Drop the Debt Fast

It is 10 years since the momentous human chain in Birmingham city centre in support of debt cancellation. I thought I'd post the email I received today from the Jubilee Debt Campaign. Do follow the links and take the pledge to keep up the campaign.








Dear friend,

Next Saturday 12 April is the start of the Drop the Debt Fast, our
36-day rolling fast demanding FASTER debt cancellation for MORE of
the world's poorest countries. Every day for 36 days we will focus on
one of the countries which still desperately need debt cancellation,
nearly ten years after world leaders promised to tackle the crisis.
Please join us - pledge to take part in the Fast for a day or more
right now:

http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/fast

As the Fast begins next weekend the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund will hold their Spring meetings in Washington DC. On 12
April we will focus on LIBERIA, which has just this month been told
that after two years of waiting, it can finally begin the process of
'qualifying' for debt cancellation. For other countries, this has
taken as long as six years and involved complying with harmful and
undemocratic economic policies dictated by the IMF. But the people of
Liberia shouldn't have to wait.

On 14 April, as the IMF and World Bank conclude their meetings by
discussing ways for poor countries to adapt to climate change, we
will focus on BANGLADESH, a country which is already on the front
line of our changing climate. The proportion of those living in
extreme poverty is actually increasing in Bangladesh, while climate
change is causing more and more devastating cyclones and floods. Yet
despite debts of $18.9 billion, Bangladesh is told it does not
'qualify' for debt cancellation.

All the countries we are focusing on in the Fast have been left out
of debt cancellation so far, either because the process is too slow -
as with Liberia - or because it is too limited - as with Bangladesh.
This must change if the debt crisis, which is keeping millions of
people in poverty, is to be resolved. Please pledge now to join the
Drop the Debt Fast:

http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/fast

When you sign up to take part in the Fast, we will send you an email
once a week with information about the countries that are the focus
of the Fast for the week ahead. We will also direct you towards the
chain links we are collecting during the Fast for use in a mass
action in Birmingham on Sunday 18 May.

The Fast is part of our programme of events marking the tenth
anniversary of the human chain in Birmingham - a key moment in the
debt campaign - and we hope you'll get involved. We have made great
strides in the last ten years, and debt cancellation is working to
tackle poverty in many countries. But the crisis isn't over. Please
help finish the job:

http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/fast

Best wishes,
Jubilee Debt Campaign

There Will Be Blood

Last night Su and I went to the cinema for the first time in ages,thanks to the babysitting services of my sister and Karl. There wasn't a lot on that we wanted to see, but in the end we decided on There Will Be Blood. (Perhaps not the most romantic of choices!) Well, what a strange and powerful film. It tells the story of Daniel Plainview, an oil prospector at the beginning of the 20th century and the start of the American oil business. It is a dark and bleak epic of how this man is overcome by greed, competition and misanthropy. Plainview's loss of relationship with his adopted son and his descent into alcoholism and murder is accompanied by an ongoing battle of the wills with a preacher who belongs to a very bizarre fundamentalist, pseudo-Christian sect. Fairly slow moving, there is very little dialogue in the film, but the drama is moved along by an incredible soundtrack, some stunning images and the wonderful, oscar-winning performance of Daniel Day-Lewis. There is no redemption in the film and the brutal and chilling climax is given away in the title. There is some kind of sub-text about the iraq war, oil, greed and errant religion going on there, although this is never explicit. Did I enjoy it? Well, enjoy would be a strange word to use for such a dark piece, but it did hold me for nearly 3 hours and I'd say it's worth watching just for Daniel Day-Lewis. Like 'Citizen Kane', I would say this is a 'film-buffs' film, not really a populist choice and definitely not a chick-flick. Su was not a big fan of the film, not that she only likes chick-flicks, but she definitely doesn't do dark, and she thought it was boring (it wasn't).

Billy Boy at the Beach

Everything is Spiritual and er.. Everything Must Change

Last night I watched the Rob Bell DVD 'Everything is Spiritual' with some friends. He is basically expanding on the creation story of Genesis 1 and arguing for a more Hebraic understanding of God, creation and our place in the world. I have to say I found it pretty awe inspiring. Partly because he is such a gifted communicator and partly because he is speaking about the wonder of creation which is mind-blowingly awesome. One of the problems with any theological preaching or teaching is that people sometimes expect you to say everything that can be said whenever you speak - 'but what about...?', and this is clearly impossible. Having said that, here's what I think -

A doctrine of creation needs to be held together with a doctrine of redemption. If you only emphasize creation then what you end up with is pantheism, everything is God, or panentheism, God is in everything. Rob Bell sometimes seems to come close to this idea, although I don't think he is actually saying this. On the other hand, if you only emphasise redemption, then you end up with dualism - creation is ruined and is going to be thrown in the dustbin and we need to escape to a 'spiritual' realm. I guess Bell is addressing a context which has often fallen into this second category and so is providing a welcome corrective. I look forward to the follow ups 'Everything is Broken', based on Genesis 3, and 'Everything is Being Renewed', based on, well, the New Testament. Everything is spiritual, but not everything is God. Everything is spiritual, but not everything is good.

I have also been reading Brian McLaren's latest book Everything Must Change
Now this is one of those book titles where you go, ok Brian, whatever - a tad over the top? What he is arguing is that if the message that Jesus brought, the message of the kingdom is true, then this challenges all the other prevailing stories and therefore everything must change, not least our understanding of the gospel. He is essentially examining how Jesus' message would address some of the global crises of our time. There is a lot in this book that I like and agree with but it has the frustration for me that whereas he has a very nuanced understanding of lots of huge subjects, and there are the usual McLaren footnotes, he does also seem to accept uncritically some recent scholarship where I think the jury may still be out, and sometimes comes across as somewhat naive and idealistic. Nevertheless he does, for me, capture the revolutionary nature of Christ's message and how the church in the West has tamed and commodified this.

As a taster, here is his reworking of the Magnificat, if Mary had the conventional understanding of the gospel that he received in his religious upbringing. Yeah, it's polemic and charicatured, but it makes an important point.

"My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my personal Saviour, for he has been mindful of the correct saving faith of his servant. My spirit will go to heaven when my body dies, for the Mighty One has provided forgiveness, assurance, and eternal security for me - holy is his name. His mercy extends to those who have correct saving faith and orthodox articulations of belief, from generation to generation. He will overcome the damning effects of original sin with his mighty arm; he will damn to hell those who believe they can be saved through their own efforts or through any religion other than the new one he is about to form. He will condemn followers of other religions to hell but bring to heaven those with correct belief. He has filled correct believers with spiritual blessings but will send those who are not elect to hell forever. He has helped those with correct doctrinal understanding, remembering to be merciful to those who believe in the correct theories of atonement, just as our preferred theologians through history have articulated."

Ouch!

For a full review of the book see Alan Mann part 1, part 2, part 3

So there we are - Everything is Spiritual and Everything Must Change.

Understanding the Muslim World

The end of another busy week at Trinity, and the end of an excellent course - 'Understanding the Muslim World'. This was a really well run course, probably one of the best I've attended so far at Trinity, with some expert speakers, and plenty of time for questions. It did sometimes raise more questions than it answered due to the highly complex nature of the subject, but was fascinating nonetheless. The tone of the course, set by the contributors such as Richard Sudworth and Colin Chapman, was very much a both/and approach to the dialogue or evangelism question, which I embrace. In other words in our relation to muslims, we need to pay as much attention to the great commandment, to love our neighbour as ourselves, as to the great commission. The course didn't, however, avoid some of the tough questions that the muslim community needs to ask itself, and is doing.

Big Up a Blogger

One of the things I've enjoyed about getting back into blogging has been catching up with some blogs that I haven't read for a while. I've been working my way through my blogroll which I use bloglines to keep an eye on. I thought I'd big up some of the bloggers I enjoy.

First up, is my friend Michael Pahl who blogs over at The Stuff of Earth.
Michael is from Calgary. I got to know him when he was over here to do the residential period of his PhD which he did at Birmingham University and has recently completed. He is a wonderful guy and a great scholar. His blog is a biblioblog covering various aspects of New Testament studies, as well as family stuff, and er.. icehockey.

To be honest, I'm slightly jealous of him, because he lives in Canada (and gets to go hiking in places like this) and because he is a New Testament lecturer which I kind of dream of doing one day. He is much smarter than I am though.

As well as keeping us up to date with the latest issues of the main New Testament Studies journals he produces some fascinating series. I thought I'd point to a couple:

What is the gospel? explores what is surely the most important question of our time from three angles:
the jewish scriptures
the death and resurrection of jesus
the roman imperial propaganda

followed by a a summary

he then offers the following concluding reflections :

concluding reflections 1
concluding reflections 2
concluding reflections 3

Another good series is popular myths of evangelicals

Some of these might apply more to North American evangelicalism, or the particular brand he describes as "fundagelicalism", but they are well worth a read.

"creation" = "creationism"
the eschaton = "the pre-trib rapture"
the bible is "the word of God"
innerancy guarantees orthodoxy

and a couple of other interesting posts:

pistis christou: the "faithfulness of christ

and one directly relevant to my MPhil dissertation

barclay, wright, and paul's anti-imperialism

very good stuff. thanks michael

Newbigin on the Church

In the last in this series of Newbigin quotes I will look at what he concluded about the role of the church. One of his more well known sayings is that
'the only hermeneutic of the gospel is a community (he uses the word congregation) of men and women who believe it and live by it.'

This community is centred on Jesus :

'Jesus... did not write a book but formed a community. This community has at its heart the remembering and rehearsing of his words and deeds, and the sacraments given by him through which it is enabled both to engraft new members into its life and to renew this life again and again through sharing in his risen life through the body broken and the lifeblood poured out. It exists in him and for him. He is the centre of its life. Its character is given to it, when it is true to its nature, not by the characters of its members but by his character. Insofar as it is true to its calling, it becomes the place where men and women and children find that the gospel gives them the framework of understanding, the "lenses" through which they are able to understand and cope with the world.'

He then gives six characteristics this community will have if it is true to its calling :

1) It will be a community of praise. That is perhaps its most distinctive character.
He defines this in 2 ways.
In reverence, over against the prevailing mood of doubt and the 'hermeneutic of suspicion' which is so dominant in modern society.
In thanksgiving - 'A Christian congregation is thus a body of people with gratitude to spare, a gratitude that can spill over into care for the neighbour.'

2) It will be a community of truth.
'The reigning 'plausibility structure' can only be effectively challenged by people who are fully integrated inhabitants of another.' In other words, by remembering and rehearsing the true story the church will challenge the false other false stories around, but in a way that is appropriate to disciples of Jesus.

3) It will be a community that does not live for itself but is deeply involved in the concerns of its neighbourhood.
'It is God's embassy in a specific place.'

4) It will be a place where men and women are prepared for and sustained in the exercise of priesthood in the world.
That is, in the public world of work, arts, education, politics etc, etc. He recognises that this is very difficult and is too much for the trained minister. He suggests the need for 'frontier groups' of people working in the different sectors, together thrashing out the issues they face in their sphere. He also makes a comment on the inadequacy of training to prepare ministers for this task - 'I realise how extremely difficult it is to find the way forward in this matter, but it seems clear that ministerial training as currently conceived is still far too much training for the pastoral care of the existing congregation, and far too little oriented toward the missionary calling to claim the whole of public life for Christ and his Kingdom.'

5) It will be a community of mutual responsibility.
It is to be the foretaste of a different social order. 'Its members will be advocates for human liberation by being themselves liberated. Its actions for justice and peace will be, and will be seen to be, the overflow of a life in Christ, where God's justice and God's peace are already an experienced treasure.'

6) It will be a community of hope.
Again, this challenges the reigning plausibility structures of despair and nihilism.
'Everything suggests that it is absurd to believe that the true authority over all things is represented in a crucified man. No amount of brilliant argument can make it sound reasonable to the inhabitants of the reigning plausibility structure. That is why I am suggesting that the only possible hermeneutic of the gospel is a congregation that believes it.'

'This will only happen as and when local congregations renounce an introverted concern for their own life, and recognise that they exist for the sake of those who are not members, as sign, instrument, and foretaste of God's redeeming grace for the whole life of society.'


So there we are, at length, the words of a prophet, and one of the most important voices for the church in our generation.

Lesslie Newbigin

Hell, Salvation and Universalism

Seems quite a few people have been thinking around this topic recently. Jon Swales has summarised Tom Wright's view on final loss, as expressed in his recent book, Surprised By Hope:
here, here, and here.

Jason Clarke who has previously done a survey on who gets saved, has been hosting Hell Week with contributions from Gregory MacDonald (a pseudonym) who has written a book called The Evangelical Universalist, followed by responses by Kevin Corcoran, a philosophy lecturer at Calvin College, and finally Dr Justin Thacker from the Evangelical Alliance.

who will be saved?

This will be my penultimate Lesslie Newbigin post (well, for now). The question of who will be ultimately be saved has generally had three or four main responses within Christian theology: exclusivism - only those with explicit faith in Christ will be saved, inclusivism - salvation is through Christ but not limited to explicit faith in Him, pluralism - God has many salvation projects, there are many paths to God etc, and universalism - everyone will be saved in the end. I wrote a very basic essay on this question a few years back. Richard Sudworth picks up these categories in his book Distinctly Welcoming arguing that we need to move beyond them. Here is some more classic Newbigin touching on these issues:

'We must look first at the strictly exclusivist view which holds that all who do not accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour are eternally lost. We shall look later at the question of whether this is in fact what fidelity to Scripture requires us to hold. There are several reasons which make it difficult for me to believe this. If it were true, then it would be not only permissible but obligatory to use any means available, all the modern techniques of brainwashing included, to rescue others from this appalling fate. And since it is God alone who knows the heart of every person, how are we to judge whether or not another person truly has the faith which is acceptable to him? If we hold this view, it is absolutely necessary to know who is saved and who is not, and we are then led into making the kind of judgements against which scripture warns us. We are in the business of erecting barriers: Has she been baptised? Has he been confirmed by a bishop in the historic succession? Or has she had a recognisable conversion and can she name the day and the hour when it happened? We are bound to become judges of that which God alone knows.' p173

He then argues again that we have usually asked the wrong question:

'I believe that the debate about this question (how should we regard other faiths) has been fatally flawed by the fact that it has been conducted around the question "Who can be saved?" It has been taken for granted that the only question was, 'Can the good non-Christian be saved?" and by that question what was meant was not "Can the non-Christian live a good and useful life and play a good and useful role in the life of society?" The question was, "Where will she go when she dies?"... The quest for truth always requires that we ask the right questions. If we ask the wrong questions we shall get only silence or confusion. In the debate about Christianity and the world's religions it is fair to say that there has been an almost unquestioned assumption that the only question is, "What happens to the non-Christian after death?" I want to affirm that this is the wrong question and that as long as it remains the central question we shall never come to the truth' p176f

He offers 3 reasons why this is the wrong question :

1. 'it is a question to which God alone has the right to give the answer... nothing could be more remote from the whole thrust of Jesus' teaching than the idea that we are in a position to know in advance the final judgement of God.'

2. 'it is based on an abstraction. By concentrating on the fate of the individual soul after death, it abstracts the soul from the full reality of the human person as an actor and sufferer in the ongoing history of the world...the question we have to ask is not 'What will happen to this person's soul after death?" but "What is the end which gives meaning to this person's story as part of God's whole story?"'

3. 'it is a question that starts with the individual and his or her need to be assured of ultimate happiness, and not with God and his glory.'

He summarises his view thus :

'The position which I have outlined is exclusivist in the sense that it affirms the unique truth of the revelation in Jesus Christ, but it is not exclusivist in the sense of denying the possibility of the salvation of the non-Christian. It is inclusivist in the sense that it refuses to limit the saving grace of God to the members of the Christian Church, but it rejects the inclusivism which regards the non-Christian religions as vehicles of salvation. It is pluralist in the sense of acknowledging the gracious work of God in the lives of all human beings, but it rejects a pluralism which denies the uniqueness and decisiveness of what God has done in Jesus Christ.' p182f

Creative Genius

Someone has way too much time on their hands. Those who are unfortunate enough to have to use Windows XP or 98 will recognise the crappy sound effects. There is something God-like about taking these useless and annoying noises and weaving them into a piece of music.



Thanks to bigbulkyanglican for the link.

Evangelism/Social Action within the Mission of God

I realise that it is not necessarily good blogging to just quite huge chunks of what other people have written, but I find Newbigin saying exactly what I want to say but can't. Here he is on the Mission of God, and the false dichotomy of evangelism and social action within that:

'It seems to me to be of great importance to insist that mission is not first of all an action of ours. It is an action of God, the triune God - of God the Father who is ceaselessly at work in all creation and in the hearts and minds of all human beings whether they acknowledge him or not, graciously guiding history toward its true end; of God the Son who has become part of this created history in the incarnation; and of God the Holy Spirit who is given as a foretaste of the end to empower and teach the Church and to convict the world of sin and righteousness and judgement. Before we speak about our role, the role of our words and deeds in mission, we need to have firmly in the center of our thinking this action of God.'

Having this view saves us from 2 wrong concepts of mission :

'On the one hand, there are those who place exclusive emphasis on the winning of individuals to conversion, baptism, and church membership. The numerical growth of the Church becomes the central goal of mission. Action for justice and peace in the world is a secondary matter. It is not the heart of mission. The gospel, it is said, is about changing people, not about changing structures. (...this neglects the very important biblical teaching about the principalities and powers..) The emphasis here is exclusively on the salvation of the individual soul and the growth of the Church. The primary task is evangelism, the direct preaching of the gospel in words - spoken or written. Action for social justice and peace may be a way of drawing people to hear the gospel, but it is not an intrinsic part of the gospel itself. The preaching of the gospel of salvation from sin and of the offer of eternal life is the primary business of the Church.

On the other hand, there are those who condemn this as irrelevant or wrong. The gospel, they will say, is about God's kingdom, God's reign over all the nations and all things. At the heart of Jesus' teaching is the prayer: "Your kingdom come; your will be done, as in heaven so on earth." The central responsibility of the Church is indicated by that prayer. It is to seek the doing of God's will of righteousness and peace in this world. A Christian community which makes its own self-enlargement its primary task may be acting against God's will. In societies such as India where good men and women seek to overcome interreligious strife and to build up the common life, the Church's program of aggressive evangelism is threatening. What is needed -it will be said- is not evangelistic preaching but action by Christians along with all people of goodwill to tackle the terrible problems of the nation, to free the oppressed, heal the sick, and bring hope to the hopeless.

If I am not mistaken, the conflict between these two ways of understanding mission is profoundly weakening the Church's witness. The conflict continues because both parties have hold of important truth. And I am suggesting that both parties are inadequately aware of the central reality, namely that mission is not primarily our work - whether of preaching or of social action- but primarily the mighty work of God. What is true in the affirmation of the evangelical side of this debate is that it does matter supremely that every human being should have the opportunity to know Jesus as Lord and Saviour, that without a living Church where this witness is borne neither evangelism nor Christian social action is possible, and that the gospel can never be identified with any particular project for justice and peace however laudable and promising. What is true in the position of the social activists is that a Church which exists only for itself and its own enlargement is a witness against the gospel, that the Church exists not for itself and not for its members but as a sign and agent and foretaste of the kingdom of God, and that it is impossible to give faithful witness to the gospel while being indifferent to the situation of the hungry, the sick, the victims of human inhumanity.'

On the Point of Mission

Trinity has a little tag-line on its brochures 'A Mission-Shaped College for a Mission-Shaped Church'. I find this idea exciting, but I'm not sure we're quite there yet. There is actually very little discussion of what mission is, or why we should do it. (This is being addressed with several new courses being written on missiology). In conversations around the college I am surprised by how often I still come across the equation of mission with evangelism. Here's Newbigin on the point of mission:

'...it is obvious that the centre of the picture is not occupied by the question of the saving, or the failure to save, individual souls from perdition. That question has dominated Protestant missionary thinking at many times and places. Clearly it cannot be left out of the picture, but I do not find that in the New Testament it occupies the center. If this were the central question, St Paul could not have said that his work in the Eastern Roman world was finished. However many local churches had come into being through his ministry, only a tiny minority of those who had died during the years of his ministry had died as Christian believers. If this is the criterion by missions are to be judged, then plainly they have been and still are a colossal failure. Not only today, but through all the centuries, the great majority of human beings who have died have died without faith in Christ. The missionary calling has sometimes been interpreted as a calling to stem this fearful cataract of souls going to eternal perdition. But I do not find this in the center of the New Testament representation of the missionary calling. Certainly Jesus tells us that God seeks the last lost sheep, and Paul is ready to be all things to all people in order that he may by all means save some. And he goes on to say, "I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings...

There is no room either for anxiety about our failure or for boasting about our success. There is room only for faithful witness to the one in whom the whole purpose of God for cosmic history has been revealed and effected, the crucified, risen, and regnant Christ.'

'It will be clear from what I have said about Paul's eschatological vision of salvation that I am not placing at the center of the argument the question of the salvation or perdition of the individual. Clearly that is part of what is involved, but my contention is that the biblical picture is distorted if this is put in the center. But it may be asked: if it is true that those who die without faith in Christ are not necessarily lost, and if it is also true that those who are baptized Christians are not necessarily saved, what is the point of missions? Why not leave events to take their course? In answer to that question, I would refer again to the word of Paul which I quoted earlier, "I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings." Jesus said as he was on his way to the cross "Where I am, there shall my servant be". The one who has been called and loved by the Lord, the one who wishes to love and serve the Lord, will want to be where he is. And where he is is on that frontier which runs between the kingdom of God and the usurped power of the evil one. When Jesus sent out his disciples on his mission, he showed them his hands and his side. They will share in his mission as they share in his passion, as they follow him in challenging and unmasking the powers of evil. There is no other way to be with him. At the heart of mission is simply the desire to be with him and to give him the service of our lives. At the heart of mission is thanksgiving and praise. We distort matters when we make mission an enterprise of our own in which we can justify ourselves by our works... the Church's mission began as the radioactive fallout from an explosion of joy. When it is true to its nature, it is so to the end. Mission is acted out doxology. That is its deepest secret. Its purpose is that God may be glorified.'

Election to a purpose, not to privilege

One of the areas in which I have found Newbigin to be most helpful is around the doctrine of election. I had always struggled, to say the least, with the idea that God chooses some for salvation and by implication others for eternal damnation. Newbigin argues that this is a false view of election which is unacceptable to many Christians as well as to others. We are chosen, as Israel was chosen, to be the bearers of his salvation for the world.

'It is the universality of God's saving love which is the ground of his choosing and calling a community to be the messengers of his truth and bearers of his love for all peoples.' p85

'God's electing grace, his choosing of some to be the bearers of his salvation for all, is a matter for awe and wonder and thankfulness: it can never become the ground for making claims against God which exclude others. God does no choose to save some and to destroy others. ( He has consigned all to disobedience in order that he may have mercy upon all.) His grace is free and sovereign, and there is no place for an exclusive claim on his grace, a claim by which others are excluded. This obviously has a great importance when we come to consider the relation of the gospel to the world religions.' p85f

'To be chosen, to be elect, therefore does not mean that the elect are the saved and the rest are lost. To be elect in Christ Jesus, and there is no other election, means to be incorporated into his mission to the world, to be the bearer of God's saving purpose for his whole world, to be the sign and the agent and the firstfruit of his blessed kingdom which is for all. It means therefore, as the New Testament makes abundantly clear, to take our share in his suffering, to bear the scars of the passion...It means that this particular body of people who bear the name of Jesus through history, this strange and often absurd company of people so feeble, so foolish, so often fatally compromised with the world, this body with all its contingency and particularity, is the body which has the responsibility of bearing the secret of God's reign through world history.' p86f

Relating to this tension between particularity and universalism he argues

'It seems to me that the whole nature of the gospel requires us to maintain this tension and not to try to resolve it either by a rationalistic universalism which denies the possibility of finally missing the mark, or by increasingly fruitless arguments about who will and who will not be saved.' p88

Newbigin on Resurrection, Worldview and Story

First up, here is Newbigin on the resurrection as a worldview defining event within our history and the Christian dogma as a story:

'It is obvious that the story of the empty tomb cannot be fitted into our contemporary worldview, or indeed into any worldview except one of which it is the starting point. That is, indeed, the whole point. What happened on that day is, according to the Christian tradition, only to be understood by analogy with what happened on the day the cosmos came into being. It is a boundary event, at the point where (as cosmologists tell us) the laws of physics cease to apply. It is the beginning of a new creation - mysterious to human reason as the creation itself. But, and this is the whole point, accepted in faith it becomes the starting point for a wholly new way of understanding our human experience, a way which - in the long run - makes more sense of human experience as a whole than does the reigning plausibility structure. That the crucified Jesus was raised from death to be the firstfruit of a new creation is -in a proper sense - dogma.' p11f

'The dogma, the thing given for our acceptance in faith, is not a set of timeless propositions: it is a story. Moreover, it is a story which is not yet finished, a story in which we are still awaiting the end when all becomes clear. Here, I think, is the point at which we may well feel that the the eighteenth-century defenders of the faith were most wide of the mark. The Christian religion which they sought to defend was a system of timeless metaphysical truths about God, nature, and man. The Bible was a source of information about such of these eternal truths as could not be discovered by direct observation of nature or by reflection on innate human ideas. Any valid defense of the Christian faith, I believe, must take a quite different route. The Christian faith, rooted in the Bible, is - I am convinced - primarily to be understood as an interpretation of the story - the human story set within the modern story of nature....The Christian faith is - as often said - a historical faith not just in the sense that it depends on a historical record, but also in the sense that it is essentially an interpretation of universal history. Its defense therefore, will be as much concerned with how we act with what we can say.' p12f

Lesslie Newbigin

I have begun reading Distinctly Welcoming by Richard Sudworth, It is an excellent read and chapter 2 'Give me back my mission' reminds me very much of the work of Lesslie Newbigin, who I'm sure must have been influential in Sudworth's thinking.

I am more and more convinced of the importance of Newbigin for mission in our country and I'm glad that people are making his thought more accessible. I know he has been a key influence on Brian Mclaren and others in the emerging church, but people may not realise that Tom Wright acknowledges his debt to him.


Here is Tom Wright on Leslie Newbigin from a conference I went to in Birmingham in 2006: (mp3)




I thought over the next couple of posts I'd mine a few quotes from 'The Gospel in a Pluralist Society' which have helped me in my thinking on salvation and other faiths.

A Fair Trial?

Steve Bell's cartoon from today's Guardian

Lonnie Frisbee

I just received a new DVD in the post:


It's a fascinating and tragic documentary about the life of Lonnie Frisbee. Lonnie was one of the key figures of the 'Jesus Movement' amongst the hippie counter-culture in '60s West Coast USA. He also played a key part in the early days of both the Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard movements.



I am intrigued by his story for several reasons :
i) He seems to have been a catalyst in a genuine move of God amongst a sub-culture who were completely outside the church. Lonnie claims to have received his calling when he was on acid in the desert. He originally had some strange ideas which mixed up Jesus stuff with UFOs and other mysticism but upon meeting other Christian hippies became more orthodox in his views and went on to baptise hundreds in the pacific ocean.

ii) I'm interested in the place of experience in conversion and the Christian life, and what happens when this becomes a main focus.

iii) His place in the Vineyard movement which has been a big part of my life. In the Vineyard, the way they do ministry is to pray 'Come, Holy Spirit' and then wait and see what happens. (this has continued into New Wine etc). Now, 'Come, Holy Spirit' is an ancient prayer of the church, but as far as I can make out, its modern use in this way of ministry goes back to Lonnie. When he prayed this on Mother's Day 1980 in John Wimber's church, people fell about, shook and began to speak in tongues. Wimber cites this occasion as being instrumental in his ministry and the growth of the Vineyard movement.

iv) Lonnie was homosexual in orientation. Although he apparently always claimed that homosexual behaviour was sinful, he evidently did have homosexual affairs at times in his life, though there is debate to what extent. When this was discovered, he was removed from public ministry in the Vineyard. He felt extremely bitter towards John Wimber about this and perhaps never really recovered. He eventually died of AIDS in 1993.

The sub-text of the film is that both the Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard movements have written Lonnie out of their history, due to his homosexuality. In the Vineyard, I'm not sure this is completely true. Although he is referred to just as 'a young man' in John Wimber's Power Evangelism book he appears on the Vineyard USA website and he is mentioned extensively in Carol Wimber's biography of John.

Now some people may just think that Lonnie was just a fraud from the start, like a hypnotist or something, but I don't think this makes sense of the testimonies of the fruit of his ministry. For my money I think he's a classic example of how God uses broken and messed up people. Like I say, a fascinating and tragic story.

Justice Mail

I don't know about you but I'm one of those people who claims to be concerned for social justice but rarely makes time to do any campaigning. My former employer John Hull helps to lead a group called Justice Mail. They send out requests for action (usually twice a month) on issues which you can respond to by sending an email or a letter. Here is the blurb :


"Justice Mail is for busy people who want to be active on issues of social justice but have not time to do the research. We send you brief information including a link to a site where you can send an email message. This will take only five minutes, and we send you our suggestions for action every week or two. You are not expected to act on them all; you make your own decisions.

We select for action only issues from current campaigns of major social justice organisations such as Oxfam, World Development Movement, Christian Aid, Church Action on Poverty, Jubilee Debt Campaign and Amnesty.
We have two administration centres, one in Birmingham at All Saints parish church in Kings Heath, and the other in the Church of the Martyrs in Leicester. We hope to create other local groups.

Although one of our aims is to increase awareness of social justice issues in local churches, we are open to all people both religious and secular, who share our hopes for a fairer world."


I thought that for Lent I would try and make a bit more of an effort to take action on some of these issues. The early February action is for Jubilee Debt Campaign.


"Dear Justice Mail Friends,

Although responses from the UK government to our earlier messages indicate that the category of illegitimate debt is not recognized by our government, we must keep up the pressure. Jubilee Debt is asking us to protest at the £525 million incurred by the dictator Suharto during his period of office more than 10 years ago. This loan enabled jet planes and tanks to be bought from Britain and were used for the suppression of the people in East Timor. Indonesia is still repaying this debt in spite of the fact the more than half the population lives in poverty. Follow the link below.

http://www.jubileedebtcampaign.org.uk/indonesia

Yours Faithfully,
John"

If you would like to join Justice Mail, and there is no charge, send a message to John Hull j.hull@queens.ac.uk (West of Britain).

Back once again...

Well, the blog has been given a spring clean and once again here I go with an attempt to write something on a semi-regular basis. Given my track record, I don't hold out much hope. My goal is to improve on the grand total of entries for my blog last year - four. No point in setting my sights too high. I am spurred on by my buddies from Trinity, Mr Barnes, the philosopher poet, and Mr Swales the future Archbishop of Canterbury.

Speaking of the Archbishop of Canterbury, I hope that most people have managed to get their knickers untwisted after realising that he didn't actually say what he is being made out to have said. Then again, our best-selling newspaper is the Sun, so I won't hold my breath. Tom Wright has written an excellent letter to his clergy, which has been posted on the fulcrum site, as has this piece by Andrew Goddard (somewhat lengthier). Richard Sudworth at Distinctly Welcoming is also well worth a read. (He's coming to Trinity soon to speak on our Islam course).

On a less controversial note, check out the ABC on the emergent church over at emergent village.

Mission: From Mars Bars to Missiles

Here is a theological reflection I did as part of the selection process:

I am here because someone gave me a chocolate bar. Of course, there have been many other factors that have brought me to this point in my journey of faith and calling, but a significant one was when a couple of smiley people approached me on the University of Birmingham campus and asked me if I wanted a free mars bar, no strings attached, as a small token of God’s love for me. This was my introduction both to the Vineyard movement, and to ‘servant evangelism’. Shortly afterwards, I joined South Birmingham Vineyard, the church which had sent out these ‘sweet’ apostles.

Servant evangelism is a method of outreach used in many Vineyard and other churches. It involves getting out in the community and giving away free gifts or offering to do simple acts of kindness for no other reason than to show people that God loves them unconditionally. It may be giving away ice cold bottles of water at a festival on a hot day, litter-picking in your local streets, gardening, car washing… the list goes on. The idea is to practically demonstrate the good news, rather than just proclaiming it. As St. Francis said, “preach the gospel wherever you go, and when necessary, use words”. It is simple, requiring little training, anyone can get involved and it’s great fun. What may at first glance seem like rather a trite publicity stunt actually has, I believe, more to it than that. It is possible to see these public acts of kindness, e.g. litter-picking as a kind of symbolic or prophetic act, an acted parable which causes on-lookers to ask ‘Why on earth are you doing that?’. Jesus often did something which made people ask questions, which then gave him an opportunity to share the gospel or teach.

Through the Vineyard I got involved in church-planting. In Coventry, we experimented with new ways of being church, meeting first in peoples homes then later in pubs, a coffee bar, and schools. One Sunday in every four was given over to ‘church on the streets’ where instead of gathering to worship church members got involved in community projects. Small groups were given a budget for ‘servant outreach’ and encouraged to be imaginative! In many Vineyard churches this is taken further and small groups are mission based, e.g. a group may be structured around working with young mums, homelessness projects, refugee work, etc.

When the ‘Mission shaped church’ report came out I was hugely encouraged to see ‘fresh expressions’ of church being encouraged within Anglican settings. I have since found myself in the fascinating situation of working for Professor John Hull, who is quite critical of the report, and has written a theological response to it. He believes it fails to deal adequately with issues of poverty, consumerism and our multi-faith society. Whilst I don’t agree with everything he says, I believe his critique is important and should be taken on board.

Of course, evangelism, ‘servant’ or otherwise, and church-planting are just one part of the mission of God, which is to reconcile and renew all of creation. In our anticipation of God’s new creation, which was begun and guaranteed in the resurrection of Jesus, we are called to work in hope for justice and peace in the power of the Spirit. Through my theological study, and especially though my work with Professor John Hull, I have come to see the vital importance of global issues such as trade justice, environmental concerns, and peace-work. In June, with John and other staff and students from the Queen’s Foundation I will be taking part in a service of worship and witness at the Faslane naval base in Scotland as part of a protest against the government’s policy to renew the Trident nuclear deterrent system. I see this too as mission work.

I feel called and committed to holistic mission, both disciple-making and working for social-justice. Of course, most Christians would say that they believe God’s mission involves both aspects, but in my experience it would appear many evangelicals are passionate about the former whilst paying lip-service to the latter and vice-versa for those of a more liberal persuasion. I refuse to choose one or the other and in my vocation would seek to encourage people in both. Whether it’s giving out chocolate or protesting against weapons of mass destruction, I believe all disciples are called to co-operate with God, playing their small part, albeit imperfectly, in His mission for the world.

Faslane 365

This weekend I will be joining a number of students and staff from several theological colleges in a pilgrimage to the Faslane naval base near Glasgow, home of the UK's strategic nuclear deterrent. I am going to take part in a service of worship and witness, as part of the protest against our government's policy of renewing the Trident missile system, our weapons of mass destruction, at a cost of between 20-76 billion pounds. You can read about the action on the Ekklesia website here.

Over the past 2 years of working with Professor John Hull, I have come to agree with him that the renewal of Trident is unjustifiable militarily, politically, economically, legally, religiously and ethically. John has written a paper outlining the arguments against renewal of Trident, which can be found here. We sent it to most of the cabinet, the Defence committee, countless MPs, all of the Church of England bishops and many more key figures, with very little response. The government produced a White Paper in December, outlining its intention to renew Trident, which made no reference to the ethical issues involved. John wrote an ethical critique of the White Paper, a summary of which can be found here.

I feel it is important to demonstrate the almost unanimous opposition of the Christian churches in this country to the renewal of Trident (Scottish and English Catholic bishops, many Anglican bishops including the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Church of Scotland general assembly, senior representatives of the Methodist church, the United Reformed church and the Baptist Union of Great Britain, the Quakers and many others have all opposed Trident renewal), and to worship and pray at the place where these dreadful weapons are held.

We are apparently going to be on the BBC show 'Heaven and Earth' on Sunday morning, how exciting!

Thumbs Up from the CofE

I have been recommended for training for ordination in the Church of England!
Just over 18 months ago I began the process of testing my call to ordained ministry. I met with a vocations advisor about 5 or 6 times and wrote a few pieces for him, about my journey of faith and calling, my understanding of ordination and priesthood and the sacraments. He also came to visit Su to check she could make a decent pot of tea. At the end of my time with vocations advisor no. 1, he recommended that, as I was new to the Church of England, I spend 6 months on placement at Holy Trinity church, as well as a short placement in a parish of a different tradition. I got as involved as I could in the life of Holy Trinity and also spent some time at St Thomas the Apostle, an Anglo-Catholic parish in Longford. At the end of my placements I met with vocations advisor no. 2 a couple of times to review my progress. She asked me to review the cynical and depressing book Last Rites:The End of the Church of England. I will post the review on here sometime.
I then began to meet with the Coventry Diocese Director of Ordinands, Roger Spiller. We began to work through the following process:



We met 5 or 6 times, and Roger came to meet Su to check the quality of her baking. He then decided to put me forward for a 'Bishops' Advisory Panel on Selection for Training for Ordained and Accredited Lay Ministry' (snappy title I know). I filled in lots of forms, had CRB checks, wrote a theological reflection, prepared a presentation, practiced my limp handshakes, popped a plumb in my mouth and off I went on 21st-23rd May. The 3 day 'selection conference' was a rigourous and intense but rewarding and enjoyable experience.
There was a nervous 10 day wait and then I got the phonecall yesterday giving me the nod. All very exciting and very scary! At last I know what I'm going to be doing with the rest of my life.

OK, so it's been a while...

Meet William John, born on 15th December '06.
He's cool.

George Blush

Just in case anyone hasn't already seen it (it's been number 1 in the google video Top 100 for a couple of weeks at least). This has to be one of the most audacious and brilliant pieces of satirical comedy I've seen in a long time, if a little cruel. I hadn't heard of Stephen Colbert before this, although I have watched and enjoyed the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I'm not sure how this was allowed to happen. I actually almost felt sorry for George Bush having to sit through it, I guess he has to get some credit for actually being there, and for shaking Colbert's hand at the end (and for doing this earlier on in the evening). I'm not sure what the Whitehouse Correspondents' dinner is all about, but I understand that the speakers usually have a bit of a pop at the administration and the media in equal measure. I think Colbert actually does this, but of course he has been heavily criticised for being too harsh on the president, the conservative media proving Colbert's point for him. For those who happen to think he did a great job there is a blog to thank him.

Bono edits The Independent

The Independent is probably my favourite newspaper. Although it has definitely gone a bit more tabloidy since its new format, and is occasionally somewhat alarmist I enjoy it a bit more than the Grauniad, which gets a bit tedious, although it is probably my second choice. All the rest are right-wing, zenophobic, fascist rags, Murdoch owned or gutter press filth. (With the possible exception of The Mirror).
Anyway, tomorrow the Independent is guest edited by Bono, and half of the proceeds go to towards his RED initiative in the fight against AIDS. Go buy it.

Love Life Love Lent

Last night at housegroup we talked about this Lent programme, which was started in the Diocese of Birmingham and is apparently growing increasingly popular. The idea is that rather than just giving up chocolate for 40 days, and then eating lots of chocolate, giving onlookers the idea that for Christians Easter is all to do with chocolate, we actually take on some generous, practical habits as part of the Lent season. I think it looks like a brilliant idea. There are 50 actions altogether, falling into 6 different catagories - Personal, Friends, Neighbours, Church, Community, World. The actions are really simple and fun. Examples from the 1st week are - Have a meat free day, write to someone and thank them, spend some time in silence, give up your place to someone who is in a rush eg. traffic or shop queue. There have been more than 50,000 booklets distributed so far; could make quite an impact. Read more about it here or download the booklet (pdf).

Ash Wednesday

Well it's day 1 of Lent. So far the alcohol free thing is going great. I haven't touched a single drop all day :). 40 days does seem like a long time though, although I have to remember that Sundays are feast days that don't count in the 40 days. (Something I didn't realise last year). So maybe my wine intake with Sunday dinner will increase:)

The thirst for life thing has made me think about how many peoples lives are destroyed by alcohol and other addictions. I can only think, 'there but for the grace of God go I.' If I didn't have such a comfortable life, if I was on the streets for example, maybe I would depend on alcohol rather than 'enjoy it responsibly.'
Last night I met a homeless man who had just fallen off the wagon after 18 months. He was understandably gutted. He asked me to pray with him, which I was glad to do, and then went on to pray one of the most penitent, beautiful prayers I have ever heard. I believe he meant it.

I'm not too sure what Ash Wednesday is all about. I know that Holy Trinity are doing their traditional Ash Wednesday service, where your forehead can be marked with a cross in ash and olive oil. I think it's a penitence thing. I must be very penitent, as I spend most days up to my eyeballs in ash. Unfortunately I will not be fasting today, as I have some pancake eating to catch up on, which I will be doing at mum and dad's tonight. I'd be such a rubbish Roman Catholic.

Sven has an excellent post on Jesus and Guantanamo Bay, which he has also done as a podcast.

Shrove Tuesday

It's pancake day again! Not that I had any as I was down at meeting place. This means that lent starts tomorrow. As last year, Maggi Dawn has some interesting thoughts here, here and here. I'm not sure if I'll repeat last years attempt to blog through lent. I might do. I could do with getting back in the habit. I guess it depends if it will be a help or a hinder to making space for God and renewing my dependence on Him, which is what lent is supposed to be about. I am going to be giving up alcohol for lent, inspired by the Thirst for Life campaign. I may also have to give up eBay, one of my latest addictions. Coventry Vineyard have started a 40 days blog for people to blog their lent stories.

Today I was sweeping in Tamworth with my fellow sweep David, and on the way back to Coventry we decided to call in on Atherstone to see if we could catch any of their ball game shenanigans. The Atherstone Ball Game is one of our countries oldest Shrove Tuesday traditions, going back at least 800 years. When we got there the police were just cordoning off the streets and shopkeepers were boarding up their windows. Schoolchildren were beginning to gather outside Barclays bank where they are apparently showered with sweets. We couldn't hang around to see the townsmen engaging in the ancient 'sport', a very primitive, alcohol fuelled version of football/rugby where the only rules are no biting, no hair pulling and 'get and keep the ball'. Shame.

Archbishop John Sentamu - Oi! Guantanamo, No!

Or words to that effect. Archbishop of York John Sentamu has added his voice to the growing number which are speaking out against the disgrace which is Guantanamo Bay. He was on the front page of the Independent on Saturday, suggesting that the UNHRC should seek a writ of habeas corpus, compelling the US to bring those being detained at Guantanamo to court, to establish whether they are imprisoned lawfully and if they should be released.

He said "The American government is breaking international law. The main building block of a democratic society is that everyone is equal before the law, innocent until proved otherwise, and has the right to legal representation. If the guilt of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay is beyond doubt, why are the Americans afraid to bring them to trial? Transparency and accountability are the other side of the coin of freedom and responsibility. We are all accountable for our actions in spite of circumstances. The events of 9/11 cannot erase the rule of law and international obligations.

The US should try all 500 detainees at Guantanamo, who still include eight British residents, or free them without further delay. To hold someone for up to four years without charge clearly indicates a society that is heading towards George Orwell's Animal Farm.

Wow! No mincing of words there. The more I hear of Archbishop Sentamu, the more I like him. His inaugural sermon was awesome, and it seems to be quoted every week at church. Great stuff.

Listening

Some of the stuff I've been listening to recently.

Close Guantanamo

Following the UN report on the Guantanamo prison camp, which described aspects of what goes on there as torture, an increasing number of voices are asking for the camp to be closed. Kofi Anna has called for the camp to be closed as soon as possible, and for the 500 inmates to be tried or freed without further delay. Cabinet minister Peter Hain has said the same thing. Even Blair has described the camp as an 'anomaly' which must be dealt with sooner or later.

Archbiship Desmond Tutu, who is always an inspiration to hear, was on the Today programme this morning. He was vociferous in his condemnation of the detention without trial which occurs at Guantanamo and which was proposed in the 90 day legislation here in the UK. (listen here).
Here are some of his comments on Guantanamo :

"A horrendous blot on the image of what was supposed to be the only superpower and a democracy to boot"

"I never imagined I would live to see the day when the United States and its satellites would use precisely the same arguments that the apartheid government used for detention without trial. It is disgraceful and one can't find strong enough words to condemn what Britain and the United States and some of their allies have accepted. I can't believe it."

"I am appalled, I am deeply appalled and what is even more sad is, especially in the United States, is that there has been so little outcry.",

A recent report by John Simpson suggested that even on the US Department of Defense's own admission only 8% of detainees held at Guantanamo were actual Al-Qaeda fighters, and only 5% were actually captured by the Americans themselves. Most were handed over by what could be called 'bounty hunters' after a big campaign in Afghanistan and Pakistan where notices such as the following were handed out :

"Get wealth and power beyond your dreams... You can receive millions of dollars helping the anti-Taleban forces catch al-Qaeda and Taleban murderers.

"This is enough money to take care of your family, your village, your tribe for the rest of your life."

hmmm.

If these people are accused of being part of terrorist groups then try them (allowing them access to lawyers). As Desmond Tutu said "If you've got the evidence, produce the evidence.". If they are prisoners in the 'war on terror' then let them be treated as prisoners of war in accordance with Geneva convention. This neither here nor there, unlawful, immoral situation cannot go on. Guantanamo Bay must be closed.

A Clean Sweep?

There was an item about my august profession on Radio 4’s Home Truths this morning (listen again). It was fascinating to hear from fellow sweeps, some of whom came from families which had been sweeping chimneys for 200 years or more, the trade being passed on from father to son.

When I’m out sweeping, people are often surprised to find that we still use brushes and rods. This equipment goes back to at least the 1830’s, when laws were passed outlawing the practice of sending small children up the chimney to clean them. Most people know that small boys used to be used to clean chimneys, but they may not be aware of some other methods which were once employed, including dragging a holly branch through the chimney or sending up a live turkey! I have actually met people out in the villages of Warwickshire who remember the holly bush method.

I’m not sure where the idea that, in the words of Dick Van Dyke, ‘a sweep is as lucky, as lucky can be’ comes from. This guy has a few ideas. One story goes back to George II. Apparently, the horses for the royal carriage were going wild on one occasion and the only person who could get them to calm down was a chimney sweep. The lucky sweep idea somehow became connected to the folklore of weddings. It was meant to be lucky to see a sweep, or especially a sweep’s brush popping out of a chimney on the way to the church. At some point sweeps began to be invited to attend weddings, to be in the photographs and to give the bride a lucky kiss as she leaves the church. Many sweeps now advertise this service as a means to supplement their income (although this guy doesn’t seem to actually do any sweeping, just wedding appearances, surely that doesn’t count!) My boss Colin has so far resisted this practice, probably 'cos he's far too busy sweeping. Maybe if I go forward for ordination as a vicar I could play both parts!

The Sacraments of Eucharist and Baptism

Here's the third and final piece which I wrote for my vocations adviser:

Here I will give a brief overview of my understanding of the sacraments of Eucharist and Baptism. Once again I am aware that there has been much ink (and blood!) spilled over the nature of these sacraments, and whatever I say here will only touch upon what is a huge subject.
I will begin by my understanding of sacraments in general. I believe a Christian sacrament is a physical action/rite which has been instituted by Christ that when combined with faith is a means of grace to those who partake in it. I do not believe that sacraments are automatically effective, no matter who they are given to, as this idea would seem to be more akin to magic, and could encourage superstition. On the other hand, I don’t believe that they are merely symbolic. When administered correctly, I believe that the sacraments effect what they signify. The key question being ‘what constitutes correct administration?’ (a question which I don’t intend to answer here!). I believe that there is an aspect of mystery to the sacraments (one of the origins of the term) which belies explanation – trying to explain how they work somehow misses the point. Nevertheless, there are depths of meaning and multi-levelled symbolism that are there to be explored.


Eucharist – The Meal Jesus Gave Us

“This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me”

In the bread and the wine of the Eucharist I believe that we meet Christ in a special way. There is a whole spectrum of beliefs as to what is happening in the bread and wine. At one end of the spectrum are the Roman Catholics who believe that the bread and wine become the literal body and blood of Christ in the miracle of transubstantiation, at the other end are the low-church evangelicals who, following Zwingli, believe that the bread and wine are just a remembrance of Christ’s death. I think I fall somewhere in the middle. I believe that when approached in faith Christ is really present in the bread and the wine so that they are to us, in a spiritual sense, the body and blood of Christ.


The Eucharist is of course a remembrance of the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross, and all that it achieved. Each time we partake in it we appropriate once again the benefits of the cross, forgiveness of sins and new life in Christ. It is a thanksgiving (eucharist), and a celebration.
In the same way that the Passover meal remembered the liberation of Israel from slavery in Egypt, the Lord’s supper remembers the New Exodus that Jesus achieved on the cross.


It is more than a remembrance, however. I believe that when we approach them in the right way the bread and the wine of the Eucharist really do feed us in a spiritual sense. They focus our lives on the central facts of our faith and prevent us from drifting off into an unmediated, mystical spirituality.

The bread and the wine are an offering. We take what has been given by God, the wheat and the grapes, we make bread and wine from them and offer them back to God. God then makes them to be the body and blood of Christ and gives them back to us. We eat and give Him thanks! There is a continual, relational interaction between God and us.


“For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes”

The Eucharist is where past, present and future meet for Christians. Each time we celebrate the Eucharist, in the present, we are connecting with the Easter victory of Christ and anticipating the consummation of that victory when He comes in the future. We remind ourselves that we are living in the ‘time between the times’. This passage also tells us that in the symbolic action of the Eucharist, we are actually preaching the gospel in a way that goes beyond words. We are rehearsing the central drama of our faith and finding our place in the story.

There is also a ‘horizontal’ aspect to the Eucharist, Holy Communion. As well as communion with God it is communion with all those who belong to the New Covenant community. It is the family meal. I believe that Holy Communion should be a truly ecumenical celebration. There is one body. It is a tragedy that so often the Eucharist has become a source of division within the church, when the Lord’s table should be the one place that all those who trust in Christ as their Lord and saviour are able to come together. – Story about Vineyard pastors at the Vatican.

There is a sombre warning in 1 Corinthians that whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup should examine themselves to make sure they are not doing so in an unworthy manner. They are to ‘discern the body’. I believe this has a double meaning. Discerning the body as in the death of Christ that it represents, and discerning the body as in the body of Christ the church, and making sure that one has not been a cause of division within that body. Paul even warns that those who don’t discern the body are eating and drinking judgement upon themselves, resulting in sickness or even death! If this is the result of the sacrament being abused, then when it is approached correctly it must bring healing and life.
This presumably has implications for priesthood and who is ‘allowed’ to partake in the Eucharist. Are there occasions when it is appropriate for the priest to deny people communion?


Water Baptism

If the Eucharist is the family meal, then baptism is a sign of entrance into the family. In baptism we are entering the New Covenant community. Baptising people is part of the ‘making disciples’ mandate of the great commission. I believe that water baptism is one part of the nexus of Christian initiation which includes repentance, water baptism, reception of the Spirit and faith in Christ.

I can see several aspects to water baptism.

A new beginning/birth. You enter a family when you are born. In baptism you are entering a new family. John 3:5 talks about being born of water and spirit.

A wash for the dirty. In baptism our sins are washed away and we are made clean.

A burial for the dead. In baptism, our old life is buried and we are raised into our new life with Christ. (Burial would seem to be especially well symbolised by full immersion, although sprinkling of earth does of course happen at burials too!)

Identifying with and being united with the death and resurrection of Jesus. Romans 6:3-5

A public declaration of faith. Baptism is a very public way of declaring our allegiance to Jesus as Lord. We leave behind our old allegiances and pledge ourselves to follow Christ.

A sign of the New Covenant. As with the Eucharist there are connections with the New Covenant. The waters of baptism recall the crossing of the Red sea and the Jordan whereby the people of Israel were delivered from slavery and entered into their inheritance. Some also see a replacement of the old covenant sign of circumcision with the new covenant sign of baptism.

Some of these aspects seem more appropriate to the baptism of believers. What about the baptism of infants?

There are historical understandings of infant baptism that I struggle with. For Augustine, and many following, the doctrine of ‘original sin’ meant that unbaptised infants who died were hell-bound, and therefore by baptising a baby you were giving him or her a better chance of salvation. This seems to portray a rather bizarre view of God, in my opinion, and would seem to be little more than superstition. I am much happier with a ‘covenantal’ view of infant baptism. I believe that the children of believers are to be considered full members of the new covenant community, and it may therefore be appropriate to give them the sign of this fact. (Incidently, I also believe this is an argument for giving these children communion –question: at what age may children be confirmed/take communion?)) Given my stated understanding of a sacrament – a means of grace, when combined with faith – in the case of the baptism of believers children, the faith must be ‘by proxy’, expressed by the parents on behalf of the child. Question - in the case of unbelieving parents presenting a child for baptism, where is the faith? Is it in the priest, or the church members, or both? Or is the actual presenting of the child seen as a step of faith on behalf of the parents?


Much more that could be written but once more time has defeated me, and I’m sure there’s more than enough here to discuss!

catching up

Ok, so somehow nearly 2 months has passed by since my last blog. How did that happen? To ease myself back into it here's a few photos :




This one was taken at Perranporth beach on the day of Jamie's dedication down at Truro Vineyard just before Christmas. It was a special day, made all the more poignant by the knowledge that his Dad (my brother-in-law) Karl had just been called up to go to Iraq. He goes out with the Auxiliary RAF for 3 months this summer.

We spent a nice and quiet Christmas down at Su's mum's in Yateley. We then went over to Su's dad's for a couple of days where we actually got some snow. It was only a couple of inches but enough to make everywhere look nice. I wanted to stay there 'cos we never get any snow in Coventry. (I can completely understand Michael bemoaning the blandness of English winter weather, where is the harsh winter we were promised?)

Just after New Year we went for a walk in the Berwyn hills with our friends Steve and Siobhan. For our North American friends, here is a stone circle which is probably around 4000 years old.

Ordination and Priesthood

Here's a little piece I rattled off for my vocations advisor about my understanding of ordination and priesthood:


Over the last few years I have given considerable thought to the nature of leadership within the church and particularly the question of ordained public ministry. Here I will attempt to give a brief overview of the development of my thought and my current understanding of ordained ministry. I will begin with some of my initial reservations, then look at my current understanding of the ‘doing’ and ‘being’ of priesthood. I am aware that there are huge debates over the nature of priesthood, leadership and authority within the church, and many books have been written on the subject. I will offer here a brief personal reflection based on my limited current understanding which will inevitably only scratch the surface of a huge subject.

Initial Reservations

When I began my theology degree, 3 years ago, I began to examine the concept of ordained, full time ministry. Within the Vineyard movement to which I belonged there was a strong emphasis on the ‘equipping of the saints’ for the work of ministry. The role of leadership was to help people to discover their own gifts and release them within the church and the world to use those gifts for the mission of God. I was and am a firm believer in the priesthood of all believers and was therefore nervous of the concept of a special class of ‘priests’ who might be considered to be ‘super-saints’. Didn’t we all have access to God now through our man in heaven, our great high-priest Jesus Christ? Did we need a set of intermediaries to act as a go-between for us and God? Wasn’t the idea of priesthood a resurrection of an old covenant category?
I was concerned about a divide between clergy and laity whereby the clergy are expected (by themselves or others) to perform the real tasks of ministry and the laity are basically passive recipients. I also felt that is was unrealistic to expect one person to combine the roles of pastor, teacher, evangelist, administrator, worship leader etc, etc.
I now see that most of my reservations came either from a faulty understanding of Christian priesthood or from (real or perceived) historical abuses of that role.

My Current Understanding

I began to realise that despite my egalitarian tendencies, God does “set apart” certain people in order to serve the church. Initially I thought in pragmatic terms. Someone needs to prepare services, and pray for people and pastor them and visit the sick etc, etc and if these things are going to be done well, then it is better to have some people who are dedicated to the tasks. I have seen how difficult it is for people to be bi-vocational and feel that they are not able to do either job to the best of their ability. I am still suspicious of a one-man band model of priesthood and feel that part of a priest’s role must be to be a facilitator, someone who equips and enables others to live out their calling within the church and the world.

I like what Archbishop Rowan Williams says about the role of priests in forming communities:

“Communities, in spite of the sentimental way we sometimes think of them, don’t just happen. They need nurture, they need to be woven into unity (more of that in a moment). If the unity of the Church is not that of a mass of individuals with a few convictions in common but that of a differentiated organism where the distinctiveness of each is always already in play, then for the Church to be consciously itself, it needs people to see and show how diversity works together. Sometimes this is a role of active co-ordination, drawing out gifts and deploying them, sometimes it is helping some people see that what others do is bound up with what they themselves do.”(1)

Many people are suspicious of an authoritarian, hierarchical structure of leadership whereby there is a ‘chain of command’ a bit like an army, although I don’t believe the Church of England really operates this way, it is sometimes perceived to. In contrast to this I prefer the picture of a conductor of an orchestra as a model of priesthood. The conductor’s job is to know the piece of music inside out, (which includes being familiar with the composer), so that he can hear how it should sound in his head. The players can look at him in order to know when they should come in and how loud to play etc. He must then listen to the different instruments that are playing and conduct them to play together so that they make a beautiful sound and not a cacophony!

I have come to see that in addition to the ‘pragmatic’ side of priesthood (what a priest does), there is also an ‘ontological’ aspect to priesthood (what a priest is). God “sets apart” men and women to be certain things within the church, these include :

A servant. First and foremost, an ordained minister, whether a deacon or priest, is called to be a servant. He or she is a servant of God, a servant of the church and a servant of those in the parish in which he/she ministers. Jesus’ footwashing of the disciples is the obvious model which springs to mind. Not that a priest is to be a doormat who is always at the beck and call of everyone in the church, but for a significant amount of his/her time they are to be “available”, available to God and available to others. The only kind of authority which is appropriate within the church is that which is administered with humility.

A priest is called to be a witness who through his or her words and life is a symbol within the community of what the whole community is called to be. People should be able to learn more of the character and mission of Christ by observing the priest. This is indeed a high calling! It is one in which failures are inevitable, otherwise the priest would not be human. Nevertheless, the priest is called to watch their life and doctrine closely. A priest within the Church of England is not only a symbol within the church, but to all those in his parish who are not necessarily members of the church. He thereby represents not only Christ, but the church as well.

A person of prayer. As Michael Ramsay wrote, a priest is ‘to be with God with the people on our heart’(2). A priest is called to a life of prayer. Prayer for all those within his/her care and prayer to sustain his own relationship with God out of which he/she ministers. This again is extremely challenging and is an area that I know I need to grow in.

A minister of the Word. A priest is called to dwell within the biblical story from creation to new creation, so that it shapes their entire worldview, and so that they can make it come alive to people in a fresh and exciting way and show people their place within the story. They are called to preach the gospel in all its glorious fullness.

A minister of sacrament. A priest will stay close to Christ through the eucharist and will administer and help people to understand this sacrament. He/she also has the privilege of baptising people into God’s church. I must admit this is one area where I need to gain a deeper understanding of the priest’s role. Having enjoyed the breaking of bread with friends in people’s homes on many occasions I am yet to see why only an ordained minister can ‘preside’ over this celebration. It is probably in order to protect the ‘specialness’ of the Lord’s table, and not want it watering down, but I am convinced that a priest is not meant to be a ‘policeman’ of the table. I also still need to deepen my awareness of baptism as a sacrament and the priest’s role in this.

This is only really a start and there is much more that could be said. I look forward to reading around the subject and increasing my understanding of Christian priesthood.

1. R. Williams, ‘The Christian Priest Today’: Lecture on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of Ripon College, Cuddesdon, Fri. 28th May 2004 - http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches/2004/040528.html
2. M. Ramsay, The Christian Priest Today’, SPCK, London, 1972, 14

Meeting Place

On a Tuesday night, Suzy and I help out at a community meal held at the Salvation Army building in town called 'meeting place'. The aim is to provide a place where people can come for friendship, conversation, a cheap meal and an evening in out of the cold. I think I blogged about it before - here, here, and here. Anyway, here are some photos of one evening. It looks like a bit of a quiet one, but usually we have between 40 and 50 guests.