by Rev. K. D. MacLeod
Historically Evangelicals have been distinguished from other professing Christians by their insistence on the necessity for the new birth and by their firm grasp of the inspiration of the Scriptures. But over the years large parts of the Evangelical movement have moved away from accepting that the Bible is reliable in its every detail. It is now no uncommon thing for scholars to claim to be evangelical although they have given up belief in the inerrancy of Scripture. They hold that, while the Bible is accurate when it speaks of matters related to faith, it may not be reliable when it deals with history or science.
Again people may hold on to the term new birth although they have departed from its Scriptural meaning. They do not view regeneration as the life-giving work of the Holy Spirit, through which alone there can be any spiritual activity in the human soul. This is related to a lack of recognition of the sinfulness of sin, and how desperately sin has affected the whole of our nature. In particular there is an unwillingness to realise that the human will can never accept Christ, unless and until it is renewed by the Spirit. So from such a quarter comes this description of the evangelist’s work: “The only concern is to be absolutely clear what the news is (in the gospel) so as to avoid it being misunderstood as something other than good. Telling people that they have won a prize or have been promoted or are going on a holiday in the sun, one does not expect to have to talk them into it. One expects them to be delighted.” There seems to be no appreciation that the will of the unconverted is opposed to receiving the gospel; that the unconverted do not, and that unaided by the Holy Spirit they cannot, appreciate the significance of the gospel. One almost wonders, when the activity of the Holy Spirit is referred to in such circles, if it is the preacher alone who needs the empowering of the Spirit, rather than the hearer.
The same attitude, that is in the human will, rather than the Holy Spirit, which takes the initiative in the work of grace, can be seen in the statement, “Sometimes we let God’s Spirit into our lives, but only so far. We need to let His Holy Spirit come and fill every part of our lives so that we can work as God wants us to.” But there can surely be no spiritual vitality where there is no understanding that the power of the Holy Spirit is sovereign, but irresistible. Indeed, were it not that God’s grace is irresistible, His Kingdom in this world would be absolutely non-existent.
And when the corruption of the human heart is minimised the power of the Holy Spirit is also belittled. What need for the powerful working of this divine Person to apply the truths of Scripture concerning Himself!
It was into the Evangelical world that the Pentecostal movement was launched in the early years of this century. More recently, established denominations have been influenced by Pentecostal theology with its insistence on the continuation of the miraculous signs exercised in the early Church, so-called speaking in tongues usually being taken as evidence of the fulness of the Spirit in an individual. (It is this Pentecostal-type movement across the established denominations which is known as the Charismatic movement). I say so-called speaking in tongues because it is clear that none of this tongues-speaking takes place in any recognisable language. An Evangelical of the older school, who at least was prepared to use his common sense in this matter, is thus described: “He distrusted Pentacostalism, believing it to be unscriptural and unsound, and he found tongues quite ludicrous and repulsive. He had never spoken to his earthly father in unintelligible gobbledegook, and he had no intention of insulting his Heavenly Father by doing so.”
Pentacostalists assumed that people were converted, and then ascended to the higher level of Christian experience which was manifested by the power to exercise what they describe as the gifts of the Spirit, especially tongues-speaking. The spread of the Charismatic movement to the extent of influencing multitudes who were never evangelically minded, Roman Catholics included, has had a further effect on Evangelical Charismatics. When many who make no profession of being converted can speak in tongues, it is assumed that they are filled with the Spirit and are therefore true Christians. The standard expected of professing Christians in Evangelical circles was in very many cases far too low already but, when anyone and everyone who is able to speak in tongues is accepted as a brother or sister in Christ, it is perfectly clear that Biblical standards have been left far behind. The fact is that many Roman Catholics claim that their Charismatic experiences lead them to an increased devotion to Mary, yet such idolators are being accepted as true followers of Christ.
Speaking in tongues is, of course, not the only gift claimed in such circles. Among the others is the gift of prophecy — the gift of giving fresh revelations from God. These are not claimed to be infallible. But what is the use of a fallible revelation, one which it is impossible to tell if it comes with divine authority or not? It is accepted that a claimed revelation may not be true, all its authority has been taken away. How can anyone today, who accepts the possibility of such revelations, differen-
tiate between God’s voice and a thought which has its origin in one’s own mind? To take an actual example: when a woman, who was noted in her church for her prophetic gift, maintained that she had a revelation that the church should open a shop, what grounds could she have for believing that the thought came from outside her own brain?
The fact is, however, that God has given us the Bible as a complete and sufficient revelation for living our lives in this world, and there is no possibility of any addition to that revelation. It is infallible and authoritative, and we need nothing further. Besides, it is far too easy to interpret prophecy in the light of subsequent events, and then to claim that the prophecy must have been from God. But there have been far too many so-called words of knowledge, claimed to be from God, which have turned out to be false, sometimes with heart-rending consequences, as when, for example, prophecies of a recovery from serious illness have proved completely wrong.
One of the most dangerous claims is to the gift of healing, a gift asserted also by some who make no profession of religion. Various other surveys have borne out the conclusion of one conducted by the British Medical Association: “We find that, while patients suffering from psychogenic disorders (those with a purely psychological cause) may be cured by various methods of spiritual healing, just as they are by methods of suggestion and other forms of psychological treatment employed by doctors, we can find no evidence that organic diseases (where there is some structural change in body organs) are cured solely by such means. The evidence suggests that any such cases claimed to be cured are likely to be either instances of wrong diagnosis, wrong prognosis, remission or possibly of spontaneous cure.”
A clear feature of the older Evangelicalism was a witness against the errors of the Church of Rome. The acceptance of devout Roman Catholics as true, believing Christians has had the effect of removing much of what was left of Protestant testimony against the soul-destroying doctrines of Rome. Such testimony is now considered unloving and sinful, “a partisan attitude” to be replaced by “a new sensitivity to the Body of Christ.” The Roman Catholic is “a brother to be loved and helped rather than to be attacked. Was he not also in Christ?” The fallacy, of course, is to assume that it is not loving and helpful to warn, for instance, about the blasphemy of the mass or the idolatrous worship of the Virgin Mary.
The Second Vatican Council made it possible for Roman Catholic priests and others to interact with Protestants on an unprecedented scale, when those who were formerly accounted heretics became “separated brethren”.
Because their doctrinal roots did not go deeply into our Reformation heritage, with its proper understanding of the Scriptures, a large part of the evangelical movement has responded enthusiastically to Rome’s overtures. Evangelists like Billy Graham have Roman Catholic prelates among their sponsors, and the Protestant and Roman Catholic sections of the Charismatic movement come together for conferences — to learn together how to serve God better! Roman Catholics have never claimed to be subject exclusively to Scripture; for them tradition has the same authority as Scripture, and both are to be understood as the Church understands them. Similarly, when once the possibility of further revelation — through a gift of prophecy — is allowed within Protestantism, the exclusive authority of Scripture is undermined there also.
It says little for a Protestant minister’s understanding of the truth when he decided that there was little difference between the Roman Catholics’ “understanding of the essential elements of the gospel and his own”. It is not surprising that the same minister could disparage the Reformation as “one of the greatest tragedies that ever happened to the Church . . . . From the Reformation onwards the Body of Christ has been torn from limb to limb into hundreds of separate pieces”, a statement which was actually made at a conference of evangelicals. He did not deny that the Reformation had brought benefits, but it was claimed that he was addressing himself to unity, not to truth. The Saviour’s petition, “That they all may be one”, is often used to justify ecumenical relationships. But this oneness is manifestly a union of those who are sanctified through the truth and who believe through the Word of God, which, Christ states, is truth. Where there is no agreement on what constitutes doctrinal truth, formal union between denominations cannot benefit the Church of God, and there can be no genuine spiritual fellowship between individuals.
The above does not claim to be a complete survey of Evangelicalism today; it is no more than a series of snapshots. It is clear enough, that, as a whole, the Evangelical movement suffers from serious ill-health. Where will it end? Unless there is a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit the outlook is ominous; a great part of Evangelicalism can only drift further and further away from the truth until it is indistinguishable from the general run of modern Christianity. Indeed, in today’s religious climate, every part of Christianity, whether purer or less pure, is in danger of increasing weakness.
We are called to “hold fast the form of sound words” and to be holy even as God Himself is holy, for which we individually need the work of the Holy Spirit. A realisation of our spiritual weakness, and of the power
of our spiritual enemies would surely call forth a degree of prayer which is manifestly rare today. Certainly we can take encouragement from the fact that Christ’s kingdom is yet to flourish, for the heathen are to be His inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth His possession. Prayer for the coming of His kingdom can therefore not be in vain.