A Haldane's Journal
The Haldanes were brought to my attention through listening to an online lecture by Nick Needham (which you can listen to here) I was immediately hooked. And I was happy to discover that some of the published books of James Alexander Haldane are available on Google. Like this one: "Journal of a tour through the northern counties of Scotland and the Orkney Isles, in autumn 1797"
A quick read through and it is captivating to see the mission these people were on. It reads like the journey of Paul and Silas. They preached in the open air wherever they went, and drew hundreds and thousands to their talks, and saw a lot of people coming back to a living faith in Christ. The book is not dissimilar to Wesley's journals of a similar era, and it is littered with little testimonies and anecdotes that are very interesting. For example, it records a moment on Orkney when, whilst a group were praising God in the open air, a man walked past and noticed that the group had left their cows unattended. Which led him to the awareness that these people cared more for their souls then their cattle. From this one thought "A train of reflections succeeded, and he is now a member of the New Church." Brilliant! Brought to faith by a cow.
Subversive of the Gospel
Anyway, back to the topic. Needham made a small reference in his lecture to a particular aspect that I found very interesting. From their utter conviction of the power of gospel truth they are also compelled to highlight the doctrinal errors they heard from their village ministers. Here is an example from their time in Thurso:
So What
We have (meaning 'I have'!) grown scared of addressing the opinions and teachings of people we do not agree with. In an increasingly intolerant society where only certain types of diversity are allowed, we all feel the pressure to hush our feelings of disagreement and instead just focus on the bits we can all agree with.
But surely there is a central core, that we cannot keep hushed. As long as we are still duty bound to go and make disciples, then we must also be duty bound to ensure that the gospel message is always one of utterly free and unearned grace. Do we not have an obligation to point out to people any time we witness teaching that would undermine this free Gospel? I believe it's this same compulsion that drives Paul to angry compassion when he shouts at the Galatians:
An After Thought
On a totally unrelated (but not really) note, I was interested to read how Carl Trueman dealt with some historical interpretation errors in one of Rob Bell's books. By focussing purely on a historical critique, and intelligently pointing out the context of Luther's words, Trueman was able to highlight the error without being mean or nasty. He stated that he did not "wish to comment on the theology of Bell's book", but by seeking to correct the error of Bell's interpretation he did in fact deal quite a blow to at least one theological point that Bell was attempting to assert. Whether that was intentional or not, he still disagreed constructively and without finger-wagging or name-calling. I felt it was an accurate but non-hostile response, which clearly had the intention of being helpful to reader's of Bell's work. Trueman is good at this. He seems to have developed a confidence in commenting on people he disagrees with, and I believe he would probably happily stand alongside James Haldane in saying that he is genuinely trying to point people to the cure, which necessarily means pointing out bottles of poison when he finds it. (I should probably ask him first though!)
Post Script
I have been to Thurso a couple of times and will always remember the wonderfully shabby bookshop in the top image. It's immortalised now on Google street view. And aptly looks like it's last visitor might have been James Haldane himself!
Subversive of the Gospel
Anyway, back to the topic. Needham made a small reference in his lecture to a particular aspect that I found very interesting. From their utter conviction of the power of gospel truth they are also compelled to highlight the doctrinal errors they heard from their village ministers. Here is an example from their time in Thurso:
"Preached in the evening to about 3000 people, and bore testimony against the doctrine which had been preached in the forenoon, as being directly subversive of the gospel."It seems so natural and obvious to James Haldane that he would do this - That in preaching to a village the amazing truth of salvation by faith alone, he would have to make reference to the sermon they had all heard previously that contradicted it. Haldane makes specific reference to this part of his ministry in the introduction, essentially saying that pointing people to the medicine that heals is pointless unless he also points them to the poisons that need to be avoided (p.23).
So What
We have (meaning 'I have'!) grown scared of addressing the opinions and teachings of people we do not agree with. In an increasingly intolerant society where only certain types of diversity are allowed, we all feel the pressure to hush our feelings of disagreement and instead just focus on the bits we can all agree with.
But surely there is a central core, that we cannot keep hushed. As long as we are still duty bound to go and make disciples, then we must also be duty bound to ensure that the gospel message is always one of utterly free and unearned grace. Do we not have an obligation to point out to people any time we witness teaching that would undermine this free Gospel? I believe it's this same compulsion that drives Paul to angry compassion when he shouts at the Galatians:
"Who has bewitched you?"(Gal 3:1-3)Whilst we must be careful how we approach messages in public that we disagree with, I am beginning to feel strongly that highlighting which bottle is poison is very important when trying to point people to the cure that is the gospel.
An After Thought
On a totally unrelated (but not really) note, I was interested to read how Carl Trueman dealt with some historical interpretation errors in one of Rob Bell's books. By focussing purely on a historical critique, and intelligently pointing out the context of Luther's words, Trueman was able to highlight the error without being mean or nasty. He stated that he did not "wish to comment on the theology of Bell's book", but by seeking to correct the error of Bell's interpretation he did in fact deal quite a blow to at least one theological point that Bell was attempting to assert. Whether that was intentional or not, he still disagreed constructively and without finger-wagging or name-calling. I felt it was an accurate but non-hostile response, which clearly had the intention of being helpful to reader's of Bell's work. Trueman is good at this. He seems to have developed a confidence in commenting on people he disagrees with, and I believe he would probably happily stand alongside James Haldane in saying that he is genuinely trying to point people to the cure, which necessarily means pointing out bottles of poison when he finds it. (I should probably ask him first though!)
Post Script
I have been to Thurso a couple of times and will always remember the wonderfully shabby bookshop in the top image. It's immortalised now on Google street view. And aptly looks like it's last visitor might have been James Haldane himself!
No comments:
Post a Comment