Ecumenism - is it always better elsewhere?

This week I have been at a two day ecumenical meeting. The programmed business centred on how the ecumenical body can achieve its core task of calling all churches into the goal of visible unity. This has to be done in ways that will work and with structures and policies that can be supported and resourced by the member churches. 
It is easy to see what has not worked in the past. It is much less easy to define precisely the tasks that we are wanting to undertake today and the structures that will be needed. How are the churches, who all are struggling with their own denominational problems (mostly about manpower and resources but also all challenged in different ways by sex!), able to look above their denominational parapet and take a wider view? Those of us who are convinced ecumeniacs may say that part of the answer will involve looking creatively beyond ecumenical boundaries. 
At our meeting we looked at the example of the churches in Wales with a new covenant and the churches in Australia that have similarly signed up to a covenant. Superficially it is easy to say that these other places have got their act together while we are still in the process of going round and round the same old ground in long and boring meetings. 
On the other hand these covenants are just further stages on the journey. They are tools or instruments for creating the space to allow churches to grow together rather than being a destination in themselves. They are agreements for a loose federality that in themselves do nothing. Yet without structures of some sort churches can't work together. The best structures should be almost invisible.
We need similar structures to facilitate and promote engagement on the deep and substantial things that matter to us. We are all agreed on the need to work together. It seems there may well be many more hours of debate to come before we are clear about how this can best take place.

(Image courtesy of Danilo Rizzuti / FreeDigitalPhotos.net )

Burned by Thomas Enger - Nordic noir

"Burned" by Thomas Enger is a debut crime fiction novel that has become a best seller in its native Norway and other Scandinavian countries. It is in the popular genre of nordic noir: books that examine the dark reality of the downside of living the Scandinavian dream.
The protagonist Henning Juul is an investigative journalist who has not worked since a traumatic incident in his life two years previously which has left him with scars both real and mental. Returning to work Henning's first investigation is the murder of a young female student in what looks like a ritual sharia killing. Her Muslim boyfriend is arrested but Henning thinks he is innocent.
Set in Oslo, Henning's investigation, using traditional journalistic methods, stays one step ahead of the police. The ethics of journalism emerge in the narrative,  particularly the tension between ethics and sensationalism under the constant pressure to attract more and more readers. The book touches on issues of immigration and prejudice, particularly Islamophobia, without preaching at the reader. 
Henning is an intelligent and intuitive damaged hero who works best alone, though he becomes more appreciative of human contact as the story develops. Hennings obsession with smoke alarms is understandable once the nature of the trauma and loss he has lived though have been explained. A violent criminal drug smuggling and people trafficking gang are on the periphery of the plot and they pose a constant threat as they know Henning is the only eyewitness to a murder. 
The novel is well written and translated and the plot is solid with some nice twists. This is one of the best crime books I have read for a while. There are many hints and references to past cases which I am sure will be developed in future novels about Henning Juul.

Image courtesy of twobee/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

A log-jam about to burst?

St Peters Basilica, Rome

Image courtesy of Simon Howden/ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

I had a short but meaningful conversation with a Roman Catholic priest that I have known for many years recently.


One very interesting part of our conversation concerned the future of the Roman Catholic church. He described the huge geographical area for which he is now the only full time working priest. There are other retired priests who help cover the masses on Saturdays and Sundays but many of them are very elderly. There has only been one ordination of a new priest in his diocese in the last twelve years.

He said that it is interesting to see the resilience that is emerging in the parishes that are, for the most part, being left on their own to get on with it. Some of them are coping and coping very well. Others who have been heavily priest dependent are coping less well and are floundering like a headless chicken. The lay people all know of the crisis they are in and my priest friend knows that if asked what should be done they would suggest two solutions. They would  suggest that the church should allow priests to marry and should ordain women. 

Do you have a problem with that I asked? He replied that with his dioceses finance hat on he wonders where on earth they will get the money from to pay enough to support the wives and families of priests! That was not the answer I was expecting.

The pressure is building - in all sorts of places and all sorts of different ways. The Roman Catholic church does not do gradual change - it changes by sudden revolutions and he believes that there is a revolution coming. It is now fifty years since Vatican II.  

And what do you think will be the tipping point I asked? It will come after Benedict he said. Benedict is not a administrator he added, he has done nothing to reform or change any of the curia (The Vatican civil service with its built in conservatism). He finished by saying that the log jam will burst suddenly with a new broom coming in that will sweep much that is now taken for granted and then who knows.
Interesting times.....

Why Scottish independence - no. 1

When Ukraine was part of the USSR it had the second largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. Only the United states had more. Now it is an independent country and it is nuclear free. It has achieved this as part of the struggle for independence. Here is a lesson for Scotland.
Trident is one of the most devastating weapons of mass destruction ever invented. I believe nuclear weapons to be immoral. These missiles and the submarines that launch them are located in Scotland. The missiles and warheads are stored in underground silos and bunkers on the beautiful hillside above Helensburgh overlooking Holy Loch, near Faslane naval base. The warheads are regularly carried through my home town of Stirling in a military convoy to take them for reprocessing (or whatever has to be done to service them).
The cost of the weapons has been astronomical. The billions to replace them are part of the British government's long term defence strategy. 
The referendum on independence offers a huge opportunity to galvanise the widespread public opinion that thinks that the possession of such devastating weaponry is totally immoral. Getting rid of this system is a very good reason to vote for Scottish Independence. I do actually believe that there are many other reasons why independence is a good idea but removing Trident from our shores is a clincher for me. 
There are already many parts of the world that are nuclear free. Africa became nuclear free by the treaty of Pelindaba in 1996; Southeast Asia by the treaty of Bangkok in 1995; the South Pacific, New Zealand and Australia by the treaty of Rorotonga in 1985 and the whole of South America by the treaty of Tlatelolco way back in 1967.
There is widespread condemnation of Trident through Scottish civic society - from the churches, the Islamic community and the trade unions. If getting rid of trident really is a priority for all these people then there is only one way for them all to vote in the referendum and that is YES!

I acknowledge the influence that Brian Quail's article in "Coracle" Autumn 2012 has had in galvanising my thinking on this subject.

(Image courtesy of Darren Robertson / FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Postscript  3rd November 2012
Support for getting rid of Trident came from an unlikely source this week.....
"Former Tory Defence Minister Michael Portillo gave a damning verdict on Britain's nuclear weapons programme on BBC This Week. In response to the question "Should Trident be renewed?", he replied "No, I think it is all nonsense". Then when asked "Should we have any kind of nuclear deterrent?" Portillo said, "No, it's completely past its sell by date. It's neither independent, because we couldn't possibly use it without the Americans, neither is it any sort of deterrent, because now largely we are facing enemies like the Taliban and Al Quaeda, who cannot be deterred by nuclear weapons. It's a tremendous waste of money. It's done entirely for reasons of national prestige and at the margins it is proliferation". In contrast, Labour MP Tessa Jowell said that the Labour Party supported Philip Hammond's plan to spend millions of pounds on Trident replacement, in advance of the formal decision to proceed with this the new system in 2016."

Hope in troubled times

In the book "Bothered and Bewildered" Ann Morisy suggests nine aptitudes that people need to develop in order to enact hope in troubled times. 

These are -

1. to be a non anxious presence in stressful times
2. to practise systemic thinking in order to resist the temptation to blame others when things go wrong
3. to practise gratitude - even in difficult circumstances
4. to engage in courageous micro-actions that counter the inclination toward neo-tribalism and fragmentation rather than social cohesion (eg the conversation between Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well)
5. to imagine ways of breaking out of the constraints of circumstances and have the motivation and discipline to persist with intentional behaviour
6. to gain confidence in the viability of the economy of abundance and generosity that Jesus inducts us into, rather than being beholden to the economy of scarcity
7. to practise sitting more lightly on the globe in recognition of our thoughtless abuse of the creation
8. to practise compassion, conviviality and harness the imagination to ward off the dangers of gnosticism
9. to draw on the enriching memories of eras past in order to affirm the human capacity to correct its own errors or in more theological language to repent or turn around.

These give an idea of the process of church needed for troubled times.

 (Image courtesy of Stuart Miles / FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

Soul Space

Last night I attended Soul Space, which some might describe as a "fresh expression"  though I like its self identity as "a time for encounter".
Just over a dozen of us met in the church hall at 6.30 and shared a pot-luck meal. Then from seven to eight we sat in a circle and most of us shared something inspiring that we had brought with us. We had been given the theme on the flyer sent out by email "One World - many faiths and cultures".

I took a short meditation from Jan Such Pickard that I had read very recently to share. One person shared a short video, others poems and others various reflections. It was not overtly Christian though it happened in a Methodist building. It was a space where people could be themselves and bring and share and listen to others at a level that is not possible in a  normal church service. 
One of the people present was an ex-minister now describing them self as a person of no faith.  
It was perhaps like a Quaker meeting - many small contributions interspersed by periods of silence - there was no planning though the structure was planned to be open and inclusive. (Of course the person who wanted to share a video had made preparations for it to be projected!) There were many connections between the contributions made. There was a spirit of peace and calm during the hour of sharing.
This meeting met the criteria outlined by Ron Sebring for healthy religion (As quoted in Ann Morisy's book "Bothered and Bewildered")

• Healthy religion does not indoctrinate, but teaches people to think for themselves
• Healthy religion invites us to be humble about what we believe and what we know
• Healthy religion does not invest in negativity; it does not major on what it is against but rather on what it is for
• Healthy beliefs stay in tune with reality, never filling in gaps for what we don't know.

It also resonates with the four hallmarks of healthy religion identified in the 2006 report from the English Anglicans and British Methodists called "Faithful Cities"

• It will enlarge the imagination
• It will teach and encourage the practice of wisdom and holiness
• It will open us to the new
• It will deepen our sympathies

The next soul space will be in six weeks time. I have already marked it in on my calendar. It will be on the theme of "Inspirational women half forgotten in our traditions".

Image courtesy of foto76 / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Change

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. " 

Reinhold Niebuhr's prayer dating from 1943 was written at a time of great change, conflict and uncertainty that puts into perspective the changes and worries we have about our own times.

Most people are anxious about change - we are all comfortable with what we know.  You sometimes find enthusiasts for change per se but I often feel that they are disconcerting people to be with. It is almost as if they are running away from something!

Change is inevitable. Everything changes!  If you refuse to change you end up like Charles Dickens' Miss Haversham - an anachronism in a time warp.

Change should be the way of life for the Christian. The bible is continually exhorting it:

The Old testament Prophets continually call for the people to change their ways.

John the Baptist came preaching a message of "repent - turn around"

Jesus teaching as we have it is all an instruction not to follow the way of the world but change and follow a different counter cultural path!

The church has the Orthodox tradition of theosis (growing into the likeness of God) and our own Methodist tradition of holiness sanctification and perfection. Change should be in the DNA of Christians but perhaps it is because it isn't that there is so much in our tradtions to encourage it.

Change is a journey and journeys can be good in themselves not just for the destination that is aimed for. To journey together people need to agree that they want to be somewhere different to where they are now. Once there is consensus on the need to move then all it takes to start is one small step. A trajectory can be set without a distinctly defined destination.

My vision of the church is of a group of friends out for a hike

1. They meet up
2. they agree to walk together
3. they agree on the direction of travel
4. they set off at a pace that is right for the slowest
5. some may want to dash ahead - they go with the groups blessing
6. some may wish to explore side paths or different directions - they too go with the groups blessing
7. the group continually and transparently reviews the progress made and the decision to be made at every junction
8. no one is excluded from what is happening
9. the leader may not always be at the front
10. they share their resources one may have a map another a gps another a compass another a set of walking poles another a water bottle and another some energy bars
11. they share and find they all have enough
12. the group will allow others to join in the journey
13. they look back and see where they have come from and recognise the changes which may have happened gradually so they missed them.

When dealing with change must remember that:

1. Different people react differently to change

2. Everyone has a need to feel in control, to know that they are included and that there is openness in the process.

3. Change often involves a loss and people will go through a grief process

4. Expectations need to be treated realistically- no one change is going to make everything perfect!

5. Fears have to be faced.

 

"Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." - Barack Obama

This post is based on a short presentation I made on change this week. 

Image courtesy of Salvatore Vuono / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

A Modern Mainstream Methodist

Thomas Jones has written the following which I want to share with the world. (And with his permission I do...)

With sincere apologies to messieurs Gilbert, Sullivan, and most of all, to yourselves:

I am the very model of a modern mainstream Methodist,
I find myself under attack both by the fundamentalist,
And the growing number who are all completely secular,

And claim that the whole universe is solely molecular,
The one lot think I’m stupid and the rest that I’m a heretic,
Despite my finest reasoning and arguments so very quick
And so I play the middle line against the pull of each extreme
Whilst they all think that I am on the evil and opposing team!

We still think Wesley’s sermons are the pinnacle rhetorical
And our Eucharistic wine is still non-alcoholical,
But at least our bread is bread unlike the Ordinariate,
Who can keep their rotten wafers, even when they transubstantiate!

I am the very model of a modern mainstream Methodist,
We tend to be quite open and aren’t really over-prejudiced
We’ve got female ministers and have a preaching laity
And think that they are equal in the sight of our deity,
We are still debating on the issue homosexual,
Is it that immoral; is it socially contextual?
But you’ll never find us being a little bit disparaging,
And we give them blessing services as we discuss gay marriaging.

People think I’m properly supposed to shun the demon drink,
But I enjoy a pint or four and I must say I really think
That all God’s gifts are good for you when used in moderation,
After all ‘twas God Himself invented fermentation!

In fact when I know off by heart ‘And Can It Be’ and ‘Love Divine’
And don’t believe you’re justified ahead of time by pre-design,
And when I think God tends towards being fairly lenient,
By making sure His grace is free and totally prevenient.
When we arrange our churches in an order circuituitous,
And know that to be Methodist is really most fortuitous.
It means we know that we are right when holding forth doctrinally,
Though our congregation sizes tend to trend declinally.

And when I know of what you speak by Wesleyan and Primitive,
And think that my theology is totally definitive,
And when I’m really rather rude about the poor old Calvinist,
You'll say I am the model of a modern mainstream Methodist!