Affinity Theological Studies Conference: 'The Worshipping Church'

Panel of speakers (minus one) 

The Affinity Theological Studies Conference is unique among a plethora of events in the Evangelical and Reformed world. Most other conferences revolve around addresses, lectures or preaching. They contain very little conferring, apart from an occasional discussion panel. Even there, any conferring usually takes place among the speakers, not conference delegates. This one's different. The papers are circulated beforehand with a view to having them discussed in the conference. First in small groups and then in plenary sessions. The papers will be published in due course, so I'm not going to attempt to summarise their contents. An outline can be seen here. Titles and authors listed below. Rather than delivering the papers, the authors simply introduce them before delegates head off to chew the fat.

I chaired our group and tried to ensure that our discussions had a practical bent. What would we do differently in response to the material in the papers? As it happens, members of our group were of one mind on most things, but there are always differences of nuance and emphasis to tease out. Discussion times flowed well, but never became especially heated. 

For me, I won't be implementing massive changes in my approach to leading worship. But I hope reading and discussing the papers will make me a a bit more thoughtful about the way I do things in future. It's a fair point that while preachers spend hours preparing to preach, little thought can go into the main prayer of a Sunday service. We can easily get stuck in a rut and become samey and boring. Keeping fresh takes effort. I'm not convinced that we should be using read prayers, though. The Spirit gifts pastors and teachers to lead worship and well as preach. But progress in gifting is both possible and necessary. When it comes to preaching, Bob Letham commended Augustine's dictum that preaching should, 'make clear, delight and pursuade' (Paper 3). That too takes work. 

So-called 'worship wars' seem to have died down of late. Congregations aren't splitting over styles of worship. Differences have now become settled, with some churches adopting a progressive approach and others maintaining a traditional stance. There are biblical principles at stake here and Paper 2 in particular took us back to the New Testament's teaching on 'gathered worship'. Yes, there is such a thing, insisted David Kirk, alongside 'whole of life worship'. Sometimes differences over worship styles can be down to cultural perspectives. Most in our group seemed to agree that we need to be contemporary, while at the same time consciously part of a worshipping tradition that goes back over 2,000 years. Before that even, if you include psalm singing (which we should!) and Old Testament worship (Paper 1). Papers 5 & 6 wrestled with managing change and what it means to be 'conteporary'. 

Yes, we who lead the gathered church in worshipping God need to give attention to the form, content and cultural relevance of our services. Sure. Paper 4 also reminded us that worship should stir the affections to the adoration of the our Father by the Son and through the Spirit. As Jonathan Edwards wrote,

That religion which God requires, and will accept, does not consist in weak, dull, and lifeless wouldings [i.e. wishes to act] raising us but a little above a state of indifference. God in his word, greatly insists upon it that we be in good earnest, fervent in spirit and our hearts be vigorously engaged in religion.

Prayer, singing, Scripture reading, preaching, Baptism and the Lord's Supper should be a means by which the hearts of worshippers are moved to worship. The affections raised should be appropriate to the truth proclaimed, ranging from godly sorrow over sin to joy inexpressible in the Lord. The truth bit needs underlining in our sentimental age. We look not for emotional outbursts, but a heartfelt response to God's Word. Edwards posited that the development of godly Christian character is the acid test of whether affections are truly of the Spirit. Emotional spasms won't produce the fruit of the Spirit. Only the word of truth and power of God can do that. 

Speaking of the Spirit, some papers gave attention to the way in which the Holy Spirit is especially present with the church gathered in worship. That gave rise to discussion on how that can be, given a) the Spirit is omnipresent and b) he dwells within each individual believer. We considered texts such as Ephesians 2:19-22, which speaks of the gathered church (note 'built together') as a 'dwelling place of God in the Spirit' and, of course the favourite verse of small churches, Matthew 18:20. In his introductory remarks to his paper Stephen Clark helpfully reminded us that while the Spirit is with the people of God when gathered and scattered, he may be more powerfully present at some times than others. The Spirit is not a force, but a sovereign person of the Trinity. His influences and effects therefore vary, both in relation to the individual believer and gathered churches. Our God seems to take special delight in drawing near to his gathered people, Psalm 87:1-3. 

Few things have been more divisive in Evangelical circles than what goes on in gathered worship, which is a great shame. But even in the church of the New Testament there was potential for division. Jewish believers with their tradition of psalm singing in the synagogues had to accommodate Gentile believers who composed new songs to the Lord. Gentiles, who were accustomed to boozy singalongs in their pagan days had to learn sing the psalms of Israel, now 'not drunk with wine...but filled with the Spirit', Ephesians 5:18-20. This involved both Jew and Gentile submitting to the other in the Lord, rather than splitting from one another, as they developed a distinctive Christian culture of worship (Ephesians 5:21). There's a lesson  there for our day and the divide between 'progs' and 'trads'. With great pastoral wisdom John Calvin shows us a more excellent way than acrimony, 

The Master... did not will in outward discipline and ceremonies to prescribe in detail what we ought to do (because he foresaw that this depended upon the state of the times, and he did not deem one form suitable for all ages)... Because he has taught nothing specifically, and because these things are not necessary to salvation, and for the upbuilding of the church ought to be variously accommodated to the customs of each nation and age, it will be fitting (as the advantage of the church will require) to change and abrogate traditional practises and to establish new ones. Indeed, I admit that we ought not to charge into innovation rashly, suddenly, for insufficient cause. But love will best judge of what may hurt or edify; and if we let love be our guide, all will be safe. (Cited in Paper 5).

Paper 1: A biblical theology of worship (Mark Johnston)
Paper 2: ‘When you come together’ (David Kirk)
Paper 3: Worship and aesthetics: a historical survey – with particular reference to Clement of Alexandria, Augustine of Hippo, Luther, Zwingli and other Reformers (Bob Letham)
Paper 4: Worship and the affections (Graham Beynon)
Paper 5. Worship today: maintaining continuity with the past and across the world (Ray Evans)
Paper 6. Worship today: contemporary expression of worship in one’s own culture (Stephen Clark)

The next Affinity Theological Studies Conference will take place in March 2021. The topic may be eschatology, but that's still to be decided. The Doctrine of God also merits attention, especially the Trinity in historical, biblical and theological perspectives, the eternal submission of the Son to the Father (or not!), one God 'without body, parts, or passions', divine sovereignty vs Open Theism, etc. Theme, 'Behold your God!' 

In Christ Alone: Perspectives on Union with Christ edited by Stephen Clark & Matthew Evans

Affinity/Mentor, 2016, 283pp 

This volume gathers together the papers presented at the 2015 Affinity Theological Studies Conference. I was present for that event and very much appreciated reading the various papers and discussing the issues raised by them with fellow conference members. 

The doctrine of union with Christ has rightly received renewed attention in Evangelical circles in recent decades. Few themes are so central to our understanding and appreciation of the work of Jesus on our behalf and how we come to benefit from what he has done for us. 

The chapters explore union with Christ from a variety of perspectives, biblical, historical and theological. Welcome attention is given to the writings of John and Paul, where union with Christ is explored most fully in the New Testament. The Reformer John Calvin and the Puritan John Owen placed union with Christ at the core of their presentation of salvation accomplished and applied. Much may be learned from their insights as teased out by Robert Letham and John Fesko. Papers are also devoted to the relationship between union with Christ and justification and sanctification respectively. 

In a final chapter Stephen Clark endeavors sum things up the heading, 'Union with Christ': Towards a Biblical and Systematic Theological Framework for Practical Living. This essay was not one of the papers written for the 2015 conference. Clark seeks to make good some aspects of the doctrine not covered by the six papers, reflecting on union with Christ in the Old Testament and the Synoptic Gospels. Especially helpful is his discussion of the union and the ordo salutis. Christ was united to his people in eternity, before the foundation of the world. Historically speaking they were crucified and raised with him. But they were only united to Christ existentially when drawn to him by faith that they might enjoy the benefits of his saving work on their behalf. (See Ephesians 1:4, Romans 6:4, 16:7).

A certain order applies even when it comes to the existential aspect of union with Christ. Logically, the sinner needs to be made spiritually alive in order to believe and so be justified by faith. Yet regeneration is not the grounds of justification. Rather God justifies the ungodly simply on the basis of Christ's obedience, blood and resurrection. Those who have been united to Christ for justification have also been united to him for progressive sanctification, having died with Christ to the old life of sin and been raised with him to a new life of holiness. 

The Christian life is not about trying to conform to a bunch of arbitrary rules laid down by the church designed to suck as much pleasure out of life as possible. It's about living out of the fullness of our union with Christ as justified sinners whom God is conforming to the image of his Son by the power of the Spirit. It is in Christ we live, suffer and die. And it is in Christ we shall be raised to everlasting glory. 

Some of Clark's lengthy footnotes are worth reading, especially the ones on time and eternity, and the interpretation of the Song of Solomon. 

I'm glad that these essays are now available to a wider audience. The authors' attention to the biblical texts offer surprising (if not always convincing) exegetical insights. At least I wasn't convinced by Cornelis Benema on John 14:1-6. Robert Letham provocatively advocates Calvin's view of the Lord's Supper in relation to union with Christ. The chapter on John Owen reminds us that unlike Lutheranism, Reformed theology is not overly based on the teaching of a single Reformer. And a good thing too. 

Theology students, pastors and serious Christian readers will find much to help them here as we seek to understand that which is beyond full human comprehension; the believer's mystical union with Christ. This work serves as a good companion piece to the 2007 Affinity Theological Study Conference papers on the person of Christ, published under the title, The Forgotten Christ: exploring the mystery and majesty of God incarnate. 

Affinity Theological Study Conference 2017

The 'Magnificent Seven' speakers'  panel

The theme of this year's conference was, 'The Christian Church: Its Mission in a Post-Christian Culture'. Timely, what with the church in the UK struggling to adjust its mission to a more secular climate. 

As is the practice with these events, the papers were circulated beforehand for delegates to study. Here are the titles/authors: 

1: ‘Light to the Nations and Aliens and Strangers: an Overview of the People of God in the Old Testament’ – David Green

2: ‘Light to the Nations and Aliens and Strangers: an Overview of the People of God in the New Testament’ – Chris Bennett

3: ‘When Society is Collapsing: Augustine and The City of God’ – Paul Helm

4: ‘The Church Militant and Martyred: The Reformation till Today’ – Lee Gatiss

5: ‘On Understanding our Times’ – John Stevens

6: ‘On Serving God in our Generation’ – David McKay

A session was devoted to discussing each paper in turn after a word of introduction by their authors. We then divided into small groups to chew the fat, before coming together to feed back to the whole conference. A speaker was delegated to each discussion group, meaning we all got to 'grill' one, which was nice. (Maybe not so much for the authors).

There were some points of disagreement. In his paper Chris Bennett argued for the Chris Wright view that the mission of the church should reflect the mission of God to restore and renew the whole universe. He questioned the distinction that is sometimes made between what may be done under the auspices of the organised church and what is a matter for individual believers. The distinction has its uses, however. Churches may organise things like Parent and Toddler Groups to foster links with the local community as well as run directly evangelistic activities, but it is down to individual believers to get involved in local politics, or help with urban redevelopment projects. They do so as members of the organic church and with the prayerful support of their local fellowship, but such activities are not in themselves an expression of the mission of the organised church. That's what I reckon, anyway.

Another thing was the extent to which we should make use of the diminishing heritage of Christendom. Most agreed that we should use our Christian heritage as a point of contact with the unbelieving world. But our primary purpose is not to preserve this at all costs. Contrary to Anglican friends (and some inconsistent Nonconformists) I don't believe we should retain Bishops as ex-officio members of the House of Lords, or the Monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Let Church and State be separate, each with its own sphere and mission. That does not entail a faith-free public square, but in Augustinian terms, the City of God should not be confused with the City of this world. 

The papers and discussion that arose from them were certainly thought provoking. A good mix of theological reflection and cultural analysis that helped us to apply biblical truth and lessons from church history to contemporary concerns. It is only as we do that will we be able to equip the church for its God-given mission in a secular world. The papers will eventually be published in book form, so I'm not going to provide a summary here. The 2015 set are available under the title, In Christ Alone: Perspectives on Union with Christ, and very good they were too.

One of the joys of a conference like this is the times of informal chat and discussion that spill over into coffee breaks and meal times. That's where you get into the practical nitty gritty of how to work out all this stuff in the context of church life. You may also find yourself engaging in discussion of whether holding that ensoulment is not from conception implies an Appolinarian moment in Christ's incarnate life. Or watching some of the most ineptly played games of Pool you're ever likely to witness. 

Despite me not being quite so active on the blogging front these days, some of the delegates were familiar with this here blog. More familiar than me it seems, as I had no recollection whatever of posting this in response to Ruth Palgrave's criticism of Affinity a few years ago. Must be getting old. 

The next Affinity Theological Study Conference will be in 2019, on the theme, 'Worship'. 

Affinity Theological Study Conference March 1 - 3, 2017

The Christian Church: 

Its Mission in a Post-Christian Culture 

Looking forward to this. A hugely relevant theme. The conference format includes opportunities for in-depth discussion of papers that are circulated beforehand. See here for full conference details and booking information. 

Affinity Theological Studies Conference 2015 Report

Last Wednesday to Friday I attended the Affinity Theological Studies Conference. Many conferences aimed at Ministers and theological students take place annually. The Affinity one is biennial, which kind of makes it seem special. But that is not its only distinction. Most conferences involve very little actual conferring aside from general chit chat at meal times, or coffee-fueled late night conversations with friends. Confer-ences they are not. And even when panel-led discussions are laid on in an attempt to facilitate interaction they don't really work. It's a bit like BBC Question Time with Dimbleby on rambling form and no one especially interesting or controversial on the panel to liven things up. Plus tiresome and predictable questions from the audience. 'Why can't we all be Presbyterians?' and the like. 

The Affinity event is different, however. It's a proper conference with discussion at its heart. Papers are circulated to delegates beforehand. At the conference authors don't deliver their papers in full, but briefly introduce them in preparation for the discussion sessions.

This year's theme was Union with Christ. See here for a breakdown of the papers and their authors. I'm not going to attempt to summarise them here, as they will be published in due course in Affinity's online theological journal, Foundations. Suffice to say that all were of excellent quality as to content. Most were of reasonable length, which was handy as I hadn't managed much reading before the event and had to get through the papers during free time. A mammoth 36-pager defeated my best attempts at speed reading late on Thursday night, but I managed to get through most of it. One lacuna was the eschatological aspect of union with Christ. Most papers hinted at this dimension, but none were entirely devoted to it. Perhaps the next conference can make good by looking at biblical eschatology? We can always hope.

As far as discussion is concerned delegates were grouped into six groups of around eight people, each with its own chair. Our group gelled well, with lots of good quality theological discussion and reflection on how to apply the teaching of the various papers in our ministries. Speakers are divided up one per group, meaning each group gets to grill a one in turn. Ours was Bob Leatham whose paper on John Calvin and union with Christ prompted in-depth discussion on the Lord's Supper and theosis. 

After the group discussions delegates come together for plenary sessions. A panel discussion brought the conference to a close. Unusually, even that worked well. When David Dimbleby eventually retires the BBC should get Stephen Clark to chair Question Time. 

Several people were kind enough to mention that they read this blog, which I've rather neglected of late. Pastoral commitments, school governor work and family stuff have left me with little time for posting displaced fragments. But taking the wife to a hospital outpatients appointment meant I was able to snatch a few spare moments in the waiting room to begin composing this piece on my mobile. 

Given the conference theme I must admit to a twinge of disappointment that on Sunday I was due to preach on Nehemiah 11, rather than John 15 or Colossians 3, say. But on the other hand, I reflected, how could I preach that chapter meaningfully to the New Testament people of God apart from the interrelated themes of the covenant of grace and union with Christ that make the Old Testament Scriptures applicable to today's church? 

I left the conference with an enriched sense of the wonder of the believers' union with Christ and the blessings that flow to us in and through the Saviour, Ephesians 1:3. 

Affinity Theological Study Conference 2015: Union with Christ

Next February 25-27 the conference will be considering the theme of 'Union with Christ' with the help of papers provided in advance by Cor Bennema, Tim Ward, Bob Letham, John Fesko, David McKay and Paul Wells.

The format of the conference is considered to be unique by many people who attend. Carl Trueman said of the 2011 event that it was 'probably the most helpful' conference he had ever attended: 'The structure was great: speakers sent papers in advance; they introduced them briefly at the conference; the conference then broke into small groups for discussion; and then reconvened for plenary debate. True conversational theology... the discussion groups, consisting of academics and pastors, pushed everything to its implications for the local church... differences were respected but not relativised; and good humour and thoughtfulness characterised everything.'

I'd second Carl's words of commendation. If theological study and discussion is your thing, then check it out here. 

An Affinity for discussion

I'm not going to try and summarise the contents of the papers delivered at last week's Affinity Theological Studies Conference. My guess is that they will be posted in Affinity's online theological journal, Foundations at some point anyway. (See here and here for papers from the 2011 conference on the doctrine of Scripture). My aim is to reflect a little on some of the issues raised by the papers and to say a word or two about the format of the conference. 

1) Bringing the ancient text of Scripture into dialogue with cutting-edge concerns

We live in a world that has thrown up new moral concerns; economic globalisation and social justice, the legitimacy or otherwise of the use of torture by democratic regimes in combating terrorism, not to mention bioethical  issues such as embryonic stem cell research. The Bible may not address these matters directly, but are there biblical principles that can be brought to bear upon them? Part of the role of the church is to try and help its members to think biblically about the whole of life and that includes ethical reflection on economics, war, medical research and so on.

2) Brining the academy into dialogue with the church

Most of the speakers were academic specialists in their field. A couple were also pastors with a background in law and economics respectively. Responding to the issues under discussion involved grappling with biblical ethics in general before specific matters could be addressed. That in itself is a demanding task, requiring thought on the relationship between general and special revelation, the differences between Old Testament and New Testament ethics, the nature of Christian love and the intersection of the "Two Kingdoms"; that of this world and the kingdom of God. The papers given by Stephen Clark, Joshua Horden and Paul Helm were more directly theological. On the biblical studies front, Gordon Wenham offered an excellent study on the Psalms as Torah. Andy Hartropp, both an economist and theologian helped us to think through the Bible's teaching on wealth and social justice. Leonardo De Chirico's paper offered a fresh, if controversial   approach to bioethical issues. Pastors aren't usually specialists in the areas just mentioned. That is why it is important to bring the academic lectern into dialogue with the church pulpit. Part of the role of Christians in the academy is to help enable pastors to equip the people of God to face the ethical challenges of the 21st century.

3) The value of discussion

Discussion is an important element of the Affinity Theological Studies Conference. Papers are circulated beforehand for delegates to read and then introduced by their authors at the event. When that's done conference-goers gather in small groups of around half a dozen people to work their way though a list of pre-set questions. This helps to facilitate a structured discussion of the various papers. Following that delegates convene for a plenary discussion, where speakers are questioned and the issues thrashed out. It's probably fair to say that the small group sessions work better than the plenaries. I like discussion and found the format stimulating. Sometimes the papers were lacking in the area of practical application so it was helpful to try and work out how we might apply what was written in a local-church context.

4) Controversy

As I've already hinted, Leonardo De Chirico's paper was probably the most controversial of the lot. In fact, Joshua Horden used the introduction to his paper as an opportunity to critique De Chirio's key proposals. The Italian pastor argued that human life in the image of God does not begin at conception, but when the embryo is implanted in the womb. In the plenary discussion session he made it clear that he is not in favour of abortion, or research on embryos. But he has no problem with IVF that involves the destruction of 'surplus embryos' on the grounds that in nature several embryos are lost for every baby that is born. The speaker made implantation in the womb determinative of human life in the image of God, as from that moment the embryo stands in relationship to its mother. He cited Scriptures such as Jeremiah 1:5 and Galatians 1:15 to seek to prove his point. But as was argued in discussion, it is doubtful that the Bible makes a clear distinction between conception and implantation when speaking of the womb. Also, the idea that human life in the image of God, or 'ensoulment', does not begin at conception, has a distorting Christological effect. The church confesses that at the incarnation Christ assumed a full human nature, body and soul. Contrary to Apollonarian error, the divine logos did not take the place of the soul of Jesus. From conception the incarnate Son was a divine person with a complete psyco-physical human nature. If ensoulment is ordinarily delayed until implantation, then that involves an 'Apollonarian' stage on Christ's human nature, which is inconceivable according to orthodox teaching on the person of Christ.

Given the controversial nature of De Chirico's paper there was some potential for heated debate in the discussion sessions. But points of disagreement were raised courteously and the speaker attempted to clarify and explain his views in a gracious and thoughtful manner. Although some delegates agreed with him, most, I think were unconvinced. However, his paper and the discussions that followed drove us back to the Scriptures to explore what the Bible teaches on the beginning of human life.

The conference broke up early due to an expected heavy snow fall, so no panel discussion took place. 

To Affinity and beyond!

Right then, later this morning I'll be hitting the road and heading off to the Affinity Theological Studies Conference on The Bible and Ethics. I managed to read all six papers and am looking forward to chewing the fat in the discussion sessions. Some papers have raised controversial points, so there shouldn't be any problem in generating debate. I'll hopefully post a report when I get back.

Affinity Theological Studies Conference 2013: Handling the Bible Ethically

The Affinity Theological Studies Conference is due to take place on 16-18 January 2013. I attended the last one on 'The Doctrine and Function of Scripture in the 21st Century' back in 2011 (see here). During our discussions it emerged that more work needed to be done on biblical ethics in the contemporary context, hence the theme of next year's event. It is a proper conference, rather than a preaching-fest. Papers are circulated beforehand (I've already received my copies) and there are opportunities for discussion in small groups, plus plenary sessions. Here's the low-down:   

Paper 1: Natural Law in Scripture

Exploring multi-faceted aspects of natural law in the Bible

Stephen Clark
Director of EMW Theological Training Course and part time Lecturer at London Theological Seminary.

Paper 2: The teaching of Jesus & the NT

Exploring themes of continuity and discontinuity between aspects of ethical teaching in the ancient world and NT

Joshua Hordern

University Lecturer in Christian Ethics, University of Oxford

Paper 3: Psalms as Torah
Exploring the Bible’s ethical teaching in the Psalms
Gordon Wenham
Old Testament Tutor, Trinity College, Bristol

Paper 4: It’s A Rich Man's World? 
Exploring the biblical material on money, wealth and economic justice
Andrew Hartropp
Church minister, economist & Research Tutor at the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies

Paper 5: War and Peace
Exploring the ethics of war, 'undercover' operations, torture etc.
Paul Helm
Theologian, philosopher & Teaching Fellow at Regent College, Canada

Paper 6: Bioethics
Exploring issues at the beginning and ending of life
Leonardo De Chirico
Church planter, theologian & ethicist in Rome, Italy

Booking form. 

New Foundations

The Spring edition of Affinity's theological journal,  Foundations is out now.

Steven Mittwede shows how the relationship between justification and sanctification in Paul’s letters helps us to avoid the pitfalls of legalistic religion; at stake, he says ‘is the spiritual health of individual believers and local fellowships of believers’. Derek Bigg contributes helpfully and practically on the neglected subject of the public reading of Scripture. Chris Thomas writes as a pastor and chaplain on the way in which chaplaincy work reflects a consistent theme throughout Scripture of God’s presence in the world he has made. He ends with a pertinent challenge to us all. Oliver Gross provides a thorough exegetical study of John 3:5 and comes to a well-argued (and, to some, controversial) conclusion. Finally, Kieran Beville gives us a useful survey of the main players in the phenomenon of New Atheism and encourages us, like David facing Goliath, to have courageous hearts. Book reviews from Stephen Clark, Gareth Williams, Paul Yeulett and Ro Mody complete this edition.

An Interview with Affinity Director Peter Milsom

GD:  Hello, Peter Milsom and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

PM: I grew up in Cardiff where I attended Park End Presbyterian Church. After working for an insurance company, I trained for the ministry of the Presbyterian Church of Wales and was ordained in 1973. My first pastorate was in Mancot in North Wales. With real sadness, I resigned from this denomination and my ministry in Mancot at the end of 1974 and began a church planting ministry in the Deeside area. I have good friends who continue to serve in the Presbyterian Church. During the early years of this new ministry I worked as the Head of Religious Education at Henry Meoles senior secondary school in Wallasey. In the 1980’s, whilst continuing my ministry in Deeside, I was involved in the planting of a new church in Bala. In 1993 I moved to Malpas Road Evangelical Church in Newport.

Since 1997 I have been the Director of UFM Worldwide, a mission agency which works closely with local churches. UFM missionaries serve in 30 countries across all continents and one of my responsibilities is the pastoral care of the missionaries. I have had the privilege of visiting many countries which has given me insights into the work of God’s Kingdom around the world and the cultural diversity of the Church. The work of taking the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the peoples of the world, with the help of the Holy Spirit, requires the combined efforts of all of the Lord’s people.

I am convinced of the importance of evangelical church unity and its significance for our witness to the Gospel. I believe it is important for these convictions to be expressed in tangible ways. Disunity undermines the credibility of our witness to people who are searching for God and need to know the truth. I have worked out my convictions about evangelical church unity in practical ways. The church in Deeside became a member church of the British Evangelical Council, which is now Affinity, in the late 1970’s. For many years I was involved with the ministries of the Evangelical Movement of Wales and was the Executive Chairman of the EMW in the early 1990’s.  In the mid 1980’s I was involved, with others, in the formation of the Associating Evangelical Churches of Wales which brings together 60 evangelical churches in Wales. In the late 1980’s I served on the organising committee of the Grace Baptist Assembly and chaired two Assemblies. I have also served on the Council of Global Connections and have chaired the Affinity World Focus Team since its inception.

GD:  Give us a potted history of Affinity.

PM: Affinity continues the work of the British Evangelical Council. The Council of the BEC adopted the name Affinity in 2004, when Jonathan Stephen became the first Director. The BEC began in 1952 as a fellowship of evangelical churches which were not part of the World Council of Churches. In the late 1960s and early 1970s the BEC grew as some churches left the major denominations because of the growing influence of liberal theology, especially amongst the leaders of those denominations.  The churches which left the denominations recognized the importance of expressing their commitment to evangelical unity through belonging to the BEC. Affinity is a church-based body. Since 2004 evangelical Christian agencies have also become Affinity Associates. This includes Bible Colleges, publishers, and mission agencies.

GD: What is the purpose of Affinity?

PM: Affinity is an expression of evangelical Christian unity. Everyone who belongs to Affinity is committed to the Bible, as the authority for all we believe and do, and to the church, as the means by which God’s purposes in the world are accomplished. We are responding to the prayer of the Lord Jesus in John 17 “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”  We believe that Jesus prayed for a visible expression of the spiritual unity all Christians have because we are “in Christ.” Unity amongst true Christians makes our witness credible to the world and is essential if the Gospel is to be taken to the whole world.  We are a partnership of churches and Christians who are committed to the Gospel. We welcome fellowship with all who are committed to the Lord, the Bible, the Church and the Gospel.

GD: Affinity seemed to begin with a bang and then (almost) peter out with a whimper. How do you plan to rejuvenate Affinity as a focus for Evangelical unity in the 21st century?

PM: Affinity continues the witness of the British Evangelical Council.  The purpose of the new name and re-launch in 2004 was to challenge evangelical churches and Christians to become more actively involved in evangelical unity. Affinity now includes Christians and churches in the UK and Ireland so the word “British” needed to be changed. Affinity also includes a number of evangelical agencies involved in a range of significant ministries including pastoral and leadership training, publishing and world mission. This partnership between churches and evangelical agencies is important because the 21^st century presents challenges which we need to address together. The need is urgent. I am keen for Affinity to enable all who belong to it, and others who may join us, to work together on a Gospel agenda. We are living in a secular society and are witnessing the decline of Western civilization. We need to stand together in Gospel partnership. A new generation of younger leaders needs encouragement and younger people generally need to be evangelized. It is important for evangelical Christians not to think of Affinity as “them” but “us” and to get involved. I am always glad to hear from people who want to work out what it means to be “in Christ” together with other churches and Christians.

GD: Why should Evangelical Churches and Church groupings affiliate to Affinity rather than the Evangelical Alliance?

PM: We recognize the excellent work done by the Evangelical Alliance, which is a bigger organization than Affinity. There are certain things which are distinctive of Affinity. We are committed to the Bible and to the church. The Affinity Council consists of church leaders appointed by the various church groupings to which they belong. Everyone who belongs to Affinity is committed to upholding and proclaiming the vital truths expressed in our Doctrinal Basis. In recent years some evangelicals have begun to question key doctrines, for example, the authority of the Bible, justification by faith, substitutionary atonement, the uniqueness of the Gospel, and eternal punishment.  We take biblical truth very seriously. The affects of embracing non-biblical, liberal theology can be seen only too clearly in the tragic decline of the major Protestant denominations in Britain today.  We recognize the major issues facing evangelical churches and Christians in the major denominations, especially the Church of England and the Church of Scotland. We want to do all we can to encourage and help our brothers and sisters in those denominations in their stand for the Lord and for the Gospel.

GD: How do you see the role of Affinity with respect to the relationship between Evangelical Nonconformists and our Evangelical Anglican brethren?

PM: In 1992 I was the chairman of the BEC Council when the first Church of England congregation was accepted into membership of the BEC. Then and now we do not require a church to have actually seceded from their denomination in order to join Affinity. We recognize that some churches believe that they should continue to witness actively to the truth within their denominations. This is important for all evangelical churches which are within a denomination, whether nonconformist or Anglican. Affinity embraces a variety of churches. There are differences amongst us on matters such as the form of church government and baptism. We are united on the basis of the fact that we are “Evangelicals”. Our commitment to our fellow evangelicals is more important to us than our commitment to an historic ecclesiastical tradition. We welcome fellowship with all, whether nonconformist or Anglican, who are Gospel people and are actively witnessing to the Gospel within their denomination.

GD: Is separation from the “mixed denominations” still a live issue?

PM: Recent events within some of the main denominations mean that separation is a live issue. This is true, for example, for some in the Church of England and also the Church of Scotland. The agenda of liberal theology is being pursued relentlessly by denominational leaders. They are determined to pursue policies and practices which are a denial of biblical authority and cause real problems for evangelical churches and pastors. We are keen to do everything we can to strengthen the hands of those bearing witness to the truth within the mixed denominations and, should they decide to separate, to encourage them to seek fellowship with other evangelical churches in Affinity.

GD: I notice that Affinity’s theological journal, Foundations is now available for free online. What might readers expect from the journal?

PM: The first online edition of Foundations, our theological journal, was published in May this year. As an online journal it is now available, free of charge, to church leaders and Christians around the world. Foundations is an international journal of evangelical theology. Its aim is to cover contemporary theological issues by articles and reviews, taking in exegesis, biblical theology, church history and apologetics, and to indicate their relevance to pastoral ministry. Its particular focus is the theology of evangelical churches which are committed to biblical truth and evangelical ecumenism.

GD: A number of people were slightly bemused when the British Evangelical Council was relaunched as Affinity. Any plans for another change of name?

PM: It has taken a little time for people to get used to the new name. We have no plans to change it. One of the big challenges we face is to work together as churches and evangelical agencies in an increasingly effective partnership for the Gospel.  Affinity is not about something that other people do for us but what we, as the Lord’s people do together.

GD: If time travel were possible, which figure from church history would you most like to meet, and what would you say to him/her?

PM: I recently enjoyed reading Jonathan Aitken’s biography of John Newtown, “From to Disgrace to Amazing Grace.” I would have liked to know John Newton and to have talked with him about his experience of God’s grace and how that had made him a warm and committed pastor of the Lord’s people. 

GD: What is the most helpful book that you have read in the last twelve months?

PM: I enjoyed reading “Son of Hamas.”  It tells the amazing story of how Mosab Hassan Yousef, the oldest son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a founder member of Hamas, became a disciple of Jesus. It encouraged me to see how the Holy Spirit works to bring people to faith in seemingly inaccessible places.  Mosab Yousef’s experience of the love of God for him and his attempt to obey Jesus’ teaching that we should “love our enemies” is a great challenge to us as evangelicals. It is an excellent book and you won’t need to sell your shirt to buy it!

GD: What is the biggest problem facing Evangelicalism today and how should we best respond?

PM: There are many big challenges facing us as Evangelicals today. It is so important that we face these challenges together. We need to resist the increasing fragmentation amongst us. Paul’s challenge in 1 Corinthians, chapter 1 is relevant to us today, “Is Christ divided?” In my early days in the ministry we wanted to encourage each other as evangelicals across the denominations. We were warm-hearted towards each other. Since then, various factors have divided us from our fellow evangelicals. It is very serious matter. It is vitally important for us to “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.”  We must “accept one another just as Christ accepted us, in order to bring praise to God.” The divisions amongst us undermine the credibility of our witness to the Lord and hinder the task of taking the Gospel to the world.  One of the immense privileges of being a Christian is that, because we belong to the Lord and are “in Christ”, we have a real and eternal fellowship with all our fellow Christians. The great divide in the world is between those who are “in Christ” and those who are not. The great desire and prayer of all Christians is that people around the world will be rescued from the dominion of darkness and be brought into the kingdom of the Son he loves. Affinity is one expression of our unity in Christ and of our passionate desire to express this tangibly so that the peoples of world might believe in him.

GD: Thanks for that, Peter. Good to see you at the Aber Conference last week. 

Peter Milsom will be preaching at Penknap Providence Church's anniversary service on Saturday 3rd September, 4pm. 

Affinity discussions

As I was saying, the Affinity Theological Studies Conference is a proper confer-ence. Meaning that those who attend get to confer together and discuss papers presented in small break-out  groups and in plenary sessions. Cool, eh? The break-out groups comprised of around twelve people.

I once attended a Ministers' conference in the UK where the big shot American speaker did not deign take his meals with the rest of us. Did he think we Brits have disgusting eating habits or something? No such aloofness was allowed at this event. Speakers duly ate with the rest of us and took their place in discussion groups along with everybody else, which is as it should be.

Philip Eveson, retired Principal of the London Theological Seminary chaired our group. Hywel Jones, who gave the final paper on preaching in the power of the Spirit, another former LTS Principal was also a member of "Group 4". But neither man attempted to hog the discussions, which gave mouthy delegates like me a chance to contribute.  We talked about the pros and cons of the papers delivered and tried to work out how to apply what we had learned in church life. For some reason, Philip Eveson got rather fixated on John Frame's point, cited in Dan Strange's paper about the Bible being sufficient for a Christian plumber. Did he mean that there is a distinctly Christian approach to welding pipes and changing washers, or that a Christian plumber will do an honest job? We thought that it was probably the latter.

It was nice to be able to put Hywel Jones on the spot when it came to discussing his paper. What are we seeking when we pray for the power of the Spirit in preaching? Boldness, liberty, life-transforming power. Can we discern the Spirit at work when we feel that we have failed in preaching, but our people are helped? Yes, God is sovereign, but we should nevertheless seek more of the empowering presence of the Spirit in our preaching.

I don't know why, but I felt OK saying my piece in the small group sessions, but didn't feel like piping up in the plenaries. Maybe something to do with my Welsh inferiority complex. Then again, 50% of the speakers and Affinity's new Director, Peter Milsom were Welsh, as were a good number of some of the most vocal contributors at the plenaries. In fact, most of the people I spoke to at the conference were either Welsh, had trained/taught at LTS, or, like me were both Welsh and LTS'ers. 

The plenary sessions were good though, especially the panel discussion when all the speakers took to the stage and fielded questions from the floor. Questions ranged around the application of biblical principles in the contemporary situation, where our people are often confronted with tricky ethical dilemmas. Should a Christian in the military use torture to obtain potentially life saving intelligence? Is there such a thing as "the lesser of two evils" - i.e. telling a lie to prevent someone being murdered? Or will the Lord not put his people in a position where the only option is to sin? What of the Christian guesthouse owners who were found guilty of breaking the law in refusing a bed to a homosexual couple? Were they right to do so? (On this, take a look at Mostyn Roberts' thought provoking post, Changing Times: the Christian in a secular society). Conference chairman Stephen Clark suggested that we need to give fresh attention to biblical ethics, an area where we are weak in comparison to our forebears. It was suggested that the next Affinity Theological Studies Conference (2013) might be given over to this issue.

Theological discussion laced with friendly banter continued at meal times and in coffee fuelled late night conversations. On Wednesday night I was chatting to Mostyn Roberts about the theology of Kevin Vanhoozer, when a chap from a neighbouring table asked if he could join us. It turns out that the brother from Romania is currently engaged in doctoral studies on Vanhoozer's theological method. We had an stimulating conversation on KJV's theodramatic proposals. It was also nice to bump into several people who I've not met before who are regular readers of this blog.

This was my first Affinity Theological Studies Conference and I really enjoyed it. The papers were very helpful and the discussion orientated format worked well. Oh, and unlike one of the speakers, Carl Trueman (where did they get him from?), the lady at the Affinity desk did know my name.

But before wrapping up my reflections on the conference, I feel I should share with readers a couple of important truths that were impressed upon me at the event. 1) Allusions to pop music are likely to be lost on many pastors and  theologians. I found myself having to explain Trueman's mealtime reference to Mark Knopfler. And I can't stand Dire Straits. It was demeaning. For me the 80's were all about Going Underground by The Jam and U2's Joshua Tree, not dire yuppie music. Also, Eminem (whose music I loath even more than Dire Straits) is a rap singer, not a packet of sweets. 2) Wearing chunky-knit jumpers with jeans and brown brogues isn't a good look.

To Affinity and back again

Dan Strange, Peter Naylor and Hywel Jones

Following on from Part 1 of this report, on the Affinity Theological Studies Conference on, "The Truth Will Set You Free: The Doctrine and Function of Scripture in the 21st Century":

Stephen Clark got down to brass tacks with a paper on The Use of the Bible in the Church. Our authority is the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scriptures. The Bible is God's clear and present word to the world and the church. Scripture was given for this purpose, "that people may come to know the Living God, who has been revealed supremely in the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ, and then grow in their knowledge of him and their likeness and conformity to him: in Paul’s memorable words, that everyone may be presented mature in Christ (Col. 1:28)." The reading of Holy Scripture is an essential component of the public worship of God. The Bible should ordinarily be read in this context by Ministers of the Word. What the church sings and the language of her prayers should be informed by the Bible. In preaching, Scripture should be expounded accurately and in the power of the Holy Spirit. In Preachers should not offer distorted readings of the Bible for the sake of practical application. The case was given of Joel Beeke's commendation of Jephthah's daughter as an example of "contagious submission" (see here). The Bible should be brought to bear on the ethical dilemmas faced by the people of God in the 21st century such as embryo research, civil partnerships etc. Pastors should help believers to feed themselves on the riches of God's Word so that the church is nourished on a rich diet of biblical truth.

The paper that generated the most discussion and debate was Dan Strange's piece, Not Ashamed! The Sufficiency of Scripture for Public Theology. Strange reminded us of Stephen Green's appearance on BBC's Question Time back in 2005. The Director of Christian Voice met with howls of derision from the audience when he persisted in answering questions from the Bible. The debacle was an indication of what can happen when the Bible comes into contact with the public square. This raises the question of how we might best speak Christianly in the public arena at a time when the Bible is no longer held in high regard. Strange set out two alternative proposals for "public theology" from within the world of Reformed theology. First, the "two kingdoms view", that emphasises the distinction between the temporary kingdom of this world and the eternal kingdom of God. The civil realm is subject to the "light of nature" or "natural law" that is common to all humanity (Romans 1:18-32, 2:14-15), while the church, belonging to the eternal kingdom is subject to Scripture. The Bible is not sufficient for the public arena, "We will not cure cancer …by reading Scripture, we will cure it by investigating molecular biology, organic chemistry and other related disciplines" (citing T. David Gordon). Second, Strange drew our attention to the "transformationist" model that seeks to bring biblical truth to bear upon the public square. In this view, the Bible must be allowed to supplement and inform the light of nature. Scripture is sufficient for public theology. So says John Frame,

When people are converted to believe in Christ, they bring their new faith and love into their daily work. They ask how Christ bears upon their work as historians, scientists, musicians, how this new passion of theirs affects art, entertainment, medicine, the care of the poor and sick, the justice of courts, the punishment of convicts, relations between nations.

Strange commended the second view, arguing that much of what passes for "the light of nature" is in fact the legacy of the impact of Christian moral teaching in the United Kingdom. The more post-Christian our country becomes, the more we will need to make the source of our values in the Bible explicit. We cannot have biblical ethics apart from the gospel revealed in Holy Scripture. Society is transformed as more and more people become Christians and then act as salt and light in their daily lives,

And when we are anxious that speaking ‘Christianly’ will threaten our place in the public square and our contribution to social transformation, we need to remember that real social transformation will only come about through conversion through encountering Jesus in the Word of God and by the regenerating and illuminating power of the Spirit. In summary, given our current context, our public theology is public apologetics.

The "transformationist" model is big enough to include a role for "the light of nature" in public theology, but it rightly insists that the Bible must be allowed to speak in the public arena. The relative value of the "two kingdoms" and "transformationist" visions and the practicalities of speaking Christianly in the public square stimulated a lot of discussion and debate in the break-out groups and plenary discussion session.

The final paper was given by Hywel Jones, entitled, Preaching the Word in the Power of the Holy Spirit. Jones  challenged the view that the Holy Spirit works invariably whenever the Word is preached. In keeping with the teaching of Scripture itself (1 Corinthians 2:1-5, 1 Thessalonians 1:5 etc) the speaker gave due emphasis to the importance of the preaching of the Word while also highlighting the need of the sovereign power of the Holy Spirit in preaching. This was his key proposal,

The Spirit and the Word are therefore not on the same plane of reality. The former is God; the latter is not seeing as it is the product of the Spirit (2 Tim. 3: 16 – 17). This means that the Spirit is as free and sovereign in his activity as is both the Father and the Son and that the Word that is his product is also his instrument. He remains the agent.

This needs to be said, as some, most notably John Woodhouse of Moore College, Sydney have been teaching a Lutheran conception of the relationship between Word and Spirit that virtually imprisons the Spirit in the Word. His views are influential among Evangelical Anglicans in the UK. Where such teaching holds sway, preachers will not be encouraged to seek the empowering presence of the Spirit in their ministries. All they need to do is preach and the Spirit can be relied upon do his work. The Reformed view is that the Holy Spirit works with his Word as he pleases. Jones quoted the words of John Stott's statement that Word and Spirit should never be divorced, and that the Spirit is needed to make the Word effective,

We must never divorce what God has married, namely his Word and his Spirit. The Word of God is the Spirit’s sword. The Spirit without the Word is weaponless; the Word without the Spirit is powerless . . . The truth of the Word, the conviction with which we speak it, and the power of its impact on others all come from the Holy Spirit. It is he who illumines our minds, so that we formulate our message with integrity and clarity. It is he whose inward witness assures us of its truth, so that we preach it with conviction. And it is he who carries it home with power, so that the hearers respond to it in penitence, faith and obedience.

Also note the words of John Owen,

When God shall be pleased to give unto the people who are called by his name, in a more abundant manner, “pastors after his own heart, to feed them with knowledge and understanding”, when he shall revive and increase a holy. humble, zealous, self-denying, powerful ministry, by a more plentiful effusion of his Spirit from above: then, and not until then, may we hope to see the pristine glory and beauty of our restored unto its primitive state and condition.

Hywel Jones' important paper was an attempt at sketching out a theology of Word and Spirit in preaching. But it was more than that. It was a passionate plea for preachers to seek a greater measure of the power of the Holy Spirit as they proclaim the Word of God. Such preaching is the crying need of the world and the church. The trouble with the Moore view is that it does not encourage preachers to seek more of the empowering presence of the Spirit so that they may preach the gospel "not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction" (1 Thessalonians 1:5).

To Affinity and back

Greg Beale, Stephen Clark, Carl Trueman, Peter Milsom

The Affinity Theological Studies Conference does exactly what it says on the tin. It is given to theological study and it is a proper confer-ence. Papers are circulated beforehand for attendees to study. At the event the papers are introduced by their authors prior to small group and plenary discussion sessions. The theme this year was,  "The Truth Will Set You Free: The Doctrine and Function of Scripture in the 21st Century."

Ever since the Garden of Eden, one of the devil's master strategies has been to cast doubt on the word of God. Once we begin to wonder, "Has God said?", we are on the high road to ruin.  This has especially been borne out during the last 150 years or so, where the doctrine of Scripture has been a storm centre of controversy. There is no sign of the storm dying out, with various cross winds threatening to blow the church off course.

Now, you might be forgiven for thinking that Princeton theologians A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield had offered the definitive defence of the Bible as God's inspired and inerrant Word in their various writings on the subject, most notably their jointly-authored article Inspiration, published in The Presbyterian Review 6 (April 1881). But things ain't that simple. It is often claimed, even by some in the Evangelical camp that the Princeton view of the Bible was based on wrongheaded Enlightenment assumptions. Furthermore, it is argued  that the teaching set forth by Hodge and Warfield was out of kilter with the way the church had regarded the Scriptures over the centuries. Carl Trueman attempted to respond to these points in his paper, Is the Princeton View of Scripture an Enlightenment Innovation? Looking at the issue from a strictly historical point of view, Trueman set out the essential elements of the Princeton position on the Bible and demonstrated that there were precedents for this view in the history of the church, most notably in the writings of Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, the Reformers and Reformed Orthodox scholars. He concluded his survey,

As a result, if the Princetonians are to be seen as innovators, it cannot be in terms of their articulation of the concept of inerrant autographs or in their concern for verbal inspiration and the connection of this to notions of truth. On these points, they stand within an established tradition of Christian discourse which goes back beyond the Reformation to the early church.

Next up for consideration was Peter Naylor's paper on Lost in the Old Testament? Literary Genres and Evangelical Hermeneutics. Naylor's brief was to respond to some of the challenges to the traditional Evangelical doctrine of Scripture from the world of Biblical Studies. He gave special attention to the issue of identifying literary genres found in the Bible. Should we regard Genesis 1-3 as mythological depiction of creation? Is the Book of Jonah to be read as historical narrative, or is it in fact an extended parable? Is Peter Enns right to say that the discovery of Ancient Near Eastern texts such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, which often depict events found on the Bible, compromise the uniqueness of Scripture? Naylor argued that both Genesis 1-3 and Jonah should be read as historical narrative and gave some clear criterion for identifying biblical literary genres. Believing in the supernatural God of the Bible we should have no problem in regarding portions of Scripture that depict the miraculous as historical. While the Old Testament might overlap with Ancient Near Eastern documents, the differences between these texts and the Bible are highly signifigant. The Bible is monotheistic rather than polytheistic. There is no notion of creation ex nihilio in Babylonian literature and no account of the fall of man into sin. Naylor warned against Evangelicals embracing a demythologizing approach to the Bible,

The assured results of liberal criticism have been empty pews, closed churches, loss of confidence, inability to stand against the tide of moral corruption that has been sweeping aside all the waymarks that once guarded the British people.

Peter Enns was under fire once more in Greg Beale's paper on The Right Doctrine, Wrong Texts: Can We Follow the Apostles’ Doctrine But Not Their Hermeneutics? Enns has argued that the apostles employed a typical Jewish non-contexual approach to Old Testament exegesis. In effect they obtained the right doctrine concerning Christ from the wrong Old Testament  texts. Beale set out to challenge this view. He reflected on the relationship between ancient Jewish and apostolic exegesis and set out five presuppositions of the apostle's exegetical method,

1. the assumption of corporate solidarity or representation ;

2. that Christ is viewed as representing the true Israel of the OT and true Israel, the church, in the NT;

3. that History is unified by a wise and sovereign plan so that the earlier parts are designed to correspond and point to the latter parts (cf. Matt. 11:13f);

4. that the age of eschatological fulfilment has come in Christ;

5. as a consequence of (4), it may be deduced that the latter parts of biblical history function as the broader context to interpret earlier parts because they all have the same, ultimate divine author who inspires the various human authors, and one deduction from this premise is that Christ as the centre of history is the key to interpreting the earlier portions of the OT and its promises .

The paper then considered a case study, the use of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15. By giving careful attention to Hosea, Beale showed that the prophet himself held the expectation of  a new, eschatological exodus, inaugurated by Israel's lion king (Hosea 11:10-11 cf. Numbers 23:24 & 24:9). Matthew was not being non-contextual in saying that this event was fulfilled in Christ. Beale assured us that "there is good reason and evidence that supports the notion that Jesus and the Apostles did interpret the Old Testament in line with the originally intended meaning of the Old Testament writers themselves."

Papers were followed my stimulating times of small group and plenary discussion. Watch this space for more reports.