Evangelicalism Divided

EVANGELICALISM DIVIDED
By Iain Murray
Banner of Truth. 342 pages. £13.50
ISBN 0 85151 783 8

What has happened to evangelicalism over the last 50 years? The main transition of these 'years of change' is as undeniable as it is unpalatable. Evangelicals may have been a despised minority in 1950, but at least they were clear on such crucial questions as what makes a Christian, the person and work of Christ and the inspiration and authority of Scripture.

Today, many more church-goers and leaders call themselves evangelicals, but the church is not only declining numerically, it is dominated by an ecumenical agenda and doctrinal confusion, or worse, indifference. How has this situation arisen?

The overarching thrust of Iain Murray's thesis is that the spiritual health of the church depends on its willing submission to God's Word, the Bible. However, evangelicals, in a right desire to win the world, have taken a wrong path in being willing to co-operate with agendas set by the world. This has led to compromise, superficiality and spiritual sickness.

Compromise for credibility

The main body of the book unfolds the different ways in which the wrong path has been followed. The initial course was set by Schleiermacher, 200 years ago, in putting experience rather than truth centre stage in religion, plus the call for church unity which began to emerge at the beginning of the 20th century. In the vastly popular Billy Graham crusades of the 1950s, 60s and 70s, evangelicals joined hands with both theological liberals and Roman Catholics.

The National Evangelical Anglican Congresses at Keele and Nottingham laid down the principle that the best interests of evangelicalism lay in giving up the old exclusive attitudes and participating fully in a comprehensive church. Here, both John Stott and Jim Packer may have meant well, but did not foresee the outcome. In the academic sphere, the attempt to gain credibility for evangelical scholarship within universities has backfired. Many 'evangelical' lecturers now reject or lampoon the reliability of Scripture. In the words of Oliver Barclay: 'We cannot continue to teach theology through a rationalist methodology and expect to produce anything other than liberal evangelicals.'

That which would have seemed wild scare-mongering 50 years ago, namely, evangelicals seeking union with Rome, is now a reality, and whatever spin is put upon it, the recent US venture of Evangelicals and Catholics Together has led to yet more confusion. In everything there has been almost a studied failure to answer the simple question: 'Who, according to the Bible, is a Christian?' All this is chronicled with page-turning prose and meticulous footnotes.

When we set out on this wrong path, who knows where people will end up? An astonishing quotation which was deeply worrying comes from Billy Graham, speaking in 1997. See what you make of it. 'I think that everybody that loves or knows Christ, whether they are conscious of it or not, they are members of the body of Christ . . . whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world or the non-believing world, they are members of the body of Christ, because they have been called by God. They may not know the name of Jesus, but they know in their hearts that they need something they do not have, and they turn to the only light they have, and I think they are saved and they are going to be with us in heaven.'

Wider scene

There are, no doubt, factors which the author leaves out of his scenario. The continued divisions among those 'valiant for truth' during this period, did not recommend doctrinal clarity to a rising generation. The association of Reformed theology with the antiquarian did a similar disservice during years of vast cultural change. Whether deserved or not, the bad press which 'hard-line' Protestantism in Northern Ireland received, made being associated with an ecumenical outlook seem more politically-astute for the furtherance of the gospel in the eyes of some. Again, the influence of the charismatic movement with its emphasis on experience rather than truth was surely another large factor in the picture. However, to have dealt adequately with all these would have required a far larger volume, and such omissions do not diminish the potency of the book's main thrust.

There are pleas to return to the New Testament's attitude to the dangers of error and the spiritual unity of the true church composed of born-again believers. The book closes on a very gracious and reconciliatory note as the author draws out the lessons he sees in the recent past. One such is: 'This period of history confirms the painful fact that there can be serious differences of belief and consequent controversies among true Christians'. And, perhaps with Stott and Packer in mind, he goes on to say: 'Men who err in one field of work or thought may provide true help to the churches in another.'

Iain Murray has sounded a vital warning and British evangelicalism needs to take note.

Compromise for credibility

Wider scene

JEB

John Benton

Main Articles

Other articles