Not many books can be just as relevant 90 years later as they were the day they were written. Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen is just that. Originally published in 1923, Machen combats liberal theology that crept into the once conservative Princeton Seminary with surgeon-like precision. His main thesis being that liberal Christianity is diametrically opposed to true, biblical Christianity.
On a personal note, I was floored by this book and gripped as it shattered to pieces thinking I have heard from liberals or those leaning liberal. I heartily endorse Christianity and Liberalism for pastors and all Christians interested in theology and apologetics–especially those who want to know the differences between the type of Christianity in most evangelical churches compared with many mainline denominations who have strayed from biblical Christianity. There aren’t many books that are “must reads” for pastors–this is clearly one.
I have gathered a smattering of quotes that sum up many of Machen’s main point and thesis which provide somewhat of a summary of this classic and important work.
Resource: Free Kindle Book of Christianity and Liberalism
Bonus Resource: 250+ Free Seminary Resources (Courses, Classes, Book Recommendations, and more)
A 40-Quote Summary of Christianity and Liberalism
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 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.
The chief modern rival of Christianity is “liberalism.” An examination of the teachings of liberalism in comparison with those of Christianity will show that at every point the two movements are in direct opposition.
The many varieties of modern liberal religion are rooted in naturalism–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.
Here is found the most fundamental difference between liberalism and Christianity–liberalism is altogether in the imperative mood, while Christianity begins with a triumphant indicative; liberalism appeals to man’s will, while Christianity announces, first, a gracious act of God.
It is no wonder, then, that liberalism is totally different from Christianity, for the foundation is different. Christianity is founded upon the Bible. It bases upon the Bible both its thinking and its life. Liberalism on the other hand is founded upon the shifting emotions of sinful men.
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.
The Church of Rome may represent a perversion of the Christian religion; but naturalistic liberalism is not Christianity at all.
If the liberal party, therefore, really obtains control of the Church, evangelical Christians must be prepared to withdraw no matter what it costs. Our Lord has died for us, and surely we must not deny Him for favor of men.
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 belong in a distinct category.
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.
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.
There are doctrines of modern liberalism, just as tenaciously and intolerantly upheld as any doctrines that find a place in the historic creeds.
If all creeds are equally true, then since they are contradictory to one another, they are all equally false, or at least equally uncertain.
According to the Christian conception, a creed is not a mere expression of Christian experience, but on the contrary it is a setting forth of those facts upon which experience is based.
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.
The greatest menace to the Christian Church to-day 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.
But if any one fact is clear, on the basis of this evidence, it is that the Christian movement at its inception was not just a way of life in the modern sense, but a way of life founded upon a message. It was based, not upon mere feeling, not upon a mere program of work, but upon an account of facts. In other words it was based upon doctrine.
Faith is essentially dogmatic. Despite all you can do, you cannot remove the element of intellectual assent from it.
Indifferentism about doctrine makes no heroes of the faith.
“Christ died”–that is history; “Christ died for our sins”–that is doctrine. Without these two elements, joined in an absolutely indissoluble union, there is no Christianity.
The growth of ignorance in the Church is the logical and inevitable result of the false notion that Christianity is a life and not also a doctrine.
After listening to modern tirades against the great creeds of the Church, one receives rather a shock when one turns to the Westminster Confession, for example, or to that tenderest and most theological of books, the “Pilgrim’s Progress” of John Bunyan, and discovers that in doing so one has turned from shallow modern phrases to a “dead orthodoxy” that is pulsating with life in every word. In such orthodoxy there is life enough to set the whole world aglow with Christian love.
The great weapon with which the disciples of Jesus set out to conquer the world was not a mere comprehension of eternal principles; it was an historical message, an account of something that had recently happened, it was the message, “He is risen.”
The dominant tendency, even in a country like America, which 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.
The liberal doctrine of God and the liberal doctrine of man are both diametrically opposite to the Christian view.
Modern preachers are trying to bring men into the Church without requiring them to relinquish their pride; they are trying to help men avoid the conviction of sin.
Laymen, as well as ministers, should return, in these trying days, with new earnestness, to the study of the Word of God.
So modern liberalism, placing Jesus alongside other benefactors of mankind, is perfectly inoffensive in the modern world. All men speak well of it. It is entirely inoffensive. But it is also entirely futile.
What was it that within a few days transformed a band of mourners into the spiritual conquerors of the world? It was not the memory of Jesus’ life; it was not the inspiration which came from past contact with Him. But it was the message, “He is risen.”
The Sermon on the Mount, like all the rest of the New Testament, really leads a man straight to the foot of the Cross.
According to Christian belief, Jesus is our Saviour, not by virtue of what He said, not even by virtue of what He was, but by what He did. He is our Saviour, not because He has inspired us to live the same kind of life that He lived, but because He took upon Himself the dreadful guilt of our sins and bore it instead of us on the cross. Such is the Christian conception of the Cross of Christ.
When Jesus said, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” he was speaking not as a philosopher calling pupils to his school; but as One who was in possession of rich stores of divine grace.
According to modern liberalism, faith is essentially the same as “making Christ Master” in one’s life; at least it is by making Christ Master in the life that the welfare of men is sought. But that simply means that salvation is thought to be obtained by our own obedience to the commands of Christ. Such teaching is just a sublimated form of legalism. Not the sacrifice of Christ, on this view, but our own obedience to God’s law, is the ground of hope.
If Christ provides only a part of our salvation, leaving us to provide the rest, then we are still hopeless under the load of sin.
God send us ministers who, instead of merely avoiding denial of the Cross shall be on fire with the Cross, whose whole life shall be one burning sacrifice of gratitude to the blessed Saviour who loved them and gave Himself for them!
It is not the Bible doctrine of the atonement which is difficult to understand—what are really incomprehensible are the elaborate modern efforts to get rid of the Bible doctrine in the interests of human pride.
Faith is the exact opposite of works; faith does not give, it receives.
But if Christian faith is based upon truth, then it is not the faith which saves the Christian but the object of the faith. And the object of the faith is Christ. Faith, then, according to the Christian view, means simply receiving a gift. To have faith in Christ means to cease trying to win God’s favor by one’s own character; the man who believes in Christ simply accepts the sacrifice which Christ offered on Calvary. The result of such faith is a new life and all good works; but the salvation itself is an absolutely free gift of God.
The grace of God is rejected by modern liberalism. And the result is slavery—the slavery of the law, the wretched bondage by which man undertakes the impossible task of establishing his own righteousness as a ground of acceptance with God. It may seem strange at first sight that “liberalism,” of which the very name means freedom, should in reality be wretched slavery. But the phenomenon is not really so strange. Emancipation from the blessed will of God always involves bondage to some worse taskmaster.
The Church is the highest Christian answer to the social needs of man.
Related Posts
The Gospel Blimp—Or, A Dummies Guide to Overcomplicating Evangelism
Summary of Finding Truth: 5 Principles for Unmasking Atheism, Secularism, and Other God Substitutes
The Expulsive Power of a New Affection by Thomas Chalmers: An 11 Quote Summary
Book Review: When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty without Hurting the Poor and Yourself
Book Summary: The Intolerance of Tolerance by D.A. Carson
[…] Dr. Woodbridge’s father, Charles Woodbridge, was a pastor and seminary professor at Fuller who was mentored by J. Gresham Machen. […]