|
 |
|
| On October 18th 1966, in the Methodist Central Hall, Westminster Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones, at the request of the Committee of the Evangelical Alliance, spoke to the opening meeting of the second National Assembly of Evangelicals. A year earlier the first Assembly had asked the Alliance to investigate what desire there might be for a united Evangelical Church. In the course of that investigation Dr Lloyd-Jones had been given the opportunity to express his own convictions and consequently this invitation to address the Assembly.
That address and its outcome are now part of evangelical history. Many might want to leave it at that. The results were unfortunate, they would say, only led to division among brethren and it would be best to forget a sad episode and move on. We do not think so. It is true that the results were unfortunate. It did lead to division, and that was very sad. May there not, though, be lessons from this that we need to learn and put into practice? Can we say that the matters under discussion then have no relevance for us now? Is the spiritual life of our churches so vibrant, and is the gospel so clearly sounded out in our nation that it feels the impact?
Dr Lloyd-Jones was concerned about two great issues, and these retain their importance today for all those who claim to hold to the Bible as their authority. One was the doctrine of the Church, and the other the visible expression of Christian unity, and by that he meant evangelical unity founded on the biblical gospel. We should be as concerned today as he was then. We may differ amongst ourselves in our understanding of what the Bible says about the Church. We may also differ as a consequence in how we visualise the proper expression of Christian unity. Nonetheless we should all be concerned to examine our own convictions to see if they stand up to close scriptural scrutiny.
The 1960s were years of much optimism for the ecumenical movement. Several schemes to unite churches were under discussion, and following Vatican II there was a new openness on the part of the Roman Church to enter into dialogue with the "separated brethren". This was the decade that saw Archbishop Ramsey's historic visit to meet the Pope in Rome, something that has now almost become commonplace. Evangelicals in the major denominations were faced with big questions about the direction in which their churches were travelling.
As the Doctor put it in his address, were those in ecumenically-involved denominations content simply to be an evangelical wing in their present or any future united church? He believed, he said, that God had given evangelical people "the solemn charge of guarding and protecting and defending the faith in this present evil age in which we find ourselves... We are standing in the position of the Protestant reformers... I believe that God is calling upon us to maintain this ancient witness, not occasionally, not haphazardly, but always, and to put it to the people of this country". It was his conviction that "we would then have the right to expect the Spirit of God to come upon us in mighty revival and re-awakening".
The essence of the Doctor's appeal was that evangelicals right across the ecclesiastical board, whether in ecumenically involved churches or not, should "come together, stand together as churches, constantly together, working together, doing everything together, bearing our witness together". He did not want to minimize the difficulties, but called for agreement on the positive principles, which would then have to be worked out in practical form. As he drew towards his conclusion he said, "fellow evangelical Christians, let us rise to the occasion".
The opportunity was clearly presented if the will was there to take it. In the event the will proved not to be there, and the Doctor's appeal simply led to a hardening of divisions among evangelicals over the direction they should take.
If there were difficulties then that proved insurmountable the situation today appears to have added problems. There is more disunity than ever. Some of it is doctrinal, much of it is due to changes that have been taking place over the years. The charismatic movement, while bringing many together from different churches, has produced confusion and polarisation among evangelicals. In fact, the very name "evangelical" has become so loosely employed that it is in danger of being meaningless. What possible point then could there be in resurrecting what must surely be a lost cause?
The outstanding reason is the Bible's teaching about the Church. Churches may appear in a variety of forms in our own country and overseas, yet the truth is clear. There is only one Church, made up of all those who have been redeemed by our Lord Jesus Christ. The unity created by the work of the Spirit in bringing us into that Church should be demonstrated to the world in practice. It is the Lord's prayer that we should be one as the Father and the Son are one, "that the world may believe that thou hast sent me" (John 17: 21).
It is also the Lord's command that we should love another as He has loved us. This shows visibly that we are truly His disciples (John 13:34,35). It is to our shame that such love is not clearly seen in our relationships with our fellow believers. It appears so easy to give completely the opposite impression, that we have no real love for them at all. To remember the Doctor's call is to face the challenge of Scripture, that which comes from the Lord.
There are factors too in today's scene that should encourage us to think again about this whole matter. There has been a slowing down, if not a complete failure, of certain schemes for reunion among denominations. The task has proved harder than many thought. Indeed, there is a crisis within the Anglican Communion itself, the outcome of which is far from clear at the moment. Moreover, developments in women's ministry within Anglicanism have erected an immoveable barrier to progress in Anglican-Roman Catholic dialogue.
At the same time, though, the Churches Together movement is producing results at the local level. Churches of varying persuasions from evangelical to Roman Catholic with everything else in between meet together for worship and prayer, co-operating in various activities, including marches of witness. At that level awareness of doctrinal differences seems even less than it used to be.
So what should we do? The easiest option is to do nothing, but can that really be right? Some would like to act but are fearful of compromising their own particular position. This is understandable, and we cannot play fast and loose with what we believe the Scripture to teach. We need to be sure that any action we take is not a betrayal of our particular convictions, whether it be, for example, about baptism, church government, or the autonomy or otherwise of the local church.
What it requires from us, though, is the recognition that those who differ from us in these and other matters and yet trust in the Lord Jesus Christ alone for their salvation are genuinely and fully our brothers and sisters in Christ. If our convictions are as biblical as we believe we have nothing to fear, and if they are not, then we must be ready to change. Where differences in biblical interpretation are finely balanced we must recognise that while we may lean in one direction it is possible for a person conscientiously to hold another view.
In the Doctor's day it seemed as though the British Evangelical Council marked the way forward for those who wanted closer co-operation. Today that has been superseded by Affinity, which spreads its net somewhat wider. In the end, though, it is within localities that practical steps can be taken by those evangelical churches who, whatever their denomination's position on the ecumenical movement, decide that their real fellowship is with those who are one with them on the gospel.
This may be particularly hard for those in the major denominations, but if it is for the glory of the Lord and the furtherance of the gospel should that stand in the way? There is no detailed blueprint that will suit every area and situation. It is for local church leaders and congregations to arrive at whatever solutions they believe suitable and then put them to the test. It is only in that setting that fellow Christians will know what can and cannot be done together.
When we look ahead to the Lord's return and the gathering together before Him of all His people does it not awaken the realisation and the desire that we should be already expressing and enjoying, even if not in its perfect form, the unity that is ours already in Him? There is something very precious here, a foretaste of the glory to come. May God give us the faith, love, and courage to pursue it. |
|---|
|
| back to magazine page |
next article |
|
