Now I’d like to
bring Andrew Murray (1828 – 1917) into our conversation, a remarkable husband,
father, friend, and pastor - a pastor
not only to his congregations, but to southern Africa, and to much of the world
(then and now) through his writing and his example of living and loving in Jesus
Christ.
As a leader in
the Dutch Reformed Church of South Africa, Murray dealt with pastors and
theology that were heretical. He was instrumental in founding a seminary in
South Africa for two reasons, one was that South Africa had an increasing
demand for pastors which the U.K. and Europe could not supply. The other was
that the Dutch Reformed Church in the Netherlands was, at that time, departing
from the Bible. Murray cared deeply about Biblical teaching, and he took church
discipline seriously – seeking to remove heretical pastors from their positions
in accordance with the tenets of the Dutch Reformed Church and the Bible.
Like Lewis,
Murray was a “Mere Christian,” seeking Jesus Christ, seeking to live in Jesus
Christ, and seeking to bring others to know Jesus Christ. Andrew Murray was more
a citizen of the Kingdom of God than he was a member and leader in the Dutch
Reformed Church (where he served as moderator and in other leadership positions
thorough out his life) - though perhaps he never thought in those terms for he worked
with English speakers, Dutch speakers, diverse ethnic groups, and Christians
from many traditions. He also ministered the Gospel to both British and Boer
during the bitter Second Boer War (1899 – 1902) and for doing so was criticized
by both sides.
With the above
as a brief background, let’s consider Murray’s Introduction to William Law.
Here is how it begins [the copy I have is titled The Power of the Spirit,
Selections from the Writings of William Law, edited by Andrew Murray,
Bethany House, reprinted from the 1896 edition]:
“In publishing
the new volume of Law’s works, I owe a word of explanation to the Christian
public, and all the more because some with whom I feel closely united have
expressed their doubt of the wisdom of giving greater currency to the writings
of an author who differs markedly in some points from what we hold to be
fundamental doctrines of the evangelical faith.
“First of all,
let me say that, as in publishing the former volume, so now in issuing this, I only
do so because I do not know where to find anywhere else the same clear and
powerful statement of the truth which the Church needs at the present day. I
have tried to read or consult every book I knew of that treats of the work of
the Holy Spirit, and nowhere have I met with anything that brings the truth of
our dependence on the continual leading of the Spirit, and the assurances that
that leading can be enjoyed without interruption, so home to the heart as the
teaching of the present volume.
“It is because I
believe that teaching to be entirely scriptural, and to supply what many are
looking for, that I venture to recommend it. I do so in the confidence that no
one will think that I have done so because I consider the truths he denies
matters of minor important, or have any sympathy with his views.”
Do we see a
similarity in Lewis when writing of MacDonald? Lewis writes in his Preface to
the Anthology, “I dare not say that he is never in error; but to speak
plainly I know hardly any other writer who seems to be closer, or more
continually close, to the Spirit of Christ Himself.”
Both Lewis and
Murray are looking for Jesus Christ, they are looking for the Spirit of Christ –
this is not a nebulous feeling and way of thinking they are seeking, it is not
touchy – feelie, for Jesus Christ is the image of God and the image of God is articulated
and given definition in Jesus Christ, the Word, the Logos. Murray and Lewis
were both highly critical thinkers – and they both dearly loved Jesus and the
Bible.
Lewis did not
dismiss areas of MacDonald’s thinking that were imperfect, nor did Murray
dismiss areas of Law’s thinking that were imperfect, but they both saw the
glory of the Spirit of Christ overshadowing the imperfections.
And here is a
critical point, MacDonald and Law were Christocentric, they were both centered
on Jesus Christ, they both honored the Lordship of Jesus Christ and were
pointing to Jesus Christ. They both believed in deep koinonia with Jesus Christ,
and they were not afraid – even at their personal peril – to contrast dead orthodoxy
and praxis with life in the Holy Spirit. (Law’s Address to the Clergy takes
up most of the book Murray published). Law and MacDonald were ostracized by
other pastors, they were men of courage as opposed to conformity.
What can we
learn from Lewis and Murray and their respective approaches to George MacDonald
and William Law?
The short answer
is, “Living in Jesus Christ is everything.” But what does this life look like
when specifically considered in Lewis’s Preface to MacDonald and Murray’s
Introduction to Law?
It seems to me
that Lewis and Murray call us back to being centered in Jesus Christ and in His
Kingdom. On the one hand we have lost the centrality of Jesus Christ and can no
longer discern between Biblical and non-Biblical teaching, on the other hand
many of us find our primary identity in a particular Christian tradition rather
than in Jesus Christ and His Kingdom – and in so doing we shut ourselves off
from the glorious Body of Christ and become self-centered rather than Jesus
centered.
If a tradition
is rooted in Jesus, then it ought to be rooted in John 17 and our oneness in
the Trinity, and if a tradition falls short of the unity of John 17, a unity
which is essential to our life and witness, then we ought to have the courage
to admit there is a problem within our tradition and seek our Lord’s help in
aligning our faith and practice with His Word.
That is, if a
tradition falls sort of promoting a Kingdom of God perspective and practice,
and a recognition of the Body of Christ, we ought to seek God’s help in being
faithful to His Word as opposed to our limiting tradition.
If we are called
to lay down our lives for the brethren (John 15:12 - 14; 1 John 3:16), then
this applies to not only us as individuals, but to us as families,
congregations, denominations, traditions…in whatever groupings we may find ourselves.
(And let’s be
clear that even those who insist they are “nondenominational” are nevertheless also
in some sort of tradition, some primary way of thinking and practice. We are
not born in a vacuum; we do not learn and grow in isolation.)
I do not want to
live and die as a Presbyterian or a Baptist or a Roman Catholic or a
Pentecostal or a Lutheran; I want to live and die as a Christian, a Mere
Christian. I want to appear before Jesus as one of His followers. I may find
myself worshipping and serving Him primarily within a particular tradition and
understanding and practice, but by His grace I want to do so as a disciple of
Jesus Christ serving within His Body and in His Kingdom, with His name and the
name of His Father written on my heart and mind – no other name, no other name.
If there is not
some measure of tension in all of this, might we not need to reconsider how we
are living?
We’ll pick this
back up in our next reflection…the Lord willing.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment