Popular beliefs that are just not true...

Scholars spend all their lives studying the biblical texts and they have discovered some wonderful things. But at the level of the ordinary church believer many ideas are strongly held that are just not right. The problem is both that the discoveries of academia are not trickling down to the popular level and also that there is considerable suspicion of anything that seems to contradict what people were taught in Sunday School!

Here is a list of eleven fairly clear insights that have not fully trickled down to the popular level. Nos 1 -10 were written by Ken Schenck  (Dean of Wesley Seminary at Indiana Wesleyan University and Professor of New Testament and Christian Ministry) and no 11 was contributed by a former colleague Revd Eric Potts. 

The list is not exhaustive and there will probably be others that could be added :

1. The Jews were not trying to earn their salvation by good works.

2. The apostle Paul did not struggle with a guilty conscience, either before or after he believed in Jesus as Christ.

3. St Paul saw works as an element in final salvation. What he did not believe were required for justification were "works of Law," especially those aspects of the Law that separated Jew from Gentile (e.g., circumcision).

4. The letter to the Romans is not primarily about how to get saved but about how the Gentiles can be included alongside the Jews in the people of God.

5. The Law that is referred to in the letter to the Romans is the Jewish Law, not some abstract moral law.

6. Paul did not change religions when he believed on Christ. He probably changed Jewish sects. All the early Christians saw themselves as Jews. The Gentile converts saw themselves as converting to a form of Judaism. It would be more accurate to speak of Christian Jews than of Jewish Christians in the earliest church.

7. The Pharisees were all strict but they were not all legalistic in the sense of only caring about rules for their own sake. Jesus puts them in the "healthy" and "righteous" category, at least initially, in several parables. Some of them became believers without leaving Pharisaism.

8. New Testament theology is theo-centric (God the Father centred) rather than Christocentric (centred on Christ).

9. The best approach to understanding the historical Jesus locates him within first century Judaism on a trajectory to the early church.

10. The earliest Christians did not see ethnic Israel as replaced but in a temporary state of unbelief.

11.  The expectation of an imminent Messiah was held only by a limited number of Jewish groups, not by everybody; though it would not be surprising if some version of the idea was found in popular religious thinking.  The idea that everybody expected a militaristic Messiah, is false.

Don't confuse guilt with shame...

It is often possible to confuse guilt and shame. They are similar but they are different. The difference is very important.

Guilt is a recognition that I did something bad whereas  shame is a confession that I am bad. It is importnat not to mix the two. Brene Brown in her latest book, "Daring Greatly" explains the difference well and the likely consequences.

"When we apologize for something we've done, make amends, or change a behaviour that doesn't align with our values, guilt - not shame - is most often the driving force... Guilt is just as powerful as shame, but its influence is positive while shame is destructive...

We live in a world where most people still subscribe to the belief that shame is a good tool for keeping people in line. Not only is this wrong, but it's dangerous...In fact, shame is much more likely to be the cause of destructive and hurtful behaviors than it is to be the solution.

...[I]t is human nature to want to feel worthy of love and belonging. When we experience shame, we feel disconnected and desperate for worthiness...

If we can share our story with someone who responds with empathy and understanding, shame can't survive... Empathy is connection; it's the ladder out of the shame hole."

 

Image courtesy of FrameAngel / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Carousel - fatalism in response to domestic abuse

I have just performed in a production of Rogers and Hammerstein's musical "Carousel". I was a chorus member at the Macrobert theatre in Stirling. It was fantastic week - a top class professional quality show that was also great fun for all involved in the production. I was pretty exhausted by the end of the week after seven performances but also exhilarated and I look forward to the next production.
However, though I enjoyed the music and all aspects of the production, I have a serious concerns about the portrayal of domestic violence in the story line. I was acutely aware of this yesterday when I was given a copy of the Scottish Women's Aid booklet "Faith communities - 10 things you can do to stop domestic abuse."
For those of you who don't know the story of "Carousel" here is some background. The musical is set in a fantasy USA in the late 19th century.  Julie, the heroine, falls in love with Billy, a man she meets on the fairground who leaves his job as barker for the carousel to be with her.  Frustrated at not working and not being able to get work he hits her. Billy, the abusive husband, is weak and easily led. Once away from the maternal care of the carousel owner he falls prey to the malevolent influence of the villain, Jigger. Throughout the musical Julie condones his actions by understanding his frustration and saying her strong love for him meant the blow never really hurt.  The sentiment is expressed most fully in the lyric 

"Oh, what’s the use of wond’rin’ If he’s good or if he’s bad?
He’s your fella and you love him, That’s all there is to that.
Common sense may tell you that the ending will be sad and now’s the time to break and run away,   
But what’s the use of wond’rin’ if the ending will be sad? He’s your fella and you love him there’s nothing more to say."

This could be an example of the author highlighting a then undisclosed social problem. But it could also have been a tacit acceptance of the status quo that didn't need to be challenged. The other women, friends of Julie, agree that men as a whole are pretty useless when they sing...

"A girl who's in love with any man is doomed to weep and wail.  
Stonecutters cut it on stone woodpeckers peck it on wood,
There's nothin' so bad for a woman as a man who's bad or good!"

Yet despite this sentiment they do not directly challenge Julie to face up to the reality that she is living.

Fifteen years after Billy's death, near the end of the musical, Julie is still firm in her belief that love makes you oblivious to pain in a remark to her daughter who has met the ghost of Billy.
It could be argued that the musical's strange concept of  divine judgement was an attempt to get Billy to face up to the wrong that he had done. But this in no way makes up for the acceptance by that community in that time of such behaviour.
Caroulsel was first produced in 1945 and society and the expectations of how to behave in all relationships was very different then compared to today. Perhaps, with our increased awareness and sensitivity to this issue, the phone number of a Domestic Abuse helpline should have been printed in the programme for anyone affected by the performance. Or am I over-reacting?

Buy a copy of the original soundtrack CD by clicking here

Magnus by George Mackay Brown

I have just finished reading George Mackay Brown's novel "Magnus" which retells in a poetic way the ancient Orcadian saga of how Magnus, one of the ruling earls in 1100s became the patron saint of Orkney through his life and martyrdom. I am trying to read all of Mackay Brown's books before I visit Orkney in June.
I had only read his "Vinland" previously and that was a traditional historic novel whereas "Magnus" is a much more poetic creation. It is episodic. It tells the life story of the saint through significant events in his life and missing out many other parts. The book is a retelling of the saga so perhaps this is a direct link to that form.  The book is a mixture of styles and some are in modern English whilst others recreate the language of ancient saga. The martyrdom chapter is written in a unique way. Instead of describing how Magnus is killed, a parellel story is told of the execution of Bonhoeffer in a Nazi German prisoner of war camp. This grizzly literary device makes the horror of the execution of an innocent by forces of evil much more real than any historical description. Yet this device confuses the morality because centuries ago, the death of one of the earls brought about peace to Orkney after years of bloody civil war. Magnus is portrayed as knowing his self sacrifice is necessary and he prepares himself for it. Bonhoffer's death on the other hand is a cruel act of violence by a cruel regime that has no greater purpose than the perverted exercise of power against those who disagree with the Nazi project.
After his death many mirculous cures were reported from people visiting his grave.  It is not always an easy book to read but it both gives an insight into the way of life in the twelfth century and the moral and ethical sensitivities of the people of those days. From this work the vikings become a vivid nordic civilisation from Norway to North Wales, with the northern and western isles of Scotland playing an important role in this empire. Brown's catholicism is not critical of the piety practice or role of the church in that fuedal society.
Here is an extract from near the end of the book to give you a flavour....

-  I’m not going a step further till I know where we’re going.
- I told you. To the Birsay Kirk.
She screamed at him.
- I’m not going to any kirk!
- You must.
- I will not!
Echo after echo came back from the low crags. A cave boomed. He put his hand over her mouth. He said, gentle and low and pleading.
- Please, Mary.
She tore her wild mouth from his hand. She screamed like a madwoman.
- No! (…)
- I’m tired of the holy talk of them brothers every time they put a bandage on my eyes. O my poor afflicted daughter, bear your cross with patience… I don’t want any more of that class of talk. O no. I’ve had my belly-full of that palaver.
- Stay where you are, then. I won’t be that long (…)
…………….
He [Old Jock]went forward, tremulously, down the nave. There it was, set in the centre of the aisle, a square of new sandstone with a carved cross – the tomb he was looking for. (…)
- A small blink only, Magnus. I’m asking no more (…)
Stone and silence. His knees and hands and mouth were beginning to be numb.
……………..
This man [St Magnus] was now in two places at once. He was lying with a terrible wound in his face in the kirk near where the old man and the old woman were girding themselves for the road; Birsay, place of his beginning and end, birth and sepulchre. Also he was pure essence in another intensity, a hoarder of the treasures of charity and prayer, a guardian.
This fragrant vivid ghost was everywhere and always, but especially he haunted the island of his childhood. That morning he had been summoned by a candle, a small pitiful earth-to-heaven cry; its flame quickly quenched, and seemingly futile (…)
Saint Magnus the Martyr accepted the tallow flame. He touched it to immortality, a hard diamond. The radiance he reserved, to give back again when it was needed (…)
……………..
She [Mary] screeched. She put her hands to her face.
- Ah-h-h-h! You struck me! You tore my face!…
- Be quiet. Nobody touched you.
Mary whimpered. And rubbed salt scurf from her eyes. And was quiet. And bent down. She plucked, tremulously, a flower from the grass. She knelt. She murmured names – daisy, seapink, thistle…
The old one got to her feet. She turned her glimmering face this way and that. Her finger pointed at the incoming ocean, then wavered over in the direction of Revay Hill…
…………….

To buy this book click here

Image courtesy of Evgeni Dinev / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Truth and lies about poverty

Truth and Lies about Poverty  - Report summary

An important new report from from the Baptist Union of Great Britain, the Methodist Church, the Church of Scotland and the United Reformed Church lays bare six myths about the poor which enable the majority to live with the comfortable assumption that both poverty and wealth are deserved.

1. ‘They’ are lazy and don’t want to work
The most commonly cited cause of child poverty by churchgoers and the general public alike is that “their parents don’t want to work”. Yet the majority of children in poverty are from working households.  In work poverty is now more common than out of work poverty. It is readily believed that across the country there are families in which three generations have never worked, and this is used as the argument behind welfare policies. However the report shows that examples of such families have not been found, and the evidence suggests it is unlikely they ever will be.
 

2.  ‘They’ are addicted to drink and drugs
Churchgoers and the wider public cite addiction as the second most common cause of child poverty. While addiction is devastating for the families andcommunities touched by it, fewer than 4% of benefit claimants report any form of addiction.

3. ‘They’ are not really poor – they just don’t manage their money properly
Nearly 60% of the UK population agrees that the poor could cope if only they handled their money properly. The experience of living on a low income is one of constant struggle to manage limited resources, with small events having serious consequences.
Statistics show that the poorest spend their money carefully, limiting themselves to the essentials.

4. They’ are on the fiddle
Over 80% of the UK population believe that “large numbers falsely claim benefits”.
Benefit fraud has decreased to historically low levels - the kind of levels that the tax system can only dream of . Less than 0.9% of the welfare budget is lost to fraud. In fact if everyone claimed and was paid correctly, the welfare system would cost around £18 billion more than it presently does.

5. ‘They’ have an easy life
Over half the British public believes benefits are too high and churchgoers tend to agree. Government ministers speak of families opting for benefits as a lifestyle choice. Yet we know that benefits do not meet minimum income standards. They have halved in value relative to average incomes over the last 30 years. We know the ill and the unemployed are the people least satisfied and happy with life.

6.  ‘They’ caused the deficit
The proportion of our tax bills spent on welfare has remained stable for the last 20 years.
It is ridiculous to argue, as some have, that increasing welfare spending is responsible for the current deficit. Public debt is a problem but why is it being laid at the feet of the poorest?

www.jointpublicissues.org.uk/truthandlies

 (Image courtesy of Stuart Miles / FreeDigitalPhotos.net)

My address for World day of prayer service 2013...

Je vous souhaite la bienvenue ici ce soir car nous considérons l'accueil que nous donnons à des étrangers. Les églises pense qu'ils sont bons à accueillir, mais ce n'est pas toujours le cas.

Did you all get that? What I tried to say was -

I welcome you all to this church tonight as we consider our them how we welcome strangers. Churches claim to be good at welcoming but this is not always the case. (Please excuse my french - it is not perfect)

Being welcoming is a state of mind. We in this country are very poor at learning languages. I have a colleague from Finland who learnt five languages in high school as well as all the ordinary subjects like history, geography and the sciences. That was normal there. She works in Scotland as a minister and goes every year to the kirkentag to keep her German up to scratch – as well as a couple of visits a year to Finland to speak her native tongue. When someone is from another place we can welcome them with a smile and gestures – communication only partly involves words and signs and pointing will go a long way but it helps if we know a few word. We had a Polish decorator working in our house a few years ago. He was a sullen guy and had very basic English. He hardly ever smiled . But his face lit up when I learned to say dzień dobry (Good day). Those remain the only words of Polish that I know. 

But we need to be welcoming to all people, not just those that don't speak our language. Let me tell a story..

I was once part of a church that thought it was a very friendly place. They had tea and coffee after the morning service every week and people so enjoyed each others company the coffee time sometimes lasted as long as the service itself.

But then a visitor came to a service and her experience was quite different. She gave me the outsiders view. This was not a friendly church. Very few people talked to her. People talked over her as if she wasn't there while she waited in the queue for coffee. A church full of friends isn't a necessarily a friendly church. And that was a mistake that church had made. Because they were all friends they assumed that outsiders would find them friendly but the outsider only saw the backs of people talking to each other in small groups and ignoring her.

Many of the people we now count as friends were once strangers. Today's central message is that before you get to know them everyone looks strange (Once we do get to know then we find out that they are just as strange as we are!) Christians have a role as the yeast to leaven our societies and communities by welcoming the newcomer and making them feel at home.

Image courtesy of zirconicusso / FreeDigitalPhotos.net 

Image courtesy of kjnnt / FreeDigitalPhotos.net