I was out all of yesterday when anonymous and Andy's conversation was going on the comment section of my previous post. It's good stuff.
I find myself agreeing with anon that our toughest challenge as ministers is to help 'folks in the church (in its widest sense)...reconnect with both the UK population and with its original message.'
I guess that's the challenge I took on when I became a minister and certainly when I took on the role I currently have. One of the issues I face - as this blog conversation has so wonderfully demonstrated - is that the language we use to do the one needs to be entirely different from the language we use to do the other.
I've spent a lot of time over the last ten years analysing where the church is losing connection with the general population and why and trying to use that analysis to frame how I speak to both my audiences - those within church and those beyond its walls. That analysis has appeared in books, articles and on this blog over the past three years. This task is made slightly more complicated by the fact that both those audiences are pretty fragmented.
The danger of this, of course, is that we become in Russell's lovely phrase 'poor talkative little Christianity', in that we spend a lot of time talking about where we are and why we're not where we want to be. At some stage analysis - vital and essential as that is - has to give rise to action.
And I think that action has to be along the lines that Andy suggested when he said that he longs to be part 'a church that quietly and lovingly lives up to its message, while still being able to explain and explore that message with others.' We need to say sorry for our stridency and judgmentalism, the speed with which we seek to impose our views on others without allowing our message to shape the way we conduct ourselves with those others.
I'm really not sure that the world needs the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other Christian leader making pronouncements. We live in a febrile media culture where a statement is simultaneously lauded and lambasted - sometimes by the same media outlet. perhaps what we need are church leaders caught doing small acts of love and grace, small works that show God loves everyone, actions that draw people into communities that can not only explore what life's about, but also make life better.
So tomorrow evening, I'll be pounding the streets of my town with others, dressed in my Street Pastor's uniform, not to shout the gospel into people's ears but to sit with them on the pavement and listen to them sob about being dumped by their girl friend or help them get a taxi or bus home, provide flip-flops to girls who can no longer walk in their stilettos, give bottles of water to folk who've taken in too much alcohol. It's not going to change the world but it will offer a helping hand, perhaps ensure one or two stay safer on the streets than they otherwise would have been and, who knows, perhaps a glimpse of a deeper reality nudging into our workaday world.
This has been a good and helpful conversation - thanks to both my dialogue partners for their contributions so far.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Judgement and shaking things up
Of course the language in my previous post won't help my non-Christian friends, since the questions were aimed at my christian ones. It is the church that needs to ask itself these questions. There are different questions we need to ask our non-Christian friends.
I'm intrigued by the suggestion that Richard Dawkins is achingly successful at getting his message across. yes, he's in the spotlight of the chattering classes - interviewed yet again in the Guardian just this week - but half the population haven't even heard of him, fewer than a train-full of people have actually read anything he's written and the number of atheists in our society is not rising, according to most polls on belief.
On Sunday, I shall be talking to my congregation about judgement, the day when God puts all things right, steps in to bring justice to the world and salvation to those who've trusted him and looked and worked for his coming. Perhaps the nation can't think as far as their pensions, but some do look further and wonder.
At the end of the day I do what I do in the light of what I think God is calling me to do. The world is in desperate need in all sorts of ways and each of us is called to meet that need. So let's agree that each of us should do something to make a difference. After all, analysing the problem is easy and shouting that someone else should do something about it is even easier.
So, my anonymous dialogue partner, what are you doing about it? How are you shaking things up?
I'm intrigued by the suggestion that Richard Dawkins is achingly successful at getting his message across. yes, he's in the spotlight of the chattering classes - interviewed yet again in the Guardian just this week - but half the population haven't even heard of him, fewer than a train-full of people have actually read anything he's written and the number of atheists in our society is not rising, according to most polls on belief.
On Sunday, I shall be talking to my congregation about judgement, the day when God puts all things right, steps in to bring justice to the world and salvation to those who've trusted him and looked and worked for his coming. Perhaps the nation can't think as far as their pensions, but some do look further and wonder.
At the end of the day I do what I do in the light of what I think God is calling me to do. The world is in desperate need in all sorts of ways and each of us is called to meet that need. So let's agree that each of us should do something to make a difference. After all, analysing the problem is easy and shouting that someone else should do something about it is even easier.
So, my anonymous dialogue partner, what are you doing about it? How are you shaking things up?
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
The third question
Yes, of course, anonymous is right to say that there's a deeper question. It's the third question that I was coming to (honest!). It's the question about what it means to be missional (to use the jargon) or more simply, how do we persuade those who aren't followers of Jesus to become followers of Jesus.
The reason for the intermediate question is that being a follower of Jesus is about belonging to others who follow Jesus, meeting with them. The New Testament and Christian tradition doesn't really recognise solo disciples. So gathering together is important. And I guess I think we need to ask what such gatherings would be like that attract those who think they might want to follow Jesus but don't know where to start.
The stats on other religions are unclear and hard to come-by. The best research suggests that Islam and Hinduism are growing almost exclusively by birth-rate and migration - certainly in the case of the latter; and probably in the case of the former, though there are isolated examples of westerners converting to Islam. The figures for Buddhism and other Eastern religions just aren't available in any accurate form. Not that that has hampered the media in rushing to judgement on the issue!
What is certainly clear is that Christianity is not profiting as much as one would expect from a rise in the levels of interest in spirituality that we've witnessed over the past decade or so. Part of the reason for this is undoubtedly that Christianity is seen to be associated with a past that the West has left behind; we've done it, been there, got the tee shirt. Other faith options appear new and untried and thus attractive in a way the Christian faith isn't.
That's a challenge the church needs to rise to rather better than it has so far.
There are Christian heroes and role models out there but by the nature of the beast, they tend not to be flashy and high profile. In the area of knife crime, there's the wonderful Les Isaacs of Street Pastors fame who is doing lots of serious work among communities in inner London, Birmingham and Manchester aimed at reducing violence. He occasionally surfaces in the media as do the pastors and priests of various areas blighted by high crime rates.
But this is certainly an anonymous statement that's worth pondering:
'From an outsider's perspective, I wonder if the church actually went back to simple fundamentals and addressed the very human needs of poverty, pain, suffering and wretchedness it might gain more recruits?'
I wonder that too. What would happen if we got hold of Acts 2 in these times of economic hardship and shared our goods and opened our homes to one another and ensured that no one was in need? Would people join us?
What if we took God at his word and sought his Spirit to move in power among us so that things happened that were beyond explanation - except that God did it; would people join us?
Often Christians cry for a return to signs and wonders. And I echo the cry providing we get both of the above - miracles and economic sharing. But then, I'm not sure you get one without the other.
And why should anyone be bothered? Because God has set a day when he will call all people to account for their lives and he's appointed the one who will be judge on that day by raising him from the dead - Jesus.
The reason for the intermediate question is that being a follower of Jesus is about belonging to others who follow Jesus, meeting with them. The New Testament and Christian tradition doesn't really recognise solo disciples. So gathering together is important. And I guess I think we need to ask what such gatherings would be like that attract those who think they might want to follow Jesus but don't know where to start.
The stats on other religions are unclear and hard to come-by. The best research suggests that Islam and Hinduism are growing almost exclusively by birth-rate and migration - certainly in the case of the latter; and probably in the case of the former, though there are isolated examples of westerners converting to Islam. The figures for Buddhism and other Eastern religions just aren't available in any accurate form. Not that that has hampered the media in rushing to judgement on the issue!
What is certainly clear is that Christianity is not profiting as much as one would expect from a rise in the levels of interest in spirituality that we've witnessed over the past decade or so. Part of the reason for this is undoubtedly that Christianity is seen to be associated with a past that the West has left behind; we've done it, been there, got the tee shirt. Other faith options appear new and untried and thus attractive in a way the Christian faith isn't.
That's a challenge the church needs to rise to rather better than it has so far.
There are Christian heroes and role models out there but by the nature of the beast, they tend not to be flashy and high profile. In the area of knife crime, there's the wonderful Les Isaacs of Street Pastors fame who is doing lots of serious work among communities in inner London, Birmingham and Manchester aimed at reducing violence. He occasionally surfaces in the media as do the pastors and priests of various areas blighted by high crime rates.
But this is certainly an anonymous statement that's worth pondering:
'From an outsider's perspective, I wonder if the church actually went back to simple fundamentals and addressed the very human needs of poverty, pain, suffering and wretchedness it might gain more recruits?'
I wonder that too. What would happen if we got hold of Acts 2 in these times of economic hardship and shared our goods and opened our homes to one another and ensured that no one was in need? Would people join us?
What if we took God at his word and sought his Spirit to move in power among us so that things happened that were beyond explanation - except that God did it; would people join us?
Often Christians cry for a return to signs and wonders. And I echo the cry providing we get both of the above - miracles and economic sharing. But then, I'm not sure you get one without the other.
And why should anyone be bothered? Because God has set a day when he will call all people to account for their lives and he's appointed the one who will be judge on that day by raising him from the dead - Jesus.
More basic questions
More friends have arrived from Prague.
We were chatting last night about what constituted church planting and whether a small but established church could be more pioneering than a church planting team moving into an area with a blank sheet of paper.
On top of asking what Christians should do when they gather, it seems like I'm always having conversations about fundamental questions regarding church life.
Perhaps the reason for this is that churches generally are struggling to engage with the wider culture generally, and each local community more specifically. it's true that most churches can point to people who have joined recently - indeed a steady, if small trickle of newcomers. That most of these are existing Christians shifting church for various reasons is beyond dispute; but there are a few people coming to faith.
But this is in a context of decline - fewer people overall this year than last across the UK - and so more fundamental questions really ought to be being asked rather more widely. Hence these two posts that ask what Christians should do when they gather and how the creation of new gatherings might be best achieved.
No doubt I'll continue to muse on this, but others' comments are always welcome.
We were chatting last night about what constituted church planting and whether a small but established church could be more pioneering than a church planting team moving into an area with a blank sheet of paper.
On top of asking what Christians should do when they gather, it seems like I'm always having conversations about fundamental questions regarding church life.
Perhaps the reason for this is that churches generally are struggling to engage with the wider culture generally, and each local community more specifically. it's true that most churches can point to people who have joined recently - indeed a steady, if small trickle of newcomers. That most of these are existing Christians shifting church for various reasons is beyond dispute; but there are a few people coming to faith.
But this is in a context of decline - fewer people overall this year than last across the UK - and so more fundamental questions really ought to be being asked rather more widely. Hence these two posts that ask what Christians should do when they gather and how the creation of new gatherings might be best achieved.
No doubt I'll continue to muse on this, but others' comments are always welcome.
Monday, October 27, 2008
What should we do when we gather?
I was chatting to a friend yesterday who is embarking on the worship and preaching module of a theology course.
We started off talking about what are the components of a worship service. I commented that even the title was unhelpful since 'worship' and 'service' are such slippery words in the theological lexicon.
We ended up wondering if we had a blank sheet of paper, what would our gatherings be like? Feel free to chip in suggestions. What should we Christians do when we gather?
We started off talking about what are the components of a worship service. I commented that even the title was unhelpful since 'worship' and 'service' are such slippery words in the theological lexicon.
We ended up wondering if we had a blank sheet of paper, what would our gatherings be like? Feel free to chip in suggestions. What should we Christians do when we gather?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
All publicity is good publicity?
A group of atheists is raising money to run the following ad on the side of London's bendy buses: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”
They've raised the money through a subscription on the Guardian Comment is Free website and, naturally, from Richard Dawkins (who, I was interested to note, has recently helped to establish a Tory humanist group...mmmm!). Assuming all the money comes in, the ads will run in January 2009.
They're doing it because, they claim, there's so much advertising on behalf of God on London's buses. I assume they are referring to the annual Alpha splurge and the occasional advertising by the Met Tab and KICC.
But I loved this response from the Rev Jenny Ellis, Spirituality and Discipleship Officer for the Methodist Church: "We are grateful to Richard for his continued interest in God and for encouraging people to think about these issues. This campaign will be a good thing if it gets people to engage with the deepest questions of life."
Nice one, Jenny. It just goes to show that all publicity is good publicity!
It should be noted, of course, that for a bunch of atheists the group seems to be hedging their bets with the word 'probably'.
Perhaps now is a good time for us to be reminding people to be happy and enjoy life because there is a God and he loves us and he's seeking relationship with us that will last forever.
They've raised the money through a subscription on the Guardian Comment is Free website and, naturally, from Richard Dawkins (who, I was interested to note, has recently helped to establish a Tory humanist group...mmmm!). Assuming all the money comes in, the ads will run in January 2009.
They're doing it because, they claim, there's so much advertising on behalf of God on London's buses. I assume they are referring to the annual Alpha splurge and the occasional advertising by the Met Tab and KICC.
But I loved this response from the Rev Jenny Ellis, Spirituality and Discipleship Officer for the Methodist Church: "We are grateful to Richard for his continued interest in God and for encouraging people to think about these issues. This campaign will be a good thing if it gets people to engage with the deepest questions of life."
Nice one, Jenny. It just goes to show that all publicity is good publicity!
It should be noted, of course, that for a bunch of atheists the group seems to be hedging their bets with the word 'probably'.
Perhaps now is a good time for us to be reminding people to be happy and enjoy life because there is a God and he loves us and he's seeking relationship with us that will last forever.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Recession, singing and being church
It's been good to have anonymous as a dialogue partner. Really got the grey matter going. And hopefully, the thinking will lead to action.
The recession adds a whole new dimension to this discussion, as anonymous suggests by way of a tangent (the whole comment on the last post repays careful reading). I do have all sorts of fears that cash will drain away from much of the good work that is being supported by Christians as they tighten their belts and that Christians might become more self-absorbed as they see their incomes falling.
But I think the recession - we can use that word now as the governor of the Bank of England used it last night(!) - does afford us an opportunity to assess our values as individuals and communities. We will suffer mild discomfort as bills rise - though already food and fuel costs are coming off the peaks they hit in the summer - but the poor around the world will suffer greatly.
The difficulty with recessions is that they are so uneven in their impact on people. Some sail through them relatively unscathed and others find their lives shattered by them. And often those people can live on the same streets, exercise in the same gym, shop in the same malls. My prayer is that our eyes are opened to see how people are being affected.
One of the interesting features of this recession, however, is that it could affect the middle class in the south much more severely than others - unlike the downturns in the early 1980s and 1990s. It is people working in financial services - and those trades dependent on them in London - and those who've relied on debt, especially tied up in property, to fuel their lifestyle who are at the eye of this storm. And these people are my neighbours.
Inevitably, as they are affected, there will be knock-ons in the wider economy affecting other sectors. But we have such a tiny manufacturing sector these days that it's unlikely we'll be seeing factory closures on the scale we saw in the 1980s.
So it's maybe not a time to focus on singing but on sharing, on being honest about how we're doing and how we can support one another and those who could well be in need around us. In short, we have an opportunity to be church in a significantly deeper, more Christ-focused way.
Of course, some would say that a sing-song in a crisis is just the medicine we need, but I'm not sure I want to go there...
The recession adds a whole new dimension to this discussion, as anonymous suggests by way of a tangent (the whole comment on the last post repays careful reading). I do have all sorts of fears that cash will drain away from much of the good work that is being supported by Christians as they tighten their belts and that Christians might become more self-absorbed as they see their incomes falling.
But I think the recession - we can use that word now as the governor of the Bank of England used it last night(!) - does afford us an opportunity to assess our values as individuals and communities. We will suffer mild discomfort as bills rise - though already food and fuel costs are coming off the peaks they hit in the summer - but the poor around the world will suffer greatly.
The difficulty with recessions is that they are so uneven in their impact on people. Some sail through them relatively unscathed and others find their lives shattered by them. And often those people can live on the same streets, exercise in the same gym, shop in the same malls. My prayer is that our eyes are opened to see how people are being affected.
One of the interesting features of this recession, however, is that it could affect the middle class in the south much more severely than others - unlike the downturns in the early 1980s and 1990s. It is people working in financial services - and those trades dependent on them in London - and those who've relied on debt, especially tied up in property, to fuel their lifestyle who are at the eye of this storm. And these people are my neighbours.
Inevitably, as they are affected, there will be knock-ons in the wider economy affecting other sectors. But we have such a tiny manufacturing sector these days that it's unlikely we'll be seeing factory closures on the scale we saw in the 1980s.
So it's maybe not a time to focus on singing but on sharing, on being honest about how we're doing and how we can support one another and those who could well be in need around us. In short, we have an opportunity to be church in a significantly deeper, more Christ-focused way.
Of course, some would say that a sing-song in a crisis is just the medicine we need, but I'm not sure I want to go there...
Why, O why do we sing in church?
I think Richard has a valid point (comment on the last post) that the aim of modern forms of worship was to help people who weren't connecting with God in traditional services an opportunity to make some connection with him. And I would say that there have been times when I have connected with God using a mix of vehicles including modern worship songs.
But I also think that anonymous (comment to same post) has touched an issue at the heart of the contemporary church's struggle to connect with people. Put baldy, it is that we are generally frothy and irrelevant, inward looking and a wee bit smug about our relatedness to God.
Now, I wouldn't want to go overboard here. I've met loads of Christians who are getting their hands very dirty in some places where people need help and only Christians are there to do anything. I've been to estates in inner cities in the UK where the only 'welfare' provision of any kind is that offered by Christians who sacrificially give of themselves, their time and their resources to make a difference and bless their neighbours.
And I'm writing this the day after a British Christian aid worker was shot dead in Kabul for doing exactly that as a Christian. So I don't think we can tar the entire church as self-obsessed. It dishonours those who are worshipping God with their bodies laid on the line day, day out.
But sadly, the contemporary worship scene is part of a wider malaise in the western church that sees offering people what we think they want is the way to attract people. And while there might be some superficial appeal for some in the entertaining mix we serve up, the longer term danger of the whole approach is that we are only offering an hour's mildly spiritual diversion.
Now some will protest that worship songs are not entertainment; they are a means of lifting up the name of God in a way that draws people to him and therefore are the essential component of what we do as churches. Sadly, as anonymous' posts so eloquently attest, such an approach repels rather than attracts some, perhaps many people.
We do seem to be afraid of thinking, of asking the hard questions about our faith that would stretch our faith both intellectually and emotionally. As an author, I am frequently asked to remember my audience doesn't want to be too taxed. I need to write in a way that will be accessible to people who don't read books - tricky when I write books!
I had some interesting conversations as I was putting the finishing touches to my recent short commentary on Galatians that I was possibly entering into discussions and debates about the text that were not appropriate for the general Christian public. The idea seems to be that the average church person can only cope with a pre-digested, entertainingly served up gobbet of something to believe rather than a range of possibilities to think about.
This could indeed be why the church in the UK is losing people. But it also highlights a real problem that churches have and it's this: who is our audience and at what level do they wish to be engaged? I have said for a number of years now that I do not believe there is a one-size fits all way of being and doing church. I am neither original nor alone in this view, but it is depressing how few of us there still are who really believe it and are prepared to practice it.
There are a load of people who think seriously about the world and their place in it and who might well find that the Christian faith has something intelligent and helpful to say that would help them engage with and think through these deep questions. At the same time, that process might well help them to meet and engage with God with every fibre of their beings - body, soul and, equally importantly, mind.
Sadly, songs like I can only imagine will only repel those with an ounce of intellect and musicality. I am sorry for anonymous' poor experience of church so far. Keep in touch. I'll return to this theme.
But I also think that anonymous (comment to same post) has touched an issue at the heart of the contemporary church's struggle to connect with people. Put baldy, it is that we are generally frothy and irrelevant, inward looking and a wee bit smug about our relatedness to God.
Now, I wouldn't want to go overboard here. I've met loads of Christians who are getting their hands very dirty in some places where people need help and only Christians are there to do anything. I've been to estates in inner cities in the UK where the only 'welfare' provision of any kind is that offered by Christians who sacrificially give of themselves, their time and their resources to make a difference and bless their neighbours.
And I'm writing this the day after a British Christian aid worker was shot dead in Kabul for doing exactly that as a Christian. So I don't think we can tar the entire church as self-obsessed. It dishonours those who are worshipping God with their bodies laid on the line day, day out.
But sadly, the contemporary worship scene is part of a wider malaise in the western church that sees offering people what we think they want is the way to attract people. And while there might be some superficial appeal for some in the entertaining mix we serve up, the longer term danger of the whole approach is that we are only offering an hour's mildly spiritual diversion.
Now some will protest that worship songs are not entertainment; they are a means of lifting up the name of God in a way that draws people to him and therefore are the essential component of what we do as churches. Sadly, as anonymous' posts so eloquently attest, such an approach repels rather than attracts some, perhaps many people.
We do seem to be afraid of thinking, of asking the hard questions about our faith that would stretch our faith both intellectually and emotionally. As an author, I am frequently asked to remember my audience doesn't want to be too taxed. I need to write in a way that will be accessible to people who don't read books - tricky when I write books!
I had some interesting conversations as I was putting the finishing touches to my recent short commentary on Galatians that I was possibly entering into discussions and debates about the text that were not appropriate for the general Christian public. The idea seems to be that the average church person can only cope with a pre-digested, entertainingly served up gobbet of something to believe rather than a range of possibilities to think about.
This could indeed be why the church in the UK is losing people. But it also highlights a real problem that churches have and it's this: who is our audience and at what level do they wish to be engaged? I have said for a number of years now that I do not believe there is a one-size fits all way of being and doing church. I am neither original nor alone in this view, but it is depressing how few of us there still are who really believe it and are prepared to practice it.
There are a load of people who think seriously about the world and their place in it and who might well find that the Christian faith has something intelligent and helpful to say that would help them engage with and think through these deep questions. At the same time, that process might well help them to meet and engage with God with every fibre of their beings - body, soul and, equally importantly, mind.
Sadly, songs like I can only imagine will only repel those with an ounce of intellect and musicality. I am sorry for anonymous' poor experience of church so far. Keep in touch. I'll return to this theme.
Bigger issues than Graham
Thanks to anonymous for raising a much bigger issue about what Graham Kendrick represents. There is truth - and not just the truth of an unpleasant experience - is this observation:
'It may not be his fault, but he is a symptom of a church that doesn't care about anyone but itself and its members - and making its members feel "great". He is a proponent of weak minded, arms in the air, let's feel the love nonsense.'
My objection to Letts' comment was that he seems to think stoicism and Christianity are synonymous. But your comment puts a finger on a real and much more important issue.
I had one of those encounters in church in Sunday that I never like having before or after a service in which I was told that we must always sing because worship is the heart of what we do as church. I have not believed this for 20 years or more. I'm not sure I ever believed it but I certainly didn't after I read an essay by Howard Marshall on the language of worship in the New Testament. I have summarised his argument in chapter 2 of Building a Better Body.
I agree with anonymous that so much of what passes for 'worship' in our churches is self-serving nonsense that is designed only to make us feel good. It results in us leaving church feeling self-satisfied and smug. It does nothing for those struggling to make sense of their lives or God who have strayed into our gatherings; indeed it might only confirm that the church has nothing to say to them because it's only interested in itself.
I still think Letts is wrong, however, about 'worship' needing to remain in the language of the Authorised Bible and modern church music being one reason for rot setting in in Britain. I'd put the Daily Mail at number one in that league table and suggest that Kendrick, for all his faults, has on occasions sought to lift the church's eyes beyond itself to the needs of the world.
The issue of what we sing - and say - in church is a huge one. Perhaps it's something that needs airing at greater length in a number of blogs.
Thanks again for stopping by
'It may not be his fault, but he is a symptom of a church that doesn't care about anyone but itself and its members - and making its members feel "great". He is a proponent of weak minded, arms in the air, let's feel the love nonsense.'
My objection to Letts' comment was that he seems to think stoicism and Christianity are synonymous. But your comment puts a finger on a real and much more important issue.
I had one of those encounters in church in Sunday that I never like having before or after a service in which I was told that we must always sing because worship is the heart of what we do as church. I have not believed this for 20 years or more. I'm not sure I ever believed it but I certainly didn't after I read an essay by Howard Marshall on the language of worship in the New Testament. I have summarised his argument in chapter 2 of Building a Better Body.
I agree with anonymous that so much of what passes for 'worship' in our churches is self-serving nonsense that is designed only to make us feel good. It results in us leaving church feeling self-satisfied and smug. It does nothing for those struggling to make sense of their lives or God who have strayed into our gatherings; indeed it might only confirm that the church has nothing to say to them because it's only interested in itself.
I still think Letts is wrong, however, about 'worship' needing to remain in the language of the Authorised Bible and modern church music being one reason for rot setting in in Britain. I'd put the Daily Mail at number one in that league table and suggest that Kendrick, for all his faults, has on occasions sought to lift the church's eyes beyond itself to the needs of the world.
The issue of what we sing - and say - in church is a huge one. Perhaps it's something that needs airing at greater length in a number of blogs.
Thanks again for stopping by
In defence of Graham
There's a great post over on Sean's blog about how Graham Kendrick is one of the 50 men to have wrecked Britain. I missed this piece of nonsense, not being a reader of the paper in question. And while I'm not a cheer leader for Kendrick, I do think his contribution to music and in particular to worship music over the past 25 years has been extremely positive.
The fabulously mis-informed Quentin Letts suggests 'The sturdy hymns of England, musical embodiment of the stoicism, resolve and undemonstrative solidarity of our nation, are in severe peril, and all thanks to ill-shaven remnants of the late Sixties - grinning inadequates who have never got over the fact that they weren't Cat Stevens.'
So much of this is so completely ridiculous that it scarcely merits comment. But I just wondered what on earth stoicism has to do with Christianity. You've got to hope he's not as woefully ignorant about the others subjects he covers - though this piece does not bode well Maybe before he pontificates again, he could allow a fact to interrupt the prejudice.
The fabulously mis-informed Quentin Letts suggests 'The sturdy hymns of England, musical embodiment of the stoicism, resolve and undemonstrative solidarity of our nation, are in severe peril, and all thanks to ill-shaven remnants of the late Sixties - grinning inadequates who have never got over the fact that they weren't Cat Stevens.'
So much of this is so completely ridiculous that it scarcely merits comment. But I just wondered what on earth stoicism has to do with Christianity. You've got to hope he's not as woefully ignorant about the others subjects he covers - though this piece does not bode well Maybe before he pontificates again, he could allow a fact to interrupt the prejudice.
On the need for Christians to think better
I've been watching the US election campaign with a mixture of fascination and bewilderment. I don't think I really get how the system works or how American voters function at an emotional level. But I've been helped by Simon Shama's spectacularly good documentary series on BBC2 - you can still catch last week's on iPlayer.
Today's paper has an alarming report from Colorado on how evangelicals are facing up to a possible victory by Barak Obama. It really doesn't make for comfortable reading by this evangelical.
Apparently one church is fasting and praying this week for a McCain victory. I'm not sure what the pastoral case load will be like if this doesn't happen and Steve Holt, the pastor in question, has to visit members of his flock to talk about how we cope when God doesn't say 'yes' to everything we ask him.
More worrying was this comment from a church member: 'has Obama through mass hypnosis, figured out a way to bypass the critical faculties of all Americans?'
Is this guy for real? Could it be that Obama has found a way of asking searching questions of all Americans that has resulted in them answering that there could be a better way of conducting ourselves in the world than the way we've been behaving over the past decade? Perhaps elections need to be fought on issues other abortion and gay marriage. Perhaps Christians ought to be as concerned about global poverty and the use of violence to settle regional disputes.
Maybe Obama has tapped into those concerns and people are thinking about what kind of presidency they want, what kind of America they want to live in.
Sadly, some Christians arrogantly think that if people disagree with us it's because they're stupid and sinful. Often it's because they've thought about issues more deeply and carefully than we have and they've found our fortune cookie answers to be wanting. When it comes to mass hypnosis, I think the church member from Colorado ought to ask whether he's been a victim of it for who knows how long and might find an Obama victory is the jolt he needs to snap him out of it.
The disappointing thing about the press report was that there's no mention of Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo or Shane Claiborne - all significant evangelical leaders who are campaigning for Christians in the States to decide their political allegiances and voting intentions on more than abortion and blind support for the secular state of Israel. In the interests of balance, it would be good to see them represented in the reporting of the US election over here.
Today's paper has an alarming report from Colorado on how evangelicals are facing up to a possible victory by Barak Obama. It really doesn't make for comfortable reading by this evangelical.
Apparently one church is fasting and praying this week for a McCain victory. I'm not sure what the pastoral case load will be like if this doesn't happen and Steve Holt, the pastor in question, has to visit members of his flock to talk about how we cope when God doesn't say 'yes' to everything we ask him.
More worrying was this comment from a church member: 'has Obama through mass hypnosis, figured out a way to bypass the critical faculties of all Americans?'
Is this guy for real? Could it be that Obama has found a way of asking searching questions of all Americans that has resulted in them answering that there could be a better way of conducting ourselves in the world than the way we've been behaving over the past decade? Perhaps elections need to be fought on issues other abortion and gay marriage. Perhaps Christians ought to be as concerned about global poverty and the use of violence to settle regional disputes.
Maybe Obama has tapped into those concerns and people are thinking about what kind of presidency they want, what kind of America they want to live in.
Sadly, some Christians arrogantly think that if people disagree with us it's because they're stupid and sinful. Often it's because they've thought about issues more deeply and carefully than we have and they've found our fortune cookie answers to be wanting. When it comes to mass hypnosis, I think the church member from Colorado ought to ask whether he's been a victim of it for who knows how long and might find an Obama victory is the jolt he needs to snap him out of it.
The disappointing thing about the press report was that there's no mention of Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo or Shane Claiborne - all significant evangelical leaders who are campaigning for Christians in the States to decide their political allegiances and voting intentions on more than abortion and blind support for the secular state of Israel. In the interests of balance, it would be good to see them represented in the reporting of the US election over here.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Praying in the midst of the credit crunch
There's a good prayer we should all be praying posted here (scroll down) - and reproduced below:
Lord God, we live in disturbing days:
across the world,
prices rise,
debts increase,
banks collapse,
jobs are taken away,
and fragile security is under threat.
Loving God, meet us in our fear and hear our prayer:
be a tower of strength amidst the shifting sands,
and a light in the darkness;
help us receive your gift of peace,
and fix our hearts where true joys are to be found,
in Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Many in our congregations will be feeling less secure and increasingly anxious in these uncertain times. And they will continue to feel these long after the headlines have moved on to the next crisis. So let's keep praying for those particularly affected by these testing times.
Lord God, we live in disturbing days:
across the world,
prices rise,
debts increase,
banks collapse,
jobs are taken away,
and fragile security is under threat.
Loving God, meet us in our fear and hear our prayer:
be a tower of strength amidst the shifting sands,
and a light in the darkness;
help us receive your gift of peace,
and fix our hearts where true joys are to be found,
in Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Many in our congregations will be feeling less secure and increasingly anxious in these uncertain times. And they will continue to feel these long after the headlines have moved on to the next crisis. So let's keep praying for those particularly affected by these testing times.
Challenging times
Had a good day yesterday, I think. The morning went well. Our morning series on hope is going very well with people responding positively to the teaching, finding real encouragement in it. One 77 year old said to me after the service yesterday that she felt excited about the future as a result of the series - that was great to hear!
Yesterday evening was similarly interesting. We did a cafe church on the topic of 'is faith anything more than a crutch in these troubled times?' Using a bit of pop music and word games and quizzes, we explored what people thought about god.
The challenge for us all was using a chapter from James Catto and Duncan Bridgeman's intriguing and beautifully edited film What about me? This is the follow up to 1 Giant Leap. The episode - called Grace - plunged us into the world of Athens as recorded in Acts 17, a world of gods and opinions about the gods and faith.
We then read Acts 17 and asked what we might learn from Paul about talking about our faith in this cacophony of opinions in a way that enables people both to hear what saying and to the God we are seeking to bring into focus.
It wasn't to everyone's taste, needless to say. But some of the exchanges around the tables sounded intriguing and useful and some of the conversations I had afterwards suggested some people had found it really helpful.
The proof, as always, is in the living this week.
Yesterday evening was similarly interesting. We did a cafe church on the topic of 'is faith anything more than a crutch in these troubled times?' Using a bit of pop music and word games and quizzes, we explored what people thought about god.
The challenge for us all was using a chapter from James Catto and Duncan Bridgeman's intriguing and beautifully edited film What about me? This is the follow up to 1 Giant Leap. The episode - called Grace - plunged us into the world of Athens as recorded in Acts 17, a world of gods and opinions about the gods and faith.
We then read Acts 17 and asked what we might learn from Paul about talking about our faith in this cacophony of opinions in a way that enables people both to hear what saying and to the God we are seeking to bring into focus.
It wasn't to everyone's taste, needless to say. But some of the exchanges around the tables sounded intriguing and useful and some of the conversations I had afterwards suggested some people had found it really helpful.
The proof, as always, is in the living this week.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Bail out Iceland
There's a great piece in today's Guardian G2 on Iceland. It contains one of the most priceless understatements to have emerged from the current financial meltdown.
The lovely Prime Minister, Geir Haardie, asked what he'd learned the whole frightening experience of the past two weeks, answered: 'it is not wise for a small country to take a lead in international banking.' You can say that again!
I, for one, think the IMF should bail Iceland out, however, because it has given some of the most wonderfully sublime music of the past decade. Bjork and Sigur Ros have been consistently creative, mystical and, admittedly, not a little bonkers.
Maybe we could all buy a share in them and it would recapitalise iceland's banking sector. In return, each of them could play a gig in our streets. Now that would be a result.
The lovely Prime Minister, Geir Haardie, asked what he'd learned the whole frightening experience of the past two weeks, answered: 'it is not wise for a small country to take a lead in international banking.' You can say that again!
I, for one, think the IMF should bail Iceland out, however, because it has given some of the most wonderfully sublime music of the past decade. Bjork and Sigur Ros have been consistently creative, mystical and, admittedly, not a little bonkers.
Maybe we could all buy a share in them and it would recapitalise iceland's banking sector. In return, each of them could play a gig in our streets. Now that would be a result.
Monday, October 13, 2008
New toy
I took delivery of a lovely Dell Inspiron Mini last week. It's a tiny laptop that weighs no more than a bag of sugar but does everything my larger (and not so easily portable) laptop does.
I shall be using it mainly for word processing and blogging on the go. So if you see at the back of a meeting with it open on my lap, I'll be reading or blogging or playing the cool definition game at freerice.com (assuming there's free wireless access, of course).
I shall be using it mainly for word processing and blogging on the go. So if you see at the back of a meeting with it open on my lap, I'll be reading or blogging or playing the cool definition game at freerice.com (assuming there's free wireless access, of course).
I always wanted to own a bank
I always fancied owning a bank. Now, it seems, I own four - obviously not on my own, I share the ownership with whole population of the UK.
'We're living in extraordinary, turbulent times.' So says the Chancellor on the morning he's taking big stakes in three high street banks - RBS, HBOS and Lloyds (these last two are still about to merge to form a super retail bank).
So, the 1983 Labour manifesto pledge to bring the banks into public ownership has been fulfilled by a Labour Government whose economic policies owe more to Margaret Thatcher than Karl Marx.
I think such ironies can be enjoyed - even in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the last one. Indeed Alastair Darling keeps using the words 'exceptional and extraordinary' to describe these events. He's not wrong there.
'The world has had a shock,' he says. Too true. I was glad that in the midst of this shock, the chairman of the World Bank reminded the G7 leaders of their commitments to the poorest of the world, calling them to ensure they redouble their efforts to see the millennium goals achieved by 2015.
Let's hope the world - and the Chancellor - is listening.
'We're living in extraordinary, turbulent times.' So says the Chancellor on the morning he's taking big stakes in three high street banks - RBS, HBOS and Lloyds (these last two are still about to merge to form a super retail bank).
So, the 1983 Labour manifesto pledge to bring the banks into public ownership has been fulfilled by a Labour Government whose economic policies owe more to Margaret Thatcher than Karl Marx.
I think such ironies can be enjoyed - even in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the last one. Indeed Alastair Darling keeps using the words 'exceptional and extraordinary' to describe these events. He's not wrong there.
'The world has had a shock,' he says. Too true. I was glad that in the midst of this shock, the chairman of the World Bank reminded the G7 leaders of their commitments to the poorest of the world, calling them to ensure they redouble their efforts to see the millennium goals achieved by 2015.
Let's hope the world - and the Chancellor - is listening.
Kind of Blue
My copy of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue arrived late last week. And it's wonderful.
I waxed lyrical about So What a while back. The rest lives up to that beginning and the album's conclusion, Flamenco Sketches, is gorgeous.
I waxed lyrical about So What a while back. The rest lives up to that beginning and the album's conclusion, Flamenco Sketches, is gorgeous.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Unpredictable people
One of the many jaw-dropping, spine-tingling moments on Mercury Rev's Snowflake Midnight is where Jonathan sings in his faltering falsetto: 'Life is uncertain and people are so... Unpredictable'. There's a wonderful hanging pause after 'so' before each syllable of un-pre-dict-able is sounded out. I feel a shudder of joy and hope every time I hear it.
It's a poignant commentary on so much of our experience. Life is truly uncertain. The credit crunch has thrown the precarious nature of our economy into stark relief, we've all heard stories of healthy and good people suddenly overtaken by illness and death.
Jonathan is right - life is uncertain. But the tone of voice with which he sings 'people are so unpredictable' suggests that in the uncertainty of life, some people come good, do good, are there for those that need them, unexpectedly offering hope in despair, light in the darkness. We think they'll act one way, but people are so unpredictable - often they act in unexpected and life-bringing ways.
The song ends with him singing 'there's no bliss like home'; nothing feels like that moment when in life's uncertainty, someone has helped us feel as though we belong, we can cope, we have a future.
Today, we could be the unpredictable people to our neighbours, offering acts of kindness to those under pressure, standing with those who who feel lost and frightened in the midst of the turmoil on the money markets, wondering what the future holds. We could be people who bring them unpredictable blessing, the bliss of a touch of acceptance and friendship.
It's a poignant commentary on so much of our experience. Life is truly uncertain. The credit crunch has thrown the precarious nature of our economy into stark relief, we've all heard stories of healthy and good people suddenly overtaken by illness and death.
Jonathan is right - life is uncertain. But the tone of voice with which he sings 'people are so unpredictable' suggests that in the uncertainty of life, some people come good, do good, are there for those that need them, unexpectedly offering hope in despair, light in the darkness. We think they'll act one way, but people are so unpredictable - often they act in unexpected and life-bringing ways.
The song ends with him singing 'there's no bliss like home'; nothing feels like that moment when in life's uncertainty, someone has helped us feel as though we belong, we can cope, we have a future.
Today, we could be the unpredictable people to our neighbours, offering acts of kindness to those under pressure, standing with those who who feel lost and frightened in the midst of the turmoil on the money markets, wondering what the future holds. We could be people who bring them unpredictable blessing, the bliss of a touch of acceptance and friendship.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Bringing the soft difference into focus
As promised here's part 2 of last week's post arising out of Miroslav Volf's excellent essay on 1 Peter. Having preached about it last Sunday, this Sunday, I'm asking how what Peter says works out in his context - and how it might work in ours (that's for the congregation to work on in groups).
It seems to me that soft difference is all about helping people see what God is like. So Peter talks about it applies in the three key areas people live in - the political arena, the work place and the home (of course, the last two were the same place for many people in Peter's world).
What a number of commentators seem to miss is that Peter expected Christians to get noticed. Bruce Winter has shown from 1 Peter 2:14 (and Romans 13:3-4) that Christians who can should behave as benefactors and be recognised as such by the powers that be. This means doing good works that benefit everyone in the community (Jeremiah 29:7 in action). The ancient world was littered with inscriptions commending folk who did such deeds. and Peter says that the followers of Jesus should also do it so that they get noticed and commended. this will silence some of the nonsense spoken about the new movement (2:15).
It's interesting that Peter tells us three times to 'submit' (2:13, 18; 3:1). Submission has a rather negative feel in our culture. But I wonder if all Peter means by it is 'recognise the context you live in and live well in it.' It's interesting that he doesn't use the word 'fear' or 'obey' - those are reserved exclusively for God. Rather, it seems that he is telling his readers to accept the world they live in rather seek to change it, but in their acceptance of this world, they should live in such a way that God comes into focus and the seeds of social change are sown - possibly though the coming to Christ of husbands, masters and governors (not so far-fetched as it sounds if Luke is right about Sergius Paullus in Acts 13:12).
So we submit in the political arena by doing good works that help to bring God into focus. In the workplace we submit to our masters. A good proportion of Peter's first readers would have been slaves, some of good masters, most of those who treated them like chattels. it's possible that Christian slaves would have got a beating for worshipping a foreign god and consorting with others who did so. But Peter says they should do 'good' to their masters, perhaps suggesting that they work beyond what they're instructed to do, going the extra mile, as it were.
And wives submit at home. This is the most foreign part of this passage to our ears - and the one that gets hackles rising (not to mention the one that has been horribly abused to justify the ill-treatment of wives by their husbands - something the text absolutely does not do).
We need to remember that wives were, in a similar way to slaves, the property of their husbands. They were expected not to have an independent life of any kind - no friends that were not from their husbands circle of acquaintances and certainly no religious allegiances that their husbands didn't share. So how is a Christian wife to conduct herself in a non-Christian household (for that certainly seems to be the context Peter is talking about in 3:1-6).
submission has to do with not doing anything that would blur God rather than bring him to focus. So, beauty is to be inward (2, 4) which sounds terribly spiritual but is also very practical: if the wife is going out to a Christian gathering, it's better she doesn't go made-up and wearing her best gown and jewels or people might assume she's heading for an illicit romantic tryst!
The reference to Sarah is subtle and amusing. The only time Sarah called Abraham 'lord' was when laughing at his faith about having a child! (Genesis 18:12). The reference is possibly rather to Genesis 12:13; 20:5, 13 where Sarah goes along with Abraham's plan in order to save Abraham's neck - at considerable risk to herself. In fact three times in Genesis, Abraham obeys her - again because the advice will save his life (16:2, 6; 21:12). Peter's point seems to be that a wife's selfless action can more often than not save the husband - exactly what he wants to see happen here among his first hearers (3:1).
It's interesting that there very little in this section about the wife's motivation, perhaps because Peter wants us to see that this flows straight out of his meditation on Jesus as the servant of Isaiah 53, suggesting that such wives are examples of Christ's submission and suffering that we should take note of and emulate.
So, that's possibly how Peter thought soft difference might work itself in the context he was writing to. The question we have to wrestle with is how might these principles apply to our very different political, working and domestic contexts. That's over to you, then....
It seems to me that soft difference is all about helping people see what God is like. So Peter talks about it applies in the three key areas people live in - the political arena, the work place and the home (of course, the last two were the same place for many people in Peter's world).
What a number of commentators seem to miss is that Peter expected Christians to get noticed. Bruce Winter has shown from 1 Peter 2:14 (and Romans 13:3-4) that Christians who can should behave as benefactors and be recognised as such by the powers that be. This means doing good works that benefit everyone in the community (Jeremiah 29:7 in action). The ancient world was littered with inscriptions commending folk who did such deeds. and Peter says that the followers of Jesus should also do it so that they get noticed and commended. this will silence some of the nonsense spoken about the new movement (2:15).
It's interesting that Peter tells us three times to 'submit' (2:13, 18; 3:1). Submission has a rather negative feel in our culture. But I wonder if all Peter means by it is 'recognise the context you live in and live well in it.' It's interesting that he doesn't use the word 'fear' or 'obey' - those are reserved exclusively for God. Rather, it seems that he is telling his readers to accept the world they live in rather seek to change it, but in their acceptance of this world, they should live in such a way that God comes into focus and the seeds of social change are sown - possibly though the coming to Christ of husbands, masters and governors (not so far-fetched as it sounds if Luke is right about Sergius Paullus in Acts 13:12).
So we submit in the political arena by doing good works that help to bring God into focus. In the workplace we submit to our masters. A good proportion of Peter's first readers would have been slaves, some of good masters, most of those who treated them like chattels. it's possible that Christian slaves would have got a beating for worshipping a foreign god and consorting with others who did so. But Peter says they should do 'good' to their masters, perhaps suggesting that they work beyond what they're instructed to do, going the extra mile, as it were.
And wives submit at home. This is the most foreign part of this passage to our ears - and the one that gets hackles rising (not to mention the one that has been horribly abused to justify the ill-treatment of wives by their husbands - something the text absolutely does not do).
We need to remember that wives were, in a similar way to slaves, the property of their husbands. They were expected not to have an independent life of any kind - no friends that were not from their husbands circle of acquaintances and certainly no religious allegiances that their husbands didn't share. So how is a Christian wife to conduct herself in a non-Christian household (for that certainly seems to be the context Peter is talking about in 3:1-6).
submission has to do with not doing anything that would blur God rather than bring him to focus. So, beauty is to be inward (2, 4) which sounds terribly spiritual but is also very practical: if the wife is going out to a Christian gathering, it's better she doesn't go made-up and wearing her best gown and jewels or people might assume she's heading for an illicit romantic tryst!
The reference to Sarah is subtle and amusing. The only time Sarah called Abraham 'lord' was when laughing at his faith about having a child! (Genesis 18:12). The reference is possibly rather to Genesis 12:13; 20:5, 13 where Sarah goes along with Abraham's plan in order to save Abraham's neck - at considerable risk to herself. In fact three times in Genesis, Abraham obeys her - again because the advice will save his life (16:2, 6; 21:12). Peter's point seems to be that a wife's selfless action can more often than not save the husband - exactly what he wants to see happen here among his first hearers (3:1).
It's interesting that there very little in this section about the wife's motivation, perhaps because Peter wants us to see that this flows straight out of his meditation on Jesus as the servant of Isaiah 53, suggesting that such wives are examples of Christ's submission and suffering that we should take note of and emulate.
So, that's possibly how Peter thought soft difference might work itself in the context he was writing to. The question we have to wrestle with is how might these principles apply to our very different political, working and domestic contexts. That's over to you, then....
Sunday, October 05, 2008
The soft difference
Does Peter have an original social ethic? It's a question I've been pondering as I've wrestled with 1 Peter 2:11-3:12 this week. My struggles have been greatly helped by a Miroslav Volf Essay 'Soft Difference: Theological Reflections on the Relation Between Church and Culture in 1 Peter' (Ex Auditu, 10 1994, Pp15-30). It's an elegant essay that repays careful reading.
To sum up his argument in a rather crude nutshell, Volf argues that Peter urges his readers to be distinctive but not eccentric. He suggests 'To make a difference, one must be different' - a simple, obvious and yet profound observation that's worth reflecting on for a moment or two.
Some scholars suggest that Peter's social ethic - like that of the pastorals - is inherently conservative. He talks about submission in the political arena, workplace and home. He explicitly states that wives are the weaker vessel and that slaves should accept their lot. It doesn't seem promising!
But Volf suggests that Peter's ethic is strongly communitarian (he doesn't use that phrase) in that his teaching urges the formation of strong counter-cultural communities that seek to embody the values of the gospel of Christ in good works. It's not our job to change society, still less the world. our role is not to bend opinion to our view, build up blocs of supporters until we can vote the Kingdom of God through whatever legislature runs our countries.
Rather, our role is much simpler and small scale. It's to live by the values of the Kingdom and tell people why we're hopeful.
He says: 'What we should learn from the text is not, of course, to keep our mouths shut and hands folded, but to make our rhetoric and action more modest so that they can be more effective. As we strive for social change, 1 Peter nudges us to drop the pen that scripts master narratives and instead give account of the living hope in God and God's future (3:15; 1:5), to abandon the project of reshaping society from the ground up and instead do as much good as we can from where we are at the time we are there (2:11), to suffer injustice and bless the unjust rather than perpetrating violence by repaying "evil for evil or abuse for abuse" (3:9), and to replace the anger of frustration with the joy of expectation (4:13).'
And that's why we need to be forming strong communities that are shaping those values in places of mutual support and prayer, so we are strengthened to live well in our homes, work places and political arenas. 'For people who live the soft difference,' he says, 'mission fundamentally takes for the form of witness and invitation. They seek to win others without pressure or manipulation, sometimes even "without a word" (3:1)'.
It's great stuff. Later this week, I'll be reflecting on how this approach helps to understand the practicalities of what Peter says about our lifestyles.
To sum up his argument in a rather crude nutshell, Volf argues that Peter urges his readers to be distinctive but not eccentric. He suggests 'To make a difference, one must be different' - a simple, obvious and yet profound observation that's worth reflecting on for a moment or two.
Some scholars suggest that Peter's social ethic - like that of the pastorals - is inherently conservative. He talks about submission in the political arena, workplace and home. He explicitly states that wives are the weaker vessel and that slaves should accept their lot. It doesn't seem promising!
But Volf suggests that Peter's ethic is strongly communitarian (he doesn't use that phrase) in that his teaching urges the formation of strong counter-cultural communities that seek to embody the values of the gospel of Christ in good works. It's not our job to change society, still less the world. our role is not to bend opinion to our view, build up blocs of supporters until we can vote the Kingdom of God through whatever legislature runs our countries.
Rather, our role is much simpler and small scale. It's to live by the values of the Kingdom and tell people why we're hopeful.
He says: 'What we should learn from the text is not, of course, to keep our mouths shut and hands folded, but to make our rhetoric and action more modest so that they can be more effective. As we strive for social change, 1 Peter nudges us to drop the pen that scripts master narratives and instead give account of the living hope in God and God's future (3:15; 1:5), to abandon the project of reshaping society from the ground up and instead do as much good as we can from where we are at the time we are there (2:11), to suffer injustice and bless the unjust rather than perpetrating violence by repaying "evil for evil or abuse for abuse" (3:9), and to replace the anger of frustration with the joy of expectation (4:13).'
And that's why we need to be forming strong communities that are shaping those values in places of mutual support and prayer, so we are strengthened to live well in our homes, work places and political arenas. 'For people who live the soft difference,' he says, 'mission fundamentally takes for the form of witness and invitation. They seek to win others without pressure or manipulation, sometimes even "without a word" (3:1)'.
It's great stuff. Later this week, I'll be reflecting on how this approach helps to understand the practicalities of what Peter says about our lifestyles.
Soaring to another place
The new Mercury rev album, snowflake midnight, is a strong late contender for record of the year. A decade after the band's sublime deserter's songs, snowflake midnight is an album of ambition and subtlety and wonderful tunes.
In many ways it shouldn't work. It's a sort of concept album, hanging around ideas of the transience of life in the enormity of the universe; it owes far too much to the prog rock of King Crimson and early Pink Floyd; and at times it meanders. Yet none of these things should put you off.
Mercury Rev have woven a load of disparate elements into one of the most affecting 41 minutes of music created this year. Check it out here. As ever the lyrics are intriguing and literate, a pile of images rather than a set of narratives. But they are embedded in gorgeous tunes and soaring melodies. it's genuinely an album to transport you to another place.
So album of the year has quite a strong and somewhat eclectic field this year - Yeasayer, Elbow, The Last Shadow Puppets, Potishead and Fleet Foxes are all in contention and there's still a couple of months to go.
In many ways it shouldn't work. It's a sort of concept album, hanging around ideas of the transience of life in the enormity of the universe; it owes far too much to the prog rock of King Crimson and early Pink Floyd; and at times it meanders. Yet none of these things should put you off.
Mercury Rev have woven a load of disparate elements into one of the most affecting 41 minutes of music created this year. Check it out here. As ever the lyrics are intriguing and literate, a pile of images rather than a set of narratives. But they are embedded in gorgeous tunes and soaring melodies. it's genuinely an album to transport you to another place.
So album of the year has quite a strong and somewhat eclectic field this year - Yeasayer, Elbow, The Last Shadow Puppets, Potishead and Fleet Foxes are all in contention and there's still a couple of months to go.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Lives in the balance
Stephen Sizer's blog has a posting of Jackson Browne's wonderful Lives in the Balance featuring the lyrics and a number of links of YouTube videos. it's here and well worth checking out.
Jackson Browne was an important voice during my university years. His album Late for the Sky was rarely off the turntable and still brings tears to the eyes thirty years later. He's an excellent lyricist and beautiful singer.
He seems to have undergone something of a renaissance in the mid to late 80s and turned out some good songs reflecting on the parlous state of the world and the need for a spirituality that works - Lives in the Balance, The Barricades of Heaven and Looking East are among the best.
Voices like his are rare. Neil Young - another seminal influence, still going strong - lamented recently that there are no young singers manning the barricades and calling the politicians to account, which is why he's out on the road again doing it!
More recent posts on Stephen Sizer's blog contain reviews of his book Christian Zionism by a range of good people, including Stephen Travis and Peter Walker. it looks really worth reading - I found the book really helpful (if a little scary).
Jackson Browne was an important voice during my university years. His album Late for the Sky was rarely off the turntable and still brings tears to the eyes thirty years later. He's an excellent lyricist and beautiful singer.
He seems to have undergone something of a renaissance in the mid to late 80s and turned out some good songs reflecting on the parlous state of the world and the need for a spirituality that works - Lives in the Balance, The Barricades of Heaven and Looking East are among the best.
Voices like his are rare. Neil Young - another seminal influence, still going strong - lamented recently that there are no young singers manning the barricades and calling the politicians to account, which is why he's out on the road again doing it!
More recent posts on Stephen Sizer's blog contain reviews of his book Christian Zionism by a range of good people, including Stephen Travis and Peter Walker. it looks really worth reading - I found the book really helpful (if a little scary).
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
So what - a classic of soul music
Just listening to Radio 4's Soul Music devoted to Miles Davis So What off the Kind of Blue album. Wow! What a piece of music. What a bunch of musicians - including John Coltrane on saxaphone, Bill evans on piano
If you missed the programme, go to the listen again feature on the radio 4 website. You'll not regret it.
Then, like me, you'll need to order the album...
If you missed the programme, go to the listen again feature on the radio 4 website. You'll not regret it.
Then, like me, you'll need to order the album...
The joys of the brief getaway
I struggled through Sunday with a sore throat, kept afloat by adrenalin I think, and crashed yesterday. So I was listening to the news through the day, drifting in and out of sleep, as US stock markets crashed and Congressmen failed to grasp reality.
Last Friday we went over to Amiens in Northern France with friends for a twenty-four hour getaway, ate by the river in the shadow of the cathedral, visited the market, sat in the sunshine enjoying bread, cheese, wine and good company. It was a world away from the shenanigans on world financial markets and the pressure of ministry.So, I'm trying to get my head in gear this morning for the challenges of the week (or maybe that should be weak as I don't feel too brilliant yet). I took delivery over the weekend of Jurgen Moltmann's The Coming of God, his exploration of Christian eschatology. I look forward to dipping into that today, along with Simon ponsonby's really rather good And the Lamb wins.
The series on hope is going fairly well. Reactions in church are positive and the questions I'm getting are helping to shape how we proceed. Having spent three sessions mapping the framework, next time we get much more personal looking at what happens when we die and how Christian hope helps us with our grief.
Our sermons are online now, so you can hear what I'm making of all this here - should you wish to (you'll need to click the downloads button on the right of the welcome screen and follow the links through).
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Keeping the rich to their promises
Well, as some of us feared, the credit crunch is beginning to affect how the rich world is acting towards the poor world. At meetings this week at the UN, France and Canada are wobbling on commitments they've made to helping fund the millennium development goals because of economic wobbles.
You can read about it here, sign the petition and sign up to receive alerts from this intriguing sounding organisation called Avaatz, a campaign and advocacy web portal seeking to empower ordinary people to act together to have their voices heard. It looks good.
It was deeply disheartening to hear Breakfast TV's 'typical' British family responding to Gordon Brown's conference speech by saying that they didn't care what happened in other countries, they just want help to cut their fuel and food bills. They didn't speak for me. I hope they don't speak for many. But it serves as a warning that a little economic gloom can make us inward-looking and more selfish than we normally are.
It's true that I spend more at Sainsbury's now than I did last year. But I've got a full fridge and an over-full stomach. The huge hikes in the cost of basics like rice and wheat, combined with the severe weather affecting many parts of the poor world, means that more people are dying for lack of food.
Now doesn't seem a good time to be turning our backs on those in need.
You can read about it here, sign the petition and sign up to receive alerts from this intriguing sounding organisation called Avaatz, a campaign and advocacy web portal seeking to empower ordinary people to act together to have their voices heard. It looks good.
It was deeply disheartening to hear Breakfast TV's 'typical' British family responding to Gordon Brown's conference speech by saying that they didn't care what happened in other countries, they just want help to cut their fuel and food bills. They didn't speak for me. I hope they don't speak for many. But it serves as a warning that a little economic gloom can make us inward-looking and more selfish than we normally are.
It's true that I spend more at Sainsbury's now than I did last year. But I've got a full fridge and an over-full stomach. The huge hikes in the cost of basics like rice and wheat, combined with the severe weather affecting many parts of the poor world, means that more people are dying for lack of food.
Now doesn't seem a good time to be turning our backs on those in need.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Play games and feed the world
Thanks to Janice who at our harvest service yesterday recommended a website called free rice (you can find it here) where you can play all kinds of games to improve your mental agility and for every answer you get right, twenty grains of rice are given to the world food programme to help eradicate hunger.
So this morning before breakfast I was playing a definitions game and donated 600 grains - not much, but imagine if we all did it!
So this morning before breakfast I was playing a definitions game and donated 600 grains - not much, but imagine if we all did it!
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Bringing a historical persepctive
Thanks to Iain for his comment on the last post - always good to see sensible baptist ministers at work!
There was an excellent documentary on Radio 4 this morning looking at the context of the current economic woes. It was by Jeff Randall, someone I don't always agree with. But I thought his analysis was spot on, especially in terms of the effects of the big bang (October 1986) on the way money markets work. You'll be able to listen to it again for a week at the BBC website.
What was great was hearing the latest member of Hoare family suggesting that markets crash from time-to-time and we all get on with life. His family bank has weathered many storms since it was founded in the 1690s. You could almost hear his eyebrows rising as he spoke.
Also good to hear Brian Winterflood's perspective. He's been a city dealer for more than 50 years. I used to talk to him occasionally when he was a stock jobber. He lived through the market meltdown of the early 1970s and said it was worse than this one - people lost trust in the banking system altogether and were taking home bags full of Kruger rands to bury in their gardens!
A bit of perspective never hurt anyone - perhaps someone could tell the Today presenters.
There was an excellent documentary on Radio 4 this morning looking at the context of the current economic woes. It was by Jeff Randall, someone I don't always agree with. But I thought his analysis was spot on, especially in terms of the effects of the big bang (October 1986) on the way money markets work. You'll be able to listen to it again for a week at the BBC website.
What was great was hearing the latest member of Hoare family suggesting that markets crash from time-to-time and we all get on with life. His family bank has weathered many storms since it was founded in the 1690s. You could almost hear his eyebrows rising as he spoke.
Also good to hear Brian Winterflood's perspective. He's been a city dealer for more than 50 years. I used to talk to him occasionally when he was a stock jobber. He lived through the market meltdown of the early 1970s and said it was worse than this one - people lost trust in the banking system altogether and were taking home bags full of Kruger rands to bury in their gardens!
A bit of perspective never hurt anyone - perhaps someone could tell the Today presenters.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Market meltdown and the millennium development goals
Have others seen the irony in Barclays acquiring Lehman Brothers US operations for $1bn today but walking away from the opportunity to rescue the group on Saturday despite the chairman of Barclays trumpeting today that it was a great deal at any price?
I was a financial journalist in the early 1980s when Mrs Thatcher was presiding over a financial meltdown that caused similar headlines to the ones we're seeing now. Unemployment hit three million plus, interest rates were in double digits as was inflation. Manufacturers were queuing up to go to the wall. Whole towns were left wasted and broken. In those days, furrowed brows combed the public sector borrowing requirement numbers for evidence of who knows what... There was much chin rubbing and mutterings of 'the markets will correct'.
Now as we face a yet another serious correction in the financial markets and jitters like we've not known for a good while, we are nightly treated to ever younger reporters overdosing on hyperbole as they seek to tell us that things are even worse than they were yesterday. I find myself sounding like the classic grumpy old man, shouting at the TV screen 'how many recessions have you seen, sunny boy?' Of course, when I was pontificating on the state of the economy, I was a mature 25 year old! 'Twas ever thus...
I wonder how much of this might have been avoided by cooler, wiser heads suggesting no one panic, no one buy or sell anything, no one create yet another fictitious financial instrument to make it look as if our asset-base is bigger than it actually is and we are all richer than we really are. I remember an FT ad in the 80s that asked where the money goes in our crazy 24 hour, global securities trading system, asked 'does it even exist?' I wonder...
Soon, it seems, we'll all be banking at the single global financial services conglomerate left after the current meltdown. Funny how unfettered markets and rapacious competition reduces the number of players and the choice left to hapless and baffled consumers.
Nothing like a good rant.... It makes me feel better about my bank being taken over by the bank I left because I wasn't happy with its service. But it also leaves me with a broader question.
When the dust settles, what will have happened to the Millennium Development Goals? How much of the money that was earmarked for achieving those - you know the ones, free primary education for all children by 2015, rising levels of healthcare, access to clean water, action on HIV, TB and malaria - has been diverted into propping up the financial institutions that fuel the global economy that has kept the developing world on its knees for too long?
Bruce Cockburn got it right back in the 1980s when the seeds for this mess were being sown in the privatising policies of the Thatcher/Reagan governments and the IMF started intoning its free-market mantra. He sang: 'spend a buck to make a buck, you don't give a flying f... about the people in poverty.' Now that's high quality economic analysis and commentary from a seasoned hand!
I was a financial journalist in the early 1980s when Mrs Thatcher was presiding over a financial meltdown that caused similar headlines to the ones we're seeing now. Unemployment hit three million plus, interest rates were in double digits as was inflation. Manufacturers were queuing up to go to the wall. Whole towns were left wasted and broken. In those days, furrowed brows combed the public sector borrowing requirement numbers for evidence of who knows what... There was much chin rubbing and mutterings of 'the markets will correct'.
Now as we face a yet another serious correction in the financial markets and jitters like we've not known for a good while, we are nightly treated to ever younger reporters overdosing on hyperbole as they seek to tell us that things are even worse than they were yesterday. I find myself sounding like the classic grumpy old man, shouting at the TV screen 'how many recessions have you seen, sunny boy?' Of course, when I was pontificating on the state of the economy, I was a mature 25 year old! 'Twas ever thus...
I wonder how much of this might have been avoided by cooler, wiser heads suggesting no one panic, no one buy or sell anything, no one create yet another fictitious financial instrument to make it look as if our asset-base is bigger than it actually is and we are all richer than we really are. I remember an FT ad in the 80s that asked where the money goes in our crazy 24 hour, global securities trading system, asked 'does it even exist?' I wonder...
Soon, it seems, we'll all be banking at the single global financial services conglomerate left after the current meltdown. Funny how unfettered markets and rapacious competition reduces the number of players and the choice left to hapless and baffled consumers.
Nothing like a good rant.... It makes me feel better about my bank being taken over by the bank I left because I wasn't happy with its service. But it also leaves me with a broader question.
When the dust settles, what will have happened to the Millennium Development Goals? How much of the money that was earmarked for achieving those - you know the ones, free primary education for all children by 2015, rising levels of healthcare, access to clean water, action on HIV, TB and malaria - has been diverted into propping up the financial institutions that fuel the global economy that has kept the developing world on its knees for too long?
Bruce Cockburn got it right back in the 1980s when the seeds for this mess were being sown in the privatising policies of the Thatcher/Reagan governments and the IMF started intoning its free-market mantra. He sang: 'spend a buck to make a buck, you don't give a flying f... about the people in poverty.' Now that's high quality economic analysis and commentary from a seasoned hand!
hyperbole and market mayhem
It looks like the bank I used to bank with is taking over the bank I moved to to get a better service - the lengths some organisations will go to to keep customers!
LloydsTSB is taking over HBOS - or are they merging, consolidating to weather the chill winds of the worst downturn since hyperbole began?
I wonder if, when the dust settles after all the shenanigans going on in world financial markets, we'll still believe in the myth of unfettered free markets; or will we be able to admit that without governments the economy doesn't work and that the mixed economy of John Maynard Keynes is actually the way things are and that Milton Friedman's pipe dreams lead only to catastrophe - especially for the poor.
It is a curious irony that those who have telling government to leave well alone for the past twenty-five years are now blaming the government for everything that's gone wrong and insisting the government sorts out the mess. Northern Rock shareholders objecting that they weren't getting a fair return on their investment when the bank was nationalised seemed oblivious to the fact that market forces - in the form of their bank going to the wall - would have left them at the back of the queue of creditors and almost certainly with nothing. That's capitalism for you...
Ah well... Providing I can get my money from a hole in the wall, I'm happy (and frankly am not too fussed which combination of barrow boys actually manages it.)
LloydsTSB is taking over HBOS - or are they merging, consolidating to weather the chill winds of the worst downturn since hyperbole began?
I wonder if, when the dust settles after all the shenanigans going on in world financial markets, we'll still believe in the myth of unfettered free markets; or will we be able to admit that without governments the economy doesn't work and that the mixed economy of John Maynard Keynes is actually the way things are and that Milton Friedman's pipe dreams lead only to catastrophe - especially for the poor.
It is a curious irony that those who have telling government to leave well alone for the past twenty-five years are now blaming the government for everything that's gone wrong and insisting the government sorts out the mess. Northern Rock shareholders objecting that they weren't getting a fair return on their investment when the bank was nationalised seemed oblivious to the fact that market forces - in the form of their bank going to the wall - would have left them at the back of the queue of creditors and almost certainly with nothing. That's capitalism for you...
Ah well... Providing I can get my money from a hole in the wall, I'm happy (and frankly am not too fussed which combination of barrow boys actually manages it.)
Belief precedes believing
'To learn a belief without belief is to sing a song without a tune'
The quote is from novelist Ursula LeGuin and I came across it this morning while reading a paper by Joel Green on holiness in 1 Peter.
It stopped me in my tracks.
She goes on to say: 'A yielding, an obedience, a willingness to accept these notes as the right notes, this pattern as the right pattern, is the essential gesture of performance, translation and understanding.'
I find myself thinking something like this when I come across the debate between believing and unbelieving New Testament scholars over who is likely to be the more accurate. I found myself pondering it when watching a video of a debate recently staged in Sheffield between James Crossley and William Lane Craig about the historicity of the resurrection.
I guess the reason it stopped me in my tracks this morning is that it highlights an issue that ministers face on a regular basis. We can expound the content of our belief in a way that congregations understand on a semantic level. But unless they believe, they will not learn the belief we are expounding.
LeGuin goes on: 'the gesture need not be permanent, a lasting posture of the mind or heart; yet it is not false. It is more than the suspension of disbelief needed to watch a play, yet less than a conversion. It is a position, a posture in the dance.'
If we are going to read 1 Peter well, says Green, we need to put ourselves in the place where we adopt Peter's perspective on the world. Only there will we have any chance of seeing whether it makes sense or not; only if we believe what Peter is saying, will we be in a position to believe that it's true of us and that a posture can become a conversion.
The quote is from novelist Ursula LeGuin and I came across it this morning while reading a paper by Joel Green on holiness in 1 Peter.
It stopped me in my tracks.
She goes on to say: 'A yielding, an obedience, a willingness to accept these notes as the right notes, this pattern as the right pattern, is the essential gesture of performance, translation and understanding.'
I find myself thinking something like this when I come across the debate between believing and unbelieving New Testament scholars over who is likely to be the more accurate. I found myself pondering it when watching a video of a debate recently staged in Sheffield between James Crossley and William Lane Craig about the historicity of the resurrection.
I guess the reason it stopped me in my tracks this morning is that it highlights an issue that ministers face on a regular basis. We can expound the content of our belief in a way that congregations understand on a semantic level. But unless they believe, they will not learn the belief we are expounding.
LeGuin goes on: 'the gesture need not be permanent, a lasting posture of the mind or heart; yet it is not false. It is more than the suspension of disbelief needed to watch a play, yet less than a conversion. It is a position, a posture in the dance.'
If we are going to read 1 Peter well, says Green, we need to put ourselves in the place where we adopt Peter's perspective on the world. Only there will we have any chance of seeing whether it makes sense or not; only if we believe what Peter is saying, will we be in a position to believe that it's true of us and that a posture can become a conversion.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Reminded of Moltmann
Roger emailed yesterday to remind me of Jurgen Moltmann on hope. I hadn't forgotten but I hadn't consulted his wonderful Theology of Hope for the present series, thinking it was probably too demanding. But yesterday evening I found this:
'Christianity is eschatology, is hope, forward looking and forward moving, and therefore also revolutionising and transforming the present.' (Theology of Hope SCM 1967, p16).
That pretty much says it all, I think. And this:
'For Christian faith lives from the raising of the crucified Christ and strains after the promises of the universal future of Christ...the eschatological outlook is characteristic of all Christian proclamation, of every Christian existence and of the whole church.'.
Great stuff to ponder on a sunny Sunday morning.
'Christianity is eschatology, is hope, forward looking and forward moving, and therefore also revolutionising and transforming the present.' (Theology of Hope SCM 1967, p16).
That pretty much says it all, I think. And this:
'For Christian faith lives from the raising of the crucified Christ and strains after the promises of the universal future of Christ...the eschatological outlook is characteristic of all Christian proclamation, of every Christian existence and of the whole church.'.
Great stuff to ponder on a sunny Sunday morning.
Friday, September 12, 2008
The dark side of eschatology?
As I've been getting into our series on hope, I've been reading some of Stephen Sizer's material on Israel and Zionism. He is excellent - clear, concise, well-informed and spot-on in his treatment of the biblical material.
It is that last point that makes his contribution on the vexed issue of 'the Bible, Israel and the Church' (the subtitle of his book Zion's Christian Soldiers, IVP 2007) so helpful. Lots of his writing can be found on his website here.
As I've been working through the issues of hope, I am realising that I need to tackle the whole 'end times' industry and the issues it highlights. I'm just not sure how. In a couple of weeks I shall put a toe in the water by talking about millennialism.
My lecturer at LBC, as he outlined the various positions, described himself as pro-milennial - 'whenever it happens, if God wants it, I'm for it,' he says. Can't argue with that!
It is that last point that makes his contribution on the vexed issue of 'the Bible, Israel and the Church' (the subtitle of his book Zion's Christian Soldiers, IVP 2007) so helpful. Lots of his writing can be found on his website here.
As I've been working through the issues of hope, I am realising that I need to tackle the whole 'end times' industry and the issues it highlights. I'm just not sure how. In a couple of weeks I shall put a toe in the water by talking about millennialism.
My lecturer at LBC, as he outlined the various positions, described himself as pro-milennial - 'whenever it happens, if God wants it, I'm for it,' he says. Can't argue with that!
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Getting together in convivial surroundings
Sometimes the world gets what the church has forgotten it knows.
Good friends sent this link to a cafe/restaurant that seems to have grasped something about the social nature of eating.
They probably aren't the only ones - though they do seem to do it very nicely (I'll have to go and check it out).
As Leonard Sweet points out in his book, The Gospel According to Starbucks, that cafe chain is only partially interested in selling you a coffee. it's much more interested in enabling you to connect with friends and have an experience that is life-affirming.
Of course, it hopes that if it does that, it'll make more money, but let's not be too cynical because anything that helps people come together in a world that's falling apart has to be a good thing. maybe we should be in there helping it happen.
Good friends sent this link to a cafe/restaurant that seems to have grasped something about the social nature of eating.
They probably aren't the only ones - though they do seem to do it very nicely (I'll have to go and check it out).
As Leonard Sweet points out in his book, The Gospel According to Starbucks, that cafe chain is only partially interested in selling you a coffee. it's much more interested in enabling you to connect with friends and have an experience that is life-affirming.
Of course, it hopes that if it does that, it'll make more money, but let's not be too cynical because anything that helps people come together in a world that's falling apart has to be a good thing. maybe we should be in there helping it happen.
Three cheers for Elbow
Great to see Elbow picking up the Mercury Prize for their album The Seldom Seen Kid the day before yesterday. What a result!
Elbow are one of the best bands in Britain - great tunes, wonderfully arranged and fabulous song writing from the almost peerless Guy Garvey. The Seldom Seen Kid is the band's fourth album and probably their best - though each one is pretty brilliant. The previous effort, Leaders of the Free World is a stunning piece of work containing one of my favourite tracks of all time (The Everthere).
Should you not be a fan, you can check out the album here (the site's a work of art in itself) and more about the band here
Elbow are one of the best bands in Britain - great tunes, wonderfully arranged and fabulous song writing from the almost peerless Guy Garvey. The Seldom Seen Kid is the band's fourth album and probably their best - though each one is pretty brilliant. The previous effort, Leaders of the Free World is a stunning piece of work containing one of my favourite tracks of all time (The Everthere).
Should you not be a fan, you can check out the album here (the site's a work of art in itself) and more about the band here
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Getting excited with Isaiah
As I get into our series on hope, I'm scurrying around my study looking for resources that might contain answers to questions that are popping into my head. Well, today as I was reading Isaiah 65 I kept asking myself where I got the idea that Isaiah spoke about the nations bringing their wealth into Jerusalem and that this act was a key part of Isaiah's vision of the end times?
I found my old tattered copy of Richard Mouw's When the Kings Come Marching in: Isaiah and the New Jerusalem (Eerdmans 1983) and realised that this little book has shaped my understanding of eschatology probably more than any other text (apart from the Bible). It was republished in a revised and expanded form in 2002 (I've ordered that).
I read it the year it came out and remember being very excited about it. Since then, its message has insinuated itself into my thinking about the coming city of God, life after the eschaton, all that stuff. And today, as I read what Mouw has to say about Isaiah 60, an enigmatic chapter that John Goldingay suggests is 'the longest unstructured stream-of-consciousness prophecy in Isaiah', I found myself getting really excited all over again.
In particular Mouw points out that a number of characters - notably the ships of Tarshish - which are judged earlier in Isaiah, feature in chapter 60 coming laden with goods and gifts into the holy city to serve God. What's happening? Mouw suggests that earlier references to these players are about purification, not destruction and that what's happening in Isaiah 60 is a description of God redeeming culture, the fruits of human creativity.
Starting from Psalm 24:1 - 'the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof' - Mouw takes us back to Genesis 2 and the mandate to subdue and fill the earth, arguing that the 'fillings' that humans make are our cultural artifacts, arts and crafts, political and economic systems, everything that makes life sustainable (and unsustainable - because of the Fall) on planet earth. All this is not written off by God. Rather it is redeemed, washed and brushed up for the great parade as His holy city is revealed to his rather stunned people.
More than that the politicians who have 'filled the earth' with governments that have instigated wars and campaigns for justice, empire building and grand initiatives to feed the hungry will march into the city to account for themselves before the people they ruled over. God will decide between them (Isaiah 2:4) as they bow before the king of kings (Phil 2:11) who has stripped them of their power (Col 2:15) and who exercises judgment on behalf of those who've suffered at their hands and cry out for a just accounting (Rev 6:9-11; 1 Pet 2:12, etc).
Whatever is going on in Isaiah 60 - and it is impressionistic and raises all sorts of questions about who remains in the city, for how long and what is the nature of the final judgement, of the settling of accounts and setting things straight - one thing is certain: the eschatological hope of the Bible - for this and other Isaianic texts sweep into the New Testament underpinning all its eschatological teaching - is absolutely rooted on planet earth; it is a physical, tangible hope with a recognisable shape. More than that, the way we live now, the things with which we fill the earth, shapes what we experience there.
In God's eschatological scheme our lives matter. How exciting is that?!
I found my old tattered copy of Richard Mouw's When the Kings Come Marching in: Isaiah and the New Jerusalem (Eerdmans 1983) and realised that this little book has shaped my understanding of eschatology probably more than any other text (apart from the Bible). It was republished in a revised and expanded form in 2002 (I've ordered that).
I read it the year it came out and remember being very excited about it. Since then, its message has insinuated itself into my thinking about the coming city of God, life after the eschaton, all that stuff. And today, as I read what Mouw has to say about Isaiah 60, an enigmatic chapter that John Goldingay suggests is 'the longest unstructured stream-of-consciousness prophecy in Isaiah', I found myself getting really excited all over again.
In particular Mouw points out that a number of characters - notably the ships of Tarshish - which are judged earlier in Isaiah, feature in chapter 60 coming laden with goods and gifts into the holy city to serve God. What's happening? Mouw suggests that earlier references to these players are about purification, not destruction and that what's happening in Isaiah 60 is a description of God redeeming culture, the fruits of human creativity.
Starting from Psalm 24:1 - 'the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof' - Mouw takes us back to Genesis 2 and the mandate to subdue and fill the earth, arguing that the 'fillings' that humans make are our cultural artifacts, arts and crafts, political and economic systems, everything that makes life sustainable (and unsustainable - because of the Fall) on planet earth. All this is not written off by God. Rather it is redeemed, washed and brushed up for the great parade as His holy city is revealed to his rather stunned people.
More than that the politicians who have 'filled the earth' with governments that have instigated wars and campaigns for justice, empire building and grand initiatives to feed the hungry will march into the city to account for themselves before the people they ruled over. God will decide between them (Isaiah 2:4) as they bow before the king of kings (Phil 2:11) who has stripped them of their power (Col 2:15) and who exercises judgment on behalf of those who've suffered at their hands and cry out for a just accounting (Rev 6:9-11; 1 Pet 2:12, etc).
Whatever is going on in Isaiah 60 - and it is impressionistic and raises all sorts of questions about who remains in the city, for how long and what is the nature of the final judgement, of the settling of accounts and setting things straight - one thing is certain: the eschatological hope of the Bible - for this and other Isaianic texts sweep into the New Testament underpinning all its eschatological teaching - is absolutely rooted on planet earth; it is a physical, tangible hope with a recognisable shape. More than that, the way we live now, the things with which we fill the earth, shapes what we experience there.
In God's eschatological scheme our lives matter. How exciting is that?!
Monday, September 08, 2008
the excitement of preaching
One of the things I love about starting new teaching series (that's a plural, by the way, so read it accordingly...!) is the sense of wonder I get at discovering new things. I think this is probably a good thing. I think preachers should get excited about what they are learning so that they preach as those who are sharing new discoveries.
Of course, I'm not discovering things that I didn't know about or which are changing my core beliefs about God, the world and our place in both. Rather I am unearthing new links between familiar things, like seeing an old master painting from a new angle or with a fresh set of questions in mind.
I'm reminded of the statement that the great historian Christopher Hill makes at the beginning of his quite wonderful The World Turned Upside Down: 'history has to be rewritten in every generation, because although the past does not change, the present does; each generation asks new questions of the past, and finds new areas of sympathy as it relives different aspects of the experiences of his predecessors.'
I thinks that's true of every preaching series. We use our familiar text - the Bible - and our well-known beliefs and understandings of its message - variously known as our doctrines or theology. But each time we embark on a series, we ask a fresh set of questions, bring new experiences and seek to make new connections between different parts of the material and between the material and the audience. The result is that we see things in new ways and, for this preacher at least, make sometimes startling and exciting new patterns out of familiar words and images.
All this has me enthusiastically opening my commentaries and other resources and wrestling with the text of scripture with a smile on my face. It also helps when - as happened this past Sunday - people respond positively to the journey you've invited them to join you on.
Of course, I'm not discovering things that I didn't know about or which are changing my core beliefs about God, the world and our place in both. Rather I am unearthing new links between familiar things, like seeing an old master painting from a new angle or with a fresh set of questions in mind.
I'm reminded of the statement that the great historian Christopher Hill makes at the beginning of his quite wonderful The World Turned Upside Down: 'history has to be rewritten in every generation, because although the past does not change, the present does; each generation asks new questions of the past, and finds new areas of sympathy as it relives different aspects of the experiences of his predecessors.'
I thinks that's true of every preaching series. We use our familiar text - the Bible - and our well-known beliefs and understandings of its message - variously known as our doctrines or theology. But each time we embark on a series, we ask a fresh set of questions, bring new experiences and seek to make new connections between different parts of the material and between the material and the audience. The result is that we see things in new ways and, for this preacher at least, make sometimes startling and exciting new patterns out of familiar words and images.
All this has me enthusiastically opening my commentaries and other resources and wrestling with the text of scripture with a smile on my face. It also helps when - as happened this past Sunday - people respond positively to the journey you've invited them to join you on.
Friday, September 05, 2008
The Age of the Understatement
This week I've been listening to the wonderful album by the Last Shadow Puppets, the side project of Arctic Monkey's front man, Alex Turner and Rascals Miles Kane. It's a blinder.
I'm not familiar with the Rascals, but Turner is fast becoming the premier songsmith in Britain. The album, The Age of the Understatement, is a collection of exquisitely crafted songs that wouldn't be out of place on a mid-60s Walker Brothers album. It's full of lush strings and twangy guitars, tricksy key changes and fabulous harmonies.
Pretty much everything they try comes off and as well a clutch of great tunes, the lyrics are a master class in how to write bittersweet love songs.
Try it. you'll not be disappointed.
I'm not familiar with the Rascals, but Turner is fast becoming the premier songsmith in Britain. The album, The Age of the Understatement, is a collection of exquisitely crafted songs that wouldn't be out of place on a mid-60s Walker Brothers album. It's full of lush strings and twangy guitars, tricksy key changes and fabulous harmonies.
Pretty much everything they try comes off and as well a clutch of great tunes, the lyrics are a master class in how to write bittersweet love songs.
Try it. you'll not be disappointed.
Welcome to the blogosphere
I don't often do this, but I thought I'd welcome IBTS to the blogosphere. Various luminaries from that august institution are posting on a college blog. Good stuff so far, including a post on IBTS hero James McClendon by our very own Ian Randall - well worth a read.
The picture of Vanessa is priceless!
Hopefully Phil and Alex will be posting soon on the joys of cats...or is that CATs....?
You can get it here
The picture of Vanessa is priceless!
Hopefully Phil and Alex will be posting soon on the joys of cats...or is that CATs....?
You can get it here
More on why eating together matters
We entertained a couple for dinner yesterday and had a lovely time.
In many ways they exemplify one or two of the issues we wrestle with as a church. In a previous generation, they would probably be at the heart of the institutional life of the church, serving on the diaconate, heavily involved in fellowship and outreach meetings.
As it is, they struggle to get to home group and wonder what the point is of many of the things that church does.
This morning, as I was reflecting on our time together, I began to ask myself whether we stress too much the gathering of believers in large numbers for what we all know of as 'church' - singing, listening, praying, reading scripture, hearing sermons, sharing coffee afterwards.
Then I read 1 Samuel 12:23-24 where the aging prophet tells Israel what he's done - prayed for them and declared God's word - and reminds them what they must do - fear the Lord, serve him faithfully and remember all he's done for them.
Now, you could argue that that is as good a description of church as you'd ever find and yet it seems to me to be a minimalist understanding of it. Do we fret too much over programmes, getting everyone together, ensuring we're all on the same page, moving ahead at the same pace? Does this mean we sacrifice real learning of the faith, living out its implications and sharing one another's lives as we do it?
I'm not sure I have any answers... But yet again, interesting things were happening as we gathered to share food around a table and enjoy one another's company. I feel a theme coming on!
In many ways they exemplify one or two of the issues we wrestle with as a church. In a previous generation, they would probably be at the heart of the institutional life of the church, serving on the diaconate, heavily involved in fellowship and outreach meetings.
As it is, they struggle to get to home group and wonder what the point is of many of the things that church does.
This morning, as I was reflecting on our time together, I began to ask myself whether we stress too much the gathering of believers in large numbers for what we all know of as 'church' - singing, listening, praying, reading scripture, hearing sermons, sharing coffee afterwards.
Then I read 1 Samuel 12:23-24 where the aging prophet tells Israel what he's done - prayed for them and declared God's word - and reminds them what they must do - fear the Lord, serve him faithfully and remember all he's done for them.
Now, you could argue that that is as good a description of church as you'd ever find and yet it seems to me to be a minimalist understanding of it. Do we fret too much over programmes, getting everyone together, ensuring we're all on the same page, moving ahead at the same pace? Does this mean we sacrifice real learning of the faith, living out its implications and sharing one another's lives as we do it?
I'm not sure I have any answers... But yet again, interesting things were happening as we gathered to share food around a table and enjoy one another's company. I feel a theme coming on!
Monday, September 01, 2008
In praise of slowing down
We said a tearful farewell to Jonathan yesterday as he moves on to pastures new in Wolverhampton. Although he's only been with us for a couple of years, it felt like the end of an era. It's been great to have him, things have happened as a result of his being with us that wouldn't have happened otherwise; we're grateful for his input.
But life goes on. Out with the old, in with the new. In the relentless treadmill of church, we start new teaching programmes next Sunday. As Jonathan himself pointed out yesterday, September is always the start of things - new terms, new seasons and, for him, new adventures in ministry.
It would be wonderful to build a certain calmness into the church's programme. It has a sense of relentlessly marching on, reaching ever higher and further, demanding ever increasing amounts of creativity and resourcefulness. Sometimes I wonder whether it's healthy.
Someone reminded me of Juan Carlos Ortiz last week - in particular his approach to discipleship - and I remember him talking once about his approach to treaching. He'd preach on the same subject for a number of weeks until he was sure that his people had not only got it but also started to live it. Done the right way that would offer lots of time and space for reflection and discussion, teasing out the implications of a word before it needed to be filed away as the next one came along.
I am hoping (sorry) that our series on hope will enable us to slow the pace a little. We will be emphasising certain core truths of our faith and reflecting on how they stimulate good living in God's people. Hopefully (sorry again) there will be a sense of each week building on and unpacking what we discovered in previous weeks, helping us grow in understanding and application of wonderful words from God about our future.
Maybe the same will happen as we look at identity from 1 Peter. There's a danger when doing an expository series on a book that you get caught up in detail and a desire to expound and explain and unpack a vast amount of information. I'm hoping that our focus on what Peter says about who we are, will enable us to spend a few weeks thinking about a few select things, allowing them to soak into us.
I guess in short I'd like us to be marinaded in a selection of truth over the coming weeks so that our lives take on the flavour of it.
But life goes on. Out with the old, in with the new. In the relentless treadmill of church, we start new teaching programmes next Sunday. As Jonathan himself pointed out yesterday, September is always the start of things - new terms, new seasons and, for him, new adventures in ministry.
It would be wonderful to build a certain calmness into the church's programme. It has a sense of relentlessly marching on, reaching ever higher and further, demanding ever increasing amounts of creativity and resourcefulness. Sometimes I wonder whether it's healthy.
Someone reminded me of Juan Carlos Ortiz last week - in particular his approach to discipleship - and I remember him talking once about his approach to treaching. He'd preach on the same subject for a number of weeks until he was sure that his people had not only got it but also started to live it. Done the right way that would offer lots of time and space for reflection and discussion, teasing out the implications of a word before it needed to be filed away as the next one came along.
I am hoping (sorry) that our series on hope will enable us to slow the pace a little. We will be emphasising certain core truths of our faith and reflecting on how they stimulate good living in God's people. Hopefully (sorry again) there will be a sense of each week building on and unpacking what we discovered in previous weeks, helping us grow in understanding and application of wonderful words from God about our future.
Maybe the same will happen as we look at identity from 1 Peter. There's a danger when doing an expository series on a book that you get caught up in detail and a desire to expound and explain and unpack a vast amount of information. I'm hoping that our focus on what Peter says about who we are, will enable us to spend a few weeks thinking about a few select things, allowing them to soak into us.
I guess in short I'd like us to be marinaded in a selection of truth over the coming weeks so that our lives take on the flavour of it.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
What hospitality does
We had a fabulous evening last night in the convivial surroundings of the home of good friends at our church. The food was gorgeous, the conversation refreshing, the attention to detail of our host and hostess - from the way the table was laid to ensuring our glasses were filled as necessary - was perfect. It was one of those truly refreshing occasions - just what I needed at the end of a busy week.
It was a reminder, if I needed it, of what hospitality does and how essential it is. If only the church could bottle this spirit and pour it over its gatherings.
So many of Jesus' significant encounters happened at the table, in the extended, time-rich surroundings of a meal. Conversation cannot be hurried, real issues cannot be buried in agendas, no one can hide behind their job title. Here is where humans touch and life and grace, love and mercy are exchanged. This is where people find themselves and each other - and in the course of the meal, God (whether they were expecting him or not).
In the story of Zacchaeus, Jesus came to dinner and salvation came to the house. If only that happened more often in our neighbourhoods
It was a reminder, if I needed it, of what hospitality does and how essential it is. If only the church could bottle this spirit and pour it over its gatherings.
So many of Jesus' significant encounters happened at the table, in the extended, time-rich surroundings of a meal. Conversation cannot be hurried, real issues cannot be buried in agendas, no one can hide behind their job title. Here is where humans touch and life and grace, love and mercy are exchanged. This is where people find themselves and each other - and in the course of the meal, God (whether they were expecting him or not).
In the story of Zacchaeus, Jesus came to dinner and salvation came to the house. If only that happened more often in our neighbourhoods
Friday, August 29, 2008
The dark art of sermon preparation
Finished preparing for Sunday - and strangely it was like pulling teeth. This morning I felt really muddled-headed and unable to concentrate. But the grey matter started to clear after lunch.
I have focused on three aspects of the story of Zacchaeus that are Lucan favourites - finance, family and faith (remember I still carry the DNA of an unreconstructed evangelical baptist about my person!) - and I think it works ok.
Sermon preparation is still something of a mystery to me. Earlier in the week, I was feeling pretty chilled, on top of the passage and knowing generally what I wanted to say. Today, I looked at a blank screen and wondered if the passage would ever reveal its treasures.
Then suddenly it takes shape - first in my mind and then, through my fingers, on the screen. And it seems to come in a flash. One moment there's nothing, then there's a page of relatively coherent notes, then there's a worksheet and an edited version of the notes. And before I know it, I'm having a cup of tea, putting the finishing touches to the PowerPoint wondering where it all comes from.
Of course, a sermon's not really finished until it's been preached because, after all, this is an oral art form not a written one. So I don't know whether it's any good yet... But then, when are we are able to assess that - as we deliver it? As people comment immediately afterwards? Weeks later when an echo of what was said turns up in conversation or a question or an email?
I have focused on three aspects of the story of Zacchaeus that are Lucan favourites - finance, family and faith (remember I still carry the DNA of an unreconstructed evangelical baptist about my person!) - and I think it works ok.
Sermon preparation is still something of a mystery to me. Earlier in the week, I was feeling pretty chilled, on top of the passage and knowing generally what I wanted to say. Today, I looked at a blank screen and wondered if the passage would ever reveal its treasures.
Then suddenly it takes shape - first in my mind and then, through my fingers, on the screen. And it seems to come in a flash. One moment there's nothing, then there's a page of relatively coherent notes, then there's a worksheet and an edited version of the notes. And before I know it, I'm having a cup of tea, putting the finishing touches to the PowerPoint wondering where it all comes from.
Of course, a sermon's not really finished until it's been preached because, after all, this is an oral art form not a written one. So I don't know whether it's any good yet... But then, when are we are able to assess that - as we deliver it? As people comment immediately afterwards? Weeks later when an echo of what was said turns up in conversation or a question or an email?
Thursday, August 28, 2008
The beauty and brilliance of Bailey
While preparing for Sunday's teaching on Luke, I have been reminded just what a wonderful scholar Ken Bailey is.
We're looking at the story of Zacchaeus and Bailey begins his reading with the simple observation that both this story and the one before it (the healing of the blind man) take place in Jericho (a fact obscured by our chapter divisions!).
So what we have is a single story in two acts of how Jesus offers the same unconditional love to both oppressed and oppressor alike. From this flows the fact that the crowd is a key character in both stories with their affections swaying one way, then the other as the narrative unfolds - and of course, it's the crowd in which we are located.
Bailey also shows how his understanding of repentance as 'the acceptance of being found' works itself out in both halves of the story. It's great stuff. And it's beautifully written as well - unusual in New testament scholarship.
You really ought to own (as well as consult regularly) Kenneth E Bailey Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (IVP 2008). Alongside this Jacob & the Prodigal: How Jesus retold Israel's Story (BRF 2003) and the combined volume Poet & Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes: A literary-cultural approach to the parables in Luke (Eerdmans 1983) are also essential reading.
We're looking at the story of Zacchaeus and Bailey begins his reading with the simple observation that both this story and the one before it (the healing of the blind man) take place in Jericho (a fact obscured by our chapter divisions!).
So what we have is a single story in two acts of how Jesus offers the same unconditional love to both oppressed and oppressor alike. From this flows the fact that the crowd is a key character in both stories with their affections swaying one way, then the other as the narrative unfolds - and of course, it's the crowd in which we are located.
Bailey also shows how his understanding of repentance as 'the acceptance of being found' works itself out in both halves of the story. It's great stuff. And it's beautifully written as well - unusual in New testament scholarship.
You really ought to own (as well as consult regularly) Kenneth E Bailey Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (IVP 2008). Alongside this Jacob & the Prodigal: How Jesus retold Israel's Story (BRF 2003) and the combined volume Poet & Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes: A literary-cultural approach to the parables in Luke (Eerdmans 1983) are also essential reading.
Our series on hope
Well, having ruminated on big words, here's an outline for our forthcoming series on hope. The titles are suitably vague, allowing us to respond to issues as they arise in the minds of those listening and interacting with the teaching.
Having begun by asking what aspects of hope Peter expects us to be talking about both to each other and the wider, watching world - taking 1 Peter 2:14-16 as our spring board - we will tackle the subject under eight broad headings:
hope and creation (Isaiah 65:17-25 - just what did Israel's prophets expect of the future?)
hope and new creation (1 Corinthians 2:9 - how did the coming of Jesus affect that?)
hope and grief (1 Thessalonians 4 - where is hope in a world of pain and loss?)
hope and my future (1 Corinthians 15 - what's my destiny in Christ?)
hope and our future (Hebrews 13:14 - God's plans are for his people, not just individuals)
hope and my present (1 John 3:3 - the future affects my lifestyle here and now)
hope and our present (Colossians 1:24-29 - the church is a community modelled on the future)
hope and my journey (Philippians 3:20 - hope calls us on to the future God has for us)
Hopefully (sorry!), this outline is flexible enough for us to be responsive to people's concerns and questions as we make our way through the series. I have high hopes (sorry again!!) that God has a lot to say to us as we take this journey together. That's my prayer.
Having begun by asking what aspects of hope Peter expects us to be talking about both to each other and the wider, watching world - taking 1 Peter 2:14-16 as our spring board - we will tackle the subject under eight broad headings:
hope and creation (Isaiah 65:17-25 - just what did Israel's prophets expect of the future?)
hope and new creation (1 Corinthians 2:9 - how did the coming of Jesus affect that?)
hope and grief (1 Thessalonians 4 - where is hope in a world of pain and loss?)
hope and my future (1 Corinthians 15 - what's my destiny in Christ?)
hope and our future (Hebrews 13:14 - God's plans are for his people, not just individuals)
hope and my present (1 John 3:3 - the future affects my lifestyle here and now)
hope and our present (Colossians 1:24-29 - the church is a community modelled on the future)
hope and my journey (Philippians 3:20 - hope calls us on to the future God has for us)
Hopefully (sorry!), this outline is flexible enough for us to be responsive to people's concerns and questions as we make our way through the series. I have high hopes (sorry again!!) that God has a lot to say to us as we take this journey together. That's my prayer.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Books on hope
The Goldingay quote in my previous posting is from a very helpful collection of essays called What are We Waiting for? Christian Hope and Contemporary Culture edited by Stephen Holmes and Russell Rook (Paternoster 2008), published to compliment Spring Harvest's theme this year.
It's a collection of biblical, historical and theological studies on hope by some top people. I'd say it was essential reading on the subject.
Also worth reading are, of course, Tom Wright's Surprised by Hope (SPCK 2007) and his grove booklet New Heavens, New earth: The Biblical Picture of Christian Hope (Grove Biblical Series number 11 1999), an expansion of his Drew Lecture delivered at Spurgeon's College in 1993.
David Lawrence Heaven...it's not the end of the world (SU 1995 - though it might have been republished by someone else more recently) is also really good - a genuine entry-level guide to all things eschatological.
Krish and Miriam Kandiah's Spring Harvest study guide Finding an Unshakeable Hope (Authentic 2008) is also worth checking out, though to my mind it only covers half the field; the half it covers, however, it covers very well.
It's a collection of biblical, historical and theological studies on hope by some top people. I'd say it was essential reading on the subject.
Also worth reading are, of course, Tom Wright's Surprised by Hope (SPCK 2007) and his grove booklet New Heavens, New earth: The Biblical Picture of Christian Hope (Grove Biblical Series number 11 1999), an expansion of his Drew Lecture delivered at Spurgeon's College in 1993.
David Lawrence Heaven...it's not the end of the world (SU 1995 - though it might have been republished by someone else more recently) is also really good - a genuine entry-level guide to all things eschatological.
Krish and Miriam Kandiah's Spring Harvest study guide Finding an Unshakeable Hope (Authentic 2008) is also worth checking out, though to my mind it only covers half the field; the half it covers, however, it covers very well.
Apocalypse now...
I said I'd blog on whether apocalyptic is a better word than eschatology for talking about how Christians think about the future.
Since posting last on this issue, I came across this quote from John Goldingay: 'I tell students that whenever they use the word eschatology they should was their mouths out with soap, because it sounds like a technical term with a defined meaning, but actually means different things to different people.' Astute as ever.
And he could substitute the word apocalyptic where he uses eschatology. For while there is broad agreement on what constitutes apocalyptic writing, there are a range of views on what apocalyptic thinking is and more particularly how it impacts on early Christian thinking about what God has achieved through Jesus and how that affects the future of creation.
So, most agree that apocalyptic writing is concerned with the future of God's people, that it generally features an angel revealing to a prophet/author what is about to happen and what the signs of it will be. For that reason, apocalyptic writing is often lurid and complex - just ask most Christians to explain the message of Revelation (from where the word apocalypse as a type of literature comes) in a couple of sentences!
The reason why the adjective could be a useful substitute for eschatology is that the literature gave rise to a a series of key ideas in the emerging Christian faith. The great New Testament scholar, J Louis Martyn, argues that Paul's theology is apocalyptic through and through. His argument is pretty convincing (at least as far as I'm concerned).
It is from apocalyptic that the early Christians got their understanding of justification, the coming of the Holy Spirit, the certainty of resurrection, the defeat of the forces of evil and the re-patterning of the created order once that defeat had happened.
However, the biggest contribution that apocalyptic thinking makes on a Christian understanding of the world has to do with the relationship between the present age and the age to come. In most apocalyptic writing there is a contrast between the age in which we live - which is evil and, in particular, one where God's people are persecuted - and the age to come - where justice and peace, prosperity and wholeness are the order of the day. Separating these two ages is a single moment when God intervenes to end the old age and bring in the new one.
Jesus came teaching that the new age was dawning in his ministry and yet the old age was still running. Early Christian teachers argued that Jesus decisively defeated the powers of the old age on the cross and ushered in the new age - of justification, peace with God, new creation, the presence of the Holy Spirit, etc - and that new age runs alongside the old one.
What this does is to make what Christians hope for accessible to some extent in the present. Our hope of a new world inspires our action to make this world better, for example. Apocalyptic is hugely important for our understanding of Christian hope and Christian lifestyle in our present fallen world as we follow Jesus in anticipation of the new age that is dawning through his life, death and resurrection.
But, it takes a bit of explaining and I'm fairly sure that talking about hope and how that affects our lives here are now does the job just as well. So, no doubt occasionally we'll make fleeting reference to these technical terms but generally we'll be talking about hope - what we hope for and how that hope affects how we live in today's world.
Since posting last on this issue, I came across this quote from John Goldingay: 'I tell students that whenever they use the word eschatology they should was their mouths out with soap, because it sounds like a technical term with a defined meaning, but actually means different things to different people.' Astute as ever.
And he could substitute the word apocalyptic where he uses eschatology. For while there is broad agreement on what constitutes apocalyptic writing, there are a range of views on what apocalyptic thinking is and more particularly how it impacts on early Christian thinking about what God has achieved through Jesus and how that affects the future of creation.
So, most agree that apocalyptic writing is concerned with the future of God's people, that it generally features an angel revealing to a prophet/author what is about to happen and what the signs of it will be. For that reason, apocalyptic writing is often lurid and complex - just ask most Christians to explain the message of Revelation (from where the word apocalypse as a type of literature comes) in a couple of sentences!
The reason why the adjective could be a useful substitute for eschatology is that the literature gave rise to a a series of key ideas in the emerging Christian faith. The great New Testament scholar, J Louis Martyn, argues that Paul's theology is apocalyptic through and through. His argument is pretty convincing (at least as far as I'm concerned).
It is from apocalyptic that the early Christians got their understanding of justification, the coming of the Holy Spirit, the certainty of resurrection, the defeat of the forces of evil and the re-patterning of the created order once that defeat had happened.
However, the biggest contribution that apocalyptic thinking makes on a Christian understanding of the world has to do with the relationship between the present age and the age to come. In most apocalyptic writing there is a contrast between the age in which we live - which is evil and, in particular, one where God's people are persecuted - and the age to come - where justice and peace, prosperity and wholeness are the order of the day. Separating these two ages is a single moment when God intervenes to end the old age and bring in the new one.
Jesus came teaching that the new age was dawning in his ministry and yet the old age was still running. Early Christian teachers argued that Jesus decisively defeated the powers of the old age on the cross and ushered in the new age - of justification, peace with God, new creation, the presence of the Holy Spirit, etc - and that new age runs alongside the old one.
What this does is to make what Christians hope for accessible to some extent in the present. Our hope of a new world inspires our action to make this world better, for example. Apocalyptic is hugely important for our understanding of Christian hope and Christian lifestyle in our present fallen world as we follow Jesus in anticipation of the new age that is dawning through his life, death and resurrection.
But, it takes a bit of explaining and I'm fairly sure that talking about hope and how that affects our lives here are now does the job just as well. So, no doubt occasionally we'll make fleeting reference to these technical terms but generally we'll be talking about hope - what we hope for and how that hope affects how we live in today's world.
Monday, August 25, 2008
...and the winner is...
What can I say, I have been honoured by Catriona with a blog award - and here's the award logo (left) to prove it. I haven't prepared a speech but I'd just like to thank my parents, neighbours, wife, children, countless church members too numerous to mention, every family pet and the man with the beard who keeps coming to my house claiming to work with me. I couldn't have blogged without them...
Of course, I know have to nominate 7 other worthy bloggers. Worse, I have to work out to put their blog names as a hyperlink so that people can just run their mouse over the name and be taken straight to their wonderful, insightful and entertaining sites.
What's more, I can't nominate those already named by Catriona - who has excellent taste in blogs!
So here goes...
Christendom - Chris Tilling's anarchic NT blog about to relocate from Germany to London
Euangelion - Michael Bird and Joel Willetts always excellent and informative NT blog
the red pill - Jonathan Somerville's richly entertaining and prescient blog that I will be following more closely in the coming weeks
The Stuff of the Earth - Michael Pahl's NT blog
the word at the barricades - Stuart Blythe's witty and trenchant blog
simply simon - an Australian blog by a theologian-cook - there aren't enough of those in the world!
tall skinny kiwi - the original blog by Andrew Jones, great thinker and communicator on the fringe of the emerging community of followers of Jesus. Still crazy after all these years. Still essential reading.
Have fun with all of these. Hopefully they'll nominate a few in their turn...
Thursday, August 21, 2008
More on the 'E' word
Well, we fell at the first hurdle with the 'E' word.
Eschatology is a word derived from the Greek word eschaton which means 'the end' and eschata meaning 'the things of the end' with ology derived from the Greek word logos meaning 'the study of' or 'words about' tagged on the end.
So, strictly speaking eschatology is the study of the end or things about the end and in Christian theology was traditionally associated with the end of the world and the second coming of Christ, the last judgement and the new heavens and the new earth.
Simon makes a good point that it's all very well to use the 'E' word in lectures but in a series at church, where you might define it in week 1, people will have forgotten what it means by week 2 or 3 and the preacher will forget to keep defining it.
Even at Spring Harvest this year, where I gather it was being regularly used in all the morning seminars, there were still baffled folk in various places asking what it actually meant.
When I was writing my Bible guide on Galatians and my Discovering the New Testament, I tended to use the word apocalyptic to describe similar ideas because the word apocalypse is at least in general use and so is not an entirely unfamiliar term.
Indeed I remember having a robust exchange of views with my then editor over whether people in church should know and understand what a word like eschatology means. Fortunately for all my readers, she prevailed and we didn't use it.
So, the 'E' word will probably not feature as we look at reasons to be hopeful. I will blog soon on why apocalyptic is a good word and whether we might use that one. I'd be interested in your views.
Eschatology is a word derived from the Greek word eschaton which means 'the end' and eschata meaning 'the things of the end' with ology derived from the Greek word logos meaning 'the study of' or 'words about' tagged on the end.
So, strictly speaking eschatology is the study of the end or things about the end and in Christian theology was traditionally associated with the end of the world and the second coming of Christ, the last judgement and the new heavens and the new earth.
Simon makes a good point that it's all very well to use the 'E' word in lectures but in a series at church, where you might define it in week 1, people will have forgotten what it means by week 2 or 3 and the preacher will forget to keep defining it.
Even at Spring Harvest this year, where I gather it was being regularly used in all the morning seminars, there were still baffled folk in various places asking what it actually meant.
When I was writing my Bible guide on Galatians and my Discovering the New Testament, I tended to use the word apocalyptic to describe similar ideas because the word apocalypse is at least in general use and so is not an entirely unfamiliar term.
Indeed I remember having a robust exchange of views with my then editor over whether people in church should know and understand what a word like eschatology means. Fortunately for all my readers, she prevailed and we didn't use it.
So, the 'E' word will probably not feature as we look at reasons to be hopeful. I will blog soon on why apocalyptic is a good word and whether we might use that one. I'd be interested in your views.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Shall I use the 'E' word?
So, I've been thinking a bit about our forthcoming series on hope, trying to give it some shape and find Bible passages that illustrate different aspects of the theme.
And I've hit my first issue: do I use the 'E' word?
They used it at Spring Harvest and it was marvellous to see all kinds of, I assume, Charismatic Christians talking earnestly over their Butlins' carry outs about 'Eschatology'. I imagine this doesn't happen in most churches across the UK on an average Sunday.
Did it help people? Well, you'll have to ask them. But the ones I talked to did find the word quite useful for labelling the full extent of Christian hope. It enabled them to see that hope is about more than the second coming and whether that's to be expected before, during or after the tribulation/millennium/rapture. Indeed it enabled most of them to realise that they could jettison the theology of the Left Behind series and still remain perfectly sound Bible believing Christians.
So, shall I be using the 'E' word?
I am tempted to because it will enable us to set the series - reasons to be hopeful - in the context of a full-orbed grasp of Christian thinking about the future and how it affects our lives in the present. What do you think?
And I've hit my first issue: do I use the 'E' word?
They used it at Spring Harvest and it was marvellous to see all kinds of, I assume, Charismatic Christians talking earnestly over their Butlins' carry outs about 'Eschatology'. I imagine this doesn't happen in most churches across the UK on an average Sunday.
Did it help people? Well, you'll have to ask them. But the ones I talked to did find the word quite useful for labelling the full extent of Christian hope. It enabled them to see that hope is about more than the second coming and whether that's to be expected before, during or after the tribulation/millennium/rapture. Indeed it enabled most of them to realise that they could jettison the theology of the Left Behind series and still remain perfectly sound Bible believing Christians.
So, shall I be using the 'E' word?
I am tempted to because it will enable us to set the series - reasons to be hopeful - in the context of a full-orbed grasp of Christian thinking about the future and how it affects our lives in the present. What do you think?
cunning and conviction in David's life
I came back from sabbatical to a teaching programme on the life of David that was in its final stages. I've had the joy of preaching on the succession narrative, that part of the story that runs from 2 Samuel 9 to 1 Kings 2 and answers the simple question 'who will sit on Israel's throne after David'?
Of course, the question is not that simple at all. There is no rule that David's son should succeed to Israel's throne as David was only the second king and he wasn't a relative of Saul. There are a number of contenders - Saul's descendants (only Mephibosheth is in the frame and his claim is dealt with in 2 Samuel 9, though he reappears in 16 and 19) and David's already grown-up sons, Amnon and Absalom. In the end Solomon is the choice and the story explains how.
I've loved this section of OT narrative since Bible college. And preaching it over the past two Sundays has reminded me why. It's a wonderfully written, subtly contrived story of political, theological and emotional depth. Having looked at the story of Mephiboseth - maybe David's high point in the account - and Bathsheba and Uriah - undoubtedly the lowest point to which David sinks; this week I'm looking at the coup of Absalom and its fallout.
I'm using the text to explore the nature of the life of faith when lived in the real world. I will be focusing on two aspects of David - his cunning and his convictions. There is no doubt that David could teach Machiavelli a thing or two about how to get your way in political life, how to survive and certainly how to outmanoeuvre your enemies. At the same time, there is no doubt that his every action is driven by core convictions derived from his faith in God.
The text shows how David's cunning and convictions enabled him to triumph and leave his throne to Solomon. The author of 2 Samuel clearly approves of how David navigated his way through events. What is less clear is what God thinks - and therein lies the brilliance of the story and the wonder of its telling.
It is also where the bear-traps await the unwary preacher. There is a danger that we flatten the story and assume that what happened must be right - must be what God wants - and therefore a few simple lessons of the pious life can be derived from how David lived. It's not that simple or bland - thank God.
Of course, the question is not that simple at all. There is no rule that David's son should succeed to Israel's throne as David was only the second king and he wasn't a relative of Saul. There are a number of contenders - Saul's descendants (only Mephibosheth is in the frame and his claim is dealt with in 2 Samuel 9, though he reappears in 16 and 19) and David's already grown-up sons, Amnon and Absalom. In the end Solomon is the choice and the story explains how.
I've loved this section of OT narrative since Bible college. And preaching it over the past two Sundays has reminded me why. It's a wonderfully written, subtly contrived story of political, theological and emotional depth. Having looked at the story of Mephiboseth - maybe David's high point in the account - and Bathsheba and Uriah - undoubtedly the lowest point to which David sinks; this week I'm looking at the coup of Absalom and its fallout.
I'm using the text to explore the nature of the life of faith when lived in the real world. I will be focusing on two aspects of David - his cunning and his convictions. There is no doubt that David could teach Machiavelli a thing or two about how to get your way in political life, how to survive and certainly how to outmanoeuvre your enemies. At the same time, there is no doubt that his every action is driven by core convictions derived from his faith in God.
The text shows how David's cunning and convictions enabled him to triumph and leave his throne to Solomon. The author of 2 Samuel clearly approves of how David navigated his way through events. What is less clear is what God thinks - and therein lies the brilliance of the story and the wonder of its telling.
It is also where the bear-traps await the unwary preacher. There is a danger that we flatten the story and assume that what happened must be right - must be what God wants - and therefore a few simple lessons of the pious life can be derived from how David lived. It's not that simple or bland - thank God.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Spending an evening with the Dark Knight
I finally got to see Batman last night - in a half-full cinema that we could walk to.
It's quite an experience. I felt hungry at the end as if I'd done a pretty stiff workout! But I'm not entirely sure what I made of it - I think partly because you leave the cinema feeling slightly numb.
It is truly spectacular - some of the set piece scenes do really have you on the edge of your seat and out of breath - and the performances are all first rate.
There's been lots of talk about whether Heath Ledger deserves a posthumous Oscar for his portrayal of the Joker. He is certainly chilling at times, playing the Joker as a bringer of chaos with no master plan whatsoever. There is a casual cruelty about him, an unrelenting darkness; he is a character with no redeeming features and there's no attempt to explain why he is as he is - it's as if director, Christopher Nolan, is suggesting that the Joker is just evil.
Part of the numbness I felt at the end, I think, was due to a slight raggedness in the story. I wonder if Ledger's death meant that Nolan couldn't do cuts and retakes to smooth the flow as he was editing. I felt that the movie needed tightening up - though if that had ratcheted up the tension, it might have made parts of it unbearable! But there were subplots and half-hinted story lines that could have been jettisoned with no loss of narrative integrity.
At its heart the film asks serious questions about terrorism and what lengths we are prepared to go to to defeat it. The Joker is repeatedly referred to as a terrorist rather than a criminal. Indeed, he is distanced from the criminal fraternity in Gotham by the simple fact that he is equally hated and feared by them as by the good citizens.
And in the midst of that exploration, we are forced to ask ourselves what is the darkness at the heart of the dark knight? Is defence of law and order and a certain way of life a reason to commit acts that might be seen as questionable? What do our actions in seeking to defeat terrorism tell us about what kind of society we are?
All these questions face us every time we open a newspaper but maybe we need a movie as well-made as this one to actually ask them.
It's quite an experience. I felt hungry at the end as if I'd done a pretty stiff workout! But I'm not entirely sure what I made of it - I think partly because you leave the cinema feeling slightly numb.
It is truly spectacular - some of the set piece scenes do really have you on the edge of your seat and out of breath - and the performances are all first rate.
There's been lots of talk about whether Heath Ledger deserves a posthumous Oscar for his portrayal of the Joker. He is certainly chilling at times, playing the Joker as a bringer of chaos with no master plan whatsoever. There is a casual cruelty about him, an unrelenting darkness; he is a character with no redeeming features and there's no attempt to explain why he is as he is - it's as if director, Christopher Nolan, is suggesting that the Joker is just evil.
Part of the numbness I felt at the end, I think, was due to a slight raggedness in the story. I wonder if Ledger's death meant that Nolan couldn't do cuts and retakes to smooth the flow as he was editing. I felt that the movie needed tightening up - though if that had ratcheted up the tension, it might have made parts of it unbearable! But there were subplots and half-hinted story lines that could have been jettisoned with no loss of narrative integrity.
At its heart the film asks serious questions about terrorism and what lengths we are prepared to go to to defeat it. The Joker is repeatedly referred to as a terrorist rather than a criminal. Indeed, he is distanced from the criminal fraternity in Gotham by the simple fact that he is equally hated and feared by them as by the good citizens.
And in the midst of that exploration, we are forced to ask ourselves what is the darkness at the heart of the dark knight? Is defence of law and order and a certain way of life a reason to commit acts that might be seen as questionable? What do our actions in seeking to defeat terrorism tell us about what kind of society we are?
All these questions face us every time we open a newspaper but maybe we need a movie as well-made as this one to actually ask them.
Monday, August 18, 2008
The great haul of China
It's great to see our sailors, rowers, swimmers and cyclists doing so well at the Olympics - and no doubt one or two track athletes will surprise us. It's a tribute to their hard work, dedication, commitment and sacrifice - all the qualities needed for sporting excellence.
It's also a tribute to the infrastructure that has been put in place over recent years in terms of facilities and coaching. I hope our great haul in China leads to a little humility among those pundits who have written off our chances of hosting a good games in 2012.
Not only do we have athletes performing at the top of their respective games, but we also have others who are competing in Beijing but who will not hit the peak of their potential until 2012. This is an exciting prospect.
We may question the amount of money being spent - and seek assurances that there'll be a lasting legacy not just in terms of sport but also local regeneration - but hosting the games offers us a chance to excel in other areas than arms sales and war fighting (and that has to be a good thing).
I still stand by my opening ceremony idea, however, perhaps with the modification of having four people representing the four nations of the UK (suitably dressed) coming into the middle of the packed arena and simply welcoming all the athletes before saying 'let the games begin' and spending the rest of the budget on feeding and immunising children in villages across Africa and Asia.
It's also a tribute to the infrastructure that has been put in place over recent years in terms of facilities and coaching. I hope our great haul in China leads to a little humility among those pundits who have written off our chances of hosting a good games in 2012.
Not only do we have athletes performing at the top of their respective games, but we also have others who are competing in Beijing but who will not hit the peak of their potential until 2012. This is an exciting prospect.
We may question the amount of money being spent - and seek assurances that there'll be a lasting legacy not just in terms of sport but also local regeneration - but hosting the games offers us a chance to excel in other areas than arms sales and war fighting (and that has to be a good thing).
I still stand by my opening ceremony idea, however, perhaps with the modification of having four people representing the four nations of the UK (suitably dressed) coming into the middle of the packed arena and simply welcoming all the athletes before saying 'let the games begin' and spending the rest of the budget on feeding and immunising children in villages across Africa and Asia.
Meeting the demands
I came across this in my morning reading today:
'The demands made upon us are only possible to meet if matched by openness to the Spirit.'
It comes from Norman Motley - someone I'm not familiar with - and seems to get to the heart of the matter with a rare succinctness.
There are lots of demands made on us as we seek to follow Jesus, as we plan for ministry and mission, as we respond to the many needs of a busy church. And it's not beyond our wit to devise a cunning plan to get the job done.
But the demands go beyond merely getting the job done. The demands are about faithfully working for the Kingdom of God. And for that we need more than planning guile. We need the Spirit of God inspiring our thinking and energising our working. More than that, we need him calling us into the work itself, showing us where he is already doing things in people's lives and getting alongside him.
'The demands made upon us are only possible to meet if matched by openness to the Spirit.'
It comes from Norman Motley - someone I'm not familiar with - and seems to get to the heart of the matter with a rare succinctness.
There are lots of demands made on us as we seek to follow Jesus, as we plan for ministry and mission, as we respond to the many needs of a busy church. And it's not beyond our wit to devise a cunning plan to get the job done.
But the demands go beyond merely getting the job done. The demands are about faithfully working for the Kingdom of God. And for that we need more than planning guile. We need the Spirit of God inspiring our thinking and energising our working. More than that, we need him calling us into the work itself, showing us where he is already doing things in people's lives and getting alongside him.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Getting to grips with the text
I'm preaching on the story of David and Bathsheba this morning. This is one of those stories we know so well and yet it is one of the preacher's equivalents of climbing Everest.
It's very familiarity make it a challenge to preach. But more than that, it's a text with such breadth and depth that encapsulating it in a twenty minute monologue is an impossibility.
So we find ourselves reaching for generalities: what is the 'key' point of the text? What is the 'major lesson' of the story? Such questions diminish the Biblical text whenever we ask them as they seek to reduce the infinite complexity of the human and divine drama to a couple of easily-grasped maxims.
And yet... In twenty minutes we cannot hope to convey, to unravel, let alone explain the intricacies of the story. So maybe all we can do is offer signposts to help people's readings; ask them to notice things along the way through the narrative, things that might help them as they reflect on the story, its characters, their reactions, the consequences of their actions, etc.
One of the questions I'm always asking people to bear in mind is 'where do they think God is in this story?' It's never as easy to answer as some think. God is in the story of David and Bathsheba but he doesn't appear as a character until the final verse of chapter 11 and then it's not him as such but the narrator's spin on what God's attitude might be. It's only chapter 12 that reveals God's heart and mind (and then it's through Nathan and our reading of the story).
So, I'm praying that as I speak this morning, people's eyes will be opened to read the story and encounter the God of grace in its unfolding drama.
It's very familiarity make it a challenge to preach. But more than that, it's a text with such breadth and depth that encapsulating it in a twenty minute monologue is an impossibility.
So we find ourselves reaching for generalities: what is the 'key' point of the text? What is the 'major lesson' of the story? Such questions diminish the Biblical text whenever we ask them as they seek to reduce the infinite complexity of the human and divine drama to a couple of easily-grasped maxims.
And yet... In twenty minutes we cannot hope to convey, to unravel, let alone explain the intricacies of the story. So maybe all we can do is offer signposts to help people's readings; ask them to notice things along the way through the narrative, things that might help them as they reflect on the story, its characters, their reactions, the consequences of their actions, etc.
One of the questions I'm always asking people to bear in mind is 'where do they think God is in this story?' It's never as easy to answer as some think. God is in the story of David and Bathsheba but he doesn't appear as a character until the final verse of chapter 11 and then it's not him as such but the narrator's spin on what God's attitude might be. It's only chapter 12 that reveals God's heart and mind (and then it's through Nathan and our reading of the story).
So, I'm praying that as I speak this morning, people's eyes will be opened to read the story and encounter the God of grace in its unfolding drama.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Batman and the downturn
We went to see Batman - The Dark Knight last night at Bluewater. Well, we went, but we couldn't get in because the cinema was heaving with people and all the performances were sold out.
Now, I thought we were suffering a downturn, straitened economic circumstances, etc. I have to say that Bluewater was humming when we arrived at 7:45pm last night, shoppers and cinema goers milling about in their thousands.
As we couldn't see the film, we went to one of the bars for a drink. Again the eateries we passed through were doing good business with people queuing for tables.
As ever when the headlines scream that we've never had it so bad, the picture on the ground is always more mixed. Some people are undoubtedly struggling because of rising fuel and food prices. But most people are not. we're paying more for basic commodities, but those items account for small amounts of our total spending (less than 15% according to a recent analysis by David Smith in the Sunday Times) and so the majority of us still have cash left over for entertainment as I saw at Bluewater last night.
Hopefully, I'll get to see Batman at the weekend...
Now, I thought we were suffering a downturn, straitened economic circumstances, etc. I have to say that Bluewater was humming when we arrived at 7:45pm last night, shoppers and cinema goers milling about in their thousands.
As we couldn't see the film, we went to one of the bars for a drink. Again the eateries we passed through were doing good business with people queuing for tables.
As ever when the headlines scream that we've never had it so bad, the picture on the ground is always more mixed. Some people are undoubtedly struggling because of rising fuel and food prices. But most people are not. we're paying more for basic commodities, but those items account for small amounts of our total spending (less than 15% according to a recent analysis by David Smith in the Sunday Times) and so the majority of us still have cash left over for entertainment as I saw at Bluewater last night.
Hopefully, I'll get to see Batman at the weekend...
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Sharing the cafe church experience
We had a really good cafe church last night. Costa was heaving with people, there was a great atmosphere and we had an interesting conversation about fair trade and why it's spiritual as well as an economic issue.
But I did come away with some questions. The fact that we were heaving with only 35 or so people means there's not a lot of room for growth or making the project economically viable on the current model. And the fact that the venue was so full - not usually a problem - meant that it wasn't quite as chilled as we was would have liked.
I also wondered how we could use it to reach those not normally in church. We had one or two people come in off the street wanting a coffee, which was fine. But they didn't join in the 'event'. Rather they went downstairs or got a take-away.
One way forward would be to encourage church folk to bring a friend, even to the extent of not allowing church folk in unless they've got a friend. This would ensure that getting on for half the participants were non-church people. But it would exclude enthusiastic supporters and pray-ers for the project and that would be a great pity.
I think it's worth persevering with it because I'm convinced that it could be a way of reaching people who are interested in exploring spirituality but wouldn't darken the doors of a church. But we have to look at the model we are using with a view to giving it a more missional edge.
I'd be interested to know what people who've been to ours think and what experience others have had who are doing similar things in other places. Feel free to comment...
But I did come away with some questions. The fact that we were heaving with only 35 or so people means there's not a lot of room for growth or making the project economically viable on the current model. And the fact that the venue was so full - not usually a problem - meant that it wasn't quite as chilled as we was would have liked.
I also wondered how we could use it to reach those not normally in church. We had one or two people come in off the street wanting a coffee, which was fine. But they didn't join in the 'event'. Rather they went downstairs or got a take-away.
One way forward would be to encourage church folk to bring a friend, even to the extent of not allowing church folk in unless they've got a friend. This would ensure that getting on for half the participants were non-church people. But it would exclude enthusiastic supporters and pray-ers for the project and that would be a great pity.
I think it's worth persevering with it because I'm convinced that it could be a way of reaching people who are interested in exploring spirituality but wouldn't darken the doors of a church. But we have to look at the model we are using with a view to giving it a more missional edge.
I'd be interested to know what people who've been to ours think and what experience others have had who are doing similar things in other places. Feel free to comment...
Monday, August 11, 2008
A good first Sunday
It was good to be back in church yesterday. It was a busy day - two sermons plus the teaching slot in the later service (that seemed to go particularly well) - but an enjoyable one.
It was good to see lots of people I've not seen for three months and catch up with what's been going on in their lives. August is a slightly odd month in churches as the usual programmes are on hold and people are coming and going. And there is a nice relaxed, slightly laid-back atmosphere. So that makes it a good month for re-entry, I reckon.
One of the things that is still running is our cafe church at Costa Coffee in the Market Square. This Tuesday is the third of our three month experiment. We're focusing on fair trade and the programme looks interesting. I'm looking forward to being involved and seeing how it goes.
I hope we'll be able to continue this new way of being church into the autumn - but we need numbers to pick up. So, if you're in Bromley's Market Square at 7pm on Tuesday evening and fancy a coffee, a conversation and a chance to explore life with God.
It was good to see lots of people I've not seen for three months and catch up with what's been going on in their lives. August is a slightly odd month in churches as the usual programmes are on hold and people are coming and going. And there is a nice relaxed, slightly laid-back atmosphere. So that makes it a good month for re-entry, I reckon.
One of the things that is still running is our cafe church at Costa Coffee in the Market Square. This Tuesday is the third of our three month experiment. We're focusing on fair trade and the programme looks interesting. I'm looking forward to being involved and seeing how it goes.
I hope we'll be able to continue this new way of being church into the autumn - but we need numbers to pick up. So, if you're in Bromley's Market Square at 7pm on Tuesday evening and fancy a coffee, a conversation and a chance to explore life with God.
Friday, August 08, 2008
Watching the Olympics
The Olympics have started with what appeared to be the longest opening ceremony in history!
Whatever I say about it will sound churlish, I guess, but I do have to say that I felt a little queasy watching the opening 20 minutes of the extravaganza (it was all i could stomach - and I had work to get back to). it seemed to me that China showed us what we know already - that totalitarian regimes do spectacle!
The bill for Beijing is £20billion - twice the budget for London 2012 - so no wonder some of the venues look spectacular. The hidden cost, of course, is in the millions of displaced people, the dissidents who've been removed to other cities or prison. Some 1,000 troops are on the streets ensuring everyone smiles and is polite.
So here's my idea for the opening ceremony at our games in 2012. We invite the world, have a parade of athletes and then a single figure dressed in a bowler hat walks to the middle of the stadium and declares the 30th Olympiad open. The rest of the budget is used to feed and immunise children across the developing world. I wonder if it's a goer?! What do you think Tessa?
Whatever I say about it will sound churlish, I guess, but I do have to say that I felt a little queasy watching the opening 20 minutes of the extravaganza (it was all i could stomach - and I had work to get back to). it seemed to me that China showed us what we know already - that totalitarian regimes do spectacle!
The bill for Beijing is £20billion - twice the budget for London 2012 - so no wonder some of the venues look spectacular. The hidden cost, of course, is in the millions of displaced people, the dissidents who've been removed to other cities or prison. Some 1,000 troops are on the streets ensuring everyone smiles and is polite.
So here's my idea for the opening ceremony at our games in 2012. We invite the world, have a parade of athletes and then a single figure dressed in a bowler hat walks to the middle of the stadium and declares the 30th Olympiad open. The rest of the budget is used to feed and immunise children across the developing world. I wonder if it's a goer?! What do you think Tessa?
Surviving my first week
I've survived my first week back at work!
Having not been in the habit of preparing sermons, getting three ready was a bit of a challenge. but I think we're there.
I delivered the first yesterday - a short (though not short enough!) reflection on Jesus the light of the world from John 9 (what a wonderful story that is - full of wit and irony). The other two are for Sunday - David and Mephibosheth in the morning; Jesus, Simon the Pharisee and a woman of dubious morals in the evening.
I've also been catching up with people and getting up to speed on what's been happening while I've been away. it's been good to see people again.
One of my other projects - now I've got a lovely new guitar - has been getting a collection of songs together to record. I now have 32 (written over a period of 32 years - coincidence or what?!) dusted off, tidied up and ready to roll. A mate has all the gear needed, so in my spare moments (hopefully there'll be some) over the next couple of months, I'll see what they sound like and select a a dozen to put on a CD. I've been promising myself that I'd do this for the last three years; now it seems I have the chance.
Having not been in the habit of preparing sermons, getting three ready was a bit of a challenge. but I think we're there.
I delivered the first yesterday - a short (though not short enough!) reflection on Jesus the light of the world from John 9 (what a wonderful story that is - full of wit and irony). The other two are for Sunday - David and Mephibosheth in the morning; Jesus, Simon the Pharisee and a woman of dubious morals in the evening.
I've also been catching up with people and getting up to speed on what's been happening while I've been away. it's been good to see people again.
One of my other projects - now I've got a lovely new guitar - has been getting a collection of songs together to record. I now have 32 (written over a period of 32 years - coincidence or what?!) dusted off, tidied up and ready to roll. A mate has all the gear needed, so in my spare moments (hopefully there'll be some) over the next couple of months, I'll see what they sound like and select a a dozen to put on a CD. I've been promising myself that I'd do this for the last three years; now it seems I have the chance.
Monday, August 04, 2008
Back in the office...
Back at work!
After three wonderful months in Prague, France and the UK with nothing to do except meet people, read books, listen to music and generally chill and enjoy myself, I am back at work. And I'm still looking forward to getting back into it - despite the challenges that I know lie ahead.
We had a great last sabbatical weekend in Devon catching up with friends and catching some waves - both excellent. It was the first time this year we've been in the sea - hopefully not the last!
Now my desk is strewn is paper and thoughts and the beginnings of an autumn teaching series. We'll be looking at Reasons to be hopeful in the mornings and who on earth are we? in the evenings (the latter loosely based on 1 Peter).
I am keen to have a more flexible, less buttoned-down approach to the teaching programme so that we can be responsive to people's questions and comments (so, hopefully, lots of those will be forthcoming!) and also the leading of God's Spirit as we work our way through the material.
Above all things, the church needs to be hearing from God. How else can we hopeful people, confident of our identity in a world of pain and laughter, chaos and order?
After three wonderful months in Prague, France and the UK with nothing to do except meet people, read books, listen to music and generally chill and enjoy myself, I am back at work. And I'm still looking forward to getting back into it - despite the challenges that I know lie ahead.
We had a great last sabbatical weekend in Devon catching up with friends and catching some waves - both excellent. It was the first time this year we've been in the sea - hopefully not the last!
Now my desk is strewn is paper and thoughts and the beginnings of an autumn teaching series. We'll be looking at Reasons to be hopeful in the mornings and who on earth are we? in the evenings (the latter loosely based on 1 Peter).
I am keen to have a more flexible, less buttoned-down approach to the teaching programme so that we can be responsive to people's questions and comments (so, hopefully, lots of those will be forthcoming!) and also the leading of God's Spirit as we work our way through the material.
Above all things, the church needs to be hearing from God. How else can we hopeful people, confident of our identity in a world of pain and laughter, chaos and order?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
