“It has just been observed that Christianity, as well as liberalism, is interested in social institutions. But the most important institution has not yet been mentioned– it is the institution of the Church. When, according to Christian belief, lost souls are saved, the saved ones become united in the Christian Church. true Christians must everywhere be united in the brotherhood of the Christian Church.” – J. Gresham Machen
Christianity has never been about the individual believer doing his/her own thing without any concern for other believers in Christ. The common adage that “I don’t need the church. I can individually worship God wherever I am” is foreign to the New Testament Scriptures. On the contrary, not only is each believer joined to the universal church at conversion but also joined to the local church by a biblical vision and mission. One of the best New Testament Epistles on this subject is Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians.
Machen held a high view of the church. This means that he not only strongly believed in the church’s importance in each believer’s life, but also that the church was indispensable. The church was not just an organization like any other social and civic group. Rather, it was/is a spiritual organism. In short, the church was/is the New Testament temple of the living God (Romans 8:9-11; I Corinthians 3:16-17; 6:19-20; Ephesians 2:19-22; I Peter 2:4-5).
The liberal concept of the universal brotherhood of man was superseded, in Machen’s perspective, by the biblical doctrine of the brotherhood of the redeemed. It is the communication and embracing of the Gospel that will solely, and ultimately, change a society for the better.
“It is upon this brotherhood of twice-born sinners, this brotherhood of the redeemed, that the Christian founds the hope of society. He finds no solid hope in the improvement of earthly conditions, or the molding of human institutions under the influence of the Golden Rule. These things indeed are to be welcomed. They may so palliate the symptoms of sin that there may be time to apply the true remedy; they may serve to produce conditions upon the earth favorable to the propagation of the gospel message; they are even valuable for their own sake. But in themselves their value, to the Christian, is certainly small. A solid building cannot be constructed when all the materials are faulty; a blessed society cannot be formed out of men who are still under the curse of sin. Human institutions are really to be molded, not by Christian principles accepted by the unsaved, but by Christian men; the true transformation of society will come by the influence of those who have themselves been redeemed,” explained Machen.
Machen believed the greatest threat to the church’s vision and mission was not from forces outside of the church, but rather from those within its fellowship. Much like the Apostle Paul’s warning to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:28-31) and the warnings from the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:1-3) and Jude (Jude 3-4), Machen sounded a warning because of what he observed in the Presbyterian church of his own day.
“The greatest menace to the Christian Church today,” he wrote, “comes not from the enemies outside, but from the enemies within; it comes from the presence within the church of a type of faith and practice that is anti-Christian to the core.” Consequently, “a separation between the two parties in the church is the crying need of the hour.” Machen’s “straightforward” and “above board” appeal earned him the respect of “friendly neutrals” (as the secular journalist H.L. Mencken described himself as he followed the debate closely),” states John R. Muether, professor of church history and dean of libraries at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Fla.
The doctrinal divide that fractured the church a hundred years ago is occurring a hundred years later. Personal experience has replaced biblical exposition. Personal preferences have replaced personal commitment to the Scriptures. Tolerance of unbiblical opinions and fellowship have replaced faithfulness to objective, biblical doctrine.
“Countervailing appeals to preserve the unity of the church obscured the issues that Machen laid out, and such ecclesiastical pacifism provided neither lasting peace nor unity,” states Muether.
“Nothing engenders strife so much as a forced unity, within the same organization, of those who disagree fundamentally in aim.” Tolerance of doctrinal deviation is “simple dishonesty,” wrote Machen.
What impact did Christianity and Liberalism have on the church and upon Machen himself? This is what we will begin to examine when next we meet.
Soli deo Gloria1
His Word Today 