Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
The Influence Machen Had on McIntire
Machen had a great influence on fundamentalism in general. First of all, he supplied many outstanding texts for the use of the fundamentalists. 130 And each of Machen’s works helped define the issues that distinguished fundamentalists from the false, unbelieving philosophy that preten.ded to be « Christian.,,131 Machen was convinced following m the tradition of Princeton Theology that « scholarship as well as piety was absolutely necessary for establishing a solid foundation for long-term evangelical survival and resurgence. » But Machen was a lonely prophet for the realms of militant fundamentalism were intellectually barren. Nevertheless, the vision he proclaimed at Princeton Seminary and carried to Westminster Seminary was inspiring a succeeding generation of fundamentalist leaders. 132 Among them were the founders of Fuller Theological Seminary. 133 Moreover, Machen had a great influence on McIntire and the American Council of Christian Churches.134 The separatist concept of the church as represented by Machen. is essential to the Presbyterian Separatist Movement. 135 From the beginning of his connection with the Presbyterian Separatist Movement, McIntire was a fervent, indeed imitative, admirer of J. Gresham Machen. Perhaps he saw himself as Machen’s successor in the leadership of the movement even before Machen’s death. At any rate, from that point onward McIntire felt providentially appointed to succeed Machen as the recognized leader, not only of the Presbyterian Separatist Movement, but of the whole fundamentalist separatist movement as well.
Impelled by a deep sense of divine leading, McIntire was the leading organizer, and first president, of the fundamentalist ACCC founded in 1941 as a parallel organization to the modernist Federal Council137 McIntire is a fervent follower of Machen’s separatist principle that « separation must take place in one of two ways, either the unbelievers must be put out or the Bible-believers must withdraw; else the church ceases to be the church.,,138 McIntire stood for too strict separation. He wrote: But Machen maintained that it is not how men talk but how they vote that counts. It is not what they say, but where they find fellowship which God’s people should judge. In fact, he said repeatedly that evangelicals who work with the modernists are greater enemies to the cause of Christ than the modernists themselves. … It is this collaboration with the modernists that removes persecution and the stigma of alleged bigotry, racism, and hate mongering.
And he spoke of Edmund P. Clowney that « a great Gibraltar of separatism, » that is, Westminster Theological Seminary, « founded by the lonely and courageous Machen, found its president warming his hands by the wrong fires. ,,140 MIc’ nbre contm. ue d: Compromise begets weakness and unbelief. Woe be unto that church whose leaders covet the recognition and the praise of an ecumenical-oriented conference of any nature at any time and any place. If the Bible is the only infallible rule of faith and practice, then the fellowship which it requires must be maintained without delusion, confluence, and unholy alliances. It is indeed better for the preservation of the faith that a church be too strict, than that it not be strict enough.
But McIntire’s separatism does not apply to ordinary situations. It can only apply to emergent situations.142 Also, there were the reasons leading to the schism in the ACCC. They are: (1) the disapproval of the leadership of McIntire, (2) the rigid separatist position of the ACCC, (3) discrepancies in the statistical reports which it was charged exaggerated the actual membership of the ACCC, and (4) the failure of the Bible Presbyterian Church to grow during the period between 1951 and 1954.
Historical Background
Protestant missions to Korea began in 1884 when Horace N. Allen was transferred from the Presbyterian Mission in China. To gain access to Korea, he came not as a missionary but as physician to the U.S. Legation in Seoul. A short-lived palace coup in December 1884 gave him the chance to heal the wounds of a Korean prince, Young Ik Min, just returned from Washington, D. C., thereby earning the gratitude of the king and permission to start a Royal Hospital. He also won toleration for religious missionary work in Seoul. In 1885 missionary work began in earnest with Horace G. Underwood and Henry G. Appenzeller, Presbyterian and Methodist, respectively. Underwood, the first clerical missionary to Korea, was known as an English teacher at the hospital Allen had founded. Allen and Underwood were sent by. the PCUSA. Appenzeller and William B. Scranton were from the Methodist Episcopal Church in America.
However, they could not be engaged in direct evangelistic works. They had to be satisfied with indirect methods of evangelism, that is, education and medical service? In 1890, however, in response to the invitation of Korea missionaries who were impressed with the plan shown in his book Methods of Mission Work, John L. Nevius visited Korea. Nevius had immediate and profound effect on mission policies of the then seven young Presbyterian missionaries through his two-week visit. The mission fully adopted Nevius’ principles and put them into practice. The phenomenal growth of the Korean church was brought about through the practice of the Nevius method.
There occurred a very significant incident in Korean church history, which was the Great Revival in 1907. It started in an annual Bible-study meeting at a Presbyterian church in Pyungyang, resulted in an unprecedented spiritual experience for Korean Christians as well as moral enhancement, and has exercised a formative influence on the Korean Church for a century. From this revival on, the Korean church began to be characterized by its zeal for prayer, Bible study and evangelism. The Korean Church, it may be said, was born in a true sense through this revival. L. George Paik, the great Christian educator, looked back on the revival as a Great Awakening by stating that « the religious experience of the people gave to the Christian church in Korea a character which is its own. … Korean Christians of today look back on the movement as the source of their spiritual life.,,263 The revival spread all over the nation, as leaders who had experienced it first in Pyungyang were invited to come to various places in the country and conduct revival meetings.264
Foreign missionaries may take credit for much of what was begun in Korean Christianity. Their work took on three main forms: churchplanting, medical work and education. Church-planting and the training of a native pastorate were their primary concern, but medicine and education were vital to the modernization of Korea. Mission schools were the only modem schools prior to World War I, and a large number of Korea’s postwar leaders had spent some time in mission schools.
In 1907 the first Presbytery meeting of the Korean church was organized and held. At that meeting, the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian Church in India was adopted as the creed of the church.
George Paik characterizes that creed as a very clear expression of Reformed doctrine by stating that « the confession itself consisted of twelve articles of strong Calvinistic trend. » The Calvinism stressed therein was cultivated most effectively in Pyungyang Theological Seminary. Since 1888, Korean students had been selected for theological training, and from 1901 on, a tentative course of study was outlined and sessions conducted on a regular basis. In 1907, that seminary was formally established and « administered by a committee of the Presbyterian Church Council, including representatives of the four missions then working among Presbyterians in Korea. » In 1918, a theological quarterly magazine was started. Samuel A. Moffett was elected president of the seminary in 1907 and served in that capacity until 1924.
INTRODUCTION
I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
1. Two Traditions in American Presb~1erianism
2. From Evangelical Empire to Marginalized Fundamentalism
3. Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy
II. THE INFLUENCE MACHEN HAD ON MCINTIRE.
1. The Fundamentalist Heritage
(1) The European Legacy
(2) The American Legacy
2. The Influence Machen Had on McIntire
(1) Machen’s Thought and Theology
(2) Machen’s Influence on Mcintire
Ill. THE DIFFERENCES OF mOUGHT BETWEEN MACHEN AND MCINTIRE
IV THE INFLUENCE OF .MACHEN AND MCINTIRE ON THE KOREAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
1. Historical Background
2. The Influence of the American Missionaries on the Korean Presbyterian Church.
3. Machen’s Influence on the Korean Presbyterian Church
4. Mcintire’s Influence on the Korean Presbyterian Church
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
