Scan barcode
A review by jnepal
Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen
2.0
I heard about this book in college and wanted to read it, so it has been on my to-read list for awhile. My views on a lot of things have changed since then and I have heard more about Machen, so this review reflects that.
The first chapter is a mess of Machen’s personal beliefs on individualism and government and socialism and etc. I wish he had left it out completely, but it does help to reveal some of where Machen goes wrong.
Machen, at least in this work, is not very nuanced in his thinking in areas. It’s troubling how he castigates “liberals,” but never really defines the term, such that liberal can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean. Yes, he does give examples in each of these chapters of what he means by liberal and the modern liberal church, but this also leaves the term “liberal,” open to misunderstanding. It allows the reader to say, “well, liberals also believe this, so that must mean this is also wrong.” This book, in places, reads like a conservative culture warrior’s manifesto.
It’s also frustrating how he bifurcates, as do many Christians, the calls to share the gospel and to do justice. These are both meant to flow from the two greatest commandments: love God, love others. But Christians have a tendency to split these two calls of the church, such that we get churches that almost only preach the gospel message, and other churches that almost only do justice. Shouldn’t it be both?
Yes, eternal welfare is greater in importance, but social welfare is the living out of the gospel, it too is the love of God and love of others, it must not be sidelined by the call to Evangelize, for if it is, what are we Evangelizing people to? A message that is all head, a message that is not warm, but cold, a message of the love of God in Jesus, but which does not show the love of God in Jesus?
Sigh.
I’m not arguing that everyone must have an equal balance in preaching the gospel and doing justice. That would be silly. Some are made for preaching, some for justice. I am arguing that all Christians should be engaged/concerned for both to some extent, and that the church should recognize and affirm both callings on/for Christians. The call of God’s love requires it.
Sadly, too, Machen was a racist, at least when he was in Seminary; we know this through an infamous letter to his mother and from some of his other writings. In this book, he actually calls for peaceful race relations, but that doesn’t mean much if you aren’t even willing to live in the same building in Seminary with your black brothers. That’s not simply lamentable, that’s evil, and directly contradicts the gospel he preached.
Perhaps he changed later in life, I guess I don’t know...
But for everything I didn’t enjoy, Machen still managed to say good things in this book. He remained connected to the message of God in Jesus, as Jesus the true God, and the true man. He preached the resurrection of our Savior, he preached our need of salvation and repentance in Christ. He preached the atonement. In these things, he fed my soul.
So will I be reading this book again or recommending it to others?
No, unless of course you’re studying the history of Evangelicalism in America :) Or you want to learn about Machen or etc.
The first chapter is a mess of Machen’s personal beliefs on individualism and government and socialism and etc. I wish he had left it out completely, but it does help to reveal some of where Machen goes wrong.
Machen, at least in this work, is not very nuanced in his thinking in areas. It’s troubling how he castigates “liberals,” but never really defines the term, such that liberal can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean. Yes, he does give examples in each of these chapters of what he means by liberal and the modern liberal church, but this also leaves the term “liberal,” open to misunderstanding. It allows the reader to say, “well, liberals also believe this, so that must mean this is also wrong.” This book, in places, reads like a conservative culture warrior’s manifesto.
It’s also frustrating how he bifurcates, as do many Christians, the calls to share the gospel and to do justice. These are both meant to flow from the two greatest commandments: love God, love others. But Christians have a tendency to split these two calls of the church, such that we get churches that almost only preach the gospel message, and other churches that almost only do justice. Shouldn’t it be both?
Yes, eternal welfare is greater in importance, but social welfare is the living out of the gospel, it too is the love of God and love of others, it must not be sidelined by the call to Evangelize, for if it is, what are we Evangelizing people to? A message that is all head, a message that is not warm, but cold, a message of the love of God in Jesus, but which does not show the love of God in Jesus?
Sigh.
I’m not arguing that everyone must have an equal balance in preaching the gospel and doing justice. That would be silly. Some are made for preaching, some for justice. I am arguing that all Christians should be engaged/concerned for both to some extent, and that the church should recognize and affirm both callings on/for Christians. The call of God’s love requires it.
Sadly, too, Machen was a racist, at least when he was in Seminary; we know this through an infamous letter to his mother and from some of his other writings. In this book, he actually calls for peaceful race relations, but that doesn’t mean much if you aren’t even willing to live in the same building in Seminary with your black brothers. That’s not simply lamentable, that’s evil, and directly contradicts the gospel he preached.
Perhaps he changed later in life, I guess I don’t know...
But for everything I didn’t enjoy, Machen still managed to say good things in this book. He remained connected to the message of God in Jesus, as Jesus the true God, and the true man. He preached the resurrection of our Savior, he preached our need of salvation and repentance in Christ. He preached the atonement. In these things, he fed my soul.
So will I be reading this book again or recommending it to others?
No, unless of course you’re studying the history of Evangelicalism in America :) Or you want to learn about Machen or etc.