The Royal Wedding

I think we all new that the Royal Wedding was going to be a rather regal affair, with all the pomp and ceremony that goes with it. And there is no doubting that we all brought into that, with some of us arranging community street events (which in itself is good), while others like me were looking out for points of interest, such as what was in the service and which sports stars turned up...

But as much as the service was unapologetically Christian, the undertones to this event were purely nationalistic....Yesterday I read many posts about being 'proud to be British', and to some degree I'm with them (I'm proud to be British as well).... However, for me, the wedding amplified a rather large cultural shift in our country, where our almighty God, the creator of all the good things we enjoy is somehow sidelined...And the notion of faith has become a rather abstract concept that can only be attained by a few special people. So to counteract the deep void which is left by faith, we attach ourselves (and I include myself in that) to something more tangible like Royalty (Prince and Princesses) or following our national sports team..Our own deepest needs for importance and meaning are projected onto to people and events like this, and as a result we make them pseudo saviours.... In short, we are looking for a form of Redemption from something other than God ( which was brought to my attention in a sermon by Timothy Keller)....

Now don't get me wrong, Royal weddings and street parties are not a bad thing in themselves, I'm all for community. But when they become the be all and end all, it would be fair to say that we've missed the point.

Rob Bell- Love wins

I went to listen to Rob Bell at the Methodist hall on Monday evening, and have to say first off that I've never heard such an effective communicator... One couldn't help but be drawn in by his rather adept way of communicating the truths we cling so tightly to, and done in a way which draws on an array of stories and theological insight, which subsequently refuses to let one box the Christian message into the confines of their own understanding...
And in light of this, one could ask whether this was a good thing? Or was I merely being led astray by a gifted communicator? Well, it's difficult to answer straight of the bat, and as a theologian I feel that it should be an ongoing dynamic process. However, this is not to say that there isn't any credence to what he's saying.. I jotted down a few points which really hold true for me:

• The good news of God is unapologetically great, based on a love we will never know anywhere else... (Something which should be at the for front of our minds this Easter)..




• The story of God's redemptive purpose is better than we first thought...




• The singular uniqueness of Christ goes hand in hand with the vast, wide love and grace of God.... (which goes with my own inclusivist views on God's redemptive activity).

The last point is particularly pertinent, because I've had all sorts of strange tests of orthodoxy from other Christians, based on a wild variety of hang ups. But Bell's reminder that God's choices/judgement are his own, not ours, is a timely reminder that the subject of salvation must be approached with humility. I really do think that there has been too much second guessing of God, and any preacher who condemns people who think differently to them to eternal punishment, is only speaking from their own insecure need for certainty.

However, as much as I wanted to be totally convinced by everything, there were some times where I felt rather short changed, particularly with the lack of robustness of some of his points. And one particular example is the way he started both his book, and the talk he gave before the question and answer session. It revolved around a woman at his church who was abused, and therefore self abused. And as a counsellor, I'm aware of this cycle and have tried to work with it. But what was particularly emotive about this story was how she handed him a note with a number on it, which turned out to be the number of days she had gone without cutting herself. Sometimes it could be up to a year, another a few days, but as touching as it was, I struggled to see the link in terms of Salvation... Was he saying that because there is so much pain in the world, everybody deserves to be redeemed? Or merely that God loves you, whoever you are, or what you struggle with, and there is also hope. Judging by the placement of story, I would guess it was the latter, but I don't remember the doctrine of salvation being about how much we suffer, as sad as it must be. Neither did I hear too much about God's refining work in our lives, although it has to be said that he did a wonderful job of that in 'Drops like Stars'..

Also, in the question and answer session, he payed a lot of attention to the proof texts of universal salvation (1 Tim 4; Colossians 1:20) ..But I would have to say that I don't know enough about the context of these verses to comment. However, what I could say is that there are a number of texts which indicate both an exclusive and inclusive view of salvation, which one needs to hold in tension.

But with all this being said, I still have a great deal of time for Rob Bell, both as a thinker and a communicator... And look forward to hearing him again at Greenbelt.

The spacious way (Part 1)

What a paradox it is that true living is found in what Jesus called the narrow gate (Matthew 7).....Which leads to the gift of Grace, from an all loving God who chooses to bless those who turn their back on him and choose to live the so called automous lifestyle (which in my opinion is a myth). As I've always said, Grace is something which is beyound ourselves and challenges the part of our ego which works to get recognition or reward. It turns upside down our own convention so much, that we choose to avoid it and rely on our own efforts, subsequently making it the narrow gate. But the more I come into contact with secular paradigms, the more I become convinced that the narrow way, is the only true way. Now one could say that as a Christian, of course I should be thinking that way. But there is much credence to the fact that modernistic enligtenment thinking and postmoden pluralism, if fully embraced, is the wide road leading to destruction (or the opposite to the narrow gate). And this will be dicuseed in part 2...

How Stupid!

Of all the myopic things one could do, burning a copy of the Koran has to be at the top of the list..But this is what former hotel owner turned so-called pastor Terry Jones has done to further the Kingdom of God. And his reason? That the Koran incites violence! As a result, one cannot help but react against the shear hypocrisy of both his statement and actions, and as a counsellor can only conclude that he is stuck in ever increasing circles of denial, which are evidently needed to keep such a toxic approach to relations going.

But In my opinion, there is something more going on here, because what we are seeing is the extremes of religion. Which in short is to take away the notion of transforming grace, which I believe should be at the centre of any Christian message.. To a message which is based around Mr Jones' ego, and a rather damaged one at that! And for those who have paid only a little attention to the ministry of Jesus in the Gospels, they would see that the people he got angry with the most, where those who thought they were set apart by their own actions. With a rather misguided notion that keeping their own rituals gave them the right to look down on, and judge others who were different to them.

And with all this said, one would have to say that the real issues here is the need for people to pay attention. And I'm a little reticent to do that, even on a blog whom hardly anyone reads, lol..But I write this in order to say that his actions have nothing to do with the Christianity which has, and still is, transforming my life.

Living with the tension

This year has already brought us all a great deal of suffering, with all the uprising in the middle east and the catoshrophic events in New Zealand and Japan. With the former, we are left with the more understandable notion of human nature, and how it can only look to its own interests. But the problem of natural disasters causes a great deal more discomfort, and forces one to live with the tension of an all loving God and all the human suffering which just seems to be so unfair.

But one has to live with the tension, or risk going to the extremes to find some form of certainty, where we find both militant atheism and I'm sad to say, theism. And one could say that there is a cost to this so-called certainty (which isn't actually certainty at all) , because in my opinion, fundamentalism is only really based around egotism, or the need to have everything in order so you don't need to live with the tension.

So I will carry on in my uncomfortable place, with the following perspectives:

• My college lecturer wrote a wonderful article about suffering, with the premise being that God created us with a sense of spontaneity, with ability to be a free agent in terms of their decisions. The same principle could be applied to that of creation, where all the natural beauty is a result of spontaneity. But with that beauty, there will always be the opposite, which is the ugly truth of natural disasters.
• Suffering is one of life's given, and there is always a choice about what we do about it.
• The promise of God's redemption plan gives hope beyond reason.

Life is hard...

Having been in the Social Care field for around 10 years now, there have many service users which I've grown close too. In my opinion working with vulnerable people in a detached way is a myth. There really is no way of not liking them and staying emotionally healthy..... Moreover, one could say that it's the human condition to connect, but to most of us, doing so with someone more needy than us comes all the more easily.

So why do I write this? Simply because I've lost two people who where very close to me . And in essence I feel grief and loss, whatever that means exactly. But while I write this, one is reminded that, to grieve, means the lose of something which meant alot, something one delighted in and made life just that little bit better. I feel sad because I enjoyed their simplistic approach to life, things were what they were, no complications and no pretense. And their funny little habits could only make me laugh.

But the reality is, they are gone, and life must go on....

With only a 50 % win record one could be forgiven for wanting a little more from their team... However,I find myself more optimistic than normal about the state of English Rugby. And if one were to ask why, it's because this series has marked the move away from the conservative forward driven game we've become so entrenched in since the 2003 World Cup. Even with the sparse amount possession we had today, there was a real desire to run and find spaces as opposed to just safety first. And as a long suffering England supporter it brought me great joy, even if against South Africa they were few and far between. But who can forget the sheer poetry of the running rugby we played against Australia, which was the most enjoyable England game I've seen for 7 years.

But with the above in mind, I think I would much rather see us lose a few six nations games in the name of endeavour instead of us relying on one dimensional forward power. Because the essence of growth is when one falls down in pursuit of the new,exciting and more effective, because it's the only arena where we really learn.