In studying the life of Francis Schaeffer you find that he evolved as a theologian, thinker, and Evangelist over the years. There were some key constants throughout his ministry, to be sure. He was, for example, always committed to the sufficiency and infallibility of the Word of God. He was also committed to the work of evangelizing, whether as a student, a pastor, or a missionary. Schaeffer had a consistent theology and a consistent ministry, in many regards. Yet, that ministry is marked by three distinct phases. A brief survey of those three phases can help us to better understand the man.
Phase One: The Separatist Years
It was surprising to me to learn that Schaeffer was a hard-line separatist in his early years. He was very willing to break fellowship with other believers and denominations if they did not fit into his personal theological box. In fact, he was involved in several denominational and even seminary splits. For example, Schaeffer started his seminary education at Westminster Theological but by his second year a split was already developing among students and some faculty. Schaeffer went with the separation group to join and become part of the first graduating class of Faith Seminary in Wilmington, Delaware. His reasons for leaving: (1) Westminster was “too Calvinistic”; (2) Westminster allowed for the consumption of alcohol in moderation, and Schaeffer was an avowed teetotaler; (3) Schaeffer’s conviction that Premillennialism was the Biblical view of eschatology – a position not shared by Westminster faculty. The forming of this new seminary also led to the formation of a new “Fundamentalist” denomination. Schaeffer left the Orthodox Presbyterian Church to become a part of the Bible Presbyterian denomination.
Schaeffer identified himself as a “Fundamentalist first and a Presbyterian second” (Hankins, Francis Schaeffer and the Shaping of Evangelical America. 15). As such, separatism was a chief tenet of his theological framework. As an early pastor he preached sermons against other preachers whom he deemed “modernist.” He railed publicly against the likes of Karl Barth. He viewed Neo-Evangelicalism as a “softening of the fundamentalist message” (21). He also refused to participate in the National Association of Evangelics in 1942, an organization he roundly criticized for its associations. Separatism was important.
Schaeffer’s separatist tendency should not lead us to conclude that his concerns were illegitimate. Modernisms influence on theology was dramatically reshaping Christianity where it took hold, and there were many who had sympathized with Schaeffer’s alarm. Neither should we conclude that Schaeffer’s ministry during these years was vastly distinct from his later work. Despite speaking of three phases of ministry, we do not really see three separate Schaeffers. His emphasis on the infallibility and authority of Scripture was an ever-present concern throughout his life and ministry. His conviction that Scripture was the ultimate standard and a reliable guide on all matters of doctrine and life was as strong on his last day of ministry as it was on his first. He was also actively working out the relationship between Scripture and history during these years. Studying, reading, and writing out ideas that would come to be significant in his later teaching and writing. And Schaeffer was ever the evangelist, leading particularly many children’s Bible clubs and seeing souls saved. These were all themes that remained throughout Schaeffer’s life and work. But these separatist years saw Schaeffer caught up in intramural fighting.
Even his first trip to Europe was focused around proselytizing for the sake of “Fundamentalism,” as he saw it. He appealed to churches throughout the continent to join the International Council of Christian Churches, a separatist organization developed by Carl McIntire. His first tour of Europe was more or less a campaign to recruit new participants to the fledgling council.
Later in life Francis would regret some of these battles. He would part ways with his own mentor, the staunch separatists Carl MacIntire and Allan MacRae. He would promote much more unity on the gospel, and in his activism years he would work broadly with all sorts of Christians for the sake of the culture war. Even in those later years, however, a strong commitment to the inerrancy and authority of Scripture would color his ministry. Schaeffer certainly became less separatist over the course of his ministry, but he never let go of the fundamentals of the faith. In other words, he was not always a separatist, but he was always a Fundamentalist.
Pastor Dave Online 