IrishOboe

Whoa!! Very John Piper. And an awesome precursor to the Lewis "mud pies" paragraph that Piper's so fond of quoting (on this pg, http://www.desiringgod.org/dg/id87.htm). (Although, for all we've been admiring MacDonald recently, I have to say I think he had some pretty screwy theology. Or at least what's depicted in Robert Falconer is. But then I haven't bothered to research that much; maybe if I were to read the book you refer to I'd be in a better position to say.)

Yes, what many people think they know if his theology is 'pretty screwy'. What he actually says and means might not be 100% right, but all theology is trying to describe the indescribably and it is easy read problems and meanings into statements if we choose to. I like how C.S. Lewis says he dares not say MacDonald was never wrong, but he comes the closest to anyone in picturing goodness. (Mom, can you help me? I can't find the quote.)

I dare not say that he is never in error; but to speak plainly I know hardly any other writer who seems to be closer, or more continually close, to the Spirit of Christ Himself.

(From Lewis's introduction to his anthology of MacDonald quotations.) Shortly before the above, he also says, speaking of MacDonald's Unspoken Sermons, "My own debt to this book is almost as great as one man can owe to another; and nearly all serious inquirers to whom I have introduced it acknowledge that it has given them great help -- sometimes indispensable help toward the very acceptance of the Christian faith."

Actually maybe I'm thinking not so much of his theology in the sense of "thoughts about God" as his take on the doctrine of the local church. It was actually very sad in Robert Falconer to watch the protagonist, such a spiritually attractive figure, eventually develop a kind of do-it-yourself, Lone-Ranger, Social Gospel in which he deemed all religious institutions corrupt and the greatest good was simply to practice his own brand of rather peculiar philanthropy by himself. I read once about the degree to which that was and was not autobiographical; I forget whether his disenchantment over being rejected by the church he pastored was so extreme as to turn him off to church entirely.

P.S. Erm, yeah, after a little research, seems his eschatology was pretty interesting. Attractive, mind, and some elements of it fall into the category of "I really would like that to be true, and wouldn't be one bit surprised if we get to heaven and find out it is true—but in the meantime I simply don't have enough biblical basis to cling to it as true."

I'm not in a position to argue the point at the moment, but I got the impression Falconer was not so much calling all religious institutions corrupt, as making the point that individual involvement with needy people does more to help them than social institutions set up to "help the poor."

On the other hand, it's true that I don't see much respect for the established, institutional church system in MacDonald's writings. Neither "Church" nor "Chapel" is preferred one over the other, and both are sometimes skewered. Often the institutional church is seen as the place where men go to seek an occupation with status and wealth, and where "they tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them." Yet even in the worst examples he usually manages to find some good.

But for the Church as the Body of Christ, as the gathering together of believers, I find MacDonald has the utmost love and respect.