Gospel-Driven Anglicanism by Oak Hill College

Gospel-driven Anglicanism

Gospel-driven Anglicanism Rev’d Dr Mark Pickles A personal plea by the former Director of Anglican Training, Oak Hill College

Oak Hill College

Gospel-driven Anglicanism © Mark Pickles 2017

Oak Hill College Chase Side, London, N14 4PS, United Kingdom www.oakhill.ac.uk

Unless otherwise stated, Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible, English Standard Version. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. ‘ESV’ and ‘English Standard Version’ are registered trademarks of Good News Publishers.

Third edition 2021

Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Chapter 1 The Mona Lisa’s Smile ............................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 2 Anglicanism Explored: Catholic and Reformed ................................................................... 16 Chapter 3 Anglicanism Explored: Reformed and Evangelical .............................................................. 31 Chapter 4 Anglicanism Explored: National and Local .......................................................................... 54 Chapter 5 Should I Stay or Should I Go? .............................................................................................. 58 Chapter 6 Don’t Let Go Lightly ............................................................................................................. 70 Chapter 7 Towards a Strategy (i).......................................................................................................... 76 Chapter 8 Towards a Strategy (ii)......................................................................................................... 89 Chapter 9 This Day the Noise of Battle ................................................................................................ 99 Chapter 10 It Takes a Village to Raise a Child… and a Church to Raise an Ordinand ........................ 106

Introduction This book was written initially to encourage those who might be considering full-time gospel ministry, to think about pursuing that within the Church of England.

In order to do that, there was a need firstly to explain and explore the historic, Reformed Anglican faith as enshrined within the 39 Articles, the Church of England’s basis of faith. Unless we know, understand and embrace the theological foundations that underpin historic Anglicanism, there is little value in thinking about a strategy for its reform and renewal. Furthermore, there is not one single doctrine or characteristic that defines Anglicanism but rather it needs to be understood as a theologically integrated whole. Only a rich theological vision can truly fuel and sustain a strategy of the order that is needed today for renewal of the Church of England according to biblical principles and its historic basis of faith. Chapters 1-4 are an attempt (albeit inevitably brief) to do that.

Before encouraging future gospel-hearted ministers to seek ordination in the Church of England, I wanted to provide a rationale for why we should stay in the denomination in the present climate, particularly when many evangelicals from independent churches or other denominations struggle to comprehend why. Chapter 5 engages with the biblical text, chapter 6 engages with our Anglican heritage, in particular those who were martyred for their refusal to deny the Biblical faith or its rightful position as the foundation for historic Anglicanism. I, personally, am greatly moved whenever I read the stories of those who gave their lives for the cause of the gospel within Anglicanism and it renews my resolve to work for the reform and renewal of the Church of England today. However, I am also aware of the emotional impact of such stories, and whilst tempted in many ways to begin there, I decided to place them after rather than before we had considered the doctrinal and biblical foundations. Many movements and causes have deeply moving stories of martyrs who have given their lives for that which they believed in, deeply moving but not necessarily right. Indeed, we live at a time when there are those who are willing to give their lives for a cause they believe in, not in sacrificial service but in appalling devastation and destruction. There is a danger in a purely emotional appeal that impacts our hearts but leaves our minds untouched, but there is also a danger in a merely intellectual appeal that convinces our minds but fails to grip our hearts.

Jonathan Edwards writes about preaching,

“I should think myself in the way of my duty (in preaching), to raise the affections of my hearers as high as possibly I can, provided that they are affected with nothing but truth, and with affections that are not disagreeable to the nature of the subject.”1

J Edwards, Concerning the Revival Yale 4:38 6

That perfectly encapsulates the aim of this book to encourage a convictional Anglicanism rooted in biblical truth that captivates our hearts.

A theological vision for the renewal and reformation of the Church of England is all well and good, but we must also answer the vital question,

“How?” Chapters 7-9 are written to engage with that question.

The book was originally published in that format. However, it soon became apparent that:

 

There was interest in the subject from congregation members and those already in ordained ministry, not just prospective ordinands. It was insufficient simply to address prospective ordinands, without engaging ministers, PCC’s and local church members. As the final chapter explains, “It takes a church to raise an ordinand”. Ordinands do not appear from a vacuum, but from the local church.

So the final chapter has been written expressly for those in leadership and those in congregations with the hope that it might encourage a focussed and prayerful commitment to raise up more labourers for the harvest field and a desire to participate in and fight for the reform and renewal of the Church of England under the Word of God.

Finally, a personal word of explanation. Before joining the Faculty at Oak Hill, I had been an Anglican minister for 26 years. Coming out of parish ministry to take up the role of Director of Anglican Training gave me the privilege of studying afresh and in depth, the doctrinal foundations and history of the Church of England, and to think deeply about questions such as:

   

How can we best train and equip ordinands for ministry in the present context of the Church of England? What ought to be our priorities? What are the questions and issues we need to think through carefully? Is it possible for the Church of England to be reformed and renewed, and if so, how?

Combined with the stimulating questions, discussions and interaction with thoughtful ordinands, this has shaped and motivated the writing of this book. There were times in my ministry when I either failed to engage with the wider Church or did so in a way that was not gracious or loving, for which I repent. Mike Ovey, the Principal of Oak Hill died whilst this book was being written. I wholly concur with words that he said at an ordination service, to those about to embark on ordained, gospelministry in the Church of England:

‘We want you to be better than us, we want you to be more faithful than us – we want you, spiritually speaking, to tower above us so that the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ stands high in this land and that men and women may know the blessings of eternal life. That is our dream for you, that is our prayer for you, not that you are as we are, but that you are better.’2

https://www.oakhill.ac.uk/resources/news-and-blog/post/57-oak-hill-college-and-church-leaderspay-tribute-to-mike-ovey

Chapter 1 The Mona Lisa’s Smile Why Bother? If you love Jesus and passionately want to give your life to serving him in full-time gospel ministry – why on earth would you bother attempting to do that in the Church of England?

  



  



Isn’t it in decline both numerically and in terms of its influence? Isn’t it hopelessly compromised and doctrinally broad? Wouldn’t it mean spending large amounts of time in endless debates, discussions and meetings all of which detract from time that could be spent much more profitably in gospel ministry and does it accomplish anything anyway? Isn’t it the case that the drift of the denomination as a whole is ever further away from biblical truth and that most likely in the end, despite all your attempts, you are still unable to reverse that drift? If you try to ignore the denomination and simply get on with gospel work in your small corner, what’s the point, then, of being in the denomination? What will happen when eventually you either leave or retire from a particular parish? Won’t the denomination simply intervene and ensure that your work is undone? Isn’t church planting the most effective way to evangelise the lost and you only have one short life, shouldn’t you invest that in a ministry that is most likely to bear fruit and impact those you are trying to reach? Besides all that, isn’t the Church of England riddled with unbiblical doctrine and practices? o Isn’t the biblical command ‘repent and be baptised’, so how can you justify baptising babies? o Doesn’t the Bible teach the need for a plurality of elders so how can you square that with bishops and vicars? Church of England services are filled with so much ritual and ceremony that is alien, confusing and off-putting to the non-church outsider, surely that is a hindrance for evangelism in a highly secular culture?

Why would you bother?

Best Boat to Fish from? It used to be argued (not so much nowadays) that one of the best reasons for getting ordained in the Church of England was that it is the best boat to fish from. As vicar of a local parish church you had all kinds of openings into the local community that provided lots of gospel opportunities. People would naturally turn to the local parish church for baptisms, weddings and funerals. Doors in the

parish would be open to the vicar, schools would be pleased to have the vicar on the board of governors and regularly take assemblies.

However, for many that no longer seems either a convincing or an adequate answer.

Firstly, many would argue it is no longer the best boat to fish from. Many of those doors are closing and many of those so-called ‘gospel opportunities’ aren’t so great after all. (A bereaved widow once said to me, “I want to have my husband’s funeral in your church and I want you to take it but I DO NOT want you to mention Jesus”).

Secondly, isn’t that sheer pragmatism? If that is the major reason for being ordained in the Church of England, then it would seem that its doctrinal distinctives are of little or no real significance whatsoever. Furthermore, the implication of course is that if at any point in time the Church of England ceases to be the best boat to fish from then the natural thing to do is to jump ship to a better boat.

So there needs to be a better argument than that, surely?

(Having said that, we do of course want to go ‘fishing’ and it’s not a bad thing to be in a boat that can help you to do that but I don’t believe that is the best or most convincing reason. In fact, the conversation with the bereaved widow that I referenced earlier was a wonderful gospel opportunity. What a privilege to be able to speak openly with someone in their hour of desperate need and deep sorrow, filled with anger and bitterness to God…but more of that later!)

Gospel-driven Anglicanism? The title of this book “Gospel-driven Anglicanism” needs some explaining. There is a whole plethora of books and movements today, containing the words “Gospel-driven” or “Gospel-centred”, in fact so common place as to risk the danger of the phrase being undervalued. However, as I hope to demonstrate, Anglicanism at its most authentic and historic is nothing other than ‘Gospel-driven’:

  

The 39 Articles (The Anglican Historic Basis of Faith) declare the gospel. The liturgy of the Book of Common Prayer pulsates with the rhythms and contours of the gospel. The ordinal3 charges those being ordained to be faithful ministers of this gospel.

The ‘Ordinal’ is the ordination service

What is perhaps more jarring is the placing of the words ‘Gospel-driven’ before the word ‘Anglicanism’. To some no doubt it sounds like an oxymoron, like ‘Gospel-driven blancmange’ – it seems bewildering to think that anything could drive an inert, amorphous, disparate blob like Anglicanism.

The conviction that drives this book is that, at its best, historic Anglicanism offers the richest, fullest expression of biblical Christianity that the world has ever seen. A statement such as that, of course, appears to convey such astonishing, breath-taking arrogance and to be so far removed from some people’s experience of the Church of England that it may leave you unsure as to whether you should roll on the floor laughing or walk off in disgust. For many evangelicals who love the biblical gospel and are committed to the authority of Scripture such a statement would seem at best to be a gross exaggeration, at worst absurd. Not only that but many Anglican evangelicals would struggle to assent to such a statement.

In an age of soundbites, blogs and twitter, we prefer brevity to longevity, succinct summaries to sustained, complex arguments, bullet points (see page 1!) to more detailed reasoning, atomistic thinking to integrated thought. However, one of the weaknesses of present-day Anglican evangelicalism is a lack of a coherent, integrated, theological, historically-minded, present-dayrelevant and future-oriented vision. This lack leaves us ill-equipped in engaging and seeking to reform the denomination; fragmented in our various strategic approaches and unconvincing in our attempts to persuade and convince future gospel ministers that the Church of England is a denomination that is worth investing your time and energy, indeed your very life in, for the sake of the gospel. In order to answer the question “Why bother?” adequately, time is needed to explain what authentic, historic Anglicanism really is, time to unearth and display its riches and treasures and time to articulate a vision of Gospel-driven Anglicanism that might fuel a sustainable long-term strategy for reforming and renewing a denomination.

A Vision Glorious4 The Mona Lisa’s Smile Therefore, in the first part of the book, I want to present a coherent and integrated vision of a fullorbed historic, authentic Anglicanism. This is so vital but is sadly not always that common amongst Anglican conservative evangelicals today. This means that the kind of objections I raised at the beginning of the chapter are not properly or satisfactorily engaged with or answered by those contemplating full-time gospel ministry, so they either go elsewhere or are ordained in the Church of England but imbibe the same piecemeal approach to Anglicanism and so the weaknesses are perpetuated.

The phrase “the vision glorious” comes in the hymn the Church’s One Foundation ‘till with the vision glorious her longing eyes are blest’, which is the blessing of the ‘beatific vision’ that awaits the people of God. It is also however, the title of a book on the Anglo Catholic movement within the Church of England written by Geoffrey Rowell. This is rather an attempt to portray a vision of what historic, Reformed, authentic Anglicanism looks like with the belief that such a vision is glorious, albeit a reflected glory.

Writing about the Mona Lisa, Daniel Tovrov suggested:

“Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa is the most famous painting in the world. But why is the painting so renowned? The reason everyone cites for the Mona Lisa's popularity is her smile. Often described as enigmatic, her half-smile has puzzled people from Sigmund Freud and Harvard professors to countless observers.”5

Undoubtedly it is the smile of the Mona Lisa that has captivated admirers down through the centuries, however it would be ludicrous to cut out her smile, frame it and hang it on the wall of an art gallery to be admired in isolation from the rest of the painting. The painting as a whole, her face as the context for her smile and the background as a context for her face are all an integral, indispensable part of the painting that serve to emphasise the wonder of the smile.

Similarly, there is not one defining characteristic that encapsulates authentic Anglicanism, but rather an interwoven tapestry of foundational theological truths, principles and beliefs that must be taken as a whole in order for the full glory of the vision to be seen.

Of course we are drawn to the smile or the eyes, but they cannot be removed and set in isolation from the painting as a whole. Similarly, there can be a tendency for some contemporary conservative Anglican Evangelicals to cut out and frame the Mona Lisa’s smile or her eyes and to ignore or even blot out other parts of the painting. Certain aspects of Anglicanism are affirmed and held onto whilst others are seen to be either insignificant or even unhelpful. This leads to a number of problems:

i. ii.

iii. iv.

The theological foundation that drives the strategy for renewal and change is fragmented, even incoherent. There is a tendency to be always on the back foot, driven by a reactionary response to whatever current heresies, false teaching or cultural pressures are assaulting the Church at any given time (such a response of course is necessary) instead of moving onto the front foot and articulating, proclaiming and pressing upon the denomination the historic Anglican faith it purports to profess. This also serves to present a proper context in which those issues can be addressed more comprehensively. It leaves us vulnerable to the charge from other Anglicans of not being true Anglicans after all, because we are seen to be indifferent to a number of its essential characteristics. Amongst ourselves there is an unhelpful and unnecessary breadth of opinion on a whole host of theological matters apart from the authority of Scripture and the content of the gospel.

Daniel Tovrov, International Business Times, http://www.ibtimes.com/why- mona-lisa-so-famous-310480 09/07/11

Most importantly of all, there is therefore a failure to capture the hearts, minds and imaginations of young gospel ministers with a vision of what this particular denomination with all the glorious riches of its theology, history, and gospel treasure could be.

Unclear Vision – Ineffective Strategy Without this coherent vision, it is impossible to present an effective, integrated and sustainable long-term strategy to renew and reform a denomination. Rather we are vulnerable to a strategy being driven by the most influential or articulate which lacks theological cohesion. Dr Martyn Lloyd Jones once wrote:

“There is all the difference in the world between organising a movement and the sheer weight of truth producing the movement inevitably”6

The great “weight of truth” that all too often lies dormant within historic, authentic Anglicanism needs to be recovered, proclaimed and cherished in order to provide a strong enough foundation for a movement to renew and reform a denomination.

Who Decides? So when we come to consider what ‘Anglicanism’ is, we also of course are faced with the question, “Who decides what is Anglicanism?” If the Church of England is a mixed denomination, containing a great breadth of theological and doctrinal beliefs, then who gets to decide which position is truly Anglican or might it even be the case that it is precisely its breadth and lack of a ‘defining’ theological position that gives it its truly ‘defining position’?

One of the prevailing interpretations of Anglicanism is that it is not only a broad church with different strands of ‘churchmanship’ within it but that the essence of Anglicanism is precisely its breadth and it jealously guards that breadth. The different strands are all integral to Anglicanism as is the understanding that all are equally valid. The most ‘unAnglican’ attitude you can take is to deem any one tradition or perspective alone as being authentically Anglican to the exclusion of all others. To challenge this mind-set is to stir deep waters of controversy, there is great tolerance of all views except any view that is deemed to be intolerant. For that view there is great intolerance!

So how are we to decide? Is it simply subjective, is it decided by the house of Bishops, the General Synod or is there no definitive means of deciding?

Letters of M Lloyd Jones p134

There are two obvious and natural places to start:

Canon Law7.

Canon A5 states: A5 Of the doctrine of the Church of England The doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular, such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal.

This makes it clear that the doctrine of the Church of England is not subjective, nor up for debate. It happily accepts the authority of the Holy Scriptures and finds further distinctive expression in the Thirty-nine Articles, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.

ii.

The Declaration of Assent

Every person who is ordained in the Church of England, is consecrated as bishop or takes up a new appointment (i.e. becomes the new minister of a church) is called upon to make the ‘Declaration of Assent’. This is a good place to start because this reveals what it is that every ordained person promises in every post, thus providing a clear and unifying expression of intent. It is not debated, it is not optional and it is not negotiable. Every ordained minister must make this declaration so it carries great weight and it ought to provide at least a basic standard of agreed common ground. It is as follows:

Firstly, there is the ‘Preface’ which is read out and then in reply the ‘Declaration of Assent’ is made.

Preface The Church of England is part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, worshipping the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It professes the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds, which faith the Church is called upon to proclaim afresh in each generation. Led by the Holy Spirit, it has borne witness to Christian truth in its historic formularies, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common 7

“Canon law is the body of ecclesiastical rules or laws imposed by authority in matters of faith, morals and discipline. Generally speaking, canon law today covers the rules of the Church for her own organization, government and administration.” http://www.thetraditionalanglicanchurchinbritain.org/

Prayer and the Ordering of Bishops, Priests and Deacons. In the declaration you are about to make, will you affirm your loyalty to this inheritance of faith as your inspiration and guidance under God in bringing the grace and truth of Christ to this generation and making Him known to those in your care?

Declaration of Assent I, A B, do so affirm, and accordingly declare my belief in the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds and to which the historic formularies of the Church of England bear witness; and in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, I will use only the forms of service which are authorized or allowed by Canon.

We will use this as the basis for exploring what is genuine, historic, authentic Anglicanism. Every ordained minister must assent to this and it helpfully defines the essential ingredients and characteristics of Anglicanism:

      

It is Trinitarian It stands as part of (not apart from) the Catholic, Apostolic Church It sits under the authority of Scripture It accepts the Catholic Creeds It finds further expression in the 39 Articles, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal (these are noted as being particularly defining) It self-consciously positions itself as a Church that is doctrinally orthodox, holding fast to the biblical, historic faith But it does so with the expressed intent of proclaiming the unchanging gospel to the people it ministers to today, as clearly, relevantly and accessibly as possible (“to proclaim afresh in each generation”).

In the next chapter we will explore these in more detail.

Chapter 2 Anglicanism Explored: Catholic and Reformed i. Catholic It is neither a mistake nor a hangover from pre-Reformation days that the Church of England never quite managed to eradicate, that the Church of England professes to be part of the ‘one, holy, CATHOLIC and apostolic Church’. The word ‘catholic’ literally means,

“’throughout the whole’, and its fundamental conception is universality…it indicated that Christianity was a religion intended for universal diffusion…this is the meaning of the word when first used by Ignatius at the beginning of the second century, ‘Where Jesus Christ may be, there is the Catholic Church…the word is, therefore most appropriate as testifying to the world-wide extension of the Gospel in the purpose of God…the Church Catholic is the Church universal, not any one Church, however large or well known. In its Catholicity all differences and distinctions, whether of race or position or capacity are unified and utilised in the one fellowship of the saints in Christ Jesus”8

Anglicanism defines itself deliberately as part of the ‘Catholic’ Church. This is more than just a word in a creed, it is a fundamental and glorious aspect of Anglicanism, that it understands itself to be part of the one true Church of Jesus Christ and so also entitled to all the riches of its heritage down through the centuries and from all around the world. This is also an expression of the right kind of ‘generosity’ of spirit that Anglicanism deliberately fosters. Recognising the Spirit of God to have been present and active in His Church throughout all the ages, sovereignly navigating the Church through the potential heretical side waters of erroneous Christologies and Trinitarian distortions, it gladly affirms the Creedal formularies of the early Church and understands them to be a part of Anglican church history. Within this ‘catholicism’ historic Anglicanism displays a right kind of ecumenism part of its essential DNA is a desire to work with other branches of the Christian Church rather than in narrow isolation - its ‘generous orthodoxy’ wants to affirm all that is good and true in other Churches recognising that no one denomination has a monopoly on all truth.

More than that, there is within that an implicit characteristic of Anglicanism that becomes much more explicit in other areas as we shall see, that has no interest in re-inventing the wheel, that approaches areas of controversy or dispute with humility, concerned to engage with the wisdom of the Church down through the ages and over matters that are not deemed to be essential or contrary to Scripture, a willingness to continue with what has gone before. This can at times lead to misunderstanding, fostering a perception that Anglicanism is compromised or lacking cutting edge clarity, the reality however is that there is a generous orthodoxy and an appreciation of what has gone before that leads to a reluctance to change what does not need to be changed, lest in the process the baby is thrown out with the bath water.

Griffith Thomas, W.H The Principles of Theology. London: Vine Books p506-8

There are some evangelicals, whose view of church history jumps from the apostolic age, stopping off briefly perhaps at Augustine and then lands again at Luther and the Protestant Reformation. This is problematic for a number of reasons, but for these two at least:

i. ii.

It (unwittingly perhaps) is a denial of the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit, active in His Church down through all the centuries It leaves centuries of theological riches buried and overlooked, rendering the present Church all the poorer for it. As the writer of Ecclesiastes tells us “there is nothing new under the sun” (Eccl 1:9), heresies, conflicts and battles that we face today have often been engaged with by our forefathers whose wisdom we ignore at our peril

The first 8 of the 39 Articles are an intentional expression of ‘catholic doctrine’. There is nothing in these articles that would not be affirmed by all orthodox branches of the Christian Church.

ii. Reformed The Tractarian movement of the 19th Century famously argued that the Anglicanism was the ‘via media’, the middle way between Roman Catholicism and Reformed Protestantism.9

However, even a cursory glance at the 39 Articles and BCP reveals that that is quite simply untenable.

The Articles clearly articulate a Protestant Reformed theology and that theology finds liturgical expression in the Prayer Book.

It is important to note that historic Anglicanism is ‘Reformed’ in contradistinction to Roman Catholicism but also at some significant points in contradistinction to other parts of the broader modern evangelical world.

ii.a The Gospel of Grace Firstly, to make clear its Reformed theology over against Roman Catholicism, in particular in its understanding of authority and the content of the gospel there are two vital questions that need to 9

John Henry Newman who wrote the Tract 38 “The Via Media No.1”, subsequently became a priest in the Roman Catholic Church, thus providing conclusive evidence that he himself, was not persuaded by the argument that Anglicanism was a true middle way between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. 17

be addressed and clearly answered in every age. They are, “What is the gospel?” and “How do you know what the gospel is?”

Paul’s letter to the Galatians deals with both these questions. The Galatian churches had been infiltrated with false teaching, in fact, with a false gospel. Of all Paul’s letters, this is Paul at his most passionate and forceful. The very life and health of the church is at stake because they have been taught a different gospel to the one Paul preached to them, “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – not that there is another one” (Gal 1:6-7).

There is only one gospel, there is no other gospel. The gospel is the Good News of God’s salvation won for us through the person and work of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. If this gospel is changed, distorted, if anything is added to it or removed from it, the gospel is lost and if the gospel is lost men and women will not be saved. It is impossible to overstate its importance and thus the need for clarity and faithfulness in proclaiming this gospel.

Paul is almost beside himself because these Galatians have been led astray, have allowed themselves to have been led astray by these false teachers and their false gospel. In all of his writings, he never writes with such vehement passion and strong denunciation as he does in these opening verses of Galatians. He could not express himself more forcefully than he does with these words, “if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8). Literally ‘let him be anathema’. This is a strong word:

“…it thus….means being delivered up and devoted to the judicial wrath of God”10

“To be anathema is to be under divine curse, like the Canaanite cities that God utterly destroyed. Paul is saying that he would be damned if he ever preached another gospel. Anyone who teaches another gospel is subject to the wrath and curse of God”11

There is so much at stake, so the denunciation is so strong. In case his readers thought that this was simply Paul writing in the heat of the moment, the fury of a passionate outburst rather than a thoughtful, measured response, he then repeats himself for clarity and emphasis, “As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:9).

10 11

Fung, Ronald Y.K. The Epistle to the Galatians Eerdmans: Grand Rapids Michigan 1988 p47 Ryken, Philip G Galatians P&R Publishing: Phillipsburg, New Jersey 2005 p23

Paul means every word of it: crystal clear logic and white-hot passion and fury because a changed gospel is a different gospel, a different gospel is a false gospel, and a false gospel is no gospel.

Precisely what is at stake in Paul’s vehement defence of the apostolic gospel? Justification by faith alone. “We know that a person is not justified by works of the law, but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified” (Gal 2:16-17).

This is THE Gospel: we are justified by grace alone through faith alone. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Eph 2:8-9).

The 39 Articles clearly proclaim the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone:

“We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith and not for our own works or deservings: wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification” Article XI

The so-called ‘solas’ (alone) of the Reformation:

    

Sola Fide, by faith alone. Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone. Solus Christus, through Christ alone. Sola Gratia, by grace alone. Soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone

serve to clarify Reformed doctrine in contrast to that of the Roman Catholic Church and the little word ‘sola’ is what makes all the difference. All would agree that we are justified by faith, it is the addition of the word ‘alone’ that is so significant. Christ has done all that is necessary for our salvation, we contribute nothing and therein lies the ground of our hope and confidence. Article XI makes this clear by the repetition of the word ‘only’.

The Prayer of Consecration in the Communion service is a beautiful expression of the finished work of Christ as being all-sufficient for our salvation:

“…give thine only Son Jesus Christ to suffer death upon the Cross for our redemption; who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world”.

The Prayer of Consecration directs our hearts and our minds to the Cross (not the Last Supper) and proclaims that the death of Christ was a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world. In other words there was nothing lacking, nothing that needed to be added, no imperfection or incompletion that we needed to contribute to.

One of the great values of such a rich, biblical liturgy is that by constant repetition doctrinal truth is driven firmly into our minds and thus to our hearts. Biblical liturgy serves to teach and disciple God’s people by filling our minds with biblical truth.

This great gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone has been proclaimed from Anglican pulpits down through the ages, from the Reformers, the great Revival Preachers of the 18th Century such as Whitefield, Rowland and Wesley, the lengthy and massively influential ministry of Charles Simeon in Cambridge into the 19th Century, Bishop JC Ryle and evangelical Anglicans of the 20th Century such as John Stott, J I Packer and Dick Lucas. Whenever the biblical gospel has been faithfully, clearly and boldly proclaimed the Church of England has been at its most effective and fruitful in engaging the culture and in winning people to Christ.

Though there are countless examples to choose from, I want to highlight in particular the preaching of Richard Hooker. Hooker is regarded by many as THE Anglican theologian. We will refer to his massive work “The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity” later, but Hooker is a vital figure in the history of Anglicanism because the various strands of Anglicanism that want to claim they are the true representatives of authentic Anglicanism (as I am doing!) all claim Hooker as one of their own.

In his sermon “Justification By Faith” Hooker expounds the biblical gospel:

“Although in ourselves we be altogether sinful and unrighteous, yet even the man who in himself is impious, full of iniquity, full of sin, him being found in Christ through faith and having his sin in hatred through repentance him God beholdeth with a gracious eye putteth away his sin by not imputing it, taketh quite away the punishment due thereunto by pardoning it and accepteth him in Jesus Christ as perfectly righteous, as if he had fulfilled all that is commanded him in the law: shall I say more perfectly righteous than if himself had fulfilled the whole law? I must take heed what I say; but the Apostle Paul saith, “God made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him”. Such we are in the sight of God the Father as is the very Son of God himself… we care

for no knowledge in the world but this: that man hath sinned and God hath suffered; that God hath made himself the sin of men and that men are made the righteousness of God”12

THE Anglican Theologian preaching THE Anglican Gospel which is nothing other than THE biblical Gospel that Paul writes to defend so passionately in his letter to the Galatians.

Hooker superbly articulates not only the glory of full and free forgiveness of sin won for us through the death of Christ – ‘God beholdeth with a gracious eye putteth away his sin by not imputing it, taketh quite away the punishment due thereunto by pardoning it and accepteth him in Jesus Christ’ but he also clearly articulates the glorious gospel truth of the ‘imputed righteousness’ of Christ. Often, in popular presentations of the gospel, preachers will declare that in the cross of Christ full provision has been made for our sin, that through the finished work of Christ the price has been paid for all our sin and that now there is ‘no condemnation for those who are in Christ’ (Romans 8:1). However, what is not as common is for preachers also to proclaim the imputed righteousness of Christ. What the Puritans called the ‘divine exchange’ whereby (as Hooker notes) Paul in 2 Corinthians 5v21 declares “For our sake he (God) made him (Christ) to be sin who knew no sin so that in him we might become the righteousness of God”. The gospel message is that by faith our sin is imputed to Christ who bears the penalty for our sin in his death upon the cross (his ‘passive obedience’) but also that through his life of faithful, perfect obedience (his ‘active obedience’) his record of perfect righteousness is also imputed to the believer through being united to Christ by faith.

The Reformed understanding of justification by faith through the imputed righteousness of Christ in contradistinction to the Roman Catholic understanding of being justified through the ‘infused’ righteousness of Christ may seem like a simple rearrangement of some letters, but in fact expresses a Grand Canyon wide difference of understanding of the gospel.

The ‘imputed righteousness’ of Christ means that Christ’s record of obedience is credited to the believer as though it were his or hers, hence Hooker’s awareness of how shocking but how true it is to declare through the gospel that the believer is “more perfectly righteous than if himself had fulfilled the whole law” because it is Christ’s righteousness that he now bears.

This also finds expression in the Prayer Book Communion service liturgy, in the so-called prayer of ‘Humble Access’ where we say, “we do not presume to come to this thy Table O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness…” and in the 3rd Homily:

R Hooker Justification By Faith

The “Homily on the Salvation of Mankind”13 “Because all men be sinners and offenders against God… every man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousness or justification… and this justification or righteousness which we so receive of God’s mercy and Christ’s merits, embraced by faith is taken accepted and allowed of God for our perfect and full justification… God sent his only son our Saviour Christ into this world to fulfil the Law for us and by shedding of his most precious blood to make a sacrifice and satisfaction… to his Father for our sins… this is that justification or righteousness which St Paul speaketh of when he saith, ’no man is justified by works of the Law but freely by faith in Jesus Christ’.

(God) provided a ransom for us, that was the most precious body and blood of his own most dear Son Jesus Christ who besides this ransom, fulfilled the law for us perfectly.

So that Christ is now the righteousness of all them that truly do believe in him. He for them paid their ransom by his death. He for them fulfilled the Law in his life. So that now in him, and by him every true Christian may be called a fulfiller of the law.”

The ‘imputed righteousness’ of Christ is integral to the gospel, without it we have no gospel. Through our union with Christ we are more than just forgiven sinners, we are those now declared ‘righteous’ in Christ, the Father does not look upon us as morally neutral but as clothed in the perfect obedience of his beloved Son. The effusive declaration of the Father about the Son at his baptism, “This is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17) is also an expression of his favour towards the believer who is ‘in Christ’.

Many Christians struggle to grasp this truth and to live in the light of it, more conscious of their sin than they are of Christ’s righteousness, their relationship with God is often lived out overshadowed by a sense of guilt, unworthiness and a condemning conscience when a fuller, deeper grasp of the imputed righteousness would lighten their darkness and lift their burden enabling them to rejoice and delight in their relationship with their heavenly Father. The 39 Articles, Prayer Book and Homilies continually encourage us to fix our eyes upon the merits and death of God’s Son.

At its very heart, historic Anglicanism radiates this glorious gospel of grace. We live in an age in which the evangelical church is awash with cheap grace, minimising both the sinfulness of sin and 13

The ‘Homilies’ are also an integral part of historic Anglicanism. Article XXXV affirms that the Homilies contain a ‘godly and wholesome doctrine’. They were particularly important PostReformation for disseminating Reformed Gospel Truth as they were required to be read in parish Churches, a very practical way of ensuring the gospel was preached in churches throughout the country when ministers who lived through the Reformation had not been taught biblical truth.

the holiness of God and all too often preaching a ‘felt-needs’ gospel that neither challenges nor transforms. We have little concept of the holiness of God that Isaiah encountered and that left him completely undone and overwhelmed and the immediate consequence of that, a crushing sense of the weightiness of our sin before such a God. It is neither life-changing nor surprising to be told that the God we have re-made in our image loves us and accepts us the way we are, why wouldn’t He?

However, the Anglican liturgy pulls no punches concerning the weightiness of sin:

“Almighty and most merciful Father, we have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep, we have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts, we have offended against thy holy laws, we have left undone those things which we ought to have done and we have done those things which we ought not to have done and there is no health in us: But thou O Lord have mercy upon us miserable offenders…”14

“Almighty God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Maker of all things, Judge of all men: we acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, which we from time to time most grievously have committed, by thought, word and deed, against thy divine majesty provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us. We do earnestly repent and heartily sorry for these our misdoings, the remembrance of them is grievous unto us, the burden of them is intolerable…”15

When my conscience is burdened with the weight of my sin, I don’t want to pussy foot around or trivialise my sin, I want a confession that can give full expression to the horror of my sin, my longing for forgiveness and a recognition that such sin is not primarily something that may have caused offence to my neighbour but that has offended against a righteous and holy God and rightly provoked his wrath. This is my true condition; I want a confession that enables me to say it as it is.

Only against the backdrop of my sinfulness and God’s holiness, do I really see the glory and splendour of the cross and the gospel of grace. Following on from the Confession in the Communion service, there are words of absolution that reassure us that God has ‘promised forgiveness of sins’ to all who truly repent and then we come to the so-called ‘comfortable words’, verses of Scripture that speak words of gospel grace about the Lord Jesus who came into the world to save sinners. Such a biblically - soaked liturgy serves to magnify the cross and the grace and love of God:

“Above all things you must give humble and hearty thanks to God…for the redemption of the world by the death and passion of our Saviour Christ, both God and man who did humble himself even to the death upon the cross for us miserable sinners who lay in darkness and the shadow of death, that he might make us the children of God and exalt us

14 15

Prayer of Confession from Morning Prayer, Book of Common Prayer Prayer of Confession, Communion Service, Book of Common Prayer

to everlasting life. And to the end that we should always remember the exceeding great love of our Master and only Saviour Jesus Christ, thus dying for us and the innumerable benefits which by his precious blood-shedding he hath obtained to us…”16

If this is our condition, hopeless and helpless then we need a Saviour who does more than meet us half-way but who does for us everything that we could not do in order to accomplish our salvation.

The so-called ‘Comfortable Words’17 in the BCP Communion service following on from the Confession serve to reassure and draw the worshipper near to God in full assurance of His gracious acceptance on the basis of the perfect, sufficient provision for sin in the death of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“The red thread that runs throughout Cranmer’s writings is this simple truth: the glory of God is to love the unworthy…Jesus himself is the one who stands by our side. He is the one who answers for us when we are accused of being sinners! Here is the heart of the revolution in the understanding of Jesus that the English Reformers wanted to proclaim. For believers, Jesus is not our judge. He is our defence lawyer…Cranmer sent out Scripture’s Comfortable Words…as a falcon, flying forth in a spiralling gyre, grounded in the human condition but gradually looping higher and higher towards the glory of the divine, holding humanity and the Trinity together in a dynamic mutual dialectic, funnelling love from above into the hearts of the beloved below so that they at last have the power to love God and one another on earth as it is in heaven”18

ii.b Calvinist not Arminian One of the great Reformation ‘solas’ – “by grace alone through faith alone” – glories in the allsufficient saving work of God. It rejoices that our salvation is entirely due to the Sovereign Grace of God and that no credit for our salvation can be attributed to ourselves. The biblical doctrine of grace is magnificent because in it, all the glory goes to God. It is impossible to meditate upon this gospel without bursting into praise, so Paul:

“Oh, the depths of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgements and how inscrutable his ways! ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who 16

3rd Prayer of Exhortation Book of Common Prayer These Scripture verses are introduced with the words, “Here what comfortable words our Saviour Christ, sayeth to all that truly to him”. The 4 verses are “Come unto to me all that travail and be heavy laden and I shall refresh you” (Matthew11:28), “So God loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son to the end that all that believe in him should not perish but have life everlasting” (John 3:16), “This is a true saying and worthy of all men to be received, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15) and “If any man sin we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:1-2) 18 A Null Divine Allurement Latimer House p 8,10-11, 13 17

has been his counsellor?’ ‘Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?’ For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory for ever. Amen” (Rom 11:3336)

The gospel of grace always ends in doxology, that is praise to God. To credit to human beings, wrongfully, any part in accomplishing our salvation is to steal glory from God. Paul is quite clear that our salvation is all of God, “those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son…and those whom he predestined he also called and those whom he called he also justified and those whom he justified he also glorified” (Romans 8:29-30). If it were not for the Sovereign Grace of God then no one could be saved, for by nature, “you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked” (Eph 2:1-2).

Popular evangelicalism is awash with ‘Arminianism’. (Arminianism denies the doctrine of Predestination claiming that although human beings are sinful they do have the ability to respond to the gospel, it denies the ‘doctrine of the irresistible grace of God’ claiming that the will has the freedom to choose or reject Christ.) Not only does Anglicanism unashamedly hold to the doctrine of predestination, its articulation of this doctrine in the 39 Articles is a superbly clear and pastorally sensitive explanation of this truth.

“Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God whereby he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God’s purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely, they be made sons of God by adoption, they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ, they walk religiously in good works and at length by God’s mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity….the godly consideration of Predestination and our Election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant and unspeakable comfort to godly persons…because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal salvation to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God” Article XVII.

This is not an embarrassed or hesitant proclamation of Predestination, rather it commends is as ‘sweet’ and ‘pleasant’ noting that its effect rightly grasped is to kindle a fervent love and comforting assurance to God’s people. However, as wonderful as this truth is, anyone who has any experience of pastoral ministry, is also well aware that even amongst committed Christians this truth can cause much disquiet. What about those who are not Christians? What about loved ones who have not yet come to Christ? Furthermore, for those exploring the faith it can also prove to be a huge stumbling block. What is the point of trying to understand the gospel or of seeking God, if He has not chosen you then there is nothing you can do about it?

Article XVII continues, “for curious and carnal persons lacking the Spirit of Christ to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God’s Predestination is a most dangerous downfall whereby the 25

Devil doth thrust them either into desperation or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation”.

In other words, this is not a doctrine to preach and hold before those who are not Christians, it is rather a doctrine to expound as a means of assurance and comfort for professing Christians. Those who have not yet come to Christ need to have the gospel offer of salvation and the invitation of Christ to come to him, preached to them.

There is much wisdom, pastoral sensitivity and graciousness to be found here, typical of historic Anglicanism’s beautiful combination of doctrinal, biblical clarity and faithfulness combined with graciousness, generosity and sensitivity.

This is THE gospel but in his letter to that Galatians, Paul not only has to defend his gospel but also to explain why his gospel is THE gospel.

ii.c Sola Scriptura: Ultimate Authority “For I would have you know, brothers that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” (Gal 1:11-12).

Paul’s gospel is authoritative because he received it directly from the Lord Jesus Christ himself, as an apostle. Paul’s gospel is THE Apostolic gospel, that was revealed to the apostles directly from Jesus Christ.

We do not receive the gospel directly from Christ but rather from his apostles who received it directly from him. This is why as Anglicans we are happy to claim in the Creed that we are part of “The One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church”. This has got nothing to do with ‘Apostolic Succession’ through the laying on of hands but rather it refers to being under Apostolic Authority, namely the Word of God revealed to the Apostles.

This is the significance of Jesus’ prayer in John 17 where he prays firstly for his disciples/apostles, “I have given them your word”. (v14) and he then goes onto pray, “I do not ask for these only but also for those who will believe in me through their word” (v20). Jesus does not say as we might expect, for those who will believe in him through ‘his’ word but ‘their’ word, in other words he has given to them the apostolic message and as they teach, proclaim and write that apostolic message so others will come to believe and trust in Christ too. We do not have direct access to the words of Jesus, it comes to us from the lips and the pens of the apostles, in our New Testament.

The question of ultimate authority is crucial for any church or denomination but is of particular significance within Anglicanism.

The 39 Articles are unequivocal that Scripture is to be the Church’s final and ultimate authority.

Articles VI states that “Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation”.

This article reveals the nuanced Anglican understanding of Scripture that we will look at more fully shortly. However, for now we note that it points us to Scripture as that which reveals the gospel to us.

Article XX addresses the question of the authority of the Church, “The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and authority in Controversies of faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore although the Church be a witness and a keeper of holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same…”

Article XXI speaking of General Councils, “…and when they be gathered together…they may err and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy Scripture”.

The Articles are clear that Scripture has authority over Church Tradition and Councils, and that no church council or synod should ever ordain anything contrary to Scripture. Church councils can and do err but Scripture is inerrant and the bar against which everything must be checked.

The question of ultimate authority in many ways brings us to the heart of the battle for the soul of Anglicanism. My point here is simply that historic Anglicanism has always been clear that Scripture and Scripture alone is our ultimate authority.

The so-called “Three legged stool” has come to be spoken of as depicting authentic Anglicanism’s approach to this question of authority. The three-fold sources of authority: Scripture, Tradition and Reason are to be held in balance in coming to a common mind on matters of faith and conduct. This has never been the position of historic Anglicanism and it is certainly not that understanding of authority revealed in the Articles. Rather, historic Anglicanism greatly prizes both tradition and reason not least because they are invaluable tools in helping us interpret Scripture correctly. We want to mine the vast resources and treasures of the Christian Church to help us understand God’s 27

Word correctly and we want to be rigorous in applying our minds, the God-given faculty of reason again to help us understand and interpret God’s Word in the right way.

However, what the Articles make abundantly clear is that if there is ever a dispute between tradition and Scripture, Scripture alone is inerrant, infallible and authoritative. Church Councils can and do err but Scripture does not.

“It is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written” Article XX. The sad fact is that the Church, the Anglican Church is capable of ordaining, agreeing to something that is contrary to God’s Word but to do so is not ‘lawful’, by which the Article means at that point the Church has gone against God’s Law.

As with Paul and the Galatians, so down through the ages and in every age, the battle for the authority of God’s Word over the Church is one that always needs to be fought. This is what it means for the Anglican Church to claim to be part of the one, holy, catholic and APOSTOLIC church. In every age this is a battle but in our day and age it is THE battle being fought within Anglicanism. Everything else flows out of this question of our authority. Will we, as the people of God, submit to the authority of the Word of God or will we bend to the prevailing wind of a culture that is moving rapidly from its Christian heritage and is increasingly hostile to orthodox Christian beliefs?

The Church of England desperately needs faithful gospel ministers who will hold fast and take to heart Paul’s command to Timothy:

“I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry.” (2 Tim 4:1-5)

When Paul gives his charge to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20 and warns of the danger of false teaching he speaks of the church as ‘the church of God which he obtained with his own blood’ Acts 20:28. This reminds us that the Church is infinitely precious to God, the bride of the Lord Jesus that he loved and gave himself up for and that therefore the love he has for the church is a costly sacrificial love. At a time when churches and congregations up and down the land are threatened by the fierce onslaught of false teaching, compromise, cultural accommodation and teachers who will teach what itchy ears want to hear, more than ever before the Church of England needs ministers in the 2 Timothy 4 mould.

Article XX also states another vitally important principle regarding our approach to Scripture, “It is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another”, see also article VII “The Old Testament is not contrary to the New: for both in the Old and New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ…”.

The Anglican understanding of Scripture is that it contains a unity which means it never contradicts itself. There are some important implications here:

It is not only unbiblical but also ‘unAnglican’ to claim a divide between the Old and New Testament, or a divide between the words of Jesus and the words of Paul. Jesus himself believed in the infallibility of Scripture and declared it to be the authoritative Word of God and all who claim to follow him must do the same. It is a liberal fallacy that seeks to play Jesus off against Paul for example, or to give more weight to the words of Jesus recorded in the four gospels and assume that if Jesus does not speak about a particular subject but Paul does, that Jesus’ silence renders Paul’s words less authoritative.

ii.

This article (XX) implicitly recognises the importance of systematic theology by stating that you must not expound any text of Scripture in such a way as to thereby contradict any other part of Scripture. In other words, there is an inner consistency to God’s Word. Contradiction is the hallmark of the lie and God who cannot lie cannot contradict himself. We can only expound Scripture in this way if we have a systematic theology that provides a framework with which to approach any individual text. We must build our systematic theology on biblical truth but failure to develop a biblical systematic theology will leave us vulnerable to expounding Scripture in contradictory ways. For example, an orthodox doctrine of the Trinity or the Person of Christ can only be established by examining all the relevant biblical material, an isolated text can leave us prone to error and heresy.

iii.

Furthermore, the Articles also make clear the significance and value of biblical theology and an awareness of both continuity and discontinuity between the Testaments. Article VII makes clear that the gospel of Jesus Christ is to be found in both the Old and the New Testament but also explains:

“Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.”

Thus the Article expresses a Reformed understanding of the so-called 3rd Use of the Law. The Ceremonial Law has been fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of Christ and the Civil Law was primarily applicable to the nation state of Israel as a ‘theocracy’ but the Moral 29

Law, most succinctly expressed in the 10 Commandments is still applicable today. This has particular relevance for current debates over matters of sexual conduct, when those who oppose biblical teaching accuse evangelicals of being selective in which parts of Scripture they claim to be still binding and which parts they appear to disregard.19

This nuanced understanding of both the continuity and discontinuity within Scripture, that is clearly articulated by these Articles, is a vital one for present day Anglicanism to grasp. When there is a failure to grasp the progressive, unfolding nature of God’s special revelation, it is all too easy to fall prey to a ‘flat’ reading of Scripture, that simply moves from one biblical ‘epoch’ to another without grasping the significance of a passage’s biblical context. One striking and common example of this, is the tendency to apply ‘Temple’ language, imagery and instruction to modern-day church buildings, worship and ministry. We no longer have a Temple, or altars, sacrifices or priests but there is a strand within Anglicanism that keeps pulling in that direction. Church architecture, clerical clothing and liturgical revision can all reflect that confused understanding. The point I am making here is simply that not only is that unbiblical it is also ‘unAnglican’ as defined by the 39 Articles and the Book of Common Prayer.

This leads us to a few areas in which historic Anglicanism finds further distinction within conservative evangelicalism as a whole.

For an excellent defence of this perspective on the Law see Sinclair Ferguson ‘The Whole Christ’ Crossway Wheaton Illinois p147-154

Chapter 3 Anglicanism Explored: Reformed and Evangelical In recent years, there have been a number of very influential movements or ministries that have been of great value for the cause and advancement of the gospel in our nation. Organisations such as UCCF and its work amongst students, Proclamation Trust and its ministry in particular to those called to teach and preach God’s Word and Gospel Partnerships that amongst other things have helped to train apprentices and church workers in gospel ministry and bible handling skills. All these organisations and others like them have been a tremendous force for good, not least in the aftermath of the tragic divide in the 1960’s between many Anglican and Free church evangelicals.

They have nurtured and fostered an evangelical unity and fellowship across denominational divides that has been heart-warming and immensely beneficial. They have united around a shared commitment to the authority of God’s Word and the Biblical Gospel.

However, at the same time and rightly so, they have not focussed on what are often called ‘secondary matters’, that is areas over which bible believing Christians can and do differ and disagree. Matters such as:

i. ii. iii. iv. v.

The role and purpose of the Law The Sacraments – Baptism and Holy Communion Polity – how Churches should be governed Ecclesiology – our doctrine and understanding of the Church, how individual churches are to relate to each other Corporate Worship

What is vital to grasp is that ‘secondary’ does not mean unimportant but it does mean that these are not ‘gospel issues’. It is possible for Christians to disagree over these matters but still to recognise that each other is still a Christian. By putting our differences over secondary issues into the background, an easy mistake to make is to conclude that therefore they do not matter. This is why I argued at the beginning that we needed a full orbed, integrated vision of historic Anglicanism because an unhelpful side effect of concentrating on issues of primary importance is that Anglican ministers (and so consequently, the congregations they serve) can be unclear or even indifferent about some of these distinctively Anglican doctrines leaving us disagreeing, confused or ill-equipped to engage in the urgent and desperate need of pursuing the renewal and reform of the Church of England.

In the rest of this chapter, we will look at these secondary issues to examine the historic Anglican perspective on them:

The Role and Purpose of the Law

This ‘3rd Use of the Law’20 also finds expression not only in the Articles but in the liturgy of the Prayer Book and the Prayer Book Catechism. In the Catechism the person is asked how many and what are the Commandments and then “what dost thou chiefly learn by these Commandments?”

“Answer: I learn two things: my duty towards God and my duty towards my Neighbour”.

The Catechist makes it clear in response to this that we cannot obey God’s commands without his special grace and the need for diligent prayer, but that obedience to them is not now done away with simply because we have been justified by faith. Similarly, in the Communion service each of the 10 Commandments is read out and is then followed by the congregation saying not only “Lord have mercy upon us”, reflecting our need for grace and mercy but also the words, “and incline our hearts to keep this law”. There is no disjunction between the character of God and the law of God, the commands of God are not only right and true but good. Psalm 119 is a beautiful exposition of the Psalmist’s love and delight in the law of God, “Oh how I love your law! It is my meditation all the day…I hate the double-minded but I love your law.” (Psalm 119:97, 113) This is not a sub-Christian legalism from which the New Testament believer is set free – Paul in Romans 7 declares, “I delight in the law of God in my inner being”.

Such a love for God’s law and a longing to live lives in conformity to it is sadly not all that prevalent today amongst many evangelicals, in part as a reaction against the fear of legalism. Such a fear has warrant as it is always a danger. Jesus himself warned his disciples to “watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matt 16:6). However, the way to avoid legalism is not to turn to antinomianism21 (or cheap grace).

“Antinomianism and legalism are not so much antithetical to each other as they are both antithetical to grace. This is why Scripture never prescribes one as the antidote for the other. Rather grace, God’s grace in Christ in our union with Christ is the antidote to both…the antinomian is by nature a person with a legalistic heart. He or she becomes an antinomian in reaction…the wholescale removal of the law seems to provide a refuge. But the problem is not with the law, but with the heart – and this remains unchanged…but turning from legalism to antinomianism is never the way to escape the husband whom we first married (the law). For we are not divorced from the law by believing that

So called because the Reformers held that the ‘First Use of the Law’ was to convict people of sin and reveal to them their need of a Saviour. It is in this sense that Christians are no longer ‘under the law’ because all of its conditions have been perfectly met by the Lord Jesus. The ‘Second Use of the Law’ is as a restraint against evil, the “Third Use of the Law” is thus as a guide for believers as to how they should live in such a way as to please God 21 Antinomianism: ‘anti’ the law, either believing that the law is done away with and so no longer need to be obeyed or a dislike of the law/obedience, sometimes called ‘cheap grace’ that is, the belief that since we are justified by faith in Christ it no longer matters how we live or behave

the commandments do not have binding force, but only by being married to Jesus Christ in union with whom it is our pleasure to fulfil them”22

Historic Anglicanism in its Articles and liturgy encourages and fosters in the believer a right view of the law and a prayerful longing for God to ‘incline our hearts’ in obedience to it, as those who have been justified by faith. I fear that this loss of the 3rd use of the law amongst evangelicals today plays a significant part in lack of heart and life transformation evident amongst many which in turn contributes to our failure to impact our culture as we should. All too often, we as Christians do not live distinctive enough lives from those around us. As we preach and teach the gospel of grace, we can sit light to the many biblical imperatives for fear of seeming to be legalistic, the consequence however, is that for many of us we do not prize or pursue whole-hearted obedience to the Lordship of Christ in all areas of our lives as we should.

ii)

The Sacraments

Here, more than anywhere else perhaps, historic Reformed Anglicanism differs from popular evangelicalism.

ii.a. Baptism Anglicanism is ‘paedo-baptist’ – that is, it believes that it is biblical to baptise babies of professing adult Christians. This is no longer the prevalent view among many evangelicals today. The argument against infant baptism is that the New Testament pattern seems to be that when a person professes faith in Christ, then he or she is baptised. On the day of Pentecost Peter commands those who respond to his message, “Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38).

Similarly, when individuals are converted we see the same pattern. So for example, Philip explains the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch who in response says, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptised?” (Acts 8:36).

It seems clear that baptism follows a profession of faith, rather than precedes it and so how it can it be right to baptise babies who are incapable of hearing, understanding and responding to the gospel?

Furthermore, evangelical suspicions are roused even further by the fact that some Anglicans claim that baptism is actually what makes someone a Christian, that is the belief in what is called

Ferguson S The Whole Christ Crossway Wheaton Illinois p156-7-8

‘baptismal regeneration’. A belief that the sacrament of baptism works automatically upon all who are baptised and that they are automatically born again by the Holy Spirit.

It is perhaps, not surprising that the so-called ‘credo-baptist’23 view has become prevalent in evangelical circles if sacramental distinctives are not taught in organisations such as CU’s and Gospel Partnerships, if it is assumed at face value that is the straightforward way of interpreting relevant biblical texts and if Anglican evangelicals do not teach a biblical rationale for infant baptism. Indeed, there are more than a few Anglican evangelical clergy who do not believe in infant baptism themselves!

Yet, historic Anglicanism insists that infant baptism is biblical, right and good. “The baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained in the Church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ” Article XXVII.

The word ‘retained’ here is instructive. Firstly, it alerts us to the fact that throughout the history of the Church down through the ages, infant baptism has been the normal custom for the vast majority of the various branches of the Christian Church, and indeed even within Protestantism, it has been the majority view since the Reformation.

This of course, does not make it right but at the very least, it gives us cause to consider that there may be good reasons why this has been the normal practice for many Christian churches and is certainly the customary practice of the Anglican church.

What then are the arguments that Bible-believing Anglicans would put forward to support the practice of infant baptism?

The context for understanding the reasons for infant baptism is that of covenant theology.

The Anglican Reformers argued that in the Old Testament circumcision was a sign of the Old Covenant, and in the New Testament baptism is a sign of the New Covenant.

“Only this difference was between them and us, that our redemption by Christ’s death and passion was then only promised and now it is performed and past. And as their sacraments (circumcision and the Passover) were figures of His death to come, so be ours figures of the same now past and gone. And yet it was all one Christ to them and us, who gave life, 23

Credo-baptist is the term often used to describe the position of those who believe that baptism should only follow from an individual’s profession of faith (Latin ‘credo’= I believe), although paedo-baptists (from Latin meaning relating to children, thus the baptism of infants) would also argue that they too believe in ‘credobaptism’, in that only the children of ‘believing parents’ should be baptised

comfort, and strength by his death to come and giveth us the same by his death passed. And he was in their sacraments spiritually and effectually present and for so much truly and really present, that is to say, in deed, before he was born, no less than he is now in our sacraments present after his death and ascension into heaven. But as for carnal presence (his physical body), he was to them not yet come and to us he is come and gone again unto his Father from whom he came”.24

Circumcision is a sign of the covenant that God made with Abraham (Genesis 17) and that at the heart of the covenant is the promise of God to Abraham and his offspring that he will be their God, they will be his people. In the case of Abraham who comes to faith from a pagan background he then receives the covenant sign of circumcision. So in Abraham, we see the same pattern that we noted in the New Testament of profession of faith followed by receiving the covenant sign.

However, what is fascinating is to see what happens to his son Isaac:

“This is my covenant which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised.” (Gen 17:10-12)

What is clear is that the sons of adult believers were also to receive the covenant sign at eight days old, clearly well before it was possible for them to profess faith themselves. God was saying to Abraham that as the child of a believer, his son was to be included within the covenant and to receive the covenant sign.

At this point it is clear that God explicitly commands that a sign of faith be administered to a person who does not yet possess or cannot yet articulate that which the sign signifies. It is not to be given to everyone, only to the children of believers but it is to be given before they had personally come to faith.

Now when we come to the New Testament, again from an understanding of covenantal theology, we see that baptism replaces circumcision as the outward sign of inward invisible grace, it is a covenantal sign and we see the same pattern as regards adult believers. Those who come to faith upon hearing the gospel are quite clearly instructed to be baptised, as we have seen people like the Ethiopian eunuch, or later in Acts Cornelius, Lydia and the Philippian jailer.

However, the million-dollar question is: “but what of their children?”

Cranmer Thomas Works Vol 1 p60

Does a child of a believer receive the sign of the Covenant in the New Testament as it does in the Old Testament?

There is clearly one difference at least. In the Old Testament the covenant sign was given only to males, to men and boys, but in the New Testament it is given to women as well.

Paul in Galatians 3:27-28 writes that, “as many of you as were baptised into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” The implication being that all the aforementioned had been baptised thus making clear their unity in Christ. In Acts 16 we read of the baptism of Lydia.

It is interesting to note that in this regard at least the New Covenant is more expansive not less, the New Covenant in this regard is more inclusive than the Old Covenant.

What would appear strange, to say the least, is the idea that after 2000 years of children being included in the covenant, that that would suddenly change and that from the Day of Pentecost onwards, children would be excluded, immediately and without a single word.

In fact, not just strange, inconceivable.

We understand how revolutionary it was for Peter to grasp that the food laws had changed. In Acts 10 and 11, Luke records the story for us, in effect repeating the story three times to emphasise the truth of this dramatic change. Mark also draws our attention to it, in Mark 7:19. It is extraordinary to believe that a change as huge as this, as regards the covenant would take place without any express command. It is unbelievable to imagine being a believer whose children were in the covenant one day and then not it in it the next, without a word of explanation anywhere in Scripture.

Modern evangelicals tend not to be so covenantal in our thinking and so we perhaps do not immediately think like this but it would be extraordinary and the idea that it changed without a whisper in the New Testament is implausible and inconceivable.

“Isn’t it strange that this departure and deviation from the purity of the apostolic church took place to the extent that it captured the whole of Christendom and not one single word of protest survives from that period? Now that’s an argument from silence. But it’s a very screaming silence.”25

RC Sproul http://www.gty.org/resources/articles/A361/case-for-infant- baptism-the-historic-paedobaptistposition

Furthermore, the natural way of reading the relevant texts reinforces this interpretation. At the conversion of Lydia and the Philippian jailer, we are told upon Lydia and the jailer’s profession of faith both they and their ‘household’ were baptised. (Acts 16:15, 33).

If there was now in the New Testament a change in practice from inclusion of the children of believers in the covenant, to the exclusion of children of believers, texts such as these are dangerously ambiguous. There is nothing in the text to suggest that each individual member of both Lydia’s family and the jailer’s family came to faith too and so were baptised. The most natural and straightforward way of reading the text is that children were baptised not because they had come to faith but because their mother or father was, in simple continuity with Old Testament practice and that Luke saw no reason to highlight or draw attention to this because he presumed it was obvious.

In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul discusses various matters concerning marriage, in particular that of a believing spouse married to an unbelieving husband or wife and says something very intriguing in v14:

“For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.”

Paul clearly cannot mean that the children of believers are Christians because either their mother or father is, so what does he mean? Again, the natural reading is to understand a covenantal context to his thinking, namely that children of believers or even of one believing spouse in a marriage, are to be included within the covenant community as they grow up and as part of the church family.

Reformed theology makes a distinction between being in the covenant internally (part of the ‘invisible church’) which means you are elect, regenerate, united to Christ and from whom you can never be severed, sealed with the Holy Spirit that is an unbreakable seal and being in the covenant externally whereby you have received the covenant sign, may participate in the life of the covenant community, the visible church and yet not be a true believer.

Thus we are encouraged to bring up our children as being a part of the church, enjoying and sharing in the benefits of being a part of the people of God, until and unless they deliberately and intentionally decide to opt out as they come of age. This is not only what the Bible teaches but also it is a tremendous privilege.

“In my experience too many Christian parents are so focused on their responsibility for their children’s spiritual lives that their prayers are essentially, “Lord help me to do my job and fulfil my calling to raise my children in the faith”. They don’t stop to listen first to what God has told them about his commitment to our children…the foundation for what we do for our 37

children is to understand and believe what God has said about his work for them and in them. Having this confidence in God’s faithfulness to his covenant promises is the most important single thing we can do for the salvation of our children. We should pray for them with earnestness but pray with confidence because God has clearly revealed his will for our children and he keeps his promises.”26

That does not mean we are to baptise babies indiscriminately. Biblically, we are to baptise the children of those who profess faith in Christ. The Church of England cannot legally refuse baptism to anyone within the parish who asks for baptism and this undeniably creates both opportunities and tensions. However, there is to be preparation for baptism which ought to entail a clear and careful explanation of the gospel, the meaning and significance of baptism and what is being promised by the parents as they bring their child for baptism. In an increasingly secular culture, with less knowledge and understanding of the Christian faith, adequate preparation needs time. A faithful gospel-hearted minister will rightly see this as an opportunity to explain the gospel.

It is perfectly possible to operate a baptism policy that has biblical integrity whilst also making good use of the opportunity for evangelism that infant baptism presents within a parish context. The offer of an alternative service of Thanksgiving for those who feel unable to make the promises entailed in baptism, allows for a warm welcome to all who enquire and yet a clear challenge to avoid perjuring oneself before God.

ii.b. Holy Communion Just as the historic Anglican understanding of baptism is perhaps a minority view amongst many evangelicals today, this is also the case as regards the historic Anglican understanding of Holy Communion.

There is clear unity amongst evangelicals that ‘transubstantiation’27 is unbiblical, but what has become the prevalent view amongst many is that the bread and wine are bare signs or symbols of the body and blood of Jesus and nothing more. In the Communion service we remember the sacrifice Christ made once for all for us upon the cross.

The historic Anglican understanding of Holy Communion clearly rejects transubstantiation (Cranmer and others were burnt at the stake for such a rejection), however it also understands that there is more to Holy Communion than simply a memorial.

Smallman S How Our Children Come to Faith p15 Transubstantiation is the Roman Catholic understanding of the Mass that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood of the Lord Jesus in the Mass. 27

The catechism defines a sacrament as “An outward and visible sign of an inward spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive the same and a pledge to assure us thereof”.28

Article XXV says about the sacraments:

“They be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him”

Jesus is now seated at the right hand of God the Father and so the bread and wine cannot become the literal body and blood of Jesus. Thomas Cranmer writes:

“They say (Roman Catholicism), that Christ is corporally in many places at one time, affirming that his body is corporally and really present in as many places as there be hosts consecrated (that is, when the bread supposedly becomes the body of Christ): we say, that as the sun corporally is ever in heaven and no where else and yet by his operation and virtue the sun is here in earth by whose influence and virtue all things in the world be corporally regenerated, increased and grow to their perfect state; so likewise our Saviour Christ bodily and corporally is in heaven, sitting at the right hand of his Father, although spiritually he hath promised to be present with us upon earth unto the world’s end. And whensoever two or three be gathered together in his name, he is there in the midst among them, by whose supernal grace all godly men be first by him spiritually regenerated and after increase and grow to their spiritual perfection in God, spiritually by faith eating his flesh and drinking his blood although the same corporally be in heaven, far distant from our sight.”29

For those who rightly receive the sacrament by faith, “The body of Christ is given, taken and eaten in the Supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith” (Article XXVIII). Thus as we eat physically the bread and wine which strengthens our bodies, so we eat and drink by faith and are strengthened spiritually.

“There is a real spiritual ‘presence’ of Christ with the hearts of all true-hearted communicants in the Lord’s Supper…I can never doubt that the great ordinance appointed by Christ has a special and peculiar blessing attached to it. That blessing, I believe consists in a special and peculiar presence of Christ, vouchsafed to the heart of every believing communicant. That truth appears to me to lie under those wonderful words of institution, “Take, eat: this is My body, drink ye all of this: this is My blood.” Those words were never meant to teach that the bread in the Lord’s Supper was literally Christ’s body, or the wine 28

Catechism, Book of Common Prayer

Cranmer T On the Lord’s Supper Berith Publications Stoke 2006 p101

literally Christ’s blood. But our Lord did mean to teach that every right-hearted believer who ate that bread and drank that wine in remembrance of Christ would in so doing find a special presence of Christ in his own heart and a special revelation of Christ’s sacrifice of His own body and blood to his soul. In a word, there is a special spiritual presence of Christ which only they know who are faithful communicants.”30

A Reformed understanding of the sacraments believes there to be a strong connection or ‘sacramental union’ between the sign and that which the sign signifies.

“We affirm that Christ doth truly and presently give His own self in His sacraments…in His supper, that we may eat Him by faith and spirit…(the sacraments) are not bare signs: it were blasphemy so to say. The grace of God doth always work with His sacraments but we are taught not to seek that grace in the sign, but to assure ourselves by receiving the sign, that it is given by the thing signified.”31

Historic Anglicanism has a ‘high’ view of the sacraments and so rejects the idea that they are simply a bare sign or memorial. It is, therefore, concerned about their wrong use, taking very seriously the biblical injunction that all those who participate in the Lord’s Supper should examine themselves:

“Whoever, therefore eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Cor 11:27-29)

This finds particular expression in the so-called 3rd prayer of exhortation found in the Book of Common Prayer, to eat and drink in an unworthy manner renders us:

“guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ our Saviour; we eat and drink our own damnation, not considering the Lord’s Body; we kindle God’s wrath against us; we provoke him to plague us with divers diseases and sundry kinds of death.”32

The prayer goes onto proclaim the gospel and encourage repentance and faith in Christ as the requisite preparation to receive the Sacrament in a worthy manner.

Ryle JC Knots Untied p159 Jewel Works Vol 2 p1102,64 32 rd 3 Prayer of Exhortation Book of Common Prayer 31

However, if misuse is so harmful, the converse is also true, that the correct use is of great spiritual benefit. The sacraments are an effectual means of grace whereby the believer is strengthened in his or her walk with Christ. This high view of the sacrament means that according to Canon Law there is to be a service of the Lord’s Supper every week.33 Historic Anglicanism thus has a strong commitment to the centrality and inseparability of the Word and the Sacrament.

iii)

Polity

The question of how the Church ought to be governed is another question that divides evangelicals. In recent years, many have come to believe and argue that the biblically prescribed way in which a local church should be governed is through a plurality of elders. In Acts 14 Paul and Barnabas appoint elders in every church (v23), in Acts 20 we see Paul meeting with the ‘Ephesian elders’, in Titus 1 Paul reminds Titus that he had left him in Crete to ‘appoint elders in every town as I directed you’ (v5).

It is also clear from the New Testament that the office of elder (Greek: presbuteros) and that of overseer/bishop (episcopos) is the same, the words are used interchangeably by Paul. (See Titus 1:5 & 7; in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 the role of an overseer is virtually identical to Titus 1:5-9 which is about elders/overseers; Acts 20 is Paul’s charge to the Ephesian ‘elders’ (v17) who he also calls ‘overseers’ (v28)). The accusation is therefore levelled at the Anglican system of church government that recognises a 3-fold office of Bishop (overseer, episcopos), Priest/Presbyter (presbuteros) and Deacon (diakonos). How can there be a separation of bishop and presbyter? Furthermore, in Anglican churches the vicar/minister has ‘sole leadership’ there is no plurality of elders as the biblical material would appear to demand.

There are two issues at least here. One is what exactly the New Testament teaches about leadership in the church. The second is the intent of Scripture, to what degree does the New Testament intend to give detailed instructions concerning the way in which churches must be governed or does it rather give certain principles but allow for freedom of development so long as nothing is done that is contrary to Scripture? To what degree is it descriptive (describing what happened) and to what degree is it prescriptive (commanding what must happen)?

iii.a New Testament teaching on Church Government It is not as clear cut as may be thought at first, regarding the insistence on plurality of elders. For example, the Ephesian elders gathered at Miletus – did they pastor together one congregation or were they pastors of a number of congregations in Ephesus?

Canon B14

There is no verse that specifically states that there must be always be a plurality of elders in every local church.

At the Council in Jerusalem in Acts 15, although this is a corporate decision-making body, it is apparent that James takes a clear, guiding and decisive lead in the procedures (Acts 15:13-21).

Most significantly, the role of Titus on Crete makes it plain that Paul does not want the local church to elect its own elders but for Titus to appoint elders in the various churches on the island (Titus 1:5). Here we see one person, not an apostle, externally exercising authority over a group of churches. Do we see in Titus and his role here an embryonic bishop role? What we do not see is traditional Presbyterianism in operation with the appointments being made by fellow elders or the congregation.

Over the whole sweep of Scripture, it seems that we have both plural and singular leadership. From Moses and his meeting with his father-in-law Jethro who advises Moses to delegate, all the way through the Scriptures to the disciples of Jesus where amongst the 12, Peter, James and John have a particular prominence and on occasion Peter in particular:

“One of great principles that grabbed my attention – was plurality in leadership…I was so committed to the principle of plurality in leadership that I at times downplayed and in some respects denied how important it is to have a strong primary leader.

When I was asked, “Who leads the church?” I would always say, “The elders”…this was true but not adequate – the facts are that I led the elders and together we led the church. I was then and always have been the primary leader in the Fellowship churches where I’ve served as senior pastor.”34

There are two extremes to be avoided where sinners (i.e. all of us) are called to be leaders in the Church of Jesus Christ. Firstly, there is the danger of one person having too much authority and not being held accountable to other people. The familiar saying “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is just as true within the church as within any secular organisation. Autocratic leadership within the Church can and has, at times, inflicted great damage upon congregations and churches. The second danger is leadership by committee where too much time is spent in discussion, debate and consultation instead of getting on with the ministry and mission of the Church.

Getz G Elders and Leaders p18

iii.b The Intent of Scripture This is the more significant debate. After the Reformation, during the reign of Elizabeth I there was a good deal of discussion as to what a truly

‘Reformed’ Church of England would look like. Some of the Puritans argued that the Elizabethan Settlement left the Church ‘halfly reformed’ and that further reformation was needed in various areas of the Church’s life, one of the most important being that of church government. They believed that a Presbyterian not Episcopal form of government was what the Bible prescribed and that episcopacy should be discarded.

Some of the most vociferous about the need for presbyteral government argued that this was not just for the ‘bene esse’ (the well-being) of the Church but was of the ‘esse’ (the essence, i.e. essential) of the Church, so that without Presbyterian government you did not have a true Church.

Richard Hooker, regarded by many as THE Anglican theologian, wrote his lengthy ‘Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity’ in defence of the Elizabethan settlement with its episcopal government against the criticisms of Presbyterians.

Hooker’s doctrine of Scripture is of fundamental importance here. His opponents, men like Thomas Cartwright, argued:

“The word of God containeth the direction of all things pertaining to the church, yea of whatsoever things can fill into any part of man’s life”35.

The 39 Articles by contrast claim “Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation” (Article VI). This is a fine distinction. Reformed Anglicanism does not claim that Scripture contains “all things necessary”, but all things “necessary for salvation”. In other words, there are many areas of life that Scripture does not speak authoritatively to and in those areas, we are free to exercise wisdom, reason and judgment so long as we do not go against what Scripture has commanded. Hooker’s concern was that an understanding of Scripture that taught it spoke authoritatively in every area of life would be pastorally crushing:

“What shall the scripture be but a snare and a torment to weak consciences filling them with infinite perplexities, scrupulosities, doubts insoluble and even extreme despair.”36

35 36

Cartwright T Replie 14 (Whitgift’s Works 1:190) Hooker R Lawes II.8.6

Whilst it is vital not to subtract from Scripture and deny, ignore or contradict the plain teaching of Scripture it is also vital, though perhaps not always so easy to spot, not to add to Scripture and make claims for it beyond what it does itself. The ‘sufficiency’ of Scripture for salvation is not the same thing as the sufficiency of Scripture for everything and Hooker was careful to make this distinction:

“The Puritans, he says, have erred in an equal and opposite direction, ‘as if Scripture did not only contain all things in that kind necessary but all things simply and in such sort that to do any thing according to any other law were not only unnecessary but even opposite unto salvation, unlawful and sinful (II.8.7). This he says while intended as high praise for Scripture, is actually a dishonour since God is honoured only by truth and Scripture never makes such claims for itself….since Scripture has been given as a supplement, not a replacement for, the natural law that Hooker thinks is still more or less inscribed on our consciences, we do not always need to appeal directly to Scripture to determine the best way to act in a given circumstance”37

This is gloriously liberating and eminently wise and it is also an essentially Anglican approach to Scripture.

Hooker, therefore, argues against those insisting on Presbyterianism as being the only possible method of church government:

“A very strange thing sure it were, that such a discipline as you speak of (Presbyterianism as opposed to episcopacy) should be taught by Christ and his Apostles in the Word of God and no church ever have found it out, nor receive it till this present time; contrariwise, the government against which you bend yourselves be observed everywhere throughout all generations and ages of the Christian world, no church ever perceiving the Word of God to be against it!” 38

This is a powerful argument. If Presbyterian government is essential for the Church to be a true Church how do you account for 1500 years of church history? Has there really been no Church for all that time, and how is it that no one sought to object, that for 1500 years nobody thought that the Church had gone against Scripture with the form of government that it exercised?

If you insist that the Bible teaches clear, unequivocal, detailed instruction as to how church government is to operate then you need to be able to demonstrate that from every relevant text and explain how the early church deviated from that virtually as soon as the apostles died out, and explain why no one across the whole church and down through the centuries objected to the form of government that developed.

37 38

Bradford Littlejohn W Richard Hooker Cascade Books Eugene 2015 P122-3 Hooker R Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity Preface, iv.1, p107

It seems to me that there is much to commend Anglicanism’s concern rather to ensure that nothing is implemented that is contrary to Scripture. In this, there is, encouraged by Scripture, a wisdom that sees episcopacy at least embryonic within the New Testament and confirmed by its subsequent historical development.

The sad reality is that because of human sinfulness there is no form of church government that can guarantee faithful gospel ministry. All forms have strengths and weaknesses.

Congregationalism or independency that believes the congregation in the local church is to exercise ultimate authority, can leave a pastor very vulnerable, particularly if the pastor seeks to bring in change or revitalisation. If the congregation decide to vote him or her out, there is nothing that can be done (Even the great Jonathan Edwards was not immune from this. Despite being the greatest theologian American has ever produced, and pastoring a congregation through remarkable seasons of revival, he was in effect, tragically sacked by his congregation and had to leave).

Both the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) and the Church of England (Episcopal) face similar problems and trials at this present time, neither polity has managed to protect the denomination from battles over false teaching.

The urgent need, whatever the polity, is for godly leaders. Whilst Bishops who fail to uphold biblical truth can do great damage, it is also true that godly bishops can be a tremendous force for good and open up all sorts of possibilities for gospel ministry in parishes that might previously have been closed to it. For our purposes here, the question is not so much “What is our present experience of episcopal ministry?” but rather, according to authentic, historic Anglicanism “What is the proper, intended role of a bishop? What is that supposed to look like and would that be a good thing for the progress of the gospel?”

In recent years, among conservative evangelicals, there has at times developed a somewhat negative attitude to bishops. Partly fuelled by frustration and discouragement through the words or actions of a particular individual bishop, partly fuelled by an emphasis on the life and ministry of the local church which can view the wider diocese and diocesan officials as somewhat irrelevant or even an unhelpful distraction for gospel ministry and partly also because we have often imbibed an independent, congregational polity that sees little biblical support for the office of bishop. But the Ordinal presents us with a glorious description of what the ministry of a faithful Bishop is intended to be. The Bishop to be consecrated is asked:



“Are you persuaded that the holy Scriptures contain sufficiently all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ? And are you determined out of the same holy Scriptures to instruct the people committed to your charge and to teach or maintain nothing as required of necessity to eternal salvation, but that which you shall be persuaded may be concluded and proved by the same? 45



Will you then faithfully exercise yourself in the same holy Scriptures and call upon God by prayer for the true understanding of the same; so as ye may be able by them to teach and exhort with wholesome doctrine and to withstand and convince gainsayers? Be you ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to God’s Word and both privately and openly call upon and encourage others to the same? Will you deny all ungodliness and worldly lusts and live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world; that you may shew yourself in all things an example of good works unto others, that the adversary may be ashamed, having nothing to say against you? Will you maintain and set forward…quietness, peace and love among all men and such as be unquiet, disobedient and criminous within your Diocese, correct and punish according to such authority as ye have by God’s Word and as to you shall be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm?”

Later in the service the Archbishop gives the bishop being consecrated a Bible saying:

“Give heed unto reading, exhortation and doctrine. Think upon things contained in this book. Be diligent in them, that the increase coming thereby may be manifest unto all men. Take heed unto thyself, and to doctrine and be diligent in doing them: for by so doing thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee. Be to the flock of Christ a shepherd, not a wolf; feed them, devour them not. Hold up the weak, heal the sick, bind up the broken, bring again the outcasts, seek the lost. Be so merciful, that ye be not too remiss; so minister discipline, that you forget not mercy: that when the chief Shepherd shall appear ye may receive the never-fading crown of glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Read those words carefully. Note that the ministry of the Bishop is to be a ministry of the Word. Imagine a denomination filled with godly bishops intent on being faithful to such a high calling, bishops who are ‘determined’ to instruct all within their diocese out of the Scriptures, to teach wholesome doctrine in accord with Scripture and who are ready to ‘banish and drive away all erroneous strange doctrine contrary to God’s Word’. Imagine what such a Church might look like. I thank God that there are and have been bishops who been faithful to these ordination promises. I thank God that I have known and experienced at first hand, the ministry of bishops faithful to these promises. The problem is not with episcopacy per se, but rather with bishops who have failed to exercise their ministry as the Ordinal would expect. The solution is not the abolition of episcopacy but rather faithful fulfilment of the episcopal role.

iv)

Ecclesiology

Along with how the Church is to be governed, there is also the question of how local churches are to relate to one another. Are they essentially independent from one another or are they to be a part of a denomination? 46

Again, many evangelicals would assert the primacy of the local church and that the Bible recognises both the local church and the Church, sometimes called the invisible Church that all true believers in Christ belong to, thus the Church as it is described in Hebrews 13 “you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem and to innumerable angels in festal gathering and to the assembly of the first - born who are enrolled in heaven and to God, the judge of all and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant…” v22-24.

The Articles do indeed recognise the primacy of the local church, “The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men in which the pure Word of God is preached and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same” Article XIX.

The local church is THE church in microcosm, not simply a part of the church as though it is lacking something. When believers gather together and the Word of God is faithfully preached and the sacraments administered, there you have the Church of Jesus Christ. However, it also recognises that there is more to say about the Church than just the local church. Churches belong together and need to have structures that enable them to relate to each other and a doctrinal basis around which they can unite.

Some Anglican evangelicals have imbibed an independent or congregational polity and sought to expound Article XIX in such a way as to argue that Anglican ecclesiology is basically congregational. However, this is clearly not what the Article intends, nor indeed other Articles. The same Article goes on to speak of the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and Rome. When speaking of the Church of Rome, the Article is not referring to a local church congregation in Rome but the Roman Catholic Church thus using the word Church in more than one sense even in the same article. Other articles, for example Article XXXIV speak of Church to mean a denomination or national Church.

Anglicanism is not congregational, it does affirm the primacy of the local church but recognises the importance of the wider church and its inter-connectedness with other Anglican churches, sharing the same doctrinal basis and form of church government (Episcopal). The New Testament can also speak of the ‘church’ meaning more than just a local congregation or the ‘one, true Church’ (that is the invisible Church).

Acts 8:1 “And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem” (by Acts 4:4 Luke tells us the number of believers were 5000, clearly more than simply one congregation).

Acts 9:31 “So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up” – clearly not a local congregation here.

In 1 Corinthians 15v9 Paul writes, “I persecuted the church of God”, again not meaning a local congregation, but local congregations spread over a large area.

As we mentioned earlier, the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 met together to discuss an issue that was impacting ‘churches’ in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia (15:23). The Council did not respond by saying that it was up to the local congregations to deal with the issue as each saw fit, but rather the council sent a letter giving a ruling for the churches. When the church in Antioch met and heard the letter they ‘rejoiced because of its encouragement’ (v31) clearly recognising that the Council had authority to make such a ruling, rather than resisting such authority on the grounds of the local congregation’s right to self-government.

If Anglican conservative evangelicals adopt a functionally Congregationalist approach to the Church of England, it can have at least two consequences:

1) Positively, it allows a pastor and a congregation to continue to focus on gospel ministry. Even if the diocese or denomination as a whole is careering wildly off course, the work of the gospel continues on the ground unswayed by what is happening elsewhere.

2) Negatively, ignoring or withdrawing from the wider denomination, may allow short term gospel gains, but in the long run serves to hinder the progress of the gospel in the renewal and reformation of the denomination as a whole. The plain fact is that the Church of England is not congregational and so synods and bishops can and do create legislation and implement strategies that impact the local church. Whenever there is an interregnum (a change of minister) the local church inevitably must work with the wider church and diocese in the appointment of a new minister. Thus to ignore or abandon the structures, committees and synods of the denomination will inevitably weaken the cause of faithful gospel ministry in the long run.

Historically, there have been periods when evangelicals have withdrawn from denominational life and sought refuge in the local church and simply got on with gospel ministry, then there have been periods of reaction to that withdrawal, with evangelicals resolving to commit themselves to the denomination as a whole and to get involved in the structures. For example, at the first National Evangelical Anglican Congress at Keele in 1967, Anglican evangelicals resolved to be committed to and work within the Church of England for its renewal:

“We are deeply committed to the present and future of the Church of England. We believe that God has led us to this commitment and we dare to hope and pray that through it God will bring His Word to bear with new power upon this Church. We do not believe secession

to be a live issue in our present situation. Only if the Church of England ceased to exhibit the marks of a true Church (Article 19) could such a step be contemplated”39

However, the chequered history of Anglican evangelicalism post Keele reveals how vital it is, when evangelicals resolve to work within the structures, that they remain wholeheartedly committed to biblical truth and doctrine. Withdrawal for fear of contamination, does enable you to resist the temptation to compromise and full involvement within the structures of the denomination is much easier if you are willing to compromise. What requires much greater strength of character and careful thought is to be willing to be involved, to contend for the truth but without compromise or moving from biblical moorings.

It is at this point that we see the need for the best possible training to equip a future minister for a life-time of faithful gospel ministry. We will return to the importance of training in a subsequent chapter.

Corporate Worship

In recent years, there has been a helpful recovery of the New Testament understanding of ‘worship’ as not just something that is done when the church gathers Sunday by Sunday but that all of life is worship:

“I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1)

However, sometimes this understanding of worship has been so stressed, that it has almost seemed that the one time we don’t worship, is when we gather together Sunday by Sunday. Amongst conservative evangelicals, there has also been a great stress on the horizontal dimension of our corporate gatherings taken from passages such as Hebrews 10:

“And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” (Heb 10:24-25).

Keele Statement. The first evangelical anglican congress was led and shaped by leading evangelicals such as John Stott, JI Packer, Alec Motyer – clear, conservative evangelicals. This was a time of resurgent evangelical confidence and activity in the Church of England, following a number of years of withdrawal and a ‘ghetto-like mentality’

We gather together for mutual encouragement and to stir up one another. Again, there is a danger that this has been so stressed that the vertical dimension has been either neglected or even ignored, that we are meeting together as the people of God in his presence. Part of our whole life of worship includes meeting with God’s people, to worship him in praise and thanksgiving, to hear his Word and to receive his ‘visible word’ (Communion), to respond in repentance and a renewed commitment to serve him wholeheartedly, including bringing before him the needs of the world in our intercessions.

Anglicanism is liturgical… just as is every other denomination or local church. Every church has a ‘liturgy’. It may be thought through, it may be spontaneous, it may be in written form or it may be extemporary but there is a form and a pattern, for some it is more deliberate and conscious than others but it is there.

In Thomas Cranmer (the man more than any other responsible for the liturgy of the Book of Common Prayer) Anglicanism has the greatest liturgist who has ever lived.

In the liturgy of the Holy Communion service in the Book of Common Prayer, we have arguably the finest liturgical expression of gospel truth in the history of the Church:

“As a piece of liturgical craftsmanship Cranmer’s 1552 liturgy is in the first rank – once its intention is understood. It is not a disordered attempt at a catholic rite, but the only effective attempt ever made to give liturgical expression to the doctrine of justification by faith”40

It is shot through with either direct biblical quotes or biblical allusions and by constant repetition, week by week it enables biblical truth to take root in people’s minds and hearts.

There are some valid concerns raised about the nature of liturgical worship:

i. ii. iii.

It becomes routine, even boring through constant repetition. Set patterns and prayers allow no room for spontaneity, creativity and movement of the Holy Spirit. It allows both leader and congregation to go through the motions, saying the words but with their hearts not engaged.

All these concerns can be and at times are true.

Gregory Dix The Shape of Liturgy p672

However, routine can work both ways, familiarity can lead to contempt but it can also lead to freedom. Familiar words, phrases and prayers can serve as a means to help us engage with God and to lift our hearts in worship because we are not distracted by the unknown or uncertain. Sometimes, when singing songs, especially new ones, part of my mind can be engaged in checking through what I am singing, sometimes I can find myself singing words that I don’t agree with or find unhelpful. Good liturgy avoids this allowing me to focus instead on the God I am addressing.

Liturgical worship does not necessarily mean that there is no room for spontaneity or creativity. When writing a sermon, I will spend time in preparation in studying the text, meditating upon it and praying over it, all the while asking the Holy Spirit to help me to understand the passage correctly. As I come to write it, again I pray for the Holy Spirit to help me, I want to understand the meaning and the main emphasis of the text but also to pray about how I can communicate this most clearly and helpfully to the congregation, I need the help of the Holy Spirit in thinking about how to apply the text in a way that is appropriate and relevant to the congregation. When I have finished the sermon, I will then pray over it, firstly asking the Holy Spirit to apply it to me and then to help me as I deliver it. On a Sunday I will get up before the church service and pray over the sermon once again and pray for the service and for all who will be present and that the Holy Spirit will take and use the sermon to speak God’s Word to us as we gather and to give me freedom and an openness and sensitivity to the leading of the Holy Spirit as I preach. I go into the pulpit with a written script, but one that I know well and sometimes will change and adapt it even as I preach.

Here’s the point – I could simply read the passage for the first time the morning I am about to preach, stand up in the pulpit and silently pray that the Holy Spirit would speak through me and then begin. That would certainly be spontaneous but which of the two allows more opportunity and possibility for the Holy Spirit to be at work? The idea that preparation and a written script quenches the Holy Spirit and restricts an openness to His presence and ministry amongst us is not true. To have a written liturgy that has stood the test of time, that has been crafted with great thought, prayer and a desire for biblical faithfulness, in no way restricts the work of the Holy Spirit. As with preaching, there needs to be an openness in leading in worship, an ability to use the liturgy creatively, to be sensitive to when to draw an emphasis or to highlight a particular aspect in connection with the theme of the service so that it does not simply become dull and routine week in week out. By comparison, lack of a ‘formal liturgy’ often results in an ‘informal liturgy’ where there is repetition each week but it has not been subject to such rigorous preparation with such theological acumen, leaving the congregation at the mercy of the ‘worship leader’ or an overly intrusive leader whose constant interruptions, explanations and exhortations serve to distract and divert our attention away from the God we have come to worship.

One legitimate concern about the Book of Common Prayer liturgy is that it was written nearly 400 years ago and so its language is archaic and difficult to follow. This is to misunderstand the expressed intent of the Prayer Book. In the Preface to the Prayer Book, it explains why there have been changes in the 1662 version from earlier versions and states:

“…for the more proper expressing of some words or phrases of ancient usage in terms more suitable to the language of the present times and the clearer explanation of some other words and phrases.”41

In other words, part of the very essence of intent of the Prayer Book is to ensure that along with biblically faithful liturgy, the liturgy is also, always accessible and relevant to the culture and age in which it is being used. Thus modernising of the language is precisely what the writers of the Preface to the Prayer Book would expect. In 2000 the Church of England produced a whole new series of services with a variety of liturgies called Common Worship. Included in that is a modern English version of the Prayer Book Communion service, as well as other permitted services allowing for more choice and thus creativity. James K A Smith writes:

“Being a disciple of Jesus is not primarily a matter of getting the right ideas and doctrines and beliefs into your head in order to guarantee proper behaviour; rather it’s a matter of being the kind of person who loves rightly – who loves God and neighbour and is oriented to the world by the primacy of that love. We are made to be such people by our immersion in the material practices of Christian worship – through affective impact, over time, of sights and smell in water and wine. The Liturgy is a ‘hearts and minds’ strategy, a pedagogy that trains us as disciples precisely by putting our bodies through a regimen of repeated practices that get hold of our heart and ‘aim’ our love towards the Kingdom of God. Before we articulate a worldview – we worship…that’s the kind of animals we are first and foremost: loving, desiring, affective, liturgical animals who for the most part don’t inhabit the world as thinkers or cognitive machines.”42

If James Smith is right, then liturgy plays a vital part, or at least can do in our spiritual formation and disciple-making. Evangelicals who are disinterested in liturgy or who dismiss it as ritualistic prone to foster a dull, routine-like approach to worship are maybe missing something significant here. Of course, liturgical worship can be dull and routine but it need not be. Anglicanism has greater liturgical riches to offer the Christian Church than any other denomination and these treasures are available for creative use and application for every local church and every Sunday service.

It may be argued that a rich liturgy may be appropriate in a middle class, highly literate context but is unhelpful, even alien in a less literate, less ‘bookish’ context. I would suggest the exact opposite. One of the tremendous values of good, biblical liturgy is that by constant repetition, week-in weekout, biblical truth begins to soak more deeply into people’s hearts and minds. Nobody ever argues that we should not sing songs or hymns in areas of low literacy in case it is off-putting for people who cannot read well. Rather, it is recognised that in cultures of low literacy, oral communication and rote learning are most effective in imparting information.

41 42

Book of Common Prayer Preface vii Smith James K A Desiring the Kingdom (Baker Grand Rapids) p33

“For the great majority of pre-modern Christians – monk, cleric and layperson alike – the primary contact with Scripture was in liturgy. The chanting and singing of psalms, the repetition of scripturally derived prayers, litanies and hymns; and the preaching of scripturally based sermons – all of these perpetuated the vocal presence of the biblical word”43

Graham, William Albert Beyond the Written Word: Oral Aspects of Scripture in the History of Religion Cambridge University Press p142

Chapter 4 Anglicanism Explored: National and Local The Church of England is a Church for the nation. This is another integral characteristic of Anglicanism. This is not the same thing as being the ‘established Church’. In other parts of the Anglican Communion worldwide, the Anglican Church is not the established church but the desire to be a national church is an expression of both an evangelistic and pastoral heart, which finds further expression in its commitment to being a local and parochial church.

Evangelism

In 1945, the Church of England published a report, “Towards the Conversion of England”, which set out, “in detail an ambitious programme to reach the nation with the gospel through a transformed and mission-focused national Church”44. Written over 70 years ago, it was well aware of the size of the task it faced:

“We cannot expect to get far with evangelism until three facts are faced. First, the vast majority of the English people need to be converted to Christianity. Secondly a large number of Church people also require to be converted… thirdly such personal knowledge of Christ is the only satisfactory basis for testimony to others….the Church is ill-equipped for its unparalleled task and opportunity…it is for the Church in this day of God, by a rededication of itself to its Lord, to receive from him that baptism of Holy Ghost and of fire which will empower it to sound the call and give the awaited lead”45

Surely the size of the task today, is even greater than it was 70 years ago. However, my point here is simply that this is a natural expression of what it means to be Anglican. It has a large vision, it is satisfied with nothing less than the conversion of the whole nation and at its truest and best this is its intent.

This then finds expression in the parochial system. The whole of the country is served by an Anglican Church; wherever you live in England you are in a Church of England parish. Each local church has a clearly defined immediate mission field; it is to seek to win for Christ all those who live within its parish. The evangelistic thrust of an Anglican minister is made plain at ordination. The presbyter is charged:

Richardson John P A Strategy that Changes a Denomination Lulu Rayleigh NC 2011 p4 Commission on Evangelism Towards the Conversion of England London: Press and publications board of the Church Assembly 1945 para 81, 33 45

“We exhort you…to seek for Christ’s sheep that are dispersed abroad and for his children who are in the midst of this naughty world, that they may be saved through Christ for ever…and seeing that you cannot by any other means compass the doing of so weighty a work, pertaining to the salvation of man, but with doctrine and exhortation taken out of the Holy Scriptures…”46

Of course, the reality is that in some areas, churches are struggling to survive, as we will see in a subsequent chapter, many churches are part of larger teams in which one vicar may well have pastoral oversight of 6 -7 churches, some congregations are extremely small, morale may be very low and there is scarcely a hint of evangelistic concern or enterprise. Many struggle with buildings that are impractical, in need of costly repairs, difficult to heat and not even remotely fit for purpose.

The two points to highlight here are:

a) The intent. Although the reality falls short of the intention, the intention is there. To some degree or other, until Christ returns the reality will always fall short of the intent, but the intent is good. It is an expression of a desire to reach the whole nation with the gospel of Jesus Christ. b) The infrastructure is in place. Yes it is crumbling and badly in need of repair and clearsighted reform, but if more and more of these parish churches were filled with gospelhearted ministers proclaiming the gospel and being intentionally and creatively evangelistic, imagine what could be done! As we will look at in chapter 7 Jesus has told us that the problem always is not the harvest but rather shortage of labourers in the vineyard. If, by the grace of God, there was to be a great increase of gospel-hearted ministers, many things are already in place to enable the crucial work of gospel proclamation to go ahead.

The parochial system is further, an expression of a desire to reach not just the nation as a whole but every part of the nation. There are no ‘no-go’ areas, no parts of the country that are beyond its reach, no sections of society, no cultures, ethnic groups or people of different religions that are not part of its mission field. The so-called ‘Homogenous Unit Principle’47 so beloved of Church Growth theorists, is alien to Anglicanism. Bishop JC Ryle beautifully expresses this intent:

“If the Established Church of this country claims to be ‘the Church of the people’, it is her bounden duty to see that no part of ‘the people’ are left like sheep without a shepherd. If she claims to be a territorial, and not a congregational Church, she should never rest till there is neither a street, nor a lane, nor a house, nor a garret, nor a cellar, nor a family,

Ordering of Priests Book of Common Prayer Homogenous Unit Principle says that for mission to take place effectively, specific cultural or social groups need to be evangelised separately. Thus churches are set up to target a specific group such as students, middle class suburban, a particular ethnic group etc. So the churches then tend to be monocultural. 47

which is not regularly looked after…her aim should be to produce such a state of things, that no-one should be able to say, ‘I am no man’s parishioner. I am never visited or spoke to: no one cares for my soul”48

At its best the parochial system, serves the mission of the gospel well, but it is open to abuse and misuse. It is intended as a means to serve the gospel, not as a wall to keep the gospel out. It is always in need of reforming and renewing as populations shift and it must be understood and applied creatively and strategically.

ii.

Pastoral Care

The biblical injunction to ‘love your neighbour’ finds a helpful vehicle for expression in the parish system. To love my neighbour means to long for and work for their good. Their greatest good, of course is to come to know and love Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord, therefore evangelism is always an ultimate aim. However if my love for my neighbour is genuine, then I will seek his or her good in whatever way I can, in whatever situation that arises. This means that there is no conflict between social concern and evangelism. A local parish church will naturally express this love and concern by being involved in the life of the local community, working where appropriate and as resources allow for the greater good of all within the community. Pastoral care is not simply offered to those within the congregation, but as an expression of the love of Christ, a local church will seek to serve, love and care for all within the parish wherever and whenever that is possible.

There are two extremes that historic Anglicanism intentionally avoids as a local church seeks to serve its community:

A Pure Church uncontaminated by the world. There are those who so stress the ‘purity’ of the local church and fail to distinguish sufficiently between the ‘visible’ and the ‘invisible church’. At first sight it can appear to be commendable and biblical, but from a right concern for the purity of the local church, it can pull the drawbridge up so high that there is little or no chance of contamination from the surrounding world. Membership is only open to those who not only profess a faith in Christ but whose lives demonstrate that profession with consistency over a period of time. There is a very clear demarcation between the church and the world.

ii.

A Compromised Church indistinguishable from the world. There are those who so stress the love of God that they erode the gospel of its biblical content and thus negate the need for evangelism. They profess to a universalism that has no concept of judgment to come or need for repentance thus blurring all distinction between the church and the community.

Ryle J C No Uncertain Sound p3-4

What is unique about a local Anglican church that takes the gospel seriously is that it wants to both welcome and challenge all who it serves within the parish. There is a need of wisdom and grace to be warm and welcoming to any who contact the church for whatever reason whilst then using that contact as an opportunity for the gospel. Within Anglicanism’s DNA there is a generosity of spirit that takes people’s profession of faith at face value, whilst also taking seriously the need for growth into maturity and the exercise of church discipline in the face of deliberate, unrepentant sin.

This means that sometimes the local Anglican church is faced with complex evangelistic and cultural opportunities and challenges that independent churches may not face. This is heightened as the culture becomes increasingly secular. What is interesting to note in this is not that the culture by and large necessarily becomes more militantly atheistic, (although in some cases this is clearly true) but that it may also become more superstitious, prone to folk religion and ‘spiritual’. In recent years, I heard numerous times the phrase, “I am spiritual but not religious” in conversation with people. When people cease to believe the biblical gospel, rather than believe nothing they tend to believe anything. The local Anglican church can encounter this most strongly at the most significant and poignant moments of people’s lives, notably birth, marriage and death. An Anglican church will have the privilege of ministering to people on each of these occasions, where commonly people will want or expect a certain kind of service or blessing from the church but with little Christian content. You can avoid the messiness of that by ensuring your church is withdrawn and remote from the community it is seeking to reach or by compromising and acquiescing completely with whatever is being asked.

The particular skill that is needed is to welcome all who come to you, work hard to establish a warm, personal relationship and within that context to present clearly the gospel and its call to repent and believe. That is the skill but what must undergird that, which is even more important is a heart that beats with the same love as that of the Lord Jesus who came to seek and to save the lost.

National What is true on a local level, is also true on a national level. Historic Anglicanism has a commitment to the nation that is evangelistic, pastoral and prophetic. It has a concern to serve the nation. In its liturgy it is bound to pray for the Queen, the royal family, and all those who exercise civil power and authority. Its Reformed doctrine of the Sovereignty of God and the Lordship of Christ finds expression in its active involvement in the life of the nation. This is also what gives it a prophetic voice, to speak God’s Word not just to the Church but to the nation and its leaders. At its best, this is neither withdrawal and indifferent silence nor compromised acquiescence but a freedom and a boldness to speak God’s truth.

However, more than anything its commitment to the nation finds fullest expression in a desire to see the nation won for Christ, this is part of its DNA.

Chapter 5 Should I Stay or Should I Go? One of the most vital and pressing question for those in a doctrinally mixed denomination is, “At what point, if any, ought we to leave the denomination?” Is there a non-negotiable, defining line that once crossed then it is time to leave and if so what is it and how do you decide what that line is? (I am well aware that for some the question is not ‘should I stay or go’ but ‘why should I bother joining in the first place?’ I will return to that question, but in this chapter I want to try to give a biblical rationale and defence for why it is a good thing to remain in a mixed denomination and attempt to work for its reform and renewal.)

This is a complex and vexed question. In October 1966 Dr Martyn Lloyd Jones’ address to the Evangelical Alliance in which he appealed to those in mixed denominations to come out and for there to be a greater unity amongst evangelicals had an explosive impact, the effects of which are still being felt today. John Stott, an Anglican who was in the chair, hastily stood up and urged no one to act precipitously, stating that he thought that both Scripture and history were against Lloyd Jones and arguing that biblically the remnant has always been inside the church not outside of it. This led to a deeply regrettable parting of the ways between nonconformist evangelicals and Anglican evangelicals. Carl Trueman describes the legacy of 1966 a disaster and writes “English evangelicalism is only just starting to move out of the long shadow that the split between Lloyd Jones and Packer (another leading Anglican and up until that time a close friend of Lloyd Jones) cast for decades”49

Critics would argue that evangelicals within the Church of England keep moving ‘the line’. For some it was the ordination of women, but when that arrived very few left, then it was the ordination of women bishops, but when that arrived few if any left. More have claimed that if the Church of England was to change its position officially on homosexuality then that would be the defining moment at which they would leave.

Some evangelical non-conformists shake their heads in bewilderment at what they deem to be hopelessly compromised Anglican evangelicals who keep moving the goal posts and never leave. Furthermore, some would suggest that despite their protestations, the reason why Anglican evangelicals do not leave is because of less principled reasons such as loss of house, income and pension, cowardice and fear.

Within the denomination, non-evangelicals are suspicious of conservative evangelicals who they think are always talking of leaving thus betraying a loose commitment to the denomination and like the boy who cried wolf, they continue to threaten to leave but never do.

Trueman Carl J I Packer and the Evangelical Future Ed: Timothy George Baker Grand Rapids 2009 p124 58

This is, of course, a complex issue and bible believing, gospel-hearted men and women will and do come to different conclusions as to what the appropriate course of action should be.

Before turning to the life and ministry of Jeremiah, which can provide us with a different perspective on this issue, I want briefly to consider Paul’s farewell address to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20. It is a deeply moving passage as Paul reminds the elders of his ministry amongst them and charges them to be faithful to their call to gospel ministry and warns them of the dangers they will face.

“I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them”

Threats from Without and Within These are startling words. Paul is speaking to elders that he has personally trained and equipped and yet he warns them of the constant danger of false teaching that will assault them on two fronts:

From outside. Fierce wolves will come in among them. They will always be under threat of attack from outside by false teachers seeking to come in and lead people astray. Wolves hunt for prey, wolves follow the sheep. It is naïve foolishness to think that if we, as sheep are vulnerable to attack in this particular field because of the presence of wolves, then if we move to another field we will escape from their clutches. Guess what – wolves move! Wherever the sheep are that is where the wolves want to be. This is not just true for Paul’s day and the specific context in Ephesus, this is the nature of church life down through the ages and all around the world. Churches with faithful gospel ministries are always vulnerable to attack from outside. It may come from the surrounding culture, it may come from the particular denomination or simply from people who join and become a part of the congregation. It can come in many forms but there is always a threat from outside.

ii.

Perhaps even more alarming, there will also be a danger from within, according to Paul. ‘From among your own selves’ says Paul. This is deeply disturbing, remember these are elders personally discipled by the Apostle Paul. If he knows that even from amongst these elders some will rise up and begin to twist the truth and move from the apostolic gospel then that ought to alert us to the fact that all of us need to be vigilant. He warns these elders to ‘pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock’ (v28), he warns Timothy to ‘keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching’ (1 Tim 4:16) and the Corinthians, ‘let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall’ (1 Cor 10:12). The point is clear, there is no room for complacency rather there is great need for vigilance. 59

The reality is that every local church, every denomination, every network of churches is vulnerable to the disease of false teaching and that orthodoxy today is no guarantee of orthodoxy tomorrow, that the danger can come from without or within. You may remove yourself from a doctrinally compromised denomination but that will not remove you from the threat of false teaching. Every new denomination that is a break away from a compromised older denomination, will in time, still have the same battles to fight, the wolves follow the sheep. This is an unerring principle. That is not to say, of course, that therefore one should never leave a denomination but it does say two things at least. Firstly, we should not be naïve about the reality and ever-present threat of false teaching, no matter how secure and vigilant we are at present and secondly, that knowing this ever-present danger, before considering the option of jumping ship, we ought to be prepared for the battle and to be willing to roll up our sleeves and fight for the life and health of the church. Paul is clear about the imminent and constant threat these Ephesian elders will face but he never counsels them, that when wolves come in and when men arise from their own number twisting the truth, they should be prepared to leave and start afresh. It never enters his mind to give such counsel, rather his sole intent is to forearm them by forewarning them and giving them steel for the battle, not least because the church is so precious to God, the last thing they ought ever to contemplate would be to abandon the flock to the mercy of wolves (Acts 20:28). Why would they? How could they? Jesus in fact, contrasts himself as THE Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep with the hired hand who abandons the flock as soon as he sees a wolf appear, “He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep” (John 10:13).

The mark of the hired hand is flight, the mark of the Under Shepherd, following THE Good Shepherd is to give his life (in sacrificial service, not of course in redemptive sacrifice) for the flock to protect the flock from wolves, no matter how fierce a battle and how great a cost that entails.

John Piper, in his address at the Bethlehem Conference on the life and ministry of Charles Simeon, an Anglican minister in Cambridge in the 19th Century, a person who exemplified more than most what faithful endurance in the face of prolonged and bitterly hostile opposition looked like, said:

“one of the pervasive marks of our times is emotional fragility. I feel it as though it hung in the air we breathe. We are easily hurt. We pout and mope easily. We break easily. Our marriages break easily. Our faith breaks easily. Our happiness breaks easily. And our commitment to the church breaks easily. We are easily disheartened, and it seems we have little capacity for surviving and thriving in the face of criticism and opposition.

A typical emotional response to trouble in the church is to think, "If that's the way they feel about me, then they can find themselves another pastor." We see very few models today whose lives spell out in flesh and blood the rugged words, "Count it all joy, my brothers, when you fall into various trials" (James 1:3). And if you think that you are not at all a child of your times just test yourself to see how you respond in the ministry when people reject your ideas.”50

Piper John Brothers “We Must Not Mind a Little Suffering” 1989 Bethlehem Pastors Conference

Piper is right. Sometimes it is just easier to walk away than to stay and fight.

I fear that one of the consequences of the latent congregationalism that has influenced many Anglican evangelicals is that many ministers may take this to heart as regards the local congregation but have far less of a sense of commitment and obligation to the denomination. Again sometimes it is just easier to walk away than to stay and fight but what of the flock that are then left even more vulnerable to attack from wolves, who then move into the space that has been vacated?

WWJD? A few years ago, ‘WWJD’ (What Would Jesus Do?) bracelets were very common but as way of helping us explore this question, I want to ask instead ‘What Would Jeremiah Do?’

Right from the moment of his calling by God to be a prophet it was clear that Jeremiah’s ministry was going to be one of conflict, opposition and struggle:

“Behold I have put my words in your mouth. See I have set you this day over nations and over kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant……And I behold, I make you this day a fortified city, an iron pillar and bronze walls against the whole land, against the kings of Judah, its officials, its priests and the people of the land. They will fight against you, but they shall not prevail against you, for I am with you, declares the Lord, to deliver you” (Jer 1:9-10, 18-19)

Jeremiah’s whole ministry is set within the context of disobedient, rebellious Judah whose kings, priests, officials and people persistently reject.

Jeremiah’s call is to repent and turn back to God and his warning is that the judgment of God is imminent and will come upon them if they do not repent.

Jeremiah has to endure great personal hostility and animosity directed against him:

“Woe is me, my mother, that you bore me a man of strife and contention to the whole land! I have not lent, nor borrowed, yet all of them curse me” (15:10)

“I have become a laughing-stock all the day; everyone mocks me. For whenever I speak, I cry out, I shout “Violence and destruction!” For the word of the Lord has become for me a reproach and derision all day long” (20:7-8) 61

Even his close friends despise him, “Denounce him! Let us denounce him!” say all my close friends, watching for my fall. Perhaps he will be deceived; then we can overcome him and take our revenge on him” (20:10)

If this is the response of his close friends, I shudder to think what his enemies wanted to do to him!

Not just his friends, but his own family also stood against him, “For even your brothers and the house of your father, even they have dealt treacherously with you, they are in full cry after you” (12:6)

He was beaten and put in the stocks (chapter 20), threatened with death by the priests, the prophets and all the people (26:7-9) imprisoned and left to rot in a muddy cistern (37:11-38:7).

One of the greatest trials he had to bear was the influence and popularity of the false prophets, who opposed Jeremiah and his message,

“…from prophet to priest everyone deals falsely. They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying ‘Peace, peace’, when there is no peace” (6:13-14)

We read with the benefit of hindsight. Jeremiah’s message was proved to be true. God’s judgment did come upon the nation, those who preached a different message were shown to be ‘false prophets’ but of course at the time, this was not how Jeremiah was viewed. In fact, he was regarded by the leaders and the people alike as traitor to the nation, guilty of treason and demoralising people with his message of judgment. It is indeed a bitter irony when God’s people are so hardened to the Word of God that they embrace gladly the words of false prophets whilst denouncing the true Word of God and those who proclaim it as being offensive and wrong.

What goes around comes around. J I Packer’s assessment of the Church of England, written in 1978 was:

“As an evangelical trying to interpret what I see by Scripture, I am forced to believe that the Church of England is under judgment in these days for multiple unfaithfulness to the gospel, and that our overmastering need is for God to revive his work and in wrath to remember mercy (Habbakuk 3:2: Psalm 85:4-7) and that we should be seeking his face constantly for just this (cf. Psalm 44; Isaiah 64)”.51

J I Packer and N T Wright Anglican Evangelical Identity: Yesterday and Today London Latimer Trust 2008 p71

What is fascinating in Jeremiah’s story is how he responds to ministering amongst a rebellious people and their disdain of and antagonism towards him.

“For the wound of the daughter of my people is my heart wounded; I mourn and dismay has taken hold of me…Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people” (Jer 8:22; 9:1)

His heart is broken because of his love for his people, he tirelessly admonishes, rebukes and warns of coming judgment not with judgmentalism or even indifference but with deep compassion. He loves them, he cares for them. How often do we as Anglican evangelicals, especially those of us ordained as ministers within the Church have eyes that are fountains of tears because we weep day and night for the Church we serve? Might it be a contributory factor to its current malaise?

Love’s Labour’s Cost What is particularly remarkable about Jeremiah’s life and ministry, though is where this love for his people took him. Jeremiah 43 provides the last recorded detail we have about the life of Jeremiah, and it is extraordinary.

When Judah is conquered by the Babylonians, and many are taken into exile in Babylon, Jeremiah deliberately chooses not to go to Babylon though that would have afforded him a good life. The Babylonians would have treated him well and in his prophetic word he himself encourages the exiles to settle down and get involved, build houses, raise a family and seek the good of those amongst whom you dwell (Jer 29:5-7). You might have expected that he too would go there especially given that the Babylonians offer him the choice, Nebuzaradan says to him, “I release you today from the chains on your hands. If it seems good to you to come with me to Babylon, come, and I will look after you well, but if it seems wrong to you to come with me to Babylon, do not come. See the whole land is before you; go wherever you think it good and right to go” (40:4).

What will he choose? What would you choose? Rather than a privileged existence in Babylon, Jeremiah decides instead to go back to Jerusalem, the scene of utter destruction and dereliction, with the temple destroyed, the walls broken down and all the leaders carried off into exile. He decides deliberately to return to the place where God’s judgment has fallen.

Gedaliah is appointed governor and we read that Jeremiah purposely chooses to live amongst ‘those of the poorest of the land who had not been taken into exile in Babylon” (40:7).

Things then take a turn for the worse when Ishmael attacks and murders Gedaliah and all the Judeans who were with him. When Johanan hears about all the evil Ishmael has done, he decides to 63

go and fight Ishmael. Ishmael escapes but Johanan with all the people Ishmael had taken prisoner then decided to flee to Egypt. Why? Because they feared what the Babylonians would do to them when they got wind of what had happened, namely that Ishmael had murdered Gedaliah who Babylon had made governor (Chapters 40-41).

They then come to Jeremiah and in chapter 42 ask him to “pray to the Lord for us as to what we should do” (v5-6), promising “just tell us the truth whatever the Lord says and we will obey the voice of the Lord our God”.

So Jeremiah calls them together after 10 days, (42:10ff) and warns them very clearly not to go to Egypt.

The Lord says, “As my anger was poured out on Jerusalem so too it will be poured out on you if you go to Egypt” (42:18).

True to form, despite Jeremiah’s clear warning they refuse to listen, rather they accuse Jeremiah once again of misleading them “you’re telling a lie, this is a plot to deliver us into the hands of the Babylonians” (43:2). So they don’t obey and they take all the remnant of Judah to Egypt including Jeremiah and Baruch.

There are various explanations given as to why Jeremiah goes to Egypt and as far as we know ends his days there.

Chris Wright in his commentary writes:

“In returning to the place of bondage the people of God have dealt a deathblow to the story of salvation – the womb of Israel’s birth – Egypt now becomes the abode of death – it is a small but very mixed crowd we see on that road south men women children old and young from rags to royalty and in their midst Jeremiah the prophet and Baruch son of Neriah released from captivity by the Babylonians only to be taken captivity by their own people forced for the rest of their days to dwell among a disobedient people in the land from which God had delivered their ancestors”52

Thompson in his commentary writes:

Wright Christopher The Message of Jeremiah IVP Nottingham 2014 p401

“It is not clear whether Jeremiah or Baruch went voluntarily with the refugees or were forced. It seems unlikely that the prophet would have gone willingly however for that would have been to defy Yahweh’s word. On the other hand, we may wonder why the refugees would force Jeremiah to go since their own past experience of him would show them that he could only be a source of aggravation as long as he lived. If he did go willingly it was out of undying faithfulness to the people and to the message of Yahweh that he felt compelled to bring them.”53

And then thirdly Philip Ryken’s commentary in Preaching the Word series:

“There is nothing in the text to suggest that Jeremiah and Baruch were taken to Egypt against their will as some scholars suggest. Such coercion is implausible why would the remnant court disaster by bringing along the prophet who opposed them?”54

So he argues:

“this is a remarkable statement of loyalty to God’s people. Jeremiah did not have to go to Egypt…he was so devoted to God’s people that he rejected the pension he richly deserved. He preferred to join the remnant of God’s people than to walk on the plush carpets of Babylon. He stayed with God’s people even when they were almost beneath his dignity. To live with such cowards may have been the most courageous thing Jeremiah ever did. It was proof of his love for God and God’s people. It also gave a glimpse of the love of God’s Son for his elect people. Jesus identified himself with our sin and entered into our death for our salvation.”55

Was he forced or did he go voluntarily?

If he went because he was forced to, then under the sovereign providence of God, God was sending his prophet to accompany those under judgment who were in defiance of his Word which is quite extraordinary.

If he went voluntarily to Egypt this is even more extraordinary. Why on earth would he accompany them knowing so clearly that the people were expressly, intentionally and unequivocally rebelling against the clear Word of God?

54 55

Thompson J A The Book of Jeremiah Eerdmans Grand Rapids 1980 p669 Ryken Philip Jeremiah and Lamentations: From Sorrow to Hope 2012 Crossway Wheaton Ibid

There is in the life and ministry of Jeremiah a remarkable and extremely rare but beautiful combination of a bold, unswerving commitment to proclaim the whole counsel of God, which in his context meant a particular focus on the persistent need to call the nation to repent in the light of God’s coming judgment and his unswerving commitment to love and care for his people despite their rejection of his message and their hatred of him. Either through the providential leading of God or through his own loyalty and love rather than remove himself from them as God’s judgment falls he appears to move ever closer to the epicentre of that judgment. Offered a comfortable retirement in Babylon he opts for a life of poverty and degradation back in Jerusalem. For a nation that has been warned of God’s judgment but failed to believe it, the final flight to Egypt by Johanan and his forces against the express command of God reveals a defiance that is almost unbelievable yet Jeremiah still accompanies them with God’s Word echoing in his ears, “I will take the remnant of Judah who have set their faces to come to the land of Egypt to live and they shall all be consumed” (44:12).

If you were to ask Jeremiah, “Jeremiah at what point will you decide to abandon the remnant of Judah? Where for you is the line to be drawn, beyond which you will declare ‘enough is enough’?”

I think you would be met with a look of bewildered incomprehension and the words, “…There is no line”.

In the life and ministry of Jeremiah, do we not see ever so faintly something of the glorious life and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ? The one who to the astonishment of John the Baptist entered the waters of the Jordan river to be baptised along with all the repentant sinners confessing their sins. “I need to be baptised by you and do you come to me?” Rightly astounded as the Sinless One came to him for baptism, an early foretaste of this unswerving love and commitment to his people, a willingness to stand with and identify with sinners rather than stand aside and be removed from them. An identification that found its fullest and most glorious fulfilment on the cross, when rather than stand with sinners, he hung dying instead of them. From the moment he set his face to Jerusalem, Jesus deliberately walked into the epicentre of God’s judgment in the place of those upon whom it should have fallen.

This is the gospel. Of course there is great complexity here and this is by no means all that there is to say, however, there is here a perspective that ought to be far more to the forefront of our thinking, our discussing, our praying and our decision-making.

We follow a Saviour who walked towards the place of judgment not away from it and removed from there sinners upon whom that judgment should fall.

If J I Packer is right that the Church of England is under the judgment of God, or at least heading that way, then it seems to be completely contrary to the nature of the gospel, that gospel ministers 66

should therefore absent themselves from the arena of judgment instead of deliberately moving nearer to it.

Contending in Love The constant opposition that Jeremiah endured didn’t serve to harden his heart towards his wayward people, rather their hard-heartedness to the Word of God and refusal to listen to it and repent, broke his heart:

“My joy is gone; grief is upon me, my heart is sick within me” (8:18)

The condition of the Church of England in our day, ought to provoke a number of responses within those who love the Lord Jesus and the gospel, but one of the strongest ought to be a stirring of our hearts, because we love the Church. A love that ought to cause us to be willing to spend and be spent for the cause of the gospel within her. As under-shepherds faced with the existence of wolves from without and within, rather than giving us reason to abandon post and flee, we ought to be willing to follow in the footsteps of the Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep to give up our very lives for her renewal and reformation.

Sometimes, in our discussions, debates and deliberations there is a missing note – the note of love.

For example, if one of my children on reaching adulthood, formally rejected the Christian faith and embraced a faith or a lifestyle completely hostile and diametrically opposed to my Christian faith, what would happen? We would no doubt have many heated conversations, discussions and arguments. Our relationship would be massively impacted but no matter how fiercely we disagreed or how strongly I disapproved of their lifestyle choices, I would always love them and I would wrestle for them in prayer, ceaselessly. Furthermore, although I would continue to challenge and confront them, the way in which I did that, my manner and tone would convey a depth of love and concern, the purpose of the discussion would not be to ‘win the argument’ but to win their hearts. All too often in ecclesiological debate that can be lacking. One of the hardest things can be to hold to strong convictions with humility, these can so easily be ‘either ors’. Furthermore, there is all the difference in the world between believing the Bible to be God’s infallible, inerrant Word on the one hand and believing that therefore my interpretation of it is also infallible and inerrant on the other. The two realities of my creatureliness and my sinfulness mean that my understanding and my interpretation of God’s truth are inevitably incomplete and prone to error. Of course God’s Truth can be truly known because He has revealed Himself to us, but it cannot be exhaustively known.

So we need to hold to the Truth we have received with conviction AND humility. Resisting the twin dangers of convictional arrogance that assumes we are always right, that not only is Scripture 67

without error but so too are we in our interpretation of it or a misplaced humility that doubts the possibility of knowing Truth truly and is filled with uncertainty and confusion.

Often this is a matter of manner and tone, the way in which we relate, discuss and debate, but we must do so with love and with humility whilst tenaciously holding fast to biblical truth and the biblical gospel.

We can also be prone to misunderstanding and confusing what it means to love someone. If we hold to the truth of God’s Word is it not loving to allow falsehood to flourish.

Our culture confuses love with tolerance. It believes that to love someone means always to affirm and never to challenge or to confront. It believes rather, that to challenge and confront is inevitably judgmental and arrogant. It believes that loving someone equates to telling them what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear.

An easily overlooked but hugely significant comment about the Lord Jesus comes in Mark 10:21. Jesus is in the middle of a conversation with the rich young man and we read:

“and Jesus looking at him, loved him and said to him, ’You lack one thing: go sell all that you have and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; and come follow me.”

It is that phrase ‘Jesus looking at him, loved him’. How does Mark know that? Jesus does not say to the man, “I love you”. It can only be because of the way in which Jesus looked at him and the tone with which he spoke. Mark draws our attention to this just as Jesus says to the man the very thing he does not want to hear, to go and sell all that he has. Mark then tells us that the man went away sorrowful because he had great possessions. The mark of Jesus loving this rich man was that he was prepared to say to him that which he most needed to hear but least wanted to hear.

To love the Church of England and to be fiercely committed to being faithful gospel ministers within it entails a willingness to speak God’s Word within the denomination, within the local church, deanery chapters and synods, diocesan and general synods, to those in our congregations and to those in authority. Not to be silent, not to compromise, not to tone down or alter biblical truth, it is a mark of love to speak the truth boldly in every area of the Church’s life but to do so with the tone and manner of the Lord Jesus.

Jude v3 “…I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints”.

Love for God, love for the Truth and love for the people of God means that when ‘the faith once for all delivered to the saints’, the ‘apostolic faith’ is threatened, distorted and rejected we must contend. We must not remain silent for the sake of a quiet life.

We find in Jeremiah a model example of what it means to be willing to confront and to challenge because of his love for his people, a willingness to stay with them as they erred and strayed from God’s ways, a willingness to be despised, persecuted and ostracised because of his pursuing, sacrificial love that refused to give up.

Before we talk of strategies to renew or reform a denomination, we need to begin by searching our hearts and asking God to fill us with a love for His Church and His people.

“When (evangelicals) are asked as they sometimes are under what circumstances they would leave the church they find the question so remote from reality and therefore hard to answer as a husband working hard and fruitfully at his marriage would find it were he asked under what circumstances he would divorce his wife”56

If Packer’s words no longer resonate with us as they once might have done, is that because circumstances have changed so much or is it because we do not love the Church as a godly husband would love his wife?

Packer J I Evangelical Identity Problem Latimer House p59

Chapter 6 Don’t Let Go Lightly John Strype, an Anglican clergyman (1643-1737) in his ‘”Ecclesiastical Memorials of the Church of England, writes, “As I have made some remarks…of Bradford and Latimer, Cranmer and Ridley, four prime pillars of the reformed Church of England”57

It is a telling description of four men who were influential in establishing the Church of England as a Reformed Church, Thomas Cranmer perhaps more than any other who was Archbishop of Canterbury through the Reformation period under Henry VIII and his son Edward VI. He was responsible for crafting first the 1549 Prayer Book and then the 1552 Prayer Book, which subsequently became the 1662 Book of Common Prayer (with only minor changes). Cranmer also wrote the 42 Articles with Nicholas Ridley, a brilliant theologian as his assistant, these subsequently became the 39 Articles.

However, what also unites them is that they were all burnt at the stake for their Reformed Protestant beliefs. Any Christian man or woman who is martyred for their faith in Jesus Christ ought to be remembered with honour and highly esteemed by the Church. The particular significance of these four and some others beside, is alluded to by Strype’s phrase “four prime pillars” of the Reformed Church of England. Their lives, their doctrine and their martyrdom provide the framework that shapes, upholds and defines the Church of England. They lived, ministered and died in the theological furnace of post-Reformation struggle.

The Reformation in England began during the reign of Henry VIII (1509-1547). Under Edward VI (reigned 1547-1553) the Church of England became more thoroughly reformed but under Queen Mary (reigned 1553-1558) the Church then lurched in a completely opposite direction, as she sought to undo the Reformation and realign the Church of England with Rome. Queen Elizabeth I (reigned 1558-1603) then came to the throne and established the Church of England once again as a clearly Protestant Church with the so-called ‘Elizabethan Settlement’. This gives a particular significance to the deaths of Cranmer, Latimer and others because they were martyred for their belief in and commitment to the doctrines that shape historic Anglicanism, that find particular expression in the 39 Articles.

The Reformed Church of England was established upon the blood of those who were martyred for their faith and commitment to the biblical gospel.

Strype John Ecclesiastical Memories…of the Church of England p254

Thomas Cranmer Thomas Cranmer was Archbishop of Canterbury during the reign of Henry VIII and that of his son Edward VI, the man largely responsible for the Book of Common Prayer and the 39 Articles. In his biography on Cranmer Diarmaid McCulloch writes movingly of Cranmer’s visit to Henry VIII when Henry was on his deathbed:

“When Henry VIII was dying he asked specifically for Cranmer to be with him “By time Cranmer reached him the small hours of that morning, Henry was already incapable of speech but reached out to his old friend. Then the archbishop exhorting him to put his trust in Christ and to call upon his mercy, desired him, though he could not speak yet to give some token with his eyes or his hand that he trusted in the Lord. Then the King, holding him with his hand, did wring his hand in his as hard as he could. Quietly playing out his calling as royal chaplain, Cranmer had won a final victory in his years of argument with the King on justification. No last rites for Henry no extreme unction just an evangelical statement of faith in a grip of the hand. Thus ended the most long-lasting relationship of love which either man had known.”58

Cranmer’s genius as a liturgist has never been surpassed and the Prayer Book Communion service is a beautifully crafted liturgical exposition of the gospel.

Cranmer was by nature a cautious and scholarly man, and upon his arrest and imprisonment under Queen Mary, witnessing as he did the deaths of Ridley and Latimer, the final weeks of his life brought him tremendous strain and stress. Under great pressure to recant, Cranmer lost his nerve and when he heard that the date set for his execution was in March 1556:

“suddenly the reality of his position hit Cranmer: no more postponement of reality just the same awful death which he had witnessed for Ridley and Latimer and which had then so profoundly affected him. It is not necessary to speculate that he was physically tortured into his change of heart, there was good reason for a simple collapse in his morale after it had rallied in such an equivocal way fatally compromised by his yearning to conciliate while retaining his integrity”59

Under great pressure Cranmer signed a recantation which amongst other things:

58 59

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. Thomas Cranmer p360 Ibid p594

“acknowledged the Pope’s power on earth, but also his position as the vicar of Christ…he acknowledged the doctrine of transubstantiation, the…7 sacraments and the doctrines of purgatory…and repented his previous contrary beliefs.”60

This was a desperately sad moment in Cranmer’s life and for those who cared about the Protestant cause. Thankfully the story does not end there.

On the last day of his life, 21st March, he was taken to University Church in Oxford where he had to listen to a sermon which explained why a repentant sinner should still be burnt for heresy and then he was allowed to speak. He began by asking those present, “to pray to God for forgiveness of his sins…” but added “yet one thing grieves my conscience more than all the rest…” The authorities had his text so they knew what was coming: a denunciation of his ‘untrue books and writings contrary to the truth of God’s word’, then there would follow a declaration of his belief in transubstantiation. But suddenly they realised that this was not what they were hearing. The ‘writing’, which Cranmer said was written “contrary to the truth which I thought in my heart and written for fear of death”, consisted of “all such bills and papers I have written or signed with my hand since my degradation…” He continued as commotion began to break out, “And as for the pope, I refuse him as Christ’s enemy and Antichrist with all his false doctrine… and as for the sacrament I believe as I have taught in my book against the bishop of Winchester”61, at which point he was stopped, pulled down and rushed to the stake through the streets of Oxford.

After his recent emotional and spiritual torment, Cranmer showed remarkable courage amidst the flames, as he was being burnt to death, famously crying out:

“‘forasmuch as my hand offended writing contrary to my heart, my hand shall first be punished therefore’. He stretched ‘his unworthy right hand’ out into the heart of the fire for all the spectators to see. He repeated ‘this hand hath offended’, and also while he could the dying words of the first martyr Stephen ‘Lord Jesus receive my spirit…I see the heavens open and Jesus standing at the right hand of God”62

Hugh Latimer Hugh Latimer became the Bishop of Worcester in 1535 and is regarded as one of England’s greatest ever preachers.

“His straightforward, honest, and biblical preaching brought the gospel of Jesus Christ to thousands upon thousands of his countrymen. Through thirty years of ministry, his voice was 60

Ibid p595 Ibid 601-3 62 Ibid 603 61

the clearest and most influential in England for the great truths of the Reformation…Apart from Tyndale...Latimer and his friend Cranmer were the greatest champions of the English Scriptures. Latimer was the foremost preacher of the English Reformation”63

Latimer was burnt at the stake along with Nicholas Ridley on October 15th 1555.

His biographer tells us that during the time of his imprisonment, he devoted himself not only to prayer, but to praying for three things in particular:

“First, that as God had appointed him to be a preacher of His Word, so also he would give him grace to stand to his doctrine unto his death, that he might give his heart-blood for the same. Secondly, that God of His mercy would restore His Gospel to England once again and these words ‘once again’, ‘once again’, he did so inculcate and beat into the ears of the Lord God, as though he had seen God before him and spoken to him face to face. The third principal matter wherewith in his prayers he was occupied, was to pray for the preservation of the Queen’s Majesty …whom in his prayer accustomably he was wont to name and even with tears desired God to make her a comfort to this comfortless realm of England”64

Those same three things are remarkably apposite and relevant today. There is a need for faithful preachers of God’s Word who hold fast to the gospel unto death, more than ever England is in desperate need of God restoring his Gospel to our nation ‘once again’ and there is a need for Christians following Latimer’s gracious example of pleading for those in authority even if some who wield power use it to bring legislation against and opposition to the cause of Christ.

Their stories should be well known and treasured and their examples serve to spur us on with a renewed desire to fight for the reform and renewal of the Church of England in our day.

Certainly, this was the conclusion J C Ryle came to as he wrote about and meditated upon the lives of these great heroes of the faith in his book “Five English Reformers”. As he contemplated their faithfulness and sacrifice, he wrote:

“The men who were burned this way were not men whose memories ought to be lightly passed over, or whose opinions ought to be lightly esteemed…to their faithfulness we owe the existence of the Reformed Church of England. Her foundations were cemented with their blood. To their courage we owe, in great measure our English liberty”65

Hannula Richard Hugh Latimer EP Books Darlington 2013 p126 Hugh Latimer: R Demaus p172 65 Ryle J C Five English Reformers Edinburgh: Banner of Truth 1960 p22 64

What then is to be the effect of remembering and esteeming such men? Ryle concludes:

“One thing, however, is very clear to my mind. We ought not lightly to forsake the Church of England. No! So long as her Articles and Formularies remain unaltered, unrepealed and unchanged, so long we ought not to forsake her. Cowardly and base is that seaman who launches the boat and forsakes the ship so long as there is a chance of saving her. Cowardly, I say, is that Protestant Churchman who talks of seceding because things on board our Church are at present out of order. What though some of the crew are traitors, and some are asleep! What though the old ship has some leaks and her rigging has given way in some places! Still I maintain there is much to be done. There is life in the old ship yet. The great Pilot has not yet forsaken here…so long as she has Christ and the Bible, let us stand by her to the last plank, nail our colours to the mast and never haul them down. Once more, I say, let us not be wheedled or bullied or frightened or cajoled, or provoked, into forsaking the Church of England…if we ever would meet Ridley and Latimer and Hooper in another world without shame, let us ‘contend earnestly’ for the truths which they died to preserve”66

Ryle draws right and appropriate conclusions.

If these men and others have given their lives for the cause of the gospel in the Church of England, surely that ought to give us pause for thought before walking away ourselves. Such a heritage ought not to be given up on lightly, in our struggle for gospel faithfulness in the Church of England we have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood.

Keeping the Flame Burning Latimer uttered these famous last words, as he was burnt at the stake:

“Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man. We shall this day light such a candle, by God’s grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out”

Latimer was burnt at the stake as a Church of England bishop, he was put to death for the beliefs and doctrine of the Reformed Church of England of which he was a devoted member. The fight to keep the flame of the gospel burning strongly within the Church of England in our day and generation, is a fight worth fighting with all the strength that God gives us. Ryle’s words are a powerful challenge to me, I do not want to meet Latimer and Cranmer and others and admit that it was on our watch that the flame went out, that the Church was abandoned to wolves and false teachers.

Ibid p32-33

Their deaths are also instructive for us as regards one of the main theses of this book, namely that historic Anglicanism is shaped by a number of entwined threads, or numerous component parts that give definition to the whole. One of the most prominent causes of Cranmer’s (and others) execution, was his understanding of the Lord’s Supper. As we noted earlier, evangelicals have differing theological understandings of the Lord’s Supper and in our fellowship together, we rightly do not make this a ‘gospel issue’. We recognise that Christians can have differing understandings on this but still be Christians, we might even label it as a ‘secondary matter’. What Cranmer’s execution makes clear is that ‘secondary’ does not mean unimportant. In one sense the divide we make between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ can be helpful but on another it can be inadequate and misleading. It may have been ‘secondary’ but it was important enough for Cranmer’s opponents to have him put to death and important enough to Cranmer to be willing to die in defence of it. ‘Secondary matters’ matter and some are worth dying for, therefore we need to be careful not to separate out too neatly and distinctly some of the particular aspects of Anglicanism that are not gospel issues but are part and parcel of Anglican doctrine and heritage.

Chapter 7 Towards a Strategy (i) “When he [Jesus] saw the crowds he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ’The harvest is plentiful, but the labourers are few, therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out labourers into his harvest’” (Matt 9:36-38).

Notice what Jesus sees and what he feels. When he viewed the large crowds of thousands of people, what he saw was many people who were harassed and helpless. Why – because they were sheep without a shepherd. To live in this fallen world, in rebellion against and adrift from the God who created you and gave you life, is to be lost, confused and purposeless. Jesus looked upon countless numbers of people whose lives were full of burdens, strains and stresses, sorrows and pressures, anxieties and emptiness, pursuing false hopes, false dreams, serving false idols, living lives of meaninglessness and in a fallen world, victims also of the sins of others that left them harassed, lied to, abused, oppressed and deceived. And that is to say nothing of a Day of Judgment and a Christless eternity to come.

No wonder the heart of Jesus was stirred to compassion as he viewed the helplessness and the lostness of a teeming humanity.

It is crucial that ministers of the gospel, live lives of close and vital union and communion with the Lord Jesus, so that increasingly we learn to see as he sees and feel as he feels.

Do we view crowds of people, who may be utterly indifferent or even hostile to the gospel with compassion or resentment and irritation? When fallen people fall into sin, when a lost world demonstrates its lostness do we respond with an attitude that conveys surprise, disapproval or condemnation? This is not so much revealed by what comes from our lips but in our manner and attitude. People instinctively discern whether or not a person cares for them, whether a professed compassion is genuine or not. As our culture moves ever further away from its Christian foundations, as values, cultural norms, legislation and accepted patterns of behaviour become more and more removed from biblical standards, there is a danger that the Church exudes a disapproving and condemning air. When lost sheep without a shepherd give ample proof of their lostness, we need rather to have the compassion of the Good Shepherd who came to seek and to save the lost.

Large Harvest…Few Workers But that was not all that Jesus saw as he looked upon the crowds, he also discerned that ‘the harvest is plentiful’. The reason that the in-gathering was not as great as it could be was not a lack of a harvest, the problem rather was lack of labourers to gather it in. 76

Of course, we can’t simply jump from Jesus’ context in Matthew 9 and apply his comments then directly to 21st century UK now…or can we? Jesus, fully God and fully man, was THE Man who could read and understand the human heart,

“Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man” (John 2:24-25)

Despite the distance of time, geography and culture, the underlying nature of the human heart hasn’t changed and the effects of alienation from God remain.

Undoubtedly in 21st century secularised Western Europe we face enormous battles but might it be that this is a missing note in our thinking? The harvest in our day and age might not be as plentiful as other parts of the vineyard and in other seasons, but the same basic truth still remains, namely that the harvest is plentiful and that the real problem in gathering it in is lack of labourers.

Furthermore, Jesus doesn’t simply offer a diagnosis he also gives a solution that in essence is very simple, “therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out labourers into his harvest”.

The need is for more labourers; the solution is to pray earnestly for the Lord of the harvest to send them.

The word ‘earnestly’ is significant, the situation is so urgent, the need so great, so we need to pray, but to pray with focussed persistence and intent so that more labourers might be raised up.

All Christians are to be involved in this great work of bringing in the harvest but for reasons I will explain shortly, there is a particular emphasis here upon those called to full-time gospel ministry.

This is precisely the great and urgent need of the hour in the Church of England at present. Urgent may not even be a strong enough word. If the harvest is plentiful then not only do we lack labourers, our number of labourers is rapidly declining and its impact upon the ministry and mission of the Church is catastrophic.

There are some in the Church who argue that this decline is an opportunity to rethink and reimagine how we do ministry, indeed it may even be the sovereign work of God to release the church from the grip of clericalism and allow the laity to flourish. As more and more clergy look after more and more parishes, inevitably others must step forward in order to keep the plates spinning.

However, both biblical principles and hard facts make it clear this is quite simply not how it is.

This is how 16,000 churches of the Church of England are currently divided:67

In single church benefices In two church benefices In three church benefices In four-six church benefices In seven plus church benefices Not designated/uncertain

3,700 3,200 2,600 4,400 1,900 200

23% 20% 16% 27% 12% 1%

The single largest group is that of clergy looking after 4-6 churches, only one in four have responsibility for just one church, or to put it another way, three-quarters of all clergy have more than one church to care for.

Let’s be perfectly clear as to why this is the case, what it is that is driving this – it is not a vision for renewal, nor is it driven by a vision to ‘release the laity’. It is quite simply because there is both a shortage of clergy and a shortage of finance.

Sometimes we can miss something because of its simplicity. The words of Jesus remind us that:

a) It is neither unusual nor a surprise that there is a shortage of labourers, it was the case then and it is the case now.

b) The solution then is not to cut our cloth accordingly and try to harvest what we can with limited resources but rather to plead our cause earnestly and persistently to the Lord of the Harvest who has at his disposal limitless resources.

According to Bob Jackson:

“The number of full-time stipendiary clergy in the Church of England has fallen from over 11,100 in 1990 to under 7,800 today. Yet the number of churches –around 16,000 has hardly changed…also, the average age of the stipendiary clergy has risen to 52…because of their

Taken from Jackson, Bob What Makes Churches Grow? London Church House Publishing 2015 78

age structure, we know the decline in the number of stipendiary clergy will continue into the foreseeable future.”68

Furthermore, reduction of the number of full-time clergy does not and will not lead to churches growing and flourishing, Jackson again:

“Many clergy asked to take on increasing numbers of churches testify to increasing stress and workload and reduced overall effectiveness. One vicar took on the incumbency of three churches with a combined attendance of around 200. After two years he was exhausted and had to conclude it was not possible to attempt evangelism, mission and growth in more than one of his churches at once. He asked his bishop to show him just one multi-church benefice in the diocese where more than one of the churches was growing numerically, but the bishop could not.”69

It is not a surprise. All the evidence supports the claim that fewer clergy pastoring more churches will not lead to growth but will perpetuate decline and increase stress.

More importantly, so too does the Bible. There is a deadly fallacy that has almost become a commonplace in the desire to dress up decline as renewal, namely that less clergy allow for the liberation and growth of the laity. We have recovered the biblical concept of ‘every-member ministry’ and it is believed that this is enhanced and fostered by the reduction of clergy. This is to completely misread and misunderstand biblical teaching.

In Ephesians 4 Paul writes of the gift Christ has given to his Church of “the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers” (4:11).

Given that we no longer have apostles and prophets today as the Word of God is complete, we would equate the role of the pastor-teacher most closely with that of a pastor/gospel minister – what was the purpose of Christ giving this gift to the Church? To what end?

Paul is clear, “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” (4:12-13).

The effect of the pastor-teacher’s work is that the saints (i.e. Christians) will be equipped – for what? For the work of ministry. 68 69

Ibid p94 Ibid p95

Again, its simplicity can be missed. Who according to Paul is to do the work of ministry? Answer – all of God’s people, the laity. But they can only do it effectively and appropriately if they have been properly equipped. And how are they to be equipped? By the ministry of the pastor-teacher. To state the opposite makes it clearer: what if there is no pastor-teacher? Or if pastor- teachers are so thinly spread and overworked that they are unable to fulfil their task properly? Then the inevitable consequence is that the people of God will not be equipped adequately and so will fail to do the work of ministry.

Reduction of clergy, far from releasing the laity, leaves them ill-equipped, badly taught, unprepared and inadequately trained for the work of ministry, so it will either not be done or will be done badly. It is a deadly fallacy, yet one that is perpetuated and deeply ingrained in current thinking and planning.

Money Flows from Grace and Vision What of the other shortage – finance? This is a second major problem greatly hindering the Church’s ministry and mission.

Firstly we need to ask, why is there a financial shortfall? What does that tell us about the state of the Church and what God is saying to us as a Church? Is He withholding his blessing, his resourcing, because He is calling the Church to repent?

This question seems to be all too rarely asked. If we are lacking what we need for effective mission it is not because there is any lack in God, therefore it must be that for whatever reason he is withholding his blessing. This ought to cause us to search ourselves and cry out to him.

This is certainly the case as regards finance.70

Year

Tax-efficient giving (millions)

1970 £42 1980 £62 1992 £147 2001 £244 2011 £276 2012 £283 Source: Church of England, Finance Statistics, 2011

Ibid 198

Weekly average total giving per Electoral Roll member £2.10 £2.70 £5.10 £7.00 £8.40 £8.70

For 2012, the average weekly giving in the Church of England is £8.70. If the average giver was tithing, it would mean that the average annual income of Church of England members is under £5000. Tithing (giving 10%) is part of Old Testament law however, and it might be argued that as such it is no longer relevant or applicable to Christians today. However, even if we accept that, consider the obvious biblical trajectory: we have now received the full revelation of the gospel in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Ought that mean that we should give less? Surely, if anything, how much more ought we give in response to so great a salvation!

Simply looking at those figures shows us that one thing is crystal clear: taken as a whole, the members of the Church of England are not being bled dry. There is plenty of potential not only for increase in giving but for substantial increase in giving.

There are at least, two vital components to sacrificial giving:

Being gripped by the gospel of grace

ii.

Being gripped by a compelling vision

Being Gripped by the Gospel of Grace

One of the most instructive New Testament texts for helping us to think about giving is 2 Corinthians 8:1-15. Paul wants to encourage the Corinthians to give by citing the remarkable example of the churches in Macedonia. He tells of how the Christians in these churches endured great affliction and extreme poverty, but they experienced the grace of God at work amongst them so powerfully that they overflowed with joy and generosity in response. Not only did they give according to their means, they gave beyond their means, begging Paul to give them the privilege of helping their fellow Christians who were in need.

What a testimony to the power of the grace of the gospel! How often do congregation members plead to be able to give with a yearning, almost a recklessness to give beyond their means? Paul understood the dynamic of grace that was driving their longing to give, “They gave themselves first to the Lord and then by the will of God to us” (8:5).

In response to the grace of God they gave themselves wholeheartedly and unreservedly to God in thanksgiving. This is nothing less than the normal Christian life; this is the response Paul urges in Romans 12 in response to the gospel of grace he has been expounding for 11 chapters, “present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God which is your spiritual worship” (Rom 12:1). The normal posture of the Christian is that Jesus is Lord of our lives and of every area of our lives, including our finances. All that we have and possess, we have as stewards recognising it all 81

belongs to him and is given to us for us to use in his service. The dynamic at work in those Macedonian Christians was not a calculating, carefully worked out financial equation as to what was theirs and what they ought to give to the Lord; no, the power of these verses is that the Macedonian Christians responded in sheer spontaneity and heart-gripped longing to give because of the way in which the grace of God had overwhelmed them.

The dire level of giving in the Church of England tells a story, but sadly not a commendable one. It reveals the heart condition of the Church as a whole and the diagnosis is not encouraging; such a poor level of giving reveals just how lightly the power of God’s grace sits upon the Church and how little it has really penetrated hearts and minds.

The flip side of that however, is that if the gospel was to take deeper root in the hearts and lives of more people and congregations then there is plenty of scope for financial giving to begin to flow. Money is never the problem nor the solution, but it does serve as an accurate gauge; it is an indicator of the extent to which people have been gripped by grace.

ii)

Being Gripped by a Compelling Vision

People give when they understand why they are giving and what they are giving for; when they believe in the vision and wish to invest in it to help achieve it.

People are not inspired to give if it is simply to pay parish share, repair a leaky roof or pay a heating bill. When the glory and scope of the gospel is displayed before them and when they understand that the life and ministry of the local church to which they belong is part of that great mission then they understand why giving is important.

We do not give to keep things ticking over or to balance the books, but because Jesus Christ came to seek and to save the lost; because he is building his church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; because the gospel brings people from darkness to light, rescues people from the kingdom of Satan to God’s eternal and glorious kingdom, saves people from God’s eternal wrath and brings them into the future glory of a renewed creation in which God will dwell with his people and in which there will be no more sorrow, suffering, sin or death.

Each local church needs to understand, proclaim and explain a Gospel- driven vision, but so too does the denomination. A vision for reaching the nation with the gospel of Jesus Christ, an acute awareness that this a matter of life and death – eternal life and eternal death – and a profound awareness that this is something that is worth investing our lives in wholeheartedly. When ministers are convinced that the gospel is true, glorious and urgent, then they are also unashamed to teach, communicate and challenge congregations on the importance of giving and of giving sacrificially. 82

There is potential for massive increase in giving in the Church of England and the degree to which it will be unlocked is the degree to which the gospel of grace penetrates our hearts and lives, and to which we catch the vision of our Lord Jesus Christ who is at work building his Church and seeking and saving the Lost.

The Need for More Labourers The urgent need of the hour in the Church of England is for more – many, many more – people to be ordained as full-time ministers of the gospel.

Jackson again, “It would take a large influx of new clergy even to halt the projected decline in numbers. There were 256 stipendiary ordinations in 2012 and the total number of stipendiary clergy is forecast to go down by about 100 a year. So ordinations would need to rise to about 350 to bring that decline to a halt.”71

We need at least a 100 a year more Ordinands. A 100 a year of Gospel- driven, bible-believing ordinands over 10 years would bring a 1000 more ministers of the gospel into the denomination and would make a significant impact.

Is that a ludicrously far-fetched ideal? Surely not.

Jesus commands us to pray earnestly for more labourers, he makes it clear this is a vital priority so we ought to make it so.

At a conservative estimate there are at least 250 conservative evangelical incumbents in the Church of England at this present time, but it in all likelihood, that number could be more like 300-400.

If every local church with a clear gospel ministry made it a focussed, prayerful, specific goal to send forward for ordination at least 2 ordinands over 10 years we would be well over half-way there, 3 over 10 years would bring us a 1000 or very near that number.

That is not an impossible dream.

The work of church revitalisation can be arduous and slow; an evangelical who takes on a church that has not had an evangelical ministry will need great patience, courage and perseverance. It may 71

Ibid p107

well be for the first few years there is little visible fruit and the changes that are implemented may need to be slow and gradual, but the work of raising up and sending gospel- workers into the harvest field can begin instantly and be taking place no matter how fast or slow the revitalisation process is taking. More established churches could be even more fruitful in this work.

More workers in the vineyard are needed, they are there and so is the finance. We need to pursue this with purpose, intent and prayerfulness.

Furthermore, in time a large number such as this will inevitably begin to impact and change the denomination. As water finds its own level an increasing number of Gospel-driven, bible-believing ministers cannot but begin to surface in all areas of the denomination’s life enabling there to be real renewal and reformation, not moving the denomination in an alien direction but reclaiming the denomination in line with its historic faith.

The Vital Importance of The Best Possible Training Ordinands need to be equipped for gospel ministry in a complex secular culture that we are seeking to win for Christ, and in a denomination that is riven with error, confusion and falsehood. They need to be equipped to sustain a biblically faithful ministry over the long haul. Surely then, training is of paramount importance.

In 1967 the first ‘National Evangelical Anglican Congress’ was held at Keele University. It marked a significant turning point for Anglican evangelicals and their involvement in the Church of England. Prior to that time for a number of years, evangelicals had ministered faithfully in their local churches, with a kind of ‘ghetto-like’ mentality. Towards the end of the 1950’s and into the 1960’s a renewed confidence combined with some exceptional emerging leaders within evangelicalism created a momentum for change and a desire to break out of the ghetto mentality, not only to become more involved but to impact and influence the denomination. People like John Stott, J I Packer and Alec Motyer were some of the leading figures in the movement which culminated with the Congress at Keele and gave a resurgent evangelicalism within the Church of England a growing sense of confidence and expectancy.

The evangelical movement continued to grow at great pace and did indeed begin to exert more influence within the denomination, but as it grew numerically so it also grew in its breadth. By the 2nd NEAC, held at Nottingham in 1977, some cracks were beginning to appear within the movement; there were varied responses to the similarly growing and influential charismatic movement. Into the 1990’s there were further divisions concerning evangelicals’ response to the ordination of women. As the movement grew, it became less cohesive and theologically distinct, the word evangelical came to need an adjective put in front of it to give it greater clarity and definition. We now had ‘charismatic evangelicals’, ‘open evangelicals’, ‘conservative evangelicals’, ‘classic evangelicals’ and even ‘liberal evangelicals’. 84

It is not unusual for numerical growth to bring theological breadth, although it is not inevitable; neither is it a surprise that when a movement feels itself to be in a minority with its back to the wall that it experiences a strong sense of cohesion and camaraderie. But a deeper diagnosis is called for; these symptoms of division and confusion reveal a deeper malaise – namely a lack of interest in, concern for and commitment to theology. As we have seen, historic, Reformed Anglicanism is rooted in weighty theological truth and doctrine; yet amongst many conservative evangelicals there is a lack of theological weight.

It is not surprising that broader ‘evangelicals’ drift from biblical moorings; but it is surprising that there is within conservative evangelicalism a growing atmosphere of indifference to theology. There is a commonly held belief that all that is needed to prepare someone adequately for a life-time of gospel ministry are Bible handling skills. The argument goes that the minister’s job is just to teach the Bible; once a person has been equipped for that then he or she is ready for ministry.

Kevin Vanhoozer and Owen Strachan have recently described this development:

“The idea of the pastor as a theologian – one who opens up the Scriptures to help people understand God, the world and themselves – no longer causes the hearts of most church members to ‘burn within’ them (Luke 24:32). Too many pastors have exchanged their vocational birthright for a bowl of lentil stew (Gen 25-29-34; Heb 12:16): management skills, strategic plans, ‘leadership courses’, therapeutic techniques and so forth. Congregations expect their pastors to have these qualifications and if pastors have an MBA, well, then so much the better…meanwhile seminaries race to catch up to new expectations, reforming their curricula in ways that result in an even greater loss of theology in the church. The story is complex and has been told elsewhere. The basic gist: theology has been more or less banished from Jerusalem. Theology is in exile and as a result the knowledge of God is in ecclesial eclipse…without theological vision, the pastors perish”72

Bible handling skills are vital for gospel ministry, but more is needed. There is a strand within conservative evangelicalism that is impatient with or sees little place for full-time in-depth theological training. They express concerns such as:

• It is undeniably expensive at a time when the Church is financially under-resourced. • Systematic theology can hinder, even negate faithful, accurate Bible exegesis, because we can let our ‘system’ obscure what the text actually says. If we come to the text with our preconceived systematic theology, we may be prone to reading into the text what our system says it should say instead of reading out from the text what it actually says. • The need is great and the task is urgent, we need to get workers into the vineyard as quickly as possible. 72

Vanhoozer, Kevin J and Strachan, Owen The Pastor as Public Theologian Baker: Grand Rapids 2015 p 1,3

The reality is that no one comes to look at a biblical text ‘neutrally’. We are finite creatures with finite minds that are not able to know all truth exhaustively, and we are sinners whose minds have been affected by sin. Furthermore, we have all been shaped and influenced by our culture, including our particular ‘theological culture’ and tradition, all of which affects us as we come to look at a text. We all have a theological framework, a theological ‘system’, even if we are not aware of it, in fact the less aware of it we are the more likely we may be to distort the text.

An awareness of my own presuppositions and theological system ought to help me be more faithful in interpreting the text. If the plain reading of the text, when read in the light of Scripture as a whole, simply cannot be reconciled with my theological presuppositions, then it may well be that I have not understood the text properly; but it may be that my system needs to change in the light of Scripture, which always remains the ultimate authority.

Proper theological training allows you the time and the resources to construct your systematic theology; it exposes you to other interpretations and other traditions within evangelicalism, as well as in the wider world. For good reasons, this may not be possible for all, but full-time training provides the best opportunity to equip future ministers for a life-time of faithful, enduring and resilient gospel-ministry:

• We live and minister in an increasingly secular and diverse culture that is either hostile or indifferent to the Christian faith. • The Church of England’s role and influence in society and nation may be declining, but it still presents unique opportunities – albeit with challenges – to navigate that relationship well for the gospel. • Within the denomination, there is the on-going battle over competing ‘theologies’ and false teaching. • Not only is our culture becoming increasingly diverse and complex, but the speed at which it is changing is also accelerating. • The task of proclaiming the biblical gospel in this present day context requires more of a faithful gospel minister today than previously because of the complexity of the culture that we want to reach with the gospel. • To be effective and faithful ‘gospel-practitioners’ we need to know, understand, experience and appropriate the gospel of grace in our own daily lives, and we need to understand the propensity of the sinful human heart towards a default legalism, and its knee-jerk reaction towards antinomianism, and navigate through it. • Faithful biblical ministry over many years is a battle that sadly spews out its casualties from time to time.

For these reasons alone, we need to be as well-equipped as we possibly can be.

In Oak Hill College’s booklet “The Best Possible Gift”, Tim Keller writes:

“Today preachers have to present truth to people from several diverse cultures all at once, and to those who are considerably more ignorant of the Bible and more hostile to its authority than a generation ago. Leadership of any institution, including churches requires more communication and organisational skill than in the past. People’s personal problems are more complex. Over my forty years of pastoral ministry, I’ve come to the conclusion that ministers need more comprehensive and exacting theological education today than when I came into the work”73

The greater the task, the greater the reason for the best possible training.

“Applying the words of Jesus’ parable, the culture we live in now is the soil where we are sowing the seeds of the gospel. What is the best way to plant those seeds so they produce the best possible harvest? Next year, the soil may be different. The challenges we face change all the time and it could be that other religions, aggressive secularism and the problems of social media will give way to a different set of problems. That’s why a good theological education not only trains you to think incisively about particular issues, it trains you to think, full stop. It enables you to apply your thinking flexibly and become, under God, a positive and dynamic resource for the church into the future”74

Brain surgeons and heart surgeons will train for many years to be properly equipped to perform operations where people’s lives are at stake. In gospel ministry, people’s eternal lives are at stake. Our whole approach to training ought to be not ‘what is the minimum required so I can be adequately equipped for the task?’ but rather ‘what is the best possible training available to me so I can be as well-equipped as possible?’

Oak Hill College is committed to equipping future Anglican ministers with the best possible training in order that their ministries might be fruitful, effective and resilient. 21st century gospel ministry is to be exercised in a complex and ever changing context. The late Mike Ovey, then Principal of Oak Hill, explains the rationale behind Oak Hill’s commitment to enabling students to be “the best possible gift for Christ to give to his church”75:

“Looking at British and world culture today, it’s not hard to see that it is fractured into many different cultures and subcultures. The fractures open up over what language people speak, what race they belong to, which religion they follow, what region, generation of social class they come from…some of these fractures in culture are very deep, with hostility on either 73

74 75

Keller Tim, Oak Hill College ‘Best Possible Gift’ p5 Oak Hill College Best Possible Gift p17 Mike Ovey: Oak Hill College Prospectus p2

side, while others are narrower, but still produce real incomprehension between different groups. An important aspect in communicating the gospel is knowing when there is a fracture, what kind of fracture it is and how it can be crossed without losing the essential point of what you want to say…

…but it’s not just that we live in a culture that is fractured. Like an earthquake, the fractures are constantly shifting. Some of today’s biggest fractures have only opened up in the past couple of decades. And many of the ones that are important right now will deepen, narrow, vanish or be replaced by new fractures over the next 30 years. In fact, that process will probably happen several times over the course of your ministry.

That means that part of our job is not only to help deepen your faith, but also to give you the tools to communicate it in a world of shifting cultures. We aim to nurture your ability to analyse when something that once worked simply doesn’t any longer.

We want to build up your skills in examining what you see around you in the light of the Bible. That way, you’ll be able to judge the truth and value of fresh cultural changes and recognise the opportunities they bring for the gospel.

Above all, we want to help you to be radically faithful to Jesus and radically adaptable in proclaiming him. That’s a big challenge, both for you and for us! But it’s vital as we help you prepare for your ministry”76

Mike Ovey: Oak Hill College Prospectus p16

Chapter 8 Towards a Strategy (ii) Church Planting In recent years, the Church of England has become more intentional and committed to church planting. ‘Bishop’s Mission Orders’ provide legislation for new church plants or ‘fresh expressions’ of church; in 2015 London diocese appointed a ‘church planting bishop’ with the vision to plant 100 new worshipping communities in London. Increasing populations, new housing developments and population shifts provide good reasons for the necessity of new churches; furthermore, church planting is one of the most effective ways of reaching communities with the gospel. There are plenty of opportunities for creative and strategic church planting within the Church of England at present.

However, alongside church planting, there is an even greater need for church revitalisation.

Church Revitalisation As I noted earlier, every person in England lives in a Church of England parish. The infrastructure, though crumbling in parts, is still in place for the Church of England to reach the whole nation with the gospel. What is needed even more than the planting of new churches is the revitalisation of existing churches.

I agree wholeheartedly with the words of Harry Reeder writing about Church Revitalisation:

“if a particular church is dying, the conventional wisdom in some circles is that it should be closed down…but I suggest that in most cases a ministry of church revitalisation is closer to the heart of our Lord…I think that when a pastor, a supporting church, or a denomination comes alongside a church in need of revitalisation, this action reflects the heart of God….the ministry of starting new churches is a rewarding one, but I suggest that the ministry of revitalising existing churches is sometimes even more rewarding…not only does the ministry of church revitalisation reflect the heart of God and of Paul, but when it is carried out according to the Word of God, it is also a practical and effective way to meet the current needs of the body of Christ”77

There are two vital ingredients necessary for this great work – the proclamation of the gospel and personnel.

Reeder Harry From Embers to a Flame P&R Phillipsburg 2008 p 18-22

All over the country there are Church of England congregations that gather week by week but they do not hear the gospel being clearly preached and they do not hear the Word of God being faithfully expounded. This is a tragedy.

“How are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preached the good news!” (Rom 10:14-15)

But surely congregations have heard of him (the Lord Jesus)? Yes and no. Yes, in that of course they have heard of Jesus, through the liturgy, the songs and hymns that are sung, the reading of the Bible and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper; but no, in the sense that if the biblical gospel is not clearly and faithfully proclaimed then the ‘Jesus’ that they have been told of is not the ‘Jesus’ of Scripture and history.

Paul writing to the Corinthians rebukes them, “If someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted you put up with it readily” 2 Corinthians 11:4. In other words, it is possible to hear a message about ‘Jesus’ and to be taught a ‘gospel’ other than the true apostolic gospel about the true Jesus and his true finished work.

I vividly remember the bemused anger of a man who had come to faith in Christ after hearing the gospel clearly explained, because he had been a church goer for many years and to his recollection had never heard the biblical gospel preached to him. How it must grieve the Lord Jesus when his sheep are not only not being properly fed but are unaware that they are not being properly fed.

On a more positive note, there is something glorious that happens when the Bible begins to be taught clearly, faithfully, patiently and graciously in a congregation that has hitherto had no or little experience of that. It is like water being poured out on a parched desert and suddenly seeing beautiful flowers begin to bloom. When those who belong to Christ but have been starved of his Word for so long78, begin to hear his voice again it is both heart-warming and desperately sad. Sad because for so long they have been wrongly deprived, heart-warming because there is often such a joy and delight in hearing God’s Word after a long famine.

We might question why a person would remain in a church where the gospel is not taught but people and situations are complex. Some stay out of loyalty to the church or friends within it, some stay because it never occurs to them to do anything else, some because they lack mobility to travel far and some with an innate trust for the clergy consume unclear or even false teaching, without always being able to identify the errors. For whatever reason, good or bad the plain fact is that there are plenty of the Lord’s sheep in churches where the gospel is not clearly taught and so there is a great, urgent need for faithful Bible teaching in such congregations

As we said in an earlier chapter, the great need is for many more faithful gospel ministers, so that more and more of these churches can be revitalised by the gospel once again.

One of the most encouraging developments in recent years within Anglican conservative evangelicalism is the ‘ReNew’ Movement, holding an annual conference of a few hundred Anglican conservative evangelicals. The strategy of ReNew, clearly defined by its strapline is to ‘Pioneer, Establish and Secure’ local Anglican churches for the gospel. This is an excellent and straightforward strategy.

Pioneer Revitalisation begins here. The immediate task is firstly ensuring that there are enough gospelhearted ministers, who have been thoroughly equipped and well-trained, with convictional courage and gracious humility, willing and able to apply for incumbencies in non-evangelical parishes. Thus the need for vastly more numbers of ordinands.

Secondly, they need not only to apply but also of course they need to be appointed. In the present climate in the Church of England, there are some parishes that appear to be closed to clear, evangelical ministry at the moment, however that is certainly not the case universally and there are a range of possible options and strategies that can be implemented.

Co-operating and engaging where possible with the wider Church.

Sometimes conservative evangelicals have a reputation for being angular, or even arrogant. Sometimes, we tell ourselves it is because we are uncompromising in our commitment to the gospel and the hostility we receive is because of the offence of the gospel, whereas the truth may in fact be that sometimes we might be arrogant or exude a critical, belligerent and judgmental attitude towards others with whom we disagree. We must never compromise but we do need to exhibit Christ-like graciousness and kindness in our interaction and debate with others. If we work hard at establishing as good a relationship as possible with fellow clergy, the diocese and the wider church, then that can open some doors for gospel ministry. Some vacant parishes that are not evangelical will happily appoint an evangelical who is personable, gracious and relationally warm. Some diocesan officials may have reservations, even objections to conservative evangelicalism but will be favourably disposed towards individual evangelicals who have worked hard at establishing and maintaining good personal relationships, thus again opening doors for gospel ministry.

ii)

Being willing to go anywhere for the sake of the Lord Jesus

One of the reasons why I firmly believe that the door has not yet shut upon gospel ministry within the Church of England is that there are a good number of non-evangelical parishes that could 91

relatively easily be won for the gospel. The problem is not a shut door to keep evangelicals out but unwillingness on our part to consider some parishes that are available. I had a conversation recently with a bishop who told me of a parish that had been vacant in his diocese for two years. The parish had not had a history of evangelical ministry but were crying out for anybody to come and lead them.

The reason it was vacant was simply because there had been no applicants. I fear that is not an isolated story but it is a shaming one. Before we jump ship claiming that there is no place for evangelical ministry in the Church of England, we may need to take a closer look at the log in our own eye. It is a sad fact and one that we need to repent of, that conservative evangelicalism as a whole prospers and sees most growth in middle class parishes, often in towns or cities with a strong student population. This is not because such an environment is most fruitful soil for the gospel but rather that that is so often where we tend to invest most of our energies and our most gifted people and resources. By and large conservative evangelicalism is a middle class movement. That is not because working class areas are harder to reach for the gospel but rather that too many of us are not willing to follow the apostle Paul and become all things for all people for the sake of the gospel. If the Lord Jesus was willing to empty himself of his glory and humble himself to become a man and then was willing to be obedient all the way to the cross, we who claim to be his followers must also demonstrate such whole-hearted obedience and willingness to deny ourselves, pick up the cross and follow him, wherever he may lead us, for the sake of the gospel.

iii)

Think and plan strategically

Churches where the gospel takes root and begins to evidence growth and transformation are the most powerful advocates for gospel ministry. Paul writing to the Thessalonians informs them that the transformation that the gospel has wrought in their lives has been an incredible advocate for the power and glory of the gospel and that their witness has impacted a vast area:

“you became an example to all believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. For not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere so that we need not say anything” (1 Thess 1:6-8)

In a time when many churches are declining, an evangelical church that is flourishing and impacting its community with the gospel will be noticed. If that church is also playing an integral role in its local deanery79, then when a local church has an interregnum80 this can be a great opportunity for the gospel:

A ‘deanery is a group of local Anglican churches, presided over by a rural dean and it also has a ‘deanery synod’ made up of all the local clergy and elected representatives of each parish 80 Interregnum – literally ‘between reigns’, when an incumbent leaves or retires, there is an interregnum until the next incumbent is appointed

a) Some may say, “we’d like a minister like the one at St ‘X’’s” because they have seen it flourish and have been attracted by the life and ministry of that church.

b) Some may be willing to appoint the curate from the evangelical church, particularly if the evangelical church has actively supported the other church through its vacancy and thus a good personal relationship has been established. (I have been in a deanery where this has happened; three non-evangelical churches in the same deanery have accepted evangelical ministers this way).

Furthermore, if a local evangelical church is strategically thinking and praying for the spread of the gospel, not just within its own parish but within the wider locality, then there are other ways in which other local churches can be won for the gospel. For example, a church in a multi-parish benefice where one worn out minister is serving 4-5 congregations might welcome the offer from a neighbouring evangelical parish to fully fund a minister to live within their parish to lead and serve that one church, with the only requirement being that the neighbouring parish be permitted to make the appointment.

This strategy is not new, but is perhaps undervalued. Writing of how evangelicalism spread during the late eighteenth century, Hylson-Smith comments:

“Both the preaching and the subsequent influence of the converts upon their neighbours and their neighbourhood as a whole was open for all to hear and behold. Evangelicalism typically took root in a small town and then exercised its influence upon the surrounding area. It was a pattern which was to be repeated with great effect throughout the history of Evangelicalism both in England and worldwide”81

The strategy is simple but effective; whenever the gospel takes root, it ought then to begin to spread outwards. A gospel-hearted minister ought to have a vision for the spread of the gospel not only in the local church but in the surrounding area too. We should pray and work towards ‘clusters’ of local churches being won for the gospel, constantly looking to spread further and further afield.

Establish This is the vital work. This is the work of reforming a local church in accordance with the Word of God and by God’s grace seeing a congregation come to life through the proclamation of the gospel. This takes time, courage, boldness, patience, wisdom and love.

Hylson-Smith, Kenneth Evangelicals in the Church of England 1734-1984 T&T Clark Edinburgh 1988 p55-56

A church that has not had faithful bible teaching for many years is not a blank canvas waiting to be filled with biblical truth, but a canvas filled with doctrinal confusion, error, heresy and half-truths. It is not uncommon for there to be a varied reaction and response to hearing the Bible being faithfully taught in such a context. It may generate feelings of anger, hostility and confusion as people hear a very different message to what they have been used to.

Paul instructs Timothy that, “The Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness” (2 Tim 2:24-25)

It is important to give the Word of God time to do its work and to remain calm and steadfast in the face of hostility or opposition that can arise, which can sometimes be vitriolic and personal.

Wisdom is needed to know which battles to fight and when to fight them, and which battles to leave. It also takes time to get to know a congregation well, to know and understand the important issues that shape and drive it– issues which may not be apparent at first sight. Similarly, it takes time to understand who are the key influencers and decision makers. Sometimes things may get worse before they get better; some people might leave, offended by the gospel message being clearly preached; and some may remain but constantly complain and criticise, resistant to the gospel and the change it inevitably brings.

Patience and courageous perseverance is needed because the process of gospel change and revitalisation can take many years. Some ministers leave too soon, worn out by the constant conflict they are experiencing or wounded and scarred by too many battles.

As the Word of God is faithfully taught, is made central in the life and ministry of a local church, and begins to shape and drive all that is done, gradually a church begins to change.

Alongside the ministry of the Word, a new minister must also take time to get to know and love the congregation. This is true for all gospel ministry, but especially so in a revitalisation context – the minister must love and serve the flock. This comes through visiting, pastoring, counselling, spending time with people and getting to know them well. As the congregation begin to see that the minister truly cares for them, then a degree of trust begins to build, those who were initially opposed to biblical teaching begin to listen more attentively and less defensively. The kindness and patience that Paul commands Timothy to exhibit begins to disarm and lower people’s defences to the gospel message.

Similarly, for the minister, as you begin to get to know your congregation and care for them, so a love begins to grow towards them which will hugely impact how you minister, how you respond to opposition and criticism and above all, nurtures a deep concern for the spiritual well-being of the flock entrusted to your care. This is nothing other than the Church of Jesus Christ, his bride that he 94

loves deeply – this reality ought to be deeply imprinted upon the heart of every minister of the gospel. Richard Baxter challenges:

“Oh what a charge is it that we have undertaken! And shall we be unfaithful to it? Have we the stewardship of God’s own family and shall we neglect it?...every time we look upon our congregations, let us believingly remember that they are the purchase of Christ’s blood and therefore should be regarded by us with the deepest interest and the most tender affection”82

In John’s gospel, Jesus speaks of himself as the ‘Good Shepherd’ who lays down his life for his sheep, because he loves them and contrasts this with the ‘hired hand’ who does not care for the sheep but rather abandons them when wolves appear, “He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep” (John 10:13)

Jesus, alone is the ‘Good Shepherd’, but we are called to be ‘under- shepherds’. We do not lay down our lives redemptively for the flock but are called to love the flock with the love of Christ and to evidence the same commitment to the flock in contrast to the hired hand. A Christ-like love for the flock means that a gospel minister will not abandon the flock to the mercy of false teachers but will be willing to spend and be spent in loving, teaching, caring, pastoring, exhorting and serving the congregation. Such a minister will not be easily moved, intimidated, bullied or enticed into abandoning the flock until the work has been established.

One of the great examples of such a ministry from Anglican church history is that of Charles Simeon, (previously cited) in Cambridge from 1783 to 1836. He endured relentless, fierce opposition yet he continued and persevered steadfastly until his death. The level of antagonism and abuse he endured would have caused many to have crumbled and looked for a ministry elsewhere. Simeon however persisted and through unwavering faithfulness established a hugely influential ministry within the Church of England.

The tragedy is that sometimes we leave too soon, but a gospel ministry that perseveres with patience, graciousness and boldness can under God be of both temporal and eternal significance. The way in which the Church of England will be renewed and revived is through the revitalisation of churches through the ministry of countless faithful gospel-hearted ministers.

However, no matter how long someone stays, we are all mortal and eventually it is either right to move or to retire, thus creating a vacancy.

Here the third plank of ReNew’s strategy comes into play, namely that of securing gospel succession. 82

Baxter, Richard The Reformed Pastor Banner of Truth Edinburgh 1994 p 131,132

Secure ‘Establishing’ a local church on an evangelical, biblically faithful footing is not the end of the task however; unless such a church is secured for future generations of gospel ministry, then the work will apparently have been in vain.83

From the moment a new minister arrives, at the back of his mind he also needs to be preparing for his departure. During a vacancy a local church will draw up a parish profile which describes the kind of person they are looking for as their new incumbent and they will also appoint two parish reps who have the right of veto over a prospective candidate.

It is crucial that the parish profile makes it quite clear that this is a conservative evangelical parish that wants a conservative evangelical minister and it is also crucial that the two reps appointed by the church are theologically sharp and willing to stand firm and contend for the right person to be appointed.

This is another reason why it is important to be involved within the wider structures of the Church of England. Precisely because the Church of England is not a congregational church, particularly at times of appointment of new ministers, the wider church has a crucial role to play. Evangelicals need not only to work for the renewal and reform of the local church but of the denomination and its structures, one of the reasons being so that we can be more effective in securing evangelical succession.

Long Term Vision Along with the need for church planting and church revitalisation, our strategy needs to rooted in a long term vision.

Effective and thorough revitalisation can take twenty years or so, certainly it often needs more than one evangelical incumbency because it takes a long time to change the culture of a church, to grow not just new converts but new leaders who are able and equipped to take up positions of influence and leadership within a local church.

The value of church history is that it can give us a long-term perspective that we often lack today in a world that values the instant and the pragmatic. Short-termism may afford us quick gains but the task of renewing and reforming the Church of England requires patience, a long-term perspective 83

Of course, any biblical ministry is never in vain, even if relatively short-lived see 1 Cor 15:58, but what is meant here is that the hard work of establishing a biblical ministry will then be undone by the next incumbent, without a long lasting secure footing for gospel ministry.

and a persevering wisdom that understands that we may lose some battles before the war is won, rather than throwing in the towel too early in resigned despair.

Numerous times in church history when all has appeared to be bleak and hopeless, God has revived his Church in remarkable ways. One of the great Reformation mottos was ‘Post Tenebras Lux’ now engraved on the Reformation wall in Geneva. It means ‘After the darkness, light’. The God of grace is so often at work when things appear to be most bleak or hopeless, thus revealing his power, his steadfast love and his glory. The Church of England in the early decades of the eighteenth century was similarly in disarray but then came the Evangelical Revival and a whole nation was impacted and changed by the power of the gospel through the ministry of Anglican ministers such as George Whitefield, Daniel Rowland and John Wesley.

Prayer This is THE most urgent need of all. ‘Earnest prayer’ to God for him to revive and renew the Church of England is the single most important strategy of all, and it may be that here is where we really get close to diagnosing the root cause of all our problems. We need to take the many rich promises of Scripture and plead them before God, asking him to be faithful to his Word.

Isaiah 62:6-7 “On your walls O Jerusalem, I have set watchmen; all the day and all the night they shall never be silent. You who put the Lord in remembrance, take no rest and give him no rest until he establishes Jerusalem and makes it a praise in the earth”

Again, we do not claim that the Church of England today is the fulfilment of Old Testament Jerusalem, rather it is a part of the people of God, part of the church of God but that does give us warrant to note God’s love for and concern for his Church and the call upon his people to pray without ceasing until he restores and renews her.

Many do pray, and pray earnestly for the Church of England, but does prayer have the prominence it ought to have in our thinking, our conferences, our movements, our discussions and our strategies? Evangelicals rightly stress the importance of the ministry of the Word, but we may at times be guilty of undervaluing the importance of the ministry of intercessory prayer, not so much in what we teach but rather in what we do.

We know that ‘unless the Lord builds the house those who build it labour in vain” Psalm 127:1. The bedrock of any effective strategy for renewing the Church of England is an earnest, even extraordinary commitment to intercessory prayer.

When Nehemiah heard of the desolate state of Jerusalem and of the plight of those who had survived the exile, we read that “as soon as I heard these words I sat down and wept and mourned for days and I continued fasting and praying before the God of heaven” (Neh 1:4)

This was not a momentary, passing thought but rather a deeply felt and sustained persistent prayer borne out of a love and concern for his people. This surely ought to be the hallmark of anyone who cares deeply about the Church of Jesus Christ.

In Acts 6, in response to a potential crisis concerning the provision of need for the Greek widows, seven godly men are appointed to sort out the problem and ensure proper care is being given to those in the need. The apostles delegate this work so that they can:

“devote ourselves to the ministry of the word and prayer” (Acts 6:4).

Did you notice anything strange about the above quotation? Read it again…it is the wrong way round. In fact, the text puts prayer first, then the ministry of the word, but I suspect many of us as evangelicals tend to put the emphasis on ‘ministry of the word’. This little incident is illuminating for us. I do not think that the apostles’ commitment to prayer here meant that they needed to be allowed time to have a ‘quiet time’ every day like everyone else was expected to in order to have time to pray, because they were too lazy to get up in the morning before work. Surely not. Rather, they saw ‘prayer’ – presumably intercessory prayer in particular – as part of their ministry. As Christians, like all other Christians they would have a regular time of devotional prayer but as apostles called to the ministry of the word, they were also called in a special way to a ministry of prayer. Their ministry of the word was undergirded and shaped by prayer, it is not accidental that Luke puts that first here.

Most evangelical ministers I know have a high commitment and disciplined approach to the ministry of the Word, most have time set aside each week for sermon preparation and only in the most exceptional of circumstances would they let something intrude into that time of preparation. But I wonder how many of us have the same disciplined and intentional commitment to time for sustained prayer? This is in addition to our regular devotional prayer time that should be the norm for all Christians, this is an integral part of full-time gospel ministry and inseparable from the ministry of the Word.

When we read the diaries of our godly forefathers, many would regularly set aside, mornings, days, seasons of time for sustained prayer. It might be argued, ‘but we live in such busier, more fast-paced times with more demands and expectations of our time’. Although there are undeniably many claims and demands on our time, the truth is we make time for that which we most value.

Prayer is not a luxurious add-on to gospel ministry, it is the very heart beat and foundation of it all. 98

Chapter 9 This Day the Noise of Battle Stand up, stand up for Jesus, The strife will not be long; This day the noise of battle, The next the victor’s song. To him who overcometh A crown of life shall be; They with the King of Glory Shall reign eternally

So…here it comes! This is where the plea to come and join us is given. If you love the Lord Jesus Christ and his gospel, if you love his Church and if the characteristics of Anglicanism have resonated with you at all, and you are considering full-time gospel ministry, then I would urge you to explore the possibility of exercising such a ministry in the Church of England. Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 6:2, “Behold now is the favourable time; Behold now is the day of salvation”.

There is no better day to be alive, there is no better time to be involved in gospel ministry – for today, now, is the gospel day.

In Revelation 12, a pivotal chapter in the whole book, we read of war in heaven (v7) and war on earth (v17). Satan in his fury has declared war on the ‘offspring’ of the woman. Who are they? John tells us, “the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” (v17)

To be a Christian is to be at war – at war with Satan the accuser and the deceiver. A war that is fought here on earth and in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:10-12). Paul tells us that we do not wrestle with flesh and blood but against the authorities and cosmic powers. John wants us to know that this is the reality of what it means to be a Christian now, on earth awaiting Christ’s return; that the followers of Jesus are the sole preoccupation and target for Satan and his fury.

This spiritual battle finds expression in many different ways and in many different guises but any who take seriously the call of Jesus Christ to follow him will taste its reality. This is the Big Picture that forms the backdrop for ministry in the Church of England today:

• An increasingly secular culture with an increasingly hostile response to the Word of God • A Church that is declining in influence, impact and numbers, whose resources (personnel and finances) are dwindling 99

• A Church increasingly adrift from its true heritage, riddled with doctrinal confusion, lacking confidence in the trustworthiness of God’s Word and the power of the biblical gospel to save • A Church that is losing its nerve on matters of morality and sexual conduct.

We could go on….

Are those reasons for assigning the Church of England to the ecclesiastical dustbin…or are they simply tell-tale signs that we are at war? Are they reasons to abandon ship or to roll up our sleeves, dig in and be prepared to fight with the strength that God gives us by his grace?

In Ephesians 5, Paul uses the metaphor of marriage to help us understand the relationship between Jesus and the Church. In fact, he teaches that rather than marriage being in prior existence and providing us with a helpful illustration and insight into the relationship between Jesus and the Church, it is in fact the other way around. When Genesis 2:24 declares “therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” it is in fact referring ultimately and primarily to Jesus and his bride, the Church (Eph 5:32). This greater reality is to help shape our understanding of and behaviour within marriage, so husbands are called to love their wives as Christ loved the Church (5:25). Paul explains what this looks like:

“Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendour without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.” (5:25-27)

The dynamic here is crucial. Jesus did not love the Church because she was beautiful, but he set his love upon her and gave his life for her in order that she might become beautiful. It is the future not the present reality that defines the Church and Jesus’ love for her, that led him to give his life in his sacrificial and atoning death for her.

This dynamic moves in the opposite direction to what we are commonly used to in many of our human relationships and typically in our understanding of marriage. We ‘fall in love’ and then as we grow closer and get to know each other more deeply, have to work harder at what it means to love each other ‘warts and all’. Jesus sees us at our worst and loves us and will go on loving us until he has sanctified us that we might be a radiant, blemish-free bride.

If the Church will one day be glorious, holy, spotless, radiant and without blemish, it also means that until then she is none of those things BUT Jesus does not give up on her. Whilst it is true, of course, that individual churches might wither and die, that Jesus can and does remove his lampstand (Rev

100

2:5) and that what is true for a local church can also of course be true for a denomination, there are nevertheless two things to draw out of this:

Until she is beautiful, the bride of Christ can at times appear to be very ugly, yet Jesus doesn’t love her because she is beautiful, he loves her so that she will become beautiful. As one such ‘ugly’ member of his bride, I am eternally grateful for his patient, pursuing, enduring and steadfast love for me. He hasn’t yet given up on me although he has plenty of reason so to do. Therefore, I don’t want to be too hasty in giving up on the Church of England despite her many blemishes.

ii)

There is no perfect church or perfect denomination. Until Christ returns, the Church will always be fighting against false teaching from outside and from within. If we withdraw from a ‘mixed denomination’ to start afresh, Scripture and history tell us that given enough time the same battles will arise there too.

The natural impulse of Christ’s love for his Church ought to lead us instinctively to labour for her reform and renewal when riddled with imperfection rather than to give up and abandon her. Furthermore, it is a battle worth fighting because a biblically reformed and renewed Anglicanism has so much to commend it.

J I Packer writes:

“the Thirty Nine Articles seem not only to catch the substance and spirit of biblical Christianity superbly well but also provide as apt a model of the way to confess the faith in a divided Christendom as the world has yet seen”84

I wholeheartedly agree and have attempted to explain why this is so. I believe that historic, Reformed Anglicanism is a generous, clear, wise and biblically faithful expression of the Christian faith. I believe that the present Church of England is in great need of reform and renewal, but not into a different ecclesiastical animal. Rather, it needs reform and renewal simply by returning to her historic and doctrinal roots. A renewed and reformed Church of England has the greatest potential to reach this nation for Christ, which is the urgent and pressing need of the hour. She desperately needs many more gospel-hearted, biblically faithful ministers who are prepared to give themselves in the service of Christ for his glory, for the building up of his church and for the evangelisation of our nation. In ‘The Effective Anglican’, Lee Gatiss writes:

“The only thing keeping us alive as a church is the gospel, the living voice of the living God in his word. Who is going to keep us alive by continually unleashing that word from the pulpits of the land, and pouring it out onto the parched soil of our parishes, if we will not take up 84

Packer J I 39 Articles Their Place and Use Today Latimer House p1

101

that challenge and endure whatever hardships may come our way as a result?...so let’s make sure we hear today and do not harden our hearts to the sound of thousands of Church of England congregations in every corner of the land, who are crying out for someone to feed them, longing for someone to pastor them, dying for someone to bring them the word of life. Surely as long as that’s possible for us and however difficult it might get in the National Church, we should be grabbing this opportunity to be missionaries to the various peoples now living in this country?”85

Daniel 11 tells of warfare and the rise and fall of successive kingdoms, and then of one who will oppose the ‘holy covenant’ and profane the Temple, setting up ‘the abomination that makes desolate’ (v31). It is by no means a straightforward passage but in the midst of the fury of this warfare waged against the people of God, tucked away in the middle of the chapter is this glorious verse:

“But the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action” (Dan 11:32b)

The urgent need of the hour then and the urgent need of the hour now is for people who know their God, who will stand firm in the midst of the battle and who will take action, who will go on the front foot and move forward for the advancement of the Kingdom of God and the spread of his gospel.

Jesus tells us that the great need is not for a larger harvest, but for more labourers in that harvest field. Daniel 11:32 tells us of the kind of labourers we need.

We need Gospel-driven ministers who:

Know their God

This has a two-fold sense:

• We need to know about God, to know his character and his attributes. To dig down deep into the rich soil of theological truth, to have an ever growing grasp of biblical doctrine, to have an ever growing grasp of his holiness, majesty and glory. To think, live, speak and act ‘theo-centrically’. To know His Word because this is how we come to know Him and to be shaped and transformed by it. • We need to know God. At the heart of this expression is the reality of personal and intimate communion with the God of the universe. Biblically, the word ‘to know’ means far more than mere intellectual knowledge, but rather it expresses a deep union of love, 85

Gatiss Lee The Effective Anglican Church Society/Lost Coin Books London 2015 p25

102

intimacy, commitment and delight. Proper theology always leads to doxology, true knowledge of God always leads to unalloyed love, delight and praise of Him. More than all the skills and gifts that might be needed for gospel ministry, this is paramount, that those in gospel ministry know, love, delight in and commune with their God.

Note that this verse does not describe three separate requirements but rather one (they know their God) and that the other two phrases are sequential, flowing out of the first. The second and third phrases follow on automatically from the first. If people know their God, then these two further qualities will also, inevitably be found in them. They will be those who:

ii.

Stand firm

When kingdoms, rulers, authorities and powers throw the full force of their might against those who know their God – they shall stand firm.

How urgent a need this is today! For gospel ministers, who will not move, crumble, falter in the cause of the gospel no matter how fierce the opposition, how great the cost, how painful the wounds and how lonely and isolated they may feel. Who will not abandon the flock when fierce wolves come in, who will not change or compromise their message to make it more culturally acceptable, more amenable to itching ears and more popular with a disinterested or even hostile world. Those who know God stand firm because they know what it is to fear God not man, to seek His – not people’s – approval and who because they know Him to be sovereign and loving are content to entrust their lives, their futures, their well-being, their families, their ‘everything’ to his loving care…and so they cannot be swayed but will stand firm. It may be that the coming years bring greater hostility and opposition to gospel ministry; the only ones who will stand firm and remain faithful will be those who know their God.

iii.

Take Action

However opposition, even increasingly hostile opposition, does not mean that we should be cowed and defensive, on the contrary it means we should be ever more bold and ‘aggressive’ (in the right sense of the word!). There is no contradiction between deep personal piety and energetic, indefatigable action; on the contrary, the one flows out of the other. Those who know their God will be known as people who take action, who are bold, who take risks, who take initiative, who are visionary and strategic thinkers. Who refuse to be pushed onto the back foot just clinging on and hoping to survive, but rather go onto the front foot, move forward and take action for the sake of the gospel. No one exemplified this more than George Whitefield, the great Anglican evangelist of the 18th century of whom J C Ryle wrote:

“he was among the first to show the right way to meet the attacks of infidels and sceptics of Christianity – he saw clearly that the most powerful weapon against such men is not cold 103

metaphysical reasoning but preaching and living and spreading the whole gospel, he was the first Englishman to have understood what has been called the aggressive system – the first to see that Christ’s ministers must do the work of fishermen – they must not wait for souls to come to them but must go after souls – he did not sit tamely by his fireside mourning over the wickedness of the land, he went forth to beard the devil in his high places, he dived into holes and corners after sinners”86

He, along with his fellow gospel ministers, changed the face of the nation because he knew, loved, trusted, believed and relied upon his God. He himself, said:

“I love those who thunder out the Word. The Christian world is in a deep sleep! Nothing but a loud voice can awaken them out of it”87

To know God means to know that:

• He is sovereign over all the earth and there is no power, person or principality that can ever thwart his plans and purposes (Isaiah 46:9-10) • That Jesus Christ has been given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18) • That the Holy Spirit has been given to a weak Church in order that she may have power for gospel proclamation (Acts 1:8) • That the gospel is the power of omnipotent God for the salvation of all who believe (Romans 1:16) • That Jesus will build his Church and the gates of Hell cannot prevail against it (Matthew 16:18) • That the number of those who will be saved through this gospel is so immense and vast, it cannot be counted (Revelation 7:9) • That one day the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord and his Kingdom will come upon earth in all its fullness (Revelation 11:15)

And so the one who knows these things, that is, who has these truths deeply imprinted upon his soul…will take action, will be willing to take risks, to refuse to accept defeat, to pray without ceasing pleading the promises of God back to Him, to spend and be spent for the sake of the gospel.

It is these kind of Gospel-driven labourers that the Church of England so desperately needs at this time, who know their God, stand firm and take action. 86 87

Ryle Christian Leaders p47-48 Dallimore A George Whitefield Vol 1p400

104

Hugh Latimer was burnt at the stake crying out that through his martyrdom and that of other Anglican Reformers, God would light a candle in England that would never be put out.

The third verse of the great missionary hymn by Frank Houghton contains these words,

We bear the torch that flaming Fell from the hands of those Who gave their lives proclaiming That Jesus died and rose Ours is the same commission The same glad message ours Fired by the same ambition To Thee we yield our powers88

• Would you pray that God would have mercy upon the Church of England and raise up many Gospel-driven ministers who will know their God, stand firm and take action for the sake of his Church, the salvation of the lost and the glory of his name? • Would you be willing to be an answer to your own prayers?

Hymn Facing a Task Unfinished F Houghton

105

Chapter 10 It Takes a Village to Raise a Child… and a Church to Raise an Ordinand This book was written as a plea to those who might be considering full-time gospel ministry, to encourage them to pursue that ministry within the Church of England. That is its narrower focus and context. However, that will only be truly effective if it is placed within a wider perspective with a wider focus. There is a proverb that says, “It takes a village to raise a child”89. For our purposes today we might say, “It takes a church to raise an ordinand”. Therefore this final chapter has been written specifically for members of local Anglican churches, incumbents, PCCs and Church Wardens.

However, its purpose is not just to encourage local churches to be intentional in praying for and seeking to raise up more full-time gospel ministers. More importantly and foundationally, its purpose is to encourage local Anglican churches to be more wholeheartedly, enthusiastically and convictionally Anglican and to be actively involved in pursuing the renewal and reform of the Church of England.

Some evangelical Anglican churches, rightly committed to the proclamation of the gospel and the faithful exposition of the Word of God, sit lightly to their Anglicanism and simply get on with the work of evangelism, discipleship and pastoral care. Others, perhaps, as they view the national scene, listen to some of the debates of General Synod or the occasional pronouncements of some Anglican leaders, feel dispirited and discouraged about the Church of England, and so direct their energies towards the life and ministry of the local church, ignoring and being indifferent to the denomination as a whole. This can be further fuelled by an ecclesiology that is ‘congregational’ rather than Anglican, believing that there is little, if any biblical significance in the inter-dependence of churches, or a denomination.

It is also the case, of course, that many evangelical Anglican churches have congregation members who have joined a particular local Anglican church not out of Anglican convictions but because it just happens to be the nearest local church where the Bible is faithfully taught and the gospel clearly preached. Our unity in the gospel is paramount; we do not and must not claim that Anglicanism is the only expression of biblical Christianity. It is entirely right and appropriate that they are welcomed in the church fellowship, but this also provides an opportunity to explain the historic basis of faith of the Church of England and how that is rooted in Scripture. There are many evangelicals who quite simply have never heard of a biblical rationale for the doctrine and practices of the Church of England.

“The proverb has been attributed to African cultures. In 2016, NPR decided to research the origins of the proverb, and concluded it was unable to pinpoint its origins, though academics said the proverb nevertheless holds the true spirits of some African cultures” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_takes_a_village. 106

Whilst an evangelical Anglican congregation might be quite mixed, there is, however, a great need for Anglican incumbents to be passionately and convictionally Anglican. We need incumbents who warmly embrace our theological and historical heritage and are confident about its biblical basis. We need incumbents who are not defensive or hesitant about Anglicanism but rather will encourage congregational members that we can be rightly ‘proud’ of our heritage and confident about its biblical basis. A weakness within evangelical Anglicanism is a lack of awareness of, or understanding of, the biblical and theological nature of historic Anglicanism. If we do not know and cherish this, it will foster an indifference to the denomination and undermine any motivation for praying and working towards the renewal and revival of the denomination.

There is a world of difference between being an ‘accidental Anglican’ and a ‘convictional Anglican’. There is a difference between being an Anglican for pragmatic reasons – because for the most part you are able to get on with gospel ministry with doors of opportunity being open for you – and being an Anglican because you have a deep conviction that at its best “historic Anglicanism offers, the richest, fullest expression of biblical Christianity that the world has ever seen”90

One of the main emphases of this book is not only to argue that historic Anglicanism is thoroughly biblical, but more than that, to encourage a love for and enthusiasm for a full-orbed historic Anglicanism. Anglican ministers who are deeply and passionately persuaded of that will have an extra dimension – even depth – to their ministry.

The Great Divorce The root of the problem is that too many of us, as evangelical Anglicans, have divorced ecclesiology (our doctrine of the church) from evangelism and discipleship.

Jesus sent out his disciples with the Great Commission to “go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you”91. We can – and often do – miss declaring that it is impossible to be a disciple of Jesus Christ and not to be a committed member of a local church. As Article 27 states, “they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church…” The Great Commission is not a call simply to seek lots of new converts, but under the authority and Lordship of Christ, to build his Church. The Great Commission is nothing other than a post resurrection exposition of the promise of Jesus that he will build his Church. (Matthew 16:18). We must not divorce mission from ecclesiology.

Having come to faith in Christ, a new Christian is to be nurtured and discipled within the context of a local church family. If that local church is Anglican, it is vital that part of the discipleship process is teaching, explaining and encouraging a new Christian to understand that. How does this particular 90 91

Quote from chapter 1 Matthew 28:19-20

107

local church express what it means to be a follower of Jesus Christ? What does it mean to be a member of this church, what are its theological foundations and guiding principles, how does it express its understanding of biblical truth and how does that shape its corporate life together?

All too often, we can think of those kinds of questions as peripheral and detached from the work of evangelism and discipleship. The problem with that is that it is at best unhelpful, at worst confusing and detrimental to a person’s growth in spiritual maturity because it inevitably communicates that Church is irrelevant or insignificant to a person’s relationship with Christ. Historic Anglicanism is defined by its doctrinal beliefs that shape it and distinguish it from other denominations. The role of the pastor-teacher in a local church, amongst other things, is to teach, explain, persuade and commend those doctrinal distinctives to those in the congregation.

It is no great surprise that if we do not do that, evangelical Anglican churches will sit light to the denomination, respond to denominational error with further withdrawal, and fail to grow members who are enthusiastically evangelical, enthusiastically Anglican and who rejoice that there is no contradiction or tension between the two.

Where Have All the Flowers Articles Gone? It is extraordinary that although the 39 Articles still form the historic, legal and essential doctrinal basis of faith for the Anglican Church, they are very hard to find in many Anglican churches, including evangelical ones! They are to be found at the back of the Book of Common Prayer; however in many evangelical churches that tends to be used only for the early morning Communion Service on a Sunday. The main morning service and evening service are more likely to make use of Common Worship with the service printed out on service sheets or service cards, or be on PowerPoint slides projected by a data projector – in all those cases the 39 Articles are nowhere to be seen. It is hard to overstate the significance of this, the long-term detrimental effect it has had, or the astonishing fact that this is not seen as astonishing!

Is it any wonder that we lack theological cohesion, backbone or clarity, if our doctrinal basis has been effectively side-lined or silenced?

Furthermore, because we have come adrift from our heritage, in the numerous conflicts that rage within the Church of England, dispirited evangelicals can find themselves swallowing the deceptive myth that the Church of England is a ‘broad Church’. The assumption that the Church of England is a ‘broad church’ is undoubtedly phenomenologically true; that it ought to be so is a different matter altogether.

It is worth reminding ourselves once again, of Canon A5:

108

“The doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular, such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal”.

Those who believe and hold fast to the 39 Articles, are not impostors, nor even tolerated guests. Those who believe the doctrine of the Church of England as upheld by Canon Law are thus the rightful and legitimate heirs of Anglican heritage and true, genuine members of that Church. The Church of England is as broad as its Articles – the breadth lies within those doctrinal markers, not outside of them.

Implications: •

•

We must resist the seductive pressure of a false tolerance. The 39 Articles shape and define the theological and doctrinal position of the Church of England; those who hold to them do not need to be ‘broadened’. If the theology that drives the ministry and mission of a local Anglican Church is not selfconsciously rooted in the 39 Articles, it is hard to deny the allegation that any particular doctrinal position or ministry emphasis is simply down to the whim of a particular incumbent. It is inadequate to argue in response to this “incumbent- determined doctrine and ministry” allegation that this is what the Bible teaches because that fails to explain why this particular local church is Anglican rather than Baptist, Presbyterian, Independent Evangelical or Methodist etc. A commitment to the authority of Scripture is not the sole prerogative of Anglicanism. A commitment to Biblical authority can clearly lead to a variety of interpretations and understandings of the sacraments, ecclesiology and polity. It is particularly helpful in a revitalisation context. If you have attended a local church for years, it is understandable that you might struggle if an evangelical is appointed who appears to be preaching a different message to what you have been used to, explaining and applying the Bible in a way that you have never heard before. This can be especially difficult if the new evangelical incumbent implicitly, if not explicitly, undermines or even contradicts the message that you have been taught for many years. To be able to explain and demonstrate that what is now being taught is in fact nothing other than true, authentic, historic Anglicanism as found in the Prayer Book and the 39 Articles can be immensely reassuring for confused congregation members. It is all there – justification by faith alone, the substitutionary atonement of Christ, the supreme authority of Scripture, original sin, predestination and a biblical understanding of the sacraments. We unnecessarily shoot ourselves in the foot if we ignore this heritage and fail to demonstrate that historic Anglicanism holds fast to the biblical gospel and that an evangelical ministry is truly and authentically Anglican. If we ignore our doctrinal basis, we fail to disciple people adequately and effectively. We will simply focus on a handful of essentials and never properly teach them about things such as the Church, the sacraments, liturgy and public worship, and some of the particular doctrinal distinctives of Anglicanism

109

•

If as incumbents we believe that historic Anglicanism is a thoroughly biblical expression of what the Church of Jesus Christ ought to be like, then why would we not want to teach new converts the theological contours of Anglicanism? If we do not believe that then why are we Anglicans?

Suggestions: • • • •

•

Every local evangelical Anglican church should have numerous copies of the 39 Articles, visible and readily available. They should be in modern English.92 Those in leadership, staff teams and PCC should know and understand the 39 Articles and be committed to them.93 A new members class ought to include summary explanations of the Articles, emphasising and commending those of particular importance. This is nothing less than what most evangelical independent churches or confessional Presbyterian churches would automatically assume to do. A friend of mine, who is a Presbyterian minister, in his new members’ class will explain the church’s doctrinal position and give a brief introduction to Presbyterianism. This is all too rare in local Anglican churches and we reap what we sow. There ought to be periodic mid-week courses that teach the 39 Articles to help congregation members become more familiar with them. Mid-week courses allow for more time, discussion and interaction than within Sunday services. It ought to be second nature and instinctive in preaching and teaching to allude to or refer to Anglican doctrine.

Jerusalem to the Ends of the Earth: In Acts 1, Jesus tells his disciples, “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

We have here the blueprint for the mission of every local church. It begins and has a right focus upon its immediate context, but such is the nature of the dynamic of the gospel that the mission thrust always pushes outwards. Thus the ‘mission field’ of every local church begins locally, but it ends at the furthest reaches of the globe, spreading out in ever wider concentric circles. It is not that each local church has a local mission field and that with enough churches eventually the whole world might be covered, but rather that every local church is called to have a heart for reaching the world for Christ.

The Church Society has produced a very helpful modern English version of the Articles I am not arguing here that every member of the PCC for example, ought to be convinced paedo-baptists but I do think that every member of the PCC should know that the Anglican Church does practice infant baptism, why it does and not be resistant to but supportive of that practice 93

110

Again, for evangelical Anglicans there is a danger we can divorce this call to far-reaching mission from our understanding of and commitment to the Church. In the history of the modern missionary movement over the last three- to four-hundred years, there have been some wonderful and highly effective mission organisations. They have often begun because of the zeal and vision of an individual with a burning passion to reach a particular nation or region with the gospel. Tragically, they have often responded to Christ’s call to go and make disciples of all the nations despite, not because of, the Church. The great Baptist missionary to India, William Carey, often called the ‘father of modern missions’, asked at a minister’s meeting in Northampton, “Whether the command given to the apostles to "teach all nations," was not obligatory on all succeeding ministers to the end of the world, seeing that the accompanying promise was of equal extent?'"94

His question provoked the now infamous response from John Collett Ryland, “"Young man, sit down; when God is pleased to convert the heathen world, He will do it without your help or mine"95.

Sadly, those words express a not uncommon attitude towards world mission – of either complete indifference, or complete inactivity, wrapped up in theological excuses. Thankfully, William Carey was not to be deterred, but is a striking example of someone with Christ-like zeal for the lost having to strike out on his own for the sake of the gospel, despite, not because of, the Church.

At times, the Church has seemed to be unable to cope with such indefatigable zeal and singleminded determination, and so ‘parachurch’ mission agencies and organisations have come into being. Thus, once again, mission has been divorced from the Church, whereas biblically, mission is the work of the Church. The consequence of such a divorce is that inevitably it leads to an approach to evangelism – seeking to win people for Christ – that lacks or is indifferent to ecclesiology. Undoubtedly, the fault for this most often lies with the Church rather than mission-minded zealous individuals. However, a far more healthy and biblical approach to world mission is that it is the Church’s mission to reach the world for Christ.

Thus Acts 1:8 ought to find natural expression for a local Anglican Church in a commitment to its immediate mission field, namely its parish, but moving every further outwards, a commitment to the Anglican deanery, diocese and national Church. That is, every local evangelical Anglican church ought to self-consciously be committed to the spread of the gospel and the renewal and revival of the Church, at every level.

Deaneries: As noted on p114, historically, evangelicalism has spread within the Church of England as it has taken root in a small town and then begun to impact a wider area. This ought not to surprise as this

94 95

http://www.wholesomewords.org/missions/bcarey10.html Ibid

111

is nothing other than the pattern Jesus describes in Acts 1:8; what is surprising, perhaps, is that as evangelicals we have not paid more focussed attention to this.

Every local evangelical Anglican church ought to be prayerfully concerned for all the other local Anglican churches nearby – that is, within its deanery. We ought to encourage congregational participation in the life of the deanery, to encourage congregation members to be involved and committed members of deanery synod. The deanery provides an immediate mission field for the gospel. A local church with a gospel focus will long for and prayerfully work towards the spread of the gospel within the deanery. This means active and gracious involvement within the life of the deanery with a constant eye for gospel opportunities. Conservative evangelicals may be known for our commitment to biblical truth, but are we also known for our Christ-like love? Do we pray for, love and befriend clergy, leaders and congregations within our deanery? Love and grace should be prominent and defining in our relationships, particularly within the Church of Jesus Christ. Of course, false teaching needs to be confronted, but there are many clergy who are simply struggling with loneliness, stress and weariness, congregations that are dispirited and struggling. Evangelical ministers and congregations ought to be renowned for their prayerful and practical support and friendship.

A local Anglican church with a gospel-heart ought to have a vision for the whole deanery, to pray and work towards all the churches in the deanery being won for the gospel. It is inevitably a long-term vision, but imagine the impact for the gospel in an area if the whole deanery was filled with churches that held fast to God’s Word and proclaimed the gospel faithfully.

The flow of the gospel is always outwards to the ends of the earth; a vision for the gospel that stops short of that is not a gospel-vision. Therefore, local Anglican churches ought not only to have a vision to reach their deanery, but beyond that – their diocese.

Diocese: What is true for our participation in deaneries for the sake of the gospel ought also to be true as regards our participation in diocesan life. As with deaneries, so with dioceses, a gospel-driven vision will pray for and work ceaselessly towards nothing less than dioceses that are filled with Bible believing, gospel proclaiming churches. The brutal reality on the ground is that such a vision appears to be a million miles away, but is that a reason for not pursuing it? It may be helpful to be reminded of William Carey once again, who despite such crushing, faithless, opposition gave his life to serving Christ as a missionary to India, and whose irrepressible zeal was encapsulated by his famous dictum, “Expect great things from God, attempt great things for God.”

112

General Synod: The reality is that the Church of England is a ‘synodically governed’ Church. It is here that decisions that impact the whole denomination are debated and voted upon.

Here we face two problems at least:

1) Anyone who is ordained as a minister of the gospel because of a love for Christ and a passion for the spread of the gospel does not naturally lie awake at night dreaming of one day being elected to Synod. The natural inclination of a gospel-hearted minister is to expend all his time and energy in gospel ministry, rather than sitting on committees and engaging in long hours of debate. Thus, not surprisingly, many conservative evangelicals are reluctant to devote time and energy to Synodical involvement. Again, this is why it is crucial that we do not divorce our ecclesiology from our missiology, but rather to see that being involved in the structures, discussing, making decisions and shaping the future direction of the Church is part of gospel ministry. 2) Quite simply – numbers are crucial. Synodical government means that policies and decisions are implemented by voting. If those who hold to biblical truth are in a minority – they will lose the vote. It is as simple as that. Thus it is imperative that in order to ensure biblical faithfulness, we need more members of Synod who are committed to the biblical gospel. All too often, in recent years, we have been fighting a rear-guard action, trying to put out fires and exercise damage limitation. However, a vision for the renewal and revival of the denomination helps us to imagine a different kind of Synod. A General Synod filled with bishops, clergy and laity who are clearly and intentionally committed to the authority of Scripture so that all debates, discussions and decisions would be governed first and foremost by a desire to understand what the Bible says and then to implement and uphold that would be glorious indeed. Synod ought not to be an organisation viewed with distrust, tolerated as a necessary evil in which evangelicals fight desperately to limit its unbiblical decisions, but rather as the denomination’s governing body seeking the advance of the gospel. The role of well-taught, wise and biblically faithful laity is absolutely crucial here, but it is through the ministry of biblically faithful pastor-teachers that well-taught laity will be equipped to serve the Church on Synod.

This will never be the case until there are many more conservative evangelicals on Synod. That in turn, will never happen until there are many more conservative evangelicals and until they are voted on to Synod.96 That will never happen until there are many more gospel-centred churches and congregations actively involved and participating in the life of the Church. And that will never happen until there are many more conservative evangelical ministers who are at work in pioneering, establishing and securing local congregations committed to the Word of God and the gospel of Jesus Christ. And that will never happen until we have many, many more ordinands. 96

As I argued in chapter 7, excellent theological training is so important to equip us to engage and contend graciously without compromise and to remain unswervingly committed to biblical inerrancy. The history of post-Keele involvement alerts us to the danger of involvement leading to doctrinal compromise.

113

Pray to the Lord of the Harvest for More Workers One of the most crucial and urgent needs in the Church of England, therefore, is the raising up of godly, Bible-believing, gospel-hearted leaders. And where are they to come from but the local church? As we have already noted, Jesus said that the harvest was plentiful but that the workers were few. The solution to that, according to Jesus, is not indifference or passivity, but urgent prayer to God to raise up more workers.

Ordinands do not appear out of a vacuum. My plea is for an integrated vision for the renewal and reform of the denomination. My concern is that as Anglican evangelicals, we: •

Lack, or are disinterested in, a theological vision of historic, Reformed, authentic Anglicanism or

•

Have a vision for gospel growth that is localised and parochial or

•

Have a larger vision for gospel growth that is indifferent to ecclesiology and simply aims to multiply lots of ‘local Anglican churches’ or

•

Have a larger vision for gospel growth majoring on gospel distinctives and pursues gospel growth in partnership with other gospel churches regardless of denominational allegiance.

The weakness with all the above is that there no comprehensive vision for the renewal and reform of the denomination. Lacking such a vision, it is inevitable that we will also therefore lack a strategy. A strategy to renew and reform the denomination must be rooted in the ministry and mission of the local church, but the local church needs to have a biblical vision for the outward spread of the gospel to the ends of the earth. I am arguing that this ought to be ecclesiologically shaped, not eccelesiologically indifferent.

It is not enough simply to seek to renew and reform local congregations. We are not in the FIEC97, but part of a denomination – a denomination that is episcopally led and synodically governed. That which we seek for the local church we must also seek for the denomination. It is simply a ‘both/and’ not an ‘either/or’. Is such a vision simply unrealistic and impossible? Has it been tried and found wanting….or has it never really been tried?

In his stimulating essay ‘The Supreme Motive’, Samuel Zwemer, the so-called ‘Apostle to Islam’, writing of the need for a passion for God’s glory to be the ultimate motive in mission, says:

FIEC = the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches

114

“Prayer is the sole dynamic in the Acts of the Apostles…God has a way of breaking through barriers and the unexpected is to be expected when He is leading on…we have only to wait on God. His power is infinite. His time limit is eternity. With God, the missionary enterprise has in it all the glory of the impossible, the adventure of leading a forlorn hope to certain victory; the glory of apparent defeat and real triumph at the end.”98

The glory of the impossible. The ‘possible’ glorifies us, the possible is something attainable and achievable by our endeavours, our skill, our resources, our strength; but when the ‘impossible’ is accomplished it is unequivocally clear to all who it is that the glory belongs to.

Another missionary to Islam, Lilias Trotter, who laboured faithfully for the gospel in Algeria in the late 19th and early 20th Century, also loved to delight in the God for whom nothing is impossible:

“Let us give ourselves up to believe for this new thing on the earth. Let us dare to test God’s resources on it. Let us ask Him to kindle in us and keep aflame that passion for the impossible that shall make us delight in it with Him, till the day when we shall see it transformed into a fact”99 ‘A passion for the impossible that shall make us delight in it with Him’. We need this ‘passion’ now more than ever, but is that not simply what it means to believe the gospel and to believe in the God of the gospel? A true, biblical renewal and reform of the Church of England in this present day may appear at times to be impossible. However, we ought not to despair, but rather remind ourselves that although ‘with man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God ’100.

Is not now an opportune time to ask God to ignite within us a passion for the glory of the impossible?

Similarly, on a worldwide scale. Every evangelical Anglican church ought to be committed to and supportive of the spread of the gospel throughout the world. There are, of course, numerous, biblically-faithful mission organisations that are worthy of support. But if we are convictionally Anglican, then there ought to be a primary commitment to support Anglican missionary agencies, so long as they are clearly committed to the biblical gospel. For example, Crosslinks is an Anglican missionary society unwavering in its commitment to biblical authority and the proclamation of the gospel. Such an organisation enables a local Anglican Church to be fully engaged in worldwide mission in a way that is shaped by and expresses its ecclesiological distinctives.

Zwemer S, Thinking Missions with Christ p69,70 Lilias Trotter cited in A Passion for the Impossible by Miriam Rockness p339 100 Mark 10:27 99

115

Contending with Lamb-like Gentleness and Lion-like Courage John Piper writes:

“Life is war. That’s not all it is. But it is always that…very few people think that we are in a war that is greater than World War II or any imaginable nuclear war. Few reckon that Satan is a much worse enemy than any earthly foe or realise that the conflict is not restricted to any one global theatre but is in every town and city in the world.”101

We live in a time and a culture when opposition to biblical truth and the biblical gospel is intensifying. It is a time for courage, not fear, a time when we need to hold fast to God’s Word no matter how fierce the opposition or how bitter the conflict. As careful readers of the Bible, this ought not to surprise us. The Bible is peppered throughout with commands for courage, not to fear or be afraid, we are reminded that we have been given ‘a spirit not of fear but power and love and self-control’ (2 Tim 1:7). Jesus goes even further and tells us:

“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when others revile and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:10-12)

Courage, even Christ-centred joy in the midst of trials, opposition and conflict, is a specifically vital characteristic which will be needed increasingly by the people of God in these days and the days to come.

Not only do we need courage, but we must also be willing to contend. Jude v3:

“Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.”

Threatened with ungodly teaching, including permissiveness in the arena of sexual ethics, he had to urge the believers to ‘contend for the faith’. The ‘faith’ that was ‘once for all delivered to the saints’. The divinely revealed gospel that does not, cannot, and must not change.

101

John Piper Let the Nations Be Glad p45, 48

116

It is not enough simply to hold fast to the Truth, we must be willing to contend for it too. It is not enough to be orthodox, we must be willing to contend for orthodoxy. If our functional ecclesiology is congregational, then our natural inclination will be to contend for the faith in our local context, but not in the wider denomination as a whole. However, unless we contend in the denomination, the denomination will continue to drift ever further from its biblical foundations.

We must not bury our heads in the sand or acquiesce in the face of relativism, doctrinal confusion or the erosion of biblical morality. And whilst on the one hand we must guard against lethargy, cowardice and indifference, on the other we must be wary not to contend in a way that dishonours Christ or that seems to deny the very gospel of grace that we proclaim.

The Reformed theologian John Frame wrote an article entitled “Machen’s Warrior Children”102. Gresham Machen was an American Reformed Theologian who battled against theological Liberalism in the Presbyterian Church of America, writing “Christianity and Liberalism”.

“[H]is book argued, not only that liberalism was wrong, but that it was a different religion from Christianity. According to Machen, Christianity and liberalism were antithetically opposed in their concepts of doctrine, God and man, the Bible, Christ, salvation, and the church.”103

Machen left the Presbyterian Church of America and founded what became known as the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). In his article, Frame writes:

“Machen died of pneumonia in 1937, disappointed that his new denomination was already showing signs of division. Machen’s children were theological battlers, and, when the battle against liberalism in the PCUSA appeared to be over, they found other theological battles to fight. Up to the present time, these and other battles have continued within the movement, and, in my judgment, that is the story of conservative evangelical Reformed theology in twentieth-century America.”104

In being willing to make a stand and to contend for the faith, there can be a danger that imperceptibly a contentious attitude becomes more and more a default position, or the instinct to contend for the faith becomes more prominent in us than the love and grace of Jesus. We can become so concerned to fight against false teaching and to expose doctrinal error that we become defined more by what we are against, than what we are for.

102

http://frame-poythress.org/machens-warrior-children/ Ibid 104 Ibid 103

117

The Diverse Excellencies of Jesus Christ The American Theologian and Pastor, Jonathan Edwards (1703 -1758), once preached a sermon entitled “The Admirable Conjunction of Diverse Excellencies in Jesus Christ”. The sermon was based on Revelation 5:5-6, in which John depicts Jesus as a Lion and a Lamb. Edwards expounded the ways in which seeming opposites are to be found in Jesus Christ, his life and his ministry:

There is in Jesus Christ:

• • • • • • • • •

infinite highness and infinite condescension infinite justice and infinite grace infinite glory and lowest humility infinite majesty and transcendent meekness the deepest reverence towards God and equality with God infinite worthiness of good, and the greatest patience under sufferings of evil an exceeding spirit of obedience, with supreme dominion over heaven and earth absolute sovereignty and perfect resignation self-sufficiency, and an entire trust and reliance on God.

When we think about the cross, we see:

• • • • • • •

Christ was in the greatest degree of his humiliation, and yet by that, above all other things, his divine glory appears. He never in any act gave so great a manifestation of love to God, and yet never so manifested his love to those that were enemies to God, as in that act. Christ never so eminently appeared for divine justice, and yet never suffered so much from divine justice, as when he offered up himself a sacrifice for our sins. Christ's holiness never so illustriously shone forth as it did in his last sufferings, and yet he never was to such a degree treated as guilty. He never was so dealt with, as unworthy, as in his last sufferings, and yet it is chiefly on account of them that he is accounted worthy. Christ in his last sufferings suffered most extremely from those towards whom he was then manifesting his greatest act of love. It was in Christ's last sufferings, above all, that he was delivered up to the power of his enemies; and yet by these, above all, he obtained victory over his enemies.

Edwards makes the point that there are so many attributes and characteristics that are seemingly diametrically opposed to each other and yet are to be found in Christ who is fully God and fully Man, the Majestic Lion and the Gentle Lamb, that it would appear to be inconceivable that they might be compatible in the same person. Such is the glory of Jesus.

118

Jesus is unique; his saving work is unique. Nevertheless, flowing from his person and work, out of union and communion with him, something of his boldness and grace ought to be displayed in the lives of his people.

We need to contend for the gospel of Jesus Christ in the Church of England today with the Lion-like courage and Lamb-like gentleness. There is a need for courage to overcome our cowardice and instinctive preference for a quiet life. There is a need for Christ-like graciousness in how we contend for gospel truth. We are called to love our enemies, to pray for those who persecute us, and to speak boldly the Word of God to a nation that rejects it and in a Church that is in danger of abandoning it.

To do so we need to walk in vital, close communion with Jesus Christ, the Lion and the Lamb:

“There is only one thing that has helped me overcome these fears and it is zeal for the gospel and it is zeal for the gospel and its effects in the world. When I am living out the gospel – and the gospel is living in me with power - my fears shrink to Lilliputian size. If we walk with Jesus, we will begin to take on both His Lamb-like gentleness and His Lion-like courage.”105

Thus the plea in this chapter is for local churches:

To be intentionally praying for and asking God to raise up more workers for his harvest field. If every evangelical Anglican local church had a vision to raise up and send at least one person every five years into ordained ministry in the Church of England, we would be well on the way to a thousand new gospel-ministers over ten years.

Suggestions:

In Matthew 9 Jesus is clear that it is ultimately God who raises up labourers, however, He does that through means. Here are some suggestions for what it might look like for a local church to have a vision to raise up and send at least one person every five years into ordained ministry:

•

105

Make it an intentional prayer for God to raise up at least one person in 5 years into ordained ministry, and for this to be prayed for at the church prayer meeting, staff meetings, PCC meetings and in church services.

Miller C John Outgrowing the Ingrown Church p114

119

• •

•

II.

For it to be a regular agenda item on the PCC for reflection, discussion and assessment, simply asking “How are we doing on this?” Hold an annual ‘Vocations Sunday’106 – not entirely given over to thinking about ‘ordained ministry’107, but with that always an integral part of it. This would give an opportunity to preach and teach on why this is so important, including a call for people to consider prayerfully before the Lord if he is calling them to full-time gospel ministry. For it to be a particular focus for the incumbent to be prayerfully sensitive and watchful for individuals who God might be raising up to send as labourers into his vineyard, and then to invest time one-to-one in teaching and discipling such individuals.

To see that a local church that is truly gospel-driven will quite rightly have a focus on the spread of the gospel in its immediate parish. But that focus will not end there, it will look ever further outwards to the ends of the earth. However, my plea is that this mission emphasis be ‘ecclesiologically’ shaped. Of course, there are numerous occasions when Anglicans might want to partner with non-Anglican evangelicals for the cause of the gospel locally, regionally, nationally and internationally. That said, if we are to integrate our ecclesiology with evangelism and mission, as I think we ought, then it follows naturally that we will also be committed to the spread of the gospel and to pioneering, establishing and securing biblically faithful, gospel-driven local Anglican churches, deaneries, and dioceses throughout the whole denomination. This ought to be the intentional and focussed mission of every local evangelical Anglican church. We should seek to do so with Lion-like courage and Lamb-like gentleness.

The Story of the Two Trampolines: A passage that is frequently referred to during times of great revival is Isaiah 64:1-3:

“Oh that you would rend the heavens and come down, that the mountains might quake at your presence – as when fire kindles brushwood and the fire causes water to boil – to make your name known to your adversaries, and that the nations might tremble at your presence! When you did awesome things that we did not look for, you came down, the mountains quaked at your presence…”

Feel the depth of emotion and longing behind the simple word ‘oh’. A cry of intensity that God would rend the heavens and come down, but the cry is stirred by a remembering of what God had done before. Meditation upon God’s past action provokes a passionate outburst, crying out in desperate longing for God to do again as he had done before.

106

That is, a day in the year to think and pray about the wider Church and the need for more full-time ministers. 107 It is vital, that particularly in the current climate when the need for more gospel-hearted ordained ministers is so crucial that that does not lead to a devaluing of the ‘calling’ of the majority of God’s people to serve him in every other sphere of life

120

We noted in the previous chapter the value of church history108. George Santayana once wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”109 However, as Christians the opposite may be true. If we are not familiar with what God has done in the past, we may have a lower sense of expectancy about what he might do in the present or future.

We used to live in a vicarage in which the study overlooked the back garden. We already had one trampoline, when a kind(!) friend donated us a second and so we put them close to each other in the back garden. One day whilst working on a sermon I looked up to see our middle son Jake (then aged about 14) jumping up and down vigorously on one trampoline and then jumping head over heels through the air and landing on the second trampoline. It was one of those situations when you both could not bear to watch, but also could not tear your eyes away. I kept thinking to myself, “One slip, one mistimed jump and…..” The consequences were unthinkable.

However, that was not my greatest concern. My greater concern was that his younger brother Reuben (then aged about 8) was watching. I knew exactly what was going through his head, “Wow….I wonder if I could do that?” Sure enough minutes later, Reuben was jumping up and down on the trampoline inching nearer and nearer to the edge, trying to summon up the courage to leap head over heels into the unknown. He did manage to summon up the courage and as I watched with bated breath, he too sailed through the air, head over heels landing safely on the other trampoline. The sermon prep did not go too well that day, but out of it came an illustration which I continue to use. The point of the ‘two trampoline story’ is simply that if Jake had not jumped head over heels across the gap between the two, it would not have entered Reuben’s head to have done the same. His vision for what was possible was enlarged and his desire for what was possible was inflamed by seeing what someone else had done. When we see what God has done in the past it can serve to enlarge our vision of what God can and has done, and inflame our desire that He might do it again. This is especially true if we live and minister in a context in which the Church seems to be making little headway or even losing ground, or if discouraged and disheartened by the current state of things within a denomination we are tempted to jump ship.

The opening chapters of 1 Samuel depict a time when the spiritual health of the nation of Israel was desperately low. The priesthood was appallingly corrupt (1 Samuel 2:12-17, 22). Furthermore, this corruption was well known (1 Samuel 2:22). We are told at the beginning of chapter 3 “and the word of the Lord was rare in those days; there was no frequent vision”

(v1). Then the writer draws our attention to a detail that is laden with a deeper meaning and significance. “The lamp of God had not yet gone out…” (1 Samuel 3:3). We could also note the preceding verse about Eli, the priest ‘whose eyesight had begun to grow dim so that he could not see’.

108108 109

See chapter 7 Santayana G The Life of Reason (1905)

121

A time of spiritual darkness and corruption, the Word of God had all but been silenced BUT the lamp of God had not yet gone out. It is a hint to us from the writer that all is not lost; God is at work but He is at work behind the scenes, quietly and unnoticed. The corrupt priesthood will soon fall under his judgment. Not only that, but God is raising up Samuel. The ordinary Israelite would know nothing of this at this point – at the beginning of chapter 3, all he or she would observe was the scandalous corruption, abuse and immorality of the sons of Eli. However, by the end of the chapter, which covers a number of years:

“Samuel grew and the Lord was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground. And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established as prophet of the Lord” (1 Samuel 3:19 -20)

A dark and dire situation was transformed. God’s Word came to God’s people again. Immorality, apostasy and corruption could not snuff out the lamp of God; the Sovereign God kindled it and set it ablaze once again. As we reflect upon church history, we see how this is borne out time and again – so often when others have abandoned a denomination because of its drift away from biblical faithfulness, God has revived it from within.

This is not to deny that there are times when a Church has become apostate, or that when Jesus threatens to remove his lampstand, he means what he says, it is no idle threat (Rev 2:5). The Church of England may indeed be heading in that dangerous direction, but the whole purpose of this book is that we might pray earnestly and work with renewed vigour for God to so reform and revive the Church that that might not happen.

The Evangelical Revival At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Church of England was in a parlous state and nationally the biblical gospel appeared to be increasingly marginalised110. The Bishop of Oxford, Thomas Secker wrote:

“In this we cannot be mistaken that an open and professed disregard of religion is become, through a variety of unhappy causes, the distinguishing character of the age. Such are the dissolutions and contempt of principle in the world and the profligacy, intemperance and fearlessness of committing crimes in the lower part, as must, if the torrent of impiety stop not, become absolutely fatal. Christianity is ridiculed and railed at with very little reserve and the teachers of it without any at all.”111 110

Though there are similarities, in a number of ways the conditions in which we find ourselves today are worse than at the beginning of the eighteenth century – however God is no less omnipotent and the gospel no less powerful. 111

Porteous and Stinton Works of Thomas Secker Vol V p29

122

However the lamp of God had not yet gone out.

The eighteenth Century witnessed a great Revival that impacted the whole nation:

“….a religious revival burst forth…which changed in a few years the whole temper of English society. The Church was restored to life and activity. Religion carried to the hearts of the people a fresh spirit of moral zeal, while it purified our literature and our manners. A new philanthropy reformed our prisons, infused clemency and wisdom into our penal laws, abolished the slave trade and gave the first impulse to popular education.”112

The most prominent figures in the Revival were George Whitefield, John and Charles Wesley, all of whom were Anglicans.

The fire of the Revival spread throughout the nation. Whitefield and the Wesleys had a largely itinerant ministry, but countless others impacted by the Revival saw their parishes transformed by the power of the gospel. John Newton writes of the ministry of William Grimshaw of Haworth. He went to a:

“people wild and uncultivated like the mountains and rocks which surrounded them’. But through the power of the gospel the lives of the people were lifted to a new level. They enjoyed their religion. Worship and spiritual conversation were a delight. Homes devastated by alcohol and cruelty were restored. ‘Families in which sin had made the most miserable havoc and in which all the comforts of life were destroyed, now were made happy in the fear of God’. This transformation affected every part of their lives bringing significant social and moral change to the town.” 113

The stories of the most prominent and gifted leaders of the Revival are well known but it is important also not to miss the impact of the Revival upon countless ‘ordinary’ gospel ministers whose faithful ministries up and down the country in due course were greatly significant:

“…even though they were a small group with little ecclesiastical status, the foundation for the Evangelical upsurge in the late 18th and early 19th C‘s had been well laid in the previous pioneering period. Despite many failings and shortcomings the Evangelical achievement had been considerable. By their example and by their teaching the few scattered Evangelical clergy had according to Lecky, ‘gradually changed’ the whole spirit of the English Church. They infused into it a new fire and passion of devotion, kindled a spirit of fervent

112

Green J R, A Short History of the English People p736-7, cited in “George Whitefield Volume 1” by Arnold Dallimore p32 113 Cook F William Grimshaw of Haworth p86

123

philanthropy and raised the standard of clerical duty and completely altered the whole tone and tendency of the preaching of its ministers”.114

There are many more examples we could cite, but the point is simply this– the God who raised up a Samuel, a Luther, a Latimer, a Whitefield, a Simeon and countless others besides, who were God’s instruments to revive his Church, is the same God we worship today.

Furthermore, it seems to me that there is also something of great significance in this that we so easily miss or overlook.

In his book “Jonathan Edwards: The Holy Spirit in Revival”115 (Evangelical Press 2005) Michael Haykin writes these extremely telling words concerning the Evangelical Revival:

“Now it is an amazing fact that when the revival for which prayer longs actually came to Great Britain, it did not originate among the fellow Dissenters of Watts and Guyse. Though biblical orthodoxy had by and large been kept alive by these heirs of Puritanism, it was from within that body which had actually persecuted the Puritans, namely, the Church of England, that revival broke forth.”116

Why so telling? On the one hand, it is a perfectly understandable comment. We would expect revival to come from those who were diligently concerned for biblical faithfulness and we would not expect revival to come from a denomination that had lost its way.

However, on the other hand, reading the Bible and Church history, and knowing something of the character of our God, it seems this is precisely the kind of thing that He is prone to do and really ought not to surprise us. The God of the Resurrection, it seems, loves to bring to life that which is dead, rather than leaving it to rot and starting again with something new. He loves to renew and recreate rather than give up and start again. He loves to seek and find that which is lost rather than letting it perish and switching his attention elsewhere. When darkness casts its all-encompassing gloomy shadow, he loves to break in with light.

In our love for all that is new, our impatience with that which is flawed and broken, our enthusiasm for ‘the latest thing’, and our innate tendency to give up in the face of seemingly overwhelming

114

Ibid p50-51 Haykin M Jonathan Edwards: The Holy Spirit in Revival Evangelical Press 2005 116 Ibid p76 115

124

obstacles and insurmountable problems, we miss something very precious about the character of the God of grace.

He loves to restore that which is moribund, to mend that which is broken and to revive rather than cast off his wayward people. Isaiah foretold that the Lord Jesus, the Servant of the Lord would not break the bruised reed, nor would he snuff out the smouldering wick. (Matthew 12:20). We would, we do…but he doesn’t.

Like younger brothers watching an elder brother fly through the air head over heels from one trampoline to another, as we consider what God has done in the past, at times that have seemed so bleak, dark and hopeless, it might too plant in our minds the thought and thus the prayer, that he might do it again:

“As a seminary student years ago, I had the privilege of attending lectures by Dr JI Packer. His reflections were stimulating in many ways. But over the years one simple sentence has echoed in my mind with almost haunting persistence: “Do not neglect the revival dimension in your ministry…My plea comes down to this. Let’s not neglect the revival dimension in our churches. It is biblical. It is right. It is of God. Let’s stop being so timid. Let’s trust God so much that we follow his Word without qualifying it to death. None of us has long to live. Why not do something boldly radical before you die? Follow God’s Word fully. Don’t censor it. Don’t whittle it down to the narrow confines of your comfort zones. Trust that God is wise in all his Word and ways. Pray for more of him than you’ve ever had before. And then go beyond praying. Expect him to show himself near to you in new ways that will delight you and honour his own name. Venture your whole personal fulfilment on God, withholding nothing.”117

Isaiah prayed, “Oh that you would rend the heavens and come down”118. He has done it before…He can do it again.

117 118

Ortlund R Revival Sent from God p11,13 Isaiah 64:1

125

Gospel-Driven Anglicanism

Articles inside

Introduction