andygoodliff

LENT blog

LENT blog starts tomorrow at hopefulimagination. We've still got quite a few days to fill so if you're interested in joining us, let me know. We hope to blog something most days through lent. It saddens me that the majority of churches do not make space for lent. The church calendar is such an helpful way to shape our lives as Christians, to live in and out the Christian story. Maggi will be blogging through the season, as will Jonny Baker and Grace, and this year Jason Clark and others are blogging through lent on the Archbishop's of Canterbury's recommended book Free of Charge by Miroslav Volf here. So lots to inspire and help you.

My Library

Via World of Sven, I've found this great website called Library thing , which allows you to catalogue your library.  You can now see my mini library here . I have 172 books catalogued and you can see that the most common authors currently are Colin Gunton, Stanley Hauerwas and Walter Brueggemann. I've enjoyed tagging everything and making tag clouds! You can see my tag cloud here and my authort cloud here. Great fun!

NT Wright on Art and the Artist

I went last night to the 2nd F. D. Maurice lecture at King's College London given by NT Wright entitled 'The Bible & the Christian Imagination'.  A simple summary would be that Wright was looking at how the biblical tradition encourages artists to re-imagine the world. Here are some of my notes. They miss out some key points in the argument. 

Wright began by looking at Isaiah 6.1-5 and 11.1-9 and the tension between the present and the future. So that 'the whole earth is full of his glory' (6.3) and 'the earth will be full of the knowledge of Yahweh' (11.9). 

There are two trends in art either sentimentalism (seen most starkly in kitsch) or brutalism.  The church tends to stray towards a sentimentalism.  Sentimentalism is the seraphs songs without Isaiah's recognition that he and the people have unclean lips. Brutalism is the opposite, a darkness without any light. Wright argues that art at its best is neither merely sentimental or brutal.

Moments of beauty are glimpses of God's future world breaking in - creation is designed for something richer than it is - art then is an anticipation in the present. Art can have a priestly role/function. Arts are then not just decoration, but pathways into the imagined world of the God of the Bible. Art should not just illustrate, but embody and expound of God's new creation. Artists should lead the way and capture the possibility of new creation in the present. So the Psalmist sings 'sing to the Lord a new song'.   

In a lot of places the emerging church is becoming the home of artists, because there art is allowed this priestly (and maybe also prophetic) role.  It seems to me that the emerging church with its engagement with culture and celebration of the arts is attempting something of what Wright is suggesting.   

Next Wednesday (1st March) is the final lecture entitled 'The Bible, Postmodernity & the New Imperialism', which I think will focus on Wright's emphasis of God's future breaking into present and what this means for politics. The lecture will be held in the Great Hall (King's College London, Strand Campus) and will start at 5.30pm.

Young People and Spiritual Formation

Next week I'm leading a session on young people's spiritual development. As I've begun thinking about what I might say, I've gone back and read Brian McLaren's recent mini essay on Spiritual Formation in a Postmodern Context. McLaren argues that spiritual growth + health = knowledge + experiences + relationships + practices + suffering + service + time, rather than the usual evangelical emphasis on knowledge = growth or charismatic emphasis on experience = growth. What does this mean for the spiritual development or formation of young people? What are we doing? Do we actually, if we're honest, have a concept of what spiritual formation means for our young people? Sometimes I wonder if I am just throwing so things out there and hoping some of them find a home. I'm not sure I am confident that I could measure what impact the discipleship I do has on my young people's spiritual formation. My attempt to get them to stop playing violent video games hasn't got very far! What does this mean? Does this mean too often we're too worried about holding on to young people that spiritual formation falls down on a list of aims and objectives? Does this simply reflect that we tend to follow a charismatic evangelical tendency to think that if we fill them with knowledge (usually 'bible' knowledge) and give them worship experiences, they will spiritually grow? Both of which had their place in my spiritual formation, but relationships + time + space for questions, were probably as important if not more. Spiritual formation must have a great emphasis on developing habits and practices which embody and expound the Christian life.  As Hauerwas says discipleship is like learning to be a bricklayer, we need to find ways of teaching and modelling the habits and skills of being a follower of Jesus Christ. No easy task!

Simon Hall on Emerging Church

Simon Hall is a good friend from Leeds where he's involved in a Baptist church called Revive, which he helped start and lead. His main job now is as an Oasis tutor on their youthwork course. I've been reading Emerging Churches by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger - the "best book yet on the emerging church" (according to Andrew Jones, aka TallSkinnyKiwi) - and found Simon's thoughts particularly helpful. Here's some of what he says:

'My main aim for the community is not to be "post" anything but to be "and" everything. We are evangelical and charismatic and liberal and orthodox and contemplative and into social justice and into alternative worship' (38-9)

'I think one of the biggest tensions within Revive is trying to prevent the charismatic flight from reality in worship. I remember working in an inner-city church in my early twenties, trying to get people to sing songs about their lives, and their attitude was, 'We have come here to get away from our lives!' I'm trying to change that, because the consequence is that faith and real life become totally separated.' (73)

'We are very Christocentric, which means that while we recognize God's presence in other religions and in people of no faith, we still see Jesus as the most perfect revelation of God and therefore the surest route to God' (123)

'One person in Revive went to an Alpha course and was helped by it, but most people are somewhat cynical about the "there must be an answer or else God is not God" philosophy behind some apologetics' (124)

'Our evangelism is pretty poor. The word itself hardly gets mentioned. Everyone who has became a Christian through Revive has done so through friendships. The people in Revive are very cynical about any evangelistic techniques. My own vision is simply to put the people of God out there in the marketplace and hope that we live a life that attracts people to God. That is the hardest option of all, because it's 24-7 evangelism.' (130)

'Creativity has been a huge part of our practice and theology. I have a highly develop theology of worship that values the homemade gift more highly than the shop-bought gift.' (181)

Christian Ethics According to Hauerwas and Wells

The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics is a book that deserves to be read and then re-read. Edited by Stanley Hauerwas and Sam Wells (two of my favourite theologians) it describes a way of studying ethics through worship. The opening chapter begins 'the aim of this volume is to stretch, inspire, and develop the readers' conception of Christian worship in order to challenge, enrich, and transform the reader's notions of the form and content of Chrisitan ethics.'   That is the way in which  we worship shapes and grounds the way we act as the body of Christ in the world. This is a theme that both Hauerwas and Wells have touched on before, but here in this companion it is described in full. They have collected together a wide range of contributers from Kevin Vanhoozer and William T. Cavanaugh to Stephen Fowl, T. J. Gorringe and Rowan Williams. I'm currently borrowing it from All Nations College Library, but hope to acquire it at some point.

Sam Wells has a new book out soon called God's Companions: Reimagining Christian Ethics, which if the synopsis is anything to go by, looks good.

Grounded in Samuel Wells' experience of ordinary lives in poorer neighborhoods, this book presents a striking and imaginative approach to Christian ethics. It argues that Christian ethics is founded on God, on the practices of human community, and on worship, and that ethics is fundamentally a reflection of God's abundance. Wells synthesizes dogmatic, liturgical, ethical, scriptural, and pastoral approaches to theology in order to make a bold claim for the centrality of the local church in theological reflection. He considers the abundance of gifts God gives through the practices of the Church, particularly the Eucharist. His central thesis, which governs his argument throughout, is that God gives his people everything they need to worship him, be his friends, and eat with him. Wells engages with serious scholarly material, yet sets out the issues lucidly for a student audience.

Child Theology

As I continue to reflect on the question of children and the church (see previous post here and here), I've come across the Child Theology Movement (CFM), which seeks to devleop the whole of theology in light of the child. Keith White, who is one of the founders says

'Child Theology is seeking to re-examine the heart of theology, church and mission, with a view to establishing how different it all looks with a child continuously standing in the midst.  This is a new endeavour: check out the major works of theology in any tradition by looking for the word child or childhood in the index or contents and you will find that children are marginalized to the point of erasure and invisibility.'

This is something as the church we need to nuture and encourage. To ask what church and theology looks like with children in the centre, in our midst, instead of on the margins. As I continue to think about what it is to be the church, I'm increasingly convinced that it is a space and a people who welcome and recognise the child as an active person who is a gift and participant as much as any other person. We have to overcome the idea that the child is an empty vessel which we simply fill with knowledge and experience. I don't think a child theology means a simplified theology. The problem in the church is that is too often the kind of theology we want or get is a theology which is so systemized, that it leaves no space for wonder or question. I came across this quote from Jeremy Begbie:

All good theology is done on the cliff-edge—one step too far and you tumble into idolatry, one step back and the view is never so good. The reader [of this book] will have to judge whether we have occasionally stumbled over the precipice, and when we have not, whether the view has justified the risk.” (Theology, Music and Time, Cambridge, 2000, p. 279)

The One, the Three and Danish Cartoons

There's a great post on the difference the doctrine of the Trinity makes here on Faith and Theology (which by the way is a great blog for those interested in theology, although fairly academic). Jason Clark is at the Emergent Theology Conversations with Mirsolav Volf and blogging each day, day one is here. I was tempted to blog about Danish Cartoons, but instead will point you in the direction of Richard Sudsworth and Big Bulky Anglican. A colleague and I taught a lesson today around the related issues - free speech and stereotyping. There is a big need for education of your children and young people (and a lot of adults), who don't know who the Prophet Muhammad is and see all Muslims as extremists - this is probably not helped by the response worldwide by some Muslims with their violent messages. We need to avoid language of 'us 'and 'them' and polarising the issue into the West on one hand and Islam on the other. Tariq Ramadan made some helpful points in yesterday's Guardian:

We are facing an incredible simplification, a gross polarisation: apparently a clash of civilisations, a confrontation between principles, with defenders, in one corner, of inalienable freedom of speech and, in the other, of the inviolable sacred sphere. Presented in such terms, the debate has unfortunately become a battle of wills, and the question becomes: who will win? Muslims, wanting apologies, threaten to attack European interests, even to attack people; western governments, intellectuals and journalists refuse to bend under threats, and certain media outlets have added to the controversy by republishing the cartoons. Most people around the world, observing these excesses, are perplexed: what sort of madness is this, they ask?

It is critical we find a way out of this infernal circle and demand from those stoking this fire that they stop their polemics at once and create a space for serious, open, indepth debate and peaceful dialogue. This is not the predicted clash of civilisations. This affair does not symbolise the confrontation between the principles of Enlightenment and those of religion. Absolutely not. What is at stake at the heart of this sad story is whether or not the duelling sides have the capacity to be free, rational (whether believers or atheists) and, at the same time, reasonable.

The fracture is not between the west and Islam but between those who, in both worlds, are able to assert who they are and what they stand for with calm - in the name of faith or reason, or both - and those driven by exclusive certainties, blind passions, reductive perceptions of the other and a liking for hasty conclusions. The latter character traits are shared equally by some intellectuals, religious scholars, journalists and ordinary people on both sides. Facing the dangerous consequences these attitudes entail, it is urgent we launch a general call for wisdom.

...

However, it is just as excessive and irresponsible to invoke the "right to freedom of expression" - the right to say anything, in any way, against anybody. Freedom of expression is not absolute. Countries have laws that define the framework for exercising this right and which, for instance, condemn racist language. There are also specific rules pertaining to the cultures, traditions and collective psychologies in the respective societies that regulate the relationship between individuals and the diversity of cultures and religions.

...

We are at a crossroads. The time has come for women and men who reject this dangerous division of people into two worlds to start building bridges based on common values. They must assert the inalienable right to freedom of expression and, at the same time, demand measured exercise of it. We need to promote an open, self-critical approach, to repudiate exclusive truths and narrow-minded, binary visions of the world.

Munich

Hannah and I, with my brother Steve, saw Munich last night. It didn't feel like a Steven Spielberg film, apart from the final third of the film not as good the first two-thirds - a common feature of Spielberg's recent work (AI, Minority Report, War of the Worlds). The film tells a fictional account based on real events of what happened after the murder of 11 Israeli hostages by a Palestinian extremist group at the 1972 Munich Olympics. The message comes across loud and clear that violence begets violence and is unable to bring any kind of resolution, let alone a peaceful resolution where there is conflict. Spielberg has come under criticism for showing that both Palestinians and Israelis have perpetrated violence and morally culable.  Violence is destructive and rather than protecting family, home, land, it destroys these things, or at least, fills them with fear. At one point the main characer says home is with his family and that then can be anywhere, it does not need to be in Israel. Maybe when home becomes a piece of land or a building, it ceases to be home. Home can be created anywhere if we are with those we love.

Films like Munich, Hotel Rwanda, Schindler's List, Cry Freedom are important. And it is good to see that such films are getting made. When they are well made they help us understand and learn from our history, especially the horrors of our history.

young adult church resource

This past week I've been teaching full-time and so my time to blog has been denied me. I've got another to go, then half-term, so it might be another blog-lite week next week as well. I spent last weekend with Mark Greer and others, completing (almost) a new resource to help Baptist churches engage better with young adults (18-35s). It's been an interesting exercise, especially the thoughts and perspectives from friends on how they feel about church, life and the major transitions that life in your 20's inevitably bring. There is much the church can do better at and do less of to help young adults find their place in church life. I think the most important thing is to listen. As churches we generally not very good at listening. We can speak and do and sing, etc, but we don't make space to listen. The resource will hopefully be out end of April/beginning of May, and we're planning to set up a group blog as a place to talk more on these issues. As Baptists there are some exciting things happening at the moment at a national level - the resource we're writing, some other stuff to help churches re-think and reflect on their work with children (oh, how we need that!), as well as opportunities at BU council (the governing type body of the BU) to ask some big questions about the future of the church.