Labels past their sell-by date (Bulldog for April)

It is high time we gave up the comparatively recent habit of dividing the evangelical constituency into two camps: 'charismatic' and 'reformed'. It is surely neither sensible nor helpful.
It is not sensible because these terms are not true alternatives (unlike charismatic/non-charismatic or Reformed/Arminian). Taken together, they are neither sufficiently exclusive, many evangelicals claiming to be both, nor sufficiently inclusive, many evangelicals claiming to be neither. It is not helpful because most evangelicals tend to be happier to categorise others in this way than to be categorised themselves.
More importantly, any label designed to identify a section of evangelicalism can more easily be used to foster division rather than unity and must be handled with care. Then again, there is little future in trying to set against each other theological positions which spring from such different roots and give rise to such varied interpretations.

Zeitgeist

However, my greatest objection to the habit is this. To suggest that the Great Divide that afflicts today's 'evangelicaldom' can be explained away in such a simplistic manner betrays a tragic naivete regarding the fundamental nature of the problem. The question is not one primarily of the security of our grasp on the doctrines of grace, far less does it concern the extent of the continuance of a few spiritual gifts. What we are confronted with is the gradual emergence over recent decades of an 'evangelicalism' that owes more to the spirit of the age than it does to the Spirit of God, a kind of Christianity shaped more by culture than by Scripture.
Here we have not a crack to be papered over, nor even a gap to be filled, but rather a space between two quite separate and distinct entities which needs to be acknowledged and, to an extent, accepted. There is only one true evangelicalism and that must pay more than mere lip-service to the final authority and sufficiency of the Bible if it is to be worthy of the name. To risk compromise at this point is to hazard the very gospel itself.
That is not to say that we simply need to return to the kind of evangelicalism that predominated prior to the existential incursions of the past 30 years or so. Far from it! Much of what passed for true faith and worship then was often essentially disengaged from both the living God and the life of the world. The evangelical ghetto was already powerless to speak to the times long before the 1960s came in like a flood.

Time for a rethink

History teaches us that following periods of great social and cultural upheaval, Christian believers have had to exercise their renewed minds with great diligence in order to reapply the unchanging principle of the Word of God to a radically altered contemporary scene. We dare not be either uncomprehending or lazy. There is so much work to be done, and in order to do it there is a desperate need for all truly biblical evangelicals to express their unity in a way that has not been seen or experienced for a long time. Such a unity would see the reversal of the fragmentation and polarisation so characteristic of the present day. Now divisive matters would once again assume the proportions of secondary issues. A new and healthier evangelical voice would be heard in our land ...

Fruitful fellowship

Just a foolish dream? Why? I sense a mounting anger and impatience among like-minded believers, of all denominations and none, with the present, public perception of evangelicalism - together with a genuine longing once again to provide a united and ruggedly Biblical alternative. As the old, tribal divisions become increasingly irrelevant, why should it be surprising if new and fruitful forms of fellowship were to be sought and found?
Yet none of this will happen through attempts to gather into one flock all those who want to fly under some trendy 'evangelical' banner. We are not all birds of a feather and it is pointless pretending that we are. The quirky, UK Christian scene throws up many absurdities but is also offers possibilities that exist in few other places around the world. The various emphases, including 'reformed' and 'charismatic', are not as structurally segregated as is generally the case elsewhere. Conditions are far from unfavourable for fresh initiatives. Is the Holy Spirit not urging us to take them?

Labels past their sell-by date (Bulldog for April)

The labels of charismatic and reformed

Zeitgeist

Time for a rethink

Fruitful fellowship

Jonathan Stephen

Main Articles

Other articles