Top 5 Worship Dislikes

A self explanatory piece about our Church services. More a debating point than a problem solving exercise.

5. Religious words, especially ‘Blessed’.

Unfortunately this word has lost it’s original meaning. Not only is it a personal turn-off because it is obtuse language for new-comers (especially when pronounced bless-sed, who speaks like that?). It also now carries more of a financial or transactional meaning. I want to say that the word is about honour, but that too has been perverted. I think if you asked a lot of Church goers they couldn’t actually tell you what ‘Hosanna’, ‘Holy’ or ‘awe’ mean. It’s not that we need to scrap all these words, although genuinely creative metaphor and imagery are always welcome. We need to explain some and reclaim others. Sometimes it seems that we are singing and saying phrases that are only pseudo-meaningful, with no attention to creativity, craft, meaning or grammar.

4. The lyric : ‘The sinners’ cross’.

Erm, no-one was crucified for being a sinner. Jesus was killed for being a revolutionary, most explicitly it seems for clearing the temple. This sort of phrase allows us to divorce the political, social and ethical teachings of the Bible from the death and resurrection, allowing us to create an ethereal message based on abstract concepts such as ‘sin’ and the ‘afterlife’. Unfortunately Jesus didn’t take your place on the cross, because you probably haven’t done anything radical enough in your service for God to warrant public torture and execution. This lyric is symptomatic of how we have divorced our services from the ongoing reality around us, and started to deal in historical doctrines and systematic frameworks rather than Biblical study

3.Narrowness of tradition.

Christianity is a deep tradition, however too many of us ‘don’t cross the streams’! Many people experiencing Christianity for the first time are actually drawn in and captivated by genuine spiritual tradition. A move away fist from Catholicism then ‘thees and thous’ has left us bereft of art, iconography and sacramental tradition. I have lost count of the amount of times I’ve heard baptism described as a ‘public declaration of faith’, even though it’s clearly more than that. Is that why Jesus was baptised?! Where is that phrase in the Bible? We have lost the power of art in our buildings, of physical action outside of raising our hands. I once heard a couple of lecturers (Alex and Amanda Brown, based on the Isle of Man) state that art can be exegesis in and of itself. Profoundly true. Churches also refuse to use each other’s music, madness when considering the poetry of some hymns and the creativity and texture within modern music. I often stuck up for Hillsong when I went to Bible college when people who liked the Soul Survivor style/branding disregarded it. Now Tim Hughes and the rest have the exact same sound and instrumentation! Be musical magpies, tradition takers and expanding experiencers. You can tell I like a bit of alliteration!

2.Narrowness of liturgy.

Everyone follows a liturgy, that is a set program of worship. The key characteristics of this are certain phrases that are repetitively used, standing/sitting/kneeling at various times and thematic worship or teaching. Unfortunately those who don’t intentionally write out their liturgy have by necessity very repetitive themes and narrow experience. For example, most church services that would associate themselves with ‘charismatic’ expression run like this.

• Opening scripture or thought by a leader.
• Song(s)
• Notices, offering (with appeal)
• Song(s)
• Sermon, a speech with a powerpoint
• Response and/or song(s)

Obviously this leads to very narrow worship experiences. People stay within narrow safe themes, as to go outside of any ‘safe’ topics needs a depth of knowledge or written preparation. Therefore every worship leader urges people to push on and meet God in order to know him more, and also to think of the cross. Preachers who do not aim to work through the whole Bible or at least a variety of texts tend to read at most 4 New Testament verses, or read a particular story/encounter (e.g. David and Goliath, Jesus and Zaccheus) and then take a narrow theme and develop it. This can vary slightly from self-help/discipleship messages, topical studies with proof texting or certain themes designed to elicit a response (Do you keep failing? Don’t pray enough? Come to the front!). We need to intentionally create liturgical plans for three key reasons. Firstly to deepen the worship experience of the community through times of silence, confession, meditation and artistic performance. Secondly to cover more of the Bible, and therefore more of Christianity. We don’t deal with tensions in the texts, ethical issues and communal life anyway near enough. Thirdly to reclaim prayer in our services from merely bridging the sections to powerful communion with God. We need to set aside intentional time in our services for intercession, confession and hands on prayer for needs.

1. Lack of charismatic experience.

Speaking in tongues, or singing your own song between set numbers is a very narrow charismatic experience. The Pentecostal movement began in poor, uneducated black communities in America and its radicalism came from its decentralisation of power. When a Church is truly charismatic there is no monopoly on the giving of God’s word or rigid definition of leadership. Leaders should encourage others to guide services and experience of God, and worship leaders should engage the community in its creation of worship as art. We should genuinely allow anyone to speak, and trust that we are discipling people with the maturity to be discerning. Do leaders genuinely think they’re the only people who can spot a mic-grabbing nutter? Let’s allow for spontaneity. True leaders have the ability to sense what God is doing and run with it, even if that means relinquishing control and set order. Participation brings unity, ownership and adds a depth of experience as we crowd-source our knowledge and experiential worship.

From Death to Life.

Romans 10:9

‘Because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved’.

Why are Christians so obsessed with death? I mean seriously. Jesus spent his entire life teaching us how to live, yet Christians are obsessed with and defined by the afterlife. Obsessed with sin not because of the problem of evil and suffering, but because they want to define who is in or out and for how long. I think it’s because the cross as it is commonly understood is a logical formula.

God hates us because of sin.

God loves Jesus because he doesn’t sin and is his son.

God’s hatred was put on Jesus on the cross, because our faith/belief places our sin upon him.

God loves us because our sin is on Jesus, so we are now his sons.

It makes perfect sense, the logic is there. I can fully understand why people are unshakable in their conviction that this is right, because as a model it is flawless. You can even fit verses around this model. ‘Why can’t you understand this model?!’ It’s defenders cry. ‘It’s how it works’.

The issue is that there are various models and metaphors for the cross in the New Testament, which is ultimately called a mystery. There are also serious questions about the nature and character of God raised by this equation. Is God’s primary characteristic intolerance? Is he limited in how he forgives, so much so that he has to solve some divine moral equation before he can show mercy? Is God more bound to a moral framework of right and wrong than his character? Is God’s justice primarily moral outrage?

think we understate the weight of sin, death and the human condition by narrowing the cross to just dealing with ‘our sins’. I think we separate the characteristics of God into separate deities. It is forgotten that God’s primary characteristic shown on the cross was love and reconciliation, rather than anger and bitterness. Rather than placing Christ the Victor over sin and death and destruction, we place God the limited under the weight of our personal transgressions.

We are overly atonement focused, and it is a narrow reading of the atonement at that. Tom Wright in his excellent book ‘Justification’ labours over how narrow the essence of salvation has become. I think his conclusions are right. It’s not that what has become mainstream theology is not right, it’s that it’s not everything.

I think the reason we have such a crucifixion centred theology and image of Christ is that the cross makes sense, with the large caveat of a very specific God with specific attributes and nature. It’s hard to quantify the resurrection, and how it has altered the fabric of the universe. However there are profound issues within this model.

The teachings of Jesus are too hard, his life too deliberately servant like. We often can only reconcile his teachings within the framework of some kind of journey to the cross. He teachings were that self-sacrificing because that’s what he did. Which is true. But we’ve centred so much of what he did on the cross event that we’ve forgotten he was talking to real people. We’ve forgotten that he was in pretty obvious terms telling us how to live exactly. He really did mean the meek. He really did say it is impossible. He really does have other sheep, in this context as well. He does call for us to give up that much. Give away your coat. Keep forgiving. Love even when you’re bleeding. Salvation is not a prayer, it’s being nailed on a cross alongside our saviour.

The verse I quoted at the start of this piece is concise, and for me it jars against the common mantra. For it is not a belief in death and suffering in our place that saves, it is a belief in the resurrection, of truly living and having faithfulness vindicated.

We need to move away from a transactional gospel, to a salvation where at baptism we die and are raised in a new life. Not a fresh start, but a new way of living. Not turning over a new leaf, but transforming our experience of existence. These are very hard things to describe and quantify. The implications are brutal when we apply them to our capitalist, selfish, ego-driven lives. No-one who’s writing is found in the Bible is aiming to describe a system of how God works. They are describing the character of God, and how our communal life looks as a result. Much harder to teach, more difficult to summarise, foolishness, the stench of death, but to those who endure the smell of life. (2 Cor 2:16)

Everyone’s a teacher.

I read an article by Don Miller recently (oh go on then http://www.catalystspace.com/content/read/shouldthechurchbeledbyteachersandscholars/).

In the piece he asks whether the Church should be led by teachers and scholars. I felt like the obvious answer is ‘no it shouldn’t’ and the correct answer is ‘no it isn’t’.

In my experiences of Church, which is predominantly evangelical charismatic, it seems that most leaders see their primary gifting or function as being a teacher. However what this looks like and means I would dispute. I think on one level Don Miller’s article may miss the point, whilst being largely true. There is a huge difference between the people described in our Churches as ‘teachers’ and what Paul, with his experience of Greco-Roman and Jewish educational and philosophical culture, may be referring to. Ancient Near Eastern Jewish communities has notably high rates of literacy and what we could anachronistically call ‘critical’ skills. This comes from the synagogue system, and being part of a religion that emphasises not just the memorising of scripture, but also the communal exegesis and debate. I think that these qualities were carried into the early Christian communities, which is why the remaining artefacts from that time are letters sent to and read within communities. Therefore exposition and argument quite rightly define the spiritual praxis of Christian communities, however probably not in the way that we currently see them.

I think an immediate problem with a modern conception of the role of ‘teacher’ is that it is more speech making than engagement. To define oneself as ‘teacher’ is, in a Western modern context, to define oneself as authoritative concerning the text. In Christian community life and study, questions are to enlighten the learner, not test the teacher or construct an idea as a group.

Paulo Freire criticizes our education system, which he labels the ‘banking’ model. The basic concept is that the teacher knows everything, the pupil knows nothing, and knowledge is passed from one to the other. This is obviously problematic when applied within the education establishment, and has arguably leaded us to an exam system that relies on regurgitation rather than conceptual understanding and critical thinking. However within the Church this is catastrophic. Firstly the overstated role of leaders as ‘teachers’ within Churches demeans all Church members to the role of unknowing students. This is not a Biblical model of Christian community, largely as if we are a priesthood of all believers then the role of teacher should be more interpersonal, dynamic, conversational and actually more confrontational than a weekly lecture from a pulpit allows. Secondly whenever Christian communities gather you have a wealth of minds who have engaged with the text and encountered the God that the teacher is exploring. It is ludicrous to not communally engage in matters of faith, and it is a relatively recent Western thing to monopolise spiritual authority and knowledge.

A good teacher has the knowledge, communication skills, debating skills and spiritual gifting to deepen the Churches doctrine and practice in dialogue. Too many Church leaders never field questions, and to do so is often to cause negative confrontation. Unfortunately for a lot of Church leaders, to be a teacher is to focus Monday to Friday on the reading of commentaries to flounce intellectual aggression for 45 minutes on a Sunday. It needs to be noted that all the teachers in the Bible were deeply involved in pastoral care, evangelistic work and missional engagement.

There is a passage that reinforces this role within Churches, it is Ephesians 4:11. I think we have misread not only what it meant within an ancient near Eastern Jewish context what it means to be a teacher. Indeed also what it meant within Hellenistic culture to be a teacher. It is hard to find practice similar to our modern conceptualisations of teacher. We have also misread the role of a ‘Pastor/Shepherd’.

Within the traditional roles and attributes ascribed to the Ephesians 4:11 gifts to the Church, the gift of ‘teacher’ can easily be put forward as the least people oriented. It’s not wholly disengaged from people or community, but the sharp end of a teacher’s work is often seen as understanding the texts. This idea can only be sustained when the role of Pastor/Shepherd is defined as loving people. I have literally lost count of the amount of leaders who have told me that they are not ‘Pastoral’, which essentially means they believe that their God given character doesn’t allow for them to be tender, patient and loving with people.

My first rather large and obvious objection to this is that it is the role of all followers of Jesus to be resolute in love and care for our neighbours and communities. I think that many leaders state that they are a teacher in order to excuse their struggle with such demanding sacrificial love. It is hard, and to acknowledge that they are struggling with caring for people is ok. It is not ok to justify and reinforce that struggle. This is why all the gifts and fruit of the Spirit are described in terms that dramatically influence relationships and people. Patience. Self-control. Humility. These attributes weren’t written for us to demonstrate as we wait for a slow computer to load. They are describing how we should act and respond to consistent antagonists and ‘failures’.

I’m unsure that the role of ‘Pastor’ really means ‘good at loving people’, even if we all know some people who fit this description (maybe they just have the gift of helps?). I think it’s notable that Jesus has to differentiate between a shepherd and a good shepherd. I think that if we are to use the metaphor of a shepherd within its proper context, it is a directional and caring gift. They are not just sheep cuddlers! A shepherd was essentially a cowboy, who drove flocks across large distances and slept outside to fend off attacks or theft. The image is rather rugged. Sure there is undoubtedly care and attention for the sheep, but there is also slaughter and shearing. Indeed David was a Shepherd, which is why he killed a lion and a bear and then Goliath, rather than going out to comfort the Israelites in the valley of Elah.

If we take away an overly fluffy definition of the term pastoral, then the remit of ‘pastoral care’ is given to every Church member and leader. The role of servanthood and service is given to every leader. This seems to be how the early Christian communities worked. The people who are really good at this maybe aren’t necessarily an Ephesian’s 4:11 ‘gift to the Church’. They are just Godly people, demonstrating and exercising the gifts and fruit of the spirit. Perhaps this is why it was required for the people who fed and cared for others in Acts to be spirit filled, because the greatest demonstration of God in someone is love outworked. This again sounds very Biblical, especially highlighting the Johannine letters.

The first role of any Church leader, especially the teacher, is to engage with, serve and love the community. Perhaps if people stopped pursuing sermon writing as a spiritual gift they would discover their real leadership gift. Then maybe we would see more of the Ephesians 4:11 gifts, and more of the love of Jesus in our Church leadership. Instead of immovable doctrinal statement, theological disagreement and limited/immature scriptural interpretation.

In the space between the congregation and the choir.

In the space between the congregation and the choir.

It is totally shocking the things that you hear in the prayer time of worship teams. The dominant language is of warfare. The chief task is to bring ‘breakthrough’, in a fight against ‘the enemy’. Singers are to take the people to a higher place. The musicians are the modern-day priesthood or Levites. Considering that the dominant model of leadership in the Bible is servanthood, chiefly modelled by Jesus, this is at best problematic. If we’re being kind, many worship teams may be misguided. If we’re being frank, this sort of divide between those leading and engaging with the congregational worship is prideful

 

A recurring basis for the difficulty of the task of leading worship is a certain legend or tale. Namely, that Satan was the chief worship leader in heaven (which surely is the equivalent of the worship leader at a church in role?!) and then was thrown out because he wanted to be worshipped. Rather than taking great value from this story as a fable warning against pride, people use it to confirm that the enemy attacks them when they are leading worship. Worship pours like anointing down the beard of Aaron, from the stage to the standing areas. The Church must join in with the expert worshippers, who instruct them in song and action. As such there is a definite divide between the congregation and the choir.

 

In the outworking of this principle, I see worship teams that fail to connect with their congregation. However these teams often appear to lay the blame for a lack of worship culture at the feet of the congregation or leadership of the Church. Musicians and singers can be aloof, often their very own church within a Church. I see so many Churches where the people involved in Sunday services see that time on stage as the sum total of their mission or engagement with the community. There are scores of guitarists across the country who are not involved in any other area of service in the Church. There are far more of these then there are Churches who degrade or devalue the hard-work and energy put into rehearsal and performance by musicians, for the benefit of the body of the Church.

 

I don’t want to declare outright war on my fellow musicians and worship-leaders. However I will go further: I see a lot of talented musicians without the character, gifting or heart for people to be leaders dictating to genuine leaders and pastoral figures in the Church. I’ve heard drummers who have never gone on a pastoral visit to the sick or elderly in their life get offended when told that their volume detracted from the general desire to meet God in worship. I hear people every Sunday who mock songs and services through which God has dramatically touched and helped people.

 

Christianity is not a logical program of teaching, it is a dynamically interactive and spiritual religion. There is profound meaning, exchange and experience of the divine that can occur in communal singing of songs, prayer, liturgy and waiting on God or meditation.  The worship or devotional practices of a Church are essential.

 

The good and proper place of a worship team is on its knees, not on a stage. True leadership is the washing of feet. Worship leaders should start Sunday with a heart to help, not from an aggressive ‘warfare’ stance. Guess what? Everybody that turns up in your Church on a Sunday does so to meet with God, and with community. Meet them where they are at, and use your talents to give depth to communal worship, not volume or necessarily intricacy. A great worship leader gently helps people turn their eyes from themselves towards Jesus. Many worship leaders drag people’s attention to them, their songs, and their arrangements.

 

We need new songs so we can engage with all the different aspects of God’s character. But as a priesthood of all believers we need to be joined together as a community, whatever that costs. Leading worship should always be something that we all do and take part in together, and sometimes style needs to be sacrificed in order to bring unity. When Churches really feel a part of what is being sung, then God tends to interact dynamically in all the community. Get rid of any barriers between the worship teams and the rest of the Church. Whatever their apparent theological or cultural basis, they are often just barriers of pride and performance. True leadership looks like Jesus: charismatic, dynamic, challenging, comforting, deeply profound, prophetic and artistic…but always a servant first and foremost. And not only a servant of God, who did what he saw the Father doing, but a servant of the people he lead. He let people answer the questions that needed the most profound answers, he washed feet and spent a lot of his time meeting people’s practical needs.

 

Worship servers. That’s got a good ring to it, hasn’t it?

One Another Series

So this Sunday I kicked off a series at the Bridge Bolton, on whenever Paul mentions ‘one another’. Tough because not only does this phrase occur a lot of times, the passages are pretty uncompromising! To kick off the series, I decided to give the letters some context. I started off with a drama where I played Paul in prison, and explained the early Christian communities’ devotion to ‘one another’, within the context of persecution. I really wanted to emphasize the dynamic contrast and tension in the background of the texts. Firstly you have the Roman empire which divided tribes and cultures in order to suppress, and also a strong Jewish culture defined by race and persecuting the Jesus-cult. Opposing this the early Christian communities with their egalitarian teaching and practice concerning race, gender and economic diversity. I’ll finish this post in the same way that I finished the little drama: with a letter from the fake Paul (who sounds suspiciously like someone who studies more John than Paul!) to the Church in Bolton.

To the community of believers in Bolton, the Boltonians.

Paul, apostle in the chains of Christ. Slave to Jesus, who was killed in hatred by those in darkness but was raised in love by the father of eternity and now lives with those in the light. Grace and peace to you who have experienced rebirth in Christ. May God continue, through his spirit, the work in you which he began so as to reconcile to himself all things. To God be the glory, now and always. Amen. 

My dear family, thank you for kind gift. It lifts my heart to know how many families you have fed, how many lives you have sustained, the hope that you bring to your town. For we know that the love of God does not discriminate, it reaches out to all in need. Indeed, this is the message that I am laying down my life for. That Jesus humbled himself from heaven, to bring salvation and rescue to the earth. I thank God in my prayers for all of you, that you have responded to the salvation and grace that you have received.

People around the town have seen your faithfulness. Not just in building projects, or attending services, although gathering together is essential in keeping the body of Christ healthy. Rather, this town has seen you offer counselling, advise people through depression and debt, take the hope you share onto the estates, to children, to the sick and infirm,  all the while devoted to prayer and discipleship. Your doors have been open, your hearts soft. You have given time, finance and your lives in the service of Jesus.

 Be relentless in your love. Give generously to the store house hampers, because the Christmas story is about Jesus and his love, not any John Lewis adverts, or Iceland snacks. Don’t tire in continuing the work, because it is not for your reputation that you share your love, put on carol services or meet in café church. It is the name of Jesus that we put forward: seen by many as a weak martyr, but know to us as a resurrected saviour, strong and able.

 However don’t lose sight of the work of God, for it is always done in community. Do not disparage the bride of Christ, for she is loved in all her flaws by her bridegroom. If one man can have such a profound impact upon faith and society, and history teaches us there have been many great men, just imagine the potential within the group that you meet within. Think of the wisdom contained within your community, all the different experiences and the ways that God has worked through you all. Be diligent in meeting up, encourage one another, develop one another, convict one another, all in love.

 I write to you now to remind you of what I said to the other Churches throughout the empire.

• Be devoted to one another in love. Honour one another above yourselves. Romans 12:10
• Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited. Romans 12:16
• May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you the same attitude of mind toward one other that Christ Jesus had. Romans 15:5
• I myself am convinced, my brothers and sisters, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with knowledge and competent to instruct one another. Romans 15:14
• Carry one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ. Galatians 6:2
• Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.  Ephesians 5:21
• Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value one another above yourselves.  Philippians 2:3
• May the Lord make your love increase and overflow for one another and for everyone else, just as ours does for you.            1 Thessalonians 3:12

My time dearest friends, is almost at it’s end. I have ran the race that God set before me, to bring his message of hope and freedom to the gentiles, who were once outside of the community of God, but are now sons and daughters and heirs. I do not regret the pain that I have endured. I do not doubt that in my hunger and weakness and trials God has been outworking his purpose. Using my simple life and short letters to spread his glorious kingdom.

 I have known great pain, but I HAVE KNOWN GREATER LOVE. Don’t tire of doing what is right, knowing that in the deepest sacrifice grace is most apparent. To those who do not know this saving love our way of life is foolish. But we know that in determined actions of faith and love we truly see the kingdom of God. I am sure that your father in heaven delights over all that you do: remain in him, and remain in his love as the apostle John wrote.

 Remember that the Church is the body of Christ, and his love for her does not falter. Don’t get lost in scoring sermons. Show patience in every queue. Give up your seat for those that need to experience the love of God in flesh and bone. Remember that God is listening for your heart, not the lyrics of the song. You are responsible for you’re your life and worship, but allow others to push you on to greater depths of his love. Speak out against what is wrong, but don’t judge other people’s journey. Be quick to help those who hurt, don’t relent in forgiving those who stumble, for God’s grace knew no limit when he met you and I. Instruct those who stumble onto destructive paths, but do not judge in case you are held accountable by the standard that you hold for others. Share what you know and have seen of God, and never stop desiring to know and see more.

 Hold fast to the love that challenges and convicts. Stay open to the Spirit of God and its work within you. May the love of God ever define all that we do, and say, and be.

 Amen.

 

Our God is more love than above

In the multi-faceted culture of Britain we are often at pains to attack divisiveness in society not only sociologically but theologically. Indeed religion or even the lack of religious dogma or praxis is often the dividing factor within communities. Efforts to reconcile differences in the interests of harmony are to be welcomed and championed, however they are often indicative of the muddled syncretism with which society approaches religion. In an effort to draw common values between the monotheistic faiths in particular we are often misguided. We need to verbally conceptualise the God we believe in, because there are many different gods to believe in that aren’t just separated by numbers.

The term ‘god’ is often misleading. We have reached a point where to state that you believe in one god equates what is termed theism; however this is a misguided concept. Within most Western depictions god is not only supreme but transcendent. He is not only true but the source of the absolute. Not only good but moralistic. Not only holy but totally separate. Not only powerful but all-willing. These theological abstractions are caricatures of Biblical theology. This is a god manufactured by the enlightenment, not one painted by texts. The use of systems to explain the concept of god has lead to the creation of a being too abstract and separate from his creation to interact within creation itself.

These concepts are obviously theologically problematic. If god can do anything and everything, why is there suffering? If god’s ‘words’ are to be taken as absolute then they have to be geographically, historically and scientifically explanatory and inerrant. How can they even begin to interact with subjects and theories not explicitly contained within them, other than to be utterly dismissive? How can any truth outside of these absolute texts be affirmed? If god is totally separate in another realm, heaven, then certain characteristics are to be assumed. This god is above humanity then its anger is to be placated and favour is to be manipulated.

As you can appreciate these conceptual sketches of god are incredibly problematic, and they are affirmed by conservative and liberal alike.

The conservative misuses the text through constant selective readings, as if each verse is a separate spell or ‘promise’ which can bend the arm of a deity bound by mechanism.  Their god should always respond when the right formula is used, so when it doesn’t respond the human agency is flawed. There are delusional Christians the world over who claim ownership of a pocket god who loves them, hates their enemies and who will lavish wealth upon them. There are also Christians who bind up people journeying with Christ in ties of inadequacy and a super-spiritual way of life that is built toward an anticipated future world, but is of no use in this one. There are not enough hours in the world to read the bible and pray in the most navel-gazing of fashions, and the guilt or desire for elusive personal intimacy destroys the individual with guilt whilst minimising their effect on the world.

The liberal is similarly ridiculous is his misrepresentations. God seeminglydoes not follow human morals therefore he is not good. The bible doesn’t stand as an inerrant absolute text therefore is is neither true nor normative. God is totally separate therefore religious and spiritual practice and ritual are at best empty and at worst control mechanisms to oppress the majority. As the god believed in does not interact in the individualistic ways outlined by popular religion then all religion, experience, texts and practice are to be rejected.

 

Throughout the Bible a god is portrayed that interacts with humanity, and is more concerned by the balance of creation than the logistics of the ethereal. The spiritual mystics found within the Biblical run counter to the spiritualists of our time. They don’t spend time speaking for the spiritual world, they confront the physical world for not being the way it should. Why? Because God lives here, and his order is never imposed yet always true. This God is dynamically shaping history through loving and liberating those created. Within this dynamic story the incarnation makes perfect sense, the logical step as the divine order is unveiled. The ultimate act of love and the most beautifully simple depiction of truth.

 

God has a plan for creation, and his spirit works within creation to bring about that plan. One day he will restore all things, but that process has begun already and it is that that true religion ascribes too. It strives to create communities that acknowledge and enforce the divine order, not least in the justice and equality found within those communities.

Our God is more love than above.

 

EXPWITHOUTMAPS?

First of all, this is about following Jesus. As people and as communities however we are defined by the experience and exploration of those who have gone before. Even when appearing to tear up the formulaic, the would-be pioneers of our day are often just repackaging the same content. Does a change of instrumentation really reflect the exponential changing nature of society? Go ahead and ‘follow’ a leader of a congregation who has discovered twitter. An innovative and defining new method of communication is used for nothing more than pithy sermonising and one-dimensional representations of their life. How can you follow a leader who never bleeds? Do we want to follow instructions or imagination? People in churches often don’t affect those outside the community because they don’t affect each other.

 

Faith communities are defined by the orientation of their religious meetings. These are non-participatory meetings for the advancement of the self, which has been labelled ‘faith’. Church is for the advancement of feeling, knowledge, belief and attitude. This is not how to engage with society. The message has changed, and the means of communication has remained the same. Sure we’ve added lights and smoke machines, or conversely stripped our buildings back. And yes the blazer and jeans combo has replaced dog-collars. But why? Of all the things that faith communities need to alter, is dress sense and persona a top priority? Churches are more religious than ever. Liturgy has been replaced by feel-good vocabulary. The priesthood of believers is ruled by autocrats and dictators. Structures of influence are meritocratic or nepotistic. People are encouraged and hyped yet disempowered.

 

I wonder if we’ve thrown out the baby and kept the bathwater.  We needed to adapt the progressive socialism that defined faith communities to contemporary society. Instead we have traded community for consumerism as we strive for the feel-good factor needed to fill our seats and finance our buildings. The biggest tragedy of all is that none of this is intentional. Churches are genuinely trying to build communities in the shape of the Jesus that their convictions dictate. Let’s sway from our convictions, leave our cluttered ways of being community and think about what the message is, and what the best way is to present that. Over 70% of Britain is nominally Christian and yet culture and community doesn’t reflect Jesus, especially within the modern church.

 

We need to start from scratch. We need to reconceptualise Jesus in the minds of our communities. We need to move from programs to true communities. Without maps we may occasionally get a little lost, but each detour teaches us more about the topography of hope.