Rupert’s Blog

Shilpa Shetty, an Indian actress, has won Celebrity Big Brother. Somehow, after all the controversy last week about alleged racist comments by Jade Goody and her cohorts, where people were asking if this was a mirror onto racism in Britain, now we have the answer.

I have to confess I didn’t watch it. I wanted to, but was appalled by what I read. At best it was bullying: aggressive and vindictive. Many were saying it was racially motivated. I wanted to watch, and see for myself (and maybe there was a little to voyeurism there too!), but it just seemed to endorse the awful way Channel 4 handled the whole episode.

I think it wasn’t so much as racism, but just plain ignorance. The three young girls in the house really couldn’t understand Shilpa or the culture she comes from. They didn’t understand how she could have servants, what kind of houses they live in, or how or what they eat in India etc. But isn’t that the root of all kinds of intolerance: Ignorance? We don’t do it that way, and we don’t understand why others wouldn’t do it the way we do. It’s not so much about colour of skin, or the accent we have, but the difference in our cultures. And when others don’t understand that, often they tease, poke fun, ridicule, bully or worse. And that really IS racism.

But now the good old British Public have voted, and have shown what they thought of Jade, Jo and Danielle … and Shilpa, who responded with dignity, poise and grace.

Perhaps this episode does show what Britain is like: there are undercurrents of racism in our society, but most people are appalled by that and will stand up for the marginalised & oppressed … as long it is at the safety of the end of a telephone! Some good news after all.

In this book, by Robert Webber, he is attempting to “interpret the changing face of evangelicalism since about 1950 and projects where evangelicalism is going in the next decades” admittedly from a North American perspective.

In the introduction, Webber sets the scene for the book, by defining what he means by “Younger Evangelicals”, not limiting young to only young in age, but also young in spirit. In fact, he says that Brian McLaren (who I don’t think by any definition you could say was young - sorry Brian!), is the archetypal leader of a younger evangelical.

He sees the younger evangelicals as:

“anyone, older or younger, who deals thoughtfully with the shift from twentieth to twenty-first century culture. He or she is committed to construct a biblically rooted, historically informed, and culturally aware new evangelical witness in the twenty first century.” p.15

The younger evangelical he sees in contrast to what he calls the “traditional evangelicals” (or fundamentalists) from the 1950’s onwards and the “pragmatic evangelicals” from 1975 onward (typified by Bill Hybels). He sees though, both these older forms of evangelicals primarily shaped and operating in a modern worldview. The younger evangelicals are the first to be shaped and operate in a postmodern worldview.

I find this a hugely helpful introduction and helps explain some of the conflict seen in the church world at the moment. There is a huge shift happening in culture, and in church, and the transition needs to happen for the gospel to be contextualised in the culture of today. There are of course dangers (certainly of imbibing too much of the culture, that we are no longer distinct and prophetic), but the transition is essential. However, in many churches (and I think ours is no exception) we are a mix of pragmatic evangelicals and younger evangelicals and there can often be great misunderstanding.

However, we would all do well to remember that we come from the same stream, belong the same “side”, and have far more in common than we do differences.

It has been posted elsewhere, but probably still worth posting a link to an excellent article written by Scot McKnight on “Five Streams of Emerging Church” for Christianity Today.

The emerging church has been very controversial in some quarters, but often, in my view, because it is misunderstood. There is a huge amount of the good, the bad and the ugly in emerging church, but I think lots is a very helpful and genuine attempt to redefine church for 21st century postmodernism.

Scott McKnight, himself a member of Willow Creek Church, but also a theologian and friend of the emerging church gives a very helpful summary of the main movements within the emerging church, and a pretty fair critique, in my humble opinion.

At risk on being a serious Malcolm Duncan (Faithworks) groupie, I feel compelled to link to another post he has written on his blog.In this post he is looking at the Millennium Development Project from the UN, which has 8 key objectives that as Christians we would have no problem, nay should, be committing to.

His reason for bringing this to our attention: well of course they are really a core expression of the gospel, but also because people no longer seem interested in the Christian faith. And why does he think this is the case?

“Perhaps it is because the church has very often lost its own way. Particularly in the Northern Hemisphere, we have too often allowed ourselves to become obsessed with those things that we think are so morally important, at the expense of the things that actually matter. Is it possible that in losing our prophetic voice and in becoming obsessed with what goes on in the bedroom, we have lost the attention of the world? Is it possible that our failure to engage in issues of justice, serving the poor and reaching out to the marginalised, we have forfeited the right to be heard on any other issue?”

Amen and Amen. Cheering from the rafters, and dancing in the aisles. Yes. Yes. Yes.

And this is the journey we are on as a church (and have been for a few years), transitioning from a fairly mainstream charismatic, evangelical church (if we must use labels) to a missional community (to use some more labels!). A community of people that take seriously the promise to Abraham in Genesis 12: We are blessed, so that ALL peoples on earth will be blessed through us. We should be good news to our neighbours, our communities, our friends etc … but mostly we have just been hidden and when we do come out, it is so often to wag our finger. (See an excellent post by Scot McKnight, using the image of the Truman show to show how we have often lived as Christians … although he is talking more about how we see our particular version of the Christian faith as the only way, the analogy still holds for the purpose of this post).

It is massive change in thinking required; this seems a huge transition for our church. There are many questions: What are our communities? What difference can we make? How can we co-operate with “Missio Dei“? How can we change our thinking? Where are the new models of other churches we can point to? What does that look like for a reasonably large, city centre, gathered church? Who can help us? Can we make it?

I don’t know, but there is something in me that wants to move from dancing in the aisles to engaging with our communities. Or perhaps we need both?

Millennium Development Project Goals:

• Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
• Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education
• Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women
• Goal 4 Reduce child mortality
• Goal 5 Improve maternal health
• Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
• Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability
• Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development

This Sunday we are starting a series about money in church. So often when we preach about money in church (at least when we church leaders do it) we talk about giving. Clearly there if we are going to speak about money, giving is part of the story, but Jesus seems to have much more to say.

So we are looking at wealth, poverty, debt, saving, consumerism, environmental use of money, giving, faith & finances. But this week, I am kicking off the series, starting by talking about our attitude to money: Who is in charge? Does money work for us or do we work for money? It seems to me to be a fundamental question that Jesus poses:

No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.
[Matt 6:24 - NLT]

Who is it going to be? God or money? And Jesus gets to the point once again. He is pretty much saying: if you want to know how much you love Jesus, then look at our bank statements. How much of our spending is influenced by Jesus and His Kingdom, and how much by other influences? It is a tangible record of our commitment to Him.

So if you were going to be speaking on this subject, what would you want to say?

1) What’s the most fun work you’ve ever done, and why?

Mostly, I love what I am doing now (church leadership)! But I also loved teaching in a school in Pakistan for a couple of years in a mission school (I wasn’t a Christian at the time!). It was my first proper job and I so enjoyed living in Pakistan, teaching and being away from home!

2) A. Name one thing you did in the past that you no longer do but wish you did?

I used to play loads of sports, but particularly cricket. Loved it. But getting older, having two kids and a busy life means not much time for any of that now days. Cycling round Edinburgh is the main way I have of keeping fit.

B. Name one thing you’ve always wanted to do but keep putting it off?

I am interested in politics, and would love to be part of the Questiontime audience someday (and to ask a question), but it has never been in Edinburgh at a time when i have been free.

3) A. What two things would you most like to learn or be better at, and why?

1. Work / Life balance: while i have improved at this over the years, and i don’t feel i rob my family of time with them, i would like to have a better life balance: more time for other interests, fitness, friends etc. Maybe this is just the stage of life that i am in, but i keep dreaming …

2. Music: I would love to be able to play the piano, or saxophone by ear and improvise. I learned the piano a bit when i was younger, but i think real musical genes probably passed me by, unlike my wife and children!

B. If you could take a class/workshop/apprentice from anyone in the world living or dead, who would it be and what would you hope to learn?

Richard Rohr would be pretty cool. His writing have inspired and challenged me over the last few years. There is something a personal journey that he has gone on that I want to emulate.

4) A. What three words might your best friends or family use to describe you?

passionate, compassionate, communicator

B. Now list two more words you wish described you…

I would love to be more organised, and well travelled (i have done quite a bit of travelling, but not for the last few years - since kids came along anyway).

5) What are your top three passions? (can be current or past, work, hobbies, or causes)

Helping people develop & grow
Communicating
Learning

6) Write–and answer–one more question that YOU would ask someone

“Tell me your story …”

It is one of things that I constantly find a privilege when someone tells me their story, and lets me into a bit of their world, especially when they trust me enough to walk with them a while on their journey. And my answer … well is probably for another post, another time …!

Who’s next….

Anna (hardasiron), Alastiar (obscenebeauty), Brian (curious in Ibiza), and Dan

If you haven’t read my previous post, I suggest reading that first. But following on a couple of great comments from Malcolm Duncan and Paul Mayers, I wanted to highlight those comments and to add a bit more information.

If you want to hear Malcolm Duncan on radio 4 on the subject, you can listen here.

Also, there is some good dialogue on Malcolm Chamberlain’s blog.

Finally, if you are like me, and want to get to the source of what is being said, rather than rely on other’s take on it, here is some questions and answers I have come across in the house of Lords (Hansard) on 13th December 06 … thanks Malcolm for the tip:

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require all schools actively to promote homosexual civil partnerships to children from primary school age to the same degree that they teach the importance of marriage. [HL447]

Lord Rooker: No. The regulations are not concerned with what is taught in schools. That is rightly a matter for the Department of Education, Northern Ireland.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require a printing shop run by a Christian to print fliers promoting gay sex.[HL448]

Lord Rooker: No. It would be entirely within the spirit of the regulations for a printing shop run by a Christian to refuse to print fliers promoting gay sex, so long as that printer also refused to print fliers promoting heterosexual sex outside the realm of marriage.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would require a family-run bed and breakfast to let out a double room to a transsexual couple, even if the family consider it to be in the best interests of their children to refuse to allow such a situation in their own home.[HL449]

Lord Rooker: No.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Whether the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 would make it illegal for a heterosexual police officer, fire fighter or member of the Armed Forces to refuse to join a Gay Pride event promoting the homosexual way of life.[HL450]

Lord Rooker: No.

Time for something a little bit more serious, after the lighthearted quiz I posted on a couple of days ago.

I was listening to the radio the other day, to a discussion on the debate that was happening in the House of Lords on Tuesday on the Sexual Orientation Regulations. The SORs have come into force in Northern Ireland and are due to be implemented in the rest of the UK in April. They are designed to ensure that “goods, facilities and services” are delivered inclusively and in a non-discriminatory way. Some Christians are concerned that this in turn will be an infringement on their freedom and liberty (for example, see here).

So, while listening to the discussion, I couldn’t shake the feeling that the Christians were overstating their concerns. Were they really telling me the truth? Are these regulations going to force ministers, pastors, or church leaders to bless same sex relationships? Or will youth groups or faith schools have to promote same sex relationships as having equal validity as heterosexual relationships? That is what I was being told, but sorry for being sceptical, but I just wasn’t sure there wasn’t a wee bit of hyperbole or perhaps even obfuscation (a great word, which basically means a deliberate concealing of meaning, which you could argue I have just done by using that word …)

At the time, I hadn’t heard any other Christian response, but then thanks to Maggi Dawn, I have found that Malcolm Duncan (leader of Faithworks, that Steve Chalke founded) has written a response to the Christian reaction to the proposed implementation to SOR’s.

Malcolm says there already exemptions for religious organisations: we won’t be forced to bless same sex relationships etc:

It is also important to remember that the measures contained in the SORs will not replace existing legislation on discrimination. Thus the protection from discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief that Christians currently enjoy will continue.

So what is the truth of all this? Well I am still not sure, but somehow the tone and words of the outspoken critics don’t ring true to me. I suspect there are some difficult scenario’s that Christians would face, but maybe not the extent that is being portrayed. A lot of the debate has focused on guesthouses: if these regulations are passed, Christians will be forced to allow a same sex couple to rent a room, but there doesn’t seem much desire to stop an unmarried heterosexual couple renting rooms. The prospect, say proponents of the bill, of guesthouses having signs outside saying “no gays allowed” brings us back to the racial intolerance a few decades ago, when “no blacks allowed” sign were posted. More obfuscation? Maybe.

But I can’t shake the feeling that guesthouse owners wouldn’t be so fussed about a bloke and a woman sharing a bed if they weren’t married, and that smacks of homophobia in my book.

For a bit of lighthearted fun, I came across this quiz at Paul’s blog, to test your theological worldview. So here are my results:

You are Emergent/Postmodern in your theology. You feel alienated from older forms of church, you don’t think they connect to modern culture very well. No one knows the whole truth about God, and we have much to learn from each other, and so learning takes place in dialogue. Evangelism should take place in relationships rather than through crusades and altar-calls. People are interested in spirituality and want to ask questions, so the church should help them to do this.

The description for my second place is:
You are neo-orthodox. You reject the human-centredness and scepticism of liberal theology, but neither do you go to the other extreme and make the Bible the central issue for faith. You believe that Christ is God’s most important revelation to humanity, and the Trinity is hugely important in your theology. The Bible is also important because it points us to the revelation of Christ. You are influenced by Karl Barth and P T Forsyth.

Both descriptions are interesting - McLaren (yes that is him in the picture) is one of the authors I am reading and hugely enjoying at the moment, and Karl Barth has also been very influential from my theological study. Not sure the results totally accurate, but actually not a bad stab from a short quiz (and we all know what quizzes can be like …). All the categories are characterisations (I do have emerging sympathies, but don’t feel alienated from older forms of church), and the questions can be pretty ambiguous (I don’t think that “speaking in tongues is one of the most important parts of being saved”, but that doesn’t mean I am abandoning my charismatic roots).

I am surprised that classic liberal is so high as I don’t identify with the description at all (I guess there are some questions that I agree with that mark me high on this, but are ambiguous - “Jesus is a great moral teacher, whose example we should follow” - but that doesn’t mean he isn’t other things too …):

You are a classical liberal. You are sceptical about much of the historicity of the Bible, and the most important thing Jesus has done is to set us a good moral example that we are to follow. Doctrines like the trinity and the incarnation are speculative and not really important, and in the face of science and philosophy the surest way we can be certain about God is by our inner awareness of him. Discipleship is expressed by good moral behaviour, but inward religious feeling is most important.

So what is clear: I am not a fundamentalist, or in the way that this quiz is using the term, a reformed evangelical. Well it got that right!

Anyone else want to give this a go, and let us in on your results?

A Happy New Year to you all. After a much needed break and time with family, I am back working and blogging. So for the many thousands of you, who have missed my online presence, here I am again … (well I am hoping that there is a couple of you, and huge thanks to Colin, for stopping to say how much he is enjoying my blog - and for that I will post a link to his blog …)

So what does 2007 have in store. Well who knows. I am looking forward to doing a bit more blogging. When I read tallskinnykiwi’s top 15 tips on blogging, I realise once again that I am in kindergarten, compared to the university league of the top bloggers (I am not sure I even understand much of what he suggests), but the only way is up when you are as low as I am. So on with my blogging learning curve.

A couple of thoughts I have for the next wee while …

• I will write a post on the Christian Union wrangle with Edinburgh University Student Association as I promised to do before Christmas, but didn’t. In fact I have a meeting next week with some of the CU leaders, so maybe I will even have something concrete to tell …
• I have been reading a few books recently, including one called “The Younger Evangelical” by Robert Webber. I am really enjoying the book, and thought that I would blog my way through the book, for those who are interested (and it means you don’t have to read it!)
• I have been thinking about desert … seasons that God takes us through, and one that I have (bizarrely enough) found to very fruitful. So I intend to do a series of blogs on “lessons from the desert”.
  

That should keep me going for a while, with other random thoughts popping in along the way. Thanks to all who have commented and are part of the journey.