Mazarine 1450

The Estate We're In (Or, Terminus Homes)

2010-05-10T15:50:00.000Z

I've lived in or around London for the best part of 13 years now (having grown up in Bristol), and have spent a considerable number of those years living near mainline terminus stations. I've lived near Victoria, Paddington and King's Cross stations, and I've noticed one common feature of the housing in the local area of each. This feature is not exclusive to these areas, but I think is a broadly 'central-London', inner-city experience.

In each area, the housing is represents extremes of wealth and comfort: there are exclusive and expensive Georgian terraces right across the road from 50s, 60s, and 70s council estates. The proximity of the one to the other is remarkable.

However, having lived in area such as these (and exclusively in the council housing areas!), I've come to realise that the appearances can be deceptive. For there are hidden within the affluent Georgian terraces, pockets of social housing stock that are not privately-owned, and perhaps not recently repaired, renovated or refurbished.

The estates also can be confusing. Ever since Thatcher introduced right-to-buy in the 80s, a large proportion of the council housing stock have been transferred from the social housing sector into private ownership. You will find in some of these properties young, upwardly-mobile, middle-class professionals - perhaps flat sharing, but all expecting to live there just a while, until ways and means allow for them to buy their own properties. You might also find elderly people who are hidden, forgotten, asset-rich but cash poor. They may be vulnerable, lonely, even if they own their council flat, and even if it's worth a fortune. They've probably witnessed decades of social change, and may be hopelessly confused by the way their community has changed.

You will, of course, also find social sector tenants, often being housed temporarily due to emergency need. They may well move on as soon as a more suitable home is found. Either way, council estates can suffer a high degree of social transience.

But what's the picture in the ludicrously expensive terraces? Well, predictably you will also find a large number of upwardly-mobile young professionals sharing properties here. But the surprise is often just how many might live in one house. The late-90s / noughties property boom seems to have tempted ever-increasing numbers of freeholders to convert their properties (note: properties not homes) into flats to gain the highest possible rents. Walking along the terraces, it's worth looking at the front doors to see how many buzzers are mounted. You might find a few freeholder families - but they'll probably not be there at weekends - and the kids probably won't go to the local comprehensive.

The other surprise is that there are plenty of long-term socially housed tenants in these properties as well - thanks in large part to the growth of the housing associations in 1950s Britain to alleviate the post-war urban poverty.

But the real surprise - which relates specifically, it seems to me, to their location - is the number of terrace 'Hotels' or 'B&Bs'. Some of these are genuine hotels catering to the tourism industry. But I'm afraid to say that I've witnessed first-hand through local pastoral ministry some of the hidden poverty in these premises.

Sometimes, large 4 or 5 bedroom Georgian properties are adapted to provide 16-20 'rooms'. These are not necessarily small rooms catering for back-packing, short city-breakers. They often provide the emergency accommodation on which the social housing sector depends. Local authorities will 'temporarily house' mothers in dire circumstances, or homeless families, or asylum seekers. There is often little temporary about them. Residents find themselves stuck for months or years waiting for adequate housing. They can be deeply oppressive places, where mental and emotional difficulties are developed or deepened. Stucco-fronted, white-washed tombs of despair for the poorest and most marginalised in society.

This is simply my experience of the realities of much of the housing in inner-city London. Extremes of wealth and poverty living cheek-by-jowl, though not necessarily where you'd expect to find them.

What would it look like for the kingdom of God to be realised here? Perhaps a renewal of hope and confidence in local community organisations. A re-appropriation of public spaces for community use (no more private squares and gardens). Certainly some creative approaches to planning to help housing supply meet need more adequately. Greater incentives for people to house-swap into appropriate sizes of homes for different life stages.

And certainly, no simple stereotypes, and an active church who will engage in mission and service to everyone in the local community: rich, poor; settled, transient; young, old; muslim, atheist; gay, straight; male, female; and of whatever class, race or religion. The story of God begins in a garden, and ends in a city. The glory of the inner-city can only be revealed and realised in Christ.

Good Friday Poems

2010-04-07T21:02:00.003Z

So we had our usual Good Friday Vigil service last week on, well, Good Friday! Each year we try to have a creative element to the service - two years ago art works to help us reflect on the passion narratives; last year pieces of music... This year, I gathered six poems all with a Good Friday theme... I'd be surprised if you'll find these six thematically linked together in any collections or anthologies, so I thought I'd re-publish them here... I hope you enjoy them (if that's the appropriate thing to do...)

‘Good Friday’ by George Herbert (1593-1633)

O my chief good,

 How shall I measure out thy blood?  

How shall I count what thee befell,  

And each grief tell?   

Shall I thy woes  

Number according to thy foes?  

Or, since one star show'd thy first breath,  

Shall all thy death?   

Or shall each leaf,  

Which falls in Autumn, score a grief?  

Or cannot leaves, but fruit be sign  

Of the true vine?   

Then let each hour  

Of my whole life one grief devour:  

That thy distress through all may run,  

And be my sun.   

Or rather let  

My several sins their sorrows get;  

That as each beast his cure doth know,  

Each sin may so.   

‘Beneath Thy Cross’ by Christina Georgina Rossetti (1830-94)

Am I a stone, and not a sheep,  

That I can stand, O Christ, beneath thy cross,  

To number drop by drop Thy Blood's slow loss,  

And yet not weep?   

Not so those women loved  

Who with exceeding grief lamented Thee;  

Not so fallen Peter weeping bitterly;  

Not so the thief was moved;   

Not so the Sun and Moon  

Which hid their faces in a starless sky,  

A horror of great darkness at broad noon--  

I, only I.   

Yet give not o'er,  

But seek Thy sheep, true Shepherd of the flock;  

Greater than Moses, turn and look once more  

And smite a rock.

‘Crucifying’ (from La Corona) by John Donne (1572-1631)

By miracles exceeding power of man,

He faith in some, envy in some begat,

For, what weak spirits admire, ambitious hate :

In both affections many to Him ran.

But O ! the worst are most, they will and can,

Alas ! and do, unto th' Immaculate,

Whose creature Fate is, now prescribe a fate,

Measuring self-life's infinity to span,

Nay to an inch. Lo ! where condemned He

Bears His own cross, with pain, yet by and by

When it bears him, He must bear more and die.

Now Thou art lifted up, draw me to Thee,

And at Thy death giving such liberal dole,

Moist with one drop of Thy blood my dry soul.

‘Stand To: Good Friday’ by Siegfried Sassoon (1886-1967)

I’d been on duty from two till four.  

I went and stared at the dug-out door.  

Down in the frowst I heard them snore.  

‘Stand to!’ Somebody grunted and swore.  

Dawn was misty; the skies were still;  

Larks were singing, discordant, shrill;  

They seemed happy; but I felt ill.  

Deep in water I splashed my way  

Up the trench to our bogged front line.  

Rain had fallen the whole damned night.  

O Jesus, send me a wound to-day,  

And I’ll believe in Your bread and wine,  

And get my bloody old sins washed white!

‘On Our Crucified Lord, Naked And Bloody’ by Richard Crashaw (1612-49)

Th’ have left thee naked, Lord, O that they had!
This garment too I would they had denied.
Thee with thyself they have too richly clad,
Opening the purple wardrobe of thy side.
O never could be found garments too good
For thee to wear, but these, of thine own blood.

‘The Passion’ by George Herbert (1593-1633)

Since blood is fittest, Lord to write  

Thy sorrows in, and bloody fight;  

My heart hath store, write there, where in  

One box doth lie both ink and sin:   

That when sin spies so many foes,  

Thy whips, thy nails, thy wounds, thy woes  

All come to lodge there, sin may say,  

'No room for me', and fly away.   

Sin being gone, oh fill the place,  

And keep possession with thy grace;  

Lest sin take courage and return,  

And all the writings blot or burn.

‘God So Loved’: Metaphors of Atonement

2010-03-18T23:22:00.004Z

About two weeks ago I came across a new song by Ben Cantelon called ‘God So Loved’ and also known as ‘Saviour Of The World’. I was immediately struck by the power and beauty of the song, but also by its lyrical richness.

This week I’ve been reading a fascinating book called ‘The Justifying Judgement of God’ by Justyn Terry. It’s the published version of his doctoral thesis, and in the first half of the book gives a detailed analysis of various metaphors employed in Scripture to describe the atonement.

Terry charts the development and influence in British theology of images and motifs used by British theologians to describe the primary model or theory of the atonement. He concludes that the approach of Colin Gunton in ‘The Actuality of the Atonement’ provides the most helpful approach by adopting the language of metaphor to describe what Scripture tells us about the atonement. Thus, rather than various isolated images (victory, sacrifice, law, redemption or love) being attributed the prime position in any theory of atonement, they are to be seen as a variety of metaphors to convey the meaning of the atonement. Gunton describes the primary metaphors as being victory, sacrifice, redemption and law (justification).

Justyn Terry’s thesis continues to argue that in fact all these metaphors will find coherent unity and inter-relatedness when seen as contributing to our understanding of the Judgement of God as the primary paradigmatic metaphor of the atonement.

Anyway, with all this in mind, I found myself reflecting on the lyrics of the Ben Cantelon song. The lyrics are as follows:

God so loved, that he gave his son

To lay down his life for the sake of us.

He bore the weight of our sin and shame.

With a cry he said, ‘It is finished.'

Christ the Lord overcame the darkness;

He’s alive: death has been defeated.

For He made us a way, by which we have been saved.

He’s the Saviour of the world.

So we lift up a shout for his fame and renown.

Praise the Lord, praise the Lord:

Jesus, Saviour of the world.

We must spread the word of His soon return

To reclaim the world for His glory.

Let the church now sing of this coming King,

Crowned with majesty: our Redeemer.

And He reigns, ruler of the heavens.

And His name is Jesus, the Messiah.

Christ the Lord overcame the darkness;

He’s alive: death has been defeated.

And He reigns, ruler of the heavens.

And His name is Jesus, the Messiah.

It struck me that Cantelon’s song manages to employ at least two of these metaphors in the song, with the kind of unity and inter-relatedness that Justyn Terry might be pointing us towards. The metaphors of sacrifice and victory are most prominent in the song.

Sacrifice is evident from the first couplet: ‘God so loved, that he gave his son / to lay down his life for the sake of us.’ Indeed, this couplet suggests a two-fold sacrifice – that of the Father giving (sending?) the Son; but also the Son laying down his life.

Victory is evident in the pre-chorus, which also forms a ‘tag’ in the middle of the song: ‘Christ the Lord overcame the darkness; / He’s alive: death has been defeated.’ In the second verse, Jesus is described as the ‘coming King / crowned with majesty’. In the second pre-chorus ‘He reigns, ruler of the heavens.’

But what other metaphors of the atonement might we find in the song? Well, in the second verse, the same Jesus who is the Victor, the ‘coming King’, is also ‘our Redeemer. And additionally, we might see the reference to ‘[bearing] the weight of our sin and shame’ in the third line of the first verse as a way of referring to the legal metaphor of the atonement: that is, that a judgement is made and that Christ bears the penalty (or even punishment) for our sin. (There is an interesting discussion of the distinction PT Forsyth draws between ‘penalty’ and ‘punishment’ in Justyn Terry’s book on p84.)

Yet amongst all these metaphors, we’d have to conclude that the dominant image is that of ‘victory’, since that is the metaphor repeatedly used during the ‘tag’ section: itself a confluence of the two pre-choruses. Whether allowing a single metaphor, and indeed this particular one, such a prominent position offer us a satisfactory way of giving an account of the atonement is something that readers of Justyn Terry’s book (and indeed the song) may want to reflect on further. But there are one or two other points worth making in relation to the success (in my view) of this song:

1. I’m impressed by the ‘completeness’ of the atonement image employed: ‘For He made us a way, by which we have been saved’ (emphasis mine). There is no conditionality of our faith response on which the saving work of Christ depends. This is an ‘objectivist’ account of the atonement – following Anselm and most of the orthodox Christian traditions, and avoiding some of the post-Enlightenment accounts of soteriology offered by the ‘subjectivist’ approaches rationalism (cf. Kant) or experience (cf. Schliermacher).

2. I also really like the way that Ben Cantelon moves from the indicative form of address in the first verse, spelling out the content of the Christian gospel, to the imperative form of address in the second verse, where he spells out the appropriate response for the Church.

3. I also like they intuitive way it engages with Christ in his post-Ascension state: ‘He reigns, ruler of the heavens’. Some of our contemporary charismatic songs imply to strongly the closeness of Jesus to us – his proximity – as though he were still present in the earthly sphere. (A prominent example would be ‘What A Friend I’ve Found’ by Martin Smith – which describes Jesus as ‘closer than a brother’, and his touch as being felt ‘more intimate than lovers’.) The shortcoming of the songs which emphasise the proximity of Jesus overlook the work of the Holy Spirit in mediating his presence to us, and concomitantly undermine the work of Jesus as Ascended great high priest who intercedes for us before the Father in heaven (Heb 7:25).

Finally, it’s got a great melody and is fantastic to play / sing – I’m sure we’ll be singing it in the church for some years to come.

What Size Are You?

2010-03-08T12:19:00.008Z

I've been thinking recently about different church sizes... At St Mary Magdalene's, we're part of what I'd describe as a medium-size church in Church of England terms: we usually have around 120-150 people gather for worship on a Sunday, but probably drawn from a pool of around 200ish... A lovely feature of this size church is that I pretty much know every regular (frequent) worshipper by name, even if I know very little more about some of them!

Speaking with a Bishop recently, I got to thinking about large churches. He was advocating the theory that 'whenever a large church is flourishing, it has a positive effect on all the other churches in the area.' I certainly don't want to fall into the trap that some do of claiming a sort of idealised 'small-church' theory as a way of excusing laziness in relation to mission, evangelism and discipleship. However, there is a serious danger in very large churches that they have a negative effect on other local churches in several ways:

1. At an obvious level, they are often resourced to offer a level of service (children's work, music, facilities etc) which many other smaller churches cannot - thus providing a powerful attraction for Christian to gather to the larger church outside of their local community rather than supporting their local church.
2. In a less obvious way, they actually create and foster an experience of Christian life and worship which is very hard to sustain elsewhere. Thus, when life-stages / situations cause Christians to move on from large churches, they are often ill-prepared or equipped for worshipping life in smaller churches.
3. Large churches often have a large 'crowd' of regular worshippers. These must not be confused with Christian disciples! There are certainly some very good systems for pastoral care and discipleship in some large churches - but I have also encountered many Christians who should be on solid food by now, but still crave infant milk because they have stayed in an environment which caters very well for their appetite for spiritual experience, but not so well for initiating them into cross-bearing service and obedience.
4. This point about experience is important. We should probably all read Schliermacher again (and of course, Barth's critique) and recognise the dangers of letting our Christian experience be the validating and authenticating mark of the Gospel.
5. Large churches invariably have a strong prevailing culture. This is not necessarily a bad thing: we would hope for a strong prevailing Christian culture in any church. But the possibility of a dominant cultural group emerging in a large church is one to watch - a homogenous, like-attracts-like culture will not give us the kind of church St Paul envisages in Galatians 3:28 and similar.
6. We must watch out for sloppy metaphors! It is often said that 'healthy churches grow - it's in their dna'. But if we're using biological metaphors, we must also acknowledge that 'cancerous cells spread'! Growth has to be qualified and assessed beyond simple numerical models: success in the church is not the same as success in the world.

Now, there are lots of positive things to be said for large churches as well, and the only criteria we should reasonably accept for critique of our ecclesial forms is whether people are being led deeper into the life of Christ, and discovering and imitating his self-giving love for the world.

However, I was prompted to write this post when I was tidying my desk and discovered a scrap of paper on which I scribbled a note about Eugene Peterson's observations on church size. Ian Stackhouse writes:

'[Peterson's] convictions about pastoral ministry have been worked out over three decades, in a church that never reached a particularly large membership - a fact that in the North American context could be interpreted as an admission of failure. Peterson, as we shall see, does not think so. the issue of size, for Peterson, is related to a prior commitment to only pastor a congregation where personal knowledge of each and every member is possible. Therefore, a megachurch could not even be countenanced under such a scheme.' (Ian Stackhouse, The Gospel-Driven Church, p227)

Worth some more careful reflection and consideration I think...

Morning Prayer In My Study

2009-07-29T09:13:00.001Z

One of the wonderful things about saying morning prayer in my study is the freedom and possibility of being diverted during one of the lectionary readings into a little bible study.

This morning, reading Ezekiel 18:21-32, I decided to see what Calvin had to say about the passage in his commentaries. What resulted was a fascinating exploration of Calvin's understanding of the relationship between what are commonly called 'Total depravity' and 'Prevenient grace'.

For Calvin, this passage, with its commands to 'rid yourselves of all the offences' and 'get a new heart and a new spirit' (TNIV), can be misinterpreted as suggesting that humans have some power within themselves to 'Repent and live' as the final words of the passage put it. In a slightly, for my money, convoluted way, Calvin instead argues that this is simply an example of God accommodating himself to human language, while actually communicating the impossibility of humans having any such strength to turn to God lest it be provided by the Holy Spirit. Calvin refers to other Scriptures in which it is clear that the 'new heart' is not 'made' (ASV) by humans, but rather given by God himself. (cf Ez.11 & 36 'new heart' passages and also Jeremiah 31). Calvin's lengthy commentary on two verses (31 & 32) ends up being his theological argument for the rejection of anything resembling Pelagianism or Arminianism.

For myself, I think the Scriptural exegesis is stretched a bit far by Calvin. I'm not sure that the pericope will really do what he wants it to do. But, I am persuaded by the theological argument that Calvin wants to make. The nagging question for me in relation to predestination, total depravity and prevenient grace is 'What does it do to our missiology?' and 'Does Calvin's argument lend itself to an abdication of evangelistic responsibility by believers?'. The Church of England is usually described as being basically Arminian - so these are questions that I should try to address at some point...

I then turned to another bookshelf, and grabbed Barth's Church Dogmatics to see what he made of the passage in Exekiel. The index directed me towards III:4 and the section entitled 'The Protection of Life'. It turns out that Barth looks at this passage in Ezekiel in relation to the commandment 'Thou shalt not murder'. Barth is exploring what is sometimes described as 'justifiable homicide', and querying whether such a practise is permissible under Biblical witness. His conclusion is to recognize that while the Bible recognises exceptional cases - they remain 'exceptional', and he suggest that we be wary as to whether what we might want to describe as 'justifiable homicide' might actually be prohibited 'murder'.

Who'd have thought I'd be exploring all this before 10am!! Now to turn the the second reading: 2 Corinthians 12...

Tom Smail: Two interesting quotes...

2009-05-21T14:35:00.002Z

I'm thinking a great deal about Pneumatology at the moment, and trying to explore a potential methodology for Pneumatological reflection. (It occurs to me that many approaches of the past few decades to comment on Pentecostal / Charismatic movements have started from humanist sciences and empiricist academic methodologies - Anthropological / Sociological / Phenomenological / Pyschological and any number of combinations of them!)

Reading Tom Smail's 1975 book Reflected Glory, this quote jumped out at me:

'The answers to all your questions about the one that healed me I do not know: one thing I know that, though I was blind, now I see' (John 9:25). That is why the first literature of revivalist movements, and so of the charismatic renewal is testimony literature, which does not seek to authenticate itself in New Testament terms, but whose chief burden is to say: 'This is what the Holy Spirit has done in me. (p19)

Of course, our usual academic discourse throws us automatically into a hermeneutic of suspicion as we seek to read, evaluate and understand the subject of our interest. Perhaps (with Tom Wright, Kevin Vanhoozer et al) we need to adopt a post-critical hermeneutic of love as we seek to reflect on the person and work of the Spirit. That way, Pneumatology becomes not the subject of our interest, but the object(ive) reality upon whose action we report with words of testimony.

How this continues to work out I'm not quite sure... But testimony as a Pneumatological Methodology seems promising...

The second quote I thought I should remember for the next time of prayer ministry at church:

As Calvin once put it, faith is the empty hand that we hold out to Christ and that he fills with himself, and the impulse and strength to stretch out the hand comes from the Spirit, and it is the Spirit who through our faith fills us with Christ. (p30)

Lovely!

Come Let Us Worship: A Song For Trinity Sunday (Or Any Sunday!)

2008-08-21T20:20:00.002Z

1st Section
Come let us worship
Come let us bow down
Come let us sing for joy

Lift up your hands
Lift up your voices
Lift up your hearts to the Lord

2nd Section
For he brings us freedom, he brings us hope
To earth from heaven above;

And he comes with grace, he comes with power
He comes with healing love

3rd Section
Jesus Christ, we worship you our Saviour;
Jesus Christ, we worship you as Lord,
With the Father and the Holy Spirit.
We lift up your name,
lift up your name,
Lift up your name in all the world… Singing,

Holy, Holy, Holy is the Father;
Holy, Holy, Holy is the Son;
Holy, Holy, Holy is the Spirit;
What a wonderful God,
Wonderful God,
What a wonderful God you are.

Introduction
At some point during the week between Ascension and Pentecost, I found myself humming a simple tune, and mentally adding the words ‘Come let us worship’. Before long, in my continued contemplation of the tune and words, I discovered that a new melody was presenting itself, and this time the words ‘Jesus Christ we worship you as Lord, with the Father and the Holy Spirit’ had become attached to the new melody.

Procrastinating from the other work I was intending to do that morning, I sat down with my guitar, and began to write. It became evident fairly soon that I was writing a new song for Trinity Sunday. The whole song took about 25 minutes to write, and if ever I have felt as though I simply ‘received’ a song as a gift, this was it! The process of opening myself to the words and melodies that were arriving was like breathing strong, fresh and cold air – the kind you breathe up mountains or by the coast. It was invigorating.

When the song was finished (at least, provisionally so…) I sang it to my wife Sara, and then a few other friends to get a sense of whether it grabbed them. Each of them found that it was very easy to remember – the melody was simple and catchy, and the words just seemed to belong with the melody. So, aside from a couple of melodic clarifications suggested by Sara (herself a singer and songwriter), the song was completed and ready to offer to a worshipping congregation. It was taught to the congregation of St Mary Magdalene’s Church, Holloway on Sunday 18th May 2008 - Trinity Sunday.

Below are a few reflections on the implicit and explicit Trinitarian motifs – both lyrical and musical which inhabit the song. We’ll begin by exploring the lyrical motifs, and then examine the musical motifs, before drawing some theological conclusions.

Trinitarian Lyrical Motifs
Song Structure
Many contemporary worship songs are written with lyrical couplets with some rhyming scheme. In doing so, they are usually building upon a long history in poetry of rhyming couplets in verse. However, ‘Come Let Us Worship’ depends much more on triplets.

The song has three sections. Many contemporary songs have three sections – usually a verse, a pre-chorus, and a chorus. (Some also have a ‘Middle 8’ – which serves as a brief interlude from the dominant scheme of the song.) The verse and chorus are usually roughly equal in length (duration) and the pre-chorus is generally shorter, and serves as a bridge along which we may pass from verse to chorus. However, each of the three sections of ‘Come Let Us Worship’ are roughly equal in length (the third is slightly longer – and more closely resembles a chorus). The song is directly linear – it has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Rather than returning to an alternative verse, the song simply repeats in full – maybe twice, maybe three times. (If wanting to conform to a Trinitarian pattern!)

Each section contains two parts, and each part is comprised of a lyrical triplet. In the first section, each line of the first triplet begins with the exhortation ‘Come let us…’. Each line of the second triplet begins with the exhortation ‘Lift up your…’. The second section has two lyrical triplets each beginning with the indicative ‘He brings’ or ‘He comes’. The final section has two parts – each with a pair of lyrical triplets!! (Although the first lyrical triplet is a slight cheat – as only the first two lines begin ‘Jesus Christ’.) The phrases ‘We lift up your name’, ‘Holy, holy, holy’, and ‘Wonderful God’ are each repeated three times in the final section.

Explicit Scriptural Motifs
The first section begins with a traditional call to worship – lifted almost directly from Psalm 95 (also known as the Venite – meaning ‘come’ – and used almost daily in traditional Anglican worship). The injunction to ‘bow down’ and to ‘sing for joy’ picks out phrases from Psalm 95, verses 1 and 4. This section continues with further injunctions to lift up ‘hands’ (1 Tim. 2:8), ‘voices’ and ‘hearts’ to the Lord. During this first section, it is only with the final line that we become aware of who we are being instructed to worship – ‘ to the Lord’. The second section continues by describing the characteristics of ‘the Lord’. But it is only in the third section that ‘the Lord’ is revealed as ‘Jesus Christ… with the Father and the Holy Spirit.’ In this manner, the song echoes the ongoing self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ and through the developing Scriptural witness.

The second section is a lyrical exposition of the characteristics of Christ revealed in the Gospels and the letters of the New Testament. Christ brings us ‘freedom’ (Gal. 5:1) and ‘hope’ (Eph. 1:12, 2 Thes. 2:16). He comes with ‘grace’ (John 1:14), ‘power’ (Matt. 3:11 & 11:20) and the love that is manifest in healing (for example the raising of Lazarus in John 11, or the healing of the synagogue-leader’s daughter and the haemorrhaging woman in Matthew 8-9).

This section rehearses in song that great truth revealed in the Gospels – that Christ is sovereign over heaven and earth. That is to say, his power, rule and scope of influence are not limited simply to ‘heaven’, traditionally conceived as God’s dwelling place – but are also seen exercising their authority on earth, in our corporate and individual lives. And so our hope, has come to earth (where God has made us, his creation, to live) from heaven, where his rule is perfectly realised. Consequently, these two spheres – heaven and earth – are held together by God’s incarnation in Jesus Christ. And God’s perfect rule of heaven has now begun to flood the earth with love, power and justice. So that one day, ‘the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.’ (Isaiah 11:9)

The second section celebrates the life of Jesus, and the rule of God seen in his ministry among us. As we celebrate these gifts of freedom, hope, grace, power and healing love that come to us in Christ, we remember that these gifts are not confined to those who interacted with Jesus during his earthly life, but also have been witnessed by each of us who have been called by his name. And so as we reach the climax of the second section, and move into the third, we find that we are bound to call out on that name by which we have been saved – the name of Jesus Christ.

The third section describes Jesus Christ as ‘our Saviour’. In doing so, it is making a clear connection between the Lord Jesus Christ and ‘God our Saviour’ as described by the New Testament writers (Luke 1:47; 1 Tim. 1:1, 2:3; Titus 1:3, 2:10, 3:4). This connection is made even more strongly in Scripture when Zechariah prophetically speaks of Jesus as ‘a mighty saviour’ who is raised up by the God of Israel. (Luke 1:69 – part of the Benedictus.) Jesus Christ is also described as ‘Lord’ – an early Christian confession, made on numerous occasions, but notably by Thomas ‘My Lord and my God’ (John 20:28) and also by Paul, as a creedal confession invoking salvation (Romans 10:9). This first part of the third section concludes with a three-fold commitment to ‘lift up your name’. As the hymnody of Israel concludes with the injunction to ‘praise the name of the Lord, for name alone is exalted [lifted up]’ (Psalm 148:13) so this triplet exhorts those who confess Jesus Christ as Lord to similarly exalt (lift up) his name.

The second part of the third section begins with a classical Trinitarian confession ‘Holy, holy, holy’, echoing the cry of the angelic hosts in both Isaiah 6:3 and also Revelation 4:8. The confession is that together, Father, Son and Holy Spirit truly are a ‘wonderful God’.

Trinitarian Musical Motifs
The musical motifs may be said to be both implicit and explicit – depending on your grasp of musical theory – but it does no harm to highlight them specifically.

Key & Chords (Part 1)
The song was written in the key of G major (although I subsequently transposed it down a tone into the key of F to make the melody more accessible to female singers). The root chord of this key is G major – and is comprised of three notes: G, B & D. This is also known as a major triad. These basic notes of the major key are worth remembering as they feature later on as part of the ‘Trinitarian’ structure of the melody. In the key of G, there are only two other chords that conform to the same structure as the root chord. They are the chords of C major and D major (known as the 4th and the 5th chords of the key according to their place on the scale). They conform in that each of the notes that make up the chord (C, E & G and D, F# & A respectively) share exactly the same interval – the number of semitones – between each note as the root chord. These three chords form the foundation of the song.

Melody
The tune of the song climbs gradually from the start to the finish. The first note of the melody, in the first of the three sections, is a G. In fact, the first section revolves around this G – although the melody departs from the G, climbing above and also falling below, it always returns to the G. So the final note of the first section is also a G. The second section climbs the scale, and hinges around the B – which you’ll remember is the second note of our G major triad: G, B & D. However, there is an ambiguity in the melodic structure of the second section. Although I have just claimed that it hinges on the B, it actually spends a large amount of time departing from and returning to the C – one semitone above the B. Which note then does the melody really depend on? Part of the ambiguity is caused by the fact that the B note, were it the root of its own chord (triad) would necessarily be a minor chord (or ‘sad chord’) in the key of G, whereas, as mentioned above, the C would be the root of a major triad (a ‘happy chord’). And so the second section has a sense of joy, but also of sorrow. The third section of the song sees the melody climb once again, and this time it unambiguously hinges around the D note – the third note of our major triad in the key of G. The melody stays very close to the D for three lines, before dropping back down to the G and climbing with determination back to the D for the climax of the melody. In this sense, both the end of the third section, and also the whole song, may be described as a ‘Song of Ascent’.

Key & Chords (Part 2)
There is something more to be said about the use of chords in the song, for as has been noted above, the second section has a degree of ambiguity about it in relation to the melody. This can also be said of the chords used. The second section begins with a minor chord – Am7. This is okay, as the second chord in the key of G should be minor. However, it also features twice a chord that shouldn’t be there at all! Each melodic phrase of the second section ends with a Cm7 chord – introducing a note, Eb, into a song in which it should have no proper place, being as it does not occur in a G major scale. The C chord we are already familiar with – it is a ‘happy chord’ and has occurred frequently by this stage of the song. And so its subversion by the occurrence of a C minor chord introduces an element of tension – a note of sadness is struck in the midst of an otherwise happy song. The reason for this will be elucidated below.

Some Theological Observations
Creator, Redeemer, Reconciler
It should be evident by now, that in some way, the song traces a pattern of Scriptural revelation, moving from the worship of Israel in the first section (with its heavy dependence on the Psalms) to the angelic cry of Revelation in the third section. The second section focuses so closely on the personal characteristics of the person of Jesus ‘the Lord’, that it sits as a ‘gospel’ in between the first and third sections. It would be easy from this to fall into an approximate scheme which correlates the first section with the Father, the second with the Son, and the third with the Holy Spirit. But of course, this would be to imply a kind of theological Modalism (not the same as musical modalism!) whereby the one God is simply revealed in three different forms or threee different modes of operation and interaction. This is not an adequate Trinitarian doctrine to apply to the song.

All three persons of the Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are invoked and worshipped in every section of the song. Rather, the song sits more closely to a Barthian scheme of seeing God’s operations as Creator, Redeemer and Reconciler in each section. And so, the first section calls creation to worship the Lord who has redeemed and its reconciling it to himself; the second section speaks of the work of redemption through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth which by ‘grace’ and ‘power’ brings ‘healing love’ to a fallen creation in need of redemption, and ‘hope to earth from heaven above’ to a world that need reconciling to its Creator; and the thirds section rejoices with a doxological song of praise as it both revels in, and anticipates a yet fuller reconciliation to the Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In this way, the life of the true God penetrates each section of song, and yet is recognised and identified in the personal self-disclosure of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Eschatological & Eucharistic Leanings
Very briefly, the song prompts us to recognise, anticipate and join our voices in the eternal song of heaven ‘Holy, Holy, Holy’. The song’s second section rehearses the saving work of Jesus. As noted above, the melody and chords introduces an ambiguity in this section, as the unexpected C minor chord speaks of pain and sorrow. This section, with its notes of both joy and sorrow, its major and minor chords which speak of new life, but also of death; resurrection, but also the cross. This reminds us that our eschatological focus has already begun in history. The end, the coming of God’s kingdom, began with the resurrection. Our eschatological focus is enhanced with the Eucharistic themes: we ‘lift up our hearts to the Lord’, we rehearsed the saving work of God, we join the company of heaven in singing ‘Holy, holy, holy’. This song would be fitting at a Eucharist, where ‘as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, [we] proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.’ (1 Cor. 11:26)
Amen, Come Lord Jesus.

Graham Hunter
Trinity Sunday
18th May 2008

The Secret of Great Faith

2008-08-16T23:39:00.003Z

Sermon for 13th Sunday after Trinity (Yr A)
St Mary Magdalene’s Church
Sunday 17th August 2008

Introduction
I wonder whether any of you have ever had a puppy for a pet? I never have done – I had several cats as a child – but never a puppy.

I’ve been told by friends though that despite being incredibly cute, they’re also terrible pests when there’s any food around. Little, organic and noisy waste-disposal units, they follow you around hoping for a bit of your food – even if it’s been only 5 minutes since they devoured their own food, Pedigree Chum or whatever…

This I can well believe, since I do have a dog of sorts in my house. Our son Caleb, you see, is a sort of dog! You see, the name Caleb, in modern Hebrew (or at least the closest equivalent, Calev) means ‘dog’. And indeed, Caleb, like a small yelping puppy, is constantly pestering Sara and me whenever we have any food in our hands.

Food, or drink, that we have prepared and intended for ourselves, ends up being demanded by him – and very often (provided it won’t harm him), we give in to his requests, and he gets to eat a bit of our meal (usually pieces of toast and honey at breakfast).

What then are we to make of the yelping Canaanite ‘dog’ mentioned in or Gospel reading today?

The Shock Of The Story
The first thing to observe is just how shocking Jesus’ actions in the story appear to be. The Jesus we think we know – merciful, gentle, loving and accepting of all – appears on our first reading to refuse to heal the Canaanite woman’s daughter simply because she is not Jewish; and to add insult to injury, goes on to describe her as a ‘dog’.

While this shocking reading may be accurate at one level, it also reveals to us how much we ignore aspects of Jesus’ character and actions in the gospels wherever they don’t conform to the comforting image of him that we each carry around in our minds.

Jesus often withdrew from the crowds; he often withheld healing from both Jews and Gentiles. Jesus got angry and thrashed a whip around in the temple courts, overturning tables. Jesus made cutting remarks while scribbling in the sand, shaming a crowd of the self-righteous, and causing them to skulk away from the women caught in adultery – and to her he issued to simple, yet sharp, command ‘go and sin no more’. A church advertising campaign a few years ago summed it up nicely when they published Christmas posters saying: ‘Meek and mild – as if.’ Our comfortable pictures of Jesus sometimes need challenging.

Jesus was the messiah, the anointed one, the chosen one of God, who would restore God’s people Israel to his purposes. And the purpose of God for Israel, right from the very beginning and the making of the covenant with Abraham, was that through Israel ‘all nations on earth will be blessed, because [Israel] has obeyed [God].’ (Gen. 22:18)

But Israel had not obeyed God, they had not kept the covenant, and it was for this reason that Jesus was sent to be a shepherd for the ‘lost sheep of Israel’ (Matt 15:24). When the lost sheep of Israel were recovered, and the new covenant established, God’s chosen people Israel would become a blessing to all nations. The 12 tribes of Israel are reconstituted in the 12 apostles, and through their resurrection community, the church, God’s peace, hope and love has been carried into all corners of the world.

But it all starts with Jesus being the messiah who would restore Israel to God’s purposes. And maybe the truly startling thing in this passage is that the Canaanite woman seems to already recognise this. For she addresses him: Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me.’ (Matt 15:22) And this title, ‘Son of David’, is a messianic title. It means ‘the one who will be a true king in the line of David’. It recognises that Jesus is sent for Israel, not the people of the Gentile nations in the vicinity.

And yet she is undeterred. Although she knows well that the Jewish leaders of the day viewed the Gentiles as ‘dogs’, and probably even more so, Gentile women, yet she persistently cries out after Jesus.

And her persistence leads me to think of a related subject, that of our relationship with God in prayer.

Persistence In Prayer
The Canaanite woman cried out to Jesus for mercy, for healing for her daughter. She probably cried out of desperation, maybe even as a last resort. Maybe she had visited the local priests of the Canaanite people, and maybe offered sacrifices to the Baal gods – the nature divinities of the ancient near east. Maybe she had sought the help of a physician, such as the Greek doctor Luke, who became a companion of St Paul, and wrote the third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. Maybe she tried all these things, and then turned to Jesus for help.

How many of us find ourselves in the same situation? I certainly do – and to my shame, too often my prayers are prayers of desperation offered when all else has failed. And what is Jesus’ response? ‘[He] did not answer a word.’ (Matt. 15:23) How devastating, how discouraging. We turn to God in prayer, in the midst of our desperation, and he does not answer a word.

Many of us would give up, and seek out help elsewhere. But not this Canaanite woman. Maybe she has heard stories of Jesus healing others, or maybe she has heard some of his teaching, maybe it is simply the Spirit of God revealing to her just who Jesus is, the ‘Son of David’, chosen by God and full of God’s power. Whichever it is, she continues to call out after Jesus. And what do the disciples do? What do we, the church, so often do with those who are noisily interrupting our work and worship? We ask Jesus to send them away. (Matt 15:23)

When I lived in Paddington, I knew a man and a woman who lived in the same neighbourhood, and who occasionally would turn up at the steps of the church. The man was the most arrogant man I’ve ever known, who had been caught up in a form of eastern mysticism, and now thought he had special revelation of God, and he was willing to share this with anyone who’d listen! He was also an alcoholic – and could become quite aggressive and agitated if he wasn’t getting his own way. The woman suffered mental illness, alcoholism, and was caught up in drugs, prostitution and crime. On more than one occasion I witnessed her half-naked and peeing in the street, completely off her face. Both came to church reasonably often – on Sundays and also during the week to the church office. And I used to beg Jesus to send them away!

In their own way, they were desperate for healing from Jesus, and yet it never seemed to come, and their desperate and angry cries simply interrupted me from my work and worship. ‘Lord, send them away’! Yet I am so thankful, that 17 years ago, when I came to Jesus, desperate for his comfort, healing and love, he did not turn me away – whatever some of the youth workers or other members of the church youth group might have wished!

The Canaanite woman persisted, and came and knelt before Jesus, saying ‘Lord, help me!’ She came with humility – kneeling before Jesus. She does not command his help, as one who knows best – if only Jesus would realise what he should do. Rather, she pleads for his help as one who knows her own powerlessness and weakness – as one who knows she can do nothing to help her daughter on her own – but simply trusts that Jesus can help.

Too often, my prayer life takes the form of a managerial supervision meeting – where I sit and tell Jesus what he should be doing in my life. I half-listen to what he is doing, but as I impatiently listen, I’m already thinking of what I’m about to say to him next. I issue my guidance on what he should do to meet my needs, and the needs of my organisation, the church. (And so often I do treat it like my organisation not his!) And then I dismiss him, so I can get on with other things – I’ll check on his progress next week.

And finally Jesus replies to the Canaanite woman. And it is not the reply that she, or we, expected. It is the shocking reply we thought about earlier – that reminds us that Jesus’ priorities are not always our priorities. Or as Isaiah puts it:
‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.’ (Isaiah 55:9)

But the Canaanite woman is bold and quick-thinking. Maybe she is a God-fearing Gentile, and knows of the promise for Israel to be a blessing to all nations. Maybe she is like the woman who had suffered hemorrhages for 12 years and trusted that just a touch of the hem of Jesus’ cloak would be sufficient for her healing. Maybe the Canaanite woman thought that she could persuade Jesus with clever reasoning. Maybe she simply longs for something, a scrap of hope.

Conclusion
Did Jesus change his mind? Was he persuaded by her clever argument? Or did he simply resist her request initially to test her persistence? I’m not sure we could ever reach a final conclusion on these questions.

But this passage does challenge me to think about my prayer life, and the way I bring my requests to Jesus. Am I bold? Am I persistent? Am I easily discouraged when my prayers are met with silence? Do I pray humbly, or as one who issues commands?

So many questions. So many ‘maybes’. And yet that is at the heart of our prayer life – the great ‘maybe’ at the heart of every prayer we offer. That what we ask may be. ‘Lord, may it be.’

The gospels are littered with examples of Jesus withdrawing from the crowd, and leaving people unhealed. And yet there are just as many examples of Jesus encouraging persistence and perseverance in prayer. It seems that this process is essential for helping us to become followers of the living God – for we may only truly follow when Jesus walks a little way ahead of us on a path we’ve not walked before.

I’ve just finished reading a book addressing the problem of unanswered prayer entitled ‘God on Mute’. In the book, Pete Greig writes this:
‘Sometimes God removes the stabilizers from our bicycle and his hands from our frightened lives. As we grow towards spiritual maturity, every believer is granted seasons of unanswered prayer when god is silent and may even appear absent from the world. At such times, we may be sure that God is weaning us off ‘adult supervision’ but that He has not abandoned us altogether.’
He continues…
‘Growing into maturity – whether it’s in a romantic relationship, a child-parent relationship or in a relationship with God – always involves a steady process of recentring from our own priorities and preferences to those of the other… We begin to pray that God would change our hearts and rewire our motivation. We long to become more like Jesus. We ask God to help us become more humble, more loving and more faithful. It is in answer to these very prayers that God may decide to deny our requests and even withdraw a little from our lives… [Only then can we] truly mature from an us-centred relationship with god to a truly Christ-centred one.’ (Pete Greig, God On Mute, p245-7)

Although Jesus seemed to withdraw and deny himself to the Canaanite woman, her faith was declared to be ‘great’. (Matt. 15:28) Her boldness, her persistence, yet also her desperation and humility were the characteristics of this ‘great’ faith. And indeed, her request was answered – her daughter was healed that very hour.

What did the disciples learn? And what do we learn from this passage? Well, as we’ve just said, something more about the characteristics of faith, something more about persistence in prayer, something more about why Jesus might apparently withdraw himself from us, and finally, that in Jesus Christ every boundary is broken down. That all the division we erect between people – class, culture, wealth, sophistication, righteousness, race, sex and sexuality – that every division is obliterated in Jesus so that God’s blessing may finally reach out to every nation and every individual person on God’s earth.

--

Lord Jesus Christ,

Thank you that you have destroyed the boundaries we construct between one another, and the boundary of sin that separates us from God our Father.

By your Holy Spirit, would you make us grow in faithfulness. With every step you withdraw from us, with every unanswered prayer, would you give us the boldness, the persistence and the humility to come chasing after you.

Make us, your church, to live as people of the new covenant, that through us you might bless all nations.

In your mighty name we pray,
Amen.

Submission

2007-05-22T11:48:00.000Z

I recently stumbled across two quotes from Richard Foster's modern evangelical spiritual classic 'Celebration of Discipline'. They reminded me of Christ's words to his disciples: ‘If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.' (Matt. 16:24) They seem to be a timely reminder to those of us who are about to embark on ordained ministry, and thus be in positions where we may abuse our leadership, with its authority and power.

According to Richard Foster, this is the problem:
'The obsession to demand that things go the way we want them to go is one of the great bondages in human society today.'

And the solution:
'Modern men and women find it extremely difficult to read the great devotional masters because they make such lavish use of the language of self-denial... we must underscore to ourselves that self-denial means the freedom to give way to others. It means to hold others' interests above self-interest. In this way self-denial releases us from self-pity.'

What Is Essential To The Church?

2007-05-11T09:45:00.000Z

Worship:
Sharing in Christ’s communion with the Father through the Spirit, the Church is gathered by baptism to be built up in its corporate life through hearing the word of God, offering prayer, praise and thanksgiving, practicing mutual encouragement and enjoying Eucharistic fellowship.

Mission:
Sharing in Christ’s communion with the Father through the Spirit, the Church is sent to be with Christ in the power of the Spirit, with him in the mission entrusted to him by the Father, so that the world might come to know Christ and be reconciled to the Father in the power of the Spirit.

Adoration & Action!!

What Is Christian Leadership?

2007-05-05T14:03:00.000Z

In discussing the question of appropriate forms of leadership for the church, we are exploring the nature of Christian leadership. Is Christian leadership something similar to Christian football or Christian radio? In each of these cases, football and radio exist as discreet and definite disciplines, with their own rules, mechanics and logic. The term ‘Christian’ stands as an collective noun to describe the people who perform and participate in the discipline. Is it the same with Christian leadership? Are we simply referring to a universal discipline called ‘leadership’ which may or may not be done by Christians? Or can the term ‘Christian’ stand in an adjectival sense, in which it affects, modifies and determines the nature of that described when used in relation to the term ‘leadership’? It is my assumption in this essay that it is this latter meaning which must apply. While there may be many interesting and helpful insights regarding leadership to be learned from the wider culture in which we live, any genuine understanding and development of Christian leadership theory must be formed within the distinctive terms of the Christian community, the Church. Thus, our theories of Christian leadership must be primarily governed by the self-revelation of God given us in the person of Jesus Christ. Christian leadership therefore finds its true provenance in the Scriptural witness to Jesus Christ, and is properly nurtured and explored by the Spirit-formed community of the Church. Steven Croft, who now heads up the recently formed ‘Fresh Expressions’ team in the Church of England makes the same point:

‘Because we are Christian ministers, our understanding of the people we are called to be and the task we are called to fulfil must be securely rooted in and consonant with the Scriptures and with the understanding of the Gospel, of Jesus Christ and the Church which we find there. It is not enough simply to be pragmatic, to argue from what we think we need to be to what we should therefore become.’ (Croft 1999, p21)

It is interesting to note that this argument is made even by a person responsible for encouraging what are often perceived to be pioneering forms of church which do not necessarily conform to inherited models of church. Where some practitioners would adopt a very pragmatic approach to such a task, promoting a ‘whatever works’ mentality, Croft is keen for any new and emerging forms of church to be rooted in the deep heritage of the Church. This results in a firm rejection of allowing primacy to any categories of thought external to the Gospel-focused tradition of the Church.

‘The understanding of ministry which we develop at the beginning of the third millennium must draw on the evolving traditions of the Church and its ministry through the ages, and not simply on understandings of leadership drawn from society around us.’ (ibid.)

We should note that while this allows the Church to resist the influence of secular management theories which are, at least superficially, hierarchically conceived, it also compels us to reject the unquestioning acceptance into the Church’s ministry of contemporary secular trends towards team or collaborative forms of management, or in other words, plural leadership. Rather, all models of leadership available in the wider world must be attended to and regarded for their potential to teach us valuable lessons, and equip us for ministry in God’s Church, but must be always made subservient to the lordship of Jesus Christ, mediated to us by the Spirit, the Scriptures and the traditions of the Church.

'Now' and 'Not Yet'

2006-12-05T11:35:00.000Z

I wish I'd had this image when I gave my homily at Ridley a few days ago (see post entitled 'St Andrew's Day Homily) - this expresses how I felt during most of last year's lectures!!

A Charismatic Communion

2006-12-05T11:30:00.000Z

(Below are some initial thoughts on 'Towards A Charismatic Eucharistic Theology', my broad subject area for my MA Thesis.)

A Charismatic communion is one which is truly a gift of the Holy Spirit, in that it is has its very being in the ‘gift’ness of the local expression of the body of Christ drawn into communion by the Spirit’s power. In this way, a Charismatic communion denies in its very being the work of human agency that is independent from the Spirit’s guidance in drawing together a congregation in the name of Jesus Christ. Thus, ecclesial gatherings whose common bond is expressed in sociological or demographic terms alone – be that in age, class, cultural preferences or denominational identity – are antithetical to the re-membering work of the Spirit in drawing us together in our Eucharistic feast. This is not to say that the Spirit may not work with and through these aspects of sociological identity, and thus denominational identity and worshipping preferences are not unimportant, but rather that the Spirit’s work finds its foundation on alternative ground – that of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

St Paul, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, articulates for us this radically alternative ground:
‘There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.’ (Ephesians 4:4-6)
‘There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.’ (Galatians 3:28)

Thus, our Spirit-filled and Spirit-given communion must first be expressed on the solid ground of the gospel. Therefore it is by our common baptism into Jesus Christ, and our submission to his Lordship that we are gathered, not upon the shifting sands of human cultural device or movement. If in our ecclesial communities we find ourselves unable to worship alongside our neighbouring Christian fellowships, and to praise God for their Spirit-giveness, then we must avoid casting judgement upon their speck and focus rather on the log in our eyes. ‘For though we are many, we are one body, because we all share in one bread.’ These words challenge us to look beyond simply the aggregation of individuals in a congregation, but to embrace a vision which encompasses all congregations in a church, and all churches in the one mystical body of Christ.

For as the scriptures direct us, all who share the Lordship of Christ by baptism and by Eucharistic celebration, and all who by the Charismatic gifts of the Spirit are being called ever onwards towards his kingdom, are in their fundamental (and ontological) nature, unified as one in Christ. Our Eucharistic celebration is not simply a recollection of events past, upon which our present identity is based, as Zwingli would have it, but rather a re-membering of Christ in the sense which is the very opposite of dismembering. That is to say that our Eucharistic celebration is an event which, as we recall Christ’s death and resurrection, we discover anew the fundamental unity that he has given to all who are baptised into him. (This, of course, could lead into fertile discussions about the relationship between baptism and communion in relation to children and infants.) We do not by our Eucharistic feast create a bond of unity between us, but recognise that bond which the Spirit has given to us, expressed in the local congregation.

We do, in the course of our celebration, repent of those things we think and do which dismember our fellowship, and this repentance is expressed in the Peace. In our repentance, and our making peace with one another in the local congregation, we recognise that this is radically different from a simple expression of ‘tolerance’ of the other, or simply a gesture of friendship. As Jesus says, ‘My peace I give to you – not as the world gives.’ The peace which comes from Jesus Christ, is one which is effective by the work of the Spirit in calling all believer to express their common bond of love by their union in Christ. Therefore, we are not simply making peace with those with whom we shake hands or hug, but are rather expressing the bond of peace which flows between all baptised believers, with whom we are knit together as one in the body of Christ. We cannot say to our neighbour in our local congregation ‘Peace be with you’ if we are unable to recognise and articulate the reality that the same peace in-dwells our relationship with our neighbouring congregations – however far removed they be from us in their cultural, worshipping style. (There is neither ‘High’ nor ‘Low’, ‘Radical’ nor ‘Traditional’, ‘Conservative’ nor ‘Catholic’ – all are one in the peace of Christ.)

(More to follow soon about eucharist and eschatology; eucharist and mission; eucharist and worship; and charismatic sacramentology...)

St Andrew’s Day Homily - Ridley Hall 2006

2006-12-05T11:25:00.000Z

I wonder how your day will start tomorrow? For most of us, it will be affected by whatever quiet day plans our staircase have, but nonetheless, I suspect that we will still go about our usual tasks of morning ablutions and breakfast – some also coping with cantankerous children, all before the dark, wet and cold journey to college.

There will be one important addition in our household, which is the opening of the first window of our Advent Calendar. Never mind that Advent fast doesn’t actually begin until Sunday, the commercial world with its candles and calendars would have us start tomorrow – and when ‘Divine’ fair-trade chocolate is involved – who am I to refuse!

Yet in the Christian calendar, today, on the eve of the Advent fast, we celebrate the feast of St Andrew the Evangelist. (To misquote Isaiah, ‘Let us feast and drink, for tomorrow we fast’!) But for those of us whose faith has been nurtured by the evangelical tradition of the church this particular form of feasting and fasting may seem unusual and irrelevant. We tend to have little experience (prior to our training at Ridley of course) of the benefits of following the liturgical calendar with its rhythm of the Christian year.

The distribution of seasons in the Christian year gives us some indication of how we might live a balanced and ordered life in Christ. A cursory analysis reveals that there are about 65 days each year given over to fasting, in Advent and Lent; about 85 years given over to feasting, in Christmas and Easter; and that broadly the rest of the year is described as ‘ordinary’ time, in which we attend to the normal rhythms of life – its needs and pleasures.

In the Charismatic Evangelical wing of the church, I have sometimes observed a temptation to live our lives as though every day were a feast, ever hoping to surf that next ecstatic wave of the Spirit’s renewing power. While this may sometimes be well and good, we often forget the Spirit’s work in the fast. (It was, after all, the Spirit who drove Jesus into his wilderness fast, and by whose power, Jesus was enabled to resist temptation.) This contributes to an unbalanced understanding of life’s order. There is in this, a correlation with the wider culture in which we live.

Speaking on the Rule of St Benedict last week in Rome, Archbishop Rowan commented on the disordered nature of modern society in relation to time:
‘In modern Europe - and the North Atlantic world - we live in a climate where both work and leisure seem to be pervasively misunderstood, where both appear regularly in inhuman and obsessive forms. Time is an undifferentiated continuum in which we either work or consume. Work follows no daily or even weekly rhythms but is a twenty-four hour business, sporadically interrupted by what is often a very hectic form of play.’
(Rowan Williams, ‘Benedict And The Future Of Europe’)

How then does this question of ordered time and living relate to the feast of St Andrew, and the readings we have heard this morning? The answer is found somewhere in the ‘Now’ and the ‘Not Yet’ of Christian life.

Andrew is often characterised as the archetypal evangelist. It is he who, according to John’s gospel, brings his brother Simon Peter to Jesus. (And since it is Peter upon whom the church is built, we can confidently sloganise ‘No pastors without the evangelists!’) In our readings today St Paul articulates the urgent cry of the evangelist: ‘How are they to believe in one of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone to proclaim him?’ We are called to take up the challenge of proclaiming Christ in the here and now of Christian life. To celebrate and proclaim in our feast that Christ has come, and that the powers of sin and death have been conclusively defeated in his death and resurrection.

But we also recognise that Christ’s rule is not yet realised completely on earth. In our Advent fast, we remember the lingering effects of our fallen nature. We resist our captivity to the ways of a fallen world, and we are renewed in our steadfast anticipation of Christ’s return.

Our Christian year concludes with the celebration of the evangelist – the one who prompts us to undertake the urgent work of proclaiming Christ’s kingdom; but it begins with the watchful, hopeful and joyful anticipation of Christ’s coming to us – both in time 2,000 years ago, and again at the end of time. Today, on the Feast of St Andrew we say to the world: ‘Jesus has come! Come and see!’ Tomorrow, as our Advent fast begins, we wait: ‘He is not yet come, but he is coming soon!’
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

Rooted, Reformed & Renewed

2006-11-21T17:42:00.000Z

For a little while now, I have been trying to develop a clear articulation of my personal manifesto for the church. I continually find myself drawn to this phrase, 'Rooted, Reformed & Renewed'. Below is an attempt to put flesh on the bones of this phrase. (I wrote this in August, and have been working on amended versions since... I intend to flesh this out fully over the next few years in a book bearing the phrase as its title...)

Rooted
I believe the local church should recognise and respect its place as a part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of God. In this way, it should live in accordance with the Holy Scriptures, the Catholic Creeds, and find the pattern of its continuing life in the dominical sacraments.

Reformed
I believe the Church of Christ should be continually receptive to His voice in and through the reception of Holy Scripture. The continuing enterprise of seeking His voice in the prophetic and apostolic witness of Scripture may not be confined to the activity of the individual, but is a task for the corporate worshipping life of the local church.

Renewed
I believe that the local church should be seeking to live in step with the Holy Spirit. It must seek always to be subservient to the prophetic call of God by the Holy Spirit; the reception of the gifts of the Spirit for the service of the church and world; and must be seeking to undertake Christian discipleship in accordance with the fruits of the Spirit.

What's Your Theological Worldview?

2006-11-06T16:23:00.000Z

You scored as Neo orthodox.

You are neo-orthodox. You reject the human-centredness and scepticism of liberal theology, but neither do you go to the other extreme and make the Bible the central issue for faith. You believe that Christ is God's most important revelation to humanity, and the Trinity is hugely important in your theology. The Bible is also important because it points us to the revelation of Christ. You are influenced by Karl Barth and P T Forsyth.

Neo orthodox 93%
Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 79%
Roman Catholic 71%
Emergent/Postmodern 68%
Charismatic/Pentecostal 54%
Reformed Evangelical 32%
Classical Liberal 25%
Modern Liberal 21%
Fundamentalist 11%

Review of 'The God Delusion'

2006-10-21T11:35:00.000Z

Dear Ridleans,

If you are at all interested in the work of Richard Dawkins, and the media
hype (and frequent C4 documentaries presented by him) that surrounds him,
you might be interested to read this review of his latest book ‘The God
Delusion’.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n20/eagl01_.html

It is written by Terry Eagleton, the Marxist-socialist literary theorist. He
is highly critical of Dawkins’ work, and it is refreshing to find such a
critique from a source other than Christian theologians (Alastair McGrath
has written extensively against Dawkins) and a reminder that we have
sympathetic and respectful supporters in what we might think unusual places
(the Marxist-socialist left).

I hope you don’t mind me emailing this link, but I’m confidant that in
ministry we will all come across people caught under Dawkins’ influence, and
will need the resources to creatively engage with their views...

By the way, Giles Fraser also wrote something shorter on broadly the same
theme in this week’s Church Times.

http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/80256FA1003E05C1/httpPublicPages/30EF4059217687
478025720B0052EE45?opendocument

Happy reading,
Graham
--
Graham Hunter
Ridley Hall
Cambridge
gh300@cam.ac.uk
www.myspace.com/grahamhunter
07711 070200

2006-07-23T14:52:00.000Z

What Is Required Of A Pastor?

‘A man must himself be cleansed, before cleansing others:
himself become wise, that he may make others wise;
become light, and then give light:
draw near to God, and so bring other near;
be hallowed, then hallow them;
be possessed of hands to lead others by the hand,
of wisdom to give advice.’

Gregory of Naziansus, Oration, 2.71

The PA Game

2006-07-04T21:52:00.000Z

I’ve found it amusing, and also annoying, to have encountered a number of church leaders and teachers over the past year who have no idea how to use a diary. In fact, it seems to be a part of ‘making it’ as an evangelical church leader, to be able to demonstrate the importance and busyness of one’s ministry, by constantly referring me to their ‘PA’ to make meeting arrangements.

It’s not that I contest the question of whether such leaders are busy, and / or involved in important ministries – in fact I’m quite sure that both are true. However, my certainty is owed to the fact that both have or do apply to me as well, and yet I seem able (and certainly have no choice but to) use my personal diary for appointments. Most church leaders up and down the country have to manage their own diaries, and the question of employing a PA to manage their schedule on their behalf would seem quite ridiculous and unlikely.

I find it even more strange that today one such occurrence involved an exchange of emails, in which the church leader in question could simply have responded to my suggested dates, but rather directed me to his PA to make an appointment. Emailing his PA resulted in an ‘Out of office auto-reply’ informing me that his PA was out of the office for another two days – did the church leader in question know his PA was off work?? If our church leaders are this bad at ‘people business’, maybe we should be challenging the notion that a more busy pastor with a PA is necessarily a better pastor. Let’s schedule a meeting to discuss further... Contact my PA!

Test

2006-06-27T00:05:00.000Z

This is a test to see whether I can publish to my blog from email...

2006-01-31T12:27:00.000Z

Here's a joke that I stumbled across yesterday, and have been quietly giggling about ever since. It is a joke about German theologians... (It may, in fact, be the only extant non-oxymoronic use of the terms 'joke' and 'German theologians'!)

***********

Karl Barth, Rudolf Bultmann and Paul Tillich are taking a break together, fishing on Lake Geneva. They are having a lovely time, smoking their pipes, chatting idly.

It's hot and they are getting thirsty. So Karl Barth gets up, steps out of the boat, and walks across the water to the shore, gets some beers and returns.

It's quite hot so the beer doesn't last long. Barth tells Tillich: "your turn, Paul". Tillich gets up, steps outside the boat, walks across the water, and fetches some beer.

It is getting really hot now, and the beer is finished once again. Bultmann is beginning to sweat particularly profusely... and finally Barth asks him too: "Come on, Rudolf, your turn now." With a slight tremor in his knees, Bultmann gets up, steps out of the boat, and sinks like a stone. Fortunately he is a good swimmer; he drags himself back into the boat and sulks at the far end.

Tillich turns to Barth and says: "Do you think we should have told him where the stepping stones are?"

Barth looks at him in astonishment and replies: "What stones?"

2006-01-30T10:25:00.000Z

This is me! I haven't been able to add a photo of myself to my profile - so I thought I would experiment with posting a photo as an entry... Hope it works fine... (The photo was taken during dinner on New Year's Eve 2005. I was staying in a cottage in the middle of the North York moors with my wife, Sara, and 9 of our friends. We had a wonderful time!)

Blog virgin! New to the game...

2005-05-24T00:03:00.000Z

Well, here we are... This is a bit of an experiment to learn how to use a web-log, or blog...

I have heard of blogs for a while, but have not begun to explore them myself, but I like the idea of an online diary to empty myself into...

Here's to experimenting...