Tag Archive for 'faith'

Saturday in the Second Week of Lent

Published on March 6, 2010 in liturgy. 1 Comment Tags: , , , , , , , , , .

Read – reflect – respond (in prayer, silence, possibly a comment)

Lectio Divina – sacred reading

Virtual Chapel with daily updates

Luke 15:1-3, 11-32

15:1 Now all the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to [Jesus].

2 And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, “This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.”

3 So he told them this parable:

11 [...]“There was a man who had two sons.

12 The younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of the property that will belong to me.’ So he divided his property between them.

13 A few days later the younger son gathered all he had and traveled to a distant country, and there he squandered his property in dissolute living.

14 When he had spent everything, a severe famine took place throughout that country, and he began to be in need.

15 So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed the pigs.

16 He would gladly have filled himself with the pods that the pigs were eating; and no one gave him anything.

17 But when he came to himself he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired hands have bread enough and to spare, but here I am dying of hunger!

18 I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you;

19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands.”’

20 So he set off and went to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion; he ran and put his arms around him and kissed him.

21 Then the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

22 But the father said to his slaves, ‘Quickly, bring out a robe–the best one–and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.

23 And get the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate;

24 for this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found!’ And they began to celebrate.

25 “Now his elder son was in the field; and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing.

26 He called one of the slaves and asked what was going on.

27 He replied, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fatted calf, because he has got him back safe and sound.’

28 Then he became angry and refused to go in. His father came out and began to plead with him.

29 But he answered his father, ‘Listen! For all these years I have been working like a slave for you, and I have never disobeyed your command; yet you have never given me even a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends.

30 But when this son of yours came back, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fatted calf for him!’

31 Then the father said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.

32 But we had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found.’”

Grant, most merciful Lord,
to your faithful people pardon and peace,
that they may be cleansed from all their sins,
and serve you with a quiet mind;
through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Michael Ruse v Richard Dawkins

Published on March 2, 2010 in liturgy. 8 Comments Tags: , , , .

One of my followers on twitter, a university professor, in response to my recent post about Richard Dawkins pointed me to an article by Michael Ruse. Michael Ruse is an atheist. He is a philosopher of biology. Ruse is well known for his arguments against “Intelligent Design”. But Ruse holds that it is possible to reconcile the Christian faith with evolutionary theory. That, of course, is the position of Francis S. Collins, who led the Human Genome Project. If you haven’t read The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief I recommend this book very highly. In Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, Dawkins likens Ruse to the pusillanimous appeaser of Munich, Neville Chamberlain, because, although he has been fighting Creationists now for 40 years, he is not prepared to extend this fight to an all-out vitriolic attack on all Christians. So, here is part of what Ruse writes:

Richard Dawkins is a genius. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, is one of the truly great books of the 20th century. … Which brings me to the supreme paradox. The God Delusion has been a smash-hit, best seller. And yet, you know, it is a very bad book. …

I think The God Delusion is badly written, but far worse … is the succession of half-baked, sophomoric arguments. Sophomoric not in the sense that the topics are unimportant but in the sense that you think that you uniquely have come upon these issues. As I have said elsewhere, after reading the book, for the first time in my life I was sorry for the ontological argument. And that is just the start. The tripe about causation leaves one aghast. The nonsense about Hitler and Christianity is simply pure ignorance. Putting the holocaust down to Hitler’s Catholic training is ludicrous. As an aside: The whole argument putting German anti-Semitism down to Christianity is about on a par with the trendy Creationist claim that German anti-Semitism is the fault of Charles Darwin and the Victorian sentiments expressed in the Descent of Man.

I have been puzzled as to why someone who, as I say, I regard as an author of genius, could be — not so much ignorant as — willfully contemptuous of the whole range of philosophy and theology and modern history and much more. It is not a question of conclusions. For what it is worth, I have no more religious belief than Dawkins and I too deplore the influences of American Evangelical Christianity, not to say the disgusting revelations of Catholic priests and sexual abuse (and the even more disgusting ways in which the hierarchy have too often tried to block inquiry).

I have been reading a short autobiography that Dawkins has penned for a book on behavioral biologists, and I think I may have found a clue. It lies in the British system of education. (Or, let me cover myself. It lies in the British system of education that held sway 50 years ago when Dawkins was being educated. I know whereof I speak, for I too went through the system at that time, although in nothing like as distinguished a fashion.)

In the 1950s, while at school around the age of 15 you started to specialize. You would drop the extraneous subjects and start to focus on what you were going to make a lifetime commitment. (Since I was going towards the physical sciences, I dropped geography, for instance.) Then the last couple of years at high school you really start to focus down on the sciences (physical or biological) or various humanities areas. In going to university, it is the departments that make the choices (at Oxford, Dawkins’s alma mater, it is the colleges) and as an undergraduate you really specialize. (I still remember that, at Bristol in my first year, we did eight hours of mathematics and nothing more. Not even a physics class. The other two years were different only in that we did 12 hours of mathematics and nothing more.) Graduate work is not a great deal different, because the English doctoral degree is based purely on the dissertation (at least it was back then). You didn’t even have to know about other areas of your subject.

I am not saying that Dawkins’s educational experiences were as narrow and awful as mine, but if you read his autobiography you will see that they are part of the same genus if not species. And of course the result is that you end very good at what you do and pig ignorant about everything else. If you are good at what you do, in a top institution, there is little wonder that you feel pretty good about yourself, and don’t feel the need to know a whole lot more. Why would you?

Speaking both as a historian of science and as an ardent biological evolutionist, I look to the past to make sense of the present. Nothing can explain genius completely. Believe me, I have spent a lifetime trying to understand Charles Darwin. But for me, Richard Dawkins’s background throws considerable light on both The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.

Tuesday in the First Week of Lent

Published on February 23, 2010 in liturgy. 1 Comment Tags: , , , , , , , , , , .

Read – reflect – respond (in prayer, silence, possibly a comment)

Lectio Divina – sacred reading

Matthew 6:7-15

7 [Jesus said] “When you are praying, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard because of their many words.

8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

9 “Pray then in this way: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.

10 Your kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.

11 Give us this day our daily bread.

12 And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

13 And do not bring us to the time of trial, but rescue us from the evil one.

14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you;

15 but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Grant to your people, Lord, grace to withstand the temptations of the world, the flesh ad the devil, and with pure hearts and minds to follow you, the only True God; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Polycarp, Bishop and Martyr of Smyrna, 156

O God, the maker of heaven and earth, who gave to your venerable servant, the holy and gentle Polycarp, boldness to confess Jesus Christ as King and Saviour, and steadfastness to die for his faith: Give us grace, following his example, to share the cup of Christ and rise to eternal life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.

antitheist

Published on January 18, 2010 in liturgy. 6 Comments Tags: , , , .

Some of my best friends are atheists. God is with them. God is present where God’s name is never heard, and God does not affirm all that is done where God’s name is regularly pronounced.

Some people tell me, “I do not believe in God.” My response often is, “tell me about this “God” you do not believe in.” And when they do, very often I find the “God” they describe I do not and could not believe in either!

So atheists can be prophets, they can challenge the idol we call “God”. I want to work in partnership with all of good will, Christians, those of other faiths, agnostics, atheists, to make this a better place. My atheist friends work in partnership with me. Many challenge me by their altruism and generosity. Some people see Christianity as being about great rewards for limited loving investment. Well orthodox Christianity is not about rewards – it is about love for its own sake and life (in its fullness) is always a gift – not a reward.

But there is, increasingly, a new style of atheist. They do not want to work in partnership with good people of faith – they proclaim faith itself as evil and the source of most of the world’s evils. These are not simply atheists – they are antitheists. Theirs is an obsessive belief-position that they incessantly have a need to impose upon others. Their mindset is most comparable to the fundamentalists they constantly berate – not surprisingly: our enemy is a mirror to ourselves was an insight from Jesus. They do not address middle, moderate, thinking, caring Christianity, but rather ask the same questions that fundamentalists do – they just come up with different answers. They do not appear to pause to examine whether the questions themselves are at issue. Fundamentalists ask questions of the Bible and find God scary. Antitheists ask the same questions of the Bible and find God silly. Atheists often struggle to live with metaphor. So do fundamentalists.

bus

For more on the antitheist bus campaign click here. I generated the above advertisement incorporating the Biblical phrase “do not be afraid” which occurs at least 70 times in the Bible. My advertisement reworks the antitheist “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”. As a qualified Mathematics and Science teacher I base my “probability that God is” on the anthropic principle – the low probability that the universe we live in exists by chance.

More than half of atheists deny evolution

A recent article in the Melbourne Age again highlighted the intellectual weakness of many claiming atheism. “24 per cent of Australians firmly believe there is no God, and 6 per cent are pretty sure.” Here’s the crunch: “Only 12 per cent believe Darwin’s theory of natural selection”. I would like to think that there are a few Australian theists who accept (I do not like “belief” applied to Science – I think it confuses things) Darwin’s theory. But, for argument’s sake, let’s pretend ALL Australian theists do not accept evolution. So: that would mean only half of Australia’s atheists accept evolution!

I agree with atheist, Guy Rundle, former editor of Arena magazine. He states the antitheist Dawkins-Hitchens version of atheism is ”the most shatteringly empty creed to come along for many a year”. It misses the point, he says, goes out of its way to hurl insults, misunderstands how belief systems work, uses straw man arguments and is boring because it ”takes the least sophisticated form of theism and beats it around the head”. It also fails to grapple with sophisticated theologians such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth; and it is blind to the fact that, when science (quantum physics and cosmology) try to explain the origins of the universe, its materialist, atheist account is as mysterious and improbable as that of any religion. New atheism also, he says, refuses to concede that many people have feelings of transcendence that must be expressed.

From 12-14 March there is The 2010 Global Atheist Convention being held in Melbourne. I conclude by quoting from the Age article:

”All that Dawkins can offer is a revival of old-fashioned secular humanism, whose hopes and aspirations are summarised in John Lennon’s insipid 1971 composition Imagine,” theology professor Tom Frame wrote last year. Melbourne Catholic auxiliary archbishop Peter J. Elliott says the new atheism should be respected, and welcomed into dialogue, and could even play an important role in ”correcting religious fanaticism”, on which score ”many religious people would agree with them”. But he echoed the concerns of a number of religious people that this movement was in danger of becoming a faith in its own right. ”It’s when they slide into a kind of fundamentalism themselves, and become dogmatic, that’s when we have a problem with them.”

There’s probably no God?

Published on December 14, 2009 in liturgy and spirituality. 54 Comments Tags: , , , , , , .

bus1_marked

New Zealand is following other countries in having an “atheist bus campaign”. Atheists are raising $NZ10,000 to mimic the UK campaign and place “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” on several buses in major New Zealand cities. Approximately 12 buses in Auckland, 8 in Wellington and 4 in Christchurch will feature the ads for 4 weeks. Television presenter Mike Hosking caught organiser Simon Fisher on the hop with his first question “why bother?” Hosking, who thinks there probably is no God, cannot see the motivation or purpose for the campaign – and Fisher reacted as if he had never thought of this most obvious of questions. That was soon followed by Jo Kelly-Moore, the Vicar of St Aidans, in Remuera, clearly running circles around Fisher’s weak points.

Rather than fear, or tut-tut, this campaign, I welcome the opportunity for some serious dialogue. One of my followers on twitter interestingly pointed out that Fisher’s language echoed the Alpha course. Alpha may be OK for introducing people who have no idea about Christianity to it – but please can we not stay at the level of alpha – please can we move on towards kappa or further. The website of the NZ Atheist Bus Campaign, over which (rather than the soundbite TV debate) they have full control – does not appear to give an adequate definition for “God” which the site is dedicated to stating “probably does not exist”. The discussions, which I am welcoming, may help Christians to move beyond rather simplistic definitions of God (alpha) towards the classical definitions in which God is not merely “a supernatural being” alongside other beings (”supernatural” or “natural”) – as if adding God to this coffee cup results in now having two “objects”. And with the rather regularly trite comment that atheists believe in merely one less god than Christians do… Hence, Christians and other theists, may be enriched by this discussion into deepening the expression of their faith, revisiting the apophatic tradition (alongside the more common kataphatic approach) of Christianity, emphasising the transcendent nature of God (alongside God’s at-Christmas-time-particularly-appropriate immanent nature).

Let’s have some nuanced discussion, rather than the popular Richard Dawkins approach of pitting the best of science against the most simplistic, childish, flat-earth theism, where every few sentences Dawkins drops a clanger demonstrating his lack of reading of any theist up to beta, let alone kappa! Let’s acknowledge the great damage that bad religion and bad theology and bad spirituality have done. But I don’t see Dawkins giving up sex or money just because of the great damage that sex and money have done in human history! And let’s not pretend that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao Zedong are particularly good exemplars of the USA version of this campaign which had the slogan: “Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness’ sake.” Are those atheists an explanation of what “good” means in a world without a god? Can you be good for goodness sake? Or do we need help to be good? And might being good (for goodness sake) be a sign of God – rather than a denial? Fisher’s slight of hand without any explanation, that “atheism” means “humanism” certainly needs justification. It seems to me that it is belief in God and the sacredness of God’s creation that leads to valuing human life – it will take a lot more than a tweet-length bus slogan to convince me that atheism naturally leads to people caring for others as a consequence.

There’s also a need to tidy other definitions:
Theist – believes in God
Atheist – believes there is no God
Agnostic (type A) – believes it is not possible to know
Agnostic (type B) – “I don’t know…”

Also the word “belief” can do with some clarification. Belief in God as a solely cerebral affirmation is a relatively new usage. “I believe in God” is originally more about trust, about commitment – in the sense of I believe in democracy, I believe in the All Blacks. Certainly “I believe in Jesus” has nothing to do with the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth which is accepted by all but the most extreme of scholars – yet popularly, and amongst some young people, they equate belief in Jesus alongside belief in the tooth-fairy, or at this time, Santa.

Alongside the atrocities of religion, let’s also list off some of the positives: art, music, science, technology, literature, genetics (Dawkins take note), the concept of the Big Bang (a real shock originally mocked by atheists), Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Dante, Shakespeare, Mozart, Bach, Beethoven,…

Alongside the need to clarify the definition of “God”, we are invited to clarify the nature of “God”. “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” is based on an impression of an almighty punishing ogre in the sky. As Kelly-Moore made crystal clear in the TV interview, nothing could (should!) be further from a Christian perspective of God, a God who is love.

So, in summary, let’s not react against these ads – they are a wonderful opportunity not only to deepen our own reflection, but to clarify the misunderstandings between us. Atheists can be prophets, challenging the idols that Christians present. And just as God does not agree with all done in God’s name – however frequently and fervently God’s name is repeated – so God is not absent from atheists’ lives – however frequently and fervently denied.

If you like the image above, you can drag and drop it into your own blog post
or use the following HTML


You can also produce your own (you can give your version in the comments below)

Comments policy

In passing, spend four minutes listening to Johann Sebastian Bach’s Jesu Joy of Man’s Desiring

Jesu, joy of man’s desiring
Holy wisdom, love most bright
Drawn by Thee, our souls aspiring
Soar to uncreated light
Word of God, our flesh that fashioned
With the fire of life impassioned
Striving still to truth unknown
Soaring, dying round Thy throne

Through the way where hope is guiding
Hark, what peaceful music rings
Where the flock, in Thee confiding
Drink of joy from deathless springs
Theirs is beauty’s fairest pleasure
Theirs is wisdom’s holiest treasure
Thou dost ever lead Thine own
In the love of joys unknown

Climate Change

Published on October 15, 2009 in liturgy. 5 Comments Tags: , , , , .

Blog Action Day blog post
There is increasing realisation (or probably better said re-realisation) that the pendulum had swung too far towards bringing earth into heaven, and we are (thankfully) swinging back more towards drawing heaven into earth. From a tendency to be so heavenly minded that we are of no earthly use – or worse: devastating this planet in order to encourage Christ’s return (!) churches, and Christian individuals are increasingly realising our responsibility towards God’s creation. In this we can join in positive partnership with people of other faiths, and people of goodwill of no faith, and even anti-faith (an increasing, fascinating phenomenon, in my opinion).

Christians can understand the activity of God’s Spirit to be present in this movement. Christians can and need to repent of our neglect of our responsibility and our blindness to it. It was relatively late, only at the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in 1990 that a fifth mark of mission was added to the other four: “To strive to safeguard the integrity of creation, and sustain and renew the life of the earth.”

In the context of this being a liturgical site, I will list off some of the prayers in relation to creation from the New Zealand Prayer Book (1989). These highlight the shift I am talking about in the formally recognised prayers of NZ Anglicans (officially understood as binding formularies). You might like to add official prayers from your tradition in the comments section below.

Awaken in us a sense of wonder for the earth and all that is in it.
Teach us to care creatively for its resources.

We remember with gratitude your many gifts to us in creation and the rich heritage of these islands. Help us and people everywhere to share with justice and peace the resources of the earth. Give wisdom to those in authority among us and to all leaders of the nations.

Caring God,
we thank you for your gifts in creation:
for our world,
the heavens tell of your glory;
for our land, its beauty and its resources,
for the rich heritage we enjoy.
We pray:
for those who make decisions about the resources of the earth,
that we may use your gifts responsibly;
for those who work on the land and sea, in city and in industry,
that all may enjoy the fruits of their labours
and marvel at your creation;
for artists, scientists and visionaries,
that through their work we may see creation afresh.

1 O give thanks to our God who is good:
whose love endures for ever.
2 You sun and moon, you stars of the southern sky:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
3 Sunrise and sunset, night and day:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
4 All mountains and valleys, grassland and scree,
glacier, avalanche, mist and snow:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
5 You kauri and pine, rata and kowhai, mosses and ferns:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
6 Dolphins and kahawai, sealion and crab,
coral, anemone, pipi and shrimp:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
7 Rabbits and cattle, moths and dogs,
kiwi and sparrow and tui and hawk:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
8 You māori and pākehā, women and men,
all who inhabit the long white cloud:
give to our God your thanks and praise.
9 All you saints and martyrs of the South Pacific:
give to our God your thanks and praise.

[10 All prophets and priests, all cleaners and clerks,
professors, shop workers, typists and teachers,
job-seekers, invalids, ' drivers • and ' doctors:
give to our ' God your ' thanks and ' praise.
11 All sweepers and diplomats, writers and artists,
grocers, carpenters, students and stock-agents,
seafarers, farmers, ' bakers • and ' mystics:
give to our ' God your ' thanks and ' praise.
12 All children and infants, all ' people • who ' play:
give to our ' God your ' thanks and ' praise.]

Please feel free to add below other prayers and responses that relate to climate change and our ecological responsibility, particularly indicating if they are part of the formally agreed liturgy of your church.
Link to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s recent address on ecological responsibility

Year for Priests – St John Vianney

Published on August 3, 2009 in liturgy. 4 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

st-jean-vianneyAs well as the Roman Catholic Church, many Anglican churches celebrate St John Vianney on August 4. This year it is 150 years since the death of the priest who is known more commonly by his title “Curé d’Ars” (the parish priest of the village of Ars-sur-Formans). He is the patron saint of parish priests, and the Pope has announced this year as a Year for Priests in honour of “the 150th anniversary of the death of the Holy Curé d’Ars, Jean-Marie Vianney, a true example of a pastor at the service of Christ’s flock”.

Some points worth reflecting on:

  • the concept of vocation – so quickly (too quickly in my opinion) the word vocation is applied to priesthood and “religious life”. Should not vocation be primarily applied to our baptismal calling to holiness and after that to discernment of our particular way of living out our baptismal vocation to love?
  • the understanding of God’s will – the impression is too quickly given in my opinion that God has a particular pathway planned out for us and should we deviate from this in any way our present happiness, let alone our eternal salvation, is in jeopardy unless and until we return to where we branched off God’s determined pathway and get back onto the correct path. This would have God intending you to marry Sarah and should you marry Martha instead, then you will be unhappy in this life not to mention the next… God intended you to be a Franciscan, but you misheard the call and became a Dominican – not until you leave the Dominicans and join the Franciscans will you be following God’s will for this life (and the next)… Possibly God’s will is more general than that – possibly it is more about searching out the deepest God-given yearnings of our God-given heart?
  • Priesthood as primarily a call to enable the baptismal life of the Christian community. The NZ Prayer Book ordinal says it well, in my opinion,

By the Holy Spirit all who believe and are baptised
receive a ministry to proclaim Jesus as Saviour and Lord,
and to love and serve the people with whom they live and work.
In Christ they are to bring redemption,
to reconcile and to make whole
They are to be salt for the earth; they are to be light to the world.

After his resurrection and ascension
Christ gave gifts abundantly to the Church
Some he made apostles, some prophets. some evangelists.
some pastors and teachers; to equip God’s people
for their work of ministry and to build up the body of Christ.

We stand within a tradition
in which there are deacons priests and bishops
They are called and empowered to fulfil an ordained ministry
and to enable the whole mission of the Church.

  • This might also be a year in which we can discuss more deeply what priesthood means, what diaconate, and laity, and episcopate means, and whether people should be ordained directly to the order to which God calls them (per saltum)?

John Vianney lived and ministered in the aftermath of the French Revolution. He struggled with the academic formation required for priesthood. He greatly stressed the love and mercy of God and also the value of personal discipline. His popularity grew so that Lyons railway station had a separate booking office for trains to Ars. Close to 100,000 individuals came to hear him preach in the last year of his life.

Once, when he was arguing with a Protestant peasant woman in his village, he asked her, “Where was your Church before the Reformation?” She promptly replied, “In the hearts of people like you.”

Heavenly Father,
Shepherd of your people,
we thank you for your Servant John,
who was faithful in the care and nurture of your flock;
and we pray that,
following his example and the teaching of his holy life,
we may by your grace grow into the stature of the fullness of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ;
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Everliving God,
you gave to your servant John Vianney
 gifts of discernment and wise counsel;
grant to all pastors 
a full measure of your wisdom and your love,
that through their ministry 
your truth may be revealed;
through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Good shepherd,
yours was the strength which kept Jean, Curé d’Ars,
praying and reconciling year after year;
protect us too, we pray,
from fatigue which shrivels up compassion;
through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Choosing a church

Published on June 24, 2009 in liturgy. 3 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , .

A follow up to What is a Christian?

The post “What is a Christian” got a huge response, in public comments, on the Facebook page, as well as in emailed observations. I undertook I would produce this follow-up post.

I certainly do not regard this post as in any way a definitive response – not even as my own final opinion. Hopefully this will be read as yet another contribution to an ongoing dialogue.

Many comments focus on the appalling experiences people have had in and through the church. We can all rattle off scandals, abuse, and hypocrisy of Christians, and of Christian communities. On the one hand such horrific evils highlight that church is a significant reality. It is not just the church that is the source of such scandals.

Money, sex, and power are significant realities in our human experience. They can be sources of great good when appropriately used, and sources of great evil when abused. The church is a similar reality – the church is a source of great good when appropriately used, a source of great evil when abused.

Furthermore, although there is some truth in church (the Christian community, the body of Christ) being a goal, that has to be balanced by the greater tradition that the church is a means – God and union with God being the goal. Getting means and ends (goals) confused always leads to confusion on the (spiritual) journey.

As well as responses from people who have been members of a church community that has hurt them significantly, or who look at the unattractive reality of abuse, there are others who have written to me expressing their struggle to find a church community that allows any discussion or dissent.

A different issue worthy of note was an example of a person coming to faith later in life, realising the significance of church/Christian community as part of that, but not having any opinions favouring one Christian tradition over another. This person is finding the experience one of “listening to all of the disparate he said she said voices shouting out like barkers at a carnival trying to tell you that their booth is the right one for you.”

I could easily list off my own list of things I would look for in a Christian community or tradition – but I would just degenerate to being merely another barker at the carnival.

We still mostly organise our communities of Christian communities “denominationally.” In my opinion, however, this increasingly reflects less and less the reality of people’s experience. Most Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, many Anglicans/Episcopalians, and possibly others may still exhibit denominational loyalties – so that they would look primarily for a church community within their denominational allegiance. But increasingly, if one images these denominational lines vertically – people find support and adherence in groupings that may be imaged horizontally. People will look for a community that has great programmes for young families, or that has a strong teaching and preaching ministry, or that has vibrant contemporary music, or that has a strong commitment to justice, contemplative prayer, and so on and so on (far more than the denominational flavour of the community). Some communities, of course, will have different combinations of these.

The divisions within Christianity clearly are a tragic scandal. Part of my perspective is that we need to learn to see that the differences being argued about are minor minor minor – in comparison to the unity at the heart, if we can just learn to listen to each other (that includes really learning to listen also between religions and to those who claim to have no faith). I think our unity needs to be found elsewhere than in lists of things we mentally agree on, and all the boxes needing to be filled in correctly.

In looking for a Christian community I am assuming you would seek one that you perceive to be orthodox, however you understand that (including in teaching and practice in relation to baptism and eucharist). But alongside this I would place some of the following, not necessarily in any order:

  • Is the community outward looking?
  • Does it care for people beyond its own faith-community (including poor people overseas) – and not just seeing such care as bait and switch to get them into the pews of the community (and contributing financially)?
  • Is there a primarily “Godward” focus – a community celebrating itself is wonderful – but is there a significant focus on God?
  • Is it inclusive? Of dissent – or is only one viewpoint permitted? Is there room to grow? Is the primary leadership at least stage 5 of Fowler’s Faith Development scale (having a strong personal position as well as being open to different ways of authentically being Christian)?
  • Is there appropriate oversight and accountability, and transparency – particularly about leadership and finances?
  • Is there a good variety ages and stages?
  • Is there support, in teaching and action, to support people through hard times - not just affirming solely our happy experiences?
  • Is there support, in teaching and action, to carry people through joyful times – not just presenting a burdensome spirituality?
  • Is the community open and welcoming to new people as well as healthy in retaining those who have been there a long time?
  • Does the community have a holistic spirituality – with a healthy positive attitude to God’s creation including sex, music, medicine,…

What do you think?

Liturgy as language (part 1)

Published on June 22, 2009 in liturgy. 11 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , .

Peter Carrell is an Anglican priest in New Zealand who usually has a very good grasp on what is happening within our province. He writes in an interesting post on Anglican Down Under that he cannot think of a single congregation that follows our official liturgy that is either growing, or thriving with a good mixture of ages (especially including younger people). This, of course, is a dire claim (Peter repeats it on his site Preaching and Worship). What is more, there has only been a single Kiwi disputing his claim in a comment. Whether I can think of a congregation that conflicts with Peter’s claim is not significant. What I want to do is attempt to analyse this situation and what we might be able to learn from this and move forward. I believe that this analysis and my proposals will be just as relevant beyond New Zealand – so please don’t tune out of this thread you non-Kiwis ☺

Peter’s strong assertion comes with little analysis. The conclusion that liturgy cannot sustain a thriving community within our culture he shows to be false through highlighting (in a comment) that Roman Catholics in this country would not dream of departing from liturgy in the way that Kiwi Anglican churches do, yet Roman Catholic communities are not only more than three times as committed in worship attendance, Peter highlights that Roman Catholic communities do not exhibit the problems with lack of flourishing whilst being liturgically faithful.

I contend that liturgy is integral to Anglican identity. The danger of Peter’s barely-hidden subtext is that a community can only thrive here by abandoning Anglican identity.

Peter maintains (again in a comment) that his observation has been perceptible for at least fifteen to twenty years. In that, already, I think, is a clue to analysis. In this series I will look at the way we learn and use language and from that develop a model that I believe is pertinent.

Update: part 2 is here

Pentecost feedback reflection

Published on June 12, 2009 in liturgy. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , .

For the Day of Pentecost, (the end of the great 50 days of the Season of Easter, during which the Easter/Paschal candle had been burning at every service) I suggested a formal way of concluding the Easter Season and mirroring the lighting of candles at the Easter Vigil that began the season (here):

Everyone carried a candle lit from the Paschal Candle during the Easter vigil, symbolically sharing the light of the risen Christ. Perhaps on the Day of Pentecost, during the period of reflection after receiving communion, these candles could be relit from the Paschal Candle. The Pentecostal fire is thereby visibly divided and shared by everyone (cf. Acts 2:1-4; first reading for the Day of Pentecost, Three Year Series). The Paschal Candle can then be extinguished, vividly concluding the Fifty Days. The risen and ascended Christ, gone from our sight, is still present by the Spirit and we are commissioned to go out into the world to spread the light of Christ. (This might be symbolised by all processing out with the lit candles).

I regularly receive feedback about suggestions on this site, and was particularly encouraged by a parish that tried the above suggestion:

I recently came across your website researching Pentecost liturgy and was delighted by your suggestions for ways to keep the Day of Pentecost connected to the Easter season. This year, we incorporated your suggestions: individual candles were lit from the Paschal candle as the people return to their seats after receiving communion. We decided to reverse the flow of communion, so that the people went up the side aisles to receive, then returned to their seats down the chancel aisle, lighting a candle off the Paschal Candle as they returned to their seats. While it did slow things down a little bit, it didn’t seem to matter, as the people who had already returned to their seats could watch the candle-lighting and see the Church–the Body of Christ–receiving the flame. In a way, this action became an icon. The energy in the room and the contemplative and peaceful looks on faces indicated a deep impression made.

We then launched straight into the retiring procession, with myself, the rector and assisting priest stopping in the aisle for the Threefold Pentecost Blessing, after which the Paschal Candle was blown out and the people dismissed. Feedback from the congregation was positive, with many appreciating the formal ending of Eastertide. We will definitely be incorporating this permanently into our Pentecost liturgy.

Thank you so much for your elegant suggestions. The ministry team here is very excited about your liturgical innovation and believes it teaches the faith in a very effective way.

marketing and evangelism – a new model

Published on June 2, 2009 in liturgy. 5 Comments Tags: , , , .

Marketers and entrepreneurs might help expanding and clarify this post, along with others as these are thoughts in the making…

I am coining the terms “permission evangelism” and “participation evangelism“. So from now on – if you use those terms – please credit me :-)

Old style marketing has been called “interruption marketing” or “interruptive marketing“. This is unsolicited, impersonal,… It is about trying to catch a person’s attention through cold calling, a television advertisement, newspaper ad, a booth at a show,… I understand the term was coined by Seth Godin. Many a graph illustrates the result – many marketers battling to get a potential buyer’s attention, and ultimately numbing the customer who tunes out of all the advertising.

The distinction is somewhat fuzzy, but newer style marketing tends to be “permission marketing” or “participation marketing“. This is much more about hospitality, about the person anticipating the approach which is personal and welcomed. It is much more about a dialogue initiated by the potential buyer (or after a much more discrete “interruption”). It is unlike a television advertisement which interrupts a person’s experience to (regularly) share information in which they have no interest. Interruptive marketing is a modern style of marketing which requires little or no participation with the person being marketed to. Permission marketing is a post-modern style, regularly involving social media and requiring personal participation along with the “product”.

Now translate this into evangelism. Old style marketing parallels evangelism as the street-corner, bible-bashing approach, which interrupts people, hands them a tract, uses a “one size fits all” approach. It first hopes to create the sense of need which can then be fulfilled by the rest of the message. In our post-modern, multi-faith environment, of course, like old style marketing, the potential convert’s attention is ultimately numbed and tunes out.

Contemporary (post-modern) “permission evangelism” or “participation evangelism” is much more about a relationship in which a person’s real need is discovered and the gospel is found to be “Good News” for their real need.

Churches, it seems to me, are so often empty of a whole section of society, or a whole band of age-groups, because no one is actually finding out what their real needs are. They certainly have real values, meaning, spiritual needs. Let’s go out and find out what they actually are – rather than assuming what they are and telling them what they are. Do we not trust that the gospel addresses the needs that they will present us with?

The distinctions of the two types above may be more blurry than here delineated. This may be an oversimplification. The comments box is open for your clarifications.

stand up for your rites

Published on May 29, 2009 in liturgy. 7 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
orans position - Catacombs of Priscilla, 3rd century AD

orans posture - Catacombs of Priscilla, 3rd century AD

“New Zealand’s [Roman Catholic] bishops are no longer seeking approval that kneeling be the posture for the faithful during the Eucharistic Prayer at Masses, reversing an earlier decision,” Michael Otto reports on front-page news of the fortnightly NZ Catholic (#317). Last November the bishops had voted, not unanimously, to kneel from the end of the Sanctus/Benedictus until after the Great Amen. Luckily, now that the bishops have changed their minds, that request was lost in the Vatican’s in-trays. The Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship has apologised for losing it. The article is unclear if kneeling will be required for what it terms the “consecration” (presumably the Last Supper story found in all of New Zealand’s RC Eucharistic Prayers). Or if standing throughout will be an option. Or if people can choose individually when to kneel or stand (I can already visualise the video of of the – how many variations can you think of, Mathematicians? – people bobbing up and down at different points within the same shared prayer… :-( )

[Aside: Not all Roman Catholic Eucharistic Prayers have a "consecration" (in the sense of Last Supper story). The Roman Catholic Church recognises the Eucharistic Prayer of Addai and Mari as a valid, consecrating eucharistic prayer even though it does not even contain the Last Supper story, nor the words “this is my body”, nor "this is my blood." These last two quotes from the Last Supper at that event were words, not of consecration, but of administration/distribution.]

The article NZ Catholic highlights the Vatican’s General Instruction of the Roman Missal has “they should kneel at the consecration, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason.” Even there, however, this appears in the Errata of that document. The article goes on to point to Cardinal Ratzinger’s (aka Pope Benedict XVI) writing on kneeling in The Spirit of the Liturgy.

The bishops at the first ecumenical council of Nicaea (325) were horrified to discover that Christians were kneeling on Sundays and in the Great Easter Season of 50 days (which they termed Pentecost) and ruled in canon 20:

Since there are some who kneel on Sunday and during the season of Pentecost, this holy synod decrees that, so that the same observances may be maintained in every diocese, one should offer one’s prayers to the Lord standing.

Bishop Cullinane in the NZ Catholic article highlights that “the ancient tradition regarded standing as the posture of the Easter people.”

Other denominations may not have a moment-of-consecration theology, and wonder what the rationale for the rest of the Eucharistic Prayer is if its purpose is effected by a small section within it. These may see the whole Eucharistic Prayer as consecrating – or in fact the whole eucharistic action (from taking bread and wine, giving thanks, breaking bread and distributing bread and wine) as consecrating. Anglican eucharistic theology was sent off on a tangent after the discontinuity of the Commonwealth Period when the 1662 Book of Common Prayer added an “Amen” after the Last Supper story, put the fraction (breaking of the bread) as an action into the Last Supper story, and referred to what followed the Sanctus as the “consecration” – implying that the preface was not part of the “consecration”.

As with the NZ Catholic article, in which the new National Liturgy Advisory Group are reported as asking the bishops to review their decision and be stronger for standing, so the NZ Prayer Book commission presented to the Anglican General Synod (1987) a rubric at the start of the Eucharistic Prayer:

It is recommended that the people stand throughout the following prayer.

This not only preserves the unity of the Eucharistic Prayer, but also has the same posture for the presiding priest as well as all others participating. I well remember the debate about this in General Synod as some misunderstood the meaning of the word “recommend” and argued that the “traditional” posture of kneeling be added, so that the rubric now reads “It is recommended that the people stand or kneel throughout the following prayer.” (Note the posture does not change from “The Lord is here…” to the Great Amen). There was much muttering of “what about people in a hospital bed… wheelchair…” I note that the Book of Worship of the United Church of Christ precedes every rubric with “All who are able may…” Each of their Eucharistic Prayers (called there “Communion Prayer”) has the rubric, “All who are able may stand.”

Christian Unity

Published on May 21, 2009 in liturgy and spirituality. 1 Comment Tags: , , , , , , , , .

Whilst in the Northern Hemisphere Christians pray during a Week of prayer for Christian Unity from 18 to 25 January, in the Southern Hemisphere that period of prayer extends from Ascension Day to the Day of Pentecost. This year the resources for this period have been provided from Korea.

This divided country points to the words from Ezekiel 37:17 “That they may become one in your hand.” The prophet Ezekiel also lived in a tragically divided nation and longed for the unity of his people.

2008 marked the centenary of this week of prayer, having begun in 1908, by the Rev. Paul Wattson, a North American Anglican priest, who founded the “Octave for unity”. The Faith and Order movement began publishing “Suggestions for an octave of prayer for Christian unity” in 1926 and in 1966, the WCC Commission on Faith and Order and the Roman Catholic Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity (now known as the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity-PCPCU) began official joint preparation of materials for the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity.

You can download here a PDF of this 2009 resources or follow this link to the Vatican website with the same material.

Remember you can also go to the virtual chapel to pray on this site – including the possibility of lighting a candle there for Christian Unity.

Selective biblical literalism

Published on May 12, 2009 in liturgy. 2 Comments Tags: , , , , .

We all, from time to time, encounter individuals (even online or elsewhere) who claim to follow the Bible literally in every detail – but a little pressing shows them to be selective in what they actually adhere to and what they ignore or sidestep.

Bart Ehrman was such a person. Raised in the Episcopal Church (Fr. Matthew’s), he had a conversion experience as a high school sophomore and was “born again”. He attended Moody Bible Institute, Wheaton, and Princeton Theological Seminary. He held and taught and wrote about that the Bible was completely without error in the original texts. However, spending more time with those original texts resulted in his realisation that those texts themselves showed the glaring weaknesses of an inerrant approach and, as in Father Matthew’s video, Ehrman’s faith came tumbling down. And he now has a new book.

The Colbert Report Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Bart Ehrman
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Gay Marriage

There are other models for treating the Bible with appropriate reverence through which the Spirit continues to speak to the church. And which do not need us to leave our brains at the church door as we enter.

One model is the Bible as the memory of God’s people. My memory is very tied in with my identity – the Bible is tied in with the identity of God’s people. Memory is not a film of the events of my life – it is the essence of those events as interpreted by me and how they are significant to me. Memory collects similarities together. Memory distorts and rearranges in order to make sense of my life and interpret the events to myself. In the library of the Bible, with its variety of genres, of literary styles, God interprets events and makes sense of them for us. We are generally agile at recognising what literary style we are dealing with – but occasionally we do get it wrong, even with contemporary material – misjudging an ironic piece and reading it straight, or not recognising something is actually an advertisement and judging it to be an article. With ancient texts we are far less agile at recognising the literary style. We need to have the humility to acknowledge we may be incorrect in judging whether a text is history or allegory, fable, parable, or poetry. The Bible may be moving in a general direction, and we may misjudge its trajectory. Reverence for scripture need not be opposed to humility about our understanding and interpretation of it.

Hat tip to Andrew plus

small church – is beautiful

Published on April 29, 2009 in liturgy and spirituality. 10 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , .

church144I recently attended a suburban Anglican church. It shall remain nameless – as its location etc. is not important. I’ll call it St. Alban for convenience. At most the church building could probably hold 130, maybe 150 people. The community who built it probably never anticipated more than a couple of hundred attending on a Sunday – with a couple of morning services and an evening service. Next door they built a vicarage. St Alban has an entrance foyer and a large hall where you can play basketball or do any number of other activities. There are a couple of smaller meeting rooms – easily usable for Sunday School. There is an area where refreshments can be prepared and placed. Then a couple of small offices – one intended for the vicar/parish priest.

In an age of bigger-is-better, mega-churches, even internet churches, St Alban and its architecture speaks of a different approach. It speaks of a local community worshipping and serving where they live. A vision of young families who generally send their children to the local kindergarten, primary school, and secondary school. The church encourages neighbourly care. I recently read of three very successful businesses where the people worked near where they live.

Yes, there will be some travelling to supermarket, even shopping mall, and cinema. Many will travel out of the suburb to work.

fc78se067-02I regularly read about and encounter the enormous energy directed towards creating “Christian communities” of like-minded, same-age congregations. Imagine our multi-faceted society as a gateaux or layer cake. These people want to slice the gateaux, the layer cake of society, horizontally – so that you look around the congregation at slightly-varying clones of yourself – people who think the same, believe the same, dress similarly, like similar music, are a similar age, income-group, culture etc. There is no stress or challenge. And maybe little transformation?

The vision that the architecture of St Alban speaks of to me is quite different. It slices the gateaux, the layer cake, vertically. Sure, not every possibility will be included in the slice – the community just isn’t big enough. But there is a variety of ages and stages, opinions and positions – rubbing shoulders, rubbing the sharp edges off, being the grit that produces the pearl.

There may be a warning in the cake-slicing metaphor. If you attempt to slice a gateaux horizontally, normally you will be very unsuccessful, ending up merely with a lot crumbs and sticky cream.

St Alban’s doesn’t just meet for worship and mutual support. The small number that meet there (relative to the population of the suburb in which it sits) serve and care in the local community. The hall is used for young people to be active together. There are visits to the local retirement homes. The vicar/parish priest is not just there to care for the worshipping community, but is understood by that community to be available for anyone in the suburb. The vicar is a general practitioner, helping people find the resources they need. The vicar is in touch with what is happening in the worshipping community and the wider local community, presiding at the eucharist and other worship as pastor of the community, preaching sermons that connect the timeless message to the actual, known, lived experiences and issues of those in the pews.

Some people want to slice the gateaux, the layer cake of society, horizontally – so that you look around the congregation at slightly-varying clones of yourself – people who think the same, believe the same, dress similarly, like similar music, are a similar age, income-group, culture etc. There may be a warning in the cake-slicing metaphor. If you attempt to slice a gateaux horizontally, normally you will be very unsuccessful, ending up merely with a lot crumbs and sticky cream.

Some groups proudly boast that ten tithing average-income families can support one average-income pastor’s family. Anglicans have never generally got such a ratio, however I posit that a community with an average weekly attendance of a hundred or more can generally support a parish with a vicar.

This post is not even beginning to explore the possible imperative to alter our lifestyle to a more local expression for the sake of the planet and our future. This post is not a denigration of larger churches, nor of the church’s use of the internet. Far from it (clearly) for the latter – it is not a romanticised yearning for a bygone, pre-internet age. The internet complements such a real world small community. This is an attempt to look again at the too-regularly forgotten value of small, local Christian communities where the pastor IS pastor to the faith community, leads, teaches, and preaches to their actual context. And the Christian community not only worships God in and prays for the local community, and really supports each other, it also serves the local community (and beyond) in a multiplicity of ways. They act locally and truly are Christ locally.