Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
475678088
label
Dr. Francis Schaeffer
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
475678088
contentType
document
title
Dr. Francis Schaeffer
citationUrl
identifierLocal
47
collections
Records of the White House Office of Public Liaison (Reagan Administration)
Morton Blackwell's Religion Liaison Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
475678088
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
b549fa4bf12cb0fb
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Blackwell, Morton: Files
Folder Title: Dr. Francis Schaeffer
Box: 40
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
The Secular Humanistic World View
Versus The Christian World View
and
The Biblical Perspectives On
Military Preparedness
a speech by
Francis A. Schaeffer
at the Mayflower Hotel
Washington, D.C.
June 22, 1982
Host Committee: The Honorable and Mrs. James G. Watt
The Honorable and Mrs. James B. Edwards
The Honorable and Mrs. Terrel H. Bell
The Honorable and Mrs. Edwin Meese, III
The Honorable and Mrs. Strom Thurmond
The Honorable Jennings Randolph
The Honorable and Mrs. Howard H. Baker, Jr.
The Honorable and Mrs. Jeremiah A. Denton, Jr.
The Honorable William V. Alexander
The Honorable and Mrs. Jack F. Kemp
The Honorable and Mrs. Carlos J. Moorhead
The Honorable and Mrs. J. Marvin Leath
The Honorable and Mrs. C. William Nelson
The Honorable and Mrs. Charles W. Stenholm
The Honorable and Mrs. James L. Buckley
General and Mrs. John William Vessey, Jr.
Mrs. Mary C. Crowley
Mr. Larry Lightner
Mr. James E. Lyon
Mr. and Mrs. Robert L. Parker
Mr. and Mrs. Robert M. Pittenger
Mr. and Mrs. George F. Will
This is a speech - not fully edited
c
Francis A. Schaeffer
All rights reserved
The theme I've been asked to speak on tonight is
rather a double one, but actually these two halves are not
in conflict. As we shall see, they really make one unity:
The Secular Humanistic World View
Versus The Christian World View
and
The Biblical Perspectives on
Military Preparedness.
First of all we must be very careful to define what
we mean by humanism. By humanism we are not talking about
humanitarianism. Humanitarianism means being kind to people,
and as Christians we should be humanitarian even more than
anyone else. We must be equally careful not to bring
into confusion the difference between humanism and the
Humanities. A study of the Humanities is the study of
human creativity -- often related to classical learning,
but also to the whole of human creativeness. And as such
Christians above everyone should be interested in the
Humanities. Many of my books, films, etc. deal with a
Christian consideration of the Humanities - being thankful
for the creativity which is a natural part of Man because
people are made in the image of God.
Then we must ask what humanism is which we must
contrast with great clarity to the Christian world view.
We must realize that the contrast goes back to two different
views of final reality. What is final reality? In the
page 2
Judeo-Christian world view, the final reality is the
infinite-personal God who truly is there objectively
whether we think He is there or not. He is not there just
because we think He is there. He is there objectively.
And He is the Creator. He is the Creator of everything
else. And we must never forget that one of the distinguish-
ing marks of the Judeo-Christian God is that not everything
is the same to Him. He has a character, and some things
agree to His character and some things conflict with that
character. To this God (in contrast to Buddhism and
Hinduism for example) not everything is the same, and,
therefore, there are absolutes, right and wrong, in the
world.
As we come on the other side - to the final reality
which is being taught in our schools and which is much of
the framework of the thinking and writing of our day -
the final reality is thought of as material or energy which
has existed in some form forever and which has its present
configuration by pure chance. The real issue is the question
of final reality. The difference lies in what the final
reality is: Either the infinite-personal God to whom not
everything is the same, or merely material or energy which
is impersonal, totally neutral to any value system or any
interest in man as man. In this view the final reality
gives no value system, no basis for law, and no basis for
page 3
man as unique and important.
Beginning about eighty years ago we began to move
from a Judeo-Christian consensus in this country to a
humanist consensus, and it has come to a special climax
in the last forty years. For anyone here who is fifty
years of age or more, the whole dramatic shift in this
country has come in your adult lifetime. And today we
must say with tears that largely the consensus in our
country, and in the western world, is no longer Judeo-
Christian, but the general consensus is humanist with its
idea that the final reality is only material or energy which
has existed forever, shaped into its present form, by pure
chance. There is no value system at all from that final
reality. No one has said it better than Jacques Monod, the
Nobel prize winner in biology, a Frenchman, who wrote a
book some years ago, which was very popular at the time,
called Chance and Necessity. His view is that this is the
final reality. He laid down very firmly that with this view
there is no way to determine the "ought" from the "is" - -
none at all. On this basis, therefore, Man makes himself
the measure of all things.
All the things that have come into our country which
have troubled us are only the inevitable results of this
world view. If you hold this world view you must realize
there is no source of knowledge except what man can find
for himself; all revelation is ruled out. Knowledge never
page 4
can be certain; and there can be no value system except
that which is totally arbitrary. This view leaves us with
no final value system, and, therefore, with only personal,
arbitrary, relative values. It isn't only Fletcher who
teaches situational ethics today; it is the general concept
that we find on the basis of this view of the final reality.
And more serious than the personal arbitrary value
systems is the fact that it leaves us only with arbitrary
law. There is no basis for law. Law becomes only the
decision of a small group of people, and what they decide
at a given moment is for the good of society. And that is
all because the final reality gives no clue as to what law
should be, and it is left up to a group of people, the
Supreme Court, or whoever they are, to make their own
decision as to what is good for society at the moment. So
you have relative personal values and arbitrary law, and
you will also have the loss of any intrinsic value of the
individual person. This is the reason that today in this
country we accept what would have been an abomination just
ten years ago, and that is abortion growing on into infanti-
cide, the killing of babies after they are born if they
do not come up to someone's standard of value, and on into
the drift toward euthanasia of the aged. This is all a
natural result of the acceptance of this other view concerning
final reality and the lowering, therefore, of any view of
page 5
human life. In their view, the final reality has nothing
to say about any real value, any unique value to human
life. In our country, this shows itself in many ways,
but it most clearly shows itself in the syndrome of
abortion leading to infanticide leading to the euthanasia
of the aged.
When Dr. C. Everett Koop, my son, Franky, and I
worked on Whatever Happened to the Human Race? and we began
to talk about infanticide, people really thought we were
way out in left field somewhere, but now it has been declared
legal in the case in Indiana where this baby, this Down's
syndrome child, was allowed to die upon the basis of the
parents' wishes.
And the euthanasia of the aged will also come with
speed. If you think this is extreme, think back on the
change from abortion to infanticide and with what speed
that came. What is involved is not only a loss of the
baby that is killed, but it is a loss increasingly of a
whole view of the unique value of human life; and it is
the loss of compassion. The compassion this country never
has had enough of, but for which it has been somewhat
known, will not stand if we continue to go down this
humanistic road, because there is no real value for people
intrinsically and as such it is not only the babies that
can be killed with abortion and infanticide, but there is
no real reason for compassion toward other people.
page 6
I would plead with those of you who are in government
not to allow other things to sidetrack you in the need to
stand against this downplaying of the value of human life.
Many things might distract you, but you must realize, for
those of you who are Christians especially, that there is
an absolutely unbreakable link between the existence of the
infinite-personal God of the Bible and the unique value of
human life. And if you allow the unique value of human
life to be played down legally, as it is at the present time
in this country, not only does it lead on to other things
such as the euthanasia of the aged, but the whole basis of
compassion is lost. For those of you in government who
think this is a small issue that should be swept under the
rug, I plead with you to think again of the fact of how
crucial and central this issue is. This is a vital issue,
which the Judeo-Christian final reality gives us, and we
are losing it with great speed. It is where humanism in
medicine and in law have come together at the point of
human life, and it naturally favors abortion and equally
it has no way to put any emphasis on the value of human
life when we consider it politically in other countries.
The First Amendment, of course, has been stood on its
head. The First Amendment was that there should be no
state church for the thirteen colonies, and that the State
should never interfere with the free expression of religion.
Today it has been turned over by the humanistic society,
page 7
the Civil Liberties Union, and so on, and the First Amendment
is made to say the very opposite. That is, that Christian
values are not allowed to be brought into contact with the
governmental process.
The terror is, that in the last forty years increasingly
government, and especially the courts, have been the vehicle
to force this other world view on the total population.
It is government that has done it by its laws and court
rulings.
We find as we look at this country that we have now a
largely humanistic consensus, a humanistic culture, a
humanistic society, but happily we do not have yet a totally
humanistic culture or consensus. It isn't total; we still
have the Christian memory, although it is moving with titanic
speed. Now, this being so, our calling is clear. It is
that we who hold the Christian world view, we who love
human life, we who love humanity, should stand first for
the honor of God, but we should also stand so that humanness
will not be lost in all areas.
And then, we must say with sobriety that the United
States does not have a "manifest destiny". Consequently, if
we continue to insist in walking down this road, at some
point, as God is God and not all things are the same to God,
we who have trampled so completely on all those amazing
things that God has given us in this country, can we expect
that God does not care? So we must not feel that we are
page 8
only playing intellectual and political games. If this
God exists and not all things are the same to Him, we
must realize as we read through the Scriptures that those
who trample upon the great gifts of God one day will know
His judgment.
The first part of our topic was the secular humanistic
world view versus the Christian world view, and I have
dealt largely with our own country. The second half is
"The Biblical Perspectives on Military Preparedness".
This is related to what I have just been speaking about;
they are really not two divergent subjects at all. You
must realize that the Soviet Union and the Soviet bloc and
all of the Marx-Engels-Lenin Communism -- all of it also
has as its base that the final reality is only material or
energy shaped by pure chance. This is the central thing.
The economics of Marxianism really is not that which is
central. It is a dialectical materialism -- you have heard
the term all your life, I am sure. "Dialectical" and then
comes the word -- "materialism". In other words, the final
reality is only material or energy shaped by chance,
exactly the same thing that is a plague in our own country
under the term of humanism. Now where does it end? It
ends in the Marxist bloc, therefore, inevitably to a
devaluation of human life. As in our country humanism
leads to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia and a loss
page 9
of compassion, this view of final reality does so more
totally in the Communist bloc because it is totally
committed to this view. There is a total emphasis that
there are no fixed values. Therefore, there is a total
emphasis that there is only arbitrary law.
Franky has just made a new film called The Second
American Revolution which we plan to show here in the fall
in Washington. It is a powerful thing, and one of the people
in the film is Stalin, and he says exactly what his own
position was. Law is only what he arbitrarily sets forth.
That's all. Now actually you will notice that we have a
parallel here to what is happening in our own country,
but the difference is that in our country, it is not total.
In these countries it has become total. This idea of the
final reality has come to its total conclusion, so there is
no fixed value; there is totally arbitrary law, and there
is the total loss of the value of the individual person,
and only the State has come to matter. There is an elite
which sets the laws, which says arbitrarily what the laws
are, and which sets forth these things as arbitrary abso-
lutes. So we find in the Soviet bloc a natural direction
toward an elite that has more total power in an arbitrary
fashion than any of the old kings.
There is no final value system, and, therefore, we
should not be surprised that they sign the Helsinki Accords
page 10
and then go ahead and continue to persecute their people
without ever a wink. Why should they not? There is no
absolute standard. Only the State matters, and the good
of the State, as they see it. We are totally naive if
we are surprised that when it is convenient the Helsinki
Accords or anything like them can be broken overnight,
for "the good of the State".
It is an interesting thing in regard to their abortion
laws that when the Soviets first came into power, they made
easy abortion laws. Later they found it was not helpful
for the State so overnight they changed them and in the
Soviet Union abortion became illegal. Later they changed
it back again. Truly just a flip-flop with no problem.
Why not? They were making arbitrary laws.
We find that on the basis of their world view they
have a low view of human life concerning the individual
person. This takes two forms: First, internal oppression
from Lenin onward. Lenin wrote before he ever came to
power that the reason that one of the early attempts at
revolution in France was not successful was that they had
not killed enough people. With their low view of human
life, we cannot expect anything else. You must understand
that oppression is not an incidental thing in their system.
From Lenin onward, oppression was logical - on their own
base as an integral part of their system.
page 11
The second result is external and that is external
expansion and oppression. But I beg you to understand
that this is not a fluke of one moment of their history.
It is also a part of the integral system which they hold.
As naturally as humanism in our country leads to abortion,
infanticide and euthanasia, in the more total expression
in the Soviet system humanism leads to internal oppression
and external expansion and oppression.
I must say that I have one admiration for them; that
is, from Lenin on they have been, I think, the only country
in the world that has had a consistent foreign policy.
They have been totally consistent, unhappily so.
We can think of Latvia. Poor Latvia, they did not
want to be overrun, but they were overrun. If you go into
Finland where people have contacts into Latvia and Estonia,
there is sorrow because of this expansion and oppression
in these countries. More close in time we have the
immediate history of Afghanistan and Poland. This is as
natural to the materialistic world view as is abortion,
infanticide and euthanasia on this side of the iron curtain.
Those of you who understand what is happening in our own
country with regard to the lowering of standards in these
areas ought to be able to understand what it means in
Communist countries where these concepts are total, and
there is total power to bring forth their natural results.
page 12
Now in the light of this natural expansion and oppression
wherever they go, what should be our Biblical perspectives
on military preparedness? That is the second half of our
talk for tonight. I would say that from my study of the
Scripture, to not do what can be done for those in the
power of those who automatically and logically
oppress
is nothing less than lack of Christian love. This is why
I am not a pacifist. I am not a pacifist because pacifism
in this poor world in which we live, this lost world, means
that we desert the people who need our greatest help. As
an illustration: I am walking down the street. I see a
great big burly man that is beating a little tiny tot to
death -- beating this little girl, beating her, beating her.
I come up and I plead with him to stop. If he won't stop,
what does love mean? Love means I stop him in any way I
can including, quite frankly, hitting him, and to me, this
is necessary Christian love in a fallen world. What about
the little girl? If I desert the little girl to the bully,
I have deserted the true meaning of Christian love, and
responsibility to my neighbor. And we have in the last war
the clearest illustration you could have with Hitler's
terrorism. That is, there was no possible way to stop that
awful terror that was occuring in Hitler's Germany except
by the use of force. There was no way. As far as I'm
concerned, this is the necessary outworking of Christian
love. The world is an abnormal world, because of the Fall
page 13
it is not the way God meant it to be. There are lots of
things in this world which grieve us, and yet we must
face them.
Now I want to read tonight a portion from a letter
that I wrote to a certain person that I like very much but
who was in danger of being confused at this very point:
We all grieve at any war and especially atomic war,
but in a fallen world there are many things we grieve at,
yet nevertheless we must face. From the time of the last
World War onward, it is the Europeans more than the
Americans who have wanted the protection of atomic weapons
and have demanded it. They understood the reality of what
Winston Churchill said immediately after the last war -
that is that with the overwhelming forces of the Soviets
that they could easily dominate Western Europe to the
Atlantic Ocean if it were not for the fact of being
deterred by the United States having the atomic weapons.
We have come to a crazy place undoubtedly, with much too
many of the atomic weapons on both sides, and where there
must be open discussion and reduction concerning this.
But the initial factor is not changed. Europe would even
more today than in Winston Churchill's day be subject to
either military or political domination of the Soviets if
it were not for the addition of the factor of the existence
of the atomic weapon.
page 14
Further than this, Europe's economic wealth, to the
level that some European nations now have a higher standard
of living than the United States, rests upon the fact that
they are spending less for defense then they normally would
have because of dependency on the atomic weapons the
United States holds. As the Soviets, with their lack of
care for the individual, have used a larger proportion of
their national income for building up their great military
machine, so Western Europe has used less money for defense
and built up its economy.
If the balance is now destroyed, there is no doubt in
my mind that either militarily or politically the greatly
superior Soviet Forces in Europe would soon overshadow
Western Europe. The leaders like Schmidt of Western Germany
understand this, even if the left wing of his party and
the peace movement do not understand it.
Unilateral disarmament in this fallen world, and with
the Soviets' materialistic, anti-God base, would be totally
utopian and romantic and lead, as utopianisms always do in
a fallen world, to disaster. Further, it may sound reason-
able to talk of a freeze at the present level or "we won't
ever use atomic weapons first", but thinking it through,
either of these equals practical unilateral disarmament.
The atomic deterrent is removed and Europe stands at the
absolute mercy of the overwhelmingly superior Soviet forces.
page 15
The world quite properly looks back to the church
in Germany during the early days of Hitler's rise and
curses it for not doing something when something could
have been done. Churchill said in the house of Commons
after Chamberlain signed the Munich pact:
[The people] should know that we have sustained
a defeat without a war.
They should know
that we have passed an awful milestone in our
history
and that the terrible words have
for the time being been pronounced against the
Western democracies: "Thou art weighed in the
balance and found wanting." And do not suppose
this is the end; this is only the beginning of
the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the
first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be
profferred to us year after year unless, by a
supreme recovery of moral health and martial
vigor, we arise again and take our stand for
freedom as in olden times.
I do not always agree with the French theologian-
philosopher, Jacques Ellul, but he certainly is correct
when he writes in his book, False Presence of the Kingdom:
It was in 1930 that Christians should have alerted
the world to decolonization, to Algeria and to
Indochina. That is when the churches should have
mobilized without let-up. By 1956, those matters
page 16
no longer held a shadow of interest. The socio-
political process was already in operation, and
it could not have made an iota of difference
whether Christians got into the act or not. It
would not have lessened a single atrocity nor
resulted in a single act of justice. Likewise it
was in 1934 (the occupation of the Ruhr) or in
1935 (the war in Abyssinia), that Christians should
have foretold the inevitable war against Nazism.
That was when clarity of vision was essential. After
1937 it was too late. The fate of the world was
already sealed for thirty years or more. But in
those years the Christians, full of good intentions,
were thinking only of peace and were loudly pro-
claiming pacifism. In matters of that kind,
Christians' good intentions are often disastrous.
I am convinced that if the Bible-believing people now
go along with the concept of "peace in our time" under the
plausible concern and fear of atomic warfare (which we all
certainly feel) that our children and grandchildren will
curse us quite properly for not doing something at this
moment to restrain the drift toward the loss of Western
Europe and other places to the Soviet expansion. It is
not a bare theoretical concept. It means more of the
world being not only under tyranny (which the Christian
always should resist) but also means more of the world
page 17
living in the horrible conditions of our brothers and
sisters under the Soviet Union, with their not only
lack of general freedom, but lack of freedom to teach
their own children about truth and about Christ. I
do not want that for my children and my grandchildren.
The issue at this moment, I believe, is nothing
less than Churchill versus Chamberlain. We stand with
one or the other.
In conclusion then (I am no longer reading from the
letter): The question comes down as to who really is
for peace and who really is for war. And the conclusion
on the base of the Bible's realism and in the light of
even recent history, is that those who say they are not
for unilateral disarmament, but whose position equals
unilateral disarmament, are those, who like Chamberlain,
will bring war.
Permission is granted in advance by the author to
anyone who wishes to reproduce this speech in part or in
full provided that the following credit is given wherever
it appears:
Copyright by Francis A. Schaeffer, 1982, "The Secular
Humanistic World View versus The Christian World View and
The Biblical Perspectives on Military Preparedness". A
speech given at the Mayflower Hotel, Washington, D.C.,
June 22, 1982.
The above permission is granted for non-commercial
purposes only, not to be reproduced for financial gain in
any form For additional information write to: Franky
Schaeffer V Productions, P.O. Box 909, Los Gatos, CA 95031.
REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENTS
junis Schenffer
To:
Officer-in-charge
Appointments Center
Room 060, OEOB
Please admit the following appointments on
September 28
, 19 82
for
Indian Treaty Room (Morton Blackwell
OPL
:
(NAME OF PERSON TO BE VISITED)
(AGENCY)
Boehme, Ron
Barry, Patricia
Brewbaker, Bill
Brabner-Smith, John
"
"
Caulk, Mark
, Daniella
Debbie
Butler, Greg
Fuller, Brett
Cresswell, Roger
Gattis, Lou Anne
Dimmit, Anthony
Gianonne, Michael
Gomes, Maria
"
Jean
Jolly, McArthur
"
Hagan, James
, Edna
Holmberg, Eric
McBride, Scott
"
Olsen, Antoinette
Ruth
Petersburg, Mark
McNunn, Margery
Rainer, Kiki
Quinn, Joe
Whitehead, John
Riedesel, Richard
Scott, Mary
Scheaffer, Francis
Singerhood, Hiles
Edith
Valdivia, Elizabeth
Waller, James
"
Gail
Buck HAM EDWIN
Kenth Joyce
ELLINGWOOD HeeB
spiers Verne
SALCEDO, FRANK
MEETING LOCATION
Building OEOB
Requested by
MORTON BLACKWELL
-
Room No.
474 (Treaty Room)
Room No. 191 Telephone
2657
Time of Meeting
4:30
Date of request
9-28-82
Additions and/or changes made by telephone should be limited to three (3) names or less.
APPOINTMENTS CENTER: SIG/OEOB - 395-6046 or WHITE HOUSE - 456-6742
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE
SSF 2027 (05-78)
219-A E Street NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
August 18, 1982
The Honorable James A. Baker III
Chief of Staff
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Jim:
Dr. Francis Schaeffer will be in Washington, D.C.
September 27, 28 and 29 to premiere a new film called
C
The Second American Revolution. This film was produced
from the book of the same title which I enclose.
The film is a drama showing how throughout society
America has strayed from her Biblical foundations
to a humanistic base instead. Distribution will
begin very soon throughout the country and we would
appreciate your considering hosting this film for
showing at the White House. Arrangements could be
made for a showing of the film during lunch or in
the early evening.
Would it be possible to try to arrange a meeting
with President Reagan sometime during Dr. Schaeffer's
P
visit? He could return to the city at a later date
in October if the time suggested is not convenient.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Y
RMP:bh
Enclosure
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Dr Francis Scheaffer will be here tomorrow to
introduce his son's powerful new movie
THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION which seeks a true
understanding of the Judeo-Christian heritage upon
which our legal system was founded. Dr. Scheaffer
is one of the most outstanding leaders of Christian
thought in the world today and is in this country to
introduce this film. He is from Switzerland.
INDIAN TREATY ROOM
4:30 p.m. Tuesday, September 28, 1982
The film is 40 minutes - we anticipate the meeting
will last about an hour. Please call Carolyn Sundseth
on Ext. 2657 if you need to add anyone to the
clearance list.
The Past Brings Suit Against The Present
For Abandoning mo God-Given Ideals
Which Inspired The Founding Fathers of
This Nation
THE
SECOND
AMERICAN
REVOLUTION
See this thought-provoking film that seeks a true
Directed by F. A. Schaeffer.
understanding of the Judeo-Christian heritage
Produced by J. Buchfuehrer.
upon which our legal system was founded. Listen
Screenplay by Harold Fickett.
to the voices of the people who shaped the
A film by Franky Schaeffer V Productions.
American system of law and government.
Released by WORD INC., Waco, Texas.
Decide whether our lawmakers have aban-
doned the original principles set forth by the
Founding Fathers. Understand the frightening
consequences of replacing the biblical base
with a humanistic one. Judge your own posi-
tion: Apathy toward the present grim reality of
a decaying society or action toward a reversal
of this trend A Second American Revolution.
TURNER ROOFING
All Types Of Roofs
WTOW
Guttering & Downspouts
Quality Work With A Fair Price
LARRY TURNER 325-4962
License # 16769
1570AM
HENRY C. BAXTER
AGENT
STATE FARM INSURANCE
1810 Potspring Road
252-8620
Timonium, MD 21093
557-7832
Does someone you love need sheltered or nursing
care in a total Christian environment?
Arlington Baptist Nursing Center offers this and
much, much more including a warm, friendly family
atmosphere.
For additional information write or call
Arlington Baptist Nursing Center
7600 Clays Lane, Baltimore, Md. 21207
298-1400
A ministry of Arlington Baptist Church
TABERNACLE BOOK STORE
8855 Belair Road, Baltimore, MD 21236
Bibles
Commentaries
Concordances
Tapes-Eight Track and Cassette
Sunday School and V.B.S. Materials
(301) 256-8565
"For private enterprise and the Judeo-Christian ethic.
Dedicated to keeping America a strong, God-fearing
country.
John Vandenberge, D.D.S.
(also a candidate for state delegate, district 14B,
Howard and Montgomery Counties.)
Edward A. Hurdle, D.D.S.
Robert W. Boman, D.D.C.
5411 Old Frederick Road, Suite #1
Baltimore, MD 21229
788-4300