?
Materialism! — The material is crowding the spiritual into the background just as verily as it was foretold in the charge against Laodicea. Institutionalise!, material gains, tangible achievements, — these are in the foreground of our thinking, our speaking, and our writing. Prophecy is fulfilling within our own ranks. Hadn't we better 4> heed the counsel of the True Witness written specifically for us? The things that are not seen are greater than the things that are seen.
Expediency! — We must ever use tact, but we dare not truckle. The two are not to be confused. Men reveal their real caliber when under fire. If weak, they will trim their sails and soften their message for the sake of "expediency." Yet in the final analysis, "expediency" is often just a more euphonious name for moral spinelessness and spiritual softness, unworthy a true man of God. Fear of critics must not deter, nor fear of misunderstanding render faithless in the discharge of bounden duty. We are humanly prone to give too much weight to the criticisms of others. It is God we serve. It is truth we are to honor. Forward march!
Unworthy! — There is a basic difference between steadfastly upholding impregnable truth, and questioning a faulty argument used in its support. The challenging of an unworthy argument or an alleged historical proof cited as supporting evidence, should never be confused with a denial of the truth itself. Rather, it is the truest and most consistent support of truth. He is unscholarly, uncandid, and unethical, who would, if undetected, continue to use a disproved and discredited argument or evidence, simply because its pioneer proponent was sincere, or the public was ignorant and it thereby passed unnoticed for a time. Immaculate honesty is demanded on the part of all proponents of truth. The honest support of truth will not tolerate unworthy arguments. Let there be sharp and abiding distinction here.
L. E. F.
