Question (composite of many): I continue to hear reports that the ceremony awarding the Templeton ...

Question (composite of many): I continue to hear reports that the ceremony awarding the Templeton Prize to Chuck Colson had nothing to do with the Parliament of the World’s Religions. Some evangelical leaders have said Colson gave one of the best talks they’d ever heard. Yet you said he did not present the gospel. How do we arrive at the facts?

Response: We did report the facts and wanted to say no more. However, inquiries such as yours continue, and require a response. Here are the facts again. In the advance information packet sent to all registrants, the sixth event listed under the heading, “Glimpses of the 1993 Parliament,” was the “21^st presentation of The Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion” (emphasis added). The official schedule of the 1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions shows the Templeton Prize ceremony as the major Parliament event for Thursday evening, Sept. 2. It is pointless to argue otherwise.

The award ceremony began with a Muslim speech and chant. After Colson’s talk a Buddhist led the audience in “meditation,” during which he and some of the audience went into a trance, and what he was saying became unintelligible. A Roman Catholic Church leader closed with final remarks. The committee that awarded Colson the prize included representatives from Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism.

The clearly stated purpose of the prize is exactly the same as the Parliament’s: “to encourage understanding of the benefits of each of the great religions.” This intent was reiterated by Templeton himself at the first news conference (New York, Feb. 17, 1993), where he announced that Colson, who was present, was the 1993 prize recipient. In response, Colson said, “I salute Sir John for establishing this award….” Would Elijah have complemented the priests of Ashtoreth, Baal, Dagon, Molech, et al., for establishing a “progress in religion” prize and have accepted it? Would Paul have accepted such a prize offered by the pagan leaders of his day? They why excuse Colson?

Can one really justify an evangelical commending and accepting the “Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion”? Is Christianity merely another religion? Do Christians help false religions progress? Religious leaders nailed Christ to the cross. To accept an award from Christ-rejecting Muslims, Hindus, et al. for “progress in religion” is to deny Christ and His gospel!

Colson’s office claimed that accepting the prize gave Colson “a marvelous opportunity, not unlike that of Paul on Mars Hill, to present the gospel of Jesus Christ clearly and powerfully to…many who have perverted the truth.” Unfortunately, in none of his news conferences or speeches did he fulfill this ideal. Moreover, it would be the height of hypocrisy and confusion to accept an award designed to promote all religions and at the same time to charge that all religions are false and that Christ alone saves. No wonder the gospel was not made plain on any of these occasions.

In his Parliament speech (page numbers below refer to the copy distributed by Prison Fellowship), though he criticized relativism and utopianism, he still fell short of presenting the gospel. He began by saying that Jesus Christ had transformed his life and that He is God and “the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” A good start, but hardly the gospel, or startling to Hindus and new Agers, who believe everyone is God and that the way, truth, and life is within all, etc.

As in past speeches, Chuck used vague terms acceptable to all religions: “transcendent values…moral consensus” (p 6); “moral choices…spiritual awakening…moral revival and social renewal…moral uplift…human dignity…character and creed…traditional beliefs” (pp 8, 9); “Judeo-Christian heritage” (p 11), etc. Even more disturbing, he honored all religions: “religious influence…every religious tradition finds common ground” (p 4); “religious conviction…all our creeds” (p 6); “true religion and its humanizing values” (p 17), etc.

The “Enduring Revolution of the Cross of Christ” was confused with “The Western Ideal” (p 11) of political, social, and economic freedoms. Colson obscured the truth by connecting Christianity with the West’s economic, political, and social liberty, tolerance, individual autonomy, and freedom (pp 10, 11) and failed to warn of God’s judgment to come upon all Christ-rejectors no matter how democratic or tolerant of others they have been. He equated “Christian conviction” with do-good impulses and with Roman Catholics such as Francis of Assisi and Mother Teresa, hardly evangelicals (p 11). That “every human soul is on a path of immortality…” (p 11) was presented as Christian truth—again tainting and blurring the gospel.

That God sent “His only Son to die so we might live” (p 12) is true but is not the gospel. Nowhere in his speech did Colson make it clear that we are sinners facing God’s wrath and that Christ’s death paid the penalty demanded by God’s justice against sin so we could be forgiven. In fact, Colson obscured that vital truth with his final story of a prison cell occupied solely by a crucifix, which a prisoner explained as, “He’s doing time for all the rest of us” (p 18). An appealing but false Catholic gospel. Christ is not “doing time” for us. He is no longer on the cross. The debt has been paid in full!

I find it both astonishing and alarming that an evangelical leader of Colson’s stature, who has written so much that is good and has opposed much false doctrine, could be drawn so far into ecumenical compromise without realizing it. It is equally alarming that not only he but other evangelical leaders would imagine that Colson presented the gospel, when its essential elements were missing. He came just close enough to the gospel for Christians to interpret his ambiguous language as meaning what they believe; and he missed it by enough so as not to offend too badly the followers of the world’s false religions or to convert them.

The space devoted to this subject, we believe, has been necessary. The sad facts should be a warning to all of us. Let us pray for and help one another.