My most recent article for Evangelicals Now asks the newly launched The Gospel Coalition-UK some questions. I write as a critical friend of The Gospel Coalition and of the individuals/groups involved in TGC-UK. You can read the EN version here and you will also see that Graham Nicholls has kindly provided a response.
Reports suggest that plans for a TGC-UK are moving forward at pace. I’ve appreciated much about The Gospel Coalition including the content provided online and the Themelios journal, I owe much to its founders Don Carson and Tim Keller in terms of my pastoral and theological formation. However, I have reservations and question marks about the new venture. Now, in one respect raising concerns now may be a little late. After all, the ship has pretty much already sailed and is unlikely to change course let alone turn back to port. Indeed, as I observed when plans were first muted, if people want to put together a UK version of TGC, they are free to do so. If Affinity wishes to rebrand and affiliate to an international body, they are also free to do so, although it, at this stage, seems that this won’t be the outcome. At the same time, I hope that it will be helpful, not just for those who disagree but for those onboard and driving the new venture to understand where some of the concerns are (not just my own but those I’ve heard from others). It may help for better working together in the future. So as a critical friend, here are my concerns.
Will TGC-UK listen to the challenge from critical friends?
Of course, the onus on us is to be proper friends and not just critical. I hope that TGC-UK will pay attention to the concerns of those who weren’t convinced about the proposal or had reservations. I think that we, as Evangelicals struggle with hearing challenge. We don’t like to say “no” and we don’t want to hear “no.” Yet the body benefits most when there is robust challenge. We all do well to pay attention to critical friends, especially those friends who may not be signed up to our specific project but do care about us.
How will they address concerns about the brand?
Whilst The Gospel Coalition has been a blessing to many over the years, it has not been without its challenges or controversies. The setting up of the Keller Center and Carson centre raised two questions. First, is there wisdom in setting up institutions named after (at the time) living individuals? Second, were those centers going to create space and opportunity for up and coming, little known teachers and apologists or would we simply see the promotion of all ready recognised names? I think that it is right to ask the same question about TGC-UK. Will it help to introduce new, people and fresh ideas or will it be another platform for those already known in the UK?
Secondly, at times TGC has been hit by scandal and controversy. It wasn’t long after the Keller Center was set up that controversy broke out concerning its promotion of one of its fellows’ books before a hasty retraction. Josh Butler’s book “Beautiful Union” was intended to introduce a theology of sex but unfortunately came across as crass. The book was withdrawn and Bulter in effect cancelled.
TGC also acted speedily to withdraw all material associated with Sam Allberry following his recent dismissal from his church for inappropriate conduct. This was in stark contrast to the approach of other Christian organisations including Living Out, that expressed their sadness, were clear on the seriousness of sin but also did not want to cast implicit judgement not just on Allberry but on the pastoral position held, not only by him but by other Christian leaders. Will TGC-UK learn from these examples and have appropriate processes that balance editorial wisdom with pastoral care for those involved?
How will they avoid duplication in a crowded space?
The Gospel Coalition-UK will aim to bring together Reformed Complementarians. I think it could have been legitimately argued that when the original US version was founded and perhaps too when variants were set up in other countries that those nations did not particularly benefit from anything significant seeking to bring together the Reformed community. Here in the UK though, we have a number of networks and umbrella groups that bring together primarily reformed, complementarian Evangelicals. These include networks and denominations such as the FIEC and Grace Baptists. Then there are regional Gospel Partnerships. Finally, there are umbrella groups such as Affinity. Do we need another grouping? Will this compete for funding?
Another factor will be the impact on Christian publication and writing in the UK. Perhaps I have an interest to declare here but it is reasonable to ask whether or not a new mega-blog will be a help or hindrance to those who blog independently. We also might want to watch to see the impact of the new resource base on existing resource platforms such as Evangelicals Now.
Another kind of Brexit?
UK contributions have been significant in relation to TGC with various British authors writing for the website and participating in the Keller and Carson centres. Then there’s where the future of Themelios lies. This theological journal was original a product of IFES and then came under the umbrella of UCCF. Historically it has had a strong British Evangelical flavour even though it was taken under the wing of TGC in 2008. Will this continue if British theologians become more focused on the UK entity?
What about the gaps?
One thing that the new organisation will need to consider is where the emphasis in its identity lies. Is its emphasis on REFORMED complementarianism or Reformed COMPLEMENTARIANISM? In other words, is the priority to bring together and develop Reformed thinking or complementarian identity.
This leads us to consider the ignored gap. If the complementarian space is crowded and broader evangelicalism is at least provided for by Evangelical Alliance, then where is the much needed space for reformed complementarians and reformed egalitarians to talk. Sometimes the impression can be given that if you are reformed then you have to be complementarian. However, reformed egalitarians exist as well. Those two perspectives may well find that they have much more in common than they realise. First, there is plenty agreement on Reformed theology. Secondly, there may be more agreement between soft-complementarians and soft-egalitarians than is always recognised.
Conclusion
I am pleased to hear that those involved in the project wish to encourage a generosity of spirit towards those who either choose not to, or, are unable to sign up to TGC-UK. If they wish to achieve this, then they will benefit from carefully considering the concerns that are being raised.
Faithroots 