Ebb and Flow

I have received an email relating to the blog from a lady asking me three questions:

1. How is it you appear to post lots and then so little?

2. Why don't you do more theology like the other blogs?  and

3. Why don't you nail your colours to the mast and make a stand against those with whom you disagree?

The reason that you find 'feast and famine' is quite simply a reflection of the working day and those things that occur within it. Some days I manage to get back to the palace and will reflect on those things that have occurred and the blog is part of my personal reflection process. I talk things out on the screen and leave them hanging to be considered, revisited and generally dealt with in some way. The natural ebb and flow of the daily engagements, the challenges and the funny all have the potential to find their way onto the blog.

That said, I have noticed that some of those who blog appear to have their lives totally taken up with clever things that they have sourced or sought. A conversation with a prolific blogger caused me some discomfort as I became aware that they were not engaging with me (and others) but merely seeking 'copy' for their blog. The blog is a servant of me and my ministry and (hopefully) a source of challenge and information for some of those I am engaged with in various ways, it is not my master!

The second question regarding theology is an interesting one as I think that there is a great deal of theology in what is to be found in this place. What I think the question is asking is, "Why don't you use theologyspeak?" The answer is that as one who seeks to be a theologian my task is to make the difficult concepts and issues that occur in Christian living understandable and to encourage those who stumble upon the simple concepts to make them everyday occurences. One of the courses of study I undertook challenged us to write about theological issues without the theological shorthand (eschatalogical, soterological, theodicy and the like).

A lecture I was most privileged to attended this week was full of what someone described as 'proper theology' as we considered 'kenosis, hierarchy and power and discussed the impact of this topic on eschatology and soteriology as we developed a reality which we called 'kenarchy' (a fantastic concept which disarms liberation theologians and also empowers them)'. As we were getting ready to go, one of my clergy colleagues told one of those they'd come with that, "It must have been good, didn't undertsand a word!' Now, I'm sure they were only joking, but this is what so many people assume theology is for - big words and more confusion.

When it comes to 'nailing colours to the mast, I think I have, and do. I am not prepared to trade insults for this benefits no one and serves only to polarise. I am always willing to dialogue, but not willing to be labelled, shouted at or abused for the sake of a man-made issue - that said, I am prepared to endure same for the Gospel and the name of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). I don't think anyone who has read this blog will be left in any doubt that my humour is flawed (as is the man) and my heart is set on God and His work of making disciples, coming alongside others (paraclete) and preaching the Gospel in and out of season. I don't see a place for condemning in the Christian life but then again neither do I see any call to deny that which we hold to be true (as long as it conforms with Biblical standards that is).

I used one of those word cloud applications on the blog to see what words it came up with and what it focussed on and (happilly) this is what came out the other end:

Seems about right!

I hope this answers the questions and hopefully those who pop by will understand why I don't write on the same topic areas as others and why you won't find such wonderfully worded theology that you need to lie down after readings it - I think the humour does that on its own :-)

Ecumenism - A view from the shelter!

Being 'Churches together' (CT) appears to be a rather variable feast in that it brings a plethora (oooh, what a nice word) of benefits, hindrances and neutral happenings.

One of the biggest strengths of being in fellowship with other Christians has to be the fact that this is putting flesh on the 'See how these Christians love one another," thing! The unity that can be developed by having an effective, and real, go at being Church together is worth its weight in banane chips.

The downside is that having a go at ecumenism means that we end up in bed with some theologies and thinking that we might otherwise maintain an otherwise healthy distance from. There are even some groups, if the stories are true, who have opened their doors to groups I regard as decidedly not Christian (Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons and Quakers to name but three).

There are benefits in bringing together the whole spectrum of Christian, from rampant liberal to ultra-orthodox, high-church to happy-clappy, bicyclng, nutters (a quote from a self-professed happy-clappy nutter!). Anabaptists, paedobaptist, pro and anti, informed and confused or unthinking. When there is diversity of thinking (and belief) there is also the potential to learn and understand the what, hows and whys.

The problem is that we tend not to share what makes us different and so before we know it we have a large mass of material that we dare not discuss lest it has an impact upon our unity. If we don't talk about it and carefully avoid referring to anything contentious we will survive, but the question is, what as?

The good thing is that is we work together for the benefit of the whole Church then we don't find ourselves regarding others as merely being in the business of self-interest and sheep-stealing. When we lose the unity we bring in the distrust of each other and lose collegiality for competition and this is where the Church really starts to lose out.

One of the key things of the Churches Together group where I am is that they covenanted together that where something could be done as a corpus then it would. The churches acted to work together and by so doing, they brought about relationships and trust which benefitted all. The problem is that in these financially challenging days we have the situation where within some of the Churches Together groups, and even within multiple benefice entities, clusters, circuits, parishes and the like, some are looking to pull up the ladder and look to their own, rather than the wider, interests of Church.

Where you find yourself today, in the church, fellowship or gathering that you are part of, what is the relationship with others who call themselves Christian. How are you working as a parish, cluster, circuit or whatever? How are you seeking to bless the others in the place you live and how are you blessing those other Christians around you?

We need to be careful lest we find the words of Tertullian (Apologetis ch.26) be made true:

"Vide", inquiunt, "ut invicem se diligant" - ipsi enim invicem oderunt - "et ut pro alteruto mori sint parati"; ipsi enim ad occidendum alterutrum paratiores erunt.

"Look," they say, "how they love one another" (for they themselves hate one another); "and how they are ready to die for each other" (for they themselves are readier to kill each other).

Pax

Pioneer Ministry - Gloves Off?

Following on from my post yesterday on the issue of Pioneer Ministry, I received this response:

"Too many clergy assume that they can do the work of a pioneer minister because they have done church but this isnt the case. Pioneering is church at the cutting edge rather than the dull edge of declining church."

Wow! 'Church at the 'cutting edge', now that's a challenge to all those poor souls who merely manage things at the dull edge I guess. I 've been thinking and praying a lot about this topic because the church I go to have a Pioneer Minister and wonder what she does and why we have one and she tells me and shows me areas of engagement and considers things like accessibility and opportunity and the like where others talk of 'services' and 'ministry'.

During a moment of reflection and prayer I realised that of course the world we occupy is a tardis-like creation that is, minute by minute, hour by hour, taking us through time. The result of this is that some of the congregation of my local big church tells me of days when everyone knew the Lord's Prayer and how they were packed every Sunday evening for Evensnog! The problem is that ministry in this established church (been there in some form for around 1,500 years) is to the older, established, folk and the newer, don't actually know about church or come in, folk. This means that even in the established and ordered churches there is an element of pioneering!

The scenery doesn't change but the people within it does and rather than 'settle a region' the minister needs to 'settle a people' and this, whether my correspondent likes it or not, is pioneering. So let us have a go at modifying the Pioneer Minister definition:

A 'Parish Minister' (PM) is 'a person who is among those who first engages or settles a people, thus opening them up to the inspiration and acceptance of God through Jesus, His Son. Therefore, Parish Ministry is 'doing and being Church where no Church is to be found'.

Now some PMs are engaged and effective in evangelistic zeal and practice. Some are content to live in a parish that neither grows or declines and maintain the status quo (and oddly they are applauded because they pay their Parish Share and never post negative numbers). Other still are ?????? [insert label from: lazy, incompetent, overworked, under-equipped, unlucky, disengaged, battle-weary or (add your own label here) and they sit within their dwindling numbers and await retirement with the same hope that others have for the parousia!

Pioneer ministry cannot exist without established church and established church cannot exist without pioneer minister who bring expertise, evangelistic zeal and a desire to build the kingdom. BUT - some of those who would be Pioneers wish to do so on their own terms and in isolation from the established or settled church. Some of those who wish to be Pioneer ministers have the zeal but lack the understanding and the tools and abilities, the experience of ministry and the theological sense that is required.

Both groups have their weaknesses, but in partnership we are strong. Can the eye say to the hand I have no need of you? if it does we will never dry our tears will we?

Pax

Pioneer Ministry - 1

Mention this and you usually get the question, "What is it?" or perhaps, "Who does it?"

The most common definitions appears to be that a 'Pioneer Minister' is 'a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region, thus opening it for occupation and development by others' and so pioneer ministry is 'doing and being Church where no Church is to be found'.

The reality is that once this country knew the Bible stories, understood the times and seasons and was the physical embodiment of the Christian message. Then, following a couple of World Wars, this situation started to change and secularism and its servant consumerism began to rise up. The situation now is that amongst the indigenous british citizen (and they are white multi-generational british not immigrants as many seem to assume) the situation is the many have no idea what Christmas of Easter is truly about and the stories some assume as being commonplace are untold and thus unknown!

The problem is that some, not all, of those in the organised church assumes that anything new must look like it and must bring people into it (and quickly!) whilst others in the pioneer church assume that whatever it is it must not look like organised church and thus they are free from the constraints and demands of the former. This causes some to sneer when dog-collars in 'organised church' say that all are pioneers, because, "If they were, where are the new members, where are the new congregations!" Some claim that the organised church dog-collars are merely archaic protectionists who are frightened by the new breed of bright young (and not so young) things that are coming to do Church in a new and 'real' way!

In return, there are many established dog-collars who see the unstructured, 'let's do coffee', abstract efforts of some of the pioneers as unproductive, elitist and separatist. "They want Church on their terms and set themselves us as something different and better that us," whined one cleric recently. The reason for this being that they'd tried to embrace (not physically) someone doing 'pioneering' and been totally blown off by them!

The aim of pioneer ministry is to create congregations (gatherings) of people who know Christ, accept that He died for them and live within all the traditional tenets of the Christian faith but perhaps in ways that are not traditional or within traditional buildings. The hope is that at some stage the two will coalesce - but in partnership not ownership! The work of pioneering is carried out in people that are wild and separate from God (just like the open prairies of the Wester US). The desire is to see them 'become Church' not 'Come to Church' and you know when a pioneer settlement has become Church because it will possess within it it the two Anglican sacraments (oooh, using the term sacrament often throws some into a flat spin - too possessive, too controlling, 'not what we are about man!') of baptism and communion.

Pioneer ministry is about doing what Church has always done, meeting the people where they are and helping them to recognise the hand of God on their lives and come to Him through His Son, Jesus Christ. It is not the panacea for that formidable parish share, neither is it a declaration of independence from the rest of the (tired, old and irrelevant) Church - it is yet another facet of the ministry of the Church and, as per Eph 4:11, gives us:

Apostles (ἀπόστολος)
Prophets (προφήτης)
Evangelists (εὐαγγελιστής)
Pastors (ποιμήν), and
Teachers (διδάσκαλος)

Not in isolation but in partnership. In an army you need bayonets (infantry), bridges (engineers), communications (signallers), medics, people who can 'soften' up the enemy and their positions before the bayonets go in (artillery), understanding of the enemy, their strength and tactics (Intelligence) and some AFvs too (why walk to war when you can ride?). Some of these are regular, some of these are volunteer reserves - but we need to have a 'one army' approach if we are to fight well and work together.

Seems this is a lesson some within Church circles could do with learning!

Pax

Jones and Sapp - Time to make a stand

It seems to me that the time has come for Christians to make a stand against those people who preach wickedness in the name of Christianity.

One of the reasons for people becoming antagonistic towards Christians and for many others to become radicalised can be found in the vitriolic and most wicked outpourings, and the actions, of men like Terry Jones and Wayne Sapp.

Terry Jones demonstrates the immensity of his madness when he spoke of the murders last night, saying that he was not responsible for them and that it was 'time for islam to held accountable', but let's let the man speak for himself:

"We must hold these countries and people accountable for what they have done as well as for any excuses they may use to promote their terrorist activities. The time has come to hold Islam accountable. Our United States government and our President must take a close, realistic look at the radical element Islam. Islam is not a religion of peace. We demand action from the United Nations. Muslim dominated countries can no longer be allowed to spread their hate against Christians and minorities.

Let's look at the facts here:

Jones and Sapp burnt a copy of the Koran.

This act led to the protest which resulted in the murder of UN workers and security staff.

In many other places, those who seek to radicalise will be using this as fuel for their wickedness.

The reality is that the murders yesterday are an effect and the cause is Jones and Sapp, along with those in Mazar-e Sharif, and they have the blood of innocents on their hands.

The reality is that these men have incited this violence and are effectively enemies of peace and sponsors of the very violence they seek so that their message might find favour with other vile and wicked people.

The reality is that by their actions the lives of good people have been lost and the Gospel of Christ has been denied.

Islam is not a 'religion of peace' - and Christianity is? Not the way Jones and Sapp act!

The British Home Secretary was right in banning Jones from entering the country and the international community, the Church worldwide and each of us also need to act.

We can voice our views at the Dove World outreach site: info@doveworld.org. (it will do nothing, but at least we can make a stand).

We can write to the US Embassy (24 Grosvenor Square, London, W1A 1AE) asking where 'freedom of speech' ends and incitement to racial, religious and political hatred begins and asking when the US government will act against the latter exhibited by these two men. I don't want to see 'freedom of speech' curtailed, but I do want people to be held accountable for their acts. There have to be responsibilities with rights!

We can preach peace from your pulpits and ask how Christians would feel if it was the Bible being burned by Islamic believers. Would we murder or would we act as believers? Would we seek to pray for those who curse us or acts against them (knowing what Jesus calls us to do)?

Ultimately those who committed the murders are responsible for their acts, but Jones and Sapp need to be made to realise that they, by their acts, commissioned the violence and sponsored the resultant deaths.

Pax

ps. And as we pray for those who mourn today, please remember to pray for those in Afghanistan who are working for peace. Pray for the forces on the ground (especially in Kandahar where tensions are rising) and for their families at home.

Libya - arming the rebels

Calls from Misrata late last night asking for,"Medicine, food and weapons," need to be responded to with great caution. For every person I hear who is positive and supportive of the action to stem the attacks against civillians there is another voice bemoaning the fact that we're in another war and there are some who believe Gaddafi's words about injuries to civillians elsewhere. The task is as sensitive in terms of publicity as it is militarily.

We have engaged in 'no fly' zones on a number of occasions over the recent past and this has been the precursor to us having boots on the ground, something that cannot (by resolution) and must not (by design) occur with Libya.

We do need to take a look at providing the people with the means by which they can live and treat their ill and injured but of course supplying arms would, in my opinion, not only be wrong but would also be illegal because it would be actively bringing about a regime change. Mind you, I have a sneaky feeling that there might well be some nations who would not have problems with supplying cash and arms to the rebels through the back door (read Col. Tim Collin's 'Rules of engagement' and you'll get a better picture of what happens behind closed door and in the dark in places like Libya !).

I have heard no talk of the ceasefire and dialogue in the same breath or calls to Gaddafi to engage in dialogue with those who oppose his regime and I wonder why? I have heard people muttering about 'targeting Gaddafi' and wonder why? Are those who are ruling the air hoping to see the man overthrown by military means? Are they hoping Hilary Clinton's half-arsed hope that Gaddafi is going to leave in the middle of the night and become an exile at Butlins, Bognor Regis is true and consider this to be little more than a waiting game?

The first objective has been achieved - command and control has been greatly limited, the air defence systems and the air force have effectively been silenced and the ground forces are aware that big brother is watching them and able, should they continue with the murderous intent, to slap them about a bit. There are still some tanks, troops and snipers who need to be dealt with and whilst the former are a fairly easy target, the task of fighting in built-up areas (FIBUA) is difficult and not one that is easily dealt with from the air (unless one is willing to accept colateral damage, which of course we are not).

So now, as I see it, phase two consists of FIBUA and diplomacy. We do need to see the tanks shelling the hospital in Misrata silenced and the snipers need to stop their work. The first is potentially possible for the air and the second, if reports that some of the SF troops are on the rebel side are true, should be a relatively simple task if they can move them in from Bengazi.

The diplomacy side is less visible but is, I am sure, going on in the background and we can only wait (and pray) until something is unveiled. What we mustn't do is provide those who wish tom undermine the action with the capital that comes from the naysaying and negative attitudes that some are succumbing to - this is a monumental action on the part of the UN and it needs to be made to work to set the Un on a better direction that that of past years.

Pax

All Ages - One Church

We celebrated twenty-five years since the consecration of our building today and one of the nicest comments ever was made about the Church in that it was a great mix of all ages and everyone appeared to be ate ease with each other. This is a true observation and is one of the strengths of the Church I belong to and the people I serve.

It seems to me that so often the older folk in a church want to see growth and yet also want to see it on their terms in a sort of liturgical NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) approach. As they get older, and have more time on their hands, some of the older folk in other congregations I have known tend to get very pre-occupied with themselves and the errors and offences (real, perceived and imaginary) of others. The return to the playground is often a hallmark of older people and, as someone who ran an old-folk's lunch club once told me, the spats and falling out that happens amongst the older generation is often spiteful and frightening.

The young have much to teach as well as learn when it comes to the older folk and vice versa. Those who have years on the clock often have experienced the self-same problems, and made the self-same mistakes, as the younger members. They know what a muck-up looks and smells like because they've made a few in their time, and so they also know how to avoid, or come out relatively unscathed from, them.

All-age torture (sorry services) are something that people inflict upon congregations. This is a service whereby we talk down to the children and try to appease the grown-ups at the same time.

All-age church is a place where we speak to the child in all of us and ensure that milk and meat are both on the menu (fortunately, according to the thirty-nine articles, we are free from the dietary regulations). The older members enjoy the new songs and are as on fire as the younger. The younger members are looking to find something relevant and sustaining, so are the older members.

Age is not a source of division, attitude is, and I thank God for the people of all ages who have the right heart and attitude. May I be one of them as I get older.

Pax