The vicar who danced at a wedding…

This made me smile and laugh and cry a little with the joy of it all.

As the Guardian put it;

If you want to believe there is still some hope for the Church of England, YouTube has the evidence right here: a video of the Rev Kate Bottley leading her congregation in an exuberant and joyful disco dance routine in the middle of an otherwise strait-laced wedding service.

It is one of those things that makes you feel good to be human. It’s a celebration of ordinary, lumpy people that manages to reframe without snobbery or affectation the Betjeman verse about a couple of lovers in a Bath teashop: “She such a very ordinary woman / He such a thumping crook. / But both, for a moment, little lower than the angels / In the teashop’s inglenook.”

This matters not because it shows the Church of England being “trendy” or up to date or anything like that. Few things could be further from London’s Hoxton than disco dancing in rural Nottinghamshire. But it does show that there are bits of it which can still connect with the people around them. This matters. The median age of Anglican congregations is now 61. That’s nearly twice the age at which most women in Britain get married.

The couple in this video were not churchgoers, and had lived together for years before they got married. They only went to a church after it was suggested by the stately home where they held their reception. But they managed to get a ceremony there that did both solemnity and joy, which are things that weddings need.

I doubt that Bottley will ever become a bishop. At the moment she is not even a full-time parish priest. She works three days a week looking after three rural churches, and two days a week as a chaplain. But it isn’t bishops who will keep the church of England going. In fact it’s largely bishops who have screwed it up over the last 30 years. Ordinary people doing unglamorous jobs like part-time vicaring are the ones who will keep it from appearing entirely as a sour and self-obsessed sect – the ones who know it is much better to be silly than self-important, and much better to be provincial than pompous.

Biblical marriage- but not as we know it…

In response to my previous post on gay marriage,  Sam Dawlatly (who has a book of poetry out on Proost soon by the way!) had this to say;

So here’s another point of view: the Bible doesn’t advocate monogamy… David had 8 wives and Solomon had more. Then at some point between then and a time perhaps before Jesus it was decided that marriage was between one man and one woman. Now the Law was given to Moses, so as far as I can make out there are no Laws that state explicitly that marriage is for one man and one woman. I am prepared to be corrected, as I am not a theologian. However monogamous marriage seems to be the norm in the New Testament.

What led to this change? It seems to me that “Christian monogamous marriage” as we accept it to be is not, in fact, biblical, but more cultural. I’m not advocating polygamy, but if the basis of marriage is more cultural then perhaps we shouldn’t use the Bible to define it and criticise those who seek to alter the definition according to modern culture?

He has a point you know. Deuteronomy is the scourge of all fundamentalists, who have to resort to immediate dispensationalist contortions every time. Check out chapter 22 for a case in point.

Or (with tongue in cheek) I offer you this;

marriagechallenge

Things to do on NYD…

You could take a wee swim in aid of charity? We did;

My mate Andy has too much time on his hands!

Find him some DIY to do Clare- quick- or at very least some dishes…

Otherwise he will post yet more embarrassing video clips of me on YouTube.

This (I think) was taken clandestinely during one of our ‘wilderness retreat’ trips. Dancing is not usually encouraged, but I must have come over all 1970’s.

I am looking forward to spring though- Christmas day is past, and the uphill climb through the hard soil of winter can begin…

We laugh at the Mayan apocalypse junkies, but…

end-of-the-world

 

…we Christians have plenty of our own End Of The World doomsday predictors. Check out this list.

On the day when at very least the prediction made by the Mayan calendar that the world will end has been proved to be a slight miscalculation, it might be useful to reflect again on that word eschatology (not to be confused with Scatology) defined by Wikipedia as follows;

 The Study of theologyphysicsphilosophy, and futurology concerned with what are believed to be the final events of history, the ultimate destiny of humanity — commonly referred to as the “end of the world” or “end time

Note that this is serious business to many theologians in particular. It is big bookshelf time. Big argument time. Big business time. Why? Particularly when the subjects of study have little to do with the environmental/political/economic/social crises at the end of our noses, and everything to do with esoteric texts written thousands of years ago.

It is perhaps ironic that many commentators on the book of Revelation (the source of a million Christian predictions of apocalypse) have a very different understanding of the text, pointing out that it was one of many pieces of ‘apocalyptic literature’ of its time- a style of writing that used mysterious and ritualised language to shine light on the culture of their day. People reading the text under Roman occupation would have had a totally different entry into the language and imagery used. They would know who the Beast was, and the meaning of ‘Babylon’.

In this way, the coming apocalypse was a warning to people to take a long hard look at who they are, what they are becoming, and to refocus on a life that is in service of the Kingdom of God.

It was not a description (thanks again to Sharon who coined the phrase) of how God is going to use his great big hoover to suck his chosen few from a doomed and despicable world up into his heavenly fall out shelter.

The apocalypse that the followers of Jesus should concern themselves with is a daily occurrence. It happens always in the shadow of Empire as forces conspire to promote greed and power mongering.

Of course I could be wrong, it is not yet Mayan high noon. I kind of thought that if I am wrong no one would be around to laugh at me though…

 

 

 

Johan’s ark…

Johan Huibers poses with a stuffed tiger in front of his Noah's ark

I want to laugh at this.

Huibers, a Christian, used books 6-9 of Genesis as his inspiration, following the instructions God gives Noah down to the last cubit.

Translating to modern measurements, Huibers came up with a vessel that works out to a whopping 427 feet (130 meters) long, 95 feet (29 meters) across and 75 feet (23 meters) high. Perhaps not big enough to fit every species on Earth, two by two, as described in the Bible, but plenty of space, for instance, for a pair elephants to dance a tango.

Johan’s Ark towers across the flat Dutch landscape and is easily visible from a nearby highway where it lies moored in the city of Dordrecht, just south of Rotterdam.

Gazing across the ark’s main hold, a huge space of stalls supported by a forest of pine trees, visitors gaze upon an array of stuffed and plastic animals, such as buffalo, zebra, gorillas, lions, tigers, bears, you name it. Elsewhere on the ark is a petting zoo with actual live animals that are less dangerous or easier to care for — such as ponies, dogs, sheep, and rabbits — and an impressive aviary of exotic birds.

Silly Dutch bloke- who had a dream and decided to build an ark- based on the original Biblical measurements (or as near as we can get to them.) It is unclear whether the lenient Dutch drug laws had anything to do with the enterprise. At least he appears to prefer his Tigers to be made of plastic.

I believe he intended to sail it up the Thames during the Olympics- not sure if he was refused permission or if the animals were tardy in their arrival.

I say want to laugh, but actually, what an amazing object Huibers has made:

I could turn all theological and ask questions about the God who was so angry with us all that he decided to wipe out the world apart from a couple of each and the odd pious family.

But lets leave that for now shall we. If the ark visits the Clyde I will visit arm in arm with Michaela. Two by two…

A window into the underbelly of a nation…

I have a confession to make- I watch too much TV.

We have a Sky TV package at the moment which we bought because Test Match Cricket is only shown live on Sky Sports these days. At the time we started the package you got to chose three categories- and we chose the sport, kids entertainment and more as penance, the documentary channels- well they will be educational won’t they (we thought.)

So we have a hundred channels. Mostly American. Mostly all different shades of crap.

Religious crap (possibly the most pungent of all.)

Consumer crap- all those shopping channels.

Lifestyle crap- ways of sexing up your house, your body, your holidays, your sex.

Endless rolling repeats of CSI and all of its spin-offs.

Do you remember the old conversations about what might happen if aliens tuned in to our TV in order to try to understand human kind. What might they learn about us. What sense would they be able to make of Jersey Shore or Big Brother?

Perhaps they might learn quite a lot about us from the documentary channels I referred to above however. By the way- most of these programmes do not show documentaries of the kind we would have grown up with. There is very little in the way of education- no David Attenborough or ‘The World About Us’- rather the channels are full of angry tattooed men and women shouting at each other whilst making motorbikes, digging for gold, attending auctions, or repossessing possessions and pets from the undeserving feckless poor.

Here is what I think they are telling us about ourselves;

The world is a scary dangerous place- but thankfully we can protect ourselves. Or at least you can if you are an American, because there they have GUNS.

There are several programmes worshipping the icon of the gun. A couple are gun manufacturers – God fearing families who just happen to love blowing things up. There is very little mention of shooting people, just the fun fun fun of bang bang bang.

There are others that endless spiral around catching terrorists, shooting insurgents, glorifying the work of our military hero’s. There is no questioning of purpose, intent or context. Facts are served up behind an unspoken set of assumptions about the way the world is, and the inherent rightness of our side. It is like warfare waged by Disney.

There is one that scares me more though which I flicked past tonight. It is called Doomsday Preppers, and is on the National Geographic channel. This programme visits individuals and groups of Americans who have taken the decision to live their lives in preparation for what they see as an inevitable disaster- either a natural disaster like an earthquake, or a breakdown in law and order after an economic crisis or a terrorist attack. ‘Experts’ then evaluate the plans and preparations, suggesting better ways of for people to arm themselves, to store more food and water, and how to prepare better ‘bug out’ escape plans. Again, there is no questioning of the assumptions behind the prepping or the sanity of lifestyles dedicated to dealing with insecurity and fear by military stockpiling.

It reminded me of this;

Such fear-mongering, reinforced by security entrepreneurs, the mass media and the entertainment industry, generates its own momentum.The terror entrepreneurs, usually described as experts on terrorism, are necessarily engaged in competition to justify their existence. Hence their task is to convince the public that it faces new threats.

The next group of programmes celebrate above all, individuality;

In our wonderful capitalist democratic free market utopias, everyone can succeed- so long has they work hard, and play by the rules of the game.

There are several motorcycle programmes- fat men swearing at each other and hammering on metal. I quite like the fact that they are making things with their hands. Then there are those people who buy up storage units that appear to have been forgotten by their owners. This seems to me to be bottom feeding of the worst kind- we have no idea what happened to the original owners of all the stuff. All we know is that there is money to be made.

Again the assumptions of all this gold digging and empire building are never questioned. Life is good, and life is massive.

I hope those Aliens also watch Eastenders- it would be a shame if they thought that we were all happy and fulfilled in our collective dysfunction.

A flash of the old Charismania…

I have just been reading a review of Greenbelt 2012 by Tony Cummings on Cross Rhythms.  Suffice it to say that Tony was not overly impressed. He thought it only a matter of time before GB announced itself no longer a ‘Christian’ festival, and records how he chastised openly gay C of E minister (and former Communard) Richard Coles. He compliments Bruce Cockburn on his music, but regrets lacking an opportunity to correct his theology.

Tony clearly comes from a particular theological position;

The Scriptures have been a light unto my feet wherever I’ve clumsily put them. Put simply, the Bible, all the Bible, is God-breathed. Over the years I’ve had informal chats, often at Greenbelt, with people who’ve called my attitude to the Bible “legalistic” or in more recent times “literalist”. They’ve been hard conversations to conduct in an atmosphere of love. It’s not easy to be gentle and loving when someone’s calling you names and it’s harder still when you’ve come to prayerfully believe that pejorative words like literalist or fundamentalist truly don’t bear any resemblance to what I believe or how I live my life. It seems to me all this theological name-calling, whether it emanates from Bruce Cockburn, Pat Robertson, Martyn Joseph, Dave Tomlinson or thousands more who call Christians deluded charismaniacs, liberal backsliders or post evangelical heretics, are continuing to slander the Church. The love the Bible tells us the Church should have one for another is still elusively far off.

This is an opinion piece and I do not intend to dwell on it too much, apart from an interesting exchange between Tony and Robin Vincent. I missed it, but Robin was part of an event at GB entitled Molten Meditation & Soul Circus’ Sacramental Charismania and Tony Cummings had a bit of a go at it all in his article.

Robin responded via his blog. I liked this;

What I find interesting is that the term “charismatic” used to describe a style of worship is increasingly a red herring. I’ve found the use of the gifts, the move of the holy spirit in every expression of church I’ve come across. This years Greenbelt programme actually had the word “charismatic” all over it describing things like the Blesséd Mass and the Accord Evensong and was ever present in the Rend Collective and Andy Flanagan. There’s a real desire to step up and reclaim the term and demonstrate how my video needs to become an archaic curiosity, a snapshot of what once was – so we can move forward without the baggage. To do that we have to lay the baggage at Jesus’ feet – that’s what I tried to do last Sunday night.

It all comes flooding back.

Me on a stage with a guitar and a sense of confused excitement. Something is stirring, there is a crackle in the air like electricity.

I try to find the wavelength with music, reaching out into what for me is mystery, but into which others all around me are claiming to be directly plugged into- wired in to the God-current.

And I hope. I try not to notice all the contradictions. The so called transformational charismatic events that seem to have no lasting significance in people lives. The selective mundanities pasted together to make clear ‘instruction’ from God. The power given to people who claim special gifting, despite their tendency to abuse and wound others.

For me and many others, it became impossible to dwell within all the contradictions of this experience and to this day, I struggle to understand what of my experience could be regarded as genuine, spiritual, God-related and how much just manipulated hot air.

My working conclusion is that both were present, but in what percentages I could not say.

Tony Cummings differentiates between the ‘Charismatic’ and ‘Charismania’. In my many years of immersion within Charismatic churches, I find this distinction very difficult to define. This might be because of my ‘lack of discernment’ (this being one of the spiritual gifts highly valued in Charismatic circles, but totally subjective in application) but also might be simply because these things will always contain both. To be an active participant in the excesses of Charismatic worship has to involve a setting aside of any kind of defensive reserves and going with the movement of the crowd. Whether the crowd is being shaped by Spirit of God, or the effect of a few charismatic individuals on the many is always difficult to say, particularly when being swept up in the moment.

It is not as if there have not been many warnings of how things can go wrong. Check out this list of Evangelical/Charismatic scandals.

The fact that Greenbelt is allowing a debate about this seems to me to be important.

As for Mr Cummings, I hope that he remains part of the debate- but hatchet jobs written with Evangelical goggles firmly in place really help no one.

Rained off…

Should have been playing cricket today at the historic West of Scotland ground- but it was cancelled as this morning there was some rain in Glasgow. Of course, as soon as it was cancelled the sun came out!

The finer details of cricket, and the significant effect that climactic conditions has on the ball, will understandably be lost on most, so instead I thought that it might be entertaining to hear a more basic (and unfortunately hilarious) cricket story.

The following is a clip of the wonderfully eccentric David Lloyd, former England player, coach and now commentator- known the world over as ‘bumble’. Lloyd played in a famous series against England crickets oldest enemies, Australia, in 1974-75, were he faced one of the most feared fast bowlers in history, Jeff Thompson.

It did not go well;