Why has Christian unity proved to be such a divisive topic? In the 1950s two movements- evangelicalism and ecumenism- offered differing paths to unity in the church. But as the decades have passed the influence of ecumenism has exposed a fault line in evangelicalism. Questions of critical importance have been brought to the surface: Is the gospel broader than evangelicals have historically insisted? Can there be unity with non-evangelicals in evangelism and church leadership? Does the gospel have priority over denominational loyalty? These gained high profile in the crusades led by Dr. Billy Graham on both sides of the Atlantic, and in the subsequent interaction among evangelicals in North America and Europe. At first a new policy of 'co-operation without compromise' promised an 'evangelical renaissance'. Those who feared an inevitable devalutation of the gospel were viewed as destined for the kind of isolation to which fundamentalism had been consigned earlier in the century. Evangelicalism Divided traces the fascinating saga of the personalities, institutions and publications involved in this fifty-year period. Iain Murray's account is not simply a black and white narrative. But using the mass of sources now available he shows how the new policy ivolved concessions which seriously weakened biblical Christianity. The first and greatest need, he argues, is to answer the most fundamental and divisive question of all: What is a Christian? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Iain Murray's historical overview of the fortunes and misfortunes of evangelical Christianity, especially in England, between 1950 and the century's end-time, will stir up both an approving and a dissenting readership. But no one can contend that it ignores some of the most vital theological issues of the time and the conflicts surrounding them. The narrative is well documented, and it details not only conflicts of perspective but inconsistencies and alterations of views by some of the leading participants in the events of the day. The names best known to Americans - Billy Graham, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, James Packer, John Stott among them - are evaluated, commended and critiqued as contributory to the present-day evangelical outlook and predicament.Carl F.H. Henry

In Ian Murray’s historical survey of 20th century evangelicalism the reader is given an understanding of the cataclysmic changes that evangelicalism has undergone in relation to its key players, its ecumenical spirit, the mainline denominations’ influence, its relationship to fundamentalism and the change that Christianity underwent on both sides of the Atlantic. The theme of the work is directly related to the divergent definitions that were offered for what it means to be a Christian in 20th century Christendom.
As Murray chronicles a record of critical change, showing the battle that had taken place in previous generations between conservative and liberal theologians. Friedrich Schleiermacher, plays a key role in the redefinition of the meaning of doctrine, and as his influence meets the strong pull of science and crosses the Atlantic, his subjectivity would later become a mark of new evangelicalism. Murray follows the influence of Billy Graham, who he sees as central to the changes that take place in evangelicalism throughout the twentieth century. His examines Graham’s role in the tensions in the church of England, showing the ecumenical foothold gained by men like Stott and organizations such a intervarsity the influence of the BGEA, is seen as the avenue that allows ecumenical cooperation in evangelistic endeavors as both the mainline liberal denominations join in his crusades. ECT is no longer a surprising event in light of the changes that had taken place in answering the question. “What is a Christian?” When the cry for unity had reached critical mass, the greatest change took place as Rome entered into the ecumenical spirit as well. The place of orthodoxy and ecumenicalism was exemplified in another form by the formation of two organizations whose nature and course serve as a perfect paradigm of the changes taking place in evangelicalism, Christianity Today and Fuller Seminary. Both organizations were profoundly influenced by Graham, Ockenga, and Henry. Especially helpful is Murray’s analysis of Martin Lloyd Jones stance and the state of evangelicalism in England. Murray had served as MLJ’s assistant, giving him special insight into this great man’s thinking on the changes taking place and the reasons for his separation for Stott and Graham. Another helpful illustration of the changes taking place was the tension between Ockenga and Carnell at Fuller. As the lines of battle were drawn, Ockenga saw their enemy as modernism, while Carnell and other were still seeking academic approval by attacking the fundamentalists.
Personally, I found Murray’s criticism of fundamentalism to be helpful, and from a friend. His look at the separatistic tendencies and political influence were much kinder and sympathetic than Marsden’s. He writes as a pastor and scholar with strong old evangelical convictions. A summary of the lesson learned was found early in Murray’s work, “This new evangelicalism approaches the liberal bear with a bit of honey rather than a gun,” said Earnest Pickering, this seems to be the greatest issue that entered evangelicalism and changes it for posterity. Two problems contributed to the division of evangelicals: neglect of what makes one a Christian and neglect of the depth of human
depravity. Murray sees Lloyd-Jones’ diagnosis as correct. Evangelicals no longer relied on the power of God and his means for the work of soul-winning but rather turned to the wisdom of man in mass methods and compromised the basic gospel message in the process. Their commitment was no longer to the Word of God but to the methods of men. The greatest question the reader is faced with throughout Evangelicalism Divided, is this: How would you react to enormous success, broad acceptance and massive ministry approval? This was the issue that Graham faced and this was the course of evangelicalism. At what point was his faithfulness compromised, which denominational alliances were too far, and which associations were illegitimate? How much of his message had to be changed, and was this change a result of pressure from Rome, a concern for souls or the fear of man? These questions are intensely personal, and any man in ministry must consider his choices in light of past history. To learn a lesson from Murray’s book, is to put ones self in the context of crucial change, recognizing that each decision we make in alliances, in methods and in ministry lead us down a particular path that men have traveled before.

The volume is fascinating, well documented, sobering, earnest, gracious, and highly relevant for modern evangelicals. While acknowledging my limited perspective, I think that Murray’s argument is convincing.
[Read More]

A very informative book. Very heady read. Murray seems to have taken himself out of the picture and simply presented the information as it is. Therefore, the reader must read very carefully - Murray isn't just going to hand you the answers all at once. Please read this book. ( )