Category: Personal Perspectives

I have been in the camp of the church as the alternative society. A people who were not nationalistic, and certainly not patriotic as they saw themselves as trans-national and bonded together in the Spirit. How alternative should they be? When I was 21 onwards I was part of a wonderful community where we shared much together, extended households, sharing of goods to some extent etc. Probably viewed by some within the wider community as weird, yet nevertheless a valuable and very shaping history. The hope was that the church – as people not as institution – would model something and the obvious attractiveness would draw people in. And there was certainly an ‘in’ and an ‘out’.

Western society has been, for many, a good place to grow up. We are not exposed to the wars, such as in Syria; there are opportunities for education; most of us are not starving. There are of course many stories also of oppression and injustice, of institutional violence, racism and sexism. From a global perspective there are privileges in the West, and within that there are those who have been highly privileged. The wealth and power gap is enormous, which does not make those at the top evil, but does indicate something about the system that is at fault. That certainly would seem to be the case if we allowed the 8th Century prophets to critique us. And it is always a challenge as to to who to target: the top 1%, or do we draw the line at the top 10% – then that gets very uncomfortable indeed.

Cracks to a collapse?

If, as many of us suspect, the cracks that are all over Western society are indicative of a level of potential collapse how do we respond? Prophetic critiques of collapse have always been there. A cursory reading of Revelation gives us the collapse of Babylon in a day! Yet Babylon (as symbolised by Rome at the time) did not collapse in a day. In the big scheme of things the days of the glory of Rome certainly suffered immensely, and the ‘merchants’ and ‘sea captains’ would have mourned as many were affected. Yet ‘Babylon’ continued and continues. We SOOOO live in a tension. Scripture continues to declare collapse on all Babylonish systems and yet we continue to live within them. My take is that every small collapse is part of THE collapse that is to eventually manifest. Every step forward is a small picture of the millennium. In one sense they never fully come, neither the collapse of Babylon nor the millennium. One day they will fully and finally come at the parousia. Anyway that is my take!

In the ‘before that time’ we will have partial collapses, manifesting in greater measure at times, and partial manifestations of the peace and health of the age to come. And maybe there are times that see them both happening together. I am so hesitant to make comment on aspects I do not understand, and refer to the angst over health-care in the USA, but living in the UK as I did for the majority of my life, the health provision was phenomenal. As a wage earner to pay into a nationalised system and to get whatever we needed out of it was incredible. Not to face insurance issues when, for example, Sue was diagnosed with cancer, was a blessing with a capital ‘B’. Now there seems to be a challenge on the future of the NHS, and perhaps a move to make health care eventually subject to market forces. For those, like Andy Knox, who is a great voice within that sphere, I am sure there are many challenges, and not simply practical but theological.

Do we have faith, should we have faith to work within, or is our faith for all Babylonish systems to collapse?

So after a few paragraphs I am getting to the point of this post! Here are some bullet points that would need a lot of expansion:

• There are collapses of dominating systems that take place at key times of history. Those collapses are not total, they give way to space for something new to rise (or maybe to come down from heaven) but at the same time there is a re-grouping and fresh systems seem to develop. Some people who benefitted from the former centralised control seem to transform themselves and appear at the centre of the new structures also.
• As believers we ultimately look for something to come down from heaven at that time, and have to be clear of any investment in the dominating system that gave us security.
• That we are of a different spirit… part of an alternative society value-wise.
• That we understand that the call of the church is not to pull everyone into an alternative society but to be the salt so that society becomes an alternative society. This has been the theme that I have sought to pursue of the ‘church as royal priesthood’.
• We take responsibility for the future. I think we could see greater collapses, and more of heaven come down if we did so in reality. Our task is to take responsibility for the shape, so that there is an opportunity for something to rise (come down?) that helps society. Gayle and I, carry at some level, a sense of responsibility for the political well-being of Spain. This does not mean we support a party, or look for perfection, but want to hold space where a new future can arise.
• And a new future is what we are looking for in the West and beyond. Too many want something from the past. The language of independence, and of nationalism, of ‘making our nation great’ etc., (and I am not referring to the USA here, but to the strong winds blowing across Europe that have not blown for some 50 or more years) that seems to be backed by believers does not bode well. By eschatological definition change comes from the future, from heaven, from the throne, and comes down. All alternative societies have to draw from that.
• I consider that believers are the key to the world. The same as Israel was to be a prayer house for the nations, but had become a den of robbers – which raises the question who were they robbing? Selling ourselves into a nationalism is dangerous. Leaving a Scottish identity, and leaving a UK identity has been invaluable, but only in that they are part of the bigger picture of entering into a ‘royal priesthood’ identity for the world. It can only lead to a prayer that whatever society I am part of becomes a greater giver of life than ever before for the marginalised.
• This is a time of incredible shift. Keeping buoyant faith alive is a challenge. Not faith at a personal ‘bless me’ level, but faith at a transformation of society level. That faith is essential as we see only partial collapses, and only partial shifts of society truly becoming an alternative to the consumerist, power-driven one that feeds from and feeds Babylon.
• And growing faith – through losing self-preservation – that we can see greater collapses than before and more transformation than before will be necessary. Otherwise we will also be guilty of becoming a den of robbers. Personally prospering, becoming ‘great’ again, but robbing others.

This post set out to be a follow on from the last one. I have rambled in the process but end with these thoughts. Every investment today is a contribution to the final New Jerusalem. We invest into the Babylon of today to make sure it is an unfinished project and that there is a coming down of heaven to a greater measure than ever into our world. The fruit of which will be the marginalised will prosper and the knowledge of God will spread. That we take responsibility for the shape where God places us. We cannot take responsibility for the choices that are made, but we become responsible so that good choices can be made.

‘Semana Santa’, Holy Week is quite something in Spain, particularly in Andalucia. Penitence features big time, and emotions relating to mother and Son are high. A school teacher told me that he had a close friend who is an atheist but every year is one of the many thousands who offer themselves to carry the ‘pasos’ on their shoulders and process through the streets. ‘Why does he do it?’, I asked. And the reply was it was a deep and privileged experience to see the tears and emotions on the peoples’ faces.

The first Easter when we were in Spain (2009) I was not happy seeing all of this, and Gayle with her wisdom quickly pulled me across the street while I was standing in the street to confront the procession… I have moved on from those days – after all I was way young back then! The shock though of the alien scene is what was provocative. I am sure there is also genuine faith among some who are attracted to the tradition and procession – same as with the Camino to Santiago.

Wright’s wonderful title ‘The Day the Revolution Began’ is of course all about the Easter event and its context. What kind of revolution is portrayed by the processions complete with statues, huge crowds and those hooded to mark the penitence surrounding the whole event? Certainly, for me with my background, it only portrays a cross that affects the spiritual, or maybe religious, part of life. But what about a narrow ‘evangelical’ gospel understanding of Easter? What kind of revolution is indicated in that message? Beyond that gospel we can have the ‘seven mountains’ of influence with its reliance on Kuyper and Reconstructionism, and of course a strong reformed theology of the sovereignty of God. At what point are we able to suggest that those are all ‘sub-‘gospels. Of course if I were to suggest that I would also have to accept that any understanding of the gospel I have is also ‘sub’.

I have had two provocative conversations in the past couple of days. One via email, where the issue of the Western world and how it is falling apart, with the cracks becoming ever more visible, raises the inevitable question of how much can we prop up, redeem the structures and how much are they simply to fall? I might not be representing the brief email conversation well, but the questions are vital ones for those of us who believe a revolution for the world began in Jerusalem that Passover time, and that the cross was not simply about making sure there is ‘a going to heaven ticket’ available from then on.

The second conversation was with Gayle who challenged my language that the body of Christ is to take responsibility for the world. I don’t think she was challenging the concept but the language. (Any volunteers to help me get her to a more compliant place????!!!!!) Language is so important. We might never get the right language and ultimately language is always co-opted by the powers to nullify what the language originally meant. So these two aspects have provoked me and in the light of the ‘sub’ nature of our understanding I will return to these elements in the next few days. I don’t plan – as if I could – to give anything definitive in response, but if there was a revolution that began, and we are in the midst of some of the greatest paradigm shifts, both in the theological / ecclesiastical realm, as well as in the world as a whole, I will at least give some attempt to some responses.

So on this great day… Blessed are the revolutionaries!!

Relentlessly and often it would seem repeatedly. The rhetorical question of what history teaches us can be asked with some cynicism, yet the question makes a clear point. I have just finished the book Blood and Faith, the scapegoating, the xenophobia, the fear, the ‘alternative facts’ that were clearly at work then are alive today. The atrocities were moderated by those of good heart, and ironically through economic greed (and necessity) the treatment given to a people who were making a huge contribution to their land was both moderated (we need them to do what we can’t and won’t do) and also intensified (they are not us and they are robbing us culturally and economically). Sounds familiar?

Giles Tremlett (author of Ghosts of Spain) wrote today in the Guardian The absurd British-Spanish rivalry, from Henry VIII to Gibraktar. The first Brexit from Europe he suggests was with Henry VIII resulting from the divorce from Catherine of Aragon. He then tracks in broad brush strokes the British relationship to Spain through Gibraltar and Franco. The article concludes with

The suggestion that all this might now get out of hand and that gunboats should be used is a purely British one. Which seems as absurd now as Franco’s decisions to close the border did back then.

My first time in Spain – early 2000’s my prophetic input to a land I knew nothing of any depth about was that two major signs would take place when Spain was turning. Bull fighting would be banned and the British flag would not be flying over Gibraltar. I should have added and ‘pigs will fly’ but held back on that one. A few days ago article 50 was actioned. Negotiations regarding a ‘soft’ or a ‘hard’ Brexit will now unfold. The ramifications, the complications, and certainly the rhetoric will at times be soap operish. There will be some good reads to come from the pens of journalists.

History marches on. There will be resonances to past events. There will be enormous changes for individuals, but through it all the powers will seek to safeguard their economic interests, and that will determine the lines of who gets what, all confirmed by treaties (Gibraltar in history… and now?).

There are cycles to history. Not simply to let us learn that we have learnt nothing, but to give an opportunity for something fresh to occur. If the geography of the Samaritan well (Sychar, John 4) is the same geography as that of Genesis 34 (Succoth) the two passages make for interesting reading. Rape, unforgiveness resulting in anger and murder maybe locked into the land all kinds of issues that many centuries later were exposed in the noon-day sun and the conversation that took place. The xenphobia, objectivisation of the other, religious taboos were all confronted, and I suggest along with the history back to Genesis 34.

Cycles to history. The Brexit – right or wrong – is a sign that there could be incredible moves forward. Not a move forward because of ‘leaving the EU’, for at that level there will be winners and losers. Always are. But moves forward if we learn how to truly relate beyond our borders (and writing as an immigrant in an accepting culture I write as a privileged person).

Our prayer focus in Spain (and this is our year for Spain as the focus) will touch on the deepest aspects of the land historically. We will almost certainly this year have to visit Gibraltar. 711 the door in for what soon became the Moorish kingdom of Al Andalus, and 1000 years on with the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) confirmed which flag would fly over that piece of land. We focus as we believe that new futures can be found, if the past can be confronted and healing brought into it.

We could easily prophesy the changes that are right here now. 1517 + 500 years (95 theses and Martin Luther); 1492 – Granada, Columbus + Jewish expulsions. Yet all prophetic words are conditional. A new media… new ways of politics being done… and alternative economics… Possibilities right on the horizon. Changes that can take place will not simply be what we probably expect as sticking the label ‘moral’, ‘conservative’ or even ‘Christian’ on something does not necessarily mean it is Jesus-aligned. And changes will be resisted and challenged. History tells us that. And I consider that history has a living voice, as today sprang from yesterday, and tomorrow is connected to yesterday… unless we begin a new story.

In a few days time we will have some 48 hours together with a number of those who have had a focus on Spain and our time will be shaped by the question of ‘what is the gospel?’. Of course the question is very easy to answer, and we can even sum it up in a few (four?) spiritual laws. Done and dusted. So that should leave a lot of spare time!

What motivates us to come together is the desire to live with the questions and be affirmed in the search for authenticity. Wrong or inadequate questions leave us with insufficient answers. Now as it should happen this morning my NT reading just came to that important passage in Rom. 15, after Paul proclaims his desire is not to preach where Christ has been preached already, and so expresses his desire to get to Spain (in his world ‘the ends of the earth’).

But now, since I no longer have any room for work in these regions, and since I have longed for many years to come to you, I hope to see you in passing as I go to Spain, and to be helped on my journey there by you, once I have enjoyed your company for a while.

We can read that very simply. New territory is there and Paul’s apostolic drive is to go to the unreached with his equivalent of the Alpha course. However, what on earth does he mean by ‘I no longer have any room for work in these regions’? He is writing the letter while in Corinth from the house of Gaius, and he can state that the whole church in Corinth can fit in Gaius’ house. Corinth a promiscuous and highly idolatrous city with a sordid reputation (think of the then contemporary insult ‘you are acting as a Corinthian’). A church that was not a shining example, and one that was obviously not going to make into the ‘mega church’ statistical book any day soon. His work is finished in the region? Are you sure Paul? Not by any stretch of the imagination by how we would measure things: souls saved and tithers in the pews.

So just saying… What on earth is this gospel? What was the work he considered he was there to do and how on earth could he really say ‘there was no more room’. I have stacks of thoughts on these issues… but hopefully my thoughts do not silence, nor answer my questions too soon.

Try these questions.

1. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: independence or respect for elders?
2. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: obedience or self-reliance?
3. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: to be considerate or to be well-behaved?
4. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a child to have: curiosity or good manners?

Or maybe we could replace them with ‘church member’?

1. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a church member to have: independence or respect for elders?
2. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a church member to have: obedience or self-reliance?
3. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a church member to have: to be considerate or to be well-behaved?
4. Please tell me which one you think is more important for a church member to have: curiosity or good manners?

I appreciate that we might want to answer ‘both’ but answering it with ‘more important’ is very challenging. I came across these questions in an article at:

vox.com.

I have deliberately not given the title of the article as we would be tempted to read it either because we want the person to be exposed or tempted not to read it if we react to such a title. The article is much deeper than just the geography or the political candidate that is the subject.

I have to say that if I had come across the questions without the article I might have struggled with my answers, whereas having read the article I knew what the ‘correct’ non-authoritarian answers should be!

We live in the ‘real’ world (theological word is ‘fallen’) so appreciate that our way of living (‘politics’) is one of compromise not the way of idealism, but the gospel demands that we do not simply live as though there is only this ‘real’ world. We live as though there is a new creation with incredible hope and faith. It is hope and faith that has to counteract fear and we know that the only antidote to fear is the love that we express to others (perfect love is not some manifestation of love from heaven to us, but how we express it to others – 1 John 4:12).

The article ties together an extraordinary rise of the appeal of an authoritarian figure when a fear narrative dominates. As gospel-shaped people there are a few things to consider concerning the set of questions from above if we were able to direct them to God. The inevitable conclusion is to question how authoritarian God is.

My conclusion is God is not authoritarian and I guess this is because s/he is not driven by fear at any level. There are consequences to going the wrong way, there are boundaries in place to protect, but the government of God is through distributed authority. It has its goal as:

In those days there was no king in the land and everyone did what was right in their own eyes.

Yes that Scripture – like so many – cuts both ways. In the writer’s view (pro-monarchial) it is a negative statement about the society, but in the eyes of a gospel-shaped reader (OK my bias came out here but I do think this bias is a correct one!) it a statement of the hope we live for, the substantial manifestation of the new creation that we already see around us.

The Western world is in crisis, there are so many signs around. The people movements, the recurring and increasingly regular boom and bust cycles of the past 20 years, the polarisation within politics, the centralisation and counter-pulls for independence to name but a few. A way of being is disappearing and as Rudolph Bahro said:

When the forms of an old culture are dying, the new culture is created by a few people who are not afraid to be insecure.

If there is a new creation reality that we have been birthed into then, let me suggest a few minimal points that we as believers should consider for ongoing repentance:

• resist the fear narrative
• embrace change – the current status quo has to give way
• resist authoritarianism and our desire to be authority figures
• resist the desire to be on the right side and have authority defend our rights
• look to defend the rights of those who are marginalised
• actively find the ‘other’ and listen
• acknowledge that there is no good / bad line that separates us from others – it is running right through us all.

I suggest now a reading of the article.