Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for April, 2012

As a follow-up to a previous post, Evangelical News are now reporting that the unrest in the Diocese of Southwark has resulted in some evangelical parishes withholding their parish quota from the Diocese.

The report is found here. It’s brief and so I’ll quote it in full,

Ministry Trust to be established in Southwark Diocese
Due to widespread concerns in the Diocese of Southwark, a Trust is being established to support the ministry cost of parish clergy.

There will be a presentation for members of the Diocese of Southwark Evangelical Union and other interested bodies within the next couple of months, which will include a question and answer session, and briefing papers to take away for Parochial Church Councils to discuss, should they want them.

There has already been an expression of interest from clergy in the Diocese of Salisbury, because of their own local concerns.

This is not an insignificant development. It’s a clear expression of the depth of feeling amongst a broad group of evangelicals that they’re willing to withhold parish quota from the Diocese. How many will, remains to be seen. But that they’re even discussing it is remarkable. In my experience of evangelical action in this Diocese since 1996, I’ve not seen anything like it. Even members of Reform, who might be expected to grab at contention as a child grabs at a sweet, have proved reluctant to ‘rock the boat’. This has often been considered the ‘nuclear’ option. So incennsed are soem within the Diocesan Evangelical Union at the apparent revisionist agenda of the new Bishop of Southwark that they’re getting up a head of steam. The Bishop of Southwark has managed to united anglican evangelicals. And for that, at least, he should be applauded! If he wanted to wholeheartedly support gospel initiatives, preach the gospel and drive away erroneous doctrine he might find more of us supporting him.

Read Full Post »

Unrest in Southwark I

Anglican Mainstream has posted a recent article (one that appeared in the Church of England Newspaper last week) that reports on the growing unrest amongst Anglican Evangelicals about the trajectory of the Diocese of Southwark. You can find it here. It’s all about the fallout as a result of a meeting of the Diocesan Evangelical Union with Bishop Christopher (the Bishop of Southwark).

I meant to attend the meeting but got caught up in the chaos that has become my life. But it sounds, from the report and from friends who made it, as though it was lively.

The essence of the growing unrest is the Bishop of Southwark, Christopher Chessun has divided the Diocese with his senior appointments. The last seven of these have gone to liberal catholics. To be fair, I think he inherited a divided Diocese. He’s not dividing it. He’s just made appointments that show which side of the divide his theological preferences lie. He’s acting with conviction. They’re not convictions that I share. But at least he’s being consistent! Of course I disagree with him. I think he should only ever appoint evangelicals. But I don’t expect that he (or any of his successors) will. He’s not an evangelical. He doesn’t agree with evangelical theology. He’s not going to put evangelicalism at the heart of the Diocese. And Reform and Fulcrum seem to be surprised by that! Surely not. What did you expect? I mean, seriously. Did you really expect that the new Bishop of Southwark would suddenly start giving preference to that ‘wing’ Church of England that the establishment want to see removed?

There’ll be more to follow, of that I’m sure. I’m already getting word of parish quota being withheld.

Read Full Post »

It was my wife’s birthday this week. And it gave me an opportunity to tell her how much I appreciated doing life and ministry together with her. I did it in writing because the words don’t always come out right when I try to speak. And this was something that I wanted to get right!

Before we were married, my sponsoring diocese gave me a grant to purchase ministry resources. Technically it was called a book grant. But I preferred the broader definition. That way it gave me permission (in my mind at least) to spend it on the most precious ministry resource I could ever ask for; Rosslyn. I took her to the Tate, lunch and the Phantom of the Opera as part of an extended campaign to persuade her to marry me! It didn’t clinch the deal. But it got me a foot in the doorway!

One day I’ll get round to spelling out the unique joys and challenges of being a Minister’s wife. But for now I want to draw your attention to this helpful article. I came across it by luck, as Calvin would say, on the 9Marks website. It’s all about the role and responsibilities of the Pastor’s wife. And I like its flavour. I like that the author gets the pressures that the Minister’s wife faces. Not many people get that. I’ve actually had people tell me how much easier it is for Rosslyn being a Minister’s wife than having a husband with a normal job because I’m around so much more. How I kept my words to myself and my cool and at that point is a miracle of God’s work in me. I’m just glad that Rosslyn wasn’t there to hear it. It’s true that there are treats to being married to the Minister. But there are not inconsiderable costs. And I’m not just talking about being married to me. I’m talking about being a Minister’s wife with a husband who rarely switches off because he’s always thinking about church related issues, the one day weekend which is’t even sacrosanct, the three or four nights a week out of the house, having to drop the family when congregational crisis hits and so on. In describing what life for his wife will be like when he returns to pastoral ministry, the author of the blog post writes, ‘life and ministry will become more intense on every front. Pressures will increase to fight pride, forgive quickly, ignore criticism, love generously, sacrifice time together, and so forth’. He’s right. If you’re a congregational member you might like to read it, pray for your Minister’s wife and send her a note of appreciation.

I’ve always been adamant that I married Rosslyn because I loved her not because I thought she’d be useful in ministry. I stand by that. I was won by her beauty (in every sense of that word) not because I needed an unpaid female curate! However, there is no way that I could have served at CCB without her unstinting support and encouragement. Like many minister’s wives, she receives far too little appreciation for what she adds to church life and endures as a result of being married to the Minister. I don’t get, or at least take, many opportunities to express my appreciation for all that she is and does. But today, I thought I might. In Proverbs 31:10 the writer asks ‘A wife of noble character who can find?’ To which I must answer; I have. By the grace of God. And no one is more grateful than me.

Read Full Post »

The last words that Jessu spoke from the cross were words of reunion. Look at Luke 23:46

44 It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last.

Jesus spoke a word of reunion when he said, ‘Father into your hands I commit my spirit’. Having endured the punishment for sin, Jesus’ suffering came to an end. Having triumphed over the world, the flesh and the devil, he looked forward to his imminent reunion with the Father. Sin had alienated him. For three hours he’d experienced nothing but God’s holy displeasure and righteous hostility. Now that was over. It was time to be reconciled. Knowing that nothing stood in the way of this glorious gathering of Father and Son, Jesus used his dying breath to exclaim his triumphant anticipation of that reunion. And so, in these words we see the expectation of the reconciliation of Father and Son. They remind us that Jesus has been restored to his Father’s presence after he had provided atonement for sin.

Therefore, will you take comfort from the fact that Jesus, our sin bearing substitute and representative is now in his Father’s presence? For you know that it guarantees yours.

Read Full Post »

Two days to go. That’s all that’s left. And only two more words uttered by Christ from the cross. The penultimate one was a word of accomplishment. It helps us see that it wasn’t a colossal waste of a young and talented life. Look at John 19:30.

29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Jesus spoke a word of accomplishment when he said, ‘it is finished’. He knew that he had completed all that his Father had asked of him. He had faced God’s just judgement upon human sin. He had endured every last ounce of divine punishment poured down onto him from his Father. Divine wrath had been exhausted. God had been satisfied. Justice had been done. And love had been fulfilled.  There was nothing more to be done. His mission had been accomplished. In perfect obedience to his Father’s will, he had done everything that he had come to do. And so, in these words we see that Jesus fully secured our salvation from sin’s condemnation. They remind us that Jesus’ death satisfied the righteous requirements of God.

Therefore, will we believe that our every last sin has already received it’s just punishment in the death of Jesus?

Read Full Post »

Three days to go. And three more sayings to consider. Today’s word is a word of abandonment. Look at Matthew 27:46 (see also Mark 15:34).

45 From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. 46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”—which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Jesus spoke a word of abandonment when he cried out, ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?’ He didn’t say this because he wasn’t sure of the answer. This wasn’t really a question. Jesus knew exactly why his Father had turned his back on him. But he wanted others to ponder the issue. He quoted Psalm 22:1 because it was particularly apt. He had literally ‘become sin’ and His Father could no longer look upon something as grotesque and hideous as human wickedness. Our sin had been laid upon him who ‘knew no sin’. He became damnable evil. And so Jesus was cursed by his Father at the cross. He faced the just judgment of God upon human sin. And those words from Psalm 22 expressed that experience perfectly. Human sin brought Jesus Christ divine abandonment. It was utterly undeserved.  And so, in these words we see that Jesus bore the condemnation that we as sinners deserve. They remind us that Jesus’ death was substitutionary.

Therefore, will we accept that Jesus has faced his Father’s wrath or will we face it ourselves?

Read Full Post »

This is the fourth of a series of seven short meditations to help us prepare for Easter. They focus on the seven ‘words’ that Jesus spoke from the cross. These are recorded for us in the gospels. Rightly understood, they stimulate our appreciation of, our affection for and our adoration of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fourth word that Jesus spoke was a word of anguish. Look at John 19:28

28 Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.”

Jesus spoke a word of anguish when he said ‘I thirst’. These words brought to fulfilment Psalm 69:21. This is a Psalm in which David, the Lord’s righteous servant, faced suffering at the hands of his enemies. His words draw attention to the fact that, in his crucifixion, Jesus suffered. This wasn’t a short pain free death. It was prolonged. And it involved real and terrible suffering. Jesus experienced all the same physical pain and hardship that anyone dying on a cross would have suffered. He did nothing to alleviate the pain or minimise his intense physical anguish. And so, in these words, we see that Jesus’ suffering was real and horrifically painful. They remind us that Jesus’ death was hugely costly to him and involved painful personal sacrifice.

Therefore, will you accept that the suffering that we deserve for our sin has been taken by Jesus on the cross?

Read Full Post »

This is the third of a series of seven short meditations to help us prepare for Easter. Jesus is recorded as having spoken seven sayings from the cross. They help us understand what he accomplished through his death. We’re looking at them so that they might stimulate our appreciation of, our affection for and our adoration of the Lord Jesus Christ.  So far we’ve thought about his first two words from the cross.

The third word that he uttered was a word of compassion.  Look at John 19:26&27

25 Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

Jesus spoke a word of compassion when he said to Mary, ‘here is your son’ and to John, ‘here is your mother’. At a time of intense physical turmoil, Jesus’ thoughts turned to his Mother’s grief and her predicament. He saw her at the foot of the cross, weeping at the sight of her son being murdered before her very eyes. Can you imagine how heartbreaking it would be to watch your child die? Some of us may have come close to that experience. But at this very moment, Jesus displayed tender concern for his Mother. Her needs came before his. He made provision for her in her widowed vulnerability as he commissioned his trusted disciple to tend to her needs. And so, in these words we see Jesus’ selfless concern for others. They remind us that Jesus’ death wasn’t motivated by self interest but by his selfless concern for others.

Therefore, will you let Jesus’ death look after your needs?

Read Full Post »

I came across this article this week as I browsed my copy of Evangelicals Now. It’s about the possibility of changing where you choose to live as a Christian. And it’s by Ken Brownell.

Ken is a much respected evangelical leader. He’s the Senior Minister at East London Tabernacle (ELT). Of the area in which ELT is situated, their website says,

More recently its (ELT’s) concern has been for the large number of Bangladeshis, Somalis and other predominantly Muslim groups that live around the church. However the church is a very diverse community with people of many nationalities and a wide social mix. While one ward near the church is one of the most socially deprived in Britain another has one of the highest concentrations of university graduates. With a number of universities the area is also home to many international students. Also effecting the church is the shift of London’s centre of gravity eastward with the development of Canary Wharf and the Thames Gateway.

Ken runs a flourishing ministry in what must be one of the toughest environments in London to grow a church. In addition to his church responsibilities, he edits Foundations, the theological journal of Affinity. In short, this is a man worth listening to.

In the article, his contends that for the past century evangelicals have been moving out of the inner city. This is killing some churches, he argues. And so he pleads with evangelicals to give serious consideration to the issue of relocating for the sake of the gospel. We need to hear this. I like much of what he says.

He suggests five possible types of people who might consider relocating for the gospel.

1. Wealthier Christian families could move into the inner city since they can afford both a nice house and independent schooling for their kids. He’s right; they could. And then they could use their decent sized kitchen-diner, their spacious living room and their garden for the gospel and benefit their poorer Christian brothers and sisters at the same time. We had a family leave CCB a while ago to do just this. And I think it’s brilliant. They’re involved as a senior family in a (albeit it large) city centre church. But they could have easily decided to throw their lot in with a smaller work if they’d wanted to and been a great blessing to them.

2. Childless Christians could move into the inner city and redeem their desperately sad circumstances by using the opportunities that their situation has created for gospel ministry. I know of a handful of couples for whom this is their situation. They add an immeasurable benefit for the gospel ministry in their churches. Providentially God has liberated them from the concerns that come from raising children. And wonderfully, in the kindness of God, they’ve been able to see their situation as a means to bless others. I’m not saying it’s easy. But I am saying that it’s wonderful.

3. Retired Christians could move into the inner city after their kids have flown the nest. Friends of mine have done this. They’ve exchanged a spacious suburban dwelling for a bijou flat in zone 1 in order to support the ministry of a recently appointed incumbent at a tiny Anglican Church. They have years of ministry under their belt and more experience than you can shake a stick at. They understand the pressure of ministry on ministry families and so they’ll be a great support to the Minister and his wife. They’re servant hearted and so they’ll do what they can to help.

4. Comfortable Christians who are fed up with their own unwillingness to embrace self sacrifice could do something courageous and challenging for the gospel. Some of us have the aptitude and opportunity to be a little bit more adventurous than the norm. Why not give it a blast rather than die wondering?

5. Suburban Christians who either travel in to a large city centre church or who attend a local suburban church could stay living where they do and travel in to help support a struggling ministry. This is the one I like least. I think I just disagree with it altogether! Commuting Christians isn’t an idea I’d want to encourage at all. I’m an unashamed supporter of the local church.

Ken doesn’t spend long in the article talking about why the small evangelical churches are small, though he does acknowledge that there are reasons for that. He writes, ‘While in some churches there are some deep problems that may need to be addressed, many are relatively healthy spiritually, though small’. The issue of church growth, the suitability and competence of a minister and the ministry patterns of the church are sensitive and delicate issues. I understand that. And I’ve personally felt their force over the years. But we need to ask the questions even if we’re not sure that we’ll like the answers. For example, did the church start small? In which case, why has it remained small? Why haven’t people joined it? What have been the barriers to growth? Or did the church start big? If so, why have they shrunk? Why have people left? Why haven’t people joined? It simply can’t be the case that evangelicals leaving the inner city is the only contributory factor, can it? White middle class evangelicals may have left the inner city (as the map above shows). But Ken acknowledges that they’ve been doing this for a century. So it’s not a new problem. These churches could be struggling for the very reasons that he identifies and putting new Christian families, couple or individuals in them may not be the answer.

In Balham we’re on the cusp of Zone 2 (which is my way of saying that I’m unwilling to accept that Balham can share the same zone as Wimbledon). It’s like doing ministry in a river here. We have a stream of people leaving us every summer; often for good reasons. But we also have a steady flow of people coming to have a look at us. For sure it’s demanding and disappointing. We often say goodbye to some of our best; people we’ve known and loved, people we’ve trained, people we’ve served and helped them grow in ministry competency. But it’s also thrilling. Every year God brings us people at the other end of the maturity spectrum. Recent graduates or people who’ve moved into the city for work come and pay us a visit. They’re looking for a home. And we’ll happily provide it for them.

But I want to suggest a more radical proposal to the struggling innner city churches. Give away your buildings. There are churches round us with fantastic buildings; spaces and rooms that could be used for the gospel. But they’re only used for that purpose on a Sunday. During the week they’re rented out to independent nursery schools. These educational businesses sustain the dying church ministries. The church congregations are often tiny. These elderly congregation are declining as they bury their friends one by one. Anyone who ministers in that situation is, in my book, a hero. They do the saints a great service; helping them to die in faith. Whatever I say should not be taken to undermine the impressive servant heartedness of those who fuflil such a wonderful ministry. But is there a better way? Rather than bury the church as they bury their friends, why not give the building away. Give it to a church that lacks the space and could use the building for the gospel throughout the week. Give it to a congregation that doesn’t need a secular business to keep the church afloat. I said it was radical. But surely that’s better for ths gospel, isn’t it?

Read Full Post »

This is the second of a series of short meditations to help us prepare for Easter. You can find the first one here. The second word that Jesus uttered was a word of reassurance. Look at Luke 23:43

39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”  42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”  43 Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”

Jesus spoke a word of reassurance when he said, ‘’I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise’. The criminal’s words are both a plea but also a profession of faith. He believed that Jesus was a heavenly king who could grant him access to the eternal Kingdom of God. And so he prayed. To Jesus. And Jesus personally reassured him that moments later he would be ushered into the eternal paradise presence of His Father. This wicked criminal would, moments’ later, enjoy an intimacy with God that surpassed that known by Adam and Eve. And so, in these words, we see Jesus’ determination to comfort a troubled sinner who faced the impending experience of eternity with fear and trembling. They remind us that Jesus’ death is supposed to reassure us that all will be well with us in the next life no matter what we’ve done in this one.

Therefore, will you let Jesus’ words personally reassure you?

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 839 other followers