Editor’s Notes

The Pre-publication Sale is now one-fourth over. The moral is this: do not continue to postpone sending in your order! Before you know it, April 1 will be here; and then it will be too late to take advantage of the sale price. Hence, get your order in today, accompanied by $7.95. Look up the handy order envelope in the February 1 issue. As of this writing, we are on schedule with our publication plans; and “Behold, He Cometh!” should meet our publication deadline of April 1.

Mind your i’s and e’s. Someone recently called my attention to a commonly made error in pronunciation (and sometimes even in spelling). Arminians (with a short i) are the followers of the heresy of James Arminius. Armenians (with a long e) are inhabitants of the country of Armenia. Whom the shoe fits, let him put it on.

The reference to government subsidy of schools in “All Around Us” reminds me of a report in a recent issue of the Dutch paper “Tot Vrijheid Geroepen” that the Free University of Amsterdam is 99% supported by government subsidy. The article in which this is reported attributes the decline and decay of the Free University in part to this fact. It claims that in this manner the Free University has increasingly gotten out of the control of the Reformed people. It refers to “the bulldozer of government subsidy” as having “shoved aside the influence of the Reformed people upon the course of affairs at the university.” This is a significant aspect of government subsidy. As government subsidy increases, two things happen: 1) The schools become independent of the people’s support, and proportionately less responsive to the control and desires of the supporters. 2)And the people become proportionately less concerned and less able to control an institution which they do not have to support and whose purse-strings are out of their control.

A further study of the question of government subsidy of schools will begin in the next issue. Through the courtesy of State Senator Milton Zaagman, I received a copy of “A Report and Recommendations of the Joint Legislative Committee on Aid To Non-Public Schools.” I requested this report so that I might base my study on accurate information. However, the report arrived too late to write about it in this issue.

Footnote to a Review, or, The Story of the Pot and the Kettle. In a recent issue of the Reformed Journal the redoubtable James Daane reviews Harry Kuitert’s book, “The Reality of Faith.” In his usual genial manner Daane takes the occasion to go a bit afield and to get in “a few licks” at other theologians. I must confess my amazement, and my amusement, at the blissful manner in which he can dismiss with one wave of the hand the theology of Abraham Kuyper, Herman Hoeksema, L. Berkhof, C. Van Til, and, in fact, all of orthodox Protestant theology. Meanwhile, he virtually excludes himself from “orthodox Protestant theology” in the process. But I especially was struck by his critique of Kuitert. As might be expected, Daane has high praise for Kuitert’s denial of the possibility of metaphysical theology (knowledge of God-as-He-is-in- Himself). But he mildly faults Kuitert for going to extremes. Daane wants to keep some metaphysical theology, it seems. And he proceeds to engage in some highly abstract theologizing about God’s grace. But Daane should criticize himself, not Kuitert. For when Daane denies that grace is an attribute of God, his basic trouble is a denial of so-called metaphysical theology. He should ponder this seriously. For this is a case of “the pot calling the kettle black.” True to form, Daane is right, but dead wrong!