The response was that he was neither for or against the pirates. "Can he do that," asked another of the crew, "Of course he can, he's religious!" was the response!
As the pirates approached the water of life, the Spaniards arrived, not to drink of the waters of eternal life but to destroy it. "Eternal life is a gift from the Lord alone," they cried. Oh how we cheered. Sadly though, the 'Christian' hero ends up going off with a mermaid and seeks his salvation in the arms of some fishy woman (not the first Christian to do that I assume) but it makes you (well, me) think about how Christians are portrayed.
One of the big problems with being a Christian is that we appear to have a few distinct groups, each with their own problems and each causing problems because of their views and attitudes.
Neither for or against brigade
These are the luke warm, pain in the butt, the meek shall inherit the earth types who look at everything and avoid making an assessment. Because they dare not speak out in case they offend, we find that they are used to endorse the behaviour and attitudes that the Bible speaks against. They assume that because they haven't said 'yes' that they are not in league with the naughty people and yet because they haven't said 'no' they are not in conflict with them either. A passive middle road that speaks of being Christian and well thought of by all.
The everything (except what I believe) is wrong brigade
Now, just in case you think that these are made up of the 'I'm an orthodox (or Mainstream) Christian, get out of here" types, you are wrong for this group also holds the "I'm a liberal (or revisionist) get out of here" types too!
These are the people who decide that they are the only people with any warrant to exist within the Church and that everyone else has to go - no discussion, no dialogue (indaba what?). They are so taken up with the infighting and factions that they ignore the evangelistic mission of the Church to the secular world. they're not seeking to change the world, they merely want the world to be as they want it to be and tolerate no other opinion.
The 'everybody's friend' brigade
These are the people who, in my opinion, are turning the Church into the world. They seek to be popular and so at their hands the Church adopts everything that the world sees as acceptable in the hope that it will attract some of those formerly excluded by the Church. The problem is that the Church is called to be (as were the Jews) 'counter cultural'. Our religious book (AKA the Bible) and or teachings (AKA traditions) demand from us certain behaviour and attitudes and because these aren't popular with those outside (because it calls upon them to act in ways that they choose not to) we merely 'revise' what being Christian is to allow them to wear a label that effectively means nothing.
I do try to be everybody's friend, but I am also aware that I have a duty to speak out when I see something that is wrong in terms of the Christian teachings as they have been for a couple of thousand years. I understand the patristic errors and know about the organisational errors handed down by the RC plc element that ran the show before we were CofE and understand the reasons people developed, practiced and continue to research what christian is. But at the end of the day it boils down to this:
Jesus dies for each of us, by name, personally, individually,
We are called to put off those things which deny Christ and which cause us to do wrong stuff (that's called 'sin')
we are called to lead others into knowledge and relationship with Christ so that we might be one with the Father, enabled by the Spirit.
We are called to warn and correct those who are caught up in sin (gently) so that we don't become sin in doing it.
Neither for or against - don't think we can live with that as a mantra, do you?
Pax
4 comments:
Posts like this make the internet worthwhile. Well said, Sir!
Amen!
The only problem with an otherwise excellent bit of joined-up thinking is that when everyone suddenly starts to speak up for or against an issue the result will be a sort of tower of Babel, and no voice will be heard.
Sadly, there are as many differing views as there are individuals in any group of people.
To Rev Van Den Bergh
Sir, your well-executed article above undoubtedly alludes to The Margate Question, viz: are the people of Margate resident by birth or have they made a lifestyle choice to consider Margate their ongoing holiday destination? The debate rages on.
That notwithstanding, I am increasingly drawn to the notion that the Church's invitation to the people of Margate should be identical to that which we issue to the people of Bournemouth, namely 'come as you are', and any message aberrant to this is unjustifiably discriminatory. We each in our turn, 'came as we were', so to speak, to a point of faith in God, thence to know his conviction of sin, sanctification and blessings of sonship. Far be it from me to deny any of these to anyone, be they resident of Bournemouth, Margate or wheresoever. Admittedly, our experience shows us that on coming to sonship, some people of Margate may in time discover the (hitherto un-noticed) delights of Bournemouth, others may forgo holiday-making for a time altogether, and yet others may find that, all in all, their hearts are resolutely wedded to Margate. But who are we to judge? The question remains: do we dare to trust God to take sole control of these matters or should we continue to implement our home-grown attempts at conviction of sin and sanctification, even if it sees Margate people hotfooting it in the opposite direction at the mere sight of our approach and never darkening the door of a church in the course of their lifetime? A Big Question indeed, but one which, I feel, increasingly demands a well-considered answer.
Personally, I prefer to holiday in Scarborough (South Bay).
With warmest regards and every blessing on your future blogging endeavours,
J Newsham (Mrs)
(Commenter's note: My apologies to anyone from Margate offended by this comment, I nearly chose Cromer)
Post a Comment