The big question unanswered.

Image by jimforest via FlickrWhy bother.  Why go to church?  What's the reason? What’s is the purpose of taking time out to go and meet people to sing hymns together, to 'pray' some stuff somebody's written and to go through some 'ritual' that some other guys have concocted from old books?

Ok so you say I have to commit to Jesus totally and you say I have to belong to your denomination and you guys tell me to chill, it's all gonna be alright.  But for goodness sake, what's the story, what are you trying to say? Do you guys agree on anything?

Whatever you say, please please please, don't ask me to join your bloody PCC, your alpha course or your discussion group.  Just tell me straight.  What's the Buzz?

Related articles

• Pentecost (frstephensmuts.wordpress.com)
• Let the Fire Fall! Reflections on the Readings for Pentecost (thesacredpage.com)

The Rapture

RAPTURE!

SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU SAID RUPTURE OVER THE PHONE!

In an Imperfect World

Image via Wikipedia

I read Lesley’s blog http://bit.ly/ivvCje today and it got me thinking.  I think yesterday, somewhere I mentioned that I was looking forward eagerly to the Parousia inferring that things will never be ‘perfect’ in this world.  However, of course, this should not stop us striving for better things now.

I love Lesley post in so many ways, not least because it resonates with my own direct experience of the church.  I have fought for too many years to promote the notion that we can allow one another to be different without feeling threatened, earlier in life on an ecumenical front, but latterly within the Anglican sphere.

The rise of fundamentalism, of every kind, in our church and the knee jerk tendency towards ‘cowardice’ or ‘self preservation’ shown by so many of us is due largely to the failure of us to understand two things.

We are taught by Christ to show both tolerance towards one another and humility. 

Tolerance is a complex thing and worth considering, for it allows us to live together without feeling that we have to ‘give up’ our own standpoint.  It requires courage, self control and a willingness to respect others.  It will not offer triumphalism, self righteousness and conquest, which is why it is out of favour today.  If the church did not feel so beleaguered in our modern society, if it had more faith in God, then tolerance might have a chance.

Humility is one of the hardest things to grasp, especially in our church, especially for those in authority.  Fundamentalism brings our church so very low, it debases the humanity of others and fills the perpetrator with pride and self justification. It is very attractive indeed as it provides a simple and a quick fix of endorphins and often adrenaline. It is popular with many of us and is often favoured by the young.

Humility, on the other hand requires sacrifice, thoughtfulness and therefore hard work, and may easily lead us into painful situations that we are called then to endure with courage and prayer.  Humility is not popular in this world and it is not favoured by ‘leaders’.  It is misunderstood as weakness and as failure.  In fact humility is one of the strongest statements of faith anyone can make.  It depends on how it is done.

Humility is defined by the one you show humility to.  In a Christian that should always be to God, to His will.  Humility is revealing the truth of humanity, it is admitting that ‘I am not certain, I am not perfect, I may be wrong’, but always addressed to God, not to another person as such. That is simply humiliating.

Today church leaders and people in general are ‘flexing their muscles’ and the world is filled with worry, nothing appears to be fixed and all around us challenges and changes abound.  It has always been like this, historians can testify to this ‘truth’ more or less.

In this situation we can look for easy ways out.  Hitler offered a very attractive ideology to the people of Europe and many grasped at it, some still do.  The catastrophe of the Great War in Europe could not have happened without the easy to grasp notion of a grotesque distortion of national pride, something we see in every nation today.  Napoleon promoted a simple plan of a United Europe, and many simply followed, fired up by a misplaced sense of loyalty to a cult figure.  This same blind following happens in Zimbabwe today, and it has its resonance in Western Party Politics. All these times and all these ‘ideologies’ failed to understand the essential ingredients; tolerance and humility.

Tragically, death, destruction, violation and debasement follow when we abandon Tolerance and Humility.

Armed with these weapons then the Waxhaw massacre, the Gnadenhutten Massacre, the Praga massacre, the Peterloo massacre, the Tripolista massacre, the Waterloo Creek massacre, the Bear River massacre, the Amritsar massacre, the Simele massacre, the Katyn massacre, the Babi Yar massacre, the Setif massacre, the Shell House massacre, the Quana massacre, the bat Mitzvah massacre, none of these, and too many more massacres would have happened.

The church is not immune to loosing its way and massacres are part of our history too.  We do, we will, but be should not underestimate the dangers of simple answers and misplaced loyalty, of fundamentalism and an abandonment of tolerance and humility in our own church.  It is not so big a step to move from hating the sin, to hating the sinner.  It is not so big a step from keeping quiet about a small thing to keeping quiet about a bigger thing.  It is not so big a step to make between believing God is right to believing you are right.

If the Church of England’s leaders and its legislators cannot offer us the example of tolerance and humility then do not loose heart for…..

The Holy Spirit goes where it will.

MrC

A church bound by ties that hurt

Image by Meredith_Farmer via Flickr

My Dear Bishop

I can only apologies profusely for the manner in which you were treated last week at St Hilda’s.  I only heard about it today on my return from holiday and I was aghast.  I have read your letter and I fully agree with everything that you say there, the situation was indeed appalling and should never have been allowed to happen.  Rest assured that I will be taking the necessary steps to ensure that this sort of thing never happens again and I will also be reprimanding all those involved in this dreadful sequence of events, at least those who are under our jurisdiction and who can be found.

I am absolutely certain that our popularity throughout the diocese is assured and not in question whatsoever; I believe the perpetrators of the events that night were from another diocese altogether, and who knows, maybe a different province.  I agree that things were said that should not have been said and that there will need to be a good deal of fence mending.

May I set before you my thoughts having already made urgent enquiries concerning this debacle?  I believe that a group of young drunken agitators fooled the local parishioners at St Hilda’s gagged and tied up the real diocesan clergy who were due to be present at the evening’s installation service.  I believe that they then stripped the clergy and using their robes dressed up as our own diocesan clergy in order to gain entrance to the service.

Only this explanation works, for the shouts of ‘hypocrite’ and ‘two-faced bastard’ are hardly the words that real clergy would utter in public.

It is inconceivable that any of the church’s clergy would assault you and Adam in such a way.  I know them all personally and believe them to be meek and mild and usually very compliant in everything you tell them to do.  I do believe that some clergy, abroad I believe, can be uppity and obnoxious, rather ill mannered and intemperate.  It may have been they who did these dreadful things, or at least they who may have bribed local louts to do the whole thing.  The visiting North American delegates, currently on a friendly exchange with our neighbouring diocese, they could be behind it all.  Yes I believe they are indeed the true culprits.

Either way I cannot think that the clergy we have these days would do such a thing.

I do believe that the churchwarden’s might be in on this skulduggery.  If I may be candid.  Firstly, they were very impertinent about you telling them that their preferred candidate for the parish would not be suitable.  The younger warden did suggest in her letter that you might be prejudiced against Robert because he was openly Gay.  I recall having to visit her small house and drinking some herb tea concoction whilst listening to her going on and on about it all.  It was tedious and frankly boring but necessary I suppose.

We realise that Robert was a very popular young man and indeed he was very efficient and worked tirelessly, he did also turn the parish fiancés around but I believe that you were quite right not to make him incumbent.  It required, as you said yourself, a better educated man to fill the post.

In Cedric we had a very safe pair of hands, but I am very sorry about the way it turned out for him that night.  I hear that it is doubtful that he will ever set foot in the diocese ever again.

Suffice to say that a full enquiry is underway and soon the matter will be closed as you indicated in your phone message.

Myrtle and I are looking forward to you both visiting at our home next week.  Do you still hear from Felicity at all?

Kindest regards,

Peter

Social Media Ministry

DONT YOU THINK YOU'RE TAKING THIS SOCIAL MEDIA MINISTRY IDEA TOO FAR ARCHBISHOP?

A very Inappropriate candidate

Image via Wikipedia

My Dear Bishop

I have finished the series of interviews regarding Jason Christopher and his stated desire to be ordained.  I consider him to be a very inappropriate candidate and do not believe that he has a ‘calling’ to priestly ministry.

I have noted in detail, elsewhere, my concerns about Jason but I will summarise the substantial evidence for my prime concern here.

Firstly it is alarming that most of his friends appear to be male and that he is unmarried.  Jason further confided in me that he had visited prostitutes on many occasions but that he had never had sexual relations with any one of them.  This is a worry.

Jason also recounted a very perturbing act of lewdness.  He admitted that he had been kissed by a man, and that this was openly in a public place in full view of others.  It is not the conduct becoming of a person seeking Holy Orders and he also went on to reveal that he and the man in question fell out soon after the kiss.  This is typical of men who are sexually attracted to other men; they have regular spats and are continually fighting amongst themselves and falling out.

I understand further, from a letter that was passed to me anonymously that another man claimed that Jason ‘loved him’ and this kind of thing is deeply worrying.  If this sort of thing got into the press then the scandal would be most damaging.  It is something we should not countenance and it is not something we would have control over.

There are several other concerns about Jason that preclude him from suitability for ordination, not least his relationship with authority and tendency to be subversive.  He is far too outspoken and fails to realise the difficulties facing the Anglican Communion today, he would never achieve high office and would be a thorn in the side of us all were he ever to do so.

As far as his education is concerned, I note that he has not attended the best schools and failed to achieve a place at either university.

You will, by now, understand why I cannot recommend Mr Christopher as a suitable candidate for ordination.

On a personal note, may I express my heartfelt concern on hearing about your separation from Felicity?  It is a difficult time for you both, I realise, but I also know that Adam will continue to be a real support to you through this time.  I am delighted that he has been able to take time out of his busy schedule to be with you at the Palace and offer you his support.

Yours sincerely

Rev’d  P Giddings

Did Jesus sell toys to the Romans?

Image via WikipediaI was wondering if Jesus sold toys to the Romans?

What I mean is that He was a carpenter’s son and so He might have helped His Dad out and had a go at making wooden toys.  He lived near the Decapolis, the towns that were multicultural and more integrated with Roman ways.  And so voilà; Did Jesus sell toys to the Romans?

Either way it sheds light on His ministry and a good deal on the content of the Bible.  For example, the towns of the Decapolis minted their own coinage and I guess they were proud of the fact that they could.  Being aware of this in Jesus’ background makes the passage concerning the question of whose image was on the coin more interesting.

Jesus’ exposure to the more ‘liberal’ society of the Decapolis might also shed light on His message of forgiveness and getting along with one another better.  It is an interesting thought that God’s arrangement of the incarnation at that moment and in that place produced the man, Jesus and it may be that the Decapolis went some way to form His character.

MrC