Apparently they are Australians emigrating to the UK. They must be mad! Based elsewhere, but doing a whirlwind tour of our area.
Pray for a quick sale!
Monday, July 2
Hold the tension
Our preacher on Sunday was talking about the balance between working hard and resting. In the sense that on the one hand we have to ‘let go and let God’, while on the other hand the imperatives of the gospel are that we should spare no effort to save the lost. He was talking about how these two truths appear to be opposite to one another. And then, holding his hand forward, palm vertical like the prow of a ship cutting a path through the water, he waved that had side to side to illustrate that “we can not cut a Christian ‘floppy middle line’ – we have to take those two opposites as they are and hold them in tension”
Which is interesting, because that is almost exactly what I have been thinking recently.
Too often, as Christians, when we face such opposites within our faith, we either have a war with major casualties and bloodletting (or at least mutual excommunications) or else we fudge a compromise where neither side is happy.
I think we need to do more of this ‘holding things in tension’
Obviously there’s the Trinity itself – three persons but definitely ONE God.
More controversially, the equality of genders but the maleness of Church leadership????
Perhaps we should affirm that priesthood is male while continuing to ordain women – holding two opposing doctrines in tension. (Don’t quote me as holding any of these positions on this I’m just musing theoretically)
What I’m really leading to is homosexuality.
We have denominations – seeking pure holiness through the Scriptures – that avow that marriage is between opposite genders for complementarity to reflect the image of God. And we have denominations – seeking pure justice through the Scriptures – that avow that we are all equal and have equal sanction to marry for love.
There’s no scope for compromise, but do we have to have one doctrine or the other? Does one have to win, while the other loses? Do we have to have public wars and excommunications? Can either of these churches represent the wholeness of God? Can a church be pure while perpetrating injustice? Can a church truly be just while sanctioning marriages that [may] fall outside of God’s perfect will? Can any one church, in its monochromatic unity, truly represent a multi-faceted God?
I believe we need to hold the tension. We need to have unchanging traditional churches upholding unchanging traditional doctrines, sticking exclusively to heterosexual marriage. We also need to have flexible churches that look in the mirror and say ‘sorry, we got that wrong’ and adjust as necessary, willing to marry same-sex couples. We have this already, but what we don’t have is mutual respect or the understanding that unity does not mean uniformity. We can hold radically different and opposing doctrines while still respecting one another as genuine expressions of God’s heart. We don’t have to understand it. We just have to hold the tension.
Which is interesting, because that is almost exactly what I have been thinking recently.
Too often, as Christians, when we face such opposites within our faith, we either have a war with major casualties and bloodletting (or at least mutual excommunications) or else we fudge a compromise where neither side is happy.
I think we need to do more of this ‘holding things in tension’
Obviously there’s the Trinity itself – three persons but definitely ONE God.
Then there is predestination and freewill.
Then there is suffering – the work of an evil Satan under the command of a holy God.
More controversially, the equality of genders but the maleness of Church leadership????
Perhaps we should affirm that priesthood is male while continuing to ordain women – holding two opposing doctrines in tension. (Don’t quote me as holding any of these positions on this I’m just musing theoretically)
What I’m really leading to is homosexuality.
We have denominations – seeking pure holiness through the Scriptures – that avow that marriage is between opposite genders for complementarity to reflect the image of God. And we have denominations – seeking pure justice through the Scriptures – that avow that we are all equal and have equal sanction to marry for love.
There’s no scope for compromise, but do we have to have one doctrine or the other? Does one have to win, while the other loses? Do we have to have public wars and excommunications? Can either of these churches represent the wholeness of God? Can a church be pure while perpetrating injustice? Can a church truly be just while sanctioning marriages that [may] fall outside of God’s perfect will? Can any one church, in its monochromatic unity, truly represent a multi-faceted God?
I believe we need to hold the tension. We need to have unchanging traditional churches upholding unchanging traditional doctrines, sticking exclusively to heterosexual marriage. We also need to have flexible churches that look in the mirror and say ‘sorry, we got that wrong’ and adjust as necessary, willing to marry same-sex couples. We have this already, but what we don’t have is mutual respect or the understanding that unity does not mean uniformity. We can hold radically different and opposing doctrines while still respecting one another as genuine expressions of God’s heart. We don’t have to understand it. We just have to hold the tension.
Friday, June 29
SaintSimon does evangelism occasionally
Chatting with chinese lady colleague. Comparing cultural differences. Got onto cemetaries - a relatively new feature in china she tells me owing to the old belief that you had to keep the body handy for the afterlife.
Got onto Christian viws of afterlife, physical resurrection, and the question of what happens if the cannibal who ate the missionary then becomes a christian.
This got onto a much deeper presentation of the Christian faith. She is of a bhuddist heritage but non-religious, although she feels that there is someone out there looking after her.
So I was able to expain about how most religions require good works to achieve whatever salvation they offer, but we can never meet God's 100% passmark. And so, not wanting heaven to be underpopulated, he comes in the form of Christ to take on himself our sins. So the sin is dealt with, and we are free. Free to enjoy a restored relationship with him in which we do good for love, not for gain.
She was very taken, but too reluctant to attach Christian labels to the 'someone out there'.
Now I'm no good at that last little bit of pushing someone into 'making a decision for Christ' and saying 'the sinner's prayer'.
But I did give her the link to Student Alpha, and hopefully something will come of it.
Please pray that those hopes will be fulfilled.
Got onto Christian viws of afterlife, physical resurrection, and the question of what happens if the cannibal who ate the missionary then becomes a christian.
This got onto a much deeper presentation of the Christian faith. She is of a bhuddist heritage but non-religious, although she feels that there is someone out there looking after her.
So I was able to expain about how most religions require good works to achieve whatever salvation they offer, but we can never meet God's 100% passmark. And so, not wanting heaven to be underpopulated, he comes in the form of Christ to take on himself our sins. So the sin is dealt with, and we are free. Free to enjoy a restored relationship with him in which we do good for love, not for gain.
She was very taken, but too reluctant to attach Christian labels to the 'someone out there'.
Now I'm no good at that last little bit of pushing someone into 'making a decision for Christ' and saying 'the sinner's prayer'.
But I did give her the link to Student Alpha, and hopefully something will come of it.
Please pray that those hopes will be fulfilled.
Thursday, June 28
White knuckles, divorce, and bare knuckles
Not mine!
It was a rather tense meeting of our workplace christian fellowship.
One chap was getting off about the need for moral purity among PCC members. At his church there is a couple who are co-habiting and decline to marry, yet want to go on the PCC. I agree that this would be inappropriate. But it led on to a discussion about those who have remarried after divorce being in leadership. My friend was clearly against it. Others, including myself, take the view that we all make mistakes, but once we have repented we move on with God. It is not possible to go back and untangle the mess. But we get a fresh start. So it would be inappropriate for a person who deliberately advocates serial monogamy to be on the PCC, but in my view someone who has entered marriages with the best of intentions only for them to fail, should not be penalised for ever. Move on.
I related the tale of a clergywoman I know. Her first husband was gay and the marriage was never consummated. Even so the congregation treated her with contempt when she escaped that situation. Under stress and on the bounce, she remarried too quickly. It seemed to be going well but when the Lord called her into ordination the man reacted badly and started to abuse her psychologically (this is not my assessment - it was Relate. The woman tried to get him to go to Relate with her but he refused. She had to go alone. Relate analysed the situation and classified his treatment of her as being significantly beyond the level at which they would be concerned). The woman accepts that she could have done more to save the marriage, but I knew her at the time and testify that she had already done more than was reasonably expected of her. Also, the Bishop was kept informed of all these developments, and in his view he was happy to ordain her despite the second divorce, nowing the circumstances.
I don't think my friend handles that gap.
As we talked his knuckles were white, his forearms and clenched hands shaking with tension. I rather got the feel that if his hands had not been clenched together, he woudl have hit me.
I like people to be passionate about their beliefs. But his mannerisms did nothing to pursuade me that he was right - quite the opposite.
It was a rather tense meeting of our workplace christian fellowship.
One chap was getting off about the need for moral purity among PCC members. At his church there is a couple who are co-habiting and decline to marry, yet want to go on the PCC. I agree that this would be inappropriate. But it led on to a discussion about those who have remarried after divorce being in leadership. My friend was clearly against it. Others, including myself, take the view that we all make mistakes, but once we have repented we move on with God. It is not possible to go back and untangle the mess. But we get a fresh start. So it would be inappropriate for a person who deliberately advocates serial monogamy to be on the PCC, but in my view someone who has entered marriages with the best of intentions only for them to fail, should not be penalised for ever. Move on.
I related the tale of a clergywoman I know. Her first husband was gay and the marriage was never consummated. Even so the congregation treated her with contempt when she escaped that situation. Under stress and on the bounce, she remarried too quickly. It seemed to be going well but when the Lord called her into ordination the man reacted badly and started to abuse her psychologically (this is not my assessment - it was Relate. The woman tried to get him to go to Relate with her but he refused. She had to go alone. Relate analysed the situation and classified his treatment of her as being significantly beyond the level at which they would be concerned). The woman accepts that she could have done more to save the marriage, but I knew her at the time and testify that she had already done more than was reasonably expected of her. Also, the Bishop was kept informed of all these developments, and in his view he was happy to ordain her despite the second divorce, nowing the circumstances.
So lots of people have theoretical objections to remarriage which I fully understand, but as a church we fail to manage the gap between the theoretical ideal and the practical reality. Marriage is for life and has to be entered into with that understanding. But once it is broken, it is broken. Jesus teaches it is wrong to divorce and marry another. I read that as refuting the idea that you can sanitise adultery (or deliberate serial mongamy) by divorce. I don't read it as forbidding remarriage of someone who has already suffered a divorce and is now making a fresh start in a new life in which they unintentionally meet someone else.
I think Jesus manages that gap between theory and reality - pure doctrine and compassionate practice.
I don't think my friend handles that gap.
As we talked his knuckles were white, his forearms and clenched hands shaking with tension. I rather got the feel that if his hands had not been clenched together, he woudl have hit me.
I like people to be passionate about their beliefs. But his mannerisms did nothing to pursuade me that he was right - quite the opposite.
Back in the pulpit
Now that I am a little more established back at our original church, I have already been asked to preach.
It will be on 14th October. It will be on Jospeh, but exactly what is unclear. When the Vicar asked me to do it he said "It's 'Joseph - a man of Character' from Genesis 37 v1-11 which is the story of Potiphar's wife". Only, that passage is not Mrs P its Joseph's dreams.
So I need him to provide some clarity about what I am actually supposed to preach on!
Ironically, the last time I spoke (which will be nearly 2 years previously) there was a similar mix-up about the date and the topic. I insisted on going ahead with what I had prepared, and it turned out to be my best sermon ever. So maybe it is the Lord who arranges these little mix-ups.
It will be on 14th October. It will be on Jospeh, but exactly what is unclear. When the Vicar asked me to do it he said "It's 'Joseph - a man of Character' from Genesis 37 v1-11 which is the story of Potiphar's wife". Only, that passage is not Mrs P its Joseph's dreams.
So I need him to provide some clarity about what I am actually supposed to preach on!
Ironically, the last time I spoke (which will be nearly 2 years previously) there was a similar mix-up about the date and the topic. I insisted on going ahead with what I had prepared, and it turned out to be my best sermon ever. So maybe it is the Lord who arranges these little mix-ups.
Monday, June 25
Ordination news (addendum 2) - the weakest link
Others in the line:
- a local franchise restaurant manager,
- a woman in a wheelchair with severe mobility and communication difficulties yet clearly under the influence of the Spirit,
- a very quiet and timid chap,
- an epileptic
“God has chosen what is weak in the eyes of the word”
“and last of all … me, as one of untimely birth”
Ordination news (addendum 1) - the spiritual gift of tears?
"There is something about me that finds tears of joy flow very easily – I only have to see a group of people walking down the street with a common purpose and it sets me off."
I like to think that this is the Holy Spirit in me and have heard people describing tears as a 'Spiritual gift' but its not on any of the Biblical lists I know.
The only other person I have come across who was like this was a gay Catholic I knew at school, who liked John Paul II - but God would never put his Spirit on a gay Catholic, would he? (??!!??)
I like to think that this is the Holy Spirit in me and have heard people describing tears as a 'Spiritual gift' but its not on any of the Biblical lists I know.
The only other person I have come across who was like this was a gay Catholic I knew at school, who liked John Paul II - but God would never put his Spirit on a gay Catholic, would he? (??!!??)
Ordination news
On Saturday night I prayed that there would be a ‘significant conversation’ on Sunday at church. No particular topic – just something of value.
I expected the conversation to involve me directly, during the coffee time after the service.
It turned out that the ‘sermon’ was the conversation. The Vicar wanted the service to have the theme of ‘vocation’, and so he called his two assistant ministers onto the platform and interviewed them, firstly about how they came to faith and secondly how they came to be called into ordained ministry and what procedural hoops they had to jump through. The Vicar also gave his own accounts.
Then at the end he asked all those in the church considering ordination or ‘something’ to come to the front.
At this moment I was at the back with my three year old jumping all over me asking for drinks and things. So I was not next to my wife to influence her decision. She felt that the call was definitely [Spellcheckers!! previous edition of this post had 'deficiently', which does not convey the same meaning at all!] for her and went to the front, along with a few other people. I went too, not really for my sake because I felt I was already on the road, so to speak, but I went to ask her if she wanted me there to support her or to stay away to avoid detracting from her. She asked me to stay.
Then members of the congregation were asked to come and lay hands on those who had gone to the front. One man that I don’t know (one of those who have joined while we were away) came up behind us and put a hand on each of us. My three year old was now running loose at the front, and we hoped one of our other kids would come and get her. Our eldest did, but then came back and laid hands on both of us. The three year old continued to jump up at me like a small dog ALL of the time I was being prayed over. I don’t remember if the people with us prayed individually – I think it was just the prayer from the Vicar at the front over everyone.
So:
• I was being prayed over about ordination
• I was next to my wife
• She was being prayed over about her own individual but linked call
• My son was laying hands on us
• He knows a lot of the history leading to this point, and was endorsing us
I found all this totally overwhelming. There is something about me that finds tears of joy flow very easily – I only have to see a group of people walking down the street with a common purpose and it sets me off. So you can imagine that the items listed above are individually strong ‘cry’ triggers for me but taken together it set off Niagara falls. Which was embarrassing, with my son watching.
In one of my earlier posts I worried about what would happen if the house swap went ahead – it didn’t seem compatible with our vision for ordination.
Now God has spoken powerfully and clearly.
House swap – no!
Ordination (for both) – yes!
(This does not rule out buying that house in the normal way in due course if we sell ours – watch this space!)
I expected the conversation to involve me directly, during the coffee time after the service.
It turned out that the ‘sermon’ was the conversation. The Vicar wanted the service to have the theme of ‘vocation’, and so he called his two assistant ministers onto the platform and interviewed them, firstly about how they came to faith and secondly how they came to be called into ordained ministry and what procedural hoops they had to jump through. The Vicar also gave his own accounts.
Then at the end he asked all those in the church considering ordination or ‘something’ to come to the front.
At this moment I was at the back with my three year old jumping all over me asking for drinks and things. So I was not next to my wife to influence her decision. She felt that the call was definitely [Spellcheckers!! previous edition of this post had 'deficiently', which does not convey the same meaning at all!] for her and went to the front, along with a few other people. I went too, not really for my sake because I felt I was already on the road, so to speak, but I went to ask her if she wanted me there to support her or to stay away to avoid detracting from her. She asked me to stay.
Then members of the congregation were asked to come and lay hands on those who had gone to the front. One man that I don’t know (one of those who have joined while we were away) came up behind us and put a hand on each of us. My three year old was now running loose at the front, and we hoped one of our other kids would come and get her. Our eldest did, but then came back and laid hands on both of us. The three year old continued to jump up at me like a small dog ALL of the time I was being prayed over. I don’t remember if the people with us prayed individually – I think it was just the prayer from the Vicar at the front over everyone.
So:
• I was being prayed over about ordination
• I was next to my wife
• She was being prayed over about her own individual but linked call
• My son was laying hands on us
• He knows a lot of the history leading to this point, and was endorsing us
I found all this totally overwhelming. There is something about me that finds tears of joy flow very easily – I only have to see a group of people walking down the street with a common purpose and it sets me off. So you can imagine that the items listed above are individually strong ‘cry’ triggers for me but taken together it set off Niagara falls. Which was embarrassing, with my son watching.
In one of my earlier posts I worried about what would happen if the house swap went ahead – it didn’t seem compatible with our vision for ordination.
Now God has spoken powerfully and clearly.
House swap – no!
Ordination (for both) – yes!
(This does not rule out buying that house in the normal way in due course if we sell ours – watch this space!)
House news
They said ‘no’ to the house swap deal. They felt it needed the support of their congregation, which would be divided.
I’m disappointed, but feel they have made the right decision – there really was no point in them incurring all the costs of moving for no real benefit.
Mrs was much more despondent over the weekend, because it felt like all of her dreams – that she has invested time and effort into and found her self-esteem from – were ripped away from her. Again. Hence the scenic tour of northern England. She feels better now (see next post!!), and is in the process of putting the house on the general market.
I’m disappointed, but feel they have made the right decision – there really was no point in them incurring all the costs of moving for no real benefit.
Mrs was much more despondent over the weekend, because it felt like all of her dreams – that she has invested time and effort into and found her self-esteem from – were ripped away from her. Again. Hence the scenic tour of northern England. She feels better now (see next post!!), and is in the process of putting the house on the general market.
Grim up north?
Took tour of the north of England on Saturday, including Durham, Newcastle, Carlisle, the Eden valley (saw a steam train on the Settle-Carlisle railway), Penrith, Ullswater, the Kirkstone Pass, and Windermere.
Water levels were high in the lakes owing to recent rain.
Kirkstone pass was very foggy – could barely see to the next corner (which people who know the road will know is not very far)
Water levels were high in the lakes owing to recent rain.
Kirkstone pass was very foggy – could barely see to the next corner (which people who know the road will know is not very far)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)