What do Political Correctness and Health & Safety have in common?
The answer is that both are means by which action is restricted or even curtailed and they, when combined with other measures that seek to prevent damage, offence and unwanted outcomes actually are handcuffing the worlds in which we live.
Health and Safety.
I was today told that a local team would not be parading their trophy from the top of an open-tipped bus because of heath and safety concerns. It appears that having done a risk-assessment, it was decided that there was too much potential for people being injured!
During the snow last year there was a news item about kids being stopped from sledding down the slopes for fear of injury to them should they fall off! Another story told of children who were stopped from playing conkers in case they were hit and hurt!
Heath and safety provides an opportunity for the nanny state to engage in excesses which go past taking reasonable care to protect and enter in the fantasy world whereby all things are potentially harmful or hazardous. It is easier to stop everything, because then nothing happens and so nothing harmful can result. The bottom-line is that Health and Safety, especially wrongly applied health and safety stops physical activity and endeavours.
Political Correctness.
A good principle in life is that if we stop people saying wrong things then this will lead to them stopping thinking wrong things. If we can stop people thinking wrong things then we can stop them doing wrong things. If we can stop people doing wrong things then we will have a society which is more balanced and a kinder, nicer, place to be in.
The problem is that when wrongly applied it produces a knee-jerk society that sees some people reporting others for breaches of what they consider to be correct behaviour and it drives the bigots, racists and people who live in a world of nastiness to merely function off the radar until they trapse through our towns with their banners and marches proclaiming that they are minority, acted-against, groups.
Many years a go, when our handicapped son was alive, we were visited by a social worker who kept wittering on about 'special children' and engaged in a variety of terms to avoid saying words like 'spastic' or 'mentally handicapped'. At the end of the visit I pointed out that rather than hide behind terms and euphemisms I would rather she'd have got to know our son. The political correctness stopped her engaging and thinking and this is the problem with being PC. I stops people thinking and encourages dishonesty.
One of the problems with ecumenical work is that just as people assume 'peace' is merely an absence of war, other assume that silence means unity! They don't and whilst I applaud the removal of offensive language from our vocabulary I am aware that this is not as real an outcome and stifling honest debate.
Last night I was approached by a member of the Islamic faith who thanked me for the words I spoke at a training session recently. Now we differ in faith and yet respect one another - this is what we need to encourage. Open and honest debate engaged on the playing field of honesty, respect and integrity, not encouraging people to merely hide words below the surface and growing the seeds of those words in the dark.
Pax
Sunday, 6 March 2011
Saturday, 5 March 2011
A Revisionist and a Desert father
"A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him saying. "You are mad, you are not like us!" Abba Anthony
Engaged in conversation with someone who was telling me that those who chose not to interpret (or ignore) the Bible as they did was a threat to the progress of the Church. They had the answers to church growth as they saw it, it went like this, "No wonder people are leaving the church. People don't want to be told that they are living the wrong way or that their choices are wrong, they want to be accepted!"
My response was something along the lines of, "But what of the areas where lifestyles, attitudes, actions and thoughts are at variance with what the Bible says or the Church (universal) has taught, what do you do then?"
The answer was (apparently) obvious. I was to embrace them and avoid condemning them because of my ideas and attitudes. Unless Church becomes more welcoming, more accepting, more 'like' the people we seek to embrace, it will die. Oddly, I thought that the very opposite was true and that unless we remained counter-cultural and stood up, and against, those things in us and others which separate us from Christ, the Church was doomed.
Oddly, just in case people think we're talking about THAT issue, this discussion was not about homosexuality but about something completely different (and not only irrelevant to the conversation but also perhaps identifying and so will be passed by, it's the principle not the focus that is in question here). This person truly believed that to ignore the Bible standards was to embrace people and bring them into relationship with the believers where they were. I had to agree that it might do that, but it would still leave a chasm between them and God.
Apparently this wouldn't be the case because God wasn't interested in the acts, only the heart and therefore, even though we might do stuff that God said was wrong, He'd be happy and welcome us into the halls of heaven. We are all sinners and sin doesn't separate us from God, all that matters is that we acknowledge Him and live 'good' lives.
I asked about sanctification, holiness and the 'no one comes to the Father except through Christ' bit and discovered that all get into heaven anyway because jesus died for everyone and so all are made acceptable. The rules and the living certain ways was merely invented by people who wanted to be 'holier than thou' and we needed to revise what we believed and how we delivered it.
Suffice to say that we disagreed at just about every step of the road. I saw a need to be constant, they saw a need to change so people could be 'honest to themselves and live as they felt was right', regardless of what the book said.
I saw denial and discipline, they saw being a peace with oneself and being happy.
I saw people doing whatever they wanted, listening to words that tickled their ears and permissioned them to do as they desired, in response my companion merely said, "People like you are mad!'
Perhaps the time Abba Anthony was talking about is already with us?
Pax
Engaged in conversation with someone who was telling me that those who chose not to interpret (or ignore) the Bible as they did was a threat to the progress of the Church. They had the answers to church growth as they saw it, it went like this, "No wonder people are leaving the church. People don't want to be told that they are living the wrong way or that their choices are wrong, they want to be accepted!"
My response was something along the lines of, "But what of the areas where lifestyles, attitudes, actions and thoughts are at variance with what the Bible says or the Church (universal) has taught, what do you do then?"
The answer was (apparently) obvious. I was to embrace them and avoid condemning them because of my ideas and attitudes. Unless Church becomes more welcoming, more accepting, more 'like' the people we seek to embrace, it will die. Oddly, I thought that the very opposite was true and that unless we remained counter-cultural and stood up, and against, those things in us and others which separate us from Christ, the Church was doomed.
Oddly, just in case people think we're talking about THAT issue, this discussion was not about homosexuality but about something completely different (and not only irrelevant to the conversation but also perhaps identifying and so will be passed by, it's the principle not the focus that is in question here). This person truly believed that to ignore the Bible standards was to embrace people and bring them into relationship with the believers where they were. I had to agree that it might do that, but it would still leave a chasm between them and God.
Apparently this wouldn't be the case because God wasn't interested in the acts, only the heart and therefore, even though we might do stuff that God said was wrong, He'd be happy and welcome us into the halls of heaven. We are all sinners and sin doesn't separate us from God, all that matters is that we acknowledge Him and live 'good' lives.
I asked about sanctification, holiness and the 'no one comes to the Father except through Christ' bit and discovered that all get into heaven anyway because jesus died for everyone and so all are made acceptable. The rules and the living certain ways was merely invented by people who wanted to be 'holier than thou' and we needed to revise what we believed and how we delivered it.
Suffice to say that we disagreed at just about every step of the road. I saw a need to be constant, they saw a need to change so people could be 'honest to themselves and live as they felt was right', regardless of what the book said.
I saw denial and discipline, they saw being a peace with oneself and being happy.
I saw people doing whatever they wanted, listening to words that tickled their ears and permissioned them to do as they desired, in response my companion merely said, "People like you are mad!'
Perhaps the time Abba Anthony was talking about is already with us?
Pax
Barnsley - an exercise in non-deviancy
It was a foregone conclusion that the results from Barnsley would put Labour at the top of the voter's choice. Regardless of the credentials the Labour candidate brought to the contest, it was a certainty that it would have been a labour victory, even if they'd only managed to put a monkey up for office!
And yet I am surprised.
Why?
Well, despite the rhetoric about the ConDem coalition and the talk of betrayed promises and the like, my surprise is that the Barnsley electorate appear to have already forgotten (or perhaps just excused) the mismanagement and maladministration of health service, financial probity, PFI feathering of nests for supporters and more beside as they long fir the good old days. One Labour supporter rang in to a radio discussion to point out that the Tories and Lib Dems were all about cuts but Labour wad about spending in the areas that mattered!
How amazingly barking mad is that?
I'd say I hope they get the government they deserve but as that would be the one that I also got, I hope and pray not!
And yet I am surprised.
Why?
Well, despite the rhetoric about the ConDem coalition and the talk of betrayed promises and the like, my surprise is that the Barnsley electorate appear to have already forgotten (or perhaps just excused) the mismanagement and maladministration of health service, financial probity, PFI feathering of nests for supporters and more beside as they long fir the good old days. One Labour supporter rang in to a radio discussion to point out that the Tories and Lib Dems were all about cuts but Labour wad about spending in the areas that mattered!
How amazingly barking mad is that?
I'd say I hope they get the government they deserve but as that would be the one that I also got, I hope and pray not!
Thursday, 3 March 2011
Into the Ordinary . .
I was taken to task recently by one of the priests who had been hinted at as being about to swim the Tiber by the RC bishop of Brentwood (Rt Rev Thomas McMahon). Using the good old standby of 'assume makes an ass of u and me" I was told by this 'priest' that I as a 'minister' should be in possession of all the facts before I published them on my 'opinionated blog' (hooray, I have another label for my collection) and that I didn't know the half of it.
Well of course I don't and I can understand that to be pointed out as one who had been in talks or had been assumed to have been one of those embarking on swimming lessons by +Brentwood must have been rather frustrating and perhaps a little too revealing. That said, when speaking of the bishop's revelations, the 'priest' in question did say in a newspaper article that the bishop's announcement was 'premature' which presumes that, like pregnancy, it is a reality that was there before its time! So it was appear that the act is either set, or has been talked about, but the time was not then. Perhaps he hadn't spoken to his bishop (Anglican) about it before the naughty brentwood went off and fired the starting pistol and so was caught perhaps a little infragrente dilecto!
Anyway, from one Priest to another I do wish him well if he does swim and if he decides not to, making +Brentwood's assumptionsg wrong, to enjoy his presence helping us maintain the catholicity of the Church of England and work the Gospel to those around us.
Still, with no assumptions at all I read today of those who had indeed swum and turn my attention to the parish of St John the Baptist, Sevenoaks, who are sending forty members and two clergy off to Rome.
The first person to be quoted is a lady who makes some interesting comments about the general direction the CofE is taking and says "I abhor abortion and euthanasia, I'm pro-life and I think the Anglican church can be very wishy-washy about this.". Many of those engaged in the pro-life ministry are Anglicans and it is a fallacy to assume that the CofE is not generally pro-life so if this was the reason to leave I'd say it was on a wrong assumption. But, (always a but isn't there?) speaking of her church she says, "When I came to St John's I thought, 'This is for me,' says Mrs Vaughan. "I love the solemnity, the ritual, the theatricality - but that was leading me on to be prayerful." I can't fault her for swimming if this is what she's after, she will find lots of that and she's going as a crowd which makes the transition better. I would query the prayerfulness, for it seems that bible knowledge, prayer and other aspects don't feature as high on the agenda of many of the high-church types I know. It's ritual and the theatre that is church that is the key focus (and that come from me who is apparently a bit of a 'closet tat queen'!!).
The parish priest says that the problems with the church are deeper than the issue of women priests and syas that, "Under the bondage of the whims of the General Synod, the Church of England is diluting the Gospel of Christ and espousing the spirit of this passing age." These are thoughts that many, regardless of churchmanship will echo and support.
From passing conversations I think that his views on the ordinariate not being an 'elite' are correct and hope it it not so, but think they will find themselves in a situation that will make them an oddity if not the ghetto many fear.
A third voice says that "Changes he finds unacceptable are gathering pace in the Anglican church. The slippery slope is getting steeper and steeper all the time... I think it's a process which is far too developed now to stop its momentum." Now I would again plead that those who have problems make a stand and use their voices and their knees rather than go.
The man is obviously balanced and as he speaks of those who endorse the changes he cannot, says, "One retains warmth of feeling towards fellow Christians but I can't escape the conclusion that in those respects, they are mistaken. I don't think that's a reason for enmity, though."
But I think he sums up the position for many who have left (or are considering it), especially when there are a few from one congregation: "It's far more comfortable doing this in a group." But he sees what I feel will be the reality for the ordinariate when he says that the time will come when it says, "Maybe we are reaching the end of our useful life and we should just dissolve into the Roman Church."
And again, there is a healthy dose of realism in that, "We go there retaining elements of Anglicanism but... you do risk being a sort of rump group, sustaining itself for the sake of sustaining itself."
So there you have it, some balance and some indication from those who have acted as they feel led and swum. Those of us who are remaining do so with sadness at their leaving (well, for the most part) and pray that they will find that which they seek.
My sadness came when I read the account of the curate who has decided to join the ordinariate and to be celibate. My sadness is not that he is going but that he has chosen not to take up ministry as a full and proper Catholic priest but stay with the ordinariate. If Rome is his true home then why, I wonder, does he choose not to fully embrace it? Obviously many of those considering (or going) are married and so can through the ordinariate have their marital rights and the comfort of a Catholic home, but for those who are unmarried it still seems to me to be an odd move.
The final word goes to one of the parishioners who has chosen to remain Anglican:
On the Ordinariate: "A common response is that this is too soon, because we're half-way through a legislative process, the end of which we do not know."
On women bishops (and inadequate f[provision for those who oppose the move): "All hell will be let loose. Some opponents will join the Roman Catholics direct, not bothering with the Ordinariate!"
Of those who have left: "For them it is the right decision. It should be respected. They should be congratulated on their decision and I wish them all the best in the next stage of their pilgrimage."
Amen to that.
Well of course I don't and I can understand that to be pointed out as one who had been in talks or had been assumed to have been one of those embarking on swimming lessons by +Brentwood must have been rather frustrating and perhaps a little too revealing. That said, when speaking of the bishop's revelations, the 'priest' in question did say in a newspaper article that the bishop's announcement was 'premature' which presumes that, like pregnancy, it is a reality that was there before its time! So it was appear that the act is either set, or has been talked about, but the time was not then. Perhaps he hadn't spoken to his bishop (Anglican) about it before the naughty brentwood went off and fired the starting pistol and so was caught perhaps a little infragrente dilecto!
Anyway, from one Priest to another I do wish him well if he does swim and if he decides not to, making +Brentwood's assumptionsg wrong, to enjoy his presence helping us maintain the catholicity of the Church of England and work the Gospel to those around us.
Still, with no assumptions at all I read today of those who had indeed swum and turn my attention to the parish of St John the Baptist, Sevenoaks, who are sending forty members and two clergy off to Rome.
The first person to be quoted is a lady who makes some interesting comments about the general direction the CofE is taking and says "I abhor abortion and euthanasia, I'm pro-life and I think the Anglican church can be very wishy-washy about this.". Many of those engaged in the pro-life ministry are Anglicans and it is a fallacy to assume that the CofE is not generally pro-life so if this was the reason to leave I'd say it was on a wrong assumption. But, (always a but isn't there?) speaking of her church she says, "When I came to St John's I thought, 'This is for me,' says Mrs Vaughan. "I love the solemnity, the ritual, the theatricality - but that was leading me on to be prayerful." I can't fault her for swimming if this is what she's after, she will find lots of that and she's going as a crowd which makes the transition better. I would query the prayerfulness, for it seems that bible knowledge, prayer and other aspects don't feature as high on the agenda of many of the high-church types I know. It's ritual and the theatre that is church that is the key focus (and that come from me who is apparently a bit of a 'closet tat queen'!!).
The parish priest says that the problems with the church are deeper than the issue of women priests and syas that, "Under the bondage of the whims of the General Synod, the Church of England is diluting the Gospel of Christ and espousing the spirit of this passing age." These are thoughts that many, regardless of churchmanship will echo and support.
From passing conversations I think that his views on the ordinariate not being an 'elite' are correct and hope it it not so, but think they will find themselves in a situation that will make them an oddity if not the ghetto many fear.
A third voice says that "Changes he finds unacceptable are gathering pace in the Anglican church. The slippery slope is getting steeper and steeper all the time... I think it's a process which is far too developed now to stop its momentum." Now I would again plead that those who have problems make a stand and use their voices and their knees rather than go.
The man is obviously balanced and as he speaks of those who endorse the changes he cannot, says, "One retains warmth of feeling towards fellow Christians but I can't escape the conclusion that in those respects, they are mistaken. I don't think that's a reason for enmity, though."
But I think he sums up the position for many who have left (or are considering it), especially when there are a few from one congregation: "It's far more comfortable doing this in a group." But he sees what I feel will be the reality for the ordinariate when he says that the time will come when it says, "Maybe we are reaching the end of our useful life and we should just dissolve into the Roman Church."
And again, there is a healthy dose of realism in that, "We go there retaining elements of Anglicanism but... you do risk being a sort of rump group, sustaining itself for the sake of sustaining itself."
So there you have it, some balance and some indication from those who have acted as they feel led and swum. Those of us who are remaining do so with sadness at their leaving (well, for the most part) and pray that they will find that which they seek.
My sadness came when I read the account of the curate who has decided to join the ordinariate and to be celibate. My sadness is not that he is going but that he has chosen not to take up ministry as a full and proper Catholic priest but stay with the ordinariate. If Rome is his true home then why, I wonder, does he choose not to fully embrace it? Obviously many of those considering (or going) are married and so can through the ordinariate have their marital rights and the comfort of a Catholic home, but for those who are unmarried it still seems to me to be an odd move.
The final word goes to one of the parishioners who has chosen to remain Anglican:
On the Ordinariate: "A common response is that this is too soon, because we're half-way through a legislative process, the end of which we do not know."
On women bishops (and inadequate f[provision for those who oppose the move): "All hell will be let loose. Some opponents will join the Roman Catholics direct, not bothering with the Ordinariate!"
Of those who have left: "For them it is the right decision. It should be respected. They should be congratulated on their decision and I wish them all the best in the next stage of their pilgrimage."
Amen to that.
Wednesday, 2 March 2011
The Cost of Integrity
Today all of the sane world will be mourning the loss of Shahbaz Bhatti, the only Christian member of the Pakistan government and minister for religious minorities who was apparently assassinated for opposing Pakistan's blasphemy. This man, a brother in Christ knew that he faced danger and yet knew that he could do nothing but stand.
Don't read my words, but hear his:
One of my friends pointed out that the in the Islamic calendar we are in 1432. When the Christian world was in 1492 it too was in an age that was both bloody and brutal, for this was the bloody and awful Middle Ages, a time when war was waged by fundamentalists and life was cheap, but at lease we didn't have nuclear weapons!
Those who wish for peace, for truth and for justice should spare a thought for Shahbaz's family and for the nation of Pakistan as he joins the governor of Pakistan's Punjab province, Salman Taseer, as another martyr for the cause of truth and justice.
For those who see the death of these men as honouring god, might I suggest that they look to Surah 5, Ayat 32:
“To cause the death of one innocent – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.
Whoever saves one life – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.”
For those of other faiths, or no faith, might I point you to the words of Micah 6: 6 - 8:
"What does God want from you? Not money, not sacrifice. What He desires is that one lives in humility and exerts justice for all and shows mercy to those who are condemned or downtrodden!"
Listen to the music and as you do, offer up prayers for those who stand, for those nations who are subject to the actions of wicked men, for those who are wrongly accused and for those who mourn.
And for Shahbaz Bhatti - dona eis requiem [grant him rest eternal]
Pax
Don't read my words, but hear his:
One of my friends pointed out that the in the Islamic calendar we are in 1432. When the Christian world was in 1492 it too was in an age that was both bloody and brutal, for this was the bloody and awful Middle Ages, a time when war was waged by fundamentalists and life was cheap, but at lease we didn't have nuclear weapons!
Those who wish for peace, for truth and for justice should spare a thought for Shahbaz's family and for the nation of Pakistan as he joins the governor of Pakistan's Punjab province, Salman Taseer, as another martyr for the cause of truth and justice.
For those who see the death of these men as honouring god, might I suggest that they look to Surah 5, Ayat 32:
“To cause the death of one innocent – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.
Whoever saves one life – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.”
For those of other faiths, or no faith, might I point you to the words of Micah 6: 6 - 8:
"What does God want from you? Not money, not sacrifice. What He desires is that one lives in humility and exerts justice for all and shows mercy to those who are condemned or downtrodden!"
Listen to the music and as you do, offer up prayers for those who stand, for those nations who are subject to the actions of wicked men, for those who are wrongly accused and for those who mourn.
And for Shahbaz Bhatti - dona eis requiem [grant him rest eternal]
Pax
Man Utd - Now's there's Something In It!
What a funny old game football is! Only a few days ago we see Wayne Rooney divert his run to elbow an opposing player only to have the referee take no action (other than a free kick) and Sir Alex Ferguson see 'Nothing in it'.
Last night Man U lost 2-1 to Chelsea and when asked about the match, Sir Alex told reporters, "You want a fair referee - or a strong referee, anyway - and we didn't get that, when I saw who the referee was I did fear it. I feared the worst!"
Oddly, I would have thought that not only has the bloke defended the indefensible over Rooney's deliberate assault on an opposing player, he has compounded his naughtiness by once again attacking referees and thus bringing the game into disrepute.
Odd how he didn't make the same comments at the decision on the weekend isn't it (or is this merely duplicity and a large measure of hypocrisy?)
I was surprised that Luis didn't get sent off but watching the Rooney incident again he kept himself in a position to be hei and hence the playing on!
Seems to me that Sir Alex (and Man U) need to have Matthew Seven baited on the wall of their dressing room in that how you see things will colour how people see the things you do.
So, last night and the moaning about the Luis' tackle - it's simple:
"There was nothing in it!"
Now as for foul and abusive language, crowding the officials and intimidating, who you gonna call?
Yep - when it comes to all the things that are wrong with the Premiership, think they were all on display last night (but still an excellent game and a just reasult for the impartial observer).
Pax
Last night Man U lost 2-1 to Chelsea and when asked about the match, Sir Alex told reporters, "You want a fair referee - or a strong referee, anyway - and we didn't get that, when I saw who the referee was I did fear it. I feared the worst!"
Oddly, I would have thought that not only has the bloke defended the indefensible over Rooney's deliberate assault on an opposing player, he has compounded his naughtiness by once again attacking referees and thus bringing the game into disrepute.
Odd how he didn't make the same comments at the decision on the weekend isn't it (or is this merely duplicity and a large measure of hypocrisy?)
I was surprised that Luis didn't get sent off but watching the Rooney incident again he kept himself in a position to be hei and hence the playing on!
Seems to me that Sir Alex (and Man U) need to have Matthew Seven baited on the wall of their dressing room in that how you see things will colour how people see the things you do.
So, last night and the moaning about the Luis' tackle - it's simple:
"There was nothing in it!"
Now as for foul and abusive language, crowding the officials and intimidating, who you gonna call?
Yep - when it comes to all the things that are wrong with the Premiership, think they were all on display last night (but still an excellent game and a just reasult for the impartial observer).
Pax
Tuesday, 1 March 2011
Protecting the unborn
Last night we had a meeting which attracted about fifty people, which for our little building meant it was pretty much full (here's a snap taken of the event).
One of the big problems is that being pro-life is that many people see this as the province of the 'religious nut'when in reality it is the place of people who have a regard for an ethically and morally-competent world. many of the people I encounter regarding this issue are so taken up with the 'nutters' that they don't see their own duplicity. Mind you, some of the nutters really don't help their case or garner any support for their position either!
Being pro-life has a number of facets to it and whilst everyone appears to assume that it's all about abortion, this is not the case for there are also a great many concerns about euthanasia, eugenics, contraceptive practice (with respect to 'morning after' pills) and more besides.
Like some of the other contentious issues Christians find themselves engaged in, this is an area which can be academic or moral for some but be about one person, themselves, for another and so compassion and honesty are the hallmarks of engagement in the pro-life arena. Sensationalism and shock do nothing here other than leave Christians looking cruel and foolish, and this is not what Christ looks like and so neither should we!
The national director of SPUC spoke well last night, outlining some of the values and some of the hypocrisy surrounding this issue and it looks like Tamworth might very soon have itself a SPUC group of its own as a result. This group of people, Christians and otherwise, may well be a voice for reason and a voice of dialogue for those who perhaps see only a small part of the issue. Let's pray that this is the case.
As a starter, here's a piece from a CofE briefing document:
The Church of England combines strong opposition to abortion with a recognition that there can be - strictly limited - conditions under which it may be morally preferable to any available alternative.
And this is just the start . . .
Pax
One of the big problems is that being pro-life is that many people see this as the province of the 'religious nut'when in reality it is the place of people who have a regard for an ethically and morally-competent world. many of the people I encounter regarding this issue are so taken up with the 'nutters' that they don't see their own duplicity. Mind you, some of the nutters really don't help their case or garner any support for their position either!
Being pro-life has a number of facets to it and whilst everyone appears to assume that it's all about abortion, this is not the case for there are also a great many concerns about euthanasia, eugenics, contraceptive practice (with respect to 'morning after' pills) and more besides.
Like some of the other contentious issues Christians find themselves engaged in, this is an area which can be academic or moral for some but be about one person, themselves, for another and so compassion and honesty are the hallmarks of engagement in the pro-life arena. Sensationalism and shock do nothing here other than leave Christians looking cruel and foolish, and this is not what Christ looks like and so neither should we!
The national director of SPUC spoke well last night, outlining some of the values and some of the hypocrisy surrounding this issue and it looks like Tamworth might very soon have itself a SPUC group of its own as a result. This group of people, Christians and otherwise, may well be a voice for reason and a voice of dialogue for those who perhaps see only a small part of the issue. Let's pray that this is the case.
As a starter, here's a piece from a CofE briefing document:
The Church of England combines strong opposition to abortion with a recognition that there can be - strictly limited - conditions under which it may be morally preferable to any available alternative.
And this is just the start . . .
Pax
Being a Vicar
I was engaged in conversation with a very nice lady recently and the topic turned to how lucky I was being a Vicar! After all she said, I got a house and was paid to do the services and stuff like that and so was basically on a good little number. I was waiting for it, and it came, "After all, Sunday is your main day!" "Yippee!" I thought, will she get the next two? "And although Easter's probably one of your busy times, apart from that you must have a nice life!" "Yes," there is is, we only have Christmas to go now and she has a full house!
Sadly, the woman didn't manage to mention that my other busy time was Christmas, but she told me of a man who leads a church from free and how he spent his time reading and praying and doing the one service a week and how lucky I was to paid for the same stuff!
Then she moved onto the magazines and posters we have in our building and remarked on how surprising it was for a 'Church of England' church to support missionary organisations, send cows, twin toilets and be fairtrade and the like. She assumed we were all to busy being liberal and supporting the work of the devil!
I must be getting better because I patiently explained that the majority of the 'Church of England' (I can't do it with the sneer) churches were more biblical than that to which she referred. I explained how our liturgy is actually sound and our services focussed and in accord with Christian tradition and standards. That when it came to being cutting edge it was the 'Church of England' where it was to be found rather than many of the other denominations and fellowships and the like! I explained that homosexuality was not the norm and that not all ministers thought couples should be Frank and Ernest (or Betty and Brenda) and had to explain that Sunday was the easy day for most clergy, it was the other nine in the week that took their toll.
If you read this and you are not an Anglican (that means 'Church of England") please realise that the majority of the clergy are engaged and involved with their community, their region and internationally through personal engagement and through support of charities and other organisations.
Please realise that It is not a 'Sunday only' job and pray for those who seek to pastor the many 'Church of England' flocks here and overseas. We are generally a sound and saved bunch, so if you are a member of the wibbly-wobbly celebrating, hands-held-high, Glossolalia, rainbow-guitar strap, fellowship (independent), please realise that it probably you that are the aberration, not us!
And as for an easy life:
07:30 The caretaker vacuumed the building and puts the chairs our, checked the heating and generally tidied up for today's funeral service.
08:15 The printer double-checked the orders of service on the DTP system and then printed and folded them.
09:00 The techie checked the PA/Sound system and checked the CDs for the service.
09:30 The Vicar sat down and had a cup of tea and thought about the deceased and the service before him and prayed for those who would come.
And before that he did the morning office, read his Bible and got the day started as usual.
Not an easy life but a choice that is made and a life that is willingly given. For those who are contemplating the ministry as a calling, be aware that those who lead are called to be and do much.
For those outside the ministry role (regardless of denomination or theological stance) please realise what goes on behind the church doors and if nothing else, pray, and perhaps even offer to be part of the task.
Pax
Continuation:
10:30 The minister greeted people, handed out the sheets, put out more chairs (with the warden) and acted as usher and car park attendant.
11:00 The minister did the funeral service and then went on to the cemetery for the committal.
12:15 Back home, cup of tea (a cold cemetery, heating wasn't working!!), emails, telephone calls, meetings to arrange and the like.
14:30 The techie/music director pops out for guitar strings, replacement leads and a sandwich with pioneer minister (AKA wife) back in time to pick kids up and a hour of reading for Sunday's services.
Sadly, the woman didn't manage to mention that my other busy time was Christmas, but she told me of a man who leads a church from free and how he spent his time reading and praying and doing the one service a week and how lucky I was to paid for the same stuff!
Then she moved onto the magazines and posters we have in our building and remarked on how surprising it was for a 'Church of England' church to support missionary organisations, send cows, twin toilets and be fairtrade and the like. She assumed we were all to busy being liberal and supporting the work of the devil!
I must be getting better because I patiently explained that the majority of the 'Church of England' (I can't do it with the sneer) churches were more biblical than that to which she referred. I explained how our liturgy is actually sound and our services focussed and in accord with Christian tradition and standards. That when it came to being cutting edge it was the 'Church of England' where it was to be found rather than many of the other denominations and fellowships and the like! I explained that homosexuality was not the norm and that not all ministers thought couples should be Frank and Ernest (or Betty and Brenda) and had to explain that Sunday was the easy day for most clergy, it was the other nine in the week that took their toll.
If you read this and you are not an Anglican (that means 'Church of England") please realise that the majority of the clergy are engaged and involved with their community, their region and internationally through personal engagement and through support of charities and other organisations.
Please realise that It is not a 'Sunday only' job and pray for those who seek to pastor the many 'Church of England' flocks here and overseas. We are generally a sound and saved bunch, so if you are a member of the wibbly-wobbly celebrating, hands-held-high, Glossolalia, rainbow-guitar strap, fellowship (independent), please realise that it probably you that are the aberration, not us!
And as for an easy life:
07:30 The caretaker vacuumed the building and puts the chairs our, checked the heating and generally tidied up for today's funeral service.
08:15 The printer double-checked the orders of service on the DTP system and then printed and folded them.
09:00 The techie checked the PA/Sound system and checked the CDs for the service.
09:30 The Vicar sat down and had a cup of tea and thought about the deceased and the service before him and prayed for those who would come.
And before that he did the morning office, read his Bible and got the day started as usual.
Not an easy life but a choice that is made and a life that is willingly given. For those who are contemplating the ministry as a calling, be aware that those who lead are called to be and do much.
For those outside the ministry role (regardless of denomination or theological stance) please realise what goes on behind the church doors and if nothing else, pray, and perhaps even offer to be part of the task.
Pax
Continuation:
10:30 The minister greeted people, handed out the sheets, put out more chairs (with the warden) and acted as usher and car park attendant.
11:00 The minister did the funeral service and then went on to the cemetery for the committal.
12:15 Back home, cup of tea (a cold cemetery, heating wasn't working!!), emails, telephone calls, meetings to arrange and the like.
14:30 The techie/music director pops out for guitar strings, replacement leads and a sandwich with pioneer minister (AKA wife) back in time to pick kids up and a hour of reading for Sunday's services.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)