Evangelicalism in Modern Britain

A History from the 1730s to the 1980s

David W. Bebbington

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2003
• ISBN:
  9781134847662
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Historia
• Subtopic: Historia del mundo

This major textbook is a newly researched historical study of Evangelical religion in its British cultural setting from its inception in the time of John Wesley to charismatic renewal today.

The Church of England, the Church of Scotland and the variety of Nonconformist denominations and sects in England, Scotland and Wales are discussed, but the book concentrates on the broad patterns of change affecting all the churches. It shows the great impact of the Evangelical movement on nineteenth-century Britain, accounts for its resurgence since the Second World War and argues that developments in the ideas and attitudes of the movement were shaped most by changes in British culture.

The contemporary interest in the phenomenon of Fundamentalism, especially in the United States, makes the book especially timely.

[1]
Preaching the Gospel: The Nature of Evangelical Religion

…woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! (1 Cor. 9:16)

Evangelical religion is a popular Protestant movement that has existed in Britain since the 1730s. It is not to be equated with any single Christian denomination, for it influenced the existing churches during the eighteenth century and generated many more in subsequent years. It has found expression in a variety of institutional forms, a wine that has been poured into many bottles. Historians regularly apply the term ‘evangelical’ to the churches arising from the Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.¹ The usage of the period justifies them. Sir Thomas More in 1531 referred to advocates of the Reformation as ‘Evaungelicalles’.² Yet the normal meaning of the word, as late as the eighteenth century, was ‘of the gospel’ in a non-partisan sense. Isaac Watts, for example, writes of an ‘Evangelical Turn of Thought’ in 1723.³ There was a reluctance, most marked in Scotland, to apply the word to a particular group, since by implication those outside the group would be branded as not ‘of the gospel’.⁴ Other terms were used, especially by critics. In 1789 Joseph Milner wrote of ‘Evangelical religion, or what is often called Calvinism or Methodism’.⁵ Steadily, however, the word ‘Evangelical’ supplanted the others as the standard description of the doctrines or mnisters of the revival movement, whether inside or outside the Church of England.⁶ In 1793 The Evangelical Magazine was founded to cater for members of any denomination dedicated to spreading the gospel. That is the sense in which the word is employed here. Although ‘evangelical’, with a lower-case initial, is occasionally used to mean ‘of the gospel’, the term ‘Evangelical’, with a capital letter, is applied to any aspect of the movement beginning in the 1730s.⁷ There was much continuity with earlier Protestant traditions, but, as Chapter 2 contends, Evangelicalism was a new phenomenon of the eighteenth century.

Who was an Evangelical? Sometimes adherents of the movement were in doubt themselves. ‘I know what constituted an Evangelical in former times’, wrote Lord Shaftesbury in his later life; ‘I have no clear notion what constitutes one now.’⁸ Part of the problem was that, as Shaftesbury implies, Evangelicalism changed greatly over time. To analyse and explain the changes is the main purpose of this book. Yet there are common features that have lasted from the first half of the eighteenth century to the second half of the twentieth. It is this continuing set of characteristics that reveals the existencc of an Evangelical tradition. They need to be examined, for no other criterion for defining Evangelicalism is satisfactory. An alternative way would be to appeal to contemporary opinion about who was included within the movement. That approach, however, risks being ensnared in the narrow perspective of a particular period. For polemical purposes the right of others to call themselves Evangelicals has often been denied, particularly in the twentieth century. The danger is that the historian may be drawn into the battles of the past. It is therefore preferable to identify adherents of the movement by certain hallmarks. Evangelicals were those who displayed all the common features that have pcrsistcd over time.

Evangelical apologists sometimes explained their distinctiveness by laying claim to particular emphases. The Evangelical clergy differed from others, according to Henry Venn (later Clerical Secretary of the Church Missionary Society) in 1835, ‘not so much in their systematic statement of doctrines, as in the relative importance which they assign to the particular parts of the Christian System, and in the vital operation of Christian Doctrines upon the heart and conduct’.⁹ Likewise Bishop Ryle of Liverpool asserted that it was not the substance of certain doctrines but the prominent position assigned to only a few of them that marked out Evangelical Churchmen from others.¹⁰ By that criterion, Ryle was able to distinguish his posirion from that of the great number of late nineteenth-century High Churchmen whose message was similar to his own, whose zeal was eqvial to his own and who preached as much for conversions.¹¹ They elevated certain doctrines surrounding the church and the sacraments to a standard of importance that he believed to be untenable. The tone of Evangelicalism permeated nearly the whole of later Victorian religion outside the Roman Catholic Church, and yet the Evangelical tradition remained distinct. It gave exclusive pride of place to a small number of leading principles.

EVANGELICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The main characteristics emerge clearly. The High Churchman G.W.E. Russell remembered that the Evangelicals of his childhood in the midnineteenth century divided humanity into two categories: ‘a converted character’ differed totally from all others. Russell had also been taught to be active in charity, to read the Bible and to maintain ‘the doctrine of the Cross’.¹² There are the four qualities that have been the special marks of Evangelical religion: conversionism, the belief that lives need to be changed; activism, the expression of the gospel in effort; biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible; and what may be called crucicentrism, a stress on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Together they form a quadrilateral of priorities that is the basis of Evangelicalism.

In the early days of the revival there was normally a stress in Evangelical apologetic on the first and the last. John Wesley was willing to describe two doctrines as fundamental: justification, the forgiving of our sins through the atoning death of Christ; and the new birth, the renewing of our fallen human nature at the time of conversion.¹³ Similarly a group at Cambridge received the ‘three capital and distinguishing doctrines of the Methodists, viz. Original Sin, Justification by Faith and the New Birth’.¹⁴ Original sin, the condition from which we are rescued by the other two, was also on Joseph Milner’s checklist of four doctrines absolutely necessary to salvation: the ‘divine light, inspiration, or illumination’ of conversion; original sin; justification by faith in the merits of Christ by which ‘the great transaction of the Cross is appropriated’; and spiritual renovation, the consequent working out of duty from the motive of gratitude.¹⁵ This final factor implies activism, but in the eighteenth century Evangelicals rarely spelt out its importance in doctrinal terms. They nevertheless threw themselves into vigorous attempts to spread the faith. Likewise they did not normally put the Bible among the most important features of their religion. The Bible, after all, was professedly held in high esteem by all Protestants. Yet they were notably devoted in their searching of the scriptures. The centrality of the Bible could still be taken as read in the mid-nineteenth century, even when activism was mentioned explicitly. ‘An Evangelical believer’, according to William Marsh in 1850, ‘is a man who believes in the fall and its consequences, in the recovery and its fruits, in the personal application of the recovery by the power of the Spirit of God, and then the Christian will aim, desire, endeavour, by example, by exertion, by influence, and by prayer to promote the great salvation of which he himself is a happy partaker…’¹⁶ Thus the earlier phase of Evangelical history concurred with the late Puritan divine Matthew Henry in dwelling on three Rs: ruin, redemption and regeneration.¹⁷ In practice, however, from its commencement the movement showed imrnense energy and a steady devotion to the Bible also.

Later generations, while still displaying the four main characteristics, tended to present them rather differently. The first leading principle of Evangelical religion, according to Bishop Ryle, is ‘the absolute supremacy it assigns to Holy Scripture’. There followed, as other leading principles, the doctrines of human sinfulness, the work of Christ in salvation, the inward work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and his outward work in sanctification. The primacy of scripture was directed against those who exalted the authority of either church or reason.¹⁸ Other late nineteenth-century writers adopted a similar defensive posture, particularly against High Church doctrine on the priesthood and the sacraments. Edward Garbett claimed in 1875 that the three cardinal Evangelical principles are the direct contact of the individual soul with God the Father, the freedom and sovereignty of the Holy Ghost and the sole High Priesthood of God the Son. His intent is to repudiate High Church teaching about the role of the priest in mediating the grace of God to the people.¹⁹ Likewise the ministers of the London Baptist Association set about defining Evangelicalism negatively. ‘In our view’, they announced in 1888, ‘the word “evangelical” has been adopted by those who have hcld the Deity of our Lord, in opposition to Socinianism; the substitutionary death of the cross, in opposition to Sacramentarianism; the simplicity of the communion of the Lord’s Supper, in opposition to the doctrine of the Real Presence. It certainly has also further references…in opposition to those who deny the infallibility of Scripture on the one hand, and who assert another probation for the irnpenitent dead on the other.’²⁰ One eye is constantly being cast over the shoulder at the ritualists and the rationalists. Instead of the joy of new discovery that pervades eighteenth-century lists of distinctives, there is a resolve to resist an incoming tide of error.

Twentieth-century formulations again put the stress elsewhere. In asking ‘What is an Evangelical?’, in 1944, Max Warren, General Secretary of the Church Missionary Society, gave priority to evangelism over everything else, even worship. The need for conversion, trusting the Holy Spirit to sustain the believer’s new life and the priesthood of all believers were his other three cardinal principles. Thus activism now comes first, with the centrality of the cross and the study of the Bible, though both are mentioned, relegated to a lower place in the scheme of things.²¹ Warren, however, was not among the more conservative Evangelicals, whose strength was to grow later in the century. Conservatives usually attributed most importance to the authority of the Bible. Once that was granted, they believed, all other features would be assured. Thus John Stott, in asking Warren’s question, ‘What is an Evangelical?’, in 1977, replied that two convictions cannot be surrendered. First, he claimed, ‘We evangelicals are Bible people’. It followed, secondly, that Evangelicals possesscd a gospel to proclaim. The cross, conversion and effort for its spread were all placed under that comprehensive heading.²² Similarly J.I.Packer put the supremacy of scripture first in a list of six Evangelical fundamentals in 1979. To the familiar categories of the work of Christ, the necessity of conversion and the priority of evangelism he added the lordship of the Holy Spirit (in deference to charismatics) and the importance of fellowship (in deference to Catholics).²³ Variations there have certainly been in statements by Evangelicals about what they regard as basic. There is nevertheless a common core that has remained remarkably constant down the centuries. Conversionism, activism, biblicism and crucicentrism forrn the defining attributes of Evangelical religion. Each characteristic can usefully be examined in turn.

CONVERSIONISM

The call to conversion has been the content of the gospel. Preachers urged their hearers to turn away from their sins in repentance and to Christ in faith. G.W.McCree, a London Baptist minister of the mid-nineteenth century, was typical in holding ‘that conversion was far above, and of greater importance than, any denominational differences of whatever kind’.²⁴ A vivid account of conversion, pinpointed by Matthew Arnold as a classic, is given in the autobiography of Sampson Staniforth, then a soldier on active service and later one of the Wesley’s early preachers:

As soon as I was alone, I kneeled down, and determined not to rise, but to continue crying and wrestling with God, till He had mercy on me. How long I was in that agony I cannot tell; but as I looked up to heaven I saw the clouds open exceeding bright, and I saw Jesus hanging on the cross. At the same moment these words were applied to my hcart, ‘Thy sins are forgiven thee’. My chains fell off; my heart was free. All guilt was gone, and my soul was filled with unutterable peace.²⁵

Staniforth’s narrative is a classic not only because of its patent sincerity but also because of its inclusion of agony, guilt and immense relief. The great crisis of life could stir deep emotion. The experience was often ardently sought, for others as well as for oneself. Prayer requests for conversion appeared in the Evangelical press: ‘For a gentleman on the road to destruction, who fancies he is saved.—For an unconverted brother who is addicted to excessive drinking—…For my late foreign governess, an avowed Unitarian’.²⁶ Conversions were the goal of personal effort, the collective aim of churches, the theme of Evangelical literature. They could seem a panacea. ‘Conversions not only bring prosperity to the Church’, declared the Wesleyan Samuel Chadwick at about the start of the twentieth century; ‘they solve the social problem.’²⁷ A converted character would work hard, save money and assist his neighbour. The line between those who had undergone the experience and those who had not was the sharpest in the world. It marked the boundary between a Christian and a pagan.

Preaching the gospel was the chief method of winning converts. Robert Bickersteth, Bishop of Ripon from 1857 to 1884, held that ‘no sermon was worthy of the name which did not contain the message of the Gospel, urging the sinner to be reconciled to God’.²⁸ There was a danger, Evangelical preachers believed, of offering only comfort from the pulpit. Hearers needed to be aroused to concern for their spiritual welfare. If the delights of heaven were described, so were the terrors of hcll. Jonathan Edwards, the American theologian who stands at the headwaters of Evangelicalism, believed in insisting on the reality of hell; Joseph Milner, an erudite early Anglican Evangelical, would preach sermons on topics like ‘The sudden destruction of obdurate offenders’; and a Methodist preacher assured a backslider ‘that the devil would soon toss [him] about in the flames of hell with a pitchfork’.²⁹ Normally, however, there was more circumspection. The minister, according to an article of 1852 ‘On the method of preaching the doctrine of eternal death’, should remember ‘that he is sent to be a preacher of the Gospel of the grace of God, and not to be a preacher of death and ruin’.³⁰ Fear was not neglected as a motive for conversion, but more emphasis was generally laid on the forgiving love of God. It was essential, however, that the preacher himself should be converted. How could he speak of what he had not known? Some ministers underwent conversion experiences when already in the ministry. Thomas Chalmers, the Evangelical leader in the early nineteenth-century Church of Scotland, was among them.³¹ One clergyman was even converted by his own sermon. Preaching on the Pharisees in his Cornish parish, William Haslam realised that he was no better than they, but then felt light and joy coming into his soul. The cry went up, ‘The parson is converted!’³² The experience turned him into an Evangelical.

Conversion was bound up with major theologic...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Preface
• 1 Preaching the Gospel: The Nature of Evangelical Religion
• 2 Knowledge of the Lord: The Early Evangelical Movement
• 3 A Troubling of the Water: Developments in the Early Nineteenth Century
• 4 The Growth of the Word: Evangelicals and Society in the Nineteenth Century
• 5 Holiness unto the Lord: Keswick and its Context in the Later Nineteenth Century
• 6 Walking Apart: Conservative and Liberal Evangelicals in the Early Twentieth Century
• 7 The Spirit Poured Out: Springs of the Charismatic Movement
• 8 Into a Broad Place: Evangelical Resurgence in the Later Twentieth Century
• 9 Time and Chance: Evangelicalism and Change
• Notes
• Index