Riots and Chaos and Catastrophe

If there ever was a week for news big and bad, this was it. David Cameron, initially staying away and thinking this would all go away, had to cut his holidays short. Parliament has been recalled to an emergency debate. Where have we gone wrong, who is doing what wrong, and what can we do about it? These questions are on everyone's lips not least the members of parliament. The questions being asked may not be very different from the famous debate in the Times, over the question, "What is wrong with the world?"  G.K. Chesterton, author and essayist, sent a letter in. "Sir, I am. Yours etc. G.K. Chesterton"
G.K. Chesterton was a devout, sincere and intelligent Christian. His response comes from the orthodox Christian theology of the Cross of Christ. Orthodox understanding sees the Cross as part of God's response to Sin. Orthodox Christians see Sin as something which contaminates everyone, and which when spelled out is simply our turning away from God to anything else which is lower and hurtful to ourselves and our race. Looting and rioting and violence are the kinds of actions which help us to distinguish ourselves from the real nasties. Or so we think. And whilst most of us would not descend to such abject depths, the Bible doggedly asserts that we have it in us to do so. That is why we need a saviour.
Jesus however does not stop the world from rushing headlong to destruction. Certainly he came because that is what it does. He saves us from rushing straight off the edge of eternity into the total absence of God, but he does not stop us from rioting or slaughtering one another, as our own Scottish clans did to one another just a few hundred years ago, and which others are still doing in some parts of the world today. So when the riots break out, as they always have and always will, sure, let's do all in our collective wisdom and power to stop it and stem whatever evil tides are momentarily buoying the chaos up. But, the elegant and beautiful dove of peace and the spirit of universal harmony are elusive and transient at the best of times, because our world is broken. However it is through that brokenness that the light gets in, as Leonard Cohen has so perceptively remarked. And even in the height of the madness that flooded our cities, we saw shafts of light: people doing brave things in the face of mob unrule and terror. Evil does not reign. It just erupts every now and again. Goodness and love do not rule yet either. But the Cross and Resurrection signpost which way the story ends.

News of the Empire

The Rupert Murdoch - News of the World story is rampaging across the media. The famine in Africa, the war in Libya, all have dropped into the interior of newspapers and rarely manage to make the t.v. headlines. Prince William and Kate barely rate a mention as they visit the Americas. This is big. I heard bullish former police officers being interviewed by the Home Affairs select committee. They tried to make their warm relationship with News International sound completely justified. Astonishing. No less astonishing was Murdoch's attempt to hold off the baying pack by silencing the News of the World for ever. In an unconvincing show of repudiation of the paper's evil deeds, he lamented its course into crime. But what I want to know is, to what real end? Murdoch still stands ultimately responsible for the crimes of the paper. If the paper is guilty, then what of its proprietor? Does he think he has done the right thing and the public will thank him for removing his rag? The public are not so stupid. Today's paper is not the criminal and sacrificing it was neither here nor there. The net will move past this distraction and continue to close on Murdoch and his flunkies. What a pity the News of the World won't be around to report it. Maybe that was why Murdoch closed it down.

Wind Turbines

A leaflet was dropped through our letterbox the other day. It encouraged us to object to the proposal to build a wind turbine along the valley from Aboyne. The heading was, "Not on our patch".  Sigh. Always it has to be someone else's problem. I have a certain amount of sympathy for people whose part of the world really is beautiful and who chose the location of their house for its outlook and would definitely not have bought if there had been a turbine there already. But my sympathy stops short of agreeing with them. Thinking people on the whole seem to agree that we cannot continue to exploit the non renewable resources ad infinitum. If this is the case, we need to become part of the solution. Part of the solution is to become renewable resources friendly. And this has to include my willingness to see turbines in my back yard. Too many of us are prepared to agree there is a problem, but when we are unwilling to play, the problem becomes someone else's to solve. We are no longer identifying with it ourselves. Unfortunately there are too many problems which are not amenable to that treatment. Ok, we have to be willing to set boundaries and say "no" sometimes, but often there is a better way, a way that invites our positive participation. Strangely enough, this is also so so true of Church. 

Answers to prayer

In our prayers of intercession in church on 12th June (Pentecost) we prayed over the issue of increased aid for vaccination programmes in the developing world. I read in today's Independent (13th) that the government is announcing increased aid of over £8m towards this. It is immensely pleasing to be able to note this here and for thanksgiving next Sunday. To keep me becoming too triumphalistic in my approach to prayer, I should also add that we prayed for peace in most of the warring countries that are hitting the headlines at the moment. Sadly I think it will be a little longer before this prayer may be answered, although I continue to look for speedy resolutions to the conflicts.

To be honest, I was also surprised to read the news about vaccinations in the paper. It occurred to me to say I was ashamed to be surprised, but I wasn't. I'm not ashamed of my being surprised, not because I've stopped believing that God answers prayer, but because I have become used to the fact that we tend to couch our more formalised prayer in the setting of the institutional church and formal church services, in a more generalised way, which doesn't seem to look for specific and speedy resolution or immediate solutions. I know that the human condition throws up far more things that we would like to see mopped up quickly than ever are. Neither God, by direct and miraculous intervention, nor the progress of humankind, clear up all the problems as soon as we would like. This latter is hardly surprising, given that we cause many of our own problems. However, the news that increased resources are being made available for the vaccinations does remind me to be more intentional about prayer, and to raise the bar of my own expectations with regard to it. I need to hold this in tension with what I like to call realism, or spiritual common sense with regard to prayer. Some things could not be cleared up quickly even if God did intervene directly and miraculously, and some things need the development of goodwill and wisdom before they can be addressed. And many of the things which God could clear up instantly, he doesn't. I suspect he doesn't so that we will learn wisdom and patience, and not tire in endeavour to make things better. This means that prayer also involves management of the expectations of those with whom or for whom we pray, since we all know of cases where people have been bitterly disappointed and even lost faith because they did not get the answer for which they longed. And then there are some things which could be miraculously changed by the application of things like grace, which is within the gift of every one of us to give, but so often we fail to manage. 

I'm looking at a column in Scotland on Sunday by Duncan Hamilton entitled War on drugs has also become a war on free thinking, and as I read, my mind drifts, and makes a connection between what he is saying, and the current impending crisis in the Church of Scotland, with many in the evangelical wing breathing heavily, gathering in corners, and making altogether threatening noises about their position in the National Church being no longer tenable.

The Global Commission on Drugs Policy produced its report last week. It is recommending the decriminalising of certain drugs. Why? It has evidence that the costs, social and financial, of incarcerating, on a global scale, millions of people, are massive and moreover do nothing to restrict or reduce the flow of drugs. The war on drugs is not being won in other words. The commission wants to find other ways of dealing with the problem which centre mainly on undermining organised crime by making drugs like cannabis legally available. Using other forms of treatment like heroine assisted programmes are also suggested. Hamilton says that for many these proposals will be offensive. Cries of "weakness" and "throwing in the towel", "letting them off the hook" etc can be heard in the wings.
.
Now, what is the goal of those who want to leave the Church of Scotland? Do they want a church which cleaves more closely to Scripture? A better purer one than the one they would leave behind? One which does not support clergy who are committed to sinful lifestyle choices? Fair enough in its own way. Let us for the moment give the ground to the anti gay lobby. For the sake of argument only, let us accept that a gay lifestyle is sinful. Are those intent on exiting the national church going to adopt the same stringency on the gluttonous in their midst, on the mean, on the proud? These too might be construed as life choices, and can certainly in the light of Scripture be shown to be sinful. And given that the debate rages between equally God and Bible loving Christians about whether or not it is sinful to act out a homosexual orientation, whereas we could agree on gluttony and pride fairly easily, I am to say the least, confused.

The connection for me between this and the decriminalisation of drugs is that we need to truly debate these things, rather than shout at each other from entrenched positions. That latter is not surely what we learned from Christ. A practical situation forced a decision upon us; one which we would rather have avoided making. But for years, we have had gay people in the ordained ministry, some with an active sexual life kept low key and secret, others celibate. Was turning a benevolent blind eye better? I don't think so. We need to keep talking to each other, and keep affirming that what makes us different from each other is not badness. 

Gays and the Second Coming

I’ve been mulling over the twin tsunami type events of the week which have been generated from within the Christian Community. The first was Mr Camping’s prediction that the world would end on the 21^st May, which I was rather hoping it wouldn’t, as my birthday is on the 29^th. The second has been the storm which broke at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland with regard to the ordination of openly gay people whether in same sex relationships or single. Mr Camping and those who are against the ordination of gay people both affirm the sovereignty of the Bible and appeal to it as the basis of their case. Mr Camping refuses to back down despite the evidence, though like Ken Clarke, he has apologised for getting the detail wrong. Apparently the first fruits did happen on 21^st May, in a spiritual sense, in that the world is now under judgement, whereas before the 21^st it wasn’t. The date of the real action with fireworks has been revised to 21^st October, fortunately after my birthday.

The point however about both Mr Camping and the anti gay lobby is that appeal to Scripture is not actually where it is at. The appeal from both camps (excuse the play on words), is futile. It no more proves greater zeal for the Lord than excessive words in prayer. Mr Camping will be proved wrong by real events in real time. He will square it with Scripture by yet more sophistry. The anti gay lot, whilst not in a position to be proved wrong, can be taken to task on two counts. One is that the evidence from Scripture is being ripped out of context in order to condemn wholesale. This makes their case less an appeal to Scripture and more a reliance on ignorance.  Second, they conveniently do not point to the many instance of deliberate overlooking or ignoring of plenty of other Scriptural mandates. Women are not supposed to worship without hats in mixed company. We are not supposed to lend our money out at interest. Although admittedly that is difficult in today’s economic climate, I cannot imagine that many in the anti gay group have never used interest bearing accounts in banks. And what about the stoning of those caught in adultery, the wearing of clothes made from mixtures of materials, and using inventions never thought of when the Bible was written, (enter the Amish communities). If we ignore some things and have a go at others, I want to ask why?

The question is actually a real one, for I have been as guilty of this kind of hypocrisy and more, as anyone. As someone whose roots are in evangelical conservative theology, I have struggled with the issues of interpretation of Scripture and the witness of the Church. And quite frankly I am tired of having to play games with Biblical interpretation. I believe the imperative to love is so overriding and overwhelming that it has to be allowed to interpret my actions and beliefs, rather than me coming to interpret Scripture with my little mind.

Prep for Kili

 Well, on days like these, who needs an excuse to be out on the hills?