J. Gresham Machen

Christianity and Culture

ne of the greatest of the problems thathave agitated the Church is the problemof the relation between knowledge and

piety, between culture and Christianity. Thisproblem has appeared first of all in the presenceof two tendencies in the Church—the scientificor academic tendency, and what may be calledthe practical tendency. Some men have devotedthemselves chiefly to the task of forming rightconceptions as to Christianity and its founda-tions. To them no fact, however trivial, has ap-peared worthy of neglect; by them truth has beencherished for its own sake, without immediatereference to practical consequences. Some, onthe other hand, have emphasized the essentialsimplicity of the gospel. The world is lying inmisery, we ourselves are sinners, men are perish-ing in sin every day. The gospel is the sole meansof escape; let us preach it to the world while yetwe may. So desperate is the need that we haveno time to engage in vain babblings or old wives’fables. While we are discussing the exact locationof the churches of Galatia, men are perishing un-der the curse of the law; while we are settling thedate of Jesus’ birth, the world is doing without itsChristmas message.

The representatives of both of these tenden-cies regard themselves as Christians, but too of-ten there is little brotherly feeling between them.The Christian of academic tastes accuses hisbrother of undue emotionalism, of shallow argu-mentation, of cheap methods of work. On theother hand, your practical man is ever loud in hisdenunciation of academic indifference to the direneeds of humanity. The scholar is representedeither as a dangerous disseminator of doubt, orelse as a man whose faith is a faith withoutworks. A man who investigates human sin and

the grace of God by the aid of dusty volumes,carefully secluded in a warm and comfortablestudy, without a thought of the men who are per-ishing in misery every day!

But if the problem appears thus in the pres-ence of different tendencies in the Church, it be-comes yet far more insistent within theconsciousness of the individual! If we arethoughtful, we must see that the desire to knowand the desire to be saved are widely different.The scholar must apparently assume the attitudeof an impartial observer—an attitude whichseems absolutely impossible to the piousChristian laying hold upon Jesus as the onlySaviour from the load of sin. If these twoactivities—on the one hand the acquisition ofknowledge, and on the other the exercise andinculcation of simple faith—are both to be givena place in our lives, the question of their properrelationship cannot be ignored.

The problem is made for us the more difficultof solution because we are unprepared for it. Ourwhole system of school and college education isso constituted as to keep religion and culture asfar apart as possible and ignore the question ofthe relationship between them. On five or sixdays in the week, we were engaged in the acqui-sition of knowledge. From this activity the studyof religion was banished. We studied natural sci-ence without considering its bearing or lack ofbearing upon natural theology or upon revela-tion. We studied Greek without opening the NewTestament. We studied history with carefulavoidance of that greatest of historical move-ments which was ushered in by the preaching ofJesus. In philosophy, the vital importance of thestudy of religion could not entirely be concealed,but it was kept as far as possible in the back-

O

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 2

ground. On Sundays, on the other hand, we hadreligious instruction that called for little exerciseof the intellect. Careful preparation for Sunday-school lessons as for lessons in mathematics orLatin was unknown. Religion seemed to be some-thing that had to do only with the emotions andthe will, leaving the intellect to secular studies.What wonder that after such training we came toregard religion and culture as belonging to twoentirely separate compartments of the soul, andtheir union as involving the destruction of both?

Upon entering the Seminary, we are suddenlyintroduced to an entirely different procedure.Religion is suddenly removed from its seclusion;the same methods of study are applied to it aswere formerly reserved for natural science andfor history. We study the Bible no longer solelywith the desire of moral and spiritual improve-ment, but also in order to know. Perhaps the firstimpression is one of infinite loss. The scientificspirit seems to be replacing simple faith, themere apprehension of dead facts to be replacingthe practice of principles. The difficulty is per-haps not so much that we are brought face toface with new doubts as to the truth of Christian-ity. Rather is it the conflict of method, of spiritthat troubles us. The scientific spirit seems to beincompatible with the old spirit of simple faith.In short, almost entirely unprepared, we arebrought face to face with the problem of therelationship between knowledge and piety, or,otherwise expressed, between culture andChristianity.

This problem may be settled in one of threeways. In the first place, Christianity may be sub-ordinated to culture. That solution really, thoughto some extent unconsciously, is being favouredby a very large and influential portion of theChurch today. For the elimination of the super-natural in Christianity—so tremendously com-mon today—really makes Christianity merelynatural. Christianity becomes a human product, amere part of human culture. But as such it issomething entirely different from the old Christi-anity that was based upon a direct revelationfrom God. Deprived thus of its note of authority,the gospel is no gospel any longer; it is a chequefor untold millions—but without the signature atthe bottom. So in subordinating Christianity toculture we have really destroyed Christianity, and

what continues to bear the old name is acounterfeit.

The second solution goes to the opposite ex-treme. In its effort to give religion a clear field, itseeks to destroy culture. This solution is betterthan the first. Instead of indulging in a shallowoptimism or deification of humanity, it recog-nizes the profound evil of the world, and doesnot shrink from the most heroic remedy. Theworld is so evil that it cannot possibly producethe means for its own salvation. Salvation must bethe gift of an entirely new life, coming directlyfrom God. Therefore, it is argued, the culture ofthis world must be a matter at least of indiffer-ence to the Christian. Now in its extreme formthis solution hardly requires refutation. If Christi-anity is really found to contradict that reasonwhich is our only means of apprehending truth,then of course we must either modify or abandonChristianity. We cannot therefore be entirely in-dependent of the achievements of the intellect.Furthermore, we cannot without inconsistencyemploy the printing-press, the railroad, the tele-graph in the propagation of our gospel, and atthe same time denounce as evil those activities ofthe human mind that produced these things. Andin the production of these things not merelypractical inventive genius had a part, but also,back of that, the investigations of pure scienceanimated simply by the desire to know. In its ex-treme form, therefore, involving the abandon-ment of all intellectual activity, this secondsolution would be adopted by none of us. Butvery many pious men in the Church today areadopting his solution in essence and in spirit.They admit that the Christian must have a part inhuman culture. But they regard such activity as anecessary evil—a dangerous and unworthy tasknecessary to be gone through with under a sternsense of duty in order that thereby the higherends of the gospel may be attained. Such mencan never engage in the arts and sciences withanything like enthusiasm—such enthusiasm theywould regard as disloyalty to the gospel. Such aposition is really both illogical and unbiblical.God has given us certain powers of mind, and hasimplanted within us the ineradicable convictionthat these powers were intended to be exercised.The Bible, too, contains poetry that exhibits nolack of enthusiasm, no lack of a keen apprecia-

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 3

tion of beauty. With this second solution of theproblem we cannot rest content. Despite all wecan do, the desire to know and the love of beautycannot be entirely stifled, and we cannot perma-nently regard these desires as evil.

Are then Christianity and culture in a conflictthat is to be settled only by the destruction ofone or the other of the contending forces? Athird solution fortunately, is possible—namely,consecration. Instead of destroying the arts andsciences or being indifferent to them, let us culti-vate them with all the enthusiasm of the veriesthumanist, but at the same time consecrate themto the service of our God. Instead of stifling thepleasures afforded by the acquisition of knowl-edge or by the appreciation of what is beautiful,let us accept these pleasures as the gifts of aheavenly Father. Instead of obliterating the dis-tinction between the Kingdom and the world, oron the other hand withdrawing from the worldinto a sort of modernized intellectual monasti-cism, let us go forth joyfully, enthusiastically tomake the world subject to God.

Certain obvious advantages are connectedwith such a solution of the problem. In the firstplace, a logical advantage. A man can believe onlywhat he holds to be true. We are Christians be-cause we hold Christianity to be true. But othermen hold Christianity to be false. Who is right?That question can be settled only by an examina-tion and comparison of the reasons adduced onboth sides. It is true, one of the grounds for ourbelief is an inward experience that we cannotshare—the great experience begun by convictionof sin and conversion and continued by commun-ion with God—an experience which other mendo not possess, and upon which, therefore, wecannot directly base an argument. But if ourposition is correct, we ought at least to be able toshow the other man that his reasons may beinconclusive. And that involves careful study ofboth sides of the question. Furthermore, the fieldof Christianity is the world. The Christian cannotbe satisfied so long as any human activity is eitheropposed to Christianity or out of all connectionwith Christianity. Christianity must pervade notmerely all nations, but also all of human thought.The Christian, therefore, cannot be indifferent toany branch of earnest human endeavour. It mustall be brought into some relation to the gospel. It

must be studied either in order to be demon-strated as false, or else in order to be made usefulin advancing the Kingdom of God. The Kingdommust be advanced not merely extensively, butalso intensively. The Church must seek to con-quer not merely every man for Christ, but alsothe whole of man. We are accustomed to en-courage ourselves in our discouragements by thethought of the time when every knee shall bowand every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. Noless inspiring is the other aspect of that samegreat consummation. That will also be a timewhen doubts have disappeared, when every con-tradiction has been removed, when all of scienceconverges to one great conviction, when all of artis devoted to one great end, when all of humanthinking is permeated by the refining, ennoblinginfluence of Jesus, when every thought has beenbrought into subjection to the obedience ofChrist.

If to some of our practical men, these advan-tages of our solution of the problem seem to beintangible, we can point to the merely numericaladvantage of intellectual and artistic activitywithin the Church. We are all agreed that at leastone great function of the Church is the conver-sion of individual men. The missionary move-ment is the great religious movement of our day.Now it is perfectly true that men must bebrought to Christ one by one. There are no la-bour-saving devices in evangelism. It is all hand-work. And yet it would be a great mistake tosuppose that all men are equally well prepared toreceive the gospel. It is true that the decisivething is the regenerative power of God. That canovercome all lack of preparation, and the absenceof that makes even the best preparation useless.But as a matter of fact, God usually exerts thatpower in connection with certain prior condi-tions of the human mind, and it should be ours tocreate, so far as we can, with the help of God,those favourable conditions for the reception ofthe gospel. False ideas are the greatest obstaclesto the reception of the gospel. We may preachwith all the fervour of a reformer and yet succeedonly in winning a straggler here and there, if wepermit the whole collective thought of the nationor of the world to be controlled by ideas which,by the resistless force of logic, prevent Christian-ity from being regarded as anything more than a

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 4

harmless delusion. Under such circumstances,what God desires us to do is to destroy the obsta-cle at its root. Many would have the seminariescombat error by attacking it as it is taught by itspopular exponents. Instead of that they confusetheir students with a lot of German names un-known outside the walls of the universities. Thatmethod of procedure is based simply upon a pro-found belief in the pervasiveness of ideas. What istoday matter of academic speculation begins to-morrow to move armies and pull down empires.In that second stage, it has gone too far to becombatted; the time to stop it was when it wasstill a matter of impassionate debate. So as Chris-tians we should try to mold the thought of theworld in such a way as to make the acceptance ofChristianity something more than a logical ab-surdity. Thoughtful men are wondering why thestudents of our great Eastern universities nolonger enter the ministry or display any very vitalinterest in Christianity. Various totally inadequateexplanations are proposed, such as the increasingattractiveness of other professions—an absurd ex-planation, by the way, since other professions arebecoming so over-crowded that a man can barelymake a living in them. The real difficulty amountsto this—that the thought of the day, as it makesitself most strongly felt in the universities, butfrom them spreads inevitably to the masses of thepeople, is profoundly opposed to Christianity, orat least—what is nearly as bad—it is out of allconnection with Christianity. The Church isunable either to combat it or to assimilate it,because the Church simply does not understandit. Under such circumstances, what morepressing duty than for those who have receivedthe mighty experience of regeneration, who,therefore, do not, like the world, neglect that thewhole series of vitally relevant facts which isembraced in Christian experience—what morepressing duty than for these men to makethemselves masters of the thought of the worldin order to make it an instrument of truth insteadof error? The Church has no right to be soabsorbed in helping the individual that sheforgets the world.

There are two objections to our solution ofthe problem. If you bring culture and Christianitythus into close union—in the first place, will notChristianity destroy culture? Must not art and sci-

ence be independent in order to flourish? We an-swer that it all depends upon the nature of theirdependence. Subjection to any external authorityor even to any human authority would be fatal toart and science. But subjection to God is entirelydifferent. Dedication of human powers to God isfound, as a matter of fact, not to destroy but toheighten them. God gave those powers. He un-derstands them well enough not bunglingly todestroy His own gifts. In the second place, willnot culture destroy Christianity? Is it not far eas-ier to be an earnest Christian if you confine yourattention to the Bible and do not risk being ledastray by the thought of the world? We answer,of course it is easier. Shut yourself up in an intel-lectual monastery, do not disturb yourself withthe thoughts of unregenerate men, and of courseyou will find it easier to be a Christian, just as itis easier to be a good soldier in comfortable win-ter quarters than it is on the field of battle. Yousave your own soul—but the Lord’s enemies re-main in possession of the field.

But by whom is this task of transforming theunwieldy, resisting mass of human thought untilit becomes subservient to the gospel—by whomis this task to be accomplished? To some extent,no doubt, by professors in theological seminariesand universities. But the ordinary minister of thegospel cannot shirk his responsibility. It is a greatmistake to suppose that investigation can suc-cessfully be carried on by a few specialists whosework is of interest to nobody but themselves.Many men of many minds are needed. What weneed first of all, especially in our Americanchurches, is a more general interest in the prob-lems of theological science. Without that, thespecialist is without the stimulating atmospherewhich nerves him to do his work.

But no matter what his station in life, thescholar must be a regenerated man—he mustyield to no one in the intensity and depth of hisreligious experience. We are well supplied in theworld with excellent scholars who are withoutthat qualification. They are doing useful work indetail, in Biblical philology, in exegesis, in Bibli-cal theology, and in other branches of study. Butthey are not accomplishing the great task, theyare not assimilating modern thought to Christian-ity, because they are without that experience ofGod’s power in the soul which is of the essence

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 5

of Christianity. They have only one side for thecomparison. Modern thought they know, butChristianity is really foreign to them. It is just thatgreat inward experience which it is the functionof the true Christian scholar to bring into somesort of connection with the thought of the world.

During the last thirty years there has been atremendous defection from the Christian Church.It is evidenced even by things that lie on the sur-face. For example, by the decline in church at-tendance and in Sabbath observance and in thenumber of candidates for the ministry. Specialexplanations, it is true, are sometimes given forthese discouraging tendencies. But why shouldwe deceive ourselves, why comfort ourselves bypalliative explanations? Let us face the facts. Thefalling off in church attendance, the neglect ofSabbath observance—these things are simply sur-face indications of a decline in the power ofChristianity. Christianity is exerting a far lesspowerful direct influence in the civilized worldtoday than it was exerting thirty years ago.

What is the cause of this tremendous defec-tion? For my part, I have little hesitation in sayingthat it lies chiefly in the intellectual sphere. Mendo not accept Christianity because they can nolonger be convinced that Christianity is true. Itmay be useful, but is it true? Other explanations,of course, are given. The modern defection fromthe Church is explained by the practical material-ism of the age. Men are so much engrossed inmaking money that they have no time for spiri-tual things. That explanation has a certain rangeof validity. But its range is limited. It applies per-haps to the boom towns of the West, where menare intoxicated by sudden possibilities of bound-less wealth. But the defection from Christianity isfar broader than that. It is felt in the settled coun-tries of Europe even more strongly than in Amer-ica. It is felt among the poor just as strongly asamong the rich. Finally, it is felt most strongly ofall in the universities, and that is only one indica-tion more that the true cause of the defection isintellectual. To a very large extent, the studentsof our great Eastern universities—and still morethe universities of Europe—are not Christians.And they are not Christians often just becausethey are students. The thought of the day, as itmakes itself most strongly felt in the universities,is profoundly opposed to Christianity, or at least

it is out of connection with Christianity. Thechief obstacle to the Christian religion today liesin the sphere of the intellect.

That assertion must be guarded against twomisconceptions. In the first place, I do not meanthat most men reject Christianity consciously onaccount of intellectual difficulties. On the con-trary, rejection of Christianity is due in the vastmajority of cases simply to indifference. Only afew men have given the subject real attention.The vast majority of those who reject the gospeldo so simply because they know nothing about it.But whence comes this indifference? It is due tothe intellectual atmosphere in which men areliving. The modern world is dominated by ideaswhich ignore the gospel. Modern culture is notaltogether opposed to the gospel. But it is out ofall connection with it. It not only prevents theacceptance of Christianity. It prevents Christian-ity even from getting a hearing.

In the second place, I do not mean that theremoval of intellectual objections will make aman a Christian. No conversion was everwrought simply by argument. A change of heartis also necessary. And that can be wrought onlyby the immediate exercise of the power of God.But because intellectual labour is insufficient itdoes not follow, as is so often assumed, that it isunnecessary. God may, it is true, overcome allintellectual obstacle by an immediate exercise ofHis regenerative power. Sometimes He does. ButHe does so very seldom. Usually He exerts Hispower in connection with certain conditions ofthe human mind. Usually He does not bring intothe Kingdom, entirely without preparation, thosewhose mind and fancy are completely dominatedby ideas which make the acceptance of the gos-pel logically impossible.

Modern culture is a tremendous force. It af-fects all classes of society. It affects the ignorantas well as the learned. What is to be done aboutit? In the first place the Church may simply with-draw from the conflict. She may simply allow themighty stream of modern thought to flow by un-heeded and do her work merely in the back-ed-dies of the current. There are still some men inthe world who have been unaffected by modernculture. They may still be won for Christ withoutintellectual labour. And they must be won. It isuseful, it is necessary work. If the Church is satis-

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 6

fied with that alone, let her give up the scientificeducation of her ministry. Let her assume thetruth of her message and learn simply how it maybe applied in detail to modern industrial and so-cial conditions. Let her give up the laboriousstudy of Greek and Hebrew. Let her abandon thescientific study of history to the men of theworld. In a day of increased scientific interest, letthe Church go on becoming less scientific. In aday of increased specialization, of renewed inter-est in philology and in history, of more rigorousscientific method, let the Church go on abandon-ing her Bible to her enemies. They will study itscientifically, rest assured, if the church does not.Let her substitute sociology altogether for He-brew, practical expertness for the proof of hergospel. Let her shorten the preparation of herministry, let her permit it to be interrupted yetmore and more by premature practical activity.By doing so she will win a straggler here andthere. But her winnings will be but temporary.The great current of modern culture will sooneror later engulf her puny eddy. God will save hersomehow—out of the depths. But the labour ofcenturies will have been swept away. God grantthat the Church may not resign herself to that.God grant she may face her problem squarely andbravely. That problem is not easy. It involves thevery basis of her faith. Christianity is the procla-mation of an historical fact—that Jesus Christrose from the dead. Modern thought has no placefor that proclamation. It prevents men even fromlistening to the message. Yet the culture of todaycannot simply be rejected as a whole. It is notlike the pagan culture of the first century. It isnot wholly non-Christian. Much of it has beenderived directly from the Bible. There are signifi-cant movements in it, going to waste, whichmight well be used for the defence of the gospel.The situation is complex. Easy wholesale meas-ures are not in place. Discrimination, investiga-tion is necessary. Some of modern thought mustbe refuted. The rest must be made subservient.But nothing in it can be ignored. He that is notwith us is against us. Modern culture is a mightyforce. It is either subservient to the gospel or elseit is the deadliest enemy of the gospel. For mak-ing it subservient, religious emotion is notenough, intellectual labour is also necessary. Andthat labour is being neglected. The Church has

turned to easier tasks. And now she is reaping thefruits of her indolence. Now she must battle forher life.

The situation is desperate. It might discour-age us. But not if we are truly Christians. Not ifwe are living in vital communion with the risenLord. If we are really convinced of the truth ofour message, then we can proclaim it before aworld of enemies, then the very difficulty of ourtask, the very scarcity of our allies becomes aninspiration, then we can even rejoice that Goddid not place us in an easy age, but in a time ofdoubt and perplexity and battle. Then, too, weshall not be afraid to call forth other soldiers intothe conflict. Instead of making our theologicalseminaries merely centres of religious emotion,we shall make them battle-grounds of the faith,where, helped a little by the experience of Chris-tian teachers, men are taught to fight their ownbattle, where they come to appreciate the realstrength of the adversary and in the hard schoolof intellectual struggle learn to substitute for theunthinking faith of childhood the profound con-victions of full-grown men. Let us not fear in thisa loss of spiritual power. The Church is perishingtoday through the lack of thinking, not throughan excess of it. She is winning victories in thissphere of material betterment. Such victories areglorious. God save us from the heartless crime ofdisparaging them. They are relieving the miseryof men. But if they stand alone, I fear they are buttemporary. The things which are seen are tempo-ral; the things which are not seen are eternal.What will become of philanthropy if God be lost?Beneath the surface of life lies a world of spirit.Philosophers have attempted to explore it. Chris-tianity has revealed its wonders to the simplesoul. There lie the springs of the Church’s power.But that spiritual realm cannot be entered with-out controversy. And now the Church is shrink-ing from the conflict. Driven from the spiritualrealm by the current of modern thought, she isconsoling herself with things about which thereis no dispute. If she favours better housing forthe poor, she need fear no contradiction. She willneed all her courage, she will have enemiesenough, God knows. But they will not fight herwith argument. The twentieth century, in theory,is agreed on social betterment. But sin, anddeath, and salvation, and life, and God—about

MARS HILL AUDIOResource Essay

J. Gresham Machen, “Christianity and Culture,” page 7

these things there is debate. You can avoid thedebate if you choose. You need only drift withthe current. Preach every Sunday during yourSeminary course, devote the fag ends of yourtime to study and to thought, study about as youstudied in college—and these questions willprobably never trouble you. The great questionsmay easily be avoided. Many preachers are avoid-ing them. And many preachers are preaching tothe air. The Church is waiting for men of anothertype. Men to fight her battles and solve her prob-lems. The hope of finding them is the one greatinspiration of a Seminary’s life. They need not allbe men of conspicuous attainments. But theymust all be men of thought. They must fight hardagainst spiritual and intellectual indolence. Theirthinking may be confined to narrow limits. But itmust be their own. To them theology must besomething more than a task. It must be a matterof inquiry. It must lead not to successful memo-rizing, but to genuine convictions.

The Church is puzzled by the world’s indif-ference. She is trying to overcome it by adaptingher message to the fashions of the day. But if, in-stead, before the conflict, she would descendinto the secret place of meditation, if by the clearlight of the gospel she would seek an answer not

merely to the question of the hour but, first of all,to the eternal problems of the spiritual world,then perhaps, by God’s grace, through His goodSpirit, in His good time, she might issue forthonce more with power, and an age of doubtmight be followed by the dawn of an era of faith.

Presbyterian theologian and New Testamentscholar J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937) taughtat Princeton Seminary from 1906 until 1929,the year in which he was instrumental infounding Westminster Theological Seminary inPhiladelphia. This essay was originally deliv-ered as an address in 1912 at Princeton, andpublished the following year in the PrincetonTheological Review (volume XI, pp. 1-15). Formore on Machen’s life, see D. G. Hart’s Defend-ing the Faith: J. Gresham Machen and the Crisisof Conservative Protestantism (Johns HopkinsUniversity Press, 1994). See also Hart’s essay, “J.Gresham Machen and the Problem of ChristianCivilization,” published by MARS HILL AUDIO athttp://www.marshillaudio.org/resources/pdf/Hart_Machen.pdf . This article in pdf form is athttp://www.marshillaudio.org/resources/pdf/Machen_Culture.pdf .