Synopsis

The Christian Institute provides a fantastic resource but also has got a lot of heat over the years.

The Christian Institute gets a lot of heat. Wikipedia leads with LGBT when discussing them. This along with comments in social media pile on the more than veiled criticism. But 20 years since coming across them, I still find them to be a vital resource for Christians who take the Great Commission seriously, more than most who are outside the CI. This post asks: what does “make disciples of all nations” actually mean in a post-Christian UK? I look at CI’s work, the backlash, their excellent research and literature, and why the Christians who most need to hear what they have to say often don’t turn up. I add a note on AI, digital IDs and where I think CI might need to speak next.

Pink News

I first came across The Christian Institute about 20 years ago. Part of my community activism was trying, not always successfully, to engage winsomely with the LBGT community. That meant reading sources I didn’t agree with. Pink News (see here for their website) was one of them. At the time I thought its reporting was pretty fair, though less so these days. But even then it was clear from the comment sections that CI was a particular target.

Wikipedia

The normally fair Wikipedia (see here for their website) reflects that. Its entry includes the words: “While the CI has campaigned on issues including gambling, abortion and euthanasia, it is most notable for its campaigns against homosexuality and gay rights. The CI sought to retain Section 28 and a higher age of consent for gay and bisexual men, and opposed the Civil Partnership Act, the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and legislation allowing same-gender couples to adopt. It has opposed measures to prevent gay people being discriminated against in the provision of services and goods.”

Introducing the Christian Institute

Fair enough – CI does take public positions on marriage, sexuality and gender that many find unacceptable. But read that paragraph and you’d think that was all they did. Which is a shame, because it misses what CI actually says about itself. From their website (see here): “The Christian Institute exists for “the furtherance and promotion of the Christian religion in the United Kingdom and elsewhere” and “the advancement of education”. We are a nondenominational Christian charity with more than 60,000 supporters throughout the UK, including more than 5,000 churches. We are committed to upholding the truths of the Bible which we believe is inerrant and the supreme authority for all of life.”

That’s it. No spin. No conspiracy theories. No party politics. Opinion yes, but based on solid facts and the conviction that if Jesus said “make disciples of all nations… teaching them to obey everything I have commanded”, then that includes doing so in the public square.

The Great Commission

Here’s what the Commission actually means and where CI fits the bill. In Matthew 28:19 the ESV is closer to the Greek than the KJV. The command isn’t just “teach.” The verb is matheteusate – “make disciples.” You do that by going, by baptizing, by teaching. Teaching is essential, but it’s part of a bigger thing: forming people who obey Jesus in every area of life. That’s why work like CI’s matters. It’s not a substitute for evangelism. It’s equipping the church to live and speak Christian principles where law and culture are being made.

Why I’ve found the Christian Institute helpful

Three things stand out for me:

1. The literature:

I read their little booklets on J.C. Ryle and on Gnosticism with special interest. Not directly related to current debates, but the kind of solid, readable theology that feeds the church.

2. The research:

Their team is forensic. They read every sentence of Hansard. They brief MPs, churches, and the media. And crucially, they keep in their lane. They don’t do party politics. They tell us what’s being proposed and why it matters for biblical conviction.

3. The partnerships:

My understanding is their relationship with organisations like Christian Concern and CARE is good. Different emphases, same goal: helping Christians live faithfully and speak clearly.

The flashpoints right now

We had a CI deputation at our church recently. It was an informative and well-presented 90-minute session. It opened up many strings to their bow but particularly highlighted two issues: Assisted Dying and Conversion Therapy. Those may not be my number 1 and 2, but I suspect they were for many in the room. And that’s the point. The Great Commission doesn’t let us pick only the comfortable bits. “Everything I have commanded” includes life, marriage, freedom of speech, how we love our neighbour when we disagree and to go back on the LGBT angle – what the Bible says about human sexuality and identity and marriage.

What about AI, Digital IDs and Surveillance?

I asked a question about this at the deputation – specifically about digital IDs and the risk of social credit scores. The response was careful. Also, CI hasn’t yet published on AI (AI has played an important part in putting this article together, as a valued research assistant). That’s understandable. But these questions won’t go away. When technology gives the state the power to identify, monitor and nudge behaviour at scale, that’s not just a tech issue. It’s a human dignity issue, and therefore a discipleship issue. “Everything I have commanded” will one day include how we live under algorithms. Other Christian groups are already saying AI must respect human dignity and must not be used to suppress free expression. My hope is CI will help the church think biblically about this before a Bill lands, not just after.

The sadness

My sadness was this: the visitors were the “usual suspects.” The Christians who, in my view, most needed to hear it were noticeably absent, sadly too often more concerned with woke nonsense, non-issues and letting the culture decide what the real issues are, e.g., in the case of climate change. Large sections of the church are more interested in not offending than speaking the truth. That’s evidence of another divide – not just between church and culture, but within the church itself. We’re happy to talk about the Great Commission in theory. Less so when it costs us social capital or requires us to engage issues we’d rather avoid.

Conclusion

The CI is a great resource. With limitations, I support CI in its efforts (I even promote the work when I lead our church’s Prayer of Mission – because it is not doing backroom stuff but is at the forefront of mission). I also note the opposition, but I understand why LGBT groups push back hard. But for those of us who take gospel proclamation and positive engagement with the culture seriously, CI remains a great resource. I didn’t mention its excellent counsel for open air preachers (a hot potato subject if ever there was one in an often hostile climate). Not perfect. Not all the church. But a non-denominational charity trying to do what Jesus commanded: teach. In a nation that no longer assumes Christian truth, that teaching is more necessary than ever. I honour the CI for giving it.