Promoting doubt

Richard Nixon is hardly someone you would think might be able to provide us with some good advice about how the church should face the challenges of what the Pope on his recent visit to Britain referred to as aggressive secularism . Forever tarnished because of Watergate, he's an unlikely inspiration for a post on a Christian blog.

Nixon wrote a book in the mid-80's called No More Vietnams. Although Nixon tried to justify the way he handled the Vietnam conflict, he came to see that the future demanded a different approach. If Western values were to triumph in the developing world, Western nations needed to use their prosperity to feed the poor rather than simply trying to gain the upper hand militarily.

Although much of his analysis applies to the Cold War and is perhaps rendered obsolete by recent history, he makes an important point: ideological battles are not won by the strength of arguments or even by military superiority. Ideology is worth squat if it doesn't actually change people's lives for the better.

Which brings me back to the Pope's statement about aggressive secularism. In the last decade or so I have heard the cry go up for a more aggressive Christian response to secularism. The subtext is that there is an ideological battle going on and we are not winning it because we are not shouting loud enough and condemning stridently enough those who oppose us. The cry is usually for more protest and utlimately points in the direction of Christian intolerance. However, there is a danger that if we meet those who oppose our faith in the same spirit we will become more like them and less like Jesus.

Fortunately, there are many capable and able Christian apologists - for example, John Lennox , Alister McGrath, to name a couple - out there who, in my opinion, are putting together robust answers to Dawkins, Hitchens, et al. It is good to have people who can clearly and publicly articulate the Christian faith.

It is important that Christians are able to give a reason for the hope within them, however, I have the feeling that the impact of Christian apologetics on secular society will be minimal. I say that not because of the quality of the apologists or their work, but because there is in general an unwillingness to even consider the possibility of an alternative to the secular worldview. Having said that, if any apologist is reading, please keep up the good work - we still need to be able to answer our opponents!

Which is where Nixon can help us. We might not be able to win the ideological battles in the ways in which ideological battles in the past have been won, but I think we can operate in ways that disarm those who want to marginalise the Christian faith. We can invest in our communities. We can spend ourselves and our money on behalf of those in need. Our era is one in which people expect both little and much from the church. It sometimes feels as if society expects the church to do nothing of practical relevance but at the same time expects the church to do much. We must act in a way that causes our communities to doubt their prejudices against the church. We might find that promoting this kind of doubt is necessary if we are to effectively promote faith.

Please don't think I'm suggesting that this will result in mass conversions. It might and it might not. That isn't really the important thing. What's important is whether or not the church is seen to be acting in a way that faithfully reflects the heart of Christ for this world. Is the Christian community functioning in a way that is consistent with it's identity as Christian? That's the question.

How Sky+ could have saved the Church of Scotland (or not)

I must admit that even though my friend was a man of good character and unimpeachable integrity, I did have to question a statement he made over lunch.

I asked him why he thought the Church of Scotland had gone into decline. (Just for the record, the decline of the decline of the Church of Scotland is not hearsay. See here and here).

I was totally unprepared for his response: The Forsyte Saga.

This classy drama from the golden age of the BBC drew the faithful away from the kirk on a Sunday evening and seriously weakened the church of Knox and the reformation. If you think I'm kidding: "Many people preferred to watch the Forsyte Saga on television to attending evening services at their local kirk." Read the whole thing here.

Now it would be comforting for those outside the C.o.S. to think it was a specifically Scottish and Presbyterian problem. However - behold - the Methodists way down in the deep south of England were under attack from the same Beeb drama!

Read the history of Teignmouth Methodist. Teignmouth is in South Devon! Auntie has obviously no ethnic prejudice when it comes to distracting the faithful! Here's the killer line:

"By 1961 there were only 23 left in the Sunday School and Evening Services were very poorly attended. The BBC's production of the Forsyth (sic) Saga caused Leaders' Meetings to discuss the timing of their evening services. This affected all the churches and in 1967 the galleries were removed from our church."

This is a church with a history: General Booth had even preached here.

Of course, it would be inaccurate and superficial to blame Sunday night tv for the decline of the historic churches in Britain. There were many other factors that ranged from theology to urban planning and development.

And we'd be foolish to think that because we are free in the Spirit and not dead and traditional like some established churches that we are somehow immune to the cultural forces of our day. In fact, describing historic churches as dead and boring might reveal more about our own perceived self-importance than the reality of what is happening in at least some historic churches.

The question is not just "What can we learn from the challenges Christians faced in the past?" Though that is a very good question. The question is "What has got hold of our hearts?"

It might be tempting to think that the C.o.S. and the Methodists were unfortunate to face their great challenges in an era before recording tv programmes was possible. Or that if some prophet had stood up and urged "Keep coming to the Sunday evening sevrice, saith the Lord, for the day will come when you shall be able to see it all again on UKGold, and the glory of the latter remake of The Forsyte Saga with Damian Lewis will far exceed the glory of what you now see," all would have been well.

For all it's benefits, Sky+ is unlikely to help us squarely face the challenges to the church the enemy will pose in our day - and by "enemy", I mean the enemy, not the BBC.

Edward the Confessor and 21st Century Christianity

I caught up with the BBC's The Normans on iPlayer. I hadn't realised that the Normans were descendants of the Vikings. Nor had I realised that the invasion of England was due to a dispute about who was England's rightful king in the wake of Edward the Confessor dying without children.

Edward the Confessor's reign was very successful. A flourishing economy and a very organised, efficient system of government (and taxation) made England a leader in Europe. Hard to believe that it had all fallen into enemy hands within twenty-five years.

Edward also had a reputation for godliness; the Catholic Church eventually beatified him. Unfortunately, his childlessness, was it seems, a direct consequence of the spirituality that made him a candidate for sainthood. Rumour had it, that, though married, he remained a virgin. His spirituality, which undoubtedly at least partially accounts for his success as a ruler, robbed him of a successor. Ultimately, the lack of a natural successor not only undermined the achievements of his reign, but was central to the fall of England into the hands of the Normans. Edward the Confessor, to the detriment of Anglo-Saxon England, didn't have an Edward the Successor.(For our Scottish readers, the Scots decided to partner with the Normans, with the result that Scotland became a cosmopolitan economic powerhouse in the 11th century).

And my point? Well, it's quite simple: the church can enjoy success and have a reputation for being deeply spiritual, but completely forget that unless we have a "next generation" we're only a few decades away from decline and possibly even oblivion.

I do get concerned when I attend conferences or meetings that are considered "cutting edge" and there are only a handful of teens and twenty-somethings present - and sometimes none at all. I worry about the impact of time heavy, programme dependant discipleship approaches and approaches to spirituality and how this impacts young parents with young children. I have to ask myself continually "Are we presenting discipleship and Christian commitment in a way that is setting people up for failure?" Is it possible to be so caught up with our revelation of what we think the Holy Spirit is doing that we don't even notice that most of the people at the party - like me - are mid-life plus?

I know that there are lot of good things happening amongst younger people today. However, I do have this feeling that if we don't frequently remind ourselves of the need for a next generation, the topic could easily drift of the agenda.

So there you have it. Edward the Confessor made me think on my day off. Perhaps his celibacy within marriage will be of some profit after all.

Letting down the drawbridge of our heart

Some stories are real life tragedies that have all the ingredients of a morality tale and really do need to be told.

There was a tragic story about the deaths of an elderly mother and her severely disabled daughter in the media a few days ago.

A person delivering leaflets noticed that when he pushed his flyers through the letter box of one home, he was met with flies escaping through the open letter box. He called the police and they discovered that both mother and daughter were dead. It is more than likely that the mother died and her daughter had no way of calling for help and starved to death.

This tragedy had its roots in decisions that were taken many years back. In the late 1990's the mother refused further help from the local authorities after wheelchair ramps and rails had been fitted.

Consequently, no panic alarm was fitted. No-one was keeping an eye on this family. And the neighbours were kept at arm's length. This lady had pulled up the drawbridge of her heart, not realising that what appeared to make her secure in her own castle exposed her to a danger she might never have imagined.

"We don't need your help" can seem like a very courageous, stoical approach to life and the difficulties it sometimes brings. However, the pride and determination that it produces can leave those that we love - as well as ourselves - very vulnerable.

It might be argued that those who knew about this mother and daughter should have been more intrusive, but that is unfair. It is unfair to lay blame at the door of those who have a lesser duty of care, especially in such instances when the primary carer has the moral and mental capacity and legal right to make decisions that affect the future of those in their charge.

When people isolate themselves they are in no position to blame others for not trying to get in touch or for not looking out for them.

Tragically, this elderly lady actually had placed a banner on her roof about three years ago with "Help" written on it. We don't know if anyone took any notice.

Unfortunately, even our cries for help can be overlooked or unheard if we have insisted for so long that we don't need help from others.

Jesus didn't just come to save individuals. He came to form a community of redeemed people who would serve each other in love. We do need each other! Why not let down the drawbridge of your heart and allow some traffic across?

Safety Behaviours

I read an article today on whether Aspirin really is the kind of talismanic pill it is sometimes thought to be. A psychologist commented that when people are frightened they sometimes resort to "safety behaviours". In other words they do things that might not reduce the real threat in any way, but their actions will make them feel safer.

Sometimes the church resorts to "safety behaviours". This post is really another follow up to Uneasy Vision.

One of our "saftey behaviours", in my opinion, is that of conspiracy theories.

I think our culture loves conspiracy theories. The Da Vinci Code, The Bourne Series, 24. And so do some Christinas. Speculation about the antichrist: I can remember the excitement of reading a book and discovering on page one hundred and something that Anwar Sadat was the antichrist. (He wasn't.). The existence of giant Nephilim like creatures hiding in the earth waiting to be revealed in the end times. Multinational companies whose Satanic control is revealed by their New Age logo. And the many scare stories about what the U.S. federal government is about to do to Christians.

I want to suggest that even if there is a grain of truth in some conspiracy theories, we risk indulging in "safety behaviours" because we are missing the real threats to our faith.

In a sermon yesterday I referred to a book by Oliver James Affluenza. Although I disagreed profoundly with some of James' solutions, his analysis of where western society is at was, I thought, very accurate. What I kept thinking was "Why wasn't this written by a Christian?" The answer? I don't know. But I do sometimes feel as though we get sidetracked into things that produce very little that is in any way helpful.

The psychologist in the article I referred to above, advised that instead of resorting to the safety behaviour of taking a pill people should "choose something healthy that [they] can do on a daily basis such as eating a good breakfast or taking the stairs instead of the lift when [they] get to work..."

Praying, sharing our faith, being kind, showing love and concern, having a servant heart. Not perhaps as exciting as conspiracy theories. Possibly not even as comforting. In the long run, however, it's this sort of Christianity, practised by followers of Jesus up and down the country that has the real potential to change the nation.

See you on the stairs.

Mega church is still church

I didn't think charismatic mega churches did this sort of thing any more. Refreshing.

Where did all those people go?

Just before Christmas our band did an event in a Church of Scotland church building. In conversation with the minister of the church, I remarked at how impressive the building was. I enthused at how wonderful his Christmas services must be in a building that was so suited to the traditonal type carol service. He replied that only a few people turned up because most of his congregation were elderly and struggled to turn out to evening events.

He then told me that at one time the church seated 980 people. On Sundays when communion was served they had to have two services. Amazing!

No doubt this was the case throughout Scotland - and the rest of the UK. Where did all those people go? What happened?

Farewell

Well, after eleven and a half years my time as pastor of Elim Church Crawley has come to an end.

Last weekend we had a farewell banquet. What a feast that was! And some very kind people brought some very gracious tributes. It was a bit like being present at your own funeral...I don't actually think my funeral will be as good as the farewell do - not that I'll have much to do with it!

Beryl and the children and I really do appreciate Elim Church Crawley for fantastic support and patience during our time with this wonderful church. We have learnt so much, grown so much and we are leaving with a greater vision of God and deeper love and respect for His peeople. Well done ECC. You are going on to greater things.

Volunteers

I was discussing volunteering with a relatively new Christian. I loved his take on it.

"It's not such much the church asking me to do something as God asking me through the church." Now there's a thought. What about that for an ecclesiology?

A church like heaven

I spent some time with a friend the other day who is a little older than me.

He told me of his experiences in the early days of what was known as the renewal movement.

His church was opposed to the gifts of the Spirit and those who wanted to know more were forced to meet in secret and discuss such things.

Eventually people began to leave their evangelical churches and form new charismatic churches. He was involved in one locally, almost from its inception.

What was it like? "Like being in heaven". That's what he felt.

I guess sometimes we take our Pentecostal / Charismatic heritage just a little bit for granted.

Thursday Thoughts

I wondered what you'd make of this clip from a David Wilkerson sermon. A couple of people have sent it to me. Love to hear your thoughts.

Two great churches. One great cause.

Most of my readers will know by now that my family and I are moving from Crawley to Glasgow in the autumn.

The last few weeks have been taken up with discussion, prayer and planning the move northwards.

We are very excited about the door that God has opened for us in Glasgow and have felt very welcomed by the church and its leaders. It's an incredible church with a great heritage stretching back to the early days of the Pentecostal movement.

It wasn't an easy decision to leave Crawley. Our lives have been so enriched by the people of Elim Church Crawley. We have had eleven and a half wonderful years serving this church and seeing God do so many new and exciting things. We'll never forget the Crawley years and hope that our friendships forged there will continue throughout our lives. Thanks to all you Crawley guys who have been so supportive of our decision.

So it's all change. New location, but same objectives: to reach people with the Good News and help them to become wholehearted followers of Jesus.

Glasgow Elim Church. Elim Church Crawley. Two great churches. One great cause.

Christianity Lite?

I have a confession to make. I watched Joel Osteen speak at the Hillsong Conference. And...wait for it...I liked much of what he had to say.

One comment stuck out. He told how he is often criticised for preaching Christianity lite. Then he told of someone in his church who said she'd had forty years of Christianity heavy and she'd take Christianity lite any day.

Something there to reflect on I think.

Apostolic remains?

The Vatican claims that the remains of the apostle Paul have been found. You can read more here

The prevailing power of an almost lost story

The Lost History of Christianity by Philip Jenkins is a must read. I am saying that even though I've only read two chapters! I think this book is going to be promoted in many places as a must read. There's so much in it. I do hope the BBC or Channel 4 or someone turns it into a documentary.

Its title sums up the main thread of the book: a lost story of how the Christian faith spread East and thrived for a thousand years after the fall of Rome. That story in itself is one that is little known and unfamiliarity makes it all the more exciting - you really don't know what's going to happen next!

In reality though, it is much more. A feel for the complex relationship between Islam and Christianity emerges from stories of interaction between Christians and Muslims. The refreshing approaches to mission of the Jacobites and the Nestorians, who despite their theological shortcomings were intent on winning the world for Christ. The towering figure of Bishop Timothy and the vast spiritual empire that he led. And perhaps most surprisingly, the relative backwardness of the Western Church and the darkness of the European continent.

There are pointers as to how faiths survive persecution and setback and why reversal comes about in the first place.

And supremely, the brute fact that even an expression of Christianity as vibrant as that described in the pages of The Lost History of Christianity can be swept away almost without a trace. And therein lies the strength of the book - to engage you emotionally as well as intellectually.

Articles of faith

A few Easter articles for some reflection.

Rod Liddle gives the C.o.E. a hard time in the The Spectator .

Archbishop Sentamu reminds us of the hope Easter brings in The Telegraph .

Joel Rosenberg brings us some very encouraging news from the Islamic world.

The religious right in the U.S. admitting they are in trouble here and here

And just when you thought it was history, The Turin Shroud seems to be making a come back.

At the hub of the community

The Times recently reported on the government's plans to help charities and churches to deliver health, day care and post office services. Such a move would put church right back at the heart of local communities.

This really could be an opportunity for the church to serve its community in really practical ways. No doubt the exposure and accessibility created would have potentially very positive spin offs.

Back to the future

Leonard Sweet (who looks suspiciously like Trevor Eve) is interviewed in the latest YFC Magazine, and makes a remark about church that I think merits some reflection:

"In the East and the South, Christianity is growing. One is a very highly liturgical almost Eastern Orthodox - smells, bells, chants -form of Christianity and the other a kind of back to basics Pentecostalism. Both are uing interfaces that work with their culture, so in some ways, traditional churches are not traditional enough."

ps. Which one's Sweet and which one's Eve (probably better known as Boyd from Waking the Dead)? Can you imagine Boyd leading a church?

Getting desperate with God in Starbucks

I was having a discussion recently about the future of the church, and, inevitably cafe church came into the conversation.

As I reflected on the discussion, I thought about some of the people who I've met "in church" with really desperate needs. I asked myself this question, "When life gets really desperate, and you need to get desperate with God, how do you get desperate in cafe church?"

What does "desperation" look like in that context?

Come to us or go to them?

I always enjoy reading Steve Addison's blog . A recent post on missional church caught my eye.

The post covers an article by Dan Kimball. For a while now some very influential voices have been advocating missional church as opposed to attractional church as the way forward. The missional church, if I understand it correctly, is one which has as its focus equipping people and sending them out into the community to do the works of the kingdom. Attractional church on the other hand seeks to attract people to its building / campus. That is probably oversimplifying the concepts, but in essence that is the supposed difference in the two approaches to church. Advocates of the missional way of doing things often argue that their way is the most faithful to the New Testament.

But it would appear that perhaps all is not well in missional world. Listen to these comments from Kimball:

"Conversely, some from our staff recently visited a self-described missional church. It was 35 people. That alone is not a problem. But the church had been missional for ten years, and it hadn't grown, multiplied, or planted any other churches in a city of several million people. That was a problem.

Another outspoken advocate of the house church model sees it as more missional and congruent with the early church. But his church has the same problem. After fifteen years it hasn't multiplied. It's a wonderful community that serves the homeless, but there's no evidence of non-Christians beginning to follow Jesus. In the same city several megachurches are seeing conversions and disciples matured."

You'll find Steve Addison's post here and Dan Kimball's thoughts here