This time last week I had put up my tent and was getting ready to get stuck into the Greenbelt festival at Cheltenham racecourse.
One of the keynote speakers this year was Tony Campolo. He is a 78 year old Professor of Sociology at Eastern University in Pennsylvania and is as an associate pastor in the Baptist church. I’d heard the name, and had seen references to things he said in the Christian press over the years. I knew he was an Evangelical Christian and assumed, (wrongly as it turned out), that as an American evangelical he would be verging on the fundamentalist. (If you want to find out more about him go to www.tonycampolo.org.)
During his talk he referred to himself (and another Greenbelt speaker Shane Clairborne) as “Red Letter Christians”. This was not a phrase I’d come across before, but during the course of his talk, (and subsequently reading one of his books), I came to understand what it means.
Apparently the phrase was first used by a radio journalist interviewing another American theologian Jim Wallis. The interviewer was trying to pigeonhole Wallis as a certain type of Christian – Evangelical, Liberal, and Charismatic? Having failed to do so, the journalist said to Wallis “So you’re one of those Red Letter Christians – you know – the ones who are really into the verses of the Bible that are in red letters.” Wallis agreed he was. (Quote taken from “Red Letter Christians – a citizen’s guide to faith and politics” Tony Campolo)
In some versions of the Bible, the words spoken by Jesus are printed in red. So Red Letter Christians seek to follow the teachings of Jesus and are committed to living out the things that Jesus taught. Sounds good to me!
You’d think all Christians would be Red Letter Christians, but the reality is that many aren’t, particularly in America. Why? As Tony Campolo points out in his book “Red Letter Christians – a citizen’s guide to faith and politics” what differentiates Red Letter Christians from other Christians, is the commitment by Red Letter Christians to social justice. And sadly many Christians do not have the same commitment.
I think it is important though to make sure that social justice doesn't become the be all and end all. And Campolo tends to agree as he says in his book that Red Letter Christians:
1. Hold to the same theological convicitions that define Evangelicals by beliving in the doctrines set down in the Apostles Creed which are central to what the Church has held over the centuries.
2. RLCs have a very high regard for scripture. They emphasise the "red letetrs" becuase they believe that the Bible can only be understood from the persepctve of Christ Jesus.
3. RLCs believe that Jesus can be alive and present in everyone and that salvation depends on him alone.
In fact Campolo would argue that these three have to be present and then following the red letters is a response.
I am pleased to call myself a Red Letter Christian.
For more information see http://www.redletterchristians.org/
Friday 31 August 2012
Monday 27 August 2012
Faith, Hope but which Charity?
Back from Greenbelt 2012. Had a great time and heard some great talks from Shane Claiborne, Tony Campolo and Peter Owen - Jones. Trying to process what I've heard. The talks were of faith and through we all live in challenging times, contained a great deal of hope.
And that brings me to charity.
Whilst I'm trying to process what I've heard, I've come home feeling that I should be giving a bit more to charity. But which one / ones? Home? Abroad? So many to choose from and in so many sectors.
But I feel I would like to support something to do with housing (given my mortgage lending background) or environmental.
Have spent the evening looking at various options but have got no further. So blogger friends I'm asking you for some ideas. Have you got any experience of charities in these sectors? Christian or otherwise.
Let me know.
And that brings me to charity.
Whilst I'm trying to process what I've heard, I've come home feeling that I should be giving a bit more to charity. But which one / ones? Home? Abroad? So many to choose from and in so many sectors.
But I feel I would like to support something to do with housing (given my mortgage lending background) or environmental.
Have spent the evening looking at various options but have got no further. So blogger friends I'm asking you for some ideas. Have you got any experience of charities in these sectors? Christian or otherwise.
Let me know.
Saturday 18 August 2012
The wisdom of Solomon
You may have seen on the news recently the story of Tony Nicklinson from Melksham. In 2005 Mr. Nicklinson suffered a severe stroke which has left him totally paralysed. But he still has all his mental faculties. He can communicate via a computer but otherwise can do nothing for himself. He has now gone to court asking for the court to allow someone else to end his life.
In a recent interview with BBC Wiltshire Mr. Nicklinson said:
I have locked-in syndrome and it makes my life a living nightmare. I cannot speak and I am also paralysed below the neck, which means I need someone to do everything for me. For example, 90% of itches have to be endured because by the time someone comes to scratch it and I have laboriously explained where it is, the itch has gone. Now I just put up with them.
We live in a wonderful age where people (in the developed world anyway) have access to wonderful medical care meaning people are living longer and doctors are able to treat diseases and illnesses that in the past would have meant people dying. But the other side of this is that people are being kept alive through what the medical profession called “heroic measures”. This means “ … a treatment or course of therapy which possesses a high risk of causing further damage to a patient's health, but is undertaken as a last resort with the understanding that any lesser treatment will surely result in failure.”
Interestingly, one of the doctors who treated Mr. Nicklinson for the stroke back in 2005 has said that he would have withheld treatment had he known the long term outcome.
In recent months I have found myself dealing with many people who have been faced with seeing a loved one slowly die, and the tacit question is whether it would be more humane for some kind of assisted suicide. The gut instinct is “Yes”. However, it is not as simple as that. There are many issues associated with this topic not least (from our perspective) what is the Christian stance. And that stance can be summarised as that human life is a God given gift and should not be taken away.
I have found a helpful article by published by the Massachusetts Council of Churches in the USA on the internet http://www.masscouncilofchurches.org/docs/doc_suicide.htm#statement.
The article (although 11 years old) tries to set out Christian thinking. Put simply it says that assisted suicide carried out by a doctor is not desirable but equally neither are “medical heroics”.
The above was the basis of my newsletter to my churches in July. On Friday 17th August the High Court ruled it would be illegal for someone to assist Tony Nicklinson to die. The thrust of the argument seems to be that someone would have to kill Tony Nicklinson and that is murder. The judgment said it was something for Parliament to decide.
Who would be a judge? Who would be a doctor? But who would be Tony Nicklinson?
In a recent interview with BBC Wiltshire Mr. Nicklinson said:
I have locked-in syndrome and it makes my life a living nightmare. I cannot speak and I am also paralysed below the neck, which means I need someone to do everything for me. For example, 90% of itches have to be endured because by the time someone comes to scratch it and I have laboriously explained where it is, the itch has gone. Now I just put up with them.
We live in a wonderful age where people (in the developed world anyway) have access to wonderful medical care meaning people are living longer and doctors are able to treat diseases and illnesses that in the past would have meant people dying. But the other side of this is that people are being kept alive through what the medical profession called “heroic measures”. This means “ … a treatment or course of therapy which possesses a high risk of causing further damage to a patient's health, but is undertaken as a last resort with the understanding that any lesser treatment will surely result in failure.”
Interestingly, one of the doctors who treated Mr. Nicklinson for the stroke back in 2005 has said that he would have withheld treatment had he known the long term outcome.
In recent months I have found myself dealing with many people who have been faced with seeing a loved one slowly die, and the tacit question is whether it would be more humane for some kind of assisted suicide. The gut instinct is “Yes”. However, it is not as simple as that. There are many issues associated with this topic not least (from our perspective) what is the Christian stance. And that stance can be summarised as that human life is a God given gift and should not be taken away.
I have found a helpful article by published by the Massachusetts Council of Churches in the USA on the internet http://www.masscouncilofchurches.org/docs/doc_suicide.htm#statement.
The article (although 11 years old) tries to set out Christian thinking. Put simply it says that assisted suicide carried out by a doctor is not desirable but equally neither are “medical heroics”.
The above was the basis of my newsletter to my churches in July. On Friday 17th August the High Court ruled it would be illegal for someone to assist Tony Nicklinson to die. The thrust of the argument seems to be that someone would have to kill Tony Nicklinson and that is murder. The judgment said it was something for Parliament to decide.
Who would be a judge? Who would be a doctor? But who would be Tony Nicklinson?
Wednesday 15 August 2012
Ark anyone?
Our summer holiday was interrupted by rain. The plan was to attend a music festival in in Dorset for 5 days and then travel to Pembrokeshire for 10 days. There was only one flaw – we intended to camp!
We managed to endure the music festival – despite liquid mud lapping round us – but decided a campsite perched near a cliff, one field away from the sea was going too far. So we cancelled and spent time at my parents’ home instead. (Thankfully by then we had some decent weather.)
The music festival - http://www.larmertreefestival.co.uk - is fortunately not on the scale of Glastonbury; and whilst it had Glastonbury like mud, it also has posh facilities like showers. And it was whilst queuing for a shower one morning that I got talking to a man called Adam. Inevitably, we started talking about the weather and we both said we couldn’t help but wonder if the poor summer was down to climate change. We both felt that the summers over the last 10 years or so have been very wet and perhaps this was down to climate change.
Of course we cannot know for sure. But just because we cannot be sure, does not mean that as Christians we should not be concerned about the potential impact of climate change.
A Christian group that lobbies on the need to do something about climate change is Operation Noah. http://www.operationnoah.org/
In its declaration issued at the start of Lent 2012 Operation Noah said:
“Humans, made in God’s image, have unique responsibility for the wellbeing of creation (Genesis 1:26, 2:15). We are to care for the earth because it is gift, the product of God’s love. No sparrow falls without God knowing. Humanity has always had the capacity to destroy our environment, but today we have this to an unprecedented extent. Whereas previous generations did not know the damage they were causing, we do. We must use our power wisely to promote the flourishing of future generations and the diversity of life on earth. This is the responsibility of every Church and every believer.”
This statement sums up what Christian theology about creation is. That we are God’s custodians, his stewards, created by him to care for his planet.
The Methodist hymn writer Fred Pratt Green wrote these words:
Earth is the Lord's: it is ours to enjoy it,
Ours, as God's stewards, to farm and defend.
From its pollution, misuse, and destruction,
good Lord deliver us, world without end!
Whether or not you are a person of faith, and merely a person of science, all of us have a duty to care for our planet and be concerned about what seems to be happening to the climate. And it seems to me that even if the climate isn't changing, taking steps to ensure that people minimise our impact on our hom,e has to be a priority regardless.
We managed to endure the music festival – despite liquid mud lapping round us – but decided a campsite perched near a cliff, one field away from the sea was going too far. So we cancelled and spent time at my parents’ home instead. (Thankfully by then we had some decent weather.)
The music festival - http://www.larmertreefestival.co.uk - is fortunately not on the scale of Glastonbury; and whilst it had Glastonbury like mud, it also has posh facilities like showers. And it was whilst queuing for a shower one morning that I got talking to a man called Adam. Inevitably, we started talking about the weather and we both said we couldn’t help but wonder if the poor summer was down to climate change. We both felt that the summers over the last 10 years or so have been very wet and perhaps this was down to climate change.
Of course we cannot know for sure. But just because we cannot be sure, does not mean that as Christians we should not be concerned about the potential impact of climate change.
A Christian group that lobbies on the need to do something about climate change is Operation Noah. http://www.operationnoah.org/
In its declaration issued at the start of Lent 2012 Operation Noah said:
“Humans, made in God’s image, have unique responsibility for the wellbeing of creation (Genesis 1:26, 2:15). We are to care for the earth because it is gift, the product of God’s love. No sparrow falls without God knowing. Humanity has always had the capacity to destroy our environment, but today we have this to an unprecedented extent. Whereas previous generations did not know the damage they were causing, we do. We must use our power wisely to promote the flourishing of future generations and the diversity of life on earth. This is the responsibility of every Church and every believer.”
This statement sums up what Christian theology about creation is. That we are God’s custodians, his stewards, created by him to care for his planet.
The Methodist hymn writer Fred Pratt Green wrote these words:
Earth is the Lord's: it is ours to enjoy it,
Ours, as God's stewards, to farm and defend.
From its pollution, misuse, and destruction,
good Lord deliver us, world without end!
Whether or not you are a person of faith, and merely a person of science, all of us have a duty to care for our planet and be concerned about what seems to be happening to the climate. And it seems to me that even if the climate isn't changing, taking steps to ensure that people minimise our impact on our hom,e has to be a priority regardless.
Tuesday 14 August 2012
Why bother qualifying to teach?
On 31st July I sent an email to Michael Gove the Education minister:
Dear Mr. Gove,
I have seen reports in several newspapers over the weekend stating that you are planning to allow academies to employ unqualified teachers. As a chair of governors at an academy I find this move concerning.
Over the last 20 or so years moves have been made by Conservative and Labour governments to raise the standards of the teaching profession. And rightly so. The consequence is that now the vast majority of teachers at the school I am involved with (and I suspect most other schools too) are professionals seeking to encourage young people to learn and develop the skills they need for an increasingly uncertain world.
Your latest initiative sends a clear message to qualified teachers “They are not good enough” and their qualification is worthless. Moreover, this idea of yours further knocks the confidence of an already demoralised profession.
Of course why stop at teaching? I have a degree in law (though did not take the professional exams needed to qualify as a lawyer) But why shouldn’t I now be able to appear in court? Is Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke proposing to do the same as you? No of course he isn’t because the professions need properly trained professionals. So why should teaching be treated differently?
Please drop this silly idea.
Today I've received a reply from one of his minnions:
Dear Rev'd Gray
Thank you for your email of 31 July addressed to the Secretary of State regarding your concerns about the employment of unqualified teachers in academies. I hope you are able to appreciate that the Secretary of State for Education receives a vast amount of correspondence and is unable to reply to each one personally. It is for this reason I have been asked to reply.
It was announced on 27 July that academies can employ teaching staff who they believe to be suitably qualified without the requirement for them to have Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). The Government remains committed to the importance of QTS as a benchmark for teacher quality and the vast majority of teachers will continue to have QTS which remains the highly respected professional status for teachers. We know that we have the best generation of teachers ever, while the quality of people training to teach and meet the QTS standards is rising each year.
The new freedom recognises that academy headteachers are best placed to make appointment decisions, including on occasions where, in their judgement, a suitably qualified teacher without QTS is the best person to employ. It will enable academies to employ professionals, such as scientists, engineers, musicians, trainers or experienced teachers from other sectors, who are well qualified and excellent teachers but do not have QTS. The highest quality of teaching is paramount to the success of each school and we trust headteachers to employ staff they believe to be well qualified for the job. All schools will remain accountable for the quality of teaching and the publication of school performance data.
Once again, thank you for writing.
Yours sincerely
David Chapman
Public Communications Unit
www.education.gov.uk
The message is very clear, Gove doesn't value teachers as he thinks anyone can teach.
I have two degrees; one in law and one in theology. They indicate that, at the time I was awarded them anyway, I knew something about the respective subjects. But that doesn't mean to say that I was capable of teaching the subject. Teaching isn't just about passing on knowledge. It is about encouraging, enabling, mentoring and communicating. Skills that someone who posseses knowledge doesn't necessarily have.
Dear Mr. Gove,
I have seen reports in several newspapers over the weekend stating that you are planning to allow academies to employ unqualified teachers. As a chair of governors at an academy I find this move concerning.
Over the last 20 or so years moves have been made by Conservative and Labour governments to raise the standards of the teaching profession. And rightly so. The consequence is that now the vast majority of teachers at the school I am involved with (and I suspect most other schools too) are professionals seeking to encourage young people to learn and develop the skills they need for an increasingly uncertain world.
Your latest initiative sends a clear message to qualified teachers “They are not good enough” and their qualification is worthless. Moreover, this idea of yours further knocks the confidence of an already demoralised profession.
Of course why stop at teaching? I have a degree in law (though did not take the professional exams needed to qualify as a lawyer) But why shouldn’t I now be able to appear in court? Is Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke proposing to do the same as you? No of course he isn’t because the professions need properly trained professionals. So why should teaching be treated differently?
Please drop this silly idea.
Today I've received a reply from one of his minnions:
Dear Rev'd Gray
Thank you for your email of 31 July addressed to the Secretary of State regarding your concerns about the employment of unqualified teachers in academies. I hope you are able to appreciate that the Secretary of State for Education receives a vast amount of correspondence and is unable to reply to each one personally. It is for this reason I have been asked to reply.
It was announced on 27 July that academies can employ teaching staff who they believe to be suitably qualified without the requirement for them to have Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). The Government remains committed to the importance of QTS as a benchmark for teacher quality and the vast majority of teachers will continue to have QTS which remains the highly respected professional status for teachers. We know that we have the best generation of teachers ever, while the quality of people training to teach and meet the QTS standards is rising each year.
The new freedom recognises that academy headteachers are best placed to make appointment decisions, including on occasions where, in their judgement, a suitably qualified teacher without QTS is the best person to employ. It will enable academies to employ professionals, such as scientists, engineers, musicians, trainers or experienced teachers from other sectors, who are well qualified and excellent teachers but do not have QTS. The highest quality of teaching is paramount to the success of each school and we trust headteachers to employ staff they believe to be well qualified for the job. All schools will remain accountable for the quality of teaching and the publication of school performance data.
Once again, thank you for writing.
Yours sincerely
David Chapman
Public Communications Unit
www.education.gov.uk
The message is very clear, Gove doesn't value teachers as he thinks anyone can teach.
I have two degrees; one in law and one in theology. They indicate that, at the time I was awarded them anyway, I knew something about the respective subjects. But that doesn't mean to say that I was capable of teaching the subject. Teaching isn't just about passing on knowledge. It is about encouraging, enabling, mentoring and communicating. Skills that someone who posseses knowledge doesn't necessarily have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)