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.
Wednesday, 15 August 2012
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.
Sunday, 20 May 2012
The story of a wounded knee
The Bible’s Society is running the Diamond Geezer campaign. Jubilee was a special year when wrongs were forgiven and debts written off. So in this very special Jubilee year, Bible Society is asking Christians across the country: ‘who are you indebted to?’
It could be an old school teacher, a midwife who delivered a baby or someone who prayed steadfastly for you – just someone to whom you feel ‘indebted’ because of their kindness and help.
http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/about-bible-society/what-we-do-in-england-and-wales/diamond-jubilee/
But equally we can feel “indebted” to someone because we have done them wrong and need their forgiveness to set free from a weight of guilt.
For over 30 years I carried round a sense of guilt for something I did to a friend at school. Or rather something I didn’t do.
My friend Shaun had a serious accident in the sports hall at school. He was running whilst playing basketball and crashed into a wall. It sounds funny but Shaun broke his knee and was in plaster for several months. It was just before the summer holidays and I promised him I’d visit.
And one day I set out to the next village where he lived. But on the way I met a girl I had a crush on and the hormones kicked in and instead of visiting Shaun I spent the afternoon chatting up the girl.
Back in school during the next term I felt really bad about not visiting my friend. And although he said he didn’t mind, boys will be boys after all, I was reminded of the incident every time we used the sports hall as there were skid marks from Shaun’s trainers on the gym floor!
This seemingly small incident niggled away in the back of my mind for some time until last year Shaun and I got back in touch on Facebook and I sent him an email apologising and he said he forgave me. It meant a lot.
Now as someone who has trained as a counsellor I know that many people feel weighed down by a sense of guilt for things they ought to do or should do. “I really ought to visit my elderly aunty” “I should go home and get dinner ready for the family rather than talking to my friend.” And these shoulds and oughts can become heavy chains for some people.
At the time of Jesus many people felt weighed down by the many hundreds of rules the Jewish faith imposed upon them. In fact this was commonly described as being “Yoked to the Torah”. The Torah being the Jewish law.
In Matthew 11: 28 – 29 Jesus says
28 If you are tired from carrying heavy burdens, come to me and I will give you rest. 29 Take the yoke[a] I give you. Put it on your shoulders and learn from me. I am gentle and humble, and you will find rest.
What Jesus meant was belief in him isn’t an invitation to an easy life but a life of being set free from the artificial burdens people impose on one anther whether through religious rules or the “Oughts” and the “Shoulds”.
Prayer
Lord Jesus, all of us from time to time carry around the weight of guilt whether for the bad things we have done, the good things we have not done, the things we have said or the things we did not say.
We are sorry and ask, that by knowing you forgive us, the burden of guilt may be taken from us.
Amen.
It could be an old school teacher, a midwife who delivered a baby or someone who prayed steadfastly for you – just someone to whom you feel ‘indebted’ because of their kindness and help.
http://www.biblesociety.org.uk/about-bible-society/what-we-do-in-england-and-wales/diamond-jubilee/
But equally we can feel “indebted” to someone because we have done them wrong and need their forgiveness to set free from a weight of guilt.
For over 30 years I carried round a sense of guilt for something I did to a friend at school. Or rather something I didn’t do.
My friend Shaun had a serious accident in the sports hall at school. He was running whilst playing basketball and crashed into a wall. It sounds funny but Shaun broke his knee and was in plaster for several months. It was just before the summer holidays and I promised him I’d visit.
And one day I set out to the next village where he lived. But on the way I met a girl I had a crush on and the hormones kicked in and instead of visiting Shaun I spent the afternoon chatting up the girl.
Back in school during the next term I felt really bad about not visiting my friend. And although he said he didn’t mind, boys will be boys after all, I was reminded of the incident every time we used the sports hall as there were skid marks from Shaun’s trainers on the gym floor!
This seemingly small incident niggled away in the back of my mind for some time until last year Shaun and I got back in touch on Facebook and I sent him an email apologising and he said he forgave me. It meant a lot.
Now as someone who has trained as a counsellor I know that many people feel weighed down by a sense of guilt for things they ought to do or should do. “I really ought to visit my elderly aunty” “I should go home and get dinner ready for the family rather than talking to my friend.” And these shoulds and oughts can become heavy chains for some people.
At the time of Jesus many people felt weighed down by the many hundreds of rules the Jewish faith imposed upon them. In fact this was commonly described as being “Yoked to the Torah”. The Torah being the Jewish law.
In Matthew 11: 28 – 29 Jesus says
28 If you are tired from carrying heavy burdens, come to me and I will give you rest. 29 Take the yoke[a] I give you. Put it on your shoulders and learn from me. I am gentle and humble, and you will find rest.
What Jesus meant was belief in him isn’t an invitation to an easy life but a life of being set free from the artificial burdens people impose on one anther whether through religious rules or the “Oughts” and the “Shoulds”.
Prayer
Lord Jesus, all of us from time to time carry around the weight of guilt whether for the bad things we have done, the good things we have not done, the things we have said or the things we did not say.
We are sorry and ask, that by knowing you forgive us, the burden of guilt may be taken from us.
Amen.
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
Breaking bread with Trevor
For me the story of Jesus’ appearance to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus is the loveliest of the resurrection stories. And it is certainly the most developed story. Its plot revolves around the failure of the two disciples to recognise their fellow traveller. The suspense builds until the moment when the two recognise the risen Lord and then he disappears from their presence. It is a wonderful story and I think most of us can picture it clearly in our minds.
As drama it has everything – sorrow, suspense, puzzlement, gradual dawning of light and then unexpected actions, astonished recognition, a flurry of excitement and activity. It is both a wonderful, unique spell binding tale and also a model for what being a Christian, from that day to this, is all about.
The origins of the story are debated and difficult to reconstruct. In fact some scholars – such as Dominic Crossan - argue that it probably didn’t happen and is included as a parable involving Jesus rather than a parable told by Jesus. We think nowadays that Luke’s gospel draws on Mark’s gospel and in Mark 16: 12 – 13 we are told:
12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
And it could be that Luke constructed his story of the road to Emmaus from these two verses in Mark. But do you know what? I don’t think it matters. I’m happy to accept it did happen as Luke describes but even if it is as Dominic Crossan says a parable involving Jesus, it still holds a huge truth.
Anyway, let’s look at the story for a moment. Over the years it has proved difficult to identify exactly where Emmaus is. There are several possibilities. The most likely place is mentioned in an ancient document that describes it as being 60 stadia from Jerusalem. A stadium was a Roman measurement of 600 feet, so 60 stadia or 36,000 feet equates to about 7 ½ miles. Other manuscripts place Emmaus as being about 160 stadia from Jerusalem or 19 ½ miles.
The opening of the story tells us it is the evening of Easter day. And we find two followers of Jesus going to Emmaus. We don’t know why. Are they going home? Are they going on business? Are they just running away from Jerusalem because they are afraid they may be arrested? We don’t know.
Initially we don’t know their names – though later we learn that one is Cleopas. (It is often said that the other one may have been Cleopas’ wife.)
And of course as we know so well from the story, when Jesus appears to them they do not recognise him. Or rather:
16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
Something, someone, (God perhaps?) kept them from recognising Jesus.
Those of us reading the story are told that the two are meeting the risen Jesus. But they do not know themselves.
Jesus starts a conversation with them by asking what they are talking about.
18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?”
Or as the NRSV puts it:
“Are you the only stranger in Jerusalem who does not know the things that have taken place there in these days?”
Of course the irony is that Cleopas thinks the stranger is the only person who doesn’t know about the events of the last few days. Whereas in fact it is the stranger Jesus who is the only one who does know the full meaning of all that has happened.
The two disciples assume they know much more about what has happened than the stranger who has joined them and Jesus plays along with it
19 “What things?” he asked.
And then the disciples tell the story no doubt tumbling over each other to fill in bits of information. And after having listened to them Jesus says to them:
25 ….. “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ[b] have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Despite this they still do not recognise Jesus. But even so, when they arrive at the village and the stranger Jesus is about to walk off they urge him to stay with them.
And for me this is where this wonderful story suddenly takes on great significance. This is the turning point in the story for us.
28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther.
Or as the NRSV puts it “he walked ahead as if he were going on”
In the custom of the time of Jesus, a guest was obliged to turn down an invitation to dine until it was vigorously repeated. So it could be said that Jesus is complying with the custom. However, there is deeper meaning to what Jesus does. Jesus’ action demonstrates that he never forces himself upon others. Jesus’ action shows that faith must always be spontaneous. Faith must be a voluntary response to God’s grace.
There is also meaning in “ … as if he were going farther.” “ … as if he were going on”. In Luke’s Gospel there is always a sense of Jesus journeying. He was journeying round Galilee and from the end of chapter 9 to the end of chapter 19 Jesus is journeying on the way to Jerusalem. For Luke then Jesus was always going further.
Once indoors, the scene shifts to the table for the evening meal.
30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them.
There is something about this that suggests other meals we know of involving Jesus such as the feeding of the five thousand and of course the Last Supper. The guest become the host and Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it and gives it to the two disciples.
As Alan Culpepper puts it in his commentary on Luke “The four verbs are Jesus’ signature in which the disciples (and readers) recognise Jesus”.
Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it and gives it to the two disciples.
We can tend to think of the meal at Emmaus as being like communion as if it was a special meal. Or a sacred act. It was these things but also it wasn’t either of these things. This was Jesus enjoying table fellowship with two friends and showing that such fellowship can become sacred.
Cleopas and his companion discovered at the table that their travelling companion was the Lord Jesus himself. And when they laid out the table and prepared the meal they did not prepare it as if it was going to be a sacred meal. It was a meal at which two companions invited a guest to dine with them. But in the act of sharing their bread with a stranger, they recognised the risen Lord in the stranger.
I mentioned Dominic Crossan earlier. In an interview he gave for the "Living the Questions" DVD discussion series, he says that whether we take the Emmaus story as an account of what actually happened, or merely as a parable involving Jesus, the truth remains the same. The real meaning of the story is that we find Jesus not through studying the scriptures – though that is preparatory and important – but by taking the stranger in. Not to eat your food but because if you believe everything is from God then the food you are sharing is God’s food.
When we sit with someone over coffee on at a church coffee morning or talk to some having a bowl of soup at a lunch club (or elsewhere)we are sharing communion. In that moment Jesus is with us.
An American pastor Wheaton Webb tells about a time when a stranger approached him and asked, "You couldn't let a man have a dollar for a meal?" A group of people was about to eat a potluck supper, so the pastor invited the man, who had the look of one who hadn't had a good meal for some time, to join them; they sat down at the end of one of the tables by themselves. "How long have you been on the road?" asked Webb. "A long time, a very long time," came the answer. "And it never occurred to you to settle down and take some steady work?" "No," the man replied, "I used to be a carpenter. But I'm one of those who has to be on his way. I'd never be happy settled in just one place." Webb comments: "It was odd the way he said it - like the wayfarer who visited Emmaus and who made as if he would have gone further until Cleopas and his companion (in the earlier episode) invited him to stay for supper." Webb asked him his name and he answered, "Mr. Immanuel."
As we know, Immanuel means "God-with-us."
Wheaton Webb concludes the story this way: "Presently he said his thanks and was off on his lonely journey that has no ending. And I thought: He still goes on his way, the hungry man, Mr. God-with-us, in his shabby coat, and always a look in his eyes as if he would go further. But when he had gone, my heart began to burn within me, and I had no doubt that Cleopas and his companion, in that silence that suddenly fell over their table, would have understood."
So would the eleven on the occasion when Jesus asked for something to eat, and so do we when the Lord occasionally appears in others who come to our tables hungry and lonely.
Much of this blog was the basis of a sermon I preached last Sunday 22nd April. After the service a young man who comes to the church occasionally - I'll call him Jason - came and spoke to me. "What you've preached on has just helped me make sense of something that happened to me a couple of weeks ago. And Jason told me his story.
Jason had been driving back home from the north of England. He stopped at a motorway service station for something to eat. The cafe was crowded and Jason was soon joined at his table by another traveller. In a very un British way they started to chat. And the other traveller said he was called Trevor and was a lorry driver. Jason said they talked for the best part of an hour and then Trevor left.
Jason told me he was left with a sense of something he couldn't put his finger on. But after hearing the idea of encountering Jesus through breaking bread with a stranger it all seemed to make sense.
Acknowledgements
Dominic Crossan interview from Living the questions 2. Study 12 "Practising resurrection" 2007 livingthequestions.com
Alan Culpepper - The New Interpreters Bible commentary Vol IX Luke
Wheaton Webb story via esermons.com
And of course thanks to Jason and Trevor.
As drama it has everything – sorrow, suspense, puzzlement, gradual dawning of light and then unexpected actions, astonished recognition, a flurry of excitement and activity. It is both a wonderful, unique spell binding tale and also a model for what being a Christian, from that day to this, is all about.
The origins of the story are debated and difficult to reconstruct. In fact some scholars – such as Dominic Crossan - argue that it probably didn’t happen and is included as a parable involving Jesus rather than a parable told by Jesus. We think nowadays that Luke’s gospel draws on Mark’s gospel and in Mark 16: 12 – 13 we are told:
12 Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13 These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
And it could be that Luke constructed his story of the road to Emmaus from these two verses in Mark. But do you know what? I don’t think it matters. I’m happy to accept it did happen as Luke describes but even if it is as Dominic Crossan says a parable involving Jesus, it still holds a huge truth.
Anyway, let’s look at the story for a moment. Over the years it has proved difficult to identify exactly where Emmaus is. There are several possibilities. The most likely place is mentioned in an ancient document that describes it as being 60 stadia from Jerusalem. A stadium was a Roman measurement of 600 feet, so 60 stadia or 36,000 feet equates to about 7 ½ miles. Other manuscripts place Emmaus as being about 160 stadia from Jerusalem or 19 ½ miles.
The opening of the story tells us it is the evening of Easter day. And we find two followers of Jesus going to Emmaus. We don’t know why. Are they going home? Are they going on business? Are they just running away from Jerusalem because they are afraid they may be arrested? We don’t know.
Initially we don’t know their names – though later we learn that one is Cleopas. (It is often said that the other one may have been Cleopas’ wife.)
And of course as we know so well from the story, when Jesus appears to them they do not recognise him. Or rather:
16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
Something, someone, (God perhaps?) kept them from recognising Jesus.
Those of us reading the story are told that the two are meeting the risen Jesus. But they do not know themselves.
Jesus starts a conversation with them by asking what they are talking about.
18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?”
Or as the NRSV puts it:
“Are you the only stranger in Jerusalem who does not know the things that have taken place there in these days?”
Of course the irony is that Cleopas thinks the stranger is the only person who doesn’t know about the events of the last few days. Whereas in fact it is the stranger Jesus who is the only one who does know the full meaning of all that has happened.
The two disciples assume they know much more about what has happened than the stranger who has joined them and Jesus plays along with it
19 “What things?” he asked.
And then the disciples tell the story no doubt tumbling over each other to fill in bits of information. And after having listened to them Jesus says to them:
25 ….. “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ[b] have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
Despite this they still do not recognise Jesus. But even so, when they arrive at the village and the stranger Jesus is about to walk off they urge him to stay with them.
And for me this is where this wonderful story suddenly takes on great significance. This is the turning point in the story for us.
28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther.
Or as the NRSV puts it “he walked ahead as if he were going on”
In the custom of the time of Jesus, a guest was obliged to turn down an invitation to dine until it was vigorously repeated. So it could be said that Jesus is complying with the custom. However, there is deeper meaning to what Jesus does. Jesus’ action demonstrates that he never forces himself upon others. Jesus’ action shows that faith must always be spontaneous. Faith must be a voluntary response to God’s grace.
There is also meaning in “ … as if he were going farther.” “ … as if he were going on”. In Luke’s Gospel there is always a sense of Jesus journeying. He was journeying round Galilee and from the end of chapter 9 to the end of chapter 19 Jesus is journeying on the way to Jerusalem. For Luke then Jesus was always going further.
Once indoors, the scene shifts to the table for the evening meal.
30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them.
There is something about this that suggests other meals we know of involving Jesus such as the feeding of the five thousand and of course the Last Supper. The guest become the host and Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it and gives it to the two disciples.
As Alan Culpepper puts it in his commentary on Luke “The four verbs are Jesus’ signature in which the disciples (and readers) recognise Jesus”.
Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it and gives it to the two disciples.
We can tend to think of the meal at Emmaus as being like communion as if it was a special meal. Or a sacred act. It was these things but also it wasn’t either of these things. This was Jesus enjoying table fellowship with two friends and showing that such fellowship can become sacred.
Cleopas and his companion discovered at the table that their travelling companion was the Lord Jesus himself. And when they laid out the table and prepared the meal they did not prepare it as if it was going to be a sacred meal. It was a meal at which two companions invited a guest to dine with them. But in the act of sharing their bread with a stranger, they recognised the risen Lord in the stranger.
I mentioned Dominic Crossan earlier. In an interview he gave for the "Living the Questions" DVD discussion series, he says that whether we take the Emmaus story as an account of what actually happened, or merely as a parable involving Jesus, the truth remains the same. The real meaning of the story is that we find Jesus not through studying the scriptures – though that is preparatory and important – but by taking the stranger in. Not to eat your food but because if you believe everything is from God then the food you are sharing is God’s food.
When we sit with someone over coffee on at a church coffee morning or talk to some having a bowl of soup at a lunch club (or elsewhere)we are sharing communion. In that moment Jesus is with us.
An American pastor Wheaton Webb tells about a time when a stranger approached him and asked, "You couldn't let a man have a dollar for a meal?" A group of people was about to eat a potluck supper, so the pastor invited the man, who had the look of one who hadn't had a good meal for some time, to join them; they sat down at the end of one of the tables by themselves. "How long have you been on the road?" asked Webb. "A long time, a very long time," came the answer. "And it never occurred to you to settle down and take some steady work?" "No," the man replied, "I used to be a carpenter. But I'm one of those who has to be on his way. I'd never be happy settled in just one place." Webb comments: "It was odd the way he said it - like the wayfarer who visited Emmaus and who made as if he would have gone further until Cleopas and his companion (in the earlier episode) invited him to stay for supper." Webb asked him his name and he answered, "Mr. Immanuel."
As we know, Immanuel means "God-with-us."
Wheaton Webb concludes the story this way: "Presently he said his thanks and was off on his lonely journey that has no ending. And I thought: He still goes on his way, the hungry man, Mr. God-with-us, in his shabby coat, and always a look in his eyes as if he would go further. But when he had gone, my heart began to burn within me, and I had no doubt that Cleopas and his companion, in that silence that suddenly fell over their table, would have understood."
So would the eleven on the occasion when Jesus asked for something to eat, and so do we when the Lord occasionally appears in others who come to our tables hungry and lonely.
Much of this blog was the basis of a sermon I preached last Sunday 22nd April. After the service a young man who comes to the church occasionally - I'll call him Jason - came and spoke to me. "What you've preached on has just helped me make sense of something that happened to me a couple of weeks ago. And Jason told me his story.
Jason had been driving back home from the north of England. He stopped at a motorway service station for something to eat. The cafe was crowded and Jason was soon joined at his table by another traveller. In a very un British way they started to chat. And the other traveller said he was called Trevor and was a lorry driver. Jason said they talked for the best part of an hour and then Trevor left.
Jason told me he was left with a sense of something he couldn't put his finger on. But after hearing the idea of encountering Jesus through breaking bread with a stranger it all seemed to make sense.
Acknowledgements
Dominic Crossan interview from Living the questions 2. Study 12 "Practising resurrection" 2007 livingthequestions.com
Alan Culpepper - The New Interpreters Bible commentary Vol IX Luke
Wheaton Webb story via esermons.com
And of course thanks to Jason and Trevor.
Sunday, 25 March 2012
Have a heart
We are living in interesting times to be a follower of Jesus aren’t we? It seems as if over the last few months every week there has been a news story suggesting that in this country anyway Christianity is on the wane and is under attack by secularists and atheists.
In February we had several such news items. The Court of Appeal found that Christian hotel owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull from Cornwall acted unlawfully in banning a homosexual couple from the hotel they run. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-15811223
We also had the court ruling that said it was illegal for Bideford Town Council to have prayers before meetings. An action brought by an atheist.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-17060065
Then Richard Dawkins’ “Foundation for Science and Reason”, published the result of a survey that found that Britain is not as Christian as is claimed in census information.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9081215/Christians-dont-want-religion-to-influence-public-life.html
Then Trevor Phillips Chair of the Equality Commission said that Christians who want to be exempt from equality legislation are like Muslims trying to impose sharia on Britain. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9087775/Christians-arent-above-the-law-says-equalities-chief-Trevor-Phillips.html
Then earlier this month The Sunday Telegraph published a story that said the Government will fight a case at the European Court of Human Rights in which two British women are seeking to establish their right to wear a cross at work.
A document seen by The Sunday Telegraph disclosed that ministers will argue that because it is not a “requirement” of the Christian faith, employers can ban the wearing of the cross and sack workers who insist on doing so. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9136191/Christians-have-no-right-to-wear-cross-at-work-says-Government.html
We also have the issue of gay marriage. And although the proposals seem to suggest that churches will not be obliged to marry gay couples, some Christians have spoken out against this saying that it undermines traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, said the "grotesque" plans would "shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world" if implemented. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/04/catholic-leader-government-gay-marriage
And last week leaders of Muslims and Sikhs in the UK also expressed opposition.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9154043/Muslims-and-Sikhs-attack-Camerons-gay-marriage-plan.html
On Wednesday just gone Academics Dr Sarah Johnsen and Dr Adam published Research into the involvement of faith groups in social and charity work has highlighted “inaccurate and out-of-date assumptions” still blighting their work. Basically, the research found that government money was still difficult to access, with civil servants wrongly assuming a faith organisation will put pressure on people they help to convert. The research also found some charities operate in the same way too.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9156381/Faith-groups-prevented-from-doing-vital-community-work-by-anti-religious-prejudice.html
Then finally we have the news that in a bid to boost the economy, Sunday trading hours will be relaxed for two months during the Olympics a move also opposed by many Christians. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17419351
So the last month / six weeks has seen plenty in the newspapers for Christians to get their teeth into. And all in all it can seem as if our faith is being attacked on a number of fronts.
But then among the gloom and doom came the stories surrounding Fabrice Muamba – the Bolton footballer who collapsed following a heart attack during a match against Tottenham Hotspur. Fabrice Muamba dropped on the pitch as if dead. The next thing that happened, after the paramedics reached him, was a member of the opposing team dropped on his knees to pray. No one jeered. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2012/mar/19/fabrice-muamba-football-prayer-natural
Since then there has been an outpouring of prayer requests on his behalf since then.
According to a report in The Guardian newspaper Fabrice Muamba's fiancée has called for fans to pray for the Bolton Wanderers midfielder, who remains in a critical condition after a heart attack on the pitch against Tottenham Hotspur on Saturday.
Shauna Muamba, told fans on Twitter: "God is in control. Please keep Fabrice in your prayers ... Please keep praying for Fabrice, it's really helping, I can feel it xx."
And the Chelsea player Gary Cahill lifted his shirt after scoring a goal last Monday to reveal a T shirt underneath with the message “Pray 4 Muamba”
So what’s going on?
On the one hand we seem to have a plethora of stories suggesting the rise of secularism. But then we have the public calls for prayer for Fabrice Muamba. What’s going on?
Let’s leave 21st century Britain for a while and go back 600 years before Jesus was born. There we find the people of Judah under threat. They are under threat from the neighbouring super powers of Assyria, Egypt and Babylon. And in the end Babylon prevails taking control of Judah and taking many of its people into exile in Babylon. But for now Jeremiah – truly a prophet of doom – warns the people of Judah and its Kings – of impending danger.
And Jeremiah emphasises in his prophecy that God is going to allow these things to happen because the people of Judah have broken their side of the covenant made with God via Moses. A covenant symbolised more than anything else by the tablets of stone on which the 10 Commandments were written.
During the exile the people of the Judah begin to question God. Their world had collapsed. They had been taken from their land – promised to them by God don’t forget. So did this mean that God had forgotten his chose people? Was God powerless compared to the apparently more powerful Babylonian gods who had won the war? How could the community survive the disaster that befell them? Did they have a future? And if so what did it look like? If they were able to return to their homeland and if they did who would rule them?
All these are issues that come out in the Book of Jeremiah and in the Book of Isaiah.
But one thing underlying all these is the big question. Had God really turned away from them because they had broken the covenant?
No he had not. Eventually God restores them to their land. And more than that
31 “The time is coming,” declares the LORD,
“when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
Jeremiah 31:31
So why was a new Covenant needed? What had changed? Well nothing on God’s side of the agreement. He continued to love his people. But they had failed in their love for him. And so in a way of showing his people how much he loved them and cared for them God promised a new covenant. A new covenant established through his son Jesus to show what God’s love looks like. And to show what a world that was based wholly on God’s love would look like.
So if Jesus was the new covenant what of the old covenant? The covenant made through Noah and Moses and so on? Did that cease to exist with Jesus?
Sometimes preachers do put that interpretation on it. That the old covenant was only made between God and the Jewish people. So with Jesus and his Good News for everyone the old covenant is abolished.
That is certainly a valid way of thinking of it. But in a way I think we shouldn’t be thinking in terms of a new covenant but rather a revised covenant. An improved covenant. For all the new covenant does is build upon what was in the original covenant. Love.
And that is the key difference. The original covenant was founded on love and proper relationships. But it became too legalistic and prescriptive. The new covenant is not based on things written on tablets of stone.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
Instead God will:
“ … put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.”
In other words we will know in our minds what God expects of us but more importantly our hearts will ensure that the response to the new covenant is founded on love.
I say our because in Jesus the new covenant was established for all people. That is the most important thing perhaps about the new covenant. God’s love as represented by the new covenant is for all.
So what has any of this got to do with the situation we find ourselves in today?
It seems to me that during the exile of the people of Judah there were people who kept the faith alive. People who kept saying God is faithful. There is no other God. People like in Psalm 137
1 By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept
when we remembered Zion.
And if you read the Book of Ezra contained in there are lists of people in exile who were descended from priestly lines who kept the message alive during exile.
They kept the faith alive. They kept telling the stories. They reminded the exiles of God.
One of the points of dispute with the Richard Dawkins survey published last month was the number of people calling them Christians. The 2001 census – the last available data – found 70% of the population called themselves Christians. Whereas Dawkins argument is that far fewer than that attend church. To be a Christian you need to attend church so therefore the real number of Christians must be lower.
And the survey conducted by Swindon Church Together last year about what Christians contribute to this town found that only 4% of the population attend church regularly. As opposed to 10% nationally. http://www.swindonchurches.org/index.php?module=pagesmith&uop=view_page&id=89
SO maybe Dawkins has a fair point.
But how does that explain the outpourings of prayer for Fabrice Muamba? Such people may not be church goers but they seem to have some faith.
It seems to me that in a sense we are those people in the exile of secular Britain today. We are the story keepers. We are the ones to keep telling the Good News. Charged with keeping the flame of Jesus alive.
What the Fabrice Muamba story tells us I feel is that in the hearts of many many people God’s love is still written. They may now know it. They may not know the saving love of Jesus. But deep inside God’s love is beating.
God speaking through Jeremiah said that a time would come when:
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbour,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
Meaning I suppose that a time would come when all people would know God and his love. And there would be no need to teach them of it. We are not in that time and there has never been such a time.
I just want to briefly comment on the Gospel. And one verse:
34 The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Christ[f] will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”
John 12:34
The crowd were made up of people who had not heard of Jesus and his Gospel. They knew that a Messiah – the Christ - was going to come. But they did not know who Jesus was. And they did not understand that through his crucifixion – his lifting up and his glorification – he was going to save them.
And many people then and now still do not get it. They still do not understand the wonderful saving love of Jesus. But many do have God’s love written on their hearts. And it is for us to show them what this means. It is for us to say yes pray for Fabrice Muamba. And then explain to them why they are praying and what that prayer means.
Do you remember the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8. But in that story Philip is prompted to go to the Ethiopian official who was reading the Book of Isaiah. And Philip says to him “Do you understand what you are reading?” And the Ethiopian replies “How can I unless someone explains it to me?” Acts 8:31
"How can I understand unless someone explains it to me?"
That is the challenge that faces us. For how will the people of this country who have God’s love in their heart understand what it means unless we – the keepers of Gospel – explain it to them?
In February we had several such news items. The Court of Appeal found that Christian hotel owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull from Cornwall acted unlawfully in banning a homosexual couple from the hotel they run. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-15811223
We also had the court ruling that said it was illegal for Bideford Town Council to have prayers before meetings. An action brought by an atheist.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-17060065
Then Richard Dawkins’ “Foundation for Science and Reason”, published the result of a survey that found that Britain is not as Christian as is claimed in census information.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9081215/Christians-dont-want-religion-to-influence-public-life.html
Then Trevor Phillips Chair of the Equality Commission said that Christians who want to be exempt from equality legislation are like Muslims trying to impose sharia on Britain. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9087775/Christians-arent-above-the-law-says-equalities-chief-Trevor-Phillips.html
Then earlier this month The Sunday Telegraph published a story that said the Government will fight a case at the European Court of Human Rights in which two British women are seeking to establish their right to wear a cross at work.
A document seen by The Sunday Telegraph disclosed that ministers will argue that because it is not a “requirement” of the Christian faith, employers can ban the wearing of the cross and sack workers who insist on doing so. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9136191/Christians-have-no-right-to-wear-cross-at-work-says-Government.html
We also have the issue of gay marriage. And although the proposals seem to suggest that churches will not be obliged to marry gay couples, some Christians have spoken out against this saying that it undermines traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland, said the "grotesque" plans would "shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world" if implemented. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/04/catholic-leader-government-gay-marriage
And last week leaders of Muslims and Sikhs in the UK also expressed opposition.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9154043/Muslims-and-Sikhs-attack-Camerons-gay-marriage-plan.html
On Wednesday just gone Academics Dr Sarah Johnsen and Dr Adam published Research into the involvement of faith groups in social and charity work has highlighted “inaccurate and out-of-date assumptions” still blighting their work. Basically, the research found that government money was still difficult to access, with civil servants wrongly assuming a faith organisation will put pressure on people they help to convert. The research also found some charities operate in the same way too.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9156381/Faith-groups-prevented-from-doing-vital-community-work-by-anti-religious-prejudice.html
Then finally we have the news that in a bid to boost the economy, Sunday trading hours will be relaxed for two months during the Olympics a move also opposed by many Christians. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17419351
So the last month / six weeks has seen plenty in the newspapers for Christians to get their teeth into. And all in all it can seem as if our faith is being attacked on a number of fronts.
But then among the gloom and doom came the stories surrounding Fabrice Muamba – the Bolton footballer who collapsed following a heart attack during a match against Tottenham Hotspur. Fabrice Muamba dropped on the pitch as if dead. The next thing that happened, after the paramedics reached him, was a member of the opposing team dropped on his knees to pray. No one jeered. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2012/mar/19/fabrice-muamba-football-prayer-natural
Since then there has been an outpouring of prayer requests on his behalf since then.
According to a report in The Guardian newspaper Fabrice Muamba's fiancée has called for fans to pray for the Bolton Wanderers midfielder, who remains in a critical condition after a heart attack on the pitch against Tottenham Hotspur on Saturday.
Shauna Muamba, told fans on Twitter: "God is in control. Please keep Fabrice in your prayers ... Please keep praying for Fabrice, it's really helping, I can feel it xx."
And the Chelsea player Gary Cahill lifted his shirt after scoring a goal last Monday to reveal a T shirt underneath with the message “Pray 4 Muamba”
So what’s going on?
On the one hand we seem to have a plethora of stories suggesting the rise of secularism. But then we have the public calls for prayer for Fabrice Muamba. What’s going on?
Let’s leave 21st century Britain for a while and go back 600 years before Jesus was born. There we find the people of Judah under threat. They are under threat from the neighbouring super powers of Assyria, Egypt and Babylon. And in the end Babylon prevails taking control of Judah and taking many of its people into exile in Babylon. But for now Jeremiah – truly a prophet of doom – warns the people of Judah and its Kings – of impending danger.
And Jeremiah emphasises in his prophecy that God is going to allow these things to happen because the people of Judah have broken their side of the covenant made with God via Moses. A covenant symbolised more than anything else by the tablets of stone on which the 10 Commandments were written.
During the exile the people of the Judah begin to question God. Their world had collapsed. They had been taken from their land – promised to them by God don’t forget. So did this mean that God had forgotten his chose people? Was God powerless compared to the apparently more powerful Babylonian gods who had won the war? How could the community survive the disaster that befell them? Did they have a future? And if so what did it look like? If they were able to return to their homeland and if they did who would rule them?
All these are issues that come out in the Book of Jeremiah and in the Book of Isaiah.
But one thing underlying all these is the big question. Had God really turned away from them because they had broken the covenant?
No he had not. Eventually God restores them to their land. And more than that
31 “The time is coming,” declares the LORD,
“when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
Jeremiah 31:31
So why was a new Covenant needed? What had changed? Well nothing on God’s side of the agreement. He continued to love his people. But they had failed in their love for him. And so in a way of showing his people how much he loved them and cared for them God promised a new covenant. A new covenant established through his son Jesus to show what God’s love looks like. And to show what a world that was based wholly on God’s love would look like.
So if Jesus was the new covenant what of the old covenant? The covenant made through Noah and Moses and so on? Did that cease to exist with Jesus?
Sometimes preachers do put that interpretation on it. That the old covenant was only made between God and the Jewish people. So with Jesus and his Good News for everyone the old covenant is abolished.
That is certainly a valid way of thinking of it. But in a way I think we shouldn’t be thinking in terms of a new covenant but rather a revised covenant. An improved covenant. For all the new covenant does is build upon what was in the original covenant. Love.
And that is the key difference. The original covenant was founded on love and proper relationships. But it became too legalistic and prescriptive. The new covenant is not based on things written on tablets of stone.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
Instead God will:
“ … put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.”
In other words we will know in our minds what God expects of us but more importantly our hearts will ensure that the response to the new covenant is founded on love.
I say our because in Jesus the new covenant was established for all people. That is the most important thing perhaps about the new covenant. God’s love as represented by the new covenant is for all.
So what has any of this got to do with the situation we find ourselves in today?
It seems to me that during the exile of the people of Judah there were people who kept the faith alive. People who kept saying God is faithful. There is no other God. People like in Psalm 137
1 By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept
when we remembered Zion.
And if you read the Book of Ezra contained in there are lists of people in exile who were descended from priestly lines who kept the message alive during exile.
They kept the faith alive. They kept telling the stories. They reminded the exiles of God.
One of the points of dispute with the Richard Dawkins survey published last month was the number of people calling them Christians. The 2001 census – the last available data – found 70% of the population called themselves Christians. Whereas Dawkins argument is that far fewer than that attend church. To be a Christian you need to attend church so therefore the real number of Christians must be lower.
And the survey conducted by Swindon Church Together last year about what Christians contribute to this town found that only 4% of the population attend church regularly. As opposed to 10% nationally. http://www.swindonchurches.org/index.php?module=pagesmith&uop=view_page&id=89
SO maybe Dawkins has a fair point.
But how does that explain the outpourings of prayer for Fabrice Muamba? Such people may not be church goers but they seem to have some faith.
It seems to me that in a sense we are those people in the exile of secular Britain today. We are the story keepers. We are the ones to keep telling the Good News. Charged with keeping the flame of Jesus alive.
What the Fabrice Muamba story tells us I feel is that in the hearts of many many people God’s love is still written. They may now know it. They may not know the saving love of Jesus. But deep inside God’s love is beating.
God speaking through Jeremiah said that a time would come when:
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbour,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
Meaning I suppose that a time would come when all people would know God and his love. And there would be no need to teach them of it. We are not in that time and there has never been such a time.
I just want to briefly comment on the Gospel. And one verse:
34 The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Christ[f] will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”
John 12:34
The crowd were made up of people who had not heard of Jesus and his Gospel. They knew that a Messiah – the Christ - was going to come. But they did not know who Jesus was. And they did not understand that through his crucifixion – his lifting up and his glorification – he was going to save them.
And many people then and now still do not get it. They still do not understand the wonderful saving love of Jesus. But many do have God’s love written on their hearts. And it is for us to show them what this means. It is for us to say yes pray for Fabrice Muamba. And then explain to them why they are praying and what that prayer means.
Do you remember the story of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8. But in that story Philip is prompted to go to the Ethiopian official who was reading the Book of Isaiah. And Philip says to him “Do you understand what you are reading?” And the Ethiopian replies “How can I unless someone explains it to me?” Acts 8:31
"How can I understand unless someone explains it to me?"
That is the challenge that faces us. For how will the people of this country who have God’s love in their heart understand what it means unless we – the keepers of Gospel – explain it to them?
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
Blitz the benefit cheats AND the tax dodgers
Apparently Rupert Murdoch's The Sun has today started a campaign to Blitz benefit cheats http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4161400/Blitz-the-12bn-fiddlers.html.
I've got no problem with that at all. As someone who managed a Benefit Fraud Investigation team prior to ministry, I've seen how much benefit cheats cost UK taxpayers each year. According to The Sun the fiddlers cost £1.2bn each year. SO well don The Sun for campaigning on this.
But wait a minute. Why stop there. How about starting a campaign for the government to Blitz people who fiddle their taxes. You know like Barclays Bank who avoided £500m of tax http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17181213 (For Sun readers and those not good at maths that's just under half of the amount swindled by benefit cheats each year.)
Or how about Vodafone who owed £8bn in tax (though thanks to some wheeler dealing only paid £1.25bn)? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-hit-out-at-vodafone-tax-letoff-6258782.html
I wonder why The Sun didn't campaign about those? Or is it because the last thing The Sun wants to do is run a campaign looking at the questionable tax repayment of big business. After all that may mean the spotlight being turned on Rupert Murdoch and NewsCorp. He has got a track record in this after all http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/02/99/e-cyclopedia/302366.stm
I for one am thoroughly fed up with this government and its cronies having one rule for the poor, the disadvantaged and the public sector, whilst letting large companies get away with it. And yes David Cameron I suppose in this respect I am being anti business.
I've got no problem with that at all. As someone who managed a Benefit Fraud Investigation team prior to ministry, I've seen how much benefit cheats cost UK taxpayers each year. According to The Sun the fiddlers cost £1.2bn each year. SO well don The Sun for campaigning on this.
But wait a minute. Why stop there. How about starting a campaign for the government to Blitz people who fiddle their taxes. You know like Barclays Bank who avoided £500m of tax http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17181213 (For Sun readers and those not good at maths that's just under half of the amount swindled by benefit cheats each year.)
Or how about Vodafone who owed £8bn in tax (though thanks to some wheeler dealing only paid £1.25bn)? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-hit-out-at-vodafone-tax-letoff-6258782.html
I wonder why The Sun didn't campaign about those? Or is it because the last thing The Sun wants to do is run a campaign looking at the questionable tax repayment of big business. After all that may mean the spotlight being turned on Rupert Murdoch and NewsCorp. He has got a track record in this after all http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/02/99/e-cyclopedia/302366.stm
I for one am thoroughly fed up with this government and its cronies having one rule for the poor, the disadvantaged and the public sector, whilst letting large companies get away with it. And yes David Cameron I suppose in this respect I am being anti business.
Wednesday, 15 February 2012
The greatest love of all
"In spring a young man's fancy turns to thoughts of love"
Alfred Lord Tennyson
I’m not sure I can be called a young man now but my thoughts have turned to love. And love was in the air yesterday as it was Valentine’s day. The celebrations of St. Valentine's Day are steeped in legend and mystery; indeed the motives behind the day's creation and even St. Valentine himself have been shrouded in controversy and doubt.
The first official Saint Valentine's Day was declared on 14th of February by Pope Galasius in 496, in memory of a 3rd century martyred priest in Rome. It is not known for sure whether Pope Galasius was honouring this 3rd century priest or whether it was one of two other martyred priests associated with the 14th of February. One was Bishop of Interamna (modern Terni) and the other apparently suffered in Africa along with a number of companions. Nothing further is known about these two Saint Valentines and it is the priest in Rome that has become the most widely acclaimed of the three.
It is believed that the young priest rose to distinction after betraying Emperor Claudius in 270 AD by conducting illegitimate wedding ceremonies in the capital. Emperor Claudius claimed that married men made poor soldiers and consequently decreed that all marriages of younger citizens would be outlawed. Bishop Valentine, however, maintained that marriage was part of God's plan and purpose for the world. He continued to conduct marriages in secret between young people, sometimes as young as twelve, in the name of love.
His success gained him unwelcome notoriety, which became Bishop Valentine's downfall. He was jailed and ultimately beheaded, but not before he fell in love with the jailer's daughter. It is thought that on the evening of his execution the bishop passed her a note which read "from your Valentine". This story has blossomed into the defining tradition of Valentine's Day. An estimated one billion cards sent each year, making it the second largest card-sending holiday of the year behind Christmas.
But it’s not just Valentine’s Day that has got me thinking about love. In the early hours of Sunday (our time) the singer Whitney Houston was found dead in her hotel room in Los Angeles. I wouldn’t claim that I was a big fan of her music. Though she did have a wonderful voice.
What struck me though hearing a number of her songs played on the radio of the last couple of days was that in many of them she sang about love.
“You give good love” “Saving all my love for you” “How will I know (if he really loves me)?” all have love in the title. And then three of them are about when a love affair goes wrong or a relationship ends:
“Didn’t we almost have it all?” “Where do broken hearts go” and “I will always love you”
Given that the singer had a very troubled marriage herself these seem to have a special meaning. She didn’t write any of the songs herself but you can’t help but wonder whether she picked them because she related to them.
Reading an article about her I was struck by the titles of two more of songs she recorded.“The greatest love of all” and “Love will save the day”. Intrigued I looked up the words of the songs.
“Love will save the day” starts with the words:
Sometimes life can make you crazy
It can really put your body to the test
You try so hard to make sure everything goes right
And you find you've only wound up with a mess
It's a common situation
“The greatest love of all” is quite a sad song. The words suggest someone full of regrets. And although the song starts with a sense of optimism:
I believe the children are our future
Teach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be
The rest of the song suggests someone with an emptiness inside:
Everybody's searching for a hero
People need someone to look up to
I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs
A lonely place to be
So I learned to depend on me
I am often struck by the fact that very often we can find theology in the most unlikely places. In other words we can find ways of thinking about God in unlikely places. TV programmes, novels and yes in pop and rock music. And on reflecting on these pop songs I found myself doing exactly that. Looking at the theology they contain.
All the songs I’ve mentioned speak of love. And immediately when love is mentioned we can reflect on how love is such a common theme in our faith.
What IS love? There are FOUR words in the Greek language for love but only ONE word for love in English.
When we talk of love in our society, we can mean the love of a mate, parent or child; we can mean a deep friendship or "liking" for a person or thing; or we can mean sexual love. Love in the Greek language is expressed by four different words. Only three of these words are used in the Bible.
What are the Greek Words of Love?
1. Eros, which is sexual or romantic love.
2. Phileo, which is a brotherly love toward someone we really like.
3. Agape, which is the deepest love, which is based on doing good things for another person.
4. Storge, which is the love of one's relatives. It is a relatively unknown word that is used only twice in scripture and only as a compound word.
We can think of love as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13 the agape love God shows us. The self-giving love of God as revealed in Jesus Christ which is the motivating power and pattern for Christian living.
John 3:16
16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
This is the greatest love of all.
How unlike the words in the song:
I decided long ago, never to walk in anyone's shadows
If I fail, if I succeed
At least I'll live as I believe
No matter what they take from me
They can't take away my dignity
Because the greatest love of all
Is happening to me
I found the greatest love of all
Inside of me
The greatest love of all
Is easy to achieve
Learning to love yourself
It is the greatest love of all
The words of the sog suggest that the greatest love of all is our love of ourselves. I suppose a psychologist would have plenty to say about the need to love ourselves. But isn’t that narcissism?
So I disagree. The greatest love of all is not learning to love ourselves. The greatest love of all is God’s love for us demonstrated through Jesus.
And going back to the song
Everybody's searching for a hero
People need someone to look up to
I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs
A lonely place to be
So I learned to depend on me
Surely if we are looking for someone to look up to; someone who fulfils our needs and who gives us the love that enables us to feel good about ourselves we have Jesus?
Acknowledgements:
Bible text talen from New International Version 1984
Song lyrics from http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/whitneyhouston/iwillalwaysloveyou.html
Alfred Lord Tennyson
I’m not sure I can be called a young man now but my thoughts have turned to love. And love was in the air yesterday as it was Valentine’s day. The celebrations of St. Valentine's Day are steeped in legend and mystery; indeed the motives behind the day's creation and even St. Valentine himself have been shrouded in controversy and doubt.
The first official Saint Valentine's Day was declared on 14th of February by Pope Galasius in 496, in memory of a 3rd century martyred priest in Rome. It is not known for sure whether Pope Galasius was honouring this 3rd century priest or whether it was one of two other martyred priests associated with the 14th of February. One was Bishop of Interamna (modern Terni) and the other apparently suffered in Africa along with a number of companions. Nothing further is known about these two Saint Valentines and it is the priest in Rome that has become the most widely acclaimed of the three.
It is believed that the young priest rose to distinction after betraying Emperor Claudius in 270 AD by conducting illegitimate wedding ceremonies in the capital. Emperor Claudius claimed that married men made poor soldiers and consequently decreed that all marriages of younger citizens would be outlawed. Bishop Valentine, however, maintained that marriage was part of God's plan and purpose for the world. He continued to conduct marriages in secret between young people, sometimes as young as twelve, in the name of love.
His success gained him unwelcome notoriety, which became Bishop Valentine's downfall. He was jailed and ultimately beheaded, but not before he fell in love with the jailer's daughter. It is thought that on the evening of his execution the bishop passed her a note which read "from your Valentine". This story has blossomed into the defining tradition of Valentine's Day. An estimated one billion cards sent each year, making it the second largest card-sending holiday of the year behind Christmas.
But it’s not just Valentine’s Day that has got me thinking about love. In the early hours of Sunday (our time) the singer Whitney Houston was found dead in her hotel room in Los Angeles. I wouldn’t claim that I was a big fan of her music. Though she did have a wonderful voice.
What struck me though hearing a number of her songs played on the radio of the last couple of days was that in many of them she sang about love.
“You give good love” “Saving all my love for you” “How will I know (if he really loves me)?” all have love in the title. And then three of them are about when a love affair goes wrong or a relationship ends:
“Didn’t we almost have it all?” “Where do broken hearts go” and “I will always love you”
Given that the singer had a very troubled marriage herself these seem to have a special meaning. She didn’t write any of the songs herself but you can’t help but wonder whether she picked them because she related to them.
Reading an article about her I was struck by the titles of two more of songs she recorded.“The greatest love of all” and “Love will save the day”. Intrigued I looked up the words of the songs.
“Love will save the day” starts with the words:
Sometimes life can make you crazy
It can really put your body to the test
You try so hard to make sure everything goes right
And you find you've only wound up with a mess
It's a common situation
“The greatest love of all” is quite a sad song. The words suggest someone full of regrets. And although the song starts with a sense of optimism:
I believe the children are our future
Teach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be
The rest of the song suggests someone with an emptiness inside:
Everybody's searching for a hero
People need someone to look up to
I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs
A lonely place to be
So I learned to depend on me
I am often struck by the fact that very often we can find theology in the most unlikely places. In other words we can find ways of thinking about God in unlikely places. TV programmes, novels and yes in pop and rock music. And on reflecting on these pop songs I found myself doing exactly that. Looking at the theology they contain.
All the songs I’ve mentioned speak of love. And immediately when love is mentioned we can reflect on how love is such a common theme in our faith.
What IS love? There are FOUR words in the Greek language for love but only ONE word for love in English.
When we talk of love in our society, we can mean the love of a mate, parent or child; we can mean a deep friendship or "liking" for a person or thing; or we can mean sexual love. Love in the Greek language is expressed by four different words. Only three of these words are used in the Bible.
What are the Greek Words of Love?
1. Eros, which is sexual or romantic love.
2. Phileo, which is a brotherly love toward someone we really like.
3. Agape, which is the deepest love, which is based on doing good things for another person.
4. Storge, which is the love of one's relatives. It is a relatively unknown word that is used only twice in scripture and only as a compound word.
We can think of love as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13 the agape love God shows us. The self-giving love of God as revealed in Jesus Christ which is the motivating power and pattern for Christian living.
John 3:16
16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
This is the greatest love of all.
How unlike the words in the song:
I decided long ago, never to walk in anyone's shadows
If I fail, if I succeed
At least I'll live as I believe
No matter what they take from me
They can't take away my dignity
Because the greatest love of all
Is happening to me
I found the greatest love of all
Inside of me
The greatest love of all
Is easy to achieve
Learning to love yourself
It is the greatest love of all
The words of the sog suggest that the greatest love of all is our love of ourselves. I suppose a psychologist would have plenty to say about the need to love ourselves. But isn’t that narcissism?
So I disagree. The greatest love of all is not learning to love ourselves. The greatest love of all is God’s love for us demonstrated through Jesus.
And going back to the song
Everybody's searching for a hero
People need someone to look up to
I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs
A lonely place to be
So I learned to depend on me
Surely if we are looking for someone to look up to; someone who fulfils our needs and who gives us the love that enables us to feel good about ourselves we have Jesus?
Acknowledgements:
Bible text talen from New International Version 1984
Song lyrics from http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/whitneyhouston/iwillalwaysloveyou.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)