There is much that the PCA can learn from J. Gresham Machen. But the two lessons surveyed above—to prioritize the gospel of Christ for its own sake and to express clearly one’s confessional convictions on pressing matters within the church and the world—rise to the top. Machen believed the first of these tasks was (and is) vital to the existence of the church and the second was (and is) critical to the church’s long-term health. And he did so with firm resolve to submit his every engagement in the church and in the world to the law of love.

This year is the centennial anniversary of the release of J. Gresham Machen’s classic work, Christianity and Liberalism, a most opportune time for all in Reformed denominations, not just Machen’s own Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), to reflect on the still relevant insights Dr. Machen has left us. My own denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. So PCA folks are providentially poised not only to give special praise to God for his grace to our expression of Christ’s kingdom, but also to assess how we can grow as a church that is “faithful to the Scriptures, true to the Reformed faith, and obedient to the great commission.”[1] With Machen’s famous book in hand, then, let us dare to ask: What can Machen teach the PCA that is useful in current days?
Asking this question requires that we first dig down to the varying roots of the OPC and the PCA. At the first General Assembly of the OPC in 1936, Machen described the thirty-four ministers and some five-thousand brave souls who had joined him as “members, at last, of a true Presbyterian Church.”[2] By claiming to represent a “true” Presbyterian church, Machen implicitly declared the northern Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A, infected as it then was with the rife spirit of modernism and liberal Protestantism, to be a false church. Over a decade earlier in Christianity and Liberalism, Machen had already been urging liberal ministers of the mainline denomination to withdraw from it in the interests of honesty, going so far as to suggest that the Unitarian Church is “just the kind of church that the liberal preacher desires—namely, a church without an authoritative Bible, without doctrinal requirements, and without a creed.”[3]
By contrast, the southern Presbyterian conservatives who founded the PCA nearly four decades after the birth of the OPC styled their new denomination a “continuing Presbyterian church loyal to Scripture and to the Reformed faith.”[4] That is, while the founders of the PCA observed that the southern Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS) was traveling a liberal course that made division inevitable, many of them envisioned the PCA to be “distinctly mainline in orientation.”[5] Like Machen and the OPC, they wanted the PCA to preserve confessional Presbyterianism in America, but to do so in a way that could also achieve “the larger goal of evangelizing and renewing American culture.”[6] Notably, the PCA has not always trumpeted this dimension of its origin story, and there have always been those within its ranks who have resisted the mainline desire for cultural influence in favor of a more thoroughly Reformed identity.[7] This fact helps to explain the tension and, at times, the struggle, over the PCA’s identity and direction over the half-century since its founding.[8]
The PCA’s ambivalent relationship with the broader culture also gives glimpse into the first lesson the PCA can learn from Machen: to be on guard, as a church, against using the Christian faith to achieve allegedly higher this-worldly goals. To be clear, this caution does not oppose Christian influence for cultural betterment per se. When Christ characterized his followers as “the salt of the earth” and “the light of the world,” he was hardly calling them to a separatistic or quasi-monastic lifestyle.[9] What Machen warned against was regarding the Christian gospel more as a means for worldly influence than a message directing sinners towards the realm of heaven through faith in Christ. The danger, Machen believed, lay in the fact that the former orientation inevitably replaces the glory of God in Christ with the rehabilitation of this “present evil age” (Gal. 1:4) as the chief end of man. As Machen puts it in Christianity and Liberalism,
[I]f one thing is plain it is that Christianity refuses to be regarded as a mere means to a higher end. Our Lord made that perfectly clear when He said, ‘If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother . . . he cannot be my disciple’ (Lk. xiv. 26). Whatever else those stupendous words may mean, they certainly mean that the relationship to Christ takes precedence of all other relationships, even the holiest of relationships like those that exist between husband and wife and parent and child. Those other relationships exist for the sake of Christianity and not Christianity for the sake of them. Christianity will indeed accomplish many useful things in this world, but if it is accepted in order to accomplish those useful things it is not Christianity . . . Christianity will produce a healthy community; but if it is accepted in order to produce a healthy community, it is not Christianity.[10]
Read More

Notes
[1] “Presbyterian Church in America,” accessed February 2, 2023.
[2] J. Gresham Machen, “A True Presbyterian Church at Last,” Presbyterian Guardian (June 22, 1936): 110; emphasis added.
[3] J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, new ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009), 139–40.
[4] G. Aiken Taylor, “For a Continuing Church,” Presbyterian Journal (November 3, 1971): 7; emphasis added.
[5] Sean Michael Lucas, For a Continuing Church: The Roots of the Presbyterian Church in America (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2015), 3.
[6] Lucas, For a Continuing Church, 3.
[7] E.g., in his sermon at the first General Assembly of the PCA, Jack Williamson declared, “We have committed ourselves to the rebirth and continuation of a Presbyterian Church loyal to Scripture, the Reformed faith, and committed to the spiritual mission of the Church as Christ commanded in the Great Commission.” W. Jack Williamson, “To the Glory of God,” Presbyterian Journal (December 26, 1973), 11. It is odd that Lucas cites this sermon as evidence that those who formed the PCA were “profoundly interested in preserving American civilization through their efforts” (Lucas, For a Continuing Church, 2, cf. 313–14), since nowhere does Williamson call for this goal. Williamson did describe the visible church as “an institution in society,” but only to note that, like other institutions, the church possessed certain “distinguishing characteristics” or “marks,” namely, “the pure preaching of the Gospel; the Scriptural administration of the sacraments; and the exercise of discipline.” Williamson, “To the Glory of God,” 19.
[8] This struggle was recently evident in the contested decision of the 49th PCA General Assembly to withdraw from the National Association of Evangelicals. See Emily McFarlan Miller, “Presbyterian Church in America votes to leave National Association of Evangelicals,” Religion News Service, accessed February 4, 2023.
[9] See Craig Blomberg, Matthew,The New American Commentary 22 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1992), 102.
[10] Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, 127–28.
This article was published in the Spring 2023 issue of the Reformed Forum Magazine. Subscribe now for free. If you provide a U.S. mailing address, we’ll mail complimentary copies of future issues to your door. You’ll also receive a link to download a PDF version of our current issue.
Related Posts:

They begin to question their role or place in a family, a school, friend group, or world. As they question these things, it is easy for the teen to falsely believe that everything would be better if life was over. This false belief can take residence in the heart. When upset, hurt, disappointed, discontent, angry, or otherwise emotionally disturbed, the teen rehearses this over and over. They question whether or not everyone else would be better if they ended their own life. It is here, we must break the sequence. The music, online culture, and often friend groups do nothing to help draw these thoughts and ideas out of a teen. As long as the teen is left to walk down this path of poor perspective on life and living, suicidal ideation increases. It is necessary to parachute into the conversation.

In the recent days, I have heard of several teenagers who have died so young and needlessly. Whether it is in our neighborhood or perhaps someone you know, our hearts break. Why would a child think this is the best option? With all of life ahead, one of our young ones decides to take his or her life. As parents, friends, and concerned adults who love their community, we desire to help, to keep these things from every happening again, and somehow provide hope.
We talk to our own children, engage with their friends, and try to help with total humility. All of us as adults realize that death is no respecter of persons. Any child can be influenced, discouraged, or even momentarily devastated circumstantially. In the process, a child makes a decision which affects everyone. I think we would all say, the child drastically underestimates the love, concern, and hopes of those around him or her.
Why? How do we better understand what is taking place?
Let me suggest four obstacles to life as a teenager. The better we understand these things, the better we will be able to help our own children deal with life around them.
Four Obstacles to Life as a Teen

Trying to understand the challenges of our teenagers is important if we hope to provide them hope and help.

“GOD ISN’T PLAYING MY GAME.”

Teenagers struggle understanding or applying God’s sovereignty to their individual lives. God’s plan may be much different than what the teen desires.  Think through these areas: size, shape, personality, economic situation, neighborhood, skin, talent, relationships, and more. In each of these categories, what a teenager gets as part of God’s plan may be diametrically opposed to what he or she wants.
“I wish I were taller/bigger/shorter/smaller.”
“I wish my personality was different.”
“I wish I could afford different clothes, better car, better shoes, etc.”
“I wish we didn’t live in an apartment, had a better house, lived in a different neighborhood, or had better stuff in my room.”
“I wish I looked different, had a different skin tone, didn’t have so many pimples, looked better in my clothes, etc.”
“I wish I had a car.”
These are just a few of the many statements we could report. You understand them. At the end of the day, we have all been there to one degree or another.
The problem: the teen is dissatisfied with the sovereignty of God. God’s plan does not match the teen’s dreams or desires.

“MY FAMILY IS SO NOT PERFECT.”

For years, dad, mom, brothers, sisters, and grandparents were the best. Children long to play with their siblings, spend time with their parents, and enjoy time with their family. Children look to parents with joy, honor, and respect.
Those days slowly change for so many.
“Dad, why do you have to wear socks with your sandals?”
“Mom, why are you wearing that?”
“It is unfair. What you did for him, you don’t do for me.”
“You people are so inconsistent.”
“I get in trouble when I say or do that, but you do it as well.”
“Why does mom have to be so loud?”
“Can’t we do something different than just spend time together?”
Sometimes it feels overnight, but parents go from hero to zero. Where it was a joy to hang out, spend time together, and just love each other, now the teen sees other parents and families as cool, desires to spend more time away from the house, and can’t understand the family’s rules, priorities, or decisions.

Read More
Related Posts:

The legal nature of earthly marriage, while dissoluble due to sin, is meant to exist until death parts a couple. Legality also implies consequences for failure, such as we find in the Old Testament where Hosea’s marriage to the prostitute Gomer was a warning to Israel not to play the harlot with the Lord and instead return to him and be faithful. If Christ were not faithful to his bride, the church, he would be liable to judgment, which is impossible (Heb. 6:13; 2 Tim. 2:13). The union between Christ and the church is indissoluble—believers are beloved by Christ and forever belong to him.

We have received a lot of questions on the Beautiful Christian Life Facebook page regarding what constitutes a legitimate marriage in God’s sight. Here are seven questions and answers on the topic of the nature of marriage according to the Bible:
1. Can people be married in their hearts?
Nowhere in the Bible does it state that a true marriage exists where people agree in their hearts that they are husband and wife. In the Bible there is always a legal aspect to marriage. This is why a certificate of divorce had to be issued if the marriage was dissolved under the Mosaic covenant (Deut. 24:1-4; Matt. 19:7-8) and why Joseph was going to quietly divorce Mary after he learned she was pregnant, as there was a marriage contract in force even though their marriage had not been consummated yet:

Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. (Matt. 1:18-19)

Waiting for a period of time between the signing of the marriage contract and the actual consummation of the marriage was common practice during the time of Joseph and Mary’s betrothal. In his book Backgrounds in Early Christianity, church historian Everett Ferguson writes the following about Jewish marriage in the first century:

The marriage was a contract between families. It was effected in two stages: the betrothal (or ‘acquisition’ of the bride) and the wedding proper (taking the bride into the husband’s home). The betrothal had the legal force of marriage and could be broken only by divorce (cf. Matt 1:18-19).” It was accomplished by the bridegroom paying the bride-price (or part of it) or delivering a deed. The customary written contract (ketubah) included the husband’s duties to his wife and the sum due her in the event of a divorce or his death” (p. 74).

The bride in all her special adornments was joyfully escorted to the groom’s house for the wedding ceremony. Along with the pronouncement of seven blessings, the marriage contract was read at the ceremony, which took place under a canopy (huppah). The wedding was then celebrated for seven days (Ferguson, p. 74).
2. Why do we have to sign a piece of paper to make a marriage legal?
People wonder why a man and woman have to sign a document in order to be married. In the Ancient Near East, in which biblical history took place, a written document was commonly associated with covenants. According to Ligonier Ministries,

The signing of a piece of paper is not a matter of affixing one’s signature in ink to a meaningless document. The signing of a marriage certificate is an integral part of what the Bible calls a covenant. Biblically, there is no such thing as a private marriage contract between two people. A covenant is done publicly before witnesses and with formal legal commitments that are taken seriously by the community. The protection of both partners is at stake; there is legal recourse should one of the partners act in a way that is destructive to the other. (“God’s Will and Your Marriage,” part 1)

Christians are called to obey governing authorities. If there are laws regarding marriage in the country where a Christian man and woman reside who are seeking to marry, they need to obey them as long as they are not disobeying God in doing so:

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. (Rom. 13:1-2)

3. Does having sex with someone equal marriage (the “two become one flesh” passages)?
Some people think that two people are married if they have had sexual intercourse with each other based on the two-become-one flesh passages:

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” (Gen. 2:24)

Read More
Related Posts: