Christianity & Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen (1923) - chapter 1
Originally published in 1923 (Macmillan, NY), this book is now in the
public domain (original pagination and footnotes have been kept
intact for purposes of reference). The electronic edition of this
book was scanned and edited by Shane Rosenthal. It may be copied and
distributed without restriction. In a few cases the spelling has been
modernized.
What This Book Is About (In Machen's Own Words).
In my little book, Christianity and Liberalism, 1923, I tried to show that
the issue in the Church of the present day is not between two varieties of
the same religion, but, at bottom, between two essentially different types
of thought and life. There is much interlocking of the branches, but the
two tendencies, Modernism and supernaturalism, or (otherwise designated)
non-doctrinal religion and historic Christianity, spring from different
roots. In particular, I tried to show that Christianity is not a "life," as
distinguished from a doctrine, and not a life that has doctrine as its
changing symbolic _expression, but that--exactly the other way around--it
is a life founded on a doctrine. (From "Christianity in Conflict," an
autobiographical essay on Machen's life and works).
Chapter 1: Introduction
The purpose of this book is not to decide the religious issue of the
present day, but merely to present the issue as sharply and clearly as
possible, in order that the reader may be aided in deciding it for himself.
Presenting an issue sharply is indeed by no means a popular business at the
present time; there are many who prefer to fight their intellectual battles
in what Dr. Francis L. Patton has aptly called a "condition of low
visibility."[1] Clear-cut definition of terms in religious matters, bold
facing of the logical implications of religious views, is by many persons
regarded as an impious proceeding. May it not discourage contribution to
mission boards? May it not hinder the progress of consolidation, and
produce a poor showing in columns of Church statistics? But with such
persons we cannot possibly bring ourselves to agree. Light may seem at
times to be an impertinent intruder, but it is always beneficial in the
end. The type of religion which rejoices in the pious sound of traditional
phrases, regardless of their meanings, or shrinks from "controversial"
matters, will never stand amid the shocks of life. In the sphere of
religion, as in other spheres, the things
1. Francis L. Patton, in the introduction to William Hallock Johnson The
Christian Faith Under Modern Searchlight, [1916], p. 7.
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 2
about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth
holding; the really important things are the things about which men will
fight.
In the sphere of religion, in particular, the present time is a time of
conflict; the great redemptive religion which has always been known as
Christianity is battling against a totally diverse type of religious
belief, which is only the more destructive of the Christian faith because
it makes use of traditional Christian terminology. This modern
non-redemptive religion is called "modernism" or "liberalism." Both names
are unsatisfactory; the latter, in particular, is question-begging. The
movement designated as "liberalism" is regarded as "liberal" only by its
friends; to its opponents it seems to involve a narrow ignoring of many
relevant facts. And indeed the movement is so various in its manifestations
that one may almost despair of finding any common name which will apply to
all its forms. But manifold as are the forms in which the movement appears,
the root of the movement is one; the many varieties of modern liberal
religion are rooted innaturalism--that is, in the denial of any entrance of
the creative power of God (as distinguished from the ordinary course of
nature) in connection with the origin of Christianity. The word
"naturalism" is here used in a sense somewhat different from its
philosophical meaning. In this non-philosophical sense it describes with
fair accuracy the real root of what is called, by what may turn out to be a
degradation of an originally noble word, "liberal" religion.
The rise of this modern naturalistic liberalism has not come by chance, but
has been occasioned by important changes which have recently taken place in
the conditions of life. The past one hundred years have witnessed the
beginning of a new era in human history, which may
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 3
conceivably be regretted, but certainly cannot be ignored, by the most
obstinate conservatism. The change is not something that lies beneath the
surface and might be visible only to the discerning eye; on the contrary it
forces itself upon the attention of the plain man at a hundred points.
Modern inventions and the industrialism that has been built upon them have
given us in many respects a new world to live in; we can no more remove
ourselves from that world than we can escape from the atmosphere that we
breathe.
But such changes in the material conditions of life do not stand alone;
they have been produced by mighty changes in the human mind, as in their
turn they themselves give rise to further spiritual changes. The industrial
world of today has been produced not by blind forces of nature but by the
conscious activity of the human spirit; it has been produced by the
achievements of science. The outstanding feature of recent history is an
enormous widening of human knowledge, which has gone hand in hand with such
perfecting of the instrument of investigation that scarcely any limits can
be assigned to future progress in the material realm.
The application of modern scientific methods is almost as broad as the
universe in which we live. Though the most palpable achievements are in the
sphere of physics and chemistry, the sphere of human life cannot be
isolated from the rest, and with the other sciences there has appeared, for
example, a modern science of history, which, with psychology and sociology
and the like, claims, even if it does not deserve, full equality with its
sister sciences. No department of knowledge can maintain its isolation from
the modern lust of scientific conquest; treaties of inviolability, though
hallowed by all the sanctions of age-long tradition, are beingflung
ruthlessly to the winds.
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 4
In such an age, it is obvious that every inheritance from the past must be
subject to searching criticism; and as a matter of fact some convictions of
the human race have crumbled to pieces in the test. Indeed, dependence of
any institution upon the past is now sometimes even regarded as furnishing
a presumption, not in favor of it, but against it. So many convictions have
had to be abandoned that men have sometimes come to believe that all
convictions must go.
If such an attitude be justifiable, then no institution is faced by a
stronger hostile presumption than the institution of the Christian
religion, for no institution has based itself more squarely upon the
authority of a by-gone age. We are not now inquiring whether such policy is
wise or historically justifiable; in any case the fact itself is plain,
that Christianity during many centuries has consistently appealed for the
truth of its claims, not merely and not even primarily to current
experience, but to certain ancient books the most recent of which was
written some nineteen hundred years ago. It is no wonder that that appeal
is being criticized today; for the writers of the books in question were no
doubt men of their own age, whose outlook upon the material world, judged
by modern standards, must have been of the crudest and most elementary
kind. Inevitably the question arises whether the opinions of such men can
ever be normative for men of the present day; in other words, whether
first-century religion can ever stand in company with twentieth-century
science.
However the question may be answered, it presents a serious problem to the
modern Church. Attempts are indeed sometimes made to make the answer easier
than at first sight it appears to be. Religion, it is said, is so entirely
separate from science, that the two, rightly defined,
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 5
cannot possibly come into conflict. This attempt at separation, as it is
hoped the following pages may show, is open to objections of the most
serious kind. But what must now be observed is that even if the separation
is justifiable it cannot be effected without effort; the removal of the
problem of religion and science itself constitutes a problem. For, rightly
or wrongly, religion during the centuries has as a matter of fact connected
itself with a host of convictions, especially in the sphere of history,
which may form the subject of scientific investigation; just as
scientificinvestigators, on the other hand, have sometimes attached
themselves, again rightly or wrongly, to conclusions which impinge upon the
innermost domain of philosophy and of religion. For example, if any simple
Christian of one hundred years ago, or even of today, were asked what would
become of his religion if history should prove indubitably that no man
called Jesus ever lived and died in the first century of our era, he would
undoubtedly answer that his religion would fall away. Yet the investigation
of events in the first century in Judea, just as much as in Italy or in
Greece, belongs to the sphere of scientific history. In other words, our
simple Christian, whether rightly or wrongly, whether wisely or unwisely,
has as a matter of fact connected his religion, in a way that to him seems
indissoluble, with convictions about which science also has a right to
speak. If, then, those convictions, ostensibly religious, which belong to
the sphere of science, are not really religious at all, the demonstration
of that fact is itself no trifling task. Even if the problem of science and
religion reduces itself to the problem of disentangling religion from
pseudo-scientific accretions, the seriousness of the problem is not thereby
diminished. From every point of view, therefore, the problem in question is
the most serious concern
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 6
of the Church. What is the relation between Christianity and modern
culture; may Christianity be maintained in a scientific age?
It is this problem which modern liberalism attempts to solve. Admitting
that scientific objections may arise against the particularities of the
Christian religion-- against the Christian doctrines of the person of
Christ, and of redemption through His death and resurrection--the liberal
theologian seeks to rescue certain of the general principles of religion,
of which these particularities are thought to be mere temporary symbols,
and these general principles he regards as constituting "the essence of
Christianity."
It may well be questioned, however, whether this method of defense will
really prove to be efficacious; for after the apologist has abandoned his
outer defenses to the enemy and withdrawn into some inner citadel, he will
probably discover that the enemy pursues him even there. Modern
materialism, especially in the realm of psychology, is not content with
occupying the lower quarters of the Christian city, but pushes its way into
all the higher reaches of life; it is just as much opposed to the
philosophical idealism of the liberal preacher as to the Biblical doctrines
that the liberal preacher has abandoned in the interests of peace. Mere
concessiveness, therefore, will never succeed in avoiding the intellectual
conflict. In the intellectualbattle of the present day there can be no
"peace without victory"; one side or the other must win.
As a matter of fact, however, it may appear that the figure which has just
been used is altogether misleading; it may appear that what the liberal
theologian has retained after abandoning to the enemy one Christian
doctrine after another is not Christianity at all, but a religion which is
so entirely different from Christianity as to be
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 7
long in a distinct category. It may appear further that the fears of the
modern man as to Christianity were entirely ungrounded, and that in
abandoning the embattled walls of the city of God he has fled in needless
panic into the open plains of a vague natural religion only to fall an easy
victim to the enemy who ever lies in ambush there.
Two lines of criticism, then, are possible with respect to the liberal
attempt at reconciling science and Christianity. Modern liberalism may be
criticized (1) on the ground that it is un-Christian and (2) on the ground
that it is unscientific. We shall concern ourselves here chiefly with the
former line of criticism; we shall be interested in showing that despite
the liberal use of traditional phraseology modern liberalism not only is a
different religion from Christianity but belongs in a totally different
class of religions. But in showing that the liberal attempt at rescuing
Christianity is false we are not showing that there is no way of rescuing
Christianity at all; on the contrary, it may appear incidentally, even in
the present little book, that it is not the Christianity of the New
Testament which is in conflict with science, but the supposed Christianity
of the modern liberal Church, and that the real city of God, and that city
alone, has defenses which are capable of warding of the assaults of modern
unbelief. However, our immediate concern is with the other side of the
problem; our principal concern just now is to show that the liberal attempt
at reconciling Christianity with modern science has really relinquished
everything distinctive of Christianity, so that what remains is in
essentials only that same indefinite type of religious aspiration which was
in the world before Christianity came upon the scene. In trying to remove
from Christianity everything that could possibly be objected to
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 8
in the name of science, in trying to bribe off the enemy by those
concessions whichthe enemy most desires, the apologist has really abandoned
what he started out to defend. Here as in many other departments of life it
appears that the things that are sometimes thought to be hardest to defend
are also the things that are most worth defending. In maintaining that
liberalism in the modern Church represents a return to an un-Christian and
sub-Christian form of the religious life, we are particularly anxious not
to be misunderstood. "Un-Christian" in such a connection is sometimes taken
as a term of opprobrium. We do not mean it at all as such. Socrates was not
a Christian, neither was Goethe; yet we share to the full the respect with
which their names are regarded. They tower immeasurably above the common
run of men; if he that is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than
they, he is certainly greater not by any inherent superiority, but by
virtue of an undeserved privilege which ought to make him humble rather
than contemptuous. Such considerations, however, should not be allowed to
obscure the vital importance of the question at issue. If a condition could
be conceived in which all the preaching of the Church should be controlled
by the liberalism which in many quarters has already become preponderant,
then, we believe, Christianity would at last have perished from the earth
and the gospel would have sounded forth for the last time. If so, it
follows that the inquiry with which we are now concerned is immeasurably
the most important of all those with which the Church has to deal. Vastly
more important than all questions with regard to methods of preaching is
the root question as to what it is that shall be preached. Many, no doubt,
will turn in impatience from the inquiry--all those, namely, who have
settled the question in,
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM,CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 9
such a way that they cannot even conceive of its being reopened. Such, for
example, are the pietists, of whom there are still many. "What," they say,
"is the need of argument in defence of the Bible? Is it not the Word of
God, and does it not carry with it an immediate certitude of its truth
which could only be obscured by defense? If science comes into
contradiction with the Bible so much the worse for science!" For these
persons we have the highest respect, for we believe that they are right in
the main point; they have arrived by a direct and easy road at a conviction
which for other men is attained only through intellectual struggle. But we
cannot reasonably expect them to be interested in what we have to say.
Another class of uninterested persons is much more numerous. It consists of
thosewho have definitely settled the question in the opposite way. By them
this little book, if it ever comes into their hands, will soon be flung
aside as only another attempt at defence of a position already hopelessly
lost. There are still individuals, they will say, who believe that the
earth is flat; there are also individuals who defend the Christianity of
the Church, miracles and atonement and all. In either case, it will be
said, the phenomenon is interesting as a curious example of arrested
development, but it is nothing more.
Such a closing of the question, however, whether it approve itself finally
or no, is in its present form based upon a very imperfect view of the
situation; it is based upon a grossly exaggerated estimate of the
achievements of modern science. Scientific investigation, as has already
been observed, has certainly accomplished much; it has in many respects
produced a new world. But there is another aspect of the picture which
should not be ignored. The modern world represents in some respects an
enormous improvement over the world in which our ancestors
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 10 l
ived; but in other respects it exhibits a lamentable decline. The
improvement appears in the physical conditions of life, but in the
spiritual realm there is a corresponding loss. The loss is clearest,
perhaps, in the realm of art. Despite the mighty revolution which has been
produced in the external conditions of life, no great poet is now living to
celebrate the change; humanity has suddenly become dumb. Gone, too, are the
great painters and the great musicians and the great sculptors. The art
that still subsists is largely imitative, and where it is not imitative it
is usually bizarre. Even the appreciation of the glories of the past is
gradually being lost, under the influence of a utilitarian education that
concerns itself only with the production of physical well-being. The
"Outline of History" of Mr. H. G. Wells, with its contemptuous neglect of
all the higher ranges of human life, is a thoroughly modern book.
This unprecedented decline in literature and art is only one manifestation
of a more far-reaching phenomenon; it is only one instance of that
narrowing of the range of personality which has been going on in the modern
world. The whole development of modern society has tended mightily toward
the limitation of the realm of freedom for the individual man. The tendency
is most clearly seen in socialism; a socialistic state would mean the
reduction to a minimum of the sphere of individual choice. Labor and
recreation, under a socialistic government, would both be prescribed, and
individual liberty would be gone. But the same tendency exhibits itself
today even in those communities where the name of socialism is
mostabhorred. When once the majority has determined that a certain regime
is beneficial, that regime without further hesitation is forced ruthlessly
upon the individual man. It never seems to occur to modern legislatures
that
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 11
although "welfare" is good, forced welfare may be bad. In other words,
utilitarianism is being carried out to its logical conclusions; in the
interests of physical well-being the great principles of liberty are being
thrown ruthlessly to the winds.
The result is an unparalleled impoverishment of human life. Personality can
only be developed in the realm of individual choice. And that realm, in the
modern state, is being slowly but steadily contracted. The tendency is
making itself felt especially in the sphere of education. The object of
education, it is now assumed, is the production of the greatest happiness
for the greatest number. But the greatest happiness for the greatest
number, it is assumed further, can be defined only by the will of the
majority. Idiosyncrasies in education, therefore, it is said, must be
avoided, and the choice of schools must be taken away from the individual
parent and placed in the hands of the state. The state then exercises its
authority through the instruments that are ready to hand, and at once,
therefore, the child is placed under the control of psychological experts,
themselves without the slightest acquaintance with the higher realms of
human life, who proceed to prevent any such acquaintance being gained by
those who come under their care. Such a result is being slightly delayed in
America by the remnants of Anglo-Saxon individualism, but the signs of the
times are all contrary to the maintenance of this half-way position;
liberty is certainly held by but a precarious tenure when once its
underlying principles have been lost. For a time it looked as though the
utilitarianism which came into vogue in the middle of the nineteenth
century would be a purely academic matter, without influence upon daily
life. But such appearances have proved to be deceptive. The dominant
tendency, even in a country like America, which
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 12
formerly prided itself on its freedom from bureaucratic regulation of the
details of life, is toward a drab utilitarianism in which all higher
aspirations are to be lost.
Manifestations of such a tendency can easily be seen. In the state of
Nebraska, for example, a law is now in force according to which no
instruction in any school inthe state, public or private, is to be given
through the medium of a language other than English, and no language other
than English is to be studied even as a language until the child has passed
an examination before the county superintendent of education showing that
the eighth grade has been passed.[1] In other words, no foreign language,
apparently not even Latin or Greek, is to be studied until the child is too
old to learn it well. It is in this way that modern collectivism deals with
a kind of study which is absolutely essential to all genuine mental
advance. The minds of the people of Nebraska, and of any other states where
similar laws prevail,[2] are to be kept by the power of the state in a
permanent condition of arrested development.
It might seem as though with such laws obscurantism had reached its lowest
possible depths. But there are depths lower still. In the state of Oregon,
on Election Day, 1922, a law was passed by a referendum vote in accordance
with which all children in the state are required to attend the public
schools. Christian schools and private schools, at least in the
all-important lower grades, are thus wiped out of existence. Such laws,
which if the present temper of the people prevails will probably
1. See Laws, Resolutions and Memorials passed by the Legislature of the
State of Nebraska at the Thirty-Seventh Session, 1919, Chapter 249, p.
1019.
2. Compare, for example, Legislative Acts of the General Assembly of Ohio,
Vol. cviii, 1919, pp. 614f.; and Act, and Joint Resolutions of the General
Assembly of Iowa, 1919, Chapter 198, p. 219.
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 13
soon be extended far beyond the bounds of one state,[1] [which will] mean
of course the ultimate destruction of all real education. When one
considers what the public schools of America in many places already
are--their materialism, their discouragement of any sustained intellectual
effort, their encouragement of the dangerous pseudo-scientific fads of
experimental psychology--one can only be appalled by the thought of a
commonwealth in which there is no escape from such a soul-killing system.
But the principle of such laws and their ultimate tendency are far worse
than the immediate results.[2] A public
1. In Michigan, a bill similar to the one now passed in Oregon recently
received an enormous vote at a referendum, and an agitation looking at
least in the same general direction is said to be continuing.
2. The evil principle is seen with special clearness in the so-called "Lusk
Laws" in the state of New York. One of these refers to teachers in the
public schools. The other provides that "No person, firm, corporation or
society shall conduct, maintain or operate any school, institute, class or
course of instruction in any subjects whatever without making application
for and being granted a license from the university of the state of New
York to so conduct, maintain or operate such institute, school, class or
course." It is further provided that "A school, institute, class or course
licensed as provided In this section shall be subject to visitation by
officers and employees of the university of the state of New York." See
Laws of the State of New York, 1921, Vol. III, Chapter 667, pp. 2049-2051.
This law is so broadly worded that it could not possibly be enforced, even
by the whole German army in its pre-war efficiency or by all the espionage
system of the Czar. The exact measure of enforcement is left to the
discretion of officials, and the citizens are placed in constant danger of
that intolerable interference with private life which real enforcement
ofthe provision about "courses of instruction in any subjects whatever"
would mean. One of the exemptions is in principle particularly bad. "Nor
shall such license he required:' the law provides. "by schools now or
hereafter established and maintained by a religious denomination or sect
well recognized as such at the time this section takes effect." One can
certainly rejoice that the existing churches are freed, for the time being,
from the menace involved in the law. But in principle the limitation of the
exemption to the existing churches really runs counter to the fundamental
idea Of religious liberty; for it sets up a distinction between established
religions and those that are not established. There was always tolerance
for established religious bodies, even in the Roman Empire; but religious
liberty consists in equal rights for religious bodies that are new. The
other exemptions do not remove in the slightest the oppressive character of
the law. Bad as the law must be in its Immediate effects, it is far more
alarming in what it reveals about the temper of the people. A people which
tolerates such preposterous legislation upon the statute books is a people
that has wandered far away from the principles of American liberty. True
patriotism will not conceal the menace, but will rather seek to recall the
citizens to those great principles for which our fathers, in America and In
England, were willing to bleed and die. There are some encouraging
indications that the Lusk Laws may soon be repealed. If they are repealed,
they will still serve as A warning that only by constant watchfulness can
liberty be preserved.
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 14
school system, in itself, is indeed of enormous benefit to the race. But it
is of benefit only if it is kept healthy at every moment by the absolutely
free possibility of the competition of private schools. A public school
system, if it means the providing of free education for those who desire
it, is a noteworthy and beneficent achievement of modern times; but when
once it becomes monopolistic it is the most perfect instrument of tyranny
which has yet been devised. Freedom of thought in the middle ages was
combated by the Inquisition, but the modern method is far more effective.
Place the lives of children in their formative years, despite the
convictions of their parents, under the intimate control of experts
appointed by the state, force them then to attend schools where the higher
aspirations of humanity are crushed out, and where the mind is filled with
the materialism of the day, and it is difficult to see how even the
remnants of liberty can subsist. Such a tyranny, supported as it is by a
perverse technique used as the instrument in destroying human souls, is
certainly far more dangerous than the crude tyrannies of the past, which
despite their weapons of fire and sword permitted thought at least to be
free.
The truth is that the materialistic paternalism of the present day, if
allowed to go on unchecked, will rapidly
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 15
make of America one huge "Main Street," where spiritual adventure will be
discouraged and democracy will be regarded as consisting in the reduction
of all mankind to the proportions of the narrowest and least gifted of the
citizens. God grant that there may come a reaction, and that the great
principles of Anglo-Saxon liberty may be rediscovered before it is too
late! But whatever solution be found for the educational and social
problems of our own country, a lamentable conditionmust be detected in the
world at large. It cannot be denied that great men are few or non-existent,
and that there has been a general contracting of the area of personal life.
Material betterment has gone hand in hand with spiritual decline.
Such a condition of the world ought to cause the choice between modernism
and traditionalism, liberalism and conservatism, to be approached without
any of the prejudice which is too often displayed. In view of the
lamentable defects of modern life, a type of religion certainly should not
be commended simply because it is modern or condemned simply because it is
old. On the contrary, the condition of mankind is such that one may well
ask what it is that made the men of past generations so great and the men
of the present generation so small. In the midst of all the material
achievements of modern life, one may well ask the question whether in
gaining the whole world we have not lost our own soul. Are we forever
condemned to live the sordid life of utilitarianism? Or is there some lost
secret which if rediscovered will restore to mankind something of the
glories of the past?
Such a secret the writer of this little book would discover in the
Christian religion. But the Christian religion which is meant is certainly
not the religion of the modern liberal Church, but a message of divine
grace, almost forgotten
CHRISTIANITY & LIBERALISM, page 16
now, as it was in the middle ages, but destined to burst forth once more in
God's good time, in a new Reformation, and bring light and freedom to
mankind. What that message is can be made clear, as is the case with all
definition, only by way of exclusion, by way of contrast. In setting forth
the current liberalism, now almost dominant in the Church, over against
Christianity, we are animated, therefore, by no merely negative or polemic
purpose; on the contrary, by showing what Christianity is not we hope to be
able to show what Christianity is, in order that men may be led to turn
from the weak and beggarly elements and have recourse again to the grace of
God.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Does he tell you he loves you when he's hitting you?
Abuse. Narrated by Halle Berry.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/aFQ_rC/isnJAA/E2hLAA/BRUplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
***************************************************************************
Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg
Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. www.ppi-india.org
***************************************************************************
__________________________________________________________________________
Mohon Perhatian:
1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik)
2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari.
3. Lihat arsip sebelumnya, www.ppi-india.da.ru;
4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
