way out west

The Making of Modern Britain

I've been watching Andrew Marr's interesting "The Making of Modern Britain".  Lots of fascinating stuff, one section deserves a mention because of the way it flies in the face of the medias love affair with the New-Atheists particularly their simplistic view "Science=good, Religion=bad".  Marr leads with a piece on Darwin's cousin Francis Galton.  Galton, the scientist wrote in 1869 the book "Hereditary Genius" in which he says,

a man's natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world. Consequently, as it is easy, notwithstanding those limitations, to obtain by careful :selection a permanent breed of dogs or horses gifted with peculiar powers of running, or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations.

effectively launching the idea of Eugenics into the modern world, which within 100 years led directly to the experiments of Joseph Mengele and the death camps of Nazi Germany.  Marr suggests that Galton believed that poverty could be bred out of culture, that only the upper classes should be encouraged to breed.  The programme then sets Galton in contrast to Seebohm Rowntree, the Christian, who conducted a study of poverty in York in 1899 the findings of which where published in the book "Poverty" in 1901 and, when taken up by David Lloyd George, became the seeds of British social welfare reform. 

Technorati Tags: Christianity: Culture: Media: Television

Holy Sex Batman!

I'm sure some will see this as being somewhat controversial... some will no doubt condemn it... I think it's something to be celebrated - sex is good and it's about time Christianity got over from it's victorian embarrassment about it... Father Ksawery Knotz, a Polish Franciscan and Catholic Priest has written a books called "Sex as you don't know it: for married couples who love God" (putting aside the obvious flaw of a celibate man writing about sex) about which he says...

Some people, when they hear about the holiness of married sex, immediately imagine that such sex has to be deprived of joy, frivolous play, fantasy and attractive positions [They think] it has to be sad like a traditional church hymn.  Every act - a type of caress, a sexual position - with the goal of arousal is permitted and pleases God. During sexual intercourse, married couples can show their love in every way, can offer one another the most sought-after caresses... Married couples celebrate their sacrament, their life with Christ also during sex.  Calling sex a celebration of the marriage sacrament raises its dignity in an exceptional way. Such a statement shocks people who learned to look at sexuality in a bad way. It is difficult for them to understand that God is also interested in their happy sex life and in this way gives them his gift.

I look forward to an English version :)

BBC News

Technorati Tags: Christianity: Church: Culture: Fun

Scraping off the Shit - Maundy Thursday liturgy

Our Foot washing Liturgy from last year seems to be getting a load of hits at the moment... so to be helpful I'm bumping it :)

http://markjberry.blogs.com/scraping.pdf

It's included in "Navigatio" our book published by Proost

Scraping off the Shit
(A large bowl of water and Towels)

Jesus knew that the Father had put him in complete charge of everything, that he came from God and was on his way back to God. So he got up from the supper table, set aside his robe, and put on an apron. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the feet of the disciples, drying them with his apron. When he got to Simon Peter, Peter said, “Master, you wash my feet?” Jesus answered, “You don't understand now what I'm doing, but it will be clear enough to you later.” Peter persisted, “You're not going to wash my feet-ever!” Jesus said, “If I don't wash you, you can't be part of what I'm doing.” “Master!” said Peter. “Not only my feet, then. Wash my hands! Wash my head!” Jesus said, “If you've had a bath in the morning, you only need your feet washed now and you're clean from head to toe. My concern, you understand, is holiness, not hygiene. So now you're clean. But not every one of you.” (He knew who was betraying him. That's why he said, “Not every one of you.”) After he had finished washing their feet, he took his robe, put it back on, and went back to his place at the table. Then he said, “Do you understand what I have done to you? You address me as ‘Teacher' and ‘Master,’ and rightly so. That is what I am. So if I, the Master and Teacher, washed your feet, you must now wash each other's feet. I've laid down a pattern for you. What I've done, you do.
John 13v3-17

Scraping off the shit
Where we walk, we walk in the crap left by others, by ourselves, the mess of human lives, the comings and goings of a wasteful, corrupt and selfish world, we wallow in the dirt and the hurt, oblivious to the stink and the stains that we carry with us. God stripped off his finery, stepped in our shit, knelt in it, touched it, held our ugliest bits in his very hands and washed them clean.

Hands which formed matter; Pulse which set the rhythm of the planets; Breath which stirred life into being; Mind which dreamt the diversity of the species; Eyes which bore deep into the heart of humanity; Heart which yearns for us to choose peace; Feet that walk each step with us; Mouth which chides and comforts; Arms which embrace the hurting; Strength which sustains the weak; Life which was given up for love; Creator who scrapes the shit off my feet; God who serves.
Wash me clean

Where I judge others
Where I dismiss others
Where I abuse others
Where I ignore others
Where I ridicule others
Where I use others
Wash me clean

Where I elevate myself
Where I think only of myself
Where I want only for myself
Where I gather to myself
Where I hold to myself
Where I value only myself
Wash me clean

Where I seek for power
Where I seek for control
Where I seek for praise
Where I seek for status
Where I seek for fame
Where I seek for wealth
Wash me clean

This story of service and servant-hood begins by washing the feet of each other; we are a community of service, we serve each other, we serve the people we meet on the road, we serve the town in which we live, we serve the servant God, who as the God who became flesh and blood and lived amongst us chose to get right down and dirty in the shit and stink of human life to wash the feet of those he lived with. So we wash each others feet.
[Washing of feet]

What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Micah 6v8

The challenge for us is that instead of pointing to the rubbish others have accumulated from a place of “holier than thou” judgment, calling them to lift themselves out of the mire, we like Jesus bend and kneel amongst the dirt and the hurt, we get right amongst it, see it up close, feel it, smell it, risk its contamination… and wash the feet of those we serve.

May I become at all times, both now and forever
A protector for those without protection
A guide for those who have lost their way
A ship for those with oceans to cross
A bridge for those with rivers to cross
A sanctuary for those in danger
A lamp for those without light
A place of refuge for those who lack shelter
And a servant to all in need.

In that moment at the table Jesus was host and servant, head of the table and servant, honoured guest and lowest member of staff, holy and humble one. Stripping himself of all status and authority he calls us to a humility that flies in the face of modern culture and human logic, to a holiness that follows his pattern, to love in the name of the Servant God.

Technorati Tags: alt.worship: Blogging: Christianity: Church: Emerging Church: Missional: Prayer: Rhythm: safespace: Spirituality: Worship

An Upside down ecclesiology?

These are the people who conspicuously share instead of consuming. They practice Jubilee rather than accumulate wealth....They give without expecting a return...They love without regard to label or obligation. They penetrate boxes marked "Stigma." They express an unequivocal concern for the poor and destitute. They look and move down the ladder. They don't take their own religious structures too seriously...They serve instead of dominate. They prefer invitation to force...Love replaces hate among these folk. Even enemies are loved. Basins replace swords in this society. These people share power, love aggressively, and make peace. They flatten hierarchies and behave like children. Compassion replaces ambition among them and equality supercedes competition and achievement.

From  "The Upside-Down Kingdom" (Donald B. Kraybill)  quoted by Ginny Hunt  (NextReformation)

Technorati Tags: Books: Christianity: Church: Community: Emerging Church: Missional

The Shack II

Finished the book earlier this morning... I don't mind admitting that it had me in tears on several occasions, not just the "human" bits but some of the "God" bits toward the end had me blubbing like a baby!  Particularly some of the stuff about living in expectancy not expectations and the letting go of shoulds and should nots in the flow of relationship..  I want to quote one passage (which didn't make me cry, but I just love the way it is put)... Mack had asked about the cliché "God first, Family second, Job third" - or variations of...

Jesus now spoke again.  "Mack, I don't want to be the first among a list of values;  I want to be at the center of everything.  When I live in you, then together we can live through everything that happens to you.  Rather than a pyramid, I want to be the center of a mobile, where everything in your life - your friends, family, occupation, thoughts, activities - is connected to me but moves with the wind, in and out and back and forth, in an incredible dance of being."

"And I," concluded Sarayu (The Spirit), "I am the wind."

I might pick out a few other thoughts if I have the time.

Technorati Tags: Books: Spirituality: theology: Worship

The Shack

Loving reading "The Shack"  by William P. Young If you haven't yet read it, you have to... it's incredible - soul crunchingly sad, heart stoppingly beautiful, warm and soothing like a good Islay malt, gently hilarious, inspiring and challenging and it puts you in such a theological helter-skelter that all you can say is "Wheeeeeeeeee"!  It's as readable and engaging as an Airport novel but at the same time as poetic and stirring as pretty much anything you might pick up from the "literature" section of the Library.  Sure, it's not perfect - there are times you want Mack to hold on to his anger just a little longer and really push the questions, there are bit's which border on the cheesey and some theological moments which feel they need digging at... but I have to say, even though it's lacks much in the way of competition, this is the best "Christian" novel I have read in a long long time... maybe ever (I'll tell you if that's the case when I've finished it!)

The EAUK Book Review page describes it thus...

Mackenzie (Mack) Allen Philip’s, an ordinary American, though one with a painful past of his own, decides one weekend to take his kids on a camping trip in the mountains of Oregon. Nothing unusual – just a fun filled weekend of campfires, hiking, canoeing and enjoying the great outdoors. Until tragedy strikes in the most unexpected way. Mack’s two older kids are out canoeing when they lose control and the canoe flips over. The reader naturally expects that one or both of them drowns, but Mack succeeds in saving them. Yet while his attention is focused on saving them, a serial killer abducts his younger daughter Missy. As the search progresses, the dress she had been wearing is found torn and bloodied in a Shack, high up in the mountains, implying that she has been murdered.

What follows for Mack is a time of several years described as The Great Sadness. Mack cannot forgive himself, and perhaps understandably, he blames God for allowing such a tragedy to happen to him. His relationship with God only worsens, becoming stoic and devoid of emotion. Until, one day Mack finds a note in his post box, signed “Papa” (God) inviting him to return to the Shack. Unsure if it is a cruel joke, a trick by the killer or whether it really is God trying to speak to him, curiosity gets the better of Mack and he decides to return to the scene of his daughter’s murder.

Here the story departs from reality as we know it (and indeed where the reader may feel comfortable) and enters a world where Mack meets God – Papa (God) portrayed in the form of a black woman, Jesus as an ordinary man in jeans and t-shirt, and Sarayu (The Holy Spirit) as an Asian woman. Mack spends the weekend with them in a world where time and reality no longer exists as we know it, and during that time finds healing, peace, deeper understanding and forgiveness about life. It’s not easy, for the questions he has to face are challenging and painful, but gradually Papa, Jesus and Sarayu work to bring about healing in Mack’s life and enable him to understand what a relationship with them is supposed to be and how that reflects in his relationship with others.

It might be worth noting that the book makes clear why Papa (Elouisa) God is depicted as an African Woman... the reason being that God is both male and female (supra-gender) and both are created in God's image, Mack primary image of God is as a white male, therefore to challenge his preconceptions God appears as a black woman... Young does not suggest that God IS a black woman anymore than God is a white man!

Technorati Tags: Books: Spirituality: theology

Sent: Living the Missional Nature of the Church

A "Bible Study/course" from Ed Stetzer on living the Missional Nature of the Church... Link

Download a pdf of the book/leaders guide from here

Sent: Living the Missional Nature of the Church

Throughout history, God has always been a sender. After all, He sent us His son, who in turn sends us. With Sent: Living the Missional Nature of the Church, Ed Stetzer issues a call to a new kind of missional living, one that engages culture, enables Christians to live in the world while not being of the world, and motivates the purposeful sharing of the story of Christ. Uncover the meaning of missional and explore where you fit into the overall purpose of the church.

Study Sessions:

• Introduction—Recovering the meaning of missional
• Session 1 God the Sender—Discovering the root of the mission
• Session 2 Kingdom Come—Living in the already, but not yet
• Session 3 The Church and the Yo-Yo—Looking out versus looking in
• Session 4 Culture Clash—Being in but not of the world
• Session 5 Living Sent—Taking steps in the right direction

Technorati Tags: Bible: Books: Mission: Missional: theology

Medicine Man or Chief?

Are you a Medicine Man or a Chief?  Mike Frost (Small Boat Big Sea - Forge) spent some time yesterday talking about a theory known as "Medicine Man Chief"... I was going to explain it, but then whilst Googling I found a blog post from Tash McGill that puts it nice and succinctly!

The Chief

Tribes arrange themselves around chiefs. The stronger the chief, the bigger the tribe. Chiefs have mini-chiefs. They are found at the centre of the tribe - the Chieftains house is always in the centre - the focal point of the tribe's direction and leadership. Tribespeople need a chief, and chiefs need tribespeople in order to be a chief at all. The loyalty is chief to tribe, tribe to chief. They are dependant on one another for security.

The Medicine Man

The medicine man never lives within the tribe. He lives on the outskirts, outside the city gates or simply travels in a nomadic fashion between tribes that require his services.  The medicine man isn't loyal to the tribe or to the chief. He's loyal to the Higher Truth. His is the business of healing. Of bringing truth to the tribe. As such, he has great influence and power. He can be magnetic and charismatic, just like a chief, but his loyalty to truth (which is ultimately for the sake and care of the tribespeople) will always be his highest priority.

Go and read Tash's Post for more on the "story"... Mike's perspective was that we need to be aware of the role and significance of both... and of who we are... a Chief on their own means the community quickly becomes institutionalised; pragmatic, following good practice but unable to improvise or take creative risks... a Medicine (wo)man on their own leads to chaos and confusion, a constant state of reinvention and restlessness.  The Medicine man can be a thorn in the side of the Chief, never allowing the community to become too self-satisfied, to become petrified or institutionalised... most Pioneers are Medicine men Mike suggests... but there comes a time in the life of a new community that Chiefs have to emerge to begin to stabilise living conditions and practice.  The question becomes then, does the Medicine man move on to start new things leaving the Chief to build the structures (to move the community from the Storming and Forming toward the Norming) or should the Medicine man hang around, be part of the "leadership" preventing the community from entering the first stages of decline by becoming unresponsive and inflexible, losing its creativity and dynamism?  But the Medicine man is not a "moaner" who always sees the grass on the other side as more lush and fulsome, they are more idealistic, more visionary than that.

As ever with "models" it seems somewhat simplistic, but there also seems to be some use in the narrative... I can see that my role has elements of both, but I guess most I am a Medicine man, a pioneer who gets excited by challenging institution etc. but needs to find the Chief, the do-er, the pragmatist in the community... I do live within the tribe and therefore I want to question the story (above) of the itinerant Medicine man, I see much more of a complimentary dynamic where different elements/people come into play in leadership in a fluid but mutually involved way - for me the Medicine man needs to be part of the community, feeling, listening, learning from the community in it's every day life, not someone who reflects from the outside.  It occurred to me that we are perhaps blind to the Medicine men, that when we think of leadership we think of the Chief?  When one looks at the attitude of modern writers/bloggers etc. to the likes of Brian McLaren, they see a Chief - when perhaps he is a Medicine man, someone who does not want to run the village, but does want to ask the awkward questions, prompt new thinking etc.?  Perhaps "our" model of leadership has become defined by Chiefdom, we expect to see a leader who leads, who demands loyalty, who manages life and business, etc. perhaps we have marginalised and even exiled the Medicine men, the Apostles, Prophets etc.  the "Awkward Squad"?  Do we cripple Chiefs by putting all the weight of leadership on their shoulders, fine when things are going well but what when challenges to change or rethink arise?

I also began to wonder whether there are communities themselves that manifest as Medicine men for the wider community?  Communities who perhaps do not seem loyal to the Chief, communities that are prepared to be a thorn in the side, idealistic, who live to be creative and to ask difficult questions?  And yet do see themselves as a part of the wider community, related to it but living on its edge... Perhaps communities of exiled Medicine men are gathering together because they have no place to live?  If so we shouldn't necessarily worry about sustainability etc. those are Chief issues, we should talk about the impact that they have on the wider community - do they bring new thinking, do they challenge structures and institutions that have themselves become idols?  Do they stir up petrified communities to re-examine purpose, vision and mission?  How do we make space for Medicine men and Medicine man communities in the Chief's world?

Technorati Tags: Leadership: Blogging: Books: Missional

The Great Emergence - Part 1

It seems I am taking part in a global, organic synchro-read of "The Great Emergence"  by Phyllis Tickle

I'm intrigued by, if a little dubious of, the central premise of the first part of the book... that every 500 years or so there happens a "Great" moment in cultural shift (in this case related to the Abramic Religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam)... let me clarify, I'm not actually dubious of Tickle's observations of either the paradigm shift, it's causes or the cycle she writes of, simply that I'm not convinced by a sense that because there have been important shifts roughly every 500 years, the timing is significant & not coincidental... I guess one can get into the argument of scientific verification - that patterns observed can only truly be seen as universal when they become predictable - i.e. if we are experiencing a semi-millenial shift now and therefore we predict that one will occur 500 years hence, and it does, then "we" can begin to be more sure of the significance of the timing (yeah I know none of us will be around then ;-) ) So, I guess to begin with I'm happy to say, yes, we can see "Great" shifts happening at almost regular intervals in history, but I'm not yet convinced that there is a mechanistic and predictable rhythm to them.

Back to the plot... Tickle uses the analogy of a cable... with three sections - a protective (waterproof) covering, a mesh sleeve and a Core (consisting of three intertwined threads)...

The Covering = The Story of community - the shared history of the "social unity" or the "ethos"

The Mesh = The world view - the common agreement or interpretation of the Story - the consensus of how the world works

The Core =

1) Spirituality - the experiences and values of the individual

2) Corporeality - the evidence - outward signs -  of the existence of the community/religion/society

3) Morality - the objective enactment or application of the values

Tickle suggests that every 500 years or so the Covering - the story comes under such stress that not only is it ruptured but so is the Mesh - the world view - when she says they "take a simultaneous blow"... this reminds me of the relationship between meaning and perspective transformation  - in relation to the work of Jack Mezirow "Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning") that we often have to reflect on and transform our awareness of meaning (schema) i.e. we look at how we live and realise it doesn't work, so we reform our meaning structures to form new schemes - but, there comes a point when our reflection not only challenges the way we respond to our perspective - the way we believe the world exists - but the perspectives themselves.  In these terms one could say that the Covering takes blows on a regular basis - the story we tell/share gets challenged and reformed - but significantly less regularly does the impact affect not only the story about how we live in the world, but also our common understanding of the world itself... when this happens we get thrown into a "Great" shift... and we have to explore deeper the factors through which our Perspectives take shape i.e. our spirituality - the experiences and values that emerge in our individual lives and in our relationships with each other and our context.

What is clear is that we are undergoing some/several major shifts which are seriously challenging our perspectives of life... one thing we should be careful of is assuming that a global perspective transformation will necessarily lead to a global meaning consensus... each culture/context/country may well experience the perspective shift - the "Great Emergence" but even a common shift will cause a different scheme for living to emerge in a different context/community... if there's one thing post-modernity (for want of a better label) should teach us it is a respect for contextual schema!

More to come.

Technorati Tags: Books: Culture: Emerging Church: Great Emergence: Post-Modernity: theology

Re-imagining Church Discussion

There is a discussion underway on Ben Witherington's Blog between himself and Frank Viola re. Franks book "Re-imagining Church"... Ben has been writing a detailed and lengthy review of the book and Frank has agreed to respond to the critique... for the most part the discussion has centered around; What exactly *is* the Body of Christ - with Witherington concerned that Viola takes what he believes to be a metaphor and reads too much into it and Viola arguing that it is a much more mystical reality than Witherington credits... What is the nature of the Trinity - Witherington takes a fairly strong Subordinationist interpretation whereas Viola has an understanding of Perichoresis as  much more of a mutual self surrender and co-participation... Church governance flowing from both the different understanding of the Trinity and from Witherington's insistence that a Hierarchical, traditional model, building focussed and with Preaching and singing as central is explicit in the NT and that "house Churches" are a later development...  There are other questions that arise e.g. Witherington seems to suggest that Christ doesn't speak through/in the Church and argues for a sytematic/historical approach to reading scripture that can not "read back" the NT into the OT... on both issues Viola generally disagrees... It is a respectful and friendly discussion and well worth the reading (though there is lots of it!)... Thanks both!

My one real disappointment is that Witherington continually points out and critiques Viola's "assertions", but too often he uses his own "assertions" to do so... therefore it fails in being a balanced and comprehensive review and critique of the book and more an argument against it from Witherington's own traditions, assertions etc.  as such it reads as a defence of Witherington's tradition rather than a genuine examination of Viola's case for re-imagining.

Frank Violas Reimagining Church Part 1

Frank Violas Reimagining Church Part 2

A Frank Response Part 1 (to BWs Parts 1 and 2)

Frank Violas Reimagining Church Part  3

A Frank Response Part 2 (to BWs Part 3)

Frank Violas Reimagining Church Part 4

Witherington's Epilogue

Viola's Coda

Technorati Tags: Blogging: Books: Emerging Church: Leadership: Missional: Organic: theology