Introduction: Evangelicalism
Derek Poole

Comment: Ourselves Alone
Alwyn Thomson

From the Director
David Porter

A World of Difference
Alwyn Thomson

What is an Evangelical Catholic?
Paddy Monaghan

Decommissioning the Heart
David Bruce

Evangelical Catholics
T. Gordon Hills

Sorting out the Family
David Montgomery

Do They Know Us by Our Love?
John Ortberg

Loyalist Speak
Robert Dunlop

Book Reviews
Alwyn Thomson

< Past Issues Archive

A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE
The Evangelicals of ECONI

Evangelicalism is a family. Like all families, there are ties that bind and there are conflicts that divide. Our diversity is often a consequence and reflection of those conflicts.

ECONI, as part of this family, has been drawn into disputes not of its own making. In particular, some Protestants have argued that ECONI is not truly evangelical while some Catholics have called for ECONI to make common cause with them on the basis that they too are evangelicals. While in some senses these debates can seem a distraction from our work, in another sense they go to the heart of the matter of who we are, what role we should play in our society and how we conduct ourselves in relation to one another.

Definitions
Evangelicals are not a single group with an agreed creed or unifying structure. Any attempt to understand the nature of evangelicalism has to recognise both the coherence that enables very diverse groups of people to be so identified and the flexibility that enables evangelicalism to accommodate these very diverse groups.

Second, defining evangelicalism is no easy task, as the multiplicity of attempts to do so indicate. Writers on evangelicalism have used a number of metaphors - it is a kaleidoscope, a Rubik's cube, a twelve ring circus.

Attempts to define a core that holds these varieties of evangelicalism together vary greatly. Perhaps the most concise attempt to define the core of evangelicalism is that of John Stott: evangelicals are "Bible people and gospel people."

George Marsden prefers a fuller definition: Evangelicals are "Christians who typically emphasise 1) the Reformation doctrine of the final authority of Scripture; 2) the real, historical character of God's saving work recorded in Scripture; 3) eternal salvation only through personal trust in Christ; 4) the importance of evangelism and missions; and 5) the importance of a spiritually transformed life."

David Bebbington suggests four key marks - biblicism, crucicentrism, conversionism and activism.

Most of these offer a theological definition. However, evangelicalism can also be interpreted as "a dynamic movement, with common heritages, common tendencies, an identity, and an organic character." (Marsden)

Thus "'evangelical' denotes a style as much as a set of beliefs. Groups as disparate as Black Baptists and Dutch Reformed Churches, Mennonites, pentecostals, Catholic charismatics and Southern Baptists all come under the evangelical umbrella and demonstrate just how diverse the movement really is." (Institute for the study of American Evangelicalism)

While these and other writers offer differing definitions of evangelicalism, there are a number of discernible common themes.

The supreme authority of Scripture
Evangelicals believe that the Bible is the Word of God - breathed into existence by the Holy Spirit. It is truthful and authoritative. Scripture is interpreted and proclaimed by the Christian community - the Church of Jesus Christ - through the Holy Spirit, but the community itself stands under the authority of Scripture.

The majesty of Jesus Christ as incarnate God and as saviour through his work on the cross
Evangelicals affirm that God came to us in human form in the person of Jesus. Evangelicals emphasise the significance of Jesus' death on the cross as an atonement for sin. Through his death and resurrection a fallen and condemned humanity can be reconciled to God. Evangelicals emphasise the need for a personal response to Jesus.

The lordship of the Holy Spirit in creating and sustaining Christian life
Evangelicals stress the sovereignty of God in making men and women Christians. The Spirit sustains that new life and brings about spiritual growth. In recent decades the growth of the charismatic movement - while sometimes controversial - has given new emphasis to the role of the Spirit in the Christian life and in the Church. This movement is widespread within, but not limited to, evangelicalism.

The need for a personal response of faith
At the heart of evangelical spirituality lies the concept of a personally appropriated faith. While evangelicalism has often focused upon a dramatic conversion experience, it is widely recognised that this need not be the experience of everyone. "It is present convertedness rather than the memory of experience of past conversion which is of fundamental importance." (Alister McGrath)

The necessity of evangelism
Evangelicals believe that all human beings are separated from God by their sin. Yet God has made it possible for men and women to be forgiven. God's desire is that the gospel should be made known to all. The task of achieving this is given to his people. Consequently, evangelicals have often been at the forefront of evangelism, both in their own communities and overseas.

The importance of the Christian community for Christian life and growth
While evangelicalism lacks a specific doctrine of church order, it is not lacking in the conception of the Church as the body of Christ. This is seen in the emphasis on the practice of Church life - Christian people meeting together to worship God and proclaim his truth - and in the ability of evangelicals to work and worship across denominational barriers.

These fundamental convictions serve both to unite evangelicals around a common identity and to distinguish them from other groups.

Protestants
ECONI grew out of and reflects the evangelical tradition within the broad Protestant community. Its Deed of Trust incorporates the Evangelical Alliance's Basis of Faith. Its evangelical convictions and its place within the wider evangelical community in Northern Ireland have been set out in the PATHWAYS booklet, The Fractured Family. Members of its Steering Group are active in evangelical churches and in a wide range of evangelical parachurch groups.

Nonetheless, it is clear that some people we would recognise as evangelicals do not recognise us as evangelicals - or, at best, see us as evangelicals who have strayed. The ongoing criticism of ECONI from a number of groups, including Take Heed Ministries, the Independent Orange Order, the Evangelical Protestant Society and the Elim and Free Presbyterian churches, makes this clear.

The existence of these groups raises two issues: Why is there this hostility? How should ECONI respond?

True Evangelicals or New Evangelicals?
Recent issues of Take Heed Ministries' magazine - News from the Front, deal with ecumenism, Roman Catholicism and the charismatic movement. Within these broad categories the author criticises advocates of the Toronto blessing in the USA, UK and Northern Ireland and is particularly scathing in his criticisms of 'ecumenical evangelicals' - Charles Colson, Jim Packer, the Promise Keeper movement, Billy Graham, American Christian singer Michael Card, Steve Chalke and Oasis Trust, Gerald Coates and Pioneer Ministries as well as humbler bodies such as ECONI, Fisherwick Presbyterian Church and Bread magazine.

Their point is simple: evangelicalism is confessional. Where that confession is denied the proper evangelical response is separation. Any movement which does not share the evangelical confession - Roman Catholicism, liberal Protestantism, the charismatic movement - is to be avoided, exposed and condemned. Those who profess to be evangelical but do not practise separatism undermine their profession. Therefore, they too must be avoided, exposed and condemned.

Hostility to ECONI is only part of a wider hostility to perceived compromise and declension among professing evangelicals. Critics of ECONI are part of a wider debate over the identity, nature and future of evangelicalism.

A host of questions arise: Has there ever been an agreed understanding of evangelicalism? Is modern evangelicalism more fragmented than in the past? If so, what has caused this fragmentation? How should we understand evangelicalism - a movement, an ideology, a theology? Is it an historical phenomenon, a social one, a theological one, or some combination? Which approach should take priority? Is 'evangelical' synonymous with 'Christian'? If not, what does it mean? Is it just one way of being Christian? How should evangelicals relate to other Christians who are not evangelicals? Is the future for evangelicalism one of separate development of different evangelical traditions? Will we have to define the kind of evangelicals we are? Will we have to abandon these words altogether?

Fraying? Fragmented? Frustrated?
While evangelicals have always had their differences on important issues - the nature of ministry and the Church; the nature of the sacraments; approaches to worship and evangelism; the extent and nature of the atonement; the meaning of sanctification - it could still be argued that evangelicalism is more fragmented than in previous times. Many explanations have been proffered. However, I want to focus on that suggested by David Wells in his essay. "On Being Evangelical: Some Theological Differences and Similarities".

Wells argues that evangelicalism has gone through three phases in the post-war years - confessional, transconfessional and charismatic.

Confessionalism, emerging after the war, defined evangelical belief in terms of biblical doctrine. "This kind of evangelicalism found its unity in commonly owned, commonly confessed truth..."

Transconfessionalism emerged in the 1970's. Outward success and growing diversity necessitated "a shift from confessional substance to simple, organizational fraternity...The ground of relatedness among evangelicals...has far less to do with living within the definitional parameters of what it means to be evangelical and far more with belonging somewhere within the entrepreneurial and organizational life of this righteous empire."

Wells understands the charismatic tradition, emerging in the 1960's, to include both pentecostalism and renewal movements. These, he suggests, "are forms of evangelicalism that are not primarily theologies." Instead, both arise centrally from a spiritual intuition about the presence of the Holy Spirit." The outcome is that biblical confession arises as an "adjunct to the experience of the Holy Spirit," an experience which also "provides the ground on which charismatics desire to meet others." Charismatic evangelicals have tried to re-establish links which had earlier been pursued by confessional evangelicals but had been allowed to wither by transconfessional evangelicals. However, whereas the confessional evangelical established the links on the basis of a shared confession, charismatic evangelicals did so on the basis of a shared spiritual experience.

Wells also argues that while the impulses that produced these developments may have predated the 1940's it is only in the post war world that they have taken shape. As a consequence he suggests that much of the work currently being done on earlier evangelicalism cannot help us in understanding "how the contemporary evangelical world is thinking about its own theological nature."

Don Carson broadly endorses Wells' argument and makes a significant contribution of his own. In essence he argues that evangelicalism has historically been a confessional movement. However, "especially in the evangelical world of the past three decades or so, there are growing components very largely disconnected from any theological definition. But it is far from clear to me that such diversity prevailed in any large-scale way earlier. The question, then, is whether we should struggle to preserve what is godly and disciplined by Scripture in the movement, and insist on attaching such elements to the 'evangelical' label, rather than resorting too quickly to sociological categories."

The end result of applying a sociological definition to evangelicalism is that what was central for past generations of evangelicals - theology - is marginalised. Consequently the history of evangelicalism is distorted. Further, contemporary evangelicalism loses its connection with historical evangelicalism and the term itself becomes almost as meaningless in our world as the term 'Christian'.

Conclusions
This debate within evangelicalism is not going to go away or be resolved. Given that local manifestations of the debate will continue, how should ECONI contribute to this debate and how should we relate to our critics?

First, we need to recognise the bigger picture and see the issues in dispute between us as part of a much wider debate within evangelicalism.

Second, we should be willing to accept that there may be no way around the differences between us. They will not convince us that theirs is the only authentic understanding of evangelicalism, nor will we convince them to the contrary.

Third, we must respect their evangelical identity. There is no historical or theological basis for arguing that they are not 'authentic' evangelicals. The argument that they are 'fundamentalists' and that 'fundamentalists' are not evangelicals is not credible no matter how many times it is made. It would be wrong to oppose their exclusivist understanding of evangelicalism with one of our own.

Fourth, we may have to accept that evangelicalism is in need of some redefinition. While there may be a shared confessional identity, the outworking of that identity may lead to division and disagreement among us. Perhaps we have to accept that in the future we will have to define ourselves by the kind of evangelicals we are, rather than defining ourselves simply as evangelicals.

Fifth, while evangelicalism may be broader than it once was or than some people believe it should be, it cannot be endlessly flexible without becoming meaningless. There must be borders if there is to be any sense of standing in a recognisable theological or historical tradition. It follows that in ECONI we must be sure of our biblical and theological basis and ensure that our thoughts, words and actions are securely grounded and justified on that biblical and theological basis.

Catholics
'Evangelical in the Strictest Sense'
The issue of relationships between 'evangelical Protestants' and those Catholics who identify themselves as evangelical is intimately connected to the wider debate within evangelicalism. Judgements on the credibility of a person's claim to be evangelical often turn on the question of their willingness to accept the legitimacy of a claim to be evangelical on the part of Catholics.

Moreover, as with the internal debate within evangelicalism, this debate has a much broader context. In fact, the debate is broader still since it is part of a debate about relationships between evangelicals and Catholicism generally. In this case, judgements on the credibility of a person's claim to be evangelical often turn on the question of their willingness to accept the legitimacy of Roman Catholicism and to make common cause with Catholics. The criticisms directed at Jim Packer and Chuck Colson for their part in preparing and endorsing the statement Evangelicals & Catholics Together is the best known example of this.

Once again it is important to keep this wider context in mind when thinking about our local situation. The following questions provide a framework for addressing this issue: Are 'evangelical Catholics' evangelical? How should we as 'evangelical Protestants' relate to evangelical Catholics' and, in particular, how should we in ECONI relate to Evangelical Catholic Initiative?

We are all Evangelicals Now?
It is generally accepted that the historical phenomenon of evangelicalism has its roots in the 18th century when a series of 'awakenings' took place among English speaking Protestants. While drawing on the traditions of English and New England puritanism, these awakenings "created a distinct set of new emphases in the Christian world."

Evangelicalism, understood in this historical sense, is a Protestant movement. Moreover, despite claims to the contrary, evangelicalism has always had an element of anti-Catholicism.

However, even if historically there is little justification for applying the term 'evangelical' to Catholics, might there not be theological justification for doing so?

'Evangelical Catholics' and 'Evangelicalism'
Evangelical Catholic Initiative (ECI) has been the most active group in Ireland promoting 'evangelical Catholicism'. Their leaflet What is an Evangelical Catholic? contains a series of affirmations and statements of belief and some background notes. While many of the affirmations have a clear evangelical ring to them, there is more to the leaflet than these affirmations.

An overall assessment of the material in the leaflet cannot be based solely on these affirmations. As well as asking what ECI is affirming we need to ask what ECI is denying. Evangelicalism by affirming certain convictions is denying others. Thus evangelicalism, understood theologically, has both positive and negative aspects. The authors of What is an Evangelical Catholic? highlight the positive affirmations but seem reluctant to deny beliefs incompatible with evangelical conviction.

To take one example, in its affirmation on Scripture, the leaflet reads: "Scripture in its entirety (both Old and New Testaments) is the inspired authoritative Word of God." However, a note to the series of affirmations states that "points above are part of the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church" and makes reference to the Dogmatic Constitution On Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) of Vatican II. While it is true that Dei Verbum does not say less that this, it is also true that it says a great deal more. Specifically, Dei Verbum affirms the role of Tradition in relation to Scripture and places both within the framework of the Magisterium of the Church.

This same difficulty arises in relation to the other affirmations, all of which are claimed to be part of the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

This raises a second issue, What do these affirmations mean? If they can be accommodated to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church can they mean the same to 'evangelical Catholics' as they do to 'evangelical Protestants'? Even if the language is similar we need to ask if the content has changed and, if so, has it gone beyond the point at which we can still recognise it as the same language. ECI, while making these affirmations, continues to distribute materials from other sources that affirm Roman Catholic doctrines incompatible with evangelical belief. Thus the article Catholic Faith and Fundamentalism by Raymond Brown, which ECI describes as "presenting the Biblical understanding of ten Catholic doctrines," reaffirms a host of Catholic doctrines that evangelicals would not accept.

It is not that 'evangelical Catholics' are deliberately setting out to subvert evangelicalism. It is rather that the theology of 'evangelical Catholics' is incoherent, eclectic and confused - incoherent in that it tries to affirm too many things without recognising that some are mutually exclusive (i.e. the evangelical view of Scripture and the Catholic Church's view of Scripture); eclectic in that it draws from official Catholic teaching, evangelical tradition and renewal / charismatic traditions; confused in that most evangelical Catholics and the groups that represent evangelical Catholics have not yet managed to put all of these theological traditions together.

This brings us back to David Wells' analysis of post-war evangelicalism noted above. Most Catholics who identify themselves as evangelicals have come to faith through renewal and charismatic movements. If Wells is right, shared spiritual experience is a more important ground of association than shared confession.

If the historical and confessional considerations outlined above are the basis for an answer to the question, Are 'evangelical Catholics' evangelical? the answer has to be no. On the other hand, if we were to decide that we are evangelical on the basis of a shared experience of new birth in Christ we might want to answer 'YES'. However, in doing so we might also undermine the legitimacy of our own understanding of evangelicalism.

The difference between groups like Take Heed Ministries on the one hand and Evangelical Catholic Initiative on the other, is that Take Heed Ministries comes from a recognisably evangelical tradition and has at its core a recognisably evangelical confession - both positively and negatively. Our disagreement concerns the outworking of those beliefs and that tradition in our contemporary situation. ECI does not come from a recognisably evangelical tradition, nor is its confessional core evangelical. Rather, evangelical beliefs -together with other beliefs have played an important role for 'evangelical Catholics' as they have reflected on their spiritual experience.

While we may sometimes feel more comfortable with the ethos and spirit of 'evangelical Catholics' than with that of some of our fellow evangelicals

However, throughout its history and in all its changes there has always been a fundamental theological, confessional core. To abandon that confessional core is to reduce the concept of evangelicalism to meaninglessness. However, if we believe that to be evangelical is to hold to this confessional core then we have to say that 'evangelical Catholics' are not evangelicals.

Conclusions
How then should we relate to those who wish to be known as 'evangelical Catholics'?

First, once more we need to recognise and bear in mind the bigger picture.

Second, we must make clear that we do not consider 'evangelical' and 'Christian' to be synonymous. God has his people beyond the bounds of evangelicalism. This is true, not only of believers within Catholicism, but also of those within Orthodoxy and many of the more confessional Protestant churches. It is also worth noting that many Southern Baptists would not consider themselves evangelical - evangelicalism being seen as a Northern phenomenon in the USA.

Third, we should make clear our concerns about the use of the term 'evangelical' by groups such as ECI. An honest debate on these matters is better in the long term for both groups than attempts to gloss over real and important differences. It follows from this and the previous point that questioning the claim to evangelical identity on the part of 'evangelical Catholics' is not tantamount to questioning the validity of their Christian faith.

Fourth, where possible we should enter into constructive debate with 'evangelical Catholics'. This debate might well have as its focus discussion of the nature of evangelicalism and the possibility of relationship, not on the basis of shared evangelical identity but on the basis of shared Christian faith. It might also focus on the possibility of 'evangelical Catholics' finding new ways of expressing their identity that do not rely on them being identified as part of the evangelical fold.

Fifth, where possible we should enter into constructive debate with our own evangelical constituency over the existence of groups like ECI. While making clear our own position regarding the claim to be evangelical, we also need to make very clear that we accept our fellow believers wherever they are found. Since many evangelicals assume that questioning the evangelical identity of 'evangelical Catholics' is to question their Christian identity we need to actively challenge this view.

Finally, we need to engage in an internal debate over the nature of our relationship with 'evangelical Catholics' in practical terms. If we accept them as believers then what limits should we set on the practical outworking of that acceptance?

Alwyn Thomson is a Research Officer with ECONI and is currently involved in the 'God, Land & Nation' project. He is author of a number of ECONI publications and Editor of our most recent book, 'Faith in Ulster'. This paper was first presented as a discussion document for ECONI's Steering Group.

Suggested Reading
The standard history of Evangelicalism in Britain is David Bebbington's, Evangelicals in Modern Britain (London 1989). For the United States the many works of George Marsden should be a good starting point. His Fundamentalism and American Culture (New York, 1980) is the standard work. Also useful is the collection of essays edited by Marsden, Evangelicalism and Modern American (Grand Rapids, 1984). For Ireland the key work is David Hempton and Myrtle Mill's Evangelical Protestantism in Ulster Society 1740-1890 (London, 1992)

Critical analysis of modern evangelicalism can be found in Mark Noll's The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Leicester, 1993) Alister McGrath, A Passion for Truth (Leicester, 1996) and two works by David Wells, No Place for Truth (Leicester, 1993) and God in the Wasteland (Leicester, 1994).

Two collections of essays are also useful. Noll, Bebbington and George Rawlyk have edited Evangelicalism (New York, 1994) which contains the piece by Wells mentioned above, and Rawlyk and Noll have edited Amazing Grace (Grand Rapids, 1993).

Of the many studies on evangelical attitudes to Roman Catholicism the essay by John Wolffe Catholicism and Evangelical Identity, contained in Noll, Bebbington and Rawlyk, is a good starting point.