Last month's blog was called Storm after Calm and it seems to have been apt! The suppression of freedoms and the bias of government, judiciary and police have been brought into sharper focus.
These are tragic signs of our culture's departure from God and subsequent decay of Christendom. But we know that the motives behind the latest actions are not really dreamt up by Keir Starmer or the progressives that fill the Establishment, they come from the Enemy and are part of the spiritual battle: 'Anyone who isn’t with me opposes me, and anyone who isn’t working with me is actually working against me.'
The one true thread
The evangelical stream in the CoE sees itself as a people apart in the CoE although actually central to the Reformation spirit, 'the one true thread'. This is seen in renowned preachers like Dick Lucas or John Stott (who was once encouraged to split from the CoE over its unfaithfulness but remained). Some of today's networks, like HTB, have a very different approach to services, preaching content, staffing and church government. They are hardly Anglican at all, but the central CoE has decided to resource them, and this of course brings its own challenges when funding may be jeopardised. It seems very late that the HTB network has entered the fray in General Synod. In Sunday talks they seem very reluctant to do even basic teaching on issues around culture (wokeness) for fear of splitting the church - a sure indicator that basic Biblical doctrine has been neglected. This has led to Christians not knowing how to respond to critical challenges in their work and social life and paradoxically missing out on opportunities of graceful witness. Many conservative Evangelical churches are also unfaithfully coy, some mainstream Anglicans and non-CoE churches are doing much better. So just being an Evangelical church is not going to give a clear-cut response. The recently formed The Alliance which includes the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC) is providing some consensus (do sign-up).
Options
Anglican Futures has prepared a table of options for churches to consider. How will people make a choice? It may feel very different for congregations than for Vicars. Many people may not even know the Bishop’s name and would not recognise him/her if they sat next to them on the bus. The vicar however makes a personal pledge to the Bishop on appointment and the Bishop has overall responsibility for the 'Cure of souls' in the parish, so the relationship is much more significant. This could work either way depending on whether you feel the Bishop is following Biblical teaching or not.
But to most members, their church is standalone and makes its own decisions about things. Does it then matter what the Bishop believes? If the Bishop and others are grieving the Holy Spirit, does that affect the local church? How do Paul’s exhortations to remove the wayward brother work here?
Outside the structure
God raises up people outside the structures if those inside are unwilling or unable to follow His commission. Paul is an example, to the non-Jews, although Peter laid the foundations. The Reformation was a grass-roots movement, ironically supported by the political leaders. John Wesley was ejected from the structure and new churches grew. John Bunyan jailed for not toeing the line, penned a classic. The great missionaries William Cary, David Livingstone, James Hudson Taylor were all non-conformists - at a time when that cost something. As well as being outside the official Church, they were often at odds with the civil establishment, but as their work prospered they welcomed CoE people who had been called out to join their work, and they also ended up being respected by the civil powers.
With LLF there has been a call for a separate structure encompassing people, property and resources, a third Province. The bishops have rejected this but it's beginning anyway. At busy St Helens Bishopsgate, William Taylor explains (first 14 mins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWnI5_rZgCs).
Lukewarm?
Some churches may not see the need to upset the status-quo as they can see no effect on their ministries. This is because they know little of what is going on, or have an orthodox bishop, or are an unambitious church (see Rev 3!). But if they do know God’s commission (through faithful preaching wedded to understanding the times) and they are compelled to take it seriously and if their bishop is contrary, then pretty soon they will come up against the stops. This is the point at which the whole church has to decide whether staying in will grieve the Holy Spirit and become a dead end.
Messy
However we do need to look back at our history to see how God has moved in the past. Is it right to say that it is often a bit messy? As with the Israelites asking for a King, or the adventure of Acts, or the struggles of the Reformation or the inability of the Puritans to agree on government so we had the Restoration – and lots more. But these are all evidence of human frailty not God's plan. They do not diminish the pursuit of truth and grace, and there are still red-lines, but it does suggest the possibility of a place where more people can cohabit and have a chance to work things out (like in a family). Evangelicals have always been dissed by the church establishment but through God’s grace they have persisted. The way ahead might be continued faithful witness unless physically forced out by an unfaithful bishop?
Solid
In a video from the 2018 GAFCON in Jerusalem, Rico Tice from All Souls says there is a direct link between scriptural faithfulness and the work of the Holy Spirit in evangelism (and I guess in all else). I'd feel safe in that company. However the practical issues fall out we must encourage our church leaders to be scripturally solid and to openly work with their congregations on the way forward.
