If
adherence to the truth and its final authority in all matters of faith and
practice, is what constitutes an evangelical, departure from this historic
position delineates a non-evangelical.
It is not a belief in the need for conversion that demarcates the
evangelical from the liberal but his faithfulness to the teaching and rule of Scripture in
all matters.
Now,
if ‘evangelicals,’ as seems to be the case today, are prepared to overlook,
ignore, or even disobey Scripture on ecclesiastical and spiritual matters, where
does that leave them? In the same camp
as their liberal colleagues. For there
is no difference. If the liberal
churchman is known for his despising of Scripture, and professing evangelicals
do exactly the same under the cover of adherence to Scripture, that leaves them in precisely identical positions on this
crucial matter.
Liberals
are accused by conservatives of being dishonest when they take their ordination
vows. They subscribe confessional
standards with their ‘fingers crossed’ behind their backs (metaphorically
speaking). But are evangelicals any
different? Listening to them, you could
be forgiven for thinking there is no difference. While they may be more truthful when it comes
to confessional subscription, when the matter of church reform is raised,
that’s the one subject they object to profoundly. The reason for this is some kind of inane
belief that his church might need a little tweak here and there, but overall
she is as near to the perfect church there is on earth. Many have convinced themselves that this is
so. Some admit that things are pretty bad
within their denomination, they know there is much unfaithfulness within her,
they know who the ministers are who do not preach the Gospel, but they will
defend her to the death against all comers.
The
really interesting thing is that they all do it. Every churchman believes his church is the
closest to Scripture. Some do not even
measure it against Scripture, but see it as a lovely socio-religious body that
keeps people from thinking too deeply about eternal issues.
While
evangelicals belong to churches that hold such or similar views, they are
being fundamentally dishonest when they resort to defending the
indefensible. They ‘paper over the
cracks’ in an attempt to show the church in better colours. They will defend the church at whatever cost
to themselves or their members, but they will not so defend the Gospel or the cause of Christ in
the world when these are under attack from within their churches. The church looks after you
well, but the Gospel tends to get you into trouble, not only with the world but
with the church itself. The church is a
comfortable place to be, but standing with the Gospel is dangerous. That stand has the effect of isolating you,
of causing alienation from the crowd, of leaving you friendless. And who wants that?
So
to avoid that, we will keep on the road of dishonesty. We’ll go on playing the children’s game, Let’s Pretend.’ That’s good fun. We enjoy that. It’s only a game, and no one gets
offended. Dishonesty gets you through
church life successfully, and might even get you promoted. Dishonesty pays, but honesty, while being the
best and only policy, can be too costly.
1 comment:
But are evangelicals any different? ....... when the matter of church reform is raised, that’s the one subject they object to profoundly.
Whether liberal or evangelical -
what reforms are these you refer to please?
Post a Comment