Dr Bill Dumbrell (1926 – 2016) with Christ
From Moore College:
In the late morning of Saturday 1 October, Dr Bill Dumbrell was called home into the presence of the Lord he had loved and served for more than sixty years. Dr Dumbrell was a long time lecturer at Moore and Vice Principal from 1975 until 1984.
Dr William J Dumbrell was born in 1926, was converted when he was twenty-five in 1951 and began his studies at Moore Theological College four years later, and took out a BD externally from the University of London with First Class Honours in 1961. He later earned an MTh from the same university in 1966 and a ThD from Harvard University in 1970.
He was ordained in 1956 and served in churches in Parramatta and Ermington before lecturing at Moore College from 1963–66. Upon his return from Harvard, he lectured at Moore College in Old Testament from 1971 to 1984 and was Vice Principal from 1975–84. He then taught at Regent College, Vancouver, from 1984–88, before returning to teach at Moore College from 1988–1994.
Bill and Norma then left for missionary service in Singapore, where Bill taught at Trinity College. Bill has been a prolific author of books and articles, including Covenant and Creation: An Old Testament Covenantal Theology (Exeter: Paternoster, 1984; 2nd edn 2013); The Faith of Israel: Its Expression in the Books of the Old Testament (Leicester: IVP, 1988; 2nd edn 2002); and The Search for Order: Biblical Eschatology in Focus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994). Bill is survived by his wife Norma and his adult children, David, Ian, Grace, Naomi, and 6 grandchildren.
Moore Theological College Principal, Dr Mark Thompson, commented on his passing with this tribute:
“Bill Dumbrell has been a teacher, mentor and friend to many. His enormous impact as a biblical exegete, theologian and minister of the gospel is felt throughout the world. Those of us who have had the privilege of being taught by him have much for which we can thank God. Alongside his highly respected contributions in the area of Old Testament studies, his theological acuity more generally, and his sense of humour and unique personality, his commitment above all else to the Lord Jesus and his gospel will leave an enduring mark on all of us. His prayerful interest in, and deep love of Moore College, right from those early days as a student through his time as Vice Principal in the 70s and 80s and into his retirement, was undoubted. It was most definitely reciprocated. If there were such a thing as a ‘Number One Borrower’ card at the Moore College library, it would undoubtedly be held by Bill. At the time of his call home to be with the Lord he had been a dearly loved and respected member of the Moore College community for more than sixty years.
One of Bill’s enduring concerns was the unity of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, a unity to be found in the idea of God’s unfolding covenant. He would emphasise again and again that this began at creation and not just at Genesis 12! His contributions in this area revolutionised the thinking of many and continues to be drawn upon by scholars, students and pastors across the world. Yet Bill had so much more to say as well, writing on many books of the New Testament as well as the Old Testament and theological themes such as eschatology. His memorable Annual Moore College Lectures, delivered in 1983 and later published as The End of the Beginning: Revelation 21–22 and the Old Testament (Sydney: Lancer, 1985), were the first I ever heard and they shook the foundations and stretched the mind of more than just this single first year student.
My initial interview to come to Moore College as a student was with Bill Dumbrell in 1982. I remember thinking at the time that he was more nervous than I was. That, of course, wasn’t true, but he was certainly able to put me at ease. Later, when he returned from study leave in Canada, I discovered his lectures were a unique experience, full of gems even if the structure wasn’t always visible. His humour was memorable. One group of students a couple of years later purged the tapes of his lectures that year of all substance and kept just the jokes and asides, labelling it ‘The Best of Bill’. We all knew we were in the presence of a very fine mind but he was always deeply engaging as just ‘Bill’. He could certainly argue his position strongly and took no prisoners in debate, but he was genuinely concerned for the students he had the opportunity to teach and shape as gospel men and women of the future.
Bill now enjoys the presence of the Lord he served throughout his life and though we grieve his loss to us, and especially to Norma and their family, we rejoice that he is safe in the care of the one who has loved him from eternity.”
Others have reflected on Dr Dumbrell and his impact. We feature some of these comments here.
Dr Paul Barnett, Former Bishop of North Sydney and Emeritus Faculty member:
“Like many others I owe a great debt of gratitude to Bill Dumbrell. He was my first teacher of Greek and later as Dean of Regent College, Vancouver extended the invitation that began a thirty year association with that distinguished hall of learning. Bill was a clever and good man, a devoted servant of Jesus.”
Dr Andrew Shead, Head of Old Testament, Moore College:
“Bill Dumbrell was unparalleled in his ability to master the trees and the forest simultaneously, combining knowledge of numerous languages and fine details of the text with a sweeping theological perceptiveness that spanned the extent of Scripture. He was a highly original and adventurous thinker, who never allowed age to set him in his ways. In particular, his work on covenant has helped to shape the thinking of generations of biblical theologians around the world. Bill’s air of the absent-minded professor could not hide his sharp wit or his interest in people, which made him a much loved teacher, colleague and friend.”
Dr Bill Dumbrell’s funeral will be held at St Philip’s Caringbah (402 Port Hacking Road), on this Wednesday 5 October at 1:30pm.
– Reproduced with permission from Moore Theological College.
Moore College Faculty, circa 1985. Dr. Dumbrell arrowed. Click for a larger version. Photo: Moore College. Top photo courtesy Baker Publishing.
Here’s a sermon on Luke 19:41-42 preached by Dr. Dumbrell at Moore College Chapel in 1986.
Dr J I Packer 90th birthday celebrations planned
Regent College and St. John’s Vancouver are planning a 90th birthday celebration for J. I. Packer – next Tuesday, 19th July, 2016.
Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans New Zealand launched with two conferences
“Nearly 500 Anglicans from around New Zealand, including the Vicars of many larger churches, have met together this week at two conferences in Auckland and Christchurch to launch the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans NZ (FCANZ). FCANZ is a local expression of the Gafcon movement, and a message of support was read out at the conferences from Most Rev Dr Eliud Wabukala, Chair of the Gafcon Primates.
Video greetings were also received from Most Rev Foley Beach (Primate of ACNA) and the Rt Rev Richard Condie (Bishop of Tasmania and Chair of FCA Australia).
Rev Canon Vaughan Roberts (St Ebbe’s, Oxford) gave 4 talks on True Gospel, True Sex, True Love and True Unity, and was joined by Rev Canon David Short (Vancouver), Dr Peter Adam (Melbourne), Rev. Dr. Sarah Harris (Auckland) and others.
The formation of FCANZ has been in response to the passing of Motion 30 in 2014 and the subsequent release of the ‘A Way Forward’ Report, due to be presented to the General Synod of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia next month. The report proposes the blessing of same-sex civil marriages thereby rendering them as “rightly-ordered” relationships opening up the possibility for those in them to be accepted as candidates for ordination.
Rev Jay Behan, Chair of FCANZ, said ‘This week has been a hugely significant moment for orthodox Anglicans in New Zealand. FCANZ is committed to promoting faithfulness and providing fellowship, and orthodox Anglicans now know that through the FCANZ there is a place for all orthodox Anglicans in New Zealand, whether they are inside or outside the current Anglican structures.
We continue to pray that General Synod will pull back from making a decision which will tear the fabric of the communion, undermining the allegiance to General Synod for many Anglicans in New Zealand.’
– Media release from FCANZ, via Anglican Mainstream.
Bishop Charlie Masters’ Reflections on Canterbury – Two weeks after
Bishop Charlie Masters, of the Anglican Network in Canada, shares some further reflections on what happened at the Primates’ Meeting in Canterbury –
“Those of us who have been living through what’s known as the realignment of Anglicanism – which incidentally began June 15, 2002 in Vancouver – are familiar with the image of the iceberg. What you see above the waterline though it may be immense is actually less than 1/8 of the complete iceberg; 7/8 of the iceberg looms below the surface. It is a big mistake to assume that the visible ice is all there is.
As Archbishop Foley said in his statement what happened at these meetings was only a beginning. But it IS a beginning, for which we can thank God.
As to the issue of discipline, although one could argue that the scope was far too narrow and the discipline far too weak and that others, including the ACoC should have been included, nevertheless this small step of discipline WAS taken. What was done was a good beginning…”
– Read it all on the ANiC website – or here as a PDF file.
J. I. Packer’s rare Puritan library digitised and available online
In one of the sad attempts to deal with faithful, Bible-believing clergy, in 2008, the then Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster issued a ‘notice of presumption of abandonment of the exercise of ministry’ to Dr J.I. Packer, and others.
As well as being a much-loved and respected theologian and preacher, Dr. Packer is a foremost Puritan historian.
“The John Richard Allison Library in Vancouver—which hosts the joint collections of Regent College and Carey Theological College—has now made available their entire rare Puritan collection to be read online for free. What a gift of modern technology to help us recover these gifts from the church of the past.
There are currently 80 Puritan authors in their collection, many of whose works were digitized from J. I. Packer’s private library.”
– Justin Taylor at the Gospel Coalition has a list of the titles and links to the digitised versions.
Crisis in the Anglican Communion: recent history and potential outcomes
“GAFCON presents itself not as an alternative, breakaway Anglican Communion, but as the majority of the Anglican Communion, committed to renewing worldwide Anglicanism based on united confession of Christ and adherence to the Bible and the historic formularies, and necessarily rejecting revisionist doctrine and practice.
They are calling on Archbishop Justin to exercise leadership, and re-commit the Anglican Communion to a clear orthodox theology and practice as a basis for united mission in the world…”
– Anglican Mainstream’s Andrew Symes pens an overview of where the Anglican Communion stands, how we came to this point, and possible outcomes to next week’s Primates’ Meeting called by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Background reading:
- When to make a stand – Dr Mark Thompson (PDF, 2015)
- The Anglican Debacle: Roots and Patterns – Dr Mark Thompson (2008)
- The Limits of Fellowship – Phillip Jensen (2008)
- A Crisis in Koinonia – David Short, Rector of St. John’s Vancouver (2004)
– all from our Resources section.
We urge all our readers to pray for a Christ-honouring outcome to the Primates’ Meeting.
And from The Anglican Mission in England:
“AMiE would like to welcome the GAFCON Primates to England for the Primates’ meetings in Canterbury, 11-15 January, and assure them (and the other Primates) of our prayers for this significant meeting.
We are grateful to the GAFCON Primates for their support of our work in England as well as recognising the Anglican Mission in England ‘as an authentic expression of authentic Anglicanism both for those within and outside the Church of England‘ (Nairobi Commitment 5).
Along with others we are encouraging all AMiE supporters to pray for Archbishop Justin Welby, the Primates and for a God-glorifying outcome to their meetings.”
‘Are we stronger than He?’ by David Short
From our archives –
The landscape of Sydney has changed drastically since the ACL was formed over 100 years ago, however the core business of Christian ministry remains the same. We hope these articles ‘from the vault’ will encourage and strengthen your faith and ministry.
This was written by David Short, Moore College Graduate and Rector of St. John’s Vancouver.
This issues addressed by David, back in late 2004, continue to beset the Anglican Communion.
To date, leadership from Lambeth has fudged on these vitally important issues of Biblical authority. They are set to be discussed again at the Primates’ meeting this month (January, 2016).
Please join with us in praying that all Anglicans might renew their confidence and trust in God’s Word.
Are we stronger than He?
In the United States of America a jeweller rents wedding rings. You pay a weekly rental and after 12 months can keep the rings because “Statistically, people change their marriage partner before they change their Miele washing machine.”1
The current crisis of Anglicanism in Canada and the USA reflects a deep and disturbing change in Western culture. We are living through a profound cultural shift in the way men and women enter, leave and re-enter sexual relationships, and in the way we think about child-bearing, nurture and family structure. Cohabitation, for example, has virtually replaced engagement, and increasingly couples have children later, out of marriage, if at all.2
There are four elements in this shift.3
First, in the aftermath of sexual revolution and contraception, the purpose of sex has moved from procreation and relationship to relationship alone. You can see evidence of this shift in the changes to the marriage service from the Canadian Book of Common Prayer (BCP 1962) to the Book of Alternative Services (BAS 1985). The BCP states three purposes of marriage: “for the hallowing of the union betwixt man and woman; for the procreation of children… and for the mutual society, help and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, in both prosperity and adversity.”
The BAS asserts only two purposes namely: for the couples’ “mutual comfort and help, that they may know each other with delight and tenderness in acts of love [and that they may be blessed in the procreation, care, and upbringing of children].” Notice that the second purpose is bracketed in the service, and that procreation is demoted from being a discrete purpose of God for marriage in itself to being part of the couple’s future experience of blessing. It reflects our culture where children are increasingly optional, accidental and peripheral to sexual relations.
Second, sexual relationships have become radically privatised. If sex is primarily about relationship, it becomes increasingly isolated from any wider dimension of public service or extended family. Sex is part of my personal lifestyle choice. Part of this shift is the whole notion of ‘sexuality’—in itself an individualistic notion cut free from a larger moral ecology of family, society and church.4
Third, sex is for self-fulfilment. If marriage or sex now have no outward goal and if sex is focussed just on my relationship, then sex is for my personal development and fulfilment. Hence I have a moral obligation to divorce my present wife if she can no longer promote my growth and development. Sex is understood as the expression of my inner freedom and gratification.
Fourth, sex becomes my saviour. To be self-fulfilled I must be free to express ‘my sexuality.’ How can I be a fulfilled human being if I cannot express myself sexually? Western culture is implicitly anti-child and sex obsessed with sex portrayed as a deep necessity of life, even a reason for living. It has become a substitute for communion with the living God. The romantic myth preached by Hollywood exalts sex as a metaphysical absolute so that it has become the real sacrament, the one mediator between God and man. Atonement is no longer salvation from sin through Christ’s cross. Rather, it is through sexual release where I express the real me and thus a return to the Canaanite religion.
In response Christian churches have tended to two opposite reactions.
One is to capitulate to culture, to embrace the current worldview, to change fundamental historic teaching in the belief that the Spirit is leading the culture to a new place. The other is to turn inward and adopt a fortress mentality, to separate from the wicked world, to become isolationist and pure—even self-righteous. However, neither of these responses is faithful, helpful or biblical. We need to find a more excellent way.
Letter to a church in crisis
In the letter of 1 Corinthians the Apostle Paul writes to a church in deep crisis, a crisis which alarmingly echoes our own. Corinth had it all: they fought over leadership, some taught that they would not rise from the dead and they were deeply divided.
More relevant to the current crisis in the Anglican communion, there was open sexual immorality in the church (in a number of forms), not only tolerated but condoned, demonstrating that the Corinthians were puffed up with pride and self-confidence.
It is vital for us to hear what the Apostle wrote to this church in crisis. Parts of this letter are surprising, even shocking, particularly with regard to sexual immorality within the church. Paul raises extremely troubling and uncomfortable questions which Anglicans must face if we are to move forward in a way that exalts the sovereign grace of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. The individual texts of 1 Corinthians must be read within the context of the whole letter, otherwise the apostle’s meaning can be distorted and misapplied. For example in the first chapter Paul writes:
“I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.” (1 Cor. 1:10)
This text has been liberally used to implore orthodox Anglicans in Canada to fall into line and stop disturbing unity—as the Joker said to Batman, “Why can’t we all just get along?”
But not all forms of unity are biblical. There was an immense unity in the hostility expressed toward God at Babel and the nations rage against the Lord’s Messiah in Psalm 2 with exquisite harmony. There was a form of unity in Corinth which opposed God by ignoring His word and condoning sexual immorality. So in chapter eleven the Apostle writes:
“In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.” (1 Cor. 11:18-19)
Just as Jesus taught so Paul teaches that there are necessary divisions which are part of God’s sovereign work to show who are truly his. The only true unity is unity in the truth of the gospel and the proof of the genuineness of our faith is not ecclesiastical status, or office, or even doctrinal orthodoxy, but behaviour which reflects the gospel. Paul opposes divisions based on the personality of the leader or other trivial issues as well as any unity that seeks to paste over disobedience. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote: “Where Christ bids me maintain fellowship for the sake of love, I will maintain it. Where his truth enjoins me to dissolve a fellowship for love’s sake, there I will dissolve it, despite all the protests of my human love.”5
Some divisions the Apostle recognised as only inevitable but necessary. It depends on your view of the church and this is where the letter of 1 Corinthians is so important for us today. In chapter three Paul reveals the church’s true nature:
“Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred [holy], and you are that temple.” (1 Cor. 3:16-17)
The Corinthians’ behaviour showed their false understanding of the church. The Christian congregation of believers is the temple of God’s Spirit; the inner sanctuary where God dwells, not just the outer precincts. The Old Testament promise of God dwelling among his people is now fulfilled through the presence of the Holy Spirit with the people of Christ. God’s people in Corinth were the temple of God, the dwelling place of the living God in Corinth, just as Christian congregations function today in Bombay, Nairobi, London and Toronto.
The crucial factor for us is that the one central feature of that temple is that it is holy. Holiness is the fundamental distinguishing mark of God’s people. Since the God of the Bible is Holy, Holy, Holy, we as his people are meant to be holy; not in a ritual sense but morally and ethically,6 with lives set apart for his purposes.
If we’re puzzled and wonder “what on earth does that mean?” it is fascinating to trace the answer the Apostle gives. In chapters 5–11 Paul spells out what commentators call the New Testament holiness code.7 He begins:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? (1 Cor. 5:1-2)
The word used for ‘sexual immorality’ is porneia (from which we derive ‘pornography’), widely used in Hellenistic Judaism to cover all extra-marital sexual sins including homosexuality, adultery, incest, bestiality.8 It appears often in the New Testament lists of sins not because the early Christians were uptight about sex but because these sins were so prevalent and accepted in the culture of that time that early converts found it hard to break clear of their former lives.9 The specific form of sexual immorality being tolerated and condoned in Corinth was a form of incest, meaning that a member of the congregation was living in sexual sin.10
Yet what staggers the Apostle in verse 2 is not so much the open sin, but that the Corinthians were proud of it. When Paul writes “And you are proud!” he is not referring to arrogance and pride in general but to the fact that some in Corinth were affirming their right and authority to condone incest and promiscuity (chapter 6:12-20). It had become a cause célèbre. They were loud and proud and trying to give this behaviour a theological basis. One is tempted to say that they were seeking to affirm the integrity and sanctity of open sexual immorality.
The Apostle deals with this situation in a remarkable way. In chapters 5 and 6 he gives very little attention to the specific sins of immorality. What distresses him so deeply is the churches attitude to these open sexual practices. The allowing, condoning and celebrating of this sexual immorality, Paul felt, was a crisis of authority and of the gospel itself. The Corinthians’ failure to deal with the sexual immorality in their midst did not simply represent their low view of sin, what was at stake was the church itself. They were in danger of destroying the temple of God.
This issue is so urgent that the Apostle instructs the Corinthians on it no less than five times.
• In verse 2 he asks with astonishment:
“Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this?”
• In verse 7 he commands:
“Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast — as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.”
• In verse 9 referring to a previous letter addressing this issue he claims:
“I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people.”
• In verse 11 Paul commands:
“you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.”
• Perhaps most significant is verse 5:
“hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.”
Handing over to Satan means moving the immoral person back out into the world which is Satan’s sphere; something done by the whole community not just one or two.
Wonderfully, the purpose of these actions is ultimately redemptive: that “the sinful nature,” meaning “what is fleshly or carnal in him” might be destroyed so that he might be saved eternally. The discipline of dissociation is remedial. Paul is no separatist but clearly, for this man living in open sexual immorality, there is meant to be an actual separation from fellowship with God’s people, so that ultimately he will repent and rejoin that community.
The separation will do two things: it will protect this man from deceiving himself that he can pretend to call upon the name of the Lord while living in open, unrepentant sexual immorality; and it will protect the temple of God from being becoming contaminated. That is the point of verses 6-8:
Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast — as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth. (1 Cor. 5:6-8)
Left alone, open sin, unrepented of, and when not dealt with by the Christian community, acts like yeast (leaven) infecting the whole body of Christ. Christ has died, not just to win us a ticket to heaven but to create a new humanity where together we express the holy character of God.
The Apostle knows exactly how this sounds so to clear up any misunderstanding he goes on:
I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.” (1 Cor. 5:9-13)
Paul urges them forward in two directions: first to continue to immerse themselves in the life of their city, having friendships and associations with non-Christians, irrespective of their morality or lack of it; but secondly to disassociate themselves and not even celebrate the meal with those who call themselves Christian yet insist on their right to continue immoral pagan practices.
His principle is simple: free association outside the church, discipline within. The reason the Apostle gives for this is that God judges those who are outside the church but in Paul’s view the church is meant to judge those who are inside.
We seem to have these two exactly the wrong way round; we are judgmental about those outside the church and tolerate open sin inside the church. There is a great difference between, on the one hand struggling with sin, failing, asking God for forgiveness, beseeching him to grant us true repentance and his Holy Spirit, and on the other hand openly persisting and condoning what is against the will of God and pretending that we are forgiven. God pardons and absolves all who truly repent and unfeignedly believe his holy gospel.
In the New Testament there are two boundary lines for communion, two grounds for restricting fellowship: belief / doctrine, and behaviour / holiness. It is possible to have communion with other Christian believers with whom we honestly disagree, we confess our knowledge is partial and we need to grow in wisdom. However, it is not possible in New Testament terms to have communion and fellowship with those who do not believe the central tenets of the gospel or who believe a different gospel (read, for example, Galatians 1:6-9): this is the ‘belief / doctrine’ boundary line.
Here in 1 Corinthians the Apostle’s concern is with the ‘behaviour / holiness’ boundary to fellowship.
The principle is clear: it is not possible to have communion with those who call themselves Christian but who condone and practice sexual immorality.
Some have tried to argue that the blessing of same sex unions is not sufficient ground for breaking fellowship because it does not involve central or creedal doctrinal issues such as the incarnation, the trinity or the resurrection. The arguments are entirely unpersuasive and even disingenuous, ignoring the fact that those advocating same sex unions do so on the basis of a revisionist understanding of the doctrines of creation, the image of God, the nature of sin, salvation, redemption, the Christian life, the cross and the afterlife.11 However, putting aside whether the blessing of same sex unions does breach central, creedal doctrinal questions (which it does), it certainly violates the ‘behaviour / holiness’ boundary line for Christian fellowship. It is impossible to deny that what is at stake is the holiness of the church, indeed our very understanding of holiness.12
To the Apostle Paul, for a church to bless, condone or even allow open sexual immorality is a crisis for the church and for the gospel, which can only be healed by the church disassociating and separating itself from those promoting the yeast of unholiness. If Paul instructed the Corinthians to disassociate themselves from the immoral man what on earth would he say to a whole congregation that voted to affirm the integrity and sanctity of incest or prostitution? What in heaven’s name would he have written to a group of congregations that did the same?
The truth is that the Apostle goes on in 1 Corinthians to deal with homosexual intercourse (6:9-11) and with prostitution (6:12-20). In chapter 10 he reveals the links between sexual immorality and idolatry. Throughout these chapters Paul’s sustained concern is for the holiness of the fellowship of the temple of God. Both idolatry and immorality provoke the risen Lord to jealousy. “[T]his is the final warning that God’s ‘jealousy’ cannot be challenged with impunity. Those who would put God to the test by insisting on their right to what Paul insists is idolatry are in effect taking God on, challenging him by their actions, daring him to act”13 and he asks with chilling candour in 10:22 “are we stronger than he?”
By way of conclusion
There are three things to say by way of conclusion.
The first has to do with grace. Every word of 1 Corinthians is written to people who have failed morally and sexually14—as Paul says in chapter 6, “this is what some of you were.” Therefore there is no room for self-righteousness or superiority on the part of any of us. Woven through the very passages quoted in this article is the heartbreaking grace of God in Jesus Christ, wooing us from our sins, opening our eyes to the beauty of holiness, calling us to be the new creation.
“For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.” (1 Cor. 5:7b-8)
The gospel of Christ crucified offers grace to all who fail, it does not matter how far we may have fallen it is not too late for us to turn to Christ for his forgiving grace.
But grace without transformation is cheap grace…
That is what we mean by cheap grace, the grace which amounts to the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sins departs… Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves. Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession… Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.15
It is a cruel distortion of grace to say “we are all sinners therefore we dare not deal with open sin in the church.” To hide behind Paul’s word that “we are all sinners” and use them as an excuse for inaction or silence is nothing more than Corinthian nihilism. Gordon Fee writes: “those who concern themselves with grace without equal concern for behaviour have missed Paul’s own theological urgencies.”16
The second conclusion has to do with ministry. Gospel ministry is not just proclamation, evangelism, and pastoral care; it involves contending for the faith once for all delivered to the saints. If, at the end of the day, we have maintained Christian orthodoxy but failed to proclaim the gospel, we cannot claim to have pleased Christ nor fulfilled the New Testament ministry. In just the same way, if, at the end of the day we have proclaimed the gospel but failed to maintain Christian orthodoxy, we will have failed Christ.
Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is a brilliant example of contending for the faith. If the church is the temple of the living God, and if that temple is holy, then tolerance of what God calls unholy will provoke his jealousy. There is an astonishing campaign at present in Canada and the USA to portray the blessing of same sex unions as a little in-house issue for the church, that those opposing this constitutionalisation of sexual immorality are somehow missing the point and being side-tracked from gospel ministry. I received a letter this week from someone in the diocese of New Westminster who referred to the stance of biblically orthodox Anglicans as a “tedious and unnecessary conflict.” If that is the case then 1 Corinthians is a tedious and unnecessary book and the holiness of the people for whom Christ died is also tedious and unnecessary.
We cannot just be pragmatic about this. We cannot believe those who say: “Peace, peace, when there is no peace.” Christian ministry which pleases Christ and is faithful to the New Testament will involve both gospel proclamation as well as contending for the faith once for all delivered to the saints.
The third conclusion has to do with Jesus himself. We need to ask ourselves: how can we judge (as Paul commands) without being judgmental? How do we insist on holiness without being holier than thou?
I admit the issues are complex. Some denominations exercise swift and harsh discipline and are all too ready to exclude those who do not measure up without having any genuine conversation. As Anglicans we must maintain a godly generosity of spirit and we are rightly slow to discipline or exclude anyone.
But if, as a denomination, we are unwilling to consider discipline as the Apostle does, we cannot hope for a restored Anglicanism and we need to ask if we are really the temple of the living God.
If you are tempted to think that this position is just the opinion of a curmudgeonly Apostle, listen to the risen Jesus as he speaks to the church of Thyatira:
To the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of the Son of God, whose eyes are like blazing fire and whose feet are like burnished bronze. I know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first.
Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling…
Only hold on to what you have until I come. To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations — ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery’ — just as I have received authority from my Father. I will also give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. (Rev. 2:18-29).
This paper was delivered at The National Canadian Anglican Essentials Conference – “The Way Forward” – Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, August 31, 2004, and is reprinted with the author’s kind permission.
Footnotes
(Please note that some of the links mentioned below are no longer active.)
1 From Ash, C. Marriage: Sex in the Service of God (Leicester: IVP, 2003), 40.
2 The National Marriage Project, http://marriage.rutgers.edu.
3 I am following the superb and incisive analysis by Ash, 34-59 and 134-156.
4 Ash, 49 quoting Woodhead, L. ‘Sex in a wider context’, in Davies and Loughlin, Sex these Days, 98-120, (Sheffield: Academic Press, 1997), 99, and Bellah, R. Habits of the Heart (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1985), 112.
5 Bonhoeffer, D. Life Together (London: SCM, translated by John W. Doberstein, 1954) 22.
6 Fee, G. The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 149.
7 E.g. “Here we may discern a parallel with the ‘Holiness Code’ for the people of Israel found in the teachings of Moses in Leviticus (especially chapters 18-21).” Barnett, P. 1 Corinthians: Holiness and Hope of a Rescued People (Ross-shire: Christian Focus Publications, 2000) 77.
8 Fee, 200, Barnett, 78.
9 Fee, ibid.
10 The present tense indicates an ongoing sexual relationship, Barnett, 78.
11 See the excellent articles by J. I. Packer, Why I Walked, (Christianity Today: January 21, 2003, Vol. 47, No. 1 www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/001/6.46.html and P. F. M. Zahl, Last Signal to the Carpathia, (an address delivered at the Episcopal Church Foundation Fellows Forum, “Reconstructing Anglican Comprehensiveness,” 5-6 February 2004, Cathedral Church of the Advent, Birmingham, Alabama www.adventbirmingham.org/articles.asp?ID=1625) where Zahl demonstrates that blessing same sex unions stands opposed to classic Christian doctrine because it undermines the anthropology of the gospel, eviscerates Christian soteriology, Christology and the historic understanding of the trinity, confuses creation with redemption and is therefore implicitly Pelagian and explicitly Arminian.
12 See E. M. Humphries, Holy is as Holy Does, June 2004, (www.anglican.tk/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=593).
13 Fee, 474.
14 The second chapter of Ash’s book is titled ‘Prejudice and Grace,’ and he finishes with three points: that Christian sexual ethics is addressed to moral failures, that the gospel offers grace to moral failures and that the Spirit of God works in us, who are moral failures to change us. Ash, 24-33.
15 Bonhoeffer, D. The Cost of Discipleship (London: SCM, 1948, translated by Kaiser Verlag) 3-4.
Or as the Apostle Paul himself wrote in Titus 2, “For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men, training us to renounce irreligion and worldly passions, and to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world, awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.”
16 Fee, 248.
Published in ACL News, January–February 2005.
Available in PDF format.
Photo at top of page: David Short and Dr. J I Packer at St. John’s Vancouver in 2011.
70 years ago today: The conversion of J. I. Packer
“On Sunday, October 22, 1944—seventy years ago today—it is doubtful that anyone noticed a soft-spoken, lanky, and decidedly bookish first-year university student leaving his dormitory room at Corpus Christi College and heading across Oxford for an evening Christian Union service at a local Anglican church.
18-year-old Jim Packer had arrived at Oxford University less than three weeks prior, a single suitcase in hand, traveling east by train from Gloucester using a free ticket available to family members of Great Western Railway employees…”
– Justin Taylor fittingly marks the anniversary.
(Photo: Dr. Packer, right, with David Short, in Vancouver three years ago.)
Mike Baird elected Premier of New South Wales
“Committed Christian and father of three, Liberal MP Mike Baird has been elected Premier of New South Wales.”
– Story from Eternity Newspaper.
and Miranda Devine at The Telegraph gives some background –
“[Mike Baird] became involved in Anglican church fellowship, where he met his wife, Kerryn, whom he married at age 21. …
His investment banking career was flourishing at Deutsche Bank when he began to wonder: ‘Is that all there is? Should I be just about accumulating money?’ So in 1994 he told Kerryn he wanted to go to Bible college and within a year they were in Vancouver at Regent College…”
(Photo: Parliament of NSW.)
Piper: World Vision USA’s move trivialises Perdition and the Cross
John Piper looks to the godly example of Jim Packer when he responds to Christianity Today’s report that “World Vision’s American branch will no longer require its more than 1,100 employees to restrict their sexual activity to marriage between one man and one woman.”
Piper: “This is a tragic development for the cause of Christ, because it trivializes perdition — and therefore, the cross — and because it sets a trajectory for the demise of true compassion for the poor.
When J.I. Packer walked out of the 2002 synod of the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster, he was protesting its decision to ‘bless same-sex unions.’ His rationale is relevant for the developments at World Vision…”
– Read it all at Desiring God.
Related:
Pointing to Disaster — The Flawed Moral Vision of World Vision – Albert Mohler.
On World Vision and the Gospel – Russell Moore.
Franklin Graham Statement on World Vision – Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. “My dear friend, Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision and Samaritan’s Purse, would be heartbroken. He was an evangelist who believed in the inspired Word of God.”
The Road Less Traveled: The Faithfulness of J.I. Packer vs. the Capitulation of World Vision – Justin Taylor.
The Hole In Their Bible – Todd Pruitt. “Stearns says that World Vision is united around the Apostle’s Creed. But what profit is there in affirming belief in God while denying that which He has made so clear?”
And from the files: Are we stronger than He? – by David Short, published in ACL News, January 2005 (PDF file).
Photo: Canon David Short and Canon Dr J I Packer at St. John’s Vancouver – they both left the Anglican Church of Canada because of that denomination’s departure from obedience to the Scriptures.
‘Bishop’s consecration: The power of sacred objects’
“The Anglican diocese of New Westminster… will install its new bishop at 1 p.m. Saturday in an elaborate centuries-old ceremony set in a contemporary West Coast urban culture. …”
– The Vancouver Sun previews this weekend’s consecration of Melissa Skelton.
Taking God Seriously
Here’s a challenging video clip from Dr J I Packer on Taking God Seriously.
It’s a subtle promotion for the book of the same name – the video was published almost a year after the book.
Runs for 1:52 at Vimeo. Well worth passing on the link.
About the book, Carl Trueman writes:
“Like many people, I first discovered what it meant ‘to take God seriously’ through reading J. I. Packer’s books. It is thus an honour and a delight to be asked to write a commendation for his latest work, a basic catechetical plea for sober, modest, thoughtful and orthodox theology.
In a church world dominated by Barnum and Bailey circus antics and the brash triviality borrowed from the world around in the name of ‘engagement,’ Dr. Packer remains a truly engaging and gentlemanly advocate for those old paths which are ever fresh.”
Related: Dr Packer’s most recent sermon preached at St. John’s Vancouver, 5th January 2014 – on John 4:1-45.
Ninth Bishop of New Westminster elected
Canon Melissa Skelton has been elected the Ninth Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster.
She is currently the Rector of an “urban, progressive Anglo-Catholic parish” in Seattle in the Episcopal Church of the USA. Earlier, she served as Vice President for Administration at the General Theological Seminary in New York.
Biographical info here. CV here (PDF). St. Paul’s Seattle.
Reaching a lost city for Christ
Principal of Moore Theological College, Dr. Mark Thompson, delivered this address at the ACL Synod Dinner on October 14.
In his talk he gave three compelling reasons why we must never give in to the pressure to move evangelism down the list.
“At last count (2011 Census) the population of Sydney was 4.3 million. Even if you took out all the regular churchgoers — Protestant and Catholic — there would still be more than 4 million people who are lost. At the end of the Book of Jonah God reminded the prophet of the mass of lost people in the city — ‘more than 120,000 persons who do not know their right hand from their left’ (Jon. 4.11). Imagine what he’d say about a population more than 33 times the size!”
Read the full text below, or download the PDF file. … Read more
Can the new St. John’s Shaughnessy really tell you anything about God?
From their website –
“St. John’s Shaughnessy is a small but flourishing congregation, living our calling as Christians by faithfully walking the Anglican path. Our road is less travelled.
We do not claim absolute knowledge of the Divine. We really welcome everyone and are enriched by the dynamic tension of differing beliefs. We embrace doubt. Pray hopefully. And celebrate diversity.”
This is the new Diocese of New Westminister congregation using the building vacated by St. John’s Vancouver. (h/t Anglican Essentials Canada blog.)
What we believe
The message at the heart of Christianity is really quite simple…