In the 1970s in the UK, Christians seeking and experiencing what they called ‘the gifts of the Spirit’ caused controversy, consternation and in many cases division amongst evangelical Christians and Churches. In the end fresh wine needed fresh wineskins. But in 1977 the British Evangelical Council (renamed Affinity in 2004) held a study conference to examine the issue and produced a series of papers to help pastors work their way through the issues. Unsurprisingly there were as many differences at the end of the conference as there had been at the start but they did seek to articulate what they saw as common ground.

Writing in the introduction to the paper the Rev Hywel Jones made a number of revealing statements. Firstly it is clear that the BEC had invited contributions from both sides of the issue and brought them together, which is a good place to start. The Rev Jones then commends them for the ‘quality of the fellowship enjoyed, the frankness of the discussions…the mutual respect and trust’ that they enjoyed that enabled them to cooperate across their differences. This work of seeking constructive dialogue with a broad range of discussion partners remains a crucial task in an age where we are more easily siloed away from each other and more easily pitted against each other than ever before.

Jones then laid out two conditions for discussion and 4 areas of agreement across their differences. The conditions were:

1. A belief in the full authority of Holy Scripture, and its supreme relevance to the subject to be discussed both as guide and standard.
2. A rejection of that type of Christianity which is made to consist in experiences without adequate reference to the written Word of God.

This is interesting to me because I still meet cessationist Christians who accuse charismatics of playing fast and loose with the Bible but here in 1977 were charismatic leaders quite prepared to disavow of experience-led and Scripture-lite Christianity.

The differences remained substantial: is Baptism of the Spirit an essential part of regeneration-conversion; is a subsequent experience of the outpouring of the Spirit promised to every believer to empower for service; is this to be evidenced by speaking in tongues?. But they managed to agree on 4 points.

1. That Pentecost is the public inauguration of the New Covenant, instituted in Christ’s blood and as such is an unrepeatable event;
2. That every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is indwelt by the Holy Spirit;
3. That all each Christian needs is stored up for him in Jesus Christ, and can only be supplied to him by the Holy Spirit.
4. Those who believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as an experience distinct from conversion, also affirm the possibility and necessity of subsequent fillings. Those who do not so believe do, however, believe in the necessity of movings and outpourings of the Spirit in the life of the believer and the church. A large measure of disagreement on this point could therefore be the consequence of the terminology used.

That last one is fascinating. It stakes out a position that denies the necessity of the baptism of the Spirit but affirms the necessity of ‘movings and outpourings of the Spirit’. It would have been fascinating to know what they thought happened in the latter that was absent or different from in the former. The introduction concluded by saying, “What assumed larger importance in our minds was, however, the urgent need of seeking a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit…”

What was true in 1977 remains true in 2024.