William Wilberforce is one of the heroes of the last abolitionist movement, but the Englishman has had much of his fame downplayed in the USA in lieu of American abolitionists such as Frederick Douglass. Because of his relative lack of popularity compared to other household names, many who have heard of him do not know that he was a very thorough theologian and respected minister - as were many of the most effective abolitionists.
His 1829 book Real Christianity has absolutely no need of being distinguished from his fellow Englishman C.S. Lewis' book Mere Christianity, because their content and intent is so totally different. While Lewis' Mere Christianity sought to assert and briefly defend the basic tenets of the Christian faith, Wilberforce's Real Christianity assumes that the reader identifies as a Christian and proceeds to distinguish "nominal" Christianity from "real Christianity".
The distinction of "real" Christianity is something almost altogether foreign in modern America, as we have come to adopt a system in the Protestant churches that is not altogether unlike the Catholic church - if a certain procedure has been followed, regardless of the lifestyle (fruit, as some would call it) that is produced, then the person is in the Church (note the capitalization to distinguish meaning). For the Catholic church, the procedure was infant baptism (or perhaps confirmation if not baptized as a baby). However, for Protestants, the procedure is most often a personal, private prayer that is also subject to no confirmation of any form. It is this manner of commitment without any fruit of the Spirit that Wilberforce endeavors to combat.
When religion is handed down among us by hereditary succession, it is not surprising to find youth of sense and spirit beginning to question the truth of the system in which they were brought up.
Wilberforce begins by developing a system of arguments to support the seriousness of properly identifying Christianity. He labels it "the importance of Christianity" but of course by "Christianity" he means "real Christianity" rather than the nominal Christianity that the majority of people, even in his age, were familiar with and assented to.
The shocking thing about this book, right out of the gate, is the way in which he describes the situation in which he lives. It is as though he is describing 21st Century America, absent the cars and smart-phones. His description of parents enabling their children to successfully pursue any career by placing them in position to procure any and every resource to help them, whilst simultaneously leaving it up to the child to "collect his religion as he may" haphazardly and without any real concern or intent was particularly accurate, and the fact that it occurred two centuries ago was shocking. The shock goes on, as Wilberforce begins to address some of the arguments against the value of Christianity or against some Christian doctrines which include:
Against the doctrine of sin - some may say, "This is how I was created." (I was born this way)
Against the concept of objective truth - some may say, "sincerity is what matters." (Everyone is right, as long as you truly believe.)
Against the doctrine of Sola Scriptura - "the bulk of nominal Christians form a religious system for themselves, instead of taking it from the Word of God." (That's just your interpretation).
The difficulties that he engages in the 1800's are bafflingly close to those we are facing today - and his answers are profound and as equally true today as they were then. There is an element of the book where one wishes that it had been more instructive and less critical. What is meant is, the book comes off like a 130 page rant about the status of Christianity as it existed in his day - which one could understand if there was adequate time spend instructing people on how to correct that behavior, rather than simply diagnosing it.
How little do we reflect to our children that they are immortal beings!
Perhaps the most important factor that Wilberforce forwards that is missing today is the way that he does attempt to teach a nominal Christian to identify themselves. He pushes hard on the doctrine of Total Depravity, leaning into the concept (although altogether unquoted) that "the carnal mind is enmity with God, it is not subject to His law, neither indeed can be." The constant point that he makes is that if a person is loathsome to go to church rather than enjoy leisure; if reading scripture is not enjoyable compared to something else; if religiously training your family is not a priority - these things should not come as a surprise at all because those things are indeed impossible for a lost person to enjoy. The surprise is not that those things would not be enjoyable to you, the surprise would be that you think that you are a Christian despite the obvious signs that you are not.
Unfortunately, there does need to be a lengthy critique of the center of the book. The book numbers seven chapters. Chapter 1 is 8 pages long. Chapter 2 is 11 pages. Chapter 3 is 21 pages. Chapter 4 is 48 pages. Chapter 5 is 6 pages. Chapter 6 is 8 pages. Chapter 7 is 19 pages. If you can follow that, the eye-opening length of chapter 4 when compared to any of the other chapters is indicative of the fact that most of the meaning of the book should be found there. The problem is - it's not.
Chapter 4, although composing over a third of the book by itself, was both less clear and less meaningful than some of the shortest chapters, namely chapters 1 and 6. In particular, Chapter 6 scarcely had a page (of its 8) that was not profound. In contrast, Chapter 4 reads like one continual 50 page argument, which if dropped or lost at any point becomes unfollowable. Not only does Wilberforce make frequent use of the word "it" when referencing something that has not been named in several pages, but his language (although not antiquated to the level of say, Luther) becomes a hurdle to interpret. Take for example, the following sentence from Chapter 4:
"Sometimes the over-evaluation and inordinate desire for worldly credit, though disavowed, are abundantly evident; they are apparent from the merit now assumed by the disavower for relinquishing them."
50 pages of that. Quite honestly, he may have just written the fourth chapter to weed out people who were not serious about reading the book, because he sandwiches that beating between some of the most wonderful Christian writing a person could ever read. Truly, if this book were 80 pages instead of 130, it would be bereaved of nothing.
Comments