The Missionary Society of Saint Wilfrid and Saint Hilda

has been launched by some catholic Anglican bishops including (from my part of the world) the Bishop of Chichester, the Bishop of Horham and Bishop Lindsey Urwin. It will be very interesting to see how it develops.

Is the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans / FCA UK which came out of the GAFCON movement an evangelical equivalent?

There seems to be a lack of English Evangelical Bishops seeking to make a similar kind of provision?

In fact, who are the English Evangelical Bishops who are opposed to the consecration of women to the Episcopate? And even if some are in favour of it, what provision will be made for their evangelical brothers and sisters and friends who up with this can not put?

Or maybe the good old C of E itself might yet do something adequate?

Converted at the Ordinacne

Tim Keller encourages pastors to say to non-Christians who might be present at the Supper:

If you are not in a position to take the bread and the cup, then take Christ! It is the best possible time to do business with him, no matter your spiritual condition or position.

Worship by the Book ed Carson (Zondervan, 2000) p234, cited in Maclean, The Lord's Supper, p181.

Stott & Calvin contra Evangelicalism!

Calvin famously argued for at least weekly Communion but couldn't get the city of Geneva to agree.

I'm told John Stott also repeatedly argued in print for weekly communion, though they didn't do that in their main service at All Souls' Langham Place. I wonder why not?

Stott says in Your Confirmation(Hodder & S, 1958), p97:

The chief expression of fellowship between Christians is the Holy Communion service. It is the central service of the church.... The Acts of the Apostles suggest that every Sunday they met to "break bread". The Lord's Day was inconceivable without the Lord's Supper. Personally, I think we, too, should attend it every Sunday.

I imagine many Evangelicals, like me, would be surprised to know that the great John Stott thought that. Why have so few Evangelicals followed his lead in this?

(HT: LB)

I'm told that Alec Motyer also advocated weekly communion. (HT: JAC)

Where to start

Warfield once said:

All subsequent attempts to state and defend that [truly evangelical] theology necessarily go back to it [The Institutes] as their starting-point, and its impress upon the history of evangelical thinking is ineffaceable.

"On the Literary History of Calvin's 'Institutes'", Works V, 373-4 quoted in Reymond, Calvin, p15f

The Briefing Revised Gospel Convictions Statement

You can see The Briefing's revised Gospel Convictions statement at www.gospelconvictions.com

On the above website, you can also find a PDF copy of the original statement with the 30 changes made in the light of feedback received.

You can see all the feedback recieved at on St Matthias Media's website.

It seems they hope the statement will have some kind of ongoing wider life as a rallying point for evangelicals / basis of working together, so it could be quite significant. They are seeking further feedback before aiming to produce a "final" version in the beginning of 2010. In the future it will be possible for individuals to sign-up to the statement on-line and for organizations to use it and so on.

An Evangelical Introduction to the Federal Vision (for Brits!)

Since the Federal Vision (FV) seems to be a growing matter of interest and, to some, concern in this country, here is Rev'd Dr Steve Jeffery seeking to introduce Evangelicals in the UK to the ongoing FV conversation (downloadable PDF file). Steve does this by expounding and giving some background to "A Joint Federal Vision Statement" issued in 2007. Steve hopes that British Evangelicals wont feel the need to fall out over all this as some Reformed types in the States have.

Agree with FV enthusiasms or not, Steve concludes that:

The Statement stands demonstrably within the Reformed tradition at every point.

And again:

every single affirmation and denial within the Statement lies firmly within the Reformed tradition. At no point could an evangelical justifiably charge the FV with being beyond the bounds of historical Reformed orthodoxy. FV theology is Reformed theology.

Further, Steve claims that:

it is abundantly clear that FV advocates do not in fact hold a number of the views ascribed to them by their critics. The FV does not represent a denial of justification by faith alone, an Arminian rejection of unconditional election and the preservation of the saints, or a reversion to Roman Catholic views of baptism and the Lord's Supper. It does not undercut the distinction between the visible and invisible church, or downplay the importance of Christ's second coming, or capitulate to the so-called 'social gospel', or deny the distinction between God's covenant with Adam and the covenant of grace, or confuse justification with sanctification, or reject the imputation of Christ's obedience or righteousness, or undermine the possibility of Christian assurance, or entail a legalistic obsession with good works at the expense of free grace. Let us be clear: none of these doctrinal errors is found in the FV. These are misunderstandings of the FV.

FCA UK launch

Some jottings on the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA) UK launch, which has grown out of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON):

As I was going to the loo and grabbing a coffee, I missed most of the excerpts from a letter from Her Majesty the Queen.

There was a great deal of purple around so I may get some of this wrong, but the Archbishops of the Southern Cone and of Sydney were present. The Archbishops of Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda and the former Archbishop of Kenya sent greetings. The Bishops of Rochester, Chichester, Exeter (?), Birmigham (?), Lewes and Fulham were present and the Bishops of Chester and Winchester and the Bishop-elect of Southwell sent greetings.

It was great to have our own Bishops, John Hind and Wallace Benn there. John Hind argued for the unity of faith, morals and order and it would be worth tracking down the quotation he used about tripe and onion soup which first may perhaps have corriander added to it, with few people noticing or caring, but which can soon become beans and bacon soup and not tripe and onion at all. Wallace Benn showed what partnership (koinonia) means in the letter to the Phippians. He said he was unimpressed by some in the UK who claim the name of evangelical but are sniffy and iffy about ACNA in its stand against secularism.

Bishop Keith Ackerman of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) said that "Affirming Catholics are neither Affirming nor Catholics!". He warned against a canonical fundamentalism that puts the rules of an institution above the Bible. He criticised the trend to eliminate the fundamental "metaphors" of Scripture, such as all language of Father and Son. He argued that calling the Father alone Creator is like calling your mother on the phone and saying, "Hello, Life-giver, please may I speak with my sperm-donor". He argued that definitive, permanent, complete revelation cannot be replaced with evolution.

Bishop John Broadhurst said: "When I was ordained I didn't believe in the devil. I now believe Satan is alive and well and lives in Church House!". He claimed that too many people believe in the system and the C of E and not the gospel. What is authentically Christian is more important than what is authentically Anglican.

In a videoed interview, Canon Dr Jim Packer argued that the Prayer Book and the Articles define Anglicanism.

Archbishop Jensen stressed that the Jerusalem Declaration of GAFCON repudiates any gospel in which human merit is invoked. We take our stand on the Biblical gospel and the authority of Scripture, loyal to the Prayer Book and the articles and combating the cultural captivity of the church.

Rev'd Vaughan Roberts called for united action on the basis of the truth. He said we must resist the salami tactics of the revisionists, slice by slice creating realities on the ground.

Rev'd William Taylor spelt out an agenda of ministry (inc. church planting), ministry (selecting and training suitable candidates), and some "yes"es and "no"s in relation to money, oversight and fellowship.

A student on Cornhill Scotland who had been involved in relief work amongst the homeless said he took the course beacuse he realised "people needed more than soup and soup - the needed salvation."

Someone from the Church in Wales refered to a textbook in which the index contained the following entry: "for Wales, see England".

Learning from New Frontiers

I have some issues with New Frontiers. I am more or less a cessationist.

But I must say I was blessed to attend The Gate Way Church in Leeds on Sunday morning. They are Reformed Bible-believers. The worship was lively and encouraging. The youth band did a very good job, I thought, with the A-team away. The welcome was excellent. The coffee and biscuits good. The meeting was well "ancoured" (that means "led"). The sermon was long. I didn't hear it as I was in creche. It contained an excellent introduction to John 7 and the significance of the Feast, according to Mrs Lloyd, and can be heard online. The children's talk, on Saul going into a cave for a wee was fantastic and I plan to copy it. Delivery amazing.

I was impressed by 3 different coloured T-shirts: "Steward"; "Welocme. New? Speak to me"; "Children's Worker". The registration system for kids and their Guardians was great.

I don't agree with them but they are brothers with lots to teach us. They do their thing brilliantly. We need to work together and respect one another as fellow-labourers in our Master's Vineyard.

The Federal Visions

One of the many things that one could say about the so-called Federal Vision (FV) is that there is some disagreement amongst proponents on the Federal Vision. There is not one set FV dogma or detailed blueprint but a conversation, a group of concerns, questions and suggestions.

As far as I know, no FVer has ever said that the FV is the be all and end all.

No doubt there are dangers in the FVs as there are in all things but under God I think there are some things that might be learnt from some FVers. Even if you don't like all their answers, you might find some of their questions stimulating. I would say, "don't panic". FV does not equal RC and need not lead in that direction. Just as FV is not the gospel neither is it Another Gospel!

I'd suggest this Joint Statement is an excellent place to start in getting a grip on some of the things that FVers have said in the US and which we may see more of in the UK.

Don Carson on The Federal Vision (updated)

Rev'd Professor Don A. Carson commented carefully and very helpfully on The Federal Vision (FV) or High Church Presbyterianism at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly (EMA) at St Helen's, Bishopgate today. The FV was also discussed in questions with Carson at New Word Alive this year, I believe.

I suggest you listen to it in full when the recording becomes available (online or to buy, I think).

I paraphrase from memory.

In the "On the Record off the Cuff slot", Rev'd Richard Cunningham asked Carson if engagement with the FV is a "99" moment analogous to the times when the captain of the British Lions called on his team to all run up and punch their opposite numbers amongst the Springbox!

Carson seemed to think not. He said that he thought such moments came rarely if ever and that such things should only be done in a spirit of brokenness, if they must be done.

A fair ammount of the hour long interview was given over to the topic and to my mind it felt like the main issue of substance tackled. Unity with Charismatics and the emerging church were also discussed. I imagine most of those present had not heard of the Federal Vision which is quite a small movement in the States and a little elsewhere. Tiny to non-existent in the UK.

Carson identified 2 main points about the FV:

(1) The issues themselves where the questions are nuanced and the answers complex.

We must be careful in our treatment of the movement which has strengths and powerful things things to teach us.

Rev'd Douglas Wilson is the most able / best advocate of things FV. He has written lots of fine stuff and is tremendously gifted. [You can find largely positive reviews of a couple of Wilson's books in The Briefing from this last year or so. I believe Wilson is due to speak at a John Piper / Desiring God conference on Calvin and the glory of God in Sept '09].

Carson didn't really go into the issues beyond what is mentioned here.

(2) The way the issues have been presented and advocated.

We must not assume we know the motives of others.

Young people tend to like the kind of tough minded clarity that some of the FV offers. It may be especially attractive to Evangelical Anglicans.

The best established teachers may not make the FV the be all and end all but students often pick up on their teachers' interests and enthusiasms even if they are not that important in themselves or to their teachers. Carson commented that the main thing he had learnt as a teacher is that students don't learn what he teaches them!

Some FVers may be like one string violins taken up with one or two issues.

Some of the younger FVers especially may have gone a bit OTT or expressed things badly etc.

Some young FVers may be going through a growing up experimental phase.

It may be that some FVers have noticed weaknesses in some contemporary evangelicalism (e.g. about baptism) and over reacted. Such movements can be the unpaid debts of the church.

We must keep the main things the main things and keep the (richly understood) gospel and evangelism central and controlling to everything, rather than, say, Christian education and baptism, though of course the issues are all related.

The gospel must not be simply assumed. We need to continue to be interested and excited about that above all. Neglecting evangelism is a danger.

We want to stick to historical Reformed orthodoxy in so far as it is Biblical and so on.

Like e.g. Young Earth Creationism we must not make the FV a touchstone of soundness, unity or fellowship.

I agree with all that and think we all need to hear it, FVers, sympathisers and opponents alike.

I might also have mentioned Rev'd Dr Peter Leithart PhD(Cantab) as a brilliant FVer. Rev'd James Jordan of Biblical Horizons has been a major influence. I think their writings repay very careful and thoughtful reading.

Obviously, as a Baptist, Carson disagrees with some of the FV stuff on baptism and I guess he thinks that baptism should always be tied to personal conversion from a life of sin and a more or less articulate declaration of individual faith. He thinks there are dangers in speaking too highly of baptismal efficacy and of kinds of presumptive regeneration which he sees as problematic historically e.g. in Holland. These latter point, of course, FVers would grant, but Carson did not address the possibility of infant faith in his brief comments nor the other arguments for infant baptism that are well known for example to the readers of the Westminster Confession or the Institutes of the Christian Religion.

Food for thought and on-going healthy discussion, I think. No punch-ups called for, then?

Ironically, I think opponents of the FV sometimes make FV a primary dividing issue by saying it is a heretical other gospel to be hated and stamped out whereas it seems Carson would prefer to say just that it is wrong and dangerous in certain respects, whatever might be going for it. I think this is a vital distinction and I imagine most FVers would grant that in many ways it is a 2nd or 23rd order issue.

Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans

Following on from GAFCON, individuals or groups who agree with the Jerusalem Declaration and the goal of the FCA can now sign-up for membership at http://www.fca.net/.

Mrs Lloyd plays on Radio 4

You can listen again to Mrs Lloyd playing part of a Haydn piano sonata on Radio 4's Sunday programme using the BBC website.

There's also an interview with Revd Professor David Peterson about Oak Hill and discussion of evangelicalism in the Church of England more generally arising out of the 'changes' at Wycliffe Hall. There's also mention of the AOCM survey about bias in suggesting which colleges ordinands should attend and contributions from WATCH, Fulcrum and Anglican Mainstream.

I thought the item was from about 34-43 mins in, but I may well have been baffled by the technology.

Here's their blurb:

Conflict at Wycliffe Hall Wycliffe Hall is one of the Church of England's main theological colleges, the home of Anglican evangelicals, and it is not a happy place. Soon after a new head arrived a third of the staff is reported to have resigned and there are claims that the staff generally feels bullied and intimidated. It is also claimed that the Thought For the Day contributor, Elaine Storkey, has been threatened with disciplinary action, and the former Principal, the Rev Professor Alister McGrath is said to have no longer any connection with the college. Now is this just a little local difficulty, a question of incompatible personalities, or does it mark a change of direction, a move to a more conservative expression of evangelism within the Church? Roger is joined by the Guardian's religious affairs correspondent, Stephen Bates.

Listen (4m 0s)

Media Studies

I can’t keep up with all the Oak Hill and Wycliffe goings on in the press. I shall have to make a trip to the common room to catch up.

There was the exchange over Oak Hill in the Church Times over the last couple of weeks.

The Church of England Newspaper have reported the AOCM survey as “Oak Hill ‘being snubbed by church leaders’” as some ordinands were encouraged not to study here.

Some video’s been dug up of Revd Dr Richard Turnbull (from a Reform conference in October 2006) apparently saying that 95% of the people in this country are heading for hell unless they trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and that the good news of the gospel needs to be urgently brought to them.

http://www.change.freeuk.com/learning/relthink/turnbull.html

Andrew McSmith in today’s Independent:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article2581243.ece

Along with Comment from Charles Nevin.

http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article2581198.ece

And Stephen Bates in yesterday’s Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2086769,00.html

And was DP being interviewed for the Radio 4 Sunday Programme today? I think they’ve even recording some of Mrs Lloyd’s wonderful piano playing, though I’m not sure Hayden is breaking news.

Right, off to Paris for the weekend with Oak Hall and a couple of talks on Psalms 1 & 2 in my rucksack.

Puritan or Evangelical

Here's Mark Noll trying to capture something of the differences between Puritanism and American evangelical Protestantism:

Although Puritans stood against [Roman?] Catholic and Anglican formalism, salvation for the Puritans was still mediated by institutions - family, church, covenanted society; in evangelicalism (at least in American forms) salvation was in principle unmediated except by the written Word of God. Puritans protested against nominal ecclesiastical life, but they still treated institutions of church and society as given; American evangelicals created their own communities, at first ecclesiastical, then voluntary. Puritans accepted authority from designated leaders; American evangelicals looked to authority from charismatic, self-selected leaders. Puritans fenced in enthusiasm with formal learning, respect for confessions, and deference to traditional interpretations of Scripture; American evangelicals fenced in enthusiasm with self-selected leaders, individualistic Bible reading, local grassroots organizations, and intuitively persuasive reason.

Noll, Mark, America's God pp173-4 quoted in D. G. Hart, John Williamson Nevin: High Church Calvinist (Philipsburg, P & R, 2005) p 26