Ugley Vicar

To point out that two women (or two men) can't have sex?

Or is it something which we have so forgotten as a culture that we need to be reminded that sex is a biological system, not a sociological construct?

I ask, because I am genuinely puzzling over this one.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

This is part of the diocesan 'Transforming Presence' project.



Evangelical bishops please note -- just give an evangelistic lead to your diocese!

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Below is the text and the signatories of the letter to The Times. For the uninitiated, a PTO is not a revolvable minister but someone with 'Permission to Officiate'. I must be careful what I say about chaplains, having been one myself for an inordinate length of time. However, I couldn't help noticing that seventeen of the hundred and twenty signatories appear to be involved in chaplaincy work (including the Head of Spiritual and Pastoral Care Services, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust). Is there some connection, I ask. There are also several other non-parochial clergy listed. As to the number of parishes, I counted seventy 'benefices' including some multi-parish groupings. It may be uncharitable of me to say so, but I suspect that if one reckoned the clergy and parishes involved by percentages, their request to have their views 'fully represented in [the General] Synod' has probably been more than met already. *************************  Letter to The Times We, the undersigned, believe that on the issue of holding civil partnership ceremonies in Church of England churches incumbents / priests in charge should be accorded the same rights as they enjoy at present in the matter of officiating at the marriage of divorced couples in church. Namely, that this should be a matter for the individual conscience of the incumbent / priest in charge. We would respectfully request that our views in this regard are fully represented in Synod. Rev. Preb. Brian Leathard, Rev. Dr. Jack Dunn
St. Luke’s with Christ Church, Chelsea, London, SW3 The Rt. Rev. Edward Holland
Hon. Assistant Bishop in London and Europe The Rev. Canon Mark Oakley
Canon Treasurer, St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, EC4 The Rev. Canon. Dr. Giles Fraser
Former Canon Chancellor, St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, EC4 Rev. Lucy Winkett, Rev. Lindsay Meader, Rev. Hugh Valentine
St. James’s, Piccadilly, London, W1 Rev. Canon. Joe Hawes
All Saints, Fulham, SW6 Rev. Gillean Craig
St. Mary Abbots, Kensington, W8 Rev. Ginny Thomas
St. Mary with St. Peter and St. Jude, West Brompton, SW10 Rev. Stephen Dando, Rev. Elaine Dando
St. Lawrence Church, Eastcote, Pinner, London, HA5 Rev. Preb. Ron Swan
PTO Diocese of London Rev. Canon. John Record
St. Peter, Black Lion Lane, Hammersmith, London, W6 Rev. Alistair McCulloch
Chaplain, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, SW3 Rev. Dr. Julie Gittoes
All Saints’ Church, Hampton, London, TW12 Rev. Robert Thompson
The Lead Chaplain: The Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, SW3 Rev. Dr. Martin Dudley
St. Bartholomew The Great, Smithfield, London, EC1 Rev. Laura Burgess
St. Botolph, Aldgate, London, E3N Rev. Stephen Mason, Rev. Dr. Brutus Green, Rev. Margaret Legg
St. John The Evangelist with St. Michael and All Angels, Hyde Park Crescent , London, W2 Rev. Craig Barber
Anglican Chaplain, London Metropolitan University, London, EC Rev. Monica Stewart, Rev. Imogen Vibert
St. Thomas, Stamford Hill, London, N16 Rev. David Peebles
St George Bloomsbury, London, WC1 Rev. Andrew Cain, Rev. Christine Cargill
St. James, West Hampstead and St. Mary with All Souls, London, NW6 Rev. Dr. Christina Beardsley
Head of Multi-Faith Chaplaincy, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation, London, SW10 Rev. Dave Tomlinson
St. Luke, West Holloway, London, N7 Rev. Kevin Morris, Rev. Graham Morgan Kt., Rev. Stephen Stavrou
St. Michael and All Angels, Bedford Park, W4 Father Michael Moorhead
All Souls, Harlesden, London, NW10 Rev. Chris Swift
St. Mary Magdalene, Littleton and St. Nicholas, Shepperton, London, TW17 Rev. Jenny Welsh
St. Pancras Parish Church, London, NW1 and Chaplain to University College London Rev. Hannah Reynolds
All Saints, Hanworth, London, TW13 Rev. Bruce Bridgewood
St. Peter-Le-Poer, Friern Barnet, London, N10 Rev. Nigel Orchard
Christ The Redeemer, Southall, London, UB1 Rev. Stephen Flatt
Head of Spiritual and Pastoral Care Services, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, W2 Rev. Stephen Coles
St. Thomas The Apostle, Finsbury Park, London, N4 Rev. David Wheeler, Rev. Paulette Mullings
St. Saviour, Wendell Park, London, W12 Rev. Will Baynes
St James the Less, Sussex Gardens, Paddington, W2 and PTO Diocese of London Rev. Dr. Edward Norman
St. James Garlickhythe, London, EC4 Rev. Gerald Beauchamp
St. Cyprian, St. Marylebone, London, NW1 and The Annunciation, Bryanston Street, St. Marylebone, London, W1 Rev. Jeff Hopkin Williams
St. Mary The Virgin, Twickenham, London, TW1 Rev. Nicola Stanley. Rev. Andrew Williams
All Hallows, Twickenham, London, TW1 Rev. Jenny Petersen
Anglican Chaplain, St. Benet’s Ecumenical Chaplaincy, Queen Mary, University of London Rev. Rachel Hawes
St. John, Notting Hill, London, W11 Rev. Paul Nicholson, Rev. Mark Speeks
St. Peter, Belsize Park and St. Saviour, South Hampstead, London, NW3 Rev. David Matthews
Holy Innocents with St. John, Hammersmith, London, W6 Rev. David Allen
St. Clement, Kings Square, London, EC1 and chaplain to Moorfields Eye Hospital and City University, London, EC1 Rev. Michael Fuller
The United Benefice of Holland Park, London, W8 Rev. Simon Grigg
St. Paul, Covent Garden, London, WC2 and chaplain to the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, London, WC2 Rev. Philip Warner
St. Magnus The Martyr with St. Margaret New Fish Street and St Michael Crooked Lane, London, EC3 Rev. John Hawkins
St. John, West Hendon, London, NW4 and St. Matthias, Colindale, London, NW9 Rev. John Willmington, Rev. Brandy Pearson, Rev. Robert Pearson
Parish of Acton Green, London, W4 Rev. Bertrand Olivier
All Hallows-by-the-Tower, London, EC3 Rev. Ben Humphries
St. Stephen and St. Thomas, Shepherd’s Bush with St. Michael and St. George, White City Estate, London, W12 Rev. Margaret Evans
St. Stephen, Canonbury, London, N1 Rev. Simon Brandes
St. Nicholas with St. Mary Magdalene, Chiswick, London, W4 Rev. Jonathan Kester, Rev. Alysoun Whitton, Rev. Annette Fritze-Shanks
Emmanuel, West Hampstead, London, NW6 Rev. Graham Buckle, Rev. Debbie Hart
St. Paul, St. Marylebone, London, NW1 Rev. Canon. Chris Chivers
John Keble Church, Mill Hill, London, NW7 Rev. Martin McGonigle
St. Andrew, Southgate, London, N14 Rev. Christopher Cawrse
Holy Cross with St. Jude and St. Peter, St. Pancras, London, WC1 The Rev. Dr. Nicholas Henderson
St Martin’s, West Acton, London W3 & All Saints, Ealing, London W5 Rev. Justin Gau
St. John of Jerusalem with Christ Church, South Hackney, London, E9 Rev. Dominic Fenton
Chaplain, North Middlesex Hospital, London, N18 Rev. Julia Porter-Pryce, Rev. Fraser Dyer
St. Peter, De Beauvoir Town, London, N1 Rev. Andrew Norwood
Chaplain, University of the Arts, London, WC1 and PTO Diocese of London Rev. Melanie Toogood
St. George and All Saints, Tufnell Park, London, N7 Rev. Stephen Williams
Senior University Chaplain, Diocese of London Rev Sr Helen Loder SSM
Leader, Sisters of the Society of St. Margaret, St. Saviour’s Priory, London, E2 and PTO, Stepney Area Rev. Nigel Asbridge
St. Mary with St. John, Edmonton, London, N18 Rev. Dr. John Seymour
Chaplain, Twyford High School, London, W3 Rev Brian Ralph
St. Barnabas, Bethnal Green, London, E3 Rev. Evan. H. Jones
PTO, Stepney Area, London Rev. Dr. Alan McCormack
St. Botolph Without Bishopsgate and St. Vedast alias Foster, London, EC2 Rev. Reuben Preston
St. Mary of Eton with St. Augustine, Hackney Wick, London, E9 Rev. Dr. Thaddeus Birchard
PTO Charing Cross, Archdeaconry, London Rev. Edd Turner
St. Aldhelm, Edmonton, N18 Rev. Mark Osborne
St. John with St. James, Walham Green, Fulham, London, SW6 Rev. Peter Bernhard
PTO Stepney Episcopal Area, London Rev. Stephen Tucker, Rev. Emma Smith
St. John, Hampstead, London, NW3 Rev. Preb. Tony Kyriakides-Yeldham
Palliative Care Chaplain, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, W2 Joe Moffatt, Rev. Mary Hawes
St. Mary with St. Alban, Teddington, London, TW11 Rev. Preb. Alan Green
St. John on Bethnal Green, London, E2 Rev. Dr. Malcolm Johnson
PTO London Diocese Rev. Canon Garth Hewitt, Rev. Malcolm Doney, Rev. Chris Rose
All Hallows, London Wall, London, EC2 Rev. Andrew Willson
Chaplain, Imperial College, London, SW7 Rev. Patrick Tuft
Prebendary Emeritus of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, EC4 Rev. George Pitcher
St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, London, EC4 Rev. Cindy Kent
St. John The Apostle, Whetstone, London, N20 Rev. Niall Weir
St. Paul, West Hackney, London, N16 Rev. Gary Bradley
Little Venice, London, W2 Rev. Canon Michael Ainsworth
St. George-in-the East with St. Paul, Cannon Street, London, E1 Rev. Preb. Adrian Benjamin
All Saints, Friern Barnet, London, N20 Rev. Preb. Alan Wynne, Rev. Jane Hodges
Poplar Team Ministry, London, E14 Rev. Bill Wilson
PTO Diocese of London Rev. David Tuck
St. Alban, North Harrow, London, HA2 Rev. Robert Mitchell
Ld Chaplain, Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, London, NW3 Rev. Rosamond McDowell
St. Mary –Le-Bow, Cheapside, London, EC2 Rev. Graeme Watson
PTO Diocese of London Rev. Preb. Michael Shrewsbury
Prebendary Emeritus of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, EC4 Rev. Philippa Turner
Chaplain, Royal Veterinary College, London, NW1 and UCL Medical London, London, WC1 Rev. Philip Davison
St. Mary, Finchley, London, N3 Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Our churches are having a Lent Course on 'the local church' this year, and I have been asked to prepare the study material.

I may well have pitched it too high, but here is what I have done so far on 'the sacraments'.

The idea is that people should read through the material, including the Bible references and answer the questions themselves before they come to the group. Then at the group they discuss the questions set at the end.


Comments?
**************

4. The sacraments that bind us together

The Church of England includes in its definition of the church,
... the sacraments … duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. (Article XIX. Of the Church) Before the Reformation in the 16th century, people spoke of there being seven sacraments. However, the Thirty-nine Articles (following the Protestant tradition) observe that,
There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God. (Article XXV, ‘Of the Sacraments’) Our focus here will therefore will be on those things properly called sacraments: baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

Background history
The Lord’s Supper (also known as Holy Communion and the Eucharist), has been the subject of much controversy in church history.

According to some, including the Roman Catholic church today, the heart of the rite is when the priest offers a sacrifice (the ‘host’, from a Latin word meaning ‘victim’) on an altar.

The Protestant Reformers all agreed this was wrong. So Article XXXI, ‘Of the One Oblation of Christ Finished on the Cross’ robustly declares that …
… the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits.  But there the agreement ended. Some, like Martin Luther, held that Christ’s body and blood really are present in the bread and wine. Others, like Huldrych Zwingli, fiercely denied this, and saw the Lord’s Supper as just an occasion for remembering Jesus’ death.

Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, the architect of the English Reformation, eventually wrote a new service of  the Lord’s Supper which made clear that there was no sacrifice taking place. Furthermore, he denied that Christ’s actual body was present in the bread and wine — the so-called ‘elements’. (For more background, read the Book of Common Prayer Communion service, and especially the notes in small print at the end.)

But what is the biblical background and understanding of the Lord’s Supper?

The Last Supper
Read Luke 22:14-20. Here we see that the ‘last supper’ of Jesus with his disciples was celebrated as a Passover meal — a traditional annual festival with a set routine. But Jesus’ words regarding the bread and wine gave it a new meaning:
And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. (Luke 22:19-20) The Blood of the Old Covenant
Read Exodus 24:1-11. The setting is at Mt Sinai, where Moses has brought the people after their ‘exodus’ from Egypt.

The annual Passover meal was a commemoration of their last night of captivity in Egypt. During that night the Israelites were spared (‘passed over’) when God judged the Egyptians, because the blood of sacrificial lambs was painted over the doorways of their houses.

Three months later, at Mt Sinai, Moses conducted a covenant ceremony and sprinkled the people with “the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you” (24:8) — blood from fresh sacrifices of peace offerings (24:5).

After that, Moses and Aaron and the leaders of Israel went up Mt Sinai and ate and drank in God’s presence (24:11)

•    How do Jesus’ words at the Last Supper echo Moses’ words to the people at Mt Sinai?
•    How else might we say the Last Supper is like the experience of the Israelites at Mt Sinai?
• How does the Last Supper draw together elements of both the Passover and the covenant at Sinai?

The Lord’s Supper and the body of Christ
The tradition of eating the Lord’s Supper together began early in the life of the church (perhaps even in Acts 2:40). At Corinth, however, things had gone wrong. Nevertheless, we learn very important lessons from Paul’s comments.

Read 1 Corinthians 11:20-34.

•    What was the first thing the Corinthians were doing wrong (see v 21)?
•    Why was this wrong (hint: think about Christians who had come for the Supper from other households)?

Notice, their commemoration of ‘the Lord’s Supper’ was obviously quite different from what we are used to, involving a full-blown meal. However, they still centred on the same words and actions of Jesus (see vv 23-25).

• What did they actually do with the bread and wine (v 26)?
• What should we conclude are the important words and actions at the Lord’s Supper?

The body of Christ and its members
But there is something else about the Lord’s Supper that is immensely important, yet which we often overlook.

In v 29 Paul gives this solemn warning:
For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. Before deciding what he means by “recognizing the body of the Lord”, read 1 Corinthians 10:15-17.

• What, according to v 15 in this passage, are the “many” people who make up the church?
• How is this idea symbolized in the Lord’s Supper?

Now read 1 Corinthians 12:13-27.

• Into what have we been baptized into by one Spirit?
• According to vv 14-19, it is very important that the body is made up of many parts. Nevertheless, what does v 20 say?
• Because of what is said in v 20, what can the ‘eye’ not say, or the ‘head’ not say?
• What point is Paul making here about the church?
• According to vv 22-24, how should we treat the ‘weaker’, ‘less presentable’ parts of the body?
• What is God’s attitude to the ‘less presentable’ parts of our own bodies (v 24)? What should be our attitude to the parts of the body of Christ that society would hold in less honour?

Now that we have looked at chapter 12, we can look back again to chapter 11.

• What does Paul mean in chapter 11 when he talks about “the body of the Lord” in v 29?
• How were people not recognizing the body of the Lord in the way they acted at the Lord’s Supper?

The Lord’s Supper is meant to be a practical demonstration and reminder of our belonging to Christ’s body and therefore of our responsibilities to one another in the church. The Christian believer is not an isolated individual standing in a ‘personal relationship with Jesus’, but a connected part of the Christ’s body in a collective relationship with him and with others:
Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. (1 Cor 12:27) Baptized into Christ
Our unity with Christ is also important to our understanding of the sacrament of baptism.

•    According to 1 Corinthians 12:13, what happened to us in baptism (v 13)?
•    What have we all been given to drink (v 13)? How is this symbolized in the Lord’s Supper?

The idea of being baptized into Christ is important for our understanding of salvation. Through baptism, what is true for Christ in his body becomes true for us. Read Romans 6:3-4.

•     What has happened to Christ, and what has happened to those who have been baptized into him?

The Thirty-nine Articles have this to say about baptism:
Baptism is not only a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that be not christened, but it is also a sign of Regeneration or new Birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed; Faith is confirmed, and Grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. (Article XXVII, ‘Of Baptism’) The key phrase here is “they that receive Baptism rightly”. To receive baptism rightly, it must be joined with faith. Therefore Paul warns against baptism without faith, just as he warns against participating in the Lord’s Supper without faith. Read 1 Corinthians 10:1-11.

•    What happened to most of those who were “baptized into Moses” and ate and drank the “spiritual” food and drink? Why was this their fate?
•    What is the lesson for those of us who are baptized into Christ and participate in the Lord’s Supper?

For group discussion
1.    What things were not clear to you from your personal study?
2.    What questions were raised by your studies?
3.    When we celebrate the Lord’s Supper in our churches, how well does what we do ‘proclaim the Lord’s death’?
4.    How well does it express the idea that the church is the body of Christ where we all belong to him and to one another?
5.    How might we do things better?
6.    How does being “baptized into Christ” affect the way we think about Christ dying ‘in our place’ on the cross?
7.     Why is the idea of the church as Christ’s body so important to our understanding of the sacraments of the gospel?

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

'Nursery Chimes' is one of my favourite-ever pieces of music. I have it on CD, but it is even more amazing watching it live.

The technique is interesting -- 'harmonic harping'. Watch Giltrap's forefinger, which creates the 'harmonic' -- the point along the string where the harmonic vibration occurs. His left hand is also fingering the strings whilst his right forefinger creates teh harmonics. Meanwhile, he is plucking the strings between the harmonic point and the bridge.

Brilliant! A wonderful sound and a wonderful tune.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Not much time blogging, as you may have noticed, in the past few days.

Yesterday I spent with the PCC and other leaders from St Peter's Harold Wood, and their 'church plant' at Immanuel Brentwood, who had gathered at Pilgrim's Hall in Ongar to think about their strategy and vision for growth.

I'm glad to say they'd all got a copy of my Strategy that Changes the Denomination, which they're studying together.

We looked at the issues of gospel growth and gospel leadership -- particularly the principle that the means of gospel proclamation and the style of leadership should reflect the content of the gospel, that Christ who was rich, became poor for our sakes.

The day before that, I spent the morning at a studio in central London recording for 4thought TV on Channel 4. An hour of material will be edited down into 90 seconds, which includes me walking on and looking into the camera. Each week they take a topic, and in my particular case it was same-sex marriages in Anglican churches. The programmes go out after the 7pm news, and mine should be on during the week beginning 5th Feb.

Thursday was also busy, but largely thanks to the fact that on Wednesday this here laptop had a disastrous failure and everything had to be reinstalled. PTL for backups.

for Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

No time for 'proper blogging' this afternoon. During the week, however, I read yet another document which referred uncritically to the 'Five Marks of Mission' as if they were the gold-standard of Anglican missional doctrine. The problem is, this overlooks the fact that these 'marks' have already been critiqued by the body which produced them, which decided they weren't quite right.

Following a review process begun in 1996, this body stated, "we have come to believe that, as our Communion travels further along the road towards being mission-centred, the Five Marks need to be revisited."

I do wish someone would tell the Church of England this.

Meanwhile, rather than rehash the material, I have simply cut and pasted from my book the relevant section (the footnotes are in the actual text). I hope this might give you some ideas ...

Reasserting Evangelism
 We referred earlier to the ‘Five Marks of Mission’, which have come to function as an unofficial, but highly popular, summary of the Church’s raison d’être. The adoption of these ‘Marks of Mission’, however, has had serious consequences for the Church. Thus, Martin Davie, in his A Guide to the Church of England, asserts on this basis that, “the Church of England ... sees mission as something that involves more than simply evangelism.”29 Indeed Davie explicitly critiques the definition of evangelism used in Towards the Conversion of England, quoting with approval the words of Paul Avis: ... mission is bigger than evangelization. Evangelization is a part of which mission is the whole. As Moltmann puts it, ‘[...] Evangelization is mission, but mission is not merely evangelization.’30 The problem with this analysis is that it has been rejected by a subsequent Anglican body set up to continue the study of mission: the ‘Standing Commission for Mission of the Anglican Communion’, also known as MISSIO. According to its report on the Anglican Communion official website, At its second meeting (Ely 1996), MISSIO began reviewing the 'Five Marks of Mission' as developed by the Anglican Consultative Council between 1984 and 1990. We recognise with gratitude that the Five Marks have won wide acceptance among Anglicans, and have given parishes and dioceses around the world a practical and memorable "checklist" for mission activities. However, we have come to believe that, as our Communion travels further along the road towards being mission-centred, the Five Marks need to be revisited.31 Crucially, and contra the assertions of Davie, Avis and indeed Jurgen Moltmann, the report goes on to say, The first mark of mission, identified at ACC-6 with personal evangelism, is really a summary of what all mission is about, because it is based on Jesus’ own summary of his mission (Matthew 4:17, Mark 1:14-15, Luke 4:18, Luke 7:22; cf. John 3:14-17). Instead of being just one (albeit the first) of five distinct activities, this should be the key statement about everything we do in mission. (Emphasis added)32 In other words, far from personal evangelism being a part of mission, it is (properly understood) the very heart of mission. The reason for this will hopefully become clear if we look carefully at the definition of evangelism used in Towards the Conversion of England. This states carefully and explicitly that to evangelize is “so to present Christ Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit, that men shall come to put their trust in God through Him, to accept Him as their Saviour, and serve Him as their King”. The last point, however, is often missed, even by those doing the evangelism. Personally I find some difficulties (not to say confusion) in the ideas about justification being put forward by the former Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright, and in some of the applications he suggests of the significance of the resurrection. However, I believe he is spot-on when he says that evangelism ought to be the announcement of the lordship of Christ: ... ‘the gospel’, in the New Testament, is the good news [...] that Jesus, whom ... God raised from the dead, is the world’s true Lord.33 Our problem has been with the extent of Christ’s lordship. Undoubtedly this is in part because of our own sinfulness and the pervasiveness of sin in the world, which makes us unable to see what his lordship requires and unwilling to be obedient when we finally understand. In the former nations of Western Christendom it may also have been because the government and the laws did some of the work for us. Today, however, the challenge is perhaps greater than ever, and pastors must work harder to show what it means. Crucially, we must see that evangelism does not consist simply of calling people to ‘get right with God’, but, through a right relationship with God, to ‘get right with our neighbour’. Moreover, to serve Christ as King is not just a matter of tweaking our personal morality (mostly in the area of family life and sexuality), but in bringing every aspect of our lives under his rule and in extending his rule as far as possible into every area of life over which we have any influence. Historically, we can find radical examples of English Christians doing just this in business life and in the political arena— unfortunately they are not usually the Anglicans! Nevertheless, there are surely lessons to be learned from how, for example, the Quakers who set up Boots the Chemists treated their workers. Some may ask how this differs from the way that evangelicals in the 1970s and ’80s moved into areas like politics and social action. The answer is that we must see and show that our actions in this regard flow directly and explicitly from our obedience to the Christ who calls everyone to acknowledge him as Lord. We must ensure that, in the words of the Sermon on the Mount, people see our good works and glorify our Father who is in heaven. Our actions must be the natural basis for proclamation because they are themselves the fruits of obedience to the gospel. Regarding the Church, therefore, we must not allow evangelism to be reduced to a ‘part’ of mission. It is sad to see as distinguished a theologian as Moltmann quoted saying that mission is “not merely evangelization” — as if there were anything ‘mere’ about the proclamation that Christ is Lord and the calling on people to obey his kingship. In the Church of England today as whole, however, that is often how evangelism is seen, and it is not long before it is reduced from being a part of mission to being an optional extra in mission. But equally, we must not allow evangelism to be reduced to a personal call to change our views as to whether or not we believe in God and what we believe about ourselves and about Jesus dying for our sins. We cannot have Christ as Saviour if we will not have Christ as Lord. And his lordship must extend into every area of the lives of those whom he saves. There is a challenge here for the more conservative evangelical. But the conservative evangelical is also entitled to ask what has happened, institutionally, to the call to personal conversion. Once again, nothing less than an institutional transformation is required, which needs a deliberate and conscious strategy. And therein lies our problem. Evangelicals will generally go on evangelizing, whatever happens in the wider institution. But this will not lead to a programme suitable to the conversion of England. That needs a bolder and more ambitious approach, yet at present there is no sign of that coming from the official, hierarchical, leadership. Given where we are today, then, how can we address the need for the transformation of the Church?
Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

My revelatory moment came with the words, "Coronation Street's on, they're having a row."

Back came the question, "Who's having a row?" and suddenly I realized: I didn't know who, but there's always someone having a row, or having a go at someone else, or cheating on their partner, or plotting something.

Wherever you go in soapland, there's always sour looks and mean deeds.

Now there's an acronym in the world of computer programming: GIGO, which means 'garbage in, garbage out'.

If you input erroneous data your results won't suddenly become Nobel Prizewinning stuff. If your programme is corrupted, don't expect it to run.

And it is often assumed that the same applies in the world of home entertainment. If someone constantly watches violent horror films, it is hardly likely to have an edifying effect. If they are addicted to violent pornography, not only is there something suspect about their inner workings, but they are likely to be exacerbating, rather than helping, the problem.

So why do we assume TV soaps are any different?

Of course there is the excuse, they're not real life. They just exaggerate the kind of things that go on in real life for entertainment.

True, but there are other things that go on in real life, that don't get exaggerated for entertainment in the soaps. There's heroism, there's self-sacrifice, there's kindness and helpfulness.

According  to a report in the Daily Mail, Pam St Clement, who used to pay Pat Butcher in East Enders, voiced something of the same concern: I'm not too sure that one little area of London has quite so much violence and adultery as ours does," she is quoted as saying, adding, "Maybe in the search to be over [sic] more interesting we are always pinning stories on things that are ever more 'out there', rather than remembering that good stories are about what happens in people's hearts and in their relationships."

But as we know, in their efforts to be 'out there', soap writers have aimed to be opinion shapers on the subjects of death, sexuality and so on, as well as entertainers. Yet if they believe they can shape opinions, would they deny they can shape a 'mood'?

When I was a schoolboy, our deputy head always seemed to end the last assembly of every academic year with a reading from St Paul's letter to the Philippians, ending with these words: "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."

It was meant as a moral exhortation, and by constant repetition it must have got through even my schoolboy skull. And there's a double lesson in itself.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

In the usual spirit of responsible journalism, I haven't had time to check all the details on this one, but apparently there are 'Real Easter Eggs' out there that some supermarkets aren't interested in stocking.

They seem like a pretty good idea. Easter eggs are an extortionate way to buy chocolate generally. If it's chocolate you want, just buy a big, cheap slab of the stuff. Cadbury's Dairy Milk in the mega-size usually does me for a while.

But if you're going to spend money on Easter Eggs, surely you might as well do it wisely. So here's a direct link to the Real Easter Egg site, where you can order them. They're Traidcraft and all that, so the guilt of expensive chocolate is somewhat assuaged.

Apparently the Bishop of Chelmsford also thinks this is a good idea - another reason at the moment for appreciating his ministry.

Chocolate and a chance to 'stick it to the man'. What's not to like (as they say)?

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

I just checked, and A Strategy that Changes the Denomination is now available on Amazon. They are charging the full 'list price' (£6.50), but it is eligible for free delivery. This is comparable with the combined £3.52 cover price and £2.99 postage if you order from Lulu (£6.51), but bear in mind that Lulu often offer discounts.

BTW I was amused to note that someone on Amazon is offering it 'used' for £18.50.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

I see from the Daily Mail that there has apparently been a surge in people buying telescopes as a result of the recent ‘Stargazing Live’ programme on BBC2. As a bit of a ‘dabbler’ myself (I actually have a minor qualification in astronomy from my university days), I think this is basically a good thing. However, when it comes to buying a telescope, there’s a couple of tips I’d like to share — and I’d invite others to contribute their own. First, forget magnification. It’s complicated to explain, but magnification figures can be very misleading when it comes to what you’re going to see down the telescope when you finally get it set up. Instead, go for ‘width’ — the bigger the aperture, generally the better. Think of light like water. Imagine its raining and you put a tea cup and a washing-up bowl out in the garden. After twenty minutes, which one’s going to contain the most water? It’s going to be the bowl. Because it covers a bigger area than the teacup, it will have been able to catch more of the rain. The same with light coming from the sky. A 4" wide telescope will capture not just twice as much light, but four times as much light as a 2" telescope. This means you will see much fainter objects. But don’t expect to see views like the pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope. With a decent 4" telescope, the Andromeda galaxy — one of the biggest and brightest ‘deep sky objects’ — is still only going to look like a faint fuzzy patch. On the other hand, the moon and the planets can be quite stunning. But here another rule applies regarding telescopes. Basically, telescopes come in two kinds: refractors and reflectors. Refractors, you look straight through the tube — think Lord Nelson. Reflectors, you look into it sideways. (There are complicated variations on reflectors, but hey, you’re a beginner, right?) Due to the way they’re made, reflectors are shorter and they tend to allow big apertures at lower costs. Refractors are longer, and you pay much more, proportionately, for large apertures. BUT refractors give sharper planetary viewing at smaller sizes than do reflectors. So if you want to view the planets — and there’s a lot to see right now — a smaller, quality, refractor might be better than a larger (but not quite large enough!) reflector. Even so, the rule above still applies — magnification is not the first concern. The other thing to bear in mind is what you’re going to put the telescope on. If this is your first venture, you’ll probably be OK with a package of telescope and mount, and don’t worry too much about fancy things like motor drives and ‘Go-to’ mounts. Just whack the thing on a tripod, have a look round and if you enjoy it, upgrade when you get bored. But if you’re reasonably serious about this, look carefully at the mount you’re going to buy. Bear in mind, you can always stick a better telescope on a good mount, whereas a flimsy mount, or an unreliable tracking motor, means even you best viewing efforts will be frustrated. And another thing — don’t neglect simple binoculars. In fact, for the complete beginner these may be a much better starting point than a telescope. Personally, I would recommend getting a pair of ‘specialist’ astronomical binoculars. I have a pair of these ‘Revelation’ binoculars from Telescope House. On a limited budget, you would be hard-pressed to do better. They cost me more than the current £55, and they will give you that ‘wow’ factor if you point them at the right part of the sky. Notice they are 15x70. That is to say, they ‘only’ magnify 15 times (though that’s a pretty big seagull at 100 yards). But they have a 70mm aperture. That’s 2.75 inches — as big as some telescopes. They’re heavy — you’ll get best viewing by putting them on a stand, so don’t forget to buy the tripod adapter as well. But a camera tripod, or even a tall ‘monopod’ will do (it needs to be tall if you’re over 6ft, like me). Get your kids a pair of these and they will have something that really will last them years, even if they graduate later to a telescope. It is much easier to pack the ‘bins’ and whip them out when needed than to do the same with a 105mm Meade, believe me! (And if you have the money, look at the next size up, though bear in mind that these ‘astronomical’ binoculars are less suitable for daylight work, like birdwatching.) Finally, much as I appreciate Amazon, this really is a case where I would recommend going to and buying from a specialist suppliers. Telescope House in Tunbridge Wells give a good service in my experience, as do Green Witch (I think it’s a word play on Greenwich, where the Royal Observatory was once located), though they have now moved from their Cambridge location. (Please don’t get their advice then buy from Amazon — that is just wrong.) Enjoy. But bear in mind, its blooming cold out there. Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Battling to prepare a Lent course on ‘the local church’, I have drawn on the definition given in the Thirty-nine Articles: The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached and the sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ’s ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. (Article XXIX) In preparing a unit on ‘the sacraments’, however, I have been struck by how Paul’s theology of the Lord’s supper dovetails with his concept of the church itself. In 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 he asks rhetorically, Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. (NIV) However, their behaviour at the Lord’s supper is a contradiction of this principle: “you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing” (11:22). In saying this, he famously warns against those who eat the bread and drink the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner (11:27) who are therefore “guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord” because they fail to recognize the body of the Lord (11:29). It is very clear, though, that whereas the body and blood in v 27 is that of Jesus himself, the ‘body’ in v29 is the church. Paul has switched references, just as he does earlier in the chapter when he talks about the ‘head’ with (at least) three different references. So by the time he gets to chapter 12, his ‘body’ language is focussed entirely on Christ’s body as identified with the church: The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. (12:12) Notice, he does not say, “So it is with the church,” which is how we often preach this passage. We tend to reduce the statement to a simile: “the church is like a body with many parts” — which is true, but not the truth Paul is conveying. For Paul at this point, church and Christ are interchangeable, and his sacramental theology is fundamental to this understanding: For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. (12:13) The diversity of the church is not that of a group who bring diverse skills to a task, but of a single body which has different organs and limbs: Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. (12:14) And therefore the behaviour criticized earlier at the Lord’s supper is not merely ‘impolite’ but a contradiction of a fundamental theological reality: But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honour to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. ... Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. (12:24b-25, 27) So when the ‘one bread’ of the Lord’s supper is broken and distributed, it is not eaten by individuals. Rather, like food going into our mouths, it feeds the organs and limbs of one body. The message of holy communion is therefore not just that Christ died for us individually (though of course it is that) but that Christ thereby ‘incorporates’ us into himself and thus joins us to one another. I cannot therefore make ‘my’ communion. I can only join with making ‘our’ communion where the one Body feeds through the Head on the healing fruit of the true ‘Tree of Life’. Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

I have posted earlier a comment about how evangelicals (I mean clergy especially) treat diocesan evangelical fellowships the way we don't want people to treat church on Sunday, and I believe it is worth highlighting.

Most of us get pretty frustrated if people habitually only turn up for Sunday church when it suits them - when they aren't visiting relatives or shopping or taking the kids to football, and so on.

The reason for this, however, ought not to be that it makes our numbers look bad or makes us personally frustrated after all the work we put in. Rather, it should be the reason given in Hebrews 10:23-25:
Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another —and all the more as you see the Day approaching. (The Holy Bible : New International Version, electronic ed)  We should be in church for one another's sake - not for our own sake alone. And we should be at the Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship for the same reason.

Goodness knows, we need —as much as the laity —encouragement to hold unswervingly to our hope (how often do clergy who drift from evangelical fellowship drift, a few years later, from evangelical doctrine?), to spur one another on to love and good deeds, and to recall the coming day of judgement when our own ministry will be revealed as building on gold and silver or hay and straw.

And if your DEF doesn't deliver that encouragement, then take action to make sure it does. But do not give up meeting!

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

I spent much of Thursday this week on a meeting of the Church of England Evangelical Council. The train journey down (as my Facebook friends will know) was a delight, travelling in the new Stansted Express rolling stock and getting free WiFi in second class — plus an entire section to myself. It was far better than working from home. They even brought coffee round! However, the CEEC, which meets at the All Souls Clubhouse, frankly struggles to meet its aims. As I have said in my book, this is partly because we are expected to express the views of an evangelical community which cannot get on with — or in many cases even bother to meet up — with one another on the ground. Twice in the past few months I have heard of diocesan evangelical groups which have voluntarily shut down, first in Manchester then in Rochester, and one has to ask how the late, lamented John Stott would have viewed this situation. Stott did probably more than anyone, in his own lifetime, to hold evangelical Anglicans together and unfortunately, this has long been a necessity. Twice in the last century or so, evangelical Anglicanism has gone through a kind of ‘super-nova’ outburst, whereby internal divisions have been followed by the departure of an ‘outer shell’ into theological liberalism, leaving behind a diminished, though more conservative, core. This happened once following the ritualist controversy of the nineteenth century and the second time in the era around and shortly after the Second World War. The book to read on the former is James Whisenant, A Fragile Unity: Anti-ritualism and the Division of Anglican Evangelicalism in the Nineteenth Century (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 2003). The book on the latter is probably Oliver Barclay, Evangelicalism in Britain 1935-1995: A Personal Sketch (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1997). As was reported at the meeting, vacancies on the CEEC are being filled by default, without any contested elections (indeed I myself was re-elected in just this way). In recent years, the CEEC has been accused of being unrepresentative — a ‘rump parliament’ of conservatives — but the sad truth is that people do not step up at the local level to revitalize evangelical fellowships. Indeed a young evangelical of my acquaintance who tried to interest others in one of the now-defunct fellowships was told it wasn’t really worth it. In recent weeks we have heard a lot about the ‘John Stott legacy’, which by common agreement is that he left evangelicalism generally, and evangelical Anglicanism specifically, much stronger. And regarding the intellectual calibre of some of the movement I am sure that is right. But ‘politically’ I am not convinced. In fact, I believe we are about two-thirds of the way through a third evangelical ‘super-nova’. The trick is, though, how to avoid history simply repeating itself. This is one of the motivations behind my book: A Strategy that Changes the Denomination. I firmly believe that evangelicals have partly sown the seeds of their own division by consistently failing to have such a strategy and a proper vision for the church. This is a problem today for both ‘conservative’ and ‘open’ evangelicals. Contrary to what someone told me at the CEEC, I do not believe I have all the answers. But I do believe that better answers are available than the approaches we have used so far. It is not sufficient for evangelicals to accept being either a ghetto (bounded by signs saying “Bishops Keep Out”) or an enclave (where we do our ‘evangelizing’ thing and let the rest of the Church of England get on with their respected tradition of not evangelizing). I also firmly believe that God’s instrument of evangelism is the church, international, national and local — mission agencies are (as someone once called the cults) the ‘unpaid bills’ of the church. They are the evidence that God’s instrument of witness to the world, the Body of Christ made visible where the pure word is preached and the sacraments duly administered, is currently not up to the job. And there is a job to do! I just doubt that we are yet getting down to it. Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

One of the things that the Church of England’s bureaucracy has manage to come up with following the introduction of ‘Common Tenure’ is the so-called ‘rôle description’. No doubt this seemed like a good idea at the time. No doubt someone thought it would be a way of regularizing or systematizing the perhaps rather-haphazard assumptions that are made about clergy and the work they do. Unfortunately, they reckoned without the capacity of human beings in general, and people who don’t actually do a job (or perhaps even understand it very well) to screw things up when they get their hands on them. If you don’t believe me, here is an actual rôle description for a vicar’s post currently being advertised in the Diocese of Chelmsford. Just to save you counting, there are thirty-four paragraphs under the list of specifics. Read them and choke on your coffee.
(i) General Statement of Purpose All incumbents are Priests in the Church of England whose responsibilities and duties are set out in the Ordinal. Incumbents are additionally licensed by the Bishop to exercise a shared ministry of leadership in a particular context where they will usually be the representative, public face of the church 1. The provision of evangelical, Bible-based worship, administration of the Sacraments, preaching, education, pastoral care, nurture, service, evangelism and leadership that is both Kingdom focussed and a locally relevant response to the Five Marks of Mission in order that: a. each worshipping congregation is a transforming presence in and for their local community and is connected with the wider church and world, and b. the vocational gifts and ministries of the whole people of God are discerned, developed and deployed. 2. The collaborative exercise of leadership with the Bishop, other clergy and lay people in the benefice, deanery and diocese to further God’s mission and ministry. 3. The blend of congregational, local community, and wider civic, social and/or church involvement that every licensed clergy person is expected to exercise.
(ii) Specific Statement of Purpose and Key Responsibilities The following eight sections summarise the main duties and responsibilities of an incumbent of [...]. The balance between what is done personally and what is delegated will vary widely, but in every case the responsibility for ensuring these things are addressed lies with the incumbent (in some cases jointly with the PCC). The exercise of ministry should always be collaborative and make use of the gifts entrusted by God to his people in each particular place. It will be important to have in mind the demography and geography of the parish and its place in the town of Chelmsford so that the appropriate needs of different ages, backgrounds and stages of faith can be addressed
1. Mission, Service and Outreach develop a ministry that gives expression to each of the Five Marks of Mission provide opportunities for individuals to discover and learn about the Christian faith interpret the Gospel afresh for this generation in this context, which may include new forms of church and discipleship, to lead new people of all ages and backgrounds in their walk with Christ open up the power of the Holy Spirit working in existing Christians to show God’s love in action through evangelism, service, witness and discipleship make use of opportunities for outreach and service to the community, collaborating where appropriate with other churches, agencies, community organisations, local authorities and institutions engage with local, national and world mission and development agencies.
2. Leadership and working collaboratively lead the benefice in discerning, setting and holding its vision within the context of the deanery and diocesan vision and strategy  motivate and empower members of the church, to achieve that vision
build up the community of faith, sharing ministry as appropriate and working collaboratively with others, (including clergy colleagues, churchwardens, PCC, staff and volunteers), so that individuals’ gifts and talents are identified and used effectively work with other churches in the deanery in implementing the deanery vision and play a full part in the life of the Deanery Chapter and Synod. partner with ecumenical colleagues and churches whenever appropriate
3. Worship, prayer, preaching and teaching  oversee a pattern of evangelical Bible-based worship and prayer for all ages and stages of faith oversee a programme of teaching and preaching which supports the Church as a learning community, develops its faith and responds to the needs of different ages and levels of faith interpret and preach the gospel in ways that encourage faith development, adapting content and style for different audiences, occasions and purposes.
4. Pastoral care oversee the structures and resources to provide appropriate care to the congregation and community lead the provision of pastoral care as appropriate, including baptism and marriage preparation, care to the sick dying and bereaved, individual support and visiting show awareness of own limitations and boundaries; and of other individuals and agencies to whom referrals can be made.
5. Discipleship, Vocation and Stewardship oversee appropriate preparation for baptism, confirmation, communion and discipleship that encourages life-long growth and development encourage a culture in which vocational discernment and response is a natural part of the church’s life enable every Christian to discern their calling from God and to use the gifts, skills and experience that have been entrusted to them in the family, church, workplace and world ensure that each person receives the appropriate support and training to exercise their ministry in response to God’s calling lead by example and teaching on the responsibility of stewardship and giving. Encourage the congregation to meet their proper obligations to the benefice and to the wider church. Work with the PCC to develop its current policy of mission giving
6. Parish Organisation and Communication ensure that structures and resources for parish organisation are appropriate, including clear boundaries and accountabilities of roles ensure that structures, processes and policies in relation to services, weddings, baptisms and funerals, health and safety, child protection, finance, fabric, staff employment and management, etc. to meet diocesan and legal requirements communicate effectively and appropriately in both written and verbal form with people of all ages and situations in society, inside and outside the church undertake personal administration, planning and organisation in a collaborative and open manner with appropriate delegation. Ensure meetings are planned and chaired effectively.
7. Personal development and spirituality be a person of prayer with a clear reliance on God and an obvious and outward-looking faith model an appropriate pattern of work that enables a rounded spiritual and personal life while meeting the proper demands of ministry. Continue to develop personal skills and knowledge in relation to ministry through appropriate use of CMD grants and relevant reading, study, consultancy, training courses and workshops maintain a worshipping and prayerful spiritual life with appropriate support structures (including spiritual direction, networks of support and regular retreats) make full use of time off to care for self, household and personal relationships, including adequate time for family life, friendship, recreation, renewal and personal health
8. Wider Ministry serve beyond the parish at local, deanery, diocesan and national level by offering time, wisdom and skills to serve the wider church’s ministry and mission. play an appropriate part in the civic and community life of the locality (e.g. governance of local schools and/or charities) learn from the traditions and diversity of the wider national and world church.
Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Notes for a sermon preached last Sunday, 8th January, First Sunday after the Epiphany: Recently on TV it was announced that the Duchess of Cambridge was going to work as a volunteer with Beavers and Cubs. This is a very good thing to do, but what really struck me when this news was announced was the female volunteer who talked about the cubs and scouts doing their astrology badge. Now I’m pretty sure she meant astronomy, but a lot of people make the same mistake. In fact it is one of the favourite bugbears of Sir Patrick Moore who gets understandably annoyed. Astronomy is an objective science. Astrology isn’t. But more than that, as far as the Bible is concerned, astrology is a false religion, along with spiritism and so on. Deuteronomy 4:15-19, which forbids idolatry, includes in this worshipping the heavenly bodies: You saw no form of any kind the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, or like any animal on earth or any bird that flies in the air, or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below. And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars—all the heavenly array—do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the Lord your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven. Astrology is a false religion because it ascribes to created things powers which belong to God alone. The nations could worship the heavenly bodies, but not Israel, because Israel belonged to the true God who had made the heavens and the earth. Which is why it is a bit surprising when we read about the visit of the ‘wise men’ in Matthew chapter 2, because the word Matthew uses to describe them is ‘magi’ — singular ‘magos’ — which actually means a magician. In Acts 13:8 we read about a man called ‘Elymas’ who we’re told is a false prophet and a ‘magos’ — a sorcerer. And in Acts 8 there is a man called Simon who, verse 12 tells us, used to amaze the people with his ‘mageia’, or sorcery. The word ‘magic’ is related to the word ‘magos’ and ‘mageia’. So what is going on with the visit of the ‘magi’? Does it mean, as someone once suggested to me, that astrology isn’t so bad after all? That would be a very odd conclusion, and certainly one that isn’t supported anywhere else in Scripture, so what is going on? The first clue, I think, is the introduction to Matthew’s gospel, which is one long genealogy, a list of names, beginning with Abraham and ending with Jesus. Most of the names are unfamiliar to us and unprounceable, but we don’t have to know all of them to get Matthew’s message, because he sums it up for us in v 17: Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ. Notice, Matthew divides Jewish history into three periods marked by four events: Abraham, David, the Exile and the Christ. The Exile had ended in about 536 bc, so an awful lot of history had happened since then and the birth of Jesus in the final months of Herod the Great. But the Exile potentially has some relevance to the visit of the magi. I’ve mentioned places in the New Testament where ‘magi’ are mentioned, but for Matthew’s original audience ‘magi’ would be familiar from the Old Testament. In the Greek translation of the book of Daniel, which is the version they would have read, there are several references to ‘magi’, who were part of the retinue of the Babylonian king — in fact these are the only OT references. But in the book of Daniel, it is Daniel — the Jewish exile in the pagan court — who shows up the ‘magi’. 1:20 sets the tone for the book: In every matter of wisdom and understanding about which the king questioned [Daniel and his companions], he found them ten times better than all the magicians and enchanters [magoi] in his whole kingdom. Throughout Daniel whenever there is a conflict between the Babylonian magoi and the Jewish exile, it is the Jewish exile, Daniel, who wins with his wisdom. Now of course not all these Jewish exiles in Babylon came home. Some of them stayed, and it may well be that their influence inspired ongoing interest in Jewish affairs amongst the ‘magi’ of that culture. But as readers of Matthew’s gospel, we can see their visit as an astonishing turning of the tables. In Daniel, the magi are pagan astrologers, whose wisdom is no match for the Jewish exile in the pagan king’s court. But look what happens when the ‘magi from the east’ arrive at the court of king Herod. Instead of Jews in exile showing up the pagan ‘magi’, it is the magi who show up the Jewish wise men on their home turf! The Jewish court is completely wrong-footed — no one even knows the king is to be born! So Herod calls in his ‘wise men’, v 4: When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Christ was to be born. “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written: “ ‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.’” It’s the right answer, from the right source. They’ve gone to Scripture and it’s told them where to look. But what happens? No one goes to check it out, and Herod’s only concern is to kill off a potential rival, which is why the wise men are warned to return by a different route, not to report back to Herod. The visit of the magi is surprising, but it is surely meant to be surprising. It is meant to give us a foretaste of things to come, for the climax to Matthew’s gospel is the message Jesus gives to his disciples at the end of chapter 28: Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Mt 28:18-19) This is not about rehabilitating astrology, but it is about those people who up until now have worshipped the sun and the moon and the stars — things Deuteronomy 4:19 says have been “apportioned to all the nations under heaven”. The great moment in the story is in v 11, where the magi bow down and worship Jesus, the king of the Jews. Matthew is telling us that the birth of Jesus is not just the end of the great period from the Exile to the Christ, it is the beginning of salvation that will finally bring in all the nations estranged from God. And this should teach us something about ourselves and our world, which is that the gospel message is for all people and all nations. There are many people out there still worshipping images, still worshipping the sun and the moon and the stars, or still believing that their lives are controlled by fates and forces. At around the time that the news came about the Duchess of Cambridge, many of you will also have heard on the news about a trial that has just started at the Old Bailey of a man and woman accused of killing her brother because they thought he was practising witchcraft. People in these cultures don’t regard witchcraft as nonsense, they are very frightened of it, and they are frightened because they believe it gives people power which they can use to hurt others. It is extraordinary that there is more fear of witchcraft in 21st century London than there was in Victorian London. And it would be a great cruelty to say, “This is part of their culture, we must not try to challenge or change it.” The gospel is for people caught up in witchcraft, and it delivers them from the fear of witchcraft — but this isn’t just about ‘foreign’ cultures. A couple of weeks before Christmas, I had to have an injection in my shoulder. The medic about to administer the injection told me there was a very slight risk of infection but “touch wood” everything would be OK. I told them that I didn’t think the wood god was going to be much help to either them or me. I’m sure they wouldn’t really put that down to touching wood and I don’t think they’d thank me if I phoned up and said, “My shoulder’s a lot better now — just as well you touched wood, isn’t it?” But you see how powerful these things are, and the gospel has a message for people caught up in that sort of superstition and fear. Or again, every year, hundreds of thousands of Muslims travel to Mecca on pilgrimage, part of which is to circulate around the sacred shrine of the Ka’aba in Mecca itself. And the ultimate experience if you do this is to touch the black stone at the corner of the Ka’aba because, according to Muslim tradition, that stone fell from heaven and was originally white, but now it is black because it absorbs the sins of anyone who touches it. So the gospel has a message for people who believe a meteoritic stone takes away the sins of the world. You may ask what is the difference between that and believing that a baby in a cradle in Bethlehem takes away the sins of the world, but of course it is different if that baby is the creator of the world, whereas the black stone is just a created thing. All these people need the gospel of Jesus Christ. Whether they are trapped by astrology, or superstition, or witchcraft, or one of the world’s great religions, what they need is to come and worship Jesus. What we need is the confidence in him to tell them. Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Valid until the 6th January if you enter code ONEMORETHINGUK305 at the checkout. Savings of up to £150 on orders.

Click here to view or order.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

Thanks to Philip Wainwright for the review and Bruce Robison for the original tip off, who also blogs here and here.

Evangelicals and the Transformation of the Episcopal Church
[...]
Richardson’s book may not attract much interest at the highest level of the Church of England, or even of the power structures of contemporary evangelicalism, but I pray that it will be read by others, especially in the Episcopal Church, and will one day be looked back on with the same respect with which Richardson describes Towards the Conversion of England. It’s not expensive. Order one for yourself here, and one for someone you know in the Episcopal Church.

Read the rest here.


Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

“I always see the death’s head lurking. I could be sitting at Madison Square Garden at the most exciting basketball game, and they’re cheering and everything is thrilling, and one of the players is doing something very beautiful — and my thought will be, ‘He’s only twenty-eight years old and I only wish he could savor this moment in some way, because, you know, this is as good as it’s going to get for him’ ... The fundamental thing behind all motivation and all activity is the constant struggle against annihilation and against death. It’s absolutely stupefying in its terror, and it renders anyone’s accomplishments meaningless. As Camus wrote, it’s not only that he dies or that man dies, but that you struggle to do a work of art that will last and then realize that the universe itself is not going to exist after a period of time. Until those issues are resolved within each person — religiously or psychologically or existentially — the social and political issues will never be resolved, except in a slapdash way. They’ll never be resolved as long as people wake up each day and worry that they’re finite, that they don’t know why they’re here or where they’re going or when they’re going to die.” (Attrib. Woody Allen, in Ortlund, Raymond, Whoredom: God’s Unfaithful Wife in Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996, fn 69 165).  ******************************* Hail the heav’n-born Prince of Peace,
Hail, the Sun of Righteousness
Light and life to all He brings,
Risen with healing in His Wings.
Mild, He lays His Glory by,
Born that man no more may die
Born to raise the sons of earth,
Born to give them second birth. Hark! the herald angels sing,
“Glory to the New-born king!”

(Charles Wesley et al., ‘Hark, the Herald Angels Sing’) ******************* “God sent into the world a unique person - neither a philosopher nor a general, important though they are, but a Saviour, with the power to forgive.” (HM the Queen) ******************** Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death — that is, the devil — and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. (Heb 2:14-15)

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:

(Update: Although what I posted below was the method I used to resolve this issue, I have found a link to Norton/Symantec offering a free tool to remove this program. You may like to try that first. Note that if you enter Windows Task Manager, you may find the XP Security program running as wdt.exe, which I found I could safely stop. The trouble is, it will reload when you try to get online. You need to close all the 'fake' windows to get past it and browse the internet. Good luck!)

There aren't many people who deserve to be hung up by their goolies, but the devisers of XP Security 2012 certainly come into that category.

Somehow my wife managed to install their scam software on her half of the desktop PC this morning and it has taken me an hour plus to remove it. In a moment, I'll tell you how (as usual the time went in finding the solution, not applying it).

For those of you unfamiliar with the product, XP Security 2012 flashes up a series of fake 'security alerts' on your screen. These, however, look incredibly like the 'real thing' from Microsoft - so much so that, despite being a long-term PC user, and innately suspicious, even I was nearly fooled.

The programme will tell you that your firewall and automatic updates are turned off (which they were, but I suspect the programme had done that itself.) It even runs a fake 'scan' of your computer in front of your eyes, telling you that all sorts of worms, viruses and trojans are installed.

If you will only register and buy the full version, XP Security 2012 will get rid of them for you.

The trouble is, the whole thing is a fake, a scam, a con-trick, and undoubtedly illegal, given that the software adjusts the settings on your computer to do things you don't want it to do - so that, for example, every internet-using programme you try to open is blocked. Moreover, I suspect that some of the advertised removal systems may just be trying to take advantage of the problem.

(Incidentally, if you run Windows Task Manager [ctrl] [alt] [del] I think you'll find the offending .exe file running as Wdt.exe. Closing it gets rid of the problem temporarily, but it will keep 'reactivating', for example if you open a browser.)
So what to do? In my case I simply used a registry restoration point. Click [Help], search for 'system restore' then selext [Run the System Restore Wizard] and let the wizard do the rest. I went back two days to be on the safe side. You could try [Run System Restore in safe mode] as an alternative. You should be able to undo this if it doesn't work, and please be aware as always I'm not guaranteeing the safety or security of this - it just worked for me is all.

However, I then used 'Iolo System Mechanic', which I have on my machine, to 'repair' the registry and to delete all cached internet files and temporary windows files in the hope this might have got rid of the problem files which must have been downloaded somewhere.

I had to reboot the system a couple of times to get everything back to as near normal as possible, but it all seems OK now.

If anyone else has found this approach works, or if they know any undetected hazards, please post a comment.

Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend: