'I have often said that we need more "R.C." churches, standing not for Roman Catholic but for Radical Conservative churches - "conservative" in the sense that they conserve what Scripture plainly requires, but "radical" in relation to that combination of tradition and convention which we call "culture". Scripture is unchangeable; culture is not.'
John Stott in the preface to his book The Living Church.
The books purpose is 'to bring together a number of characteristics of what I will call an authentic or living church, whether it calls itself 'emerging' or not. I hope to show that these characteristics, being clearly biblical, must in some way be preserved.'
Friday 19 November 2010
Monday 15 November 2010
Members of God's Kingdom or citizens of the world?
The New Covenant which those of us who seek to be Christ's Disciples sign up to is about loving God with all our heart and mind and soul and strength and all our fellows in God's family as ourselves. The battles which go on in traditional institutional Churches (not just Anglicans) seem to have more to do with secular politicing with little love for the poor and the spiritually hungry:-
Covenant rejecters compared to BNP as opposition grows
Opponents of the proposed Anglican Covenant have been called ‘an ecclesiastical BNP’, while a new coalition against the proposal has been formed. The Rt Revd Gregory Cameron, Bishop of St Asaph, also described the Inclusive Church and Modern Church groups as ‘latter-day Little Englanders’ who are ‘scaremongering about foreigners’ despite their liberal views. The bishop had a key role in designing the Communion Covenant, which aims to lay down the rules by which the provinces can work together. At the same time, another opposing group has appeared, called The No Anglican Covenant Coalition. Its members are Anglican bloggers from across the globe, including England, the USA, Canada and New Zealand. The Covenant will be debated at the General Synod later this month.Sources: Church Times (5/11); Church of England Newspaper (4/11)
Liberals oppose Anglican covenant on controversial issues
Liberal Anglicans are campaigning against the Church of England’s proposal for a covenant that will lay the ground rules for future disputes. Liberals believe the covenant is too ‘dogmatic’ and will make it more difficult to select gay priests or bless gay couples. The groups Inclusive Church and Modern Church have taken out large advertisements in church newspapers and magazines, attacking the proposal as ‘inward looking and backward looking’. They even say that the covenant would ‘redefine Anglicanism’ itself. Anglican provinces would have to accept the covenant in order to stay in the Communion, but the Archbishop of Canterbury has said that it is not ‘envisaged as an instrument of control’. The General Synod will debate the issue on 24 November.Source: Guardian (28/10)
Time to pray-
Friday 12 November 2010
The Movement for Change -What faith communities can do--
The comments below apply equally to people of faith in any democracy as a movement for change:
It is always appropriate and necessary for the faith community to question and challenge political leadership on the biggest moral issues -- indeed it is our prophetic vocation to do so. That means lifting up the now growing rates of poverty in America and around the world, even when both parties only want to talk about the middle class. The plight of undocumented immigrants and their families unites almost all sectors of the faith community. The younger generation of the faithful is insisting on the urgency of "creation care" of the environment and the threat of climate change, especially to the poorest people around the globe. People of faith across the political spectrum also want to make serious progress on reducing the number of abortions in America -- not with symbolic amendments or criminalizing desperate and tragic choices -- but by preventing unwanted pregnancies and supporting low-income women. There is much work to be done in promoting healthy families; not by scapegoating gays and lesbians or bullying gay teens, but by creating policies that build a culture of support for families. Increased numbers of religious leaders are also ready to challenge the ethics of endless and failed wars of occupation, which have yet to seriously reduce the real threats of terrorism but have killed too many people.
It is not enough to talk about what President Obama should be doing; but instead we should be talking about what a movement can be doing to clear the space for change and provide energy and pressure on both the Congress and the White House. Only serious public education and mobilization will move the country forward on the "big vision" above. The "outside strategy" must be strong for the "inside strategy " to finally be successful -- and only then will access give way to influence. Learning the lessons of the midterm elections means not just wondering what Obama will do next; but also asking what we will do.
I have learned in the last two years that changes in Washington, Wall Street, and the country, are indeed much harder to accomplish than anyone expects. The combination of entrenched politics (on both sides); hugely influential special interests; the growing power of money in politics; the 24/7 assault of ideologically driven media machines; and a still-passive electorate that believes voting is the only requirement of citizenship -- all have contributed to where we now find ourselves.
Instead of just sitting back and watching how things go, an empowered new electorate must push the country deeper into our best shared values, understand the need for social movements in making social change, and act to hold both political sides accountable to trying to actually solve the country's greatest challenges, instead of just winning and keeping power.
We need to construct a new "moral center" in American politics. Yes, the rising deficit is a moral issue, but dealing with it in a moral way is also important. We cannot cut the deficit using methods that would hurt our most vulnerable and least powerful people. Yes, defeating terrorism is also a noble cause, but being willing to challenge the enormous human and financial costs of failed military solutions is also a just cause. And the faith community will always be lifting up the biblical priority of the poor, the weak, the sick, the oppressed, the left out and left behind, and always the children; and we will look for allies on both sides of the political aisle wherever we can find them.
Real social change depends more on a return to core values than a partisan victory by either political side. It means lifting up the fundamental personal and social virtues in our individual choices, family lives, community involvement, and engaged citizenship. For people of faith, it means leading by example from our congregations and actually doing the things we say we believe in.
Neither the left nor the right has the answers now, though both will continue to say that it does. So we have to focus on the spiritual and moral values that bring us together; that choose the common good over private gain, inclusiveness over intolerance, civility over shouting, long term over short term, integrity over celebrity, justice over excuses, morality over expediency, stewardship over consumption, truth over spin, patient persistence over immediate results, and finally, right over wrong.
These are the values that work for our personal lives, for teaching our children, for leading our congregations, for changing our communities, for holding politicians accountable, and for creating the social movements that make a difference.
We've learned that making change is harder than we think; now it's time to go deeper.
From Jim Wallis God's Politics blog
It is always appropriate and necessary for the faith community to question and challenge political leadership on the biggest moral issues -- indeed it is our prophetic vocation to do so. That means lifting up the now growing rates of poverty in America and around the world, even when both parties only want to talk about the middle class. The plight of undocumented immigrants and their families unites almost all sectors of the faith community. The younger generation of the faithful is insisting on the urgency of "creation care" of the environment and the threat of climate change, especially to the poorest people around the globe. People of faith across the political spectrum also want to make serious progress on reducing the number of abortions in America -- not with symbolic amendments or criminalizing desperate and tragic choices -- but by preventing unwanted pregnancies and supporting low-income women. There is much work to be done in promoting healthy families; not by scapegoating gays and lesbians or bullying gay teens, but by creating policies that build a culture of support for families. Increased numbers of religious leaders are also ready to challenge the ethics of endless and failed wars of occupation, which have yet to seriously reduce the real threats of terrorism but have killed too many people.
It is not enough to talk about what President Obama should be doing; but instead we should be talking about what a movement can be doing to clear the space for change and provide energy and pressure on both the Congress and the White House. Only serious public education and mobilization will move the country forward on the "big vision" above. The "outside strategy" must be strong for the "inside strategy " to finally be successful -- and only then will access give way to influence. Learning the lessons of the midterm elections means not just wondering what Obama will do next; but also asking what we will do.
I have learned in the last two years that changes in Washington, Wall Street, and the country, are indeed much harder to accomplish than anyone expects. The combination of entrenched politics (on both sides); hugely influential special interests; the growing power of money in politics; the 24/7 assault of ideologically driven media machines; and a still-passive electorate that believes voting is the only requirement of citizenship -- all have contributed to where we now find ourselves.
Instead of just sitting back and watching how things go, an empowered new electorate must push the country deeper into our best shared values, understand the need for social movements in making social change, and act to hold both political sides accountable to trying to actually solve the country's greatest challenges, instead of just winning and keeping power.
We need to construct a new "moral center" in American politics. Yes, the rising deficit is a moral issue, but dealing with it in a moral way is also important. We cannot cut the deficit using methods that would hurt our most vulnerable and least powerful people. Yes, defeating terrorism is also a noble cause, but being willing to challenge the enormous human and financial costs of failed military solutions is also a just cause. And the faith community will always be lifting up the biblical priority of the poor, the weak, the sick, the oppressed, the left out and left behind, and always the children; and we will look for allies on both sides of the political aisle wherever we can find them.
Real social change depends more on a return to core values than a partisan victory by either political side. It means lifting up the fundamental personal and social virtues in our individual choices, family lives, community involvement, and engaged citizenship. For people of faith, it means leading by example from our congregations and actually doing the things we say we believe in.
Neither the left nor the right has the answers now, though both will continue to say that it does. So we have to focus on the spiritual and moral values that bring us together; that choose the common good over private gain, inclusiveness over intolerance, civility over shouting, long term over short term, integrity over celebrity, justice over excuses, morality over expediency, stewardship over consumption, truth over spin, patient persistence over immediate results, and finally, right over wrong.
These are the values that work for our personal lives, for teaching our children, for leading our congregations, for changing our communities, for holding politicians accountable, and for creating the social movements that make a difference.
We've learned that making change is harder than we think; now it's time to go deeper.
From Jim Wallis God's Politics blog
Saturday 6 November 2010
Christian Unity
An investigation of local Church activity in Edinburgh revealed that
"Unity seems to occur more readily when people work together on a new project, which no one church, group or congregation has previously run by themselves. Common ownership seems to be a sound foundation for happier and more creative co-operation. Also, it seems that projects receive more support when there are tangible ways through which people can become involved in a practical way: for example, driving people to clubs, sorting out Starter Packs, walking to shopping centres or in centres, or Bible Study. These are some of the ways in which people can do ecumenism. It is also important that people can recognise the need that they are seeking to meet, whether it is to help people with Dementia, support the struggle of their carers, or give people who are homeless a helping hand up and out of the cycle of despair.
The Ecumenical Relations Committee felt that it would be good to gather a sample of stories which could be shared with others. Stories which offer various models, take different journeys of discovery, reveal unexpected twists and turns, which may encourage you in your situation to take the risk of walking together as pilgrims where resources, ministry and faith can be shared, nurtured and directed." more(from Stories of Ecumenical Witness in Edinburgh published In Jan 2010 by Edinburgh Churches Together)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)