0 20;; 5>@ 2>=B8=C8BD. B74 B74>;>6820; 2>=B@81CB8>= >5 90<4A >@@ 6OIQ 6$ AGRTKMI 0 BLIUMU AWFPMVVIH JRT VLI 3IKTII RJ ?L3 EV VLI CQMXITUMV[ RJ AV$ 0QHTIYU '-,* 5WOO PIVEHEVE JRT VLMU MVIP MU EXEMOEFOI MQ @IUIETGL/AV0QHTIYU.5WOOBIZV EV. LVVS.%%TIUIETGL#TISRUMVRT[$UV#EQHTIYU$EG$WN% ?OIEUI WUI VLMU MHIQVMJMIT VR GMVI RT OMQN VR VLMU MVIP. LVVS.%%LHO$LEQHOI$QIV%'&&()%(+), BLMU MVIP MU STRVIGVIH F[ RTMKMQEO GRS[TMKLV A CALL FOR CONTINUITY: THE THEOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTION OF JAMES ORR a thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of St. Andrews for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Glen G. Scorgie, B. Th., M. A., M. C. S. March 1986 ABSTRACT James Orr (1844-1913) was a Scottish theologian, apologist and polemicist. He was the leading United Presbyterian theologian at the time of the United Free Church of Scotland union of 1900, and beyond his own church and nation he came to exercise a significant influence in North America. This study is an examination of Orris theological contribution, what he believed and how he expressed it, in its historical setting Particular attention is paid to the convictions which undergirded and gave impetus to his activities. The study reveals that while Orr was far from unaffected by the intellectual movements of the late-Victorian period, his contribution may best be described as a call for continuity with the central tenets of evangelical orthodoxy. He was one of the earliest and principal British critics of the Ritschlian theology, and a strong opponent of rationalistic biblical criticism. He emphatically rejected all evolutionary interpretations of man's moral history, and held firmly to orthodox Christological formulations in the face of alternative assessments of the historical Jesus. While factors of temperament affected the tenor of his work, his contribution was most decisively shaped by the convictions that evangelical orthodoxy is ultimately self-authenticating, that truth comprises a unity or interconnected whole, that genuine Christian belief implies a two-story supernaturalist cosmology, and that the rationalism of the times was a temporary malaise. A general lack of support for his views within the scholarly 2 community, combined with his own deep-seated populist instincts and common sense convictions, led Orr in later years to direct his appeals primarily toward the Christian public. The conclusion reached is that Orr deserves to be recognized, not so much as a brilliant or particularly original thinker, but as an able and exceptionally vigorous participant in a period of dramatic theological challenge and change. BLANK IN ORIGINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................... v INTRODUCTION 1 ........................ CHAPTERS I. NINETEENTH CENTURY PROTESTANT THEOLOGY IN BRITAIN AND NORTH AMERICA : 8 Refining Fires ................... II. THE FORMATIVE YEARS: 31 Glaswegian, United Presbyterian, Student ...... III. FROM WESTMINSTER CONFESSION TO "THE CHRISTIAN VIEW": A Theological Position Established 56 ......... IV. ENCOUNTER WITH RITSCHLIANISM: Continuity in Theological Method 83 .......... V. THE CHALLENGE OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM: Continuity in the Interpretation and Doctrine of Scripture 124 ...................... VI. THE EXPANSION OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY: Continuity in Doctrines Man Sin 158 the of and ..... VII. THE QUEST OF THE HISTORICAL JESUS: Continuity in Christology 184 .............. VIII. POPULARIZING EVANGELICAL ORTHODOXY: An Appeal Public 208 to the ............... CONCLUSION 233 ......................... SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 251 .................... DECLARATION I was admitted as a research student under Ordinance 350 (General No. 12) on October 1,1981 and as a candidate for the degree of Ph. D. under Resolution of the University Court, 1967, No. 1 (as amended) on February 16,1983, with retrospective effect to October 1,1981. The following thesis is based on the results of research carried out by myself, is my own composition, and has not previously been presented for a higher degree. The research was carried out in the University of St. Andrews under the supervision of Professor James K. Cameron. V 1`. LL V" VVVi Gi`' Candidate 0 CERTIFICATE I certify that Glen G. Scorgie has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution of the University Court, 1967, No. 1 (as amended), and is qualified to submit this thesis in application for the Degree of Doctor of. Philosophy. Professor James K. Cameron, Supervisor 111 THESIS COPYRIGHT DECLARATION FORM UNRESTRICTED In submitting this thesis to the University of St. Andrews I understand that I am giving permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations of the University Library for the time being in force, subject to any copyright vested in the work not being affected thereby. I also understand that the title and abstract will be published, and that a copy of the work may be made and supplied to any bona fide library or research worker. Glen G. Scorgie 6 IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Even the writing of intellectual history involves certain economic realities, and I gratefully acknowledge that this research was made possible through generous financial assistance from the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the United Kingdom Cthrough its Overseas Research Students Fee Support Scheme), the University of St. Andrews, the Conoco Oil Company, the Canadian Bible College and the Alta Vista Baptist Church in Burnaby, British Columbia. Research is a fascinating priyilege, but it can also be dif- ficult, and is usually a solitary, and sometimes even a lonely enter- prise. For these latter reasons one deeply appreciates those who share one's interest, and come alongside to help and to encourage. In this vein I thank from the bottom of my heart Ian Rennie, James Packer, Robbie Orr and J. D. Douglas, as well as my colleagues at St. Mary's College and at St. John's House. More than to any other individual, I am indebted to my insightful and patient supervisor, James K. Cameron. I hasten to add the usual disclaimer, though: responsibility for this work and the conclusions to which it has led is entirely my own. I would also like to express thanks to the Master of St. John's House for providing me with study space there; to Carlos Wilton for his inquiries behalf on my at Princeton; to Jack Weir for repeated trips to the British Library in the same interest; to Lindsay Thomson, V vi Hawick, for the loan the minister of Trinity Church, of a valuable Orr, the James Orr, for primary source, and to J. M. grandson of " some intriguing "oral tradition. Librarians and archivists have been invariably cheerful and competent, but I owe a special debt to the staffs of the University of St. Andrews Library, the New College Library and the Glasgow University Archives. Sandy Ayer graciously proof-read the manuscript of this thesis, and Diane Ayer typed this final version. I am grateful to them all. Finally, I thank my wife Kate, who has always shared my enthusiasm for this study, kept the vision alight during the darker moments and willingly shared the sacrifices necessary to bring it to this stage. For these reasons, and countless others, I gladly and affectionately dedicate this thesis to her. vii When I am asked, as I sometimes am, which of these articles of the Evan- gelical faith I am prepared to part with at the instance of modern thought, and in the interests of a re-constructed theology, I answer, with fullest confidence: None of them. James Orr INTRODUCTION James Orr was a Scottish theologian, apologist and polemicist. He was born in Glasgow, educated for the most part in that city's university and was nurtured in the Christian faith in the United Presbyterian Church. For seventeen years he was a minister in the Border town of Hawick. A series of lectures he delivered in 1891 at the United Presbyterian College proved a turning-point in his career. Later published as The Christian View of God and the WorZd, these lectures were widely acclaimed as a valuable contribution to theological and apologetical literature. Orr was immediately appointed to a vacant chair in the United Presbyterian College on the strength of this work. His subsequent academic career was remarkably productive. In the remaining twenty-two years of his life, nine as a United Pres- byterian professor and thirteen at the United Free Church College in Glasgow, Orr wrote sixteen books, edited a denominational magazine for some years, contributed hundreds of articles and reviews to religious periodicals, frequently lectured abroad, and finally, edited a major reference work, The International Standard Bib Ze Encyclopaedia. Orr was the leading United Presbyterian theologian at the time of the United Free Church union, and had an important role in advocating and negotiating that ecclesiastical merger. Beyond his own church and nation, he came to exercise a significant influence in North America. 1 2 dynamic Orr's adult life corresponded to a particularly period in Protestant theology and church life, and within this context he sought to defend and preserve a degree of continuity with the older theology in the face of various challenges, usually of German origin. Orr was one of the earliest and principal British critics of Ritschlian theology, and a vigorous opponent of rationalistic biblical criticism. He was a leading conservative theological force in Scotland in his time, and one of the last major Scottish theologians to defend the traditional theological framework. Orr has received a modest amount of scholarly attention to date, and it has tended to focus on three aspects of his work: his response to Ritschlianism, his general approach to apologetics, and his doctrines of Scripture and revelation. In 1929, Samuel L. Akers included Orr among four British theologians (the others were James Denney, A. E. Garvie and H. R. Mackintosh) whose reactions to Ritsch- lianism he compared and contrasted., More recently, James Richmond has given careful consideration to Orr's criticisms of Ritschl in his Ritschl: A Reappraisal, a work based on Richmond's 1975 Kerr 2 Lectures at Glasgow University.