I’ve recently finished Andy Johnston’s highly readable biography of Terry Virgo. It is a fascinating and detailed account of the life of one of the senior leaders within Evangelicalism, indeed I would argue specifically Reformed Evangelicalism. It specifically highlights how someone who might have been seen in his early days of ministry as a rebel or disrupter has come to be loved and respected not just within his own movement but seen as a father figure to many beyond New Frontiers. In that respect the commendations at the start including from the FIEC’s John Stevens are illuminating.
The book is well written and reflects Johnstons’ love for the subject, indeed we might identify three subjects here, an aspect of Christian theology and missiology, a particular moment in church history and Terry Virgo the person. It is a challenging read. How could you not be challenged as you read not just about a man, but a family’s utter dependence on Jesus, love for the church and radical commitment to mission.
It’s not a perfect book of course, anymore than Virgo is perfect. If I were to identify a couple of areas for challenge, they would be as follows. First, I’m not sure that Andy does quite give us the warts and all suggested in the blurb. There might be points where Virgo’s words and actions could be subject to more scrutiny. As it happens, I don’t think that makes it a weak book. My issue is more with the blurb than the book itself. There’s nothing wrong with an affectionate retelling of the story. And perhaps Terry’s failings are his own story to tell.
Secondly, whilst we can have a high confidence in the detailed recording of events from Terry’s perspective, I wonder if there may be a few points where to quote the late Queen, “recollections may vary.” To give two examples, one minor the other more significant: first Johnston talks in terms of Virgo going forward at All Souls under John Stott’s ministry.[1] Stott was notably not in favour of altar calls. This does not undermine the historicity of the event itself but the language may not be quite right for the context.
Secondly, Johnston tells us that Martyn Lloyd Jones accepted an invitation speak at Terry’s events at Brighton Town Hall but later changed his mind. It’s suggested that this was because of pressure put on Lloyd Jones by other less favourable conservative evangelicals.[2] The problem here is that, again, that doesn’t sound quite like what we know of “The Dr” who was not inclined to be pushed around by others. I also wonder if there might be other explanations that better fit. We know that at this stage Lloyd Jones had stepped back from leadership at The Chapel and had suffered serious ill health and was increasingly frail. This might have led to caution about which speaking engagements he prioritised. It may have also given gate keepers around him more power. More significantly I think we have to consider the evidence of Eveson’s recent book on Lloyd Jones and the Holy Spirt. It seems that a good lesson from there is on the dangers of wither cessationists or charismatics attempting to own or pigeon-hole DMLJ. Further, remember that whilst he was positive about an openness to the work of the Spirit in assurance, he also warned of the excesses. One can understand why he might have distinguished friendly advice to someone in a slightly different camp to speaking not at a local church but at an event that could have been seen to endorse a movement. However, we don’t know enough to draw firm conclusions.
I think what we see here is something about the book’s methodology and setting. It sits somewhere between memoir and critical biography. That’s a strength because what it means is that Johnston allows us to hear Terry in his own voice even as he reports as a third person.
There are a couple of things that stood out to me. First, the relationship to Bryn Jones was closer than I realised although he was clear in his rejection of the more authoritarian nature of Bryn’s approach. Secondly, there is a strong sense that the origins of the movement lie in a very close knit and fairly small group.
I wonder if one of the helpful things Andy does is to set out the story without seeking to intrude with his own assessment. This creates a useful tool for self-reflection within the movement/New Frontiers Family as it moves to third or even fourth generation. A few questions to consider might include:
- What unintentional impact might relationships have on a culture. In the Bryn Jones example was there a complete isolation and sealing off of the unhelpful aspects of that part of Restorationism’s influence from the whole of the New Frontiers movement?
- What are the benefits of a close knit foundation and what are the drawback? To what extent is the movement able to draw and graft others in to the movement from outside?
- To what extent is the original vision still live and necessary? Does the movement still have a mission of reform and renewal for the whole church or has it now evolved into a network of churches/loose denomination in the more traditional sense?
I highlight these questions as someone from within New Frontiers and I believe that this is the best place for them to be discussed rather than from critics from the outside, though any movement benefits from external, friendly critics.
Whilst I have highlighted challenges and questions, I believe a bigger theme to take away should be encouragement. We are encouraged by how this story points to God’s faithfulness as he acts for his own glory and pleasure.
[1] Johnston, Building God’s House, 38.
[2] Johnston, Building God’s House, 80-81.
