Anglican Church League

Synod Dinner 9th October 2000

The Rev. Canon Dr. Peter Jensen

Principal of Moore Theological College, Sydney


Introduction

The critical moment of my life was the 1959 Billy Graham Crusade. Two things happened. First, I became a definite, committed, evangelical Christian, living for the Lord Jesus Christ. Second, a challenge from Mr Graham led me to the ministry of God's word.

I was sixteen. I did not know it at the time, but, humanly speaking, the Diocese of Sydney was basic to the success of the Crusade. Many Anglicans of the day scorned and even attacked the so-called fundamentalist, Billy Graham. Leaders such as Archbishop Mowll, Bishop Clive Kerle and Bishop Marcus Loane disregarded criticism by other Anglicans and welcomed the Graham team. Around the country, some other Anglican leaders were half hearted or outright critical of Mr Graham, his methods and his message. Our own leaders were clear, supportive and involved. We praise God for them. Being from Sydney, they were used to such criticism, and they made exactly the right choice. They, in their generation, put the Bible and the Gospel of the Lord Jesus first. My question tonight is: are we going to do the same in our generation? My theme is, that we must, or we will fail God, his people and our nation.

Developing the Diocese, 1960 onwards.

It was a critical moment for the Diocese. Let me explain who we were, so we can see who we are, and who we should be.

The 1950s saw large church and Sunday School attendances. The churches seemed to be flourishing. But an acute observer would have been very worried even then. The Christianity of the people was not evangelical. It was a sort of 'common Christianity', a 'lowest common denominator' Christianity. It had a strong moral emphasis; Christianity was about behaviour not belief; parents sent their children to Sunday School in the hope that they would grow up decent citizens rather than committed Christians. To be born once was enough; to be born again was excessive. The ranks of church-goers were swollen with the unsaved. The real religion was materialism.

Naturally, there were many fine, born-again Christians in the churches. But the evangelistic strategy matched the need of the moment: it was therefore aimed at nominal Christians, the church-going unsaved; the nominal uncommitted. It had its successes, but the next decade saw a massive change. This sort of evangelism was about to lose its audience.

In the 1960s, Australia awoke to the fact that it was non-Christian. The moralistic 'common Christianity' was shown to be empty and even hypocritical. In one decade - that is all it took - nominalism was dealt a death blow, and the churches began to lose their constituency. Those who were born once had no answer to the massive assault on Christian belief and practice. Their materialism was no defence, as our society mocked God openly and embraced public blasphemy, promiscuity, abortion and drugs. The twin ideologies of the gay and feminist movements, not to mention greed for money, become far more important in shaping society than the teaching of the Bible. The young were honest and turned the indifference of their parents into clear rejection of the gospel.

The promise of personal autonomy fuelled the rebellion against God. We are now living through the equivalent of a spiritual cyclone, a cyclone of a far greater intensity than Cyclone Tracy, the destroyer of Darwin. Do not be alarmed or surprised if your church is tiny and struggling, if the vast majority of the people around you are indifferent to spiritual truths, if it has proved immensely hard to pass on your faith to your children, if the media are hostile to your leaders and to your faith. All this, is what we must expect and get used to. We are not living in an even nominal Christian society, but in an ignorant and rebellious culture. Genuine Christianity offends the opinion-makers of this culture. We must expect the culture to demand that we change the gospel to suit its version of the truth.

How have we survived the cyclone so far? In general terms, the mainstream Christian movement in Australia has not survived all that well. Its constituency is aging; its numbers are in significant decline; what it stands for is a mystery to most of its fellow citizens; ordinands are fewer and older than ever before; the missionary spirit is in neutral; we are selling the assets left to us by earlier generations of Christians. These are the outward and visible signs of decay.

The culture has offered to smooth the pillow of a dying church. If we promise not to be missionary, not to believe in the wrath of God, not to say that the Lord Jesus is the only way to God, not to order our lives according to God's will, not to preach biblical ethics, not to oppose the gambling, materialistic ethos which surrounds us - then we may come in from the cold, we may be accepted back into polite society. To this pressure, many Christians have capitulated; indeed whole churches have capitulated. They have become captive to culture, rather than captive to the word of God.

Let me focus on the Diocese of Sydney. We are not exempt. No doubt we have compromised; certainly we have suffered; we have also responded inappropriately. But, as with other churches who have taken their stand on gospel and Bible, there are also unusual signs of hope and progress. We can actually see progress being made under the good hand of God. We should recognise that the mere fact that we exist at all, and that most of our churches are self supporting even if small, is a miracle of God-given tough mindedness. Gloom is out of order: we believe in a sovereign God. In this spiritual cyclone, survival is good news; progress is better. But this progress is no accident: it has stemmed from a commitment to Bible and gospel, and it has been the consequence of willingness to engage in change, and thoughtful planning for the future.

How do we cope with the pretty strong criticism that we sometimes receive? We seem about as popular as Michael Knight! Let me make a few points. First, sometimes we are being condemned for our true faults and there are always things to repent of and amend. Second, the criticism is nothing new. I can show you the same criticisms being made in the 1880s, 1904, 1933, 1958 and so on. This is because the Diocese of Sydney throughout its long history has virtually always stood for gospel and Bible first, and other church people, let alone the world, do not like it. They did not like Billy Graham; they have never liked Moore College. But these are the concrete manifestations of gospel and Bible. Third, the criticisms are often ignorant of Anglican history. Fourth we should respond graciously and winsomely.

Rather than being frightened or dismayed, therefore, let us understand our own history and be true to our principles. I am saying that we have a history, one marked by a determination to be true to Bible and gospel. As a result, we have also been willing to change and engage in strategic thinking about how to survive and grow for the sake of Christ.

For example, let us note four points about the strategy (out of the very many) which have kept us going.

First - the evangelism of the nominals in the fifties and sixties.

Thank God this was done. It meant that there was vigorous church planting, and a good number of converted people to witness for Christ in the next decades. During these decades the nominals flooded out, making our churches seem small; but smaller had advantages in strength and determination. We older converts have been very active in the community, in the schools and in the churches since the 1950s, and we promise to keep it up in the various nursing homes to which we shall shortly be consigned! But our day is passing, and the danger is that in late middle age we will fail the gospel by being too conservative for the needs of this hour.

Second - the pioneering of new ways of evangelism and nurture in the 70s.

People like John Chapman, Dudley Foord and Paul Barnett saw that evangelism would have to change; they worked very hard at re-equipping us. We were not idle; we re-tooled the factory. From my perspective, August 1976 was the crucial turning point; up to that month the number of converts remained small; from then on the Lord has particularly blessed the preaching of the gospel in fruitful and exciting ways. We had new methods, but we gave the same message. It is only the gospel under the power of God's Spirit which makes new Christians and nurtures older ones. Whatever further changes lie ahead of us, the gospel and the Bible must remain unchanged. Conservatism here is essential.

Third - The growing number of deeply committed and well trained lay men and women.

To survive the secularist challenge we must out-live, out-think and out-love the world. We need to have ordinary Christians who believe the Lord Jesus and who know and live their Bibles in the world; men and women who automatically believe the Bible more than the media or liberal Christianity. From the early 1970s, God was blessing us with such movements as the revitalised Katoomba conventions. The result of this and many other initiatives is that we have a Diocese which is rich in outstanding lay leadership, and also in humble, unknown servants of Christ who honour his name continually. Clerical domination is a curse; responsibility for the Bible and the gospel in church and community belongs to all of us. We cannot leave it to professionals.

Fourth - the congregational emphasis that has proved absolutely essential for the good health of the Diocese. The church is the local congregation; the real action takes place in the parish, not head office. However important the Diocese, the episcopacy and the liturgy (and all are important), they exist to serve the congregation and not the other way around. Grasping this meant that local congregations throughout the spiritual cyclone have not waited to be led from the top, from some mythical 'them' who, if only 'they' would do something, would save the day. We have not waited for permission to change what happens in church; we have done what needs to be done to nurture Christian of all ages. We have engaged - and we still need to engage in - a principled radicalism.

Where to from here? God has blessed and kept us amazingly. The first of these blessings, however, are gospel and Bible, and our use of these gifts will determine the nature of his future blessings.

My question is, will we continue to put Bible and gospel first? My theme is that we must, or we will fail God, his people and our nation. It sounds simple and right when put like that, but it has never been easy to have this priority. We are going to need to be as wise and courageous as our spiritual forebears.

The trouble is that the tests of our faith are never obvious: allegiance to Bible and the Lord Jesus come wrapped up in hard issues like homosexuality, or parish boundaries or the prayer book or the ordination of women to the priesthood; or our relationships with other Anglicans; or the significance of daily work. Confronted with such issues, attention to scripture will issue in tenacious and costly obedience to God. Then our position needs to be expressed in clear, courteous, loving and persuasive teaching. We must never attack the person of others, no matter what their views; but we must not shrink from disagreeing with them.

Sometimes it almost seems that being from Sydney Diocese is a crime in itself! But let me assure you that such problems are not new; they are part of our very history as a Diocese; it is because we have put Bible and gospel first at many difficult and tumultuous times that we are who we are. We ought never to be proud of being from the Diocese; but we ought not to be ashamed either. Our stand is on Bible and gospel, not on a Diocese. It is the cause of our unpopularity in some quarters; but is also the cause - and I know this through extensive overseas contacts - that there are many others draw strength from the stands we take on issues of principle. Sydney is by no means isolated in the evangelical or in the Anglican world.

But what should our continuing strategy involve? Let me suggest three memorable commitments for each of us.

First - Build on the past.

History helps us understand who we are and where we are going. The developments I have outlined represent the gospel and the Bible in action. For example, study them and you will see that they have been shaped by the type of men and women who have been involved in our church. Absolutely crucial to the future is the choice of persons for the work of the Diocese who will value Bible and gospel above all things. We need men and women of real insight and of considerable courage lead our churches, to guide our schools, and to serve on our departments, boards and councils. They must have the wisdom to apply gospel priorities to the work for which they are responsible. The future belongs to the men and women, to the church, that determines to preach the gospel of Jesus and be ruled by the Bible. Fail here and we will fail God, the church and the nation.

Second - Seize this moment.

The most extraordinary feature of the present moment is the large number of young men and women seeking to engage in the ministry of God's word. There is an unparalleled movement of God's Spirit occurring in our midst. It has not just happened. It is the precise result of the hard work and prayer of the last three decades. If you are looking to see what God is doing in our world, stop assuming in your doubting Australian way, that it must be in Africa or amongst the Pentecostals. First gaze on this local movement in wonder, and then look up to the abounding gospel opportunities for the young men and women of this city, and the wider Diocese. The Diocese is very much involved in this; we can continue to support it, own it, pray for it, rejoice in it; or we may fail it through being narrow minded or miserly or even jealous of it. God does not owe us anything, and he does not need to use us. We need to own this movement; we need to own its fervour, accept its mistakes, guide its priorities, be generous with our sons and daughters. Here we have a unique opportunity for the gospel to spread in our Diocese and into all the world.

Third - Create the future. The gospel first landed on Australian shores via an evangelical Anglican, Richard Johnson. He was only here because evangelical leaders like William Wilberforce insisted that he be sent. By their daring initiative, they gave us a sacred trust: to ensure that the gospel and the Bible be available for all Australians of whatever racial background, social class, or geographical location. We must be a missionary Diocese. Our church is narrowly English in name, but it must be comprehensive in fact. Our fundamental aim should be to address the secular challenge by providing flourishing Bible-based, gospel-centred, people-nurturing churches in as many places as possible. We need to be both prayerful and intentional; trusting and planning.

 

Conclusion

I have given you a theme and a question. My theme is this: that unless we put Bible and gospel first, we will fail God, the people of God and our nation. The history of the second half of the twentieth century shows the truth of this theme. However inadequately we have proceeded, we have been blessed by God in the cyclone of secularism by keeping the priority of preaching the gospel and obeying the Bible.

We are still in the midst of the storm. Our problems are legion. But we have not lost our way. In developing Moore College, for example, Dr Knox always had a hundred years in mind. I would say from 1960 to 2060 should be the period that we are thinking of. In my view we have done much to improve the church. Church life is far better now than it used to be forty years ago.

That task must continue. But we have done little yet to engage in the next great labour, for my theme is not just about the church, but about the nation, our own dear land. The sheer power of secularism has marginalised us; it has been very difficult to live for Christ and preach the gospel. But we are developing the experience, the resources, the people, the strategies to challenge the world of secular Australia, and to remind it of the gospel it so desperately needs to hear. Will we accept the logic of our history? But that leads back to my original question:

Despite the difficulties and the adverse criticism they received, Christians like Mowll, Loane, Kerle and Knox put the Bible and the gospel first in their generation. Are we going to do the same in ours?


    Dr Peter Jensen

 

Canon Dr Peter Jensen is Principal of Moore Theological College, Sydney and was elected Archbishop of Sydney on 5th June 2001.

 

He is also a Vice-President of the Anglican Church League.

 

Document added Tuesday, 10 October 2000.

URL of this document - http://www.acl.asn.au/pfj_dinner2000.html