Signs and Blunders

In 2001 I distributed the following bogus Press release at church:

FINGER LICKING GOOD

The City of Slough, which has been dubbed the most boring place on Earth, has been guest to strange events at a local Anglican church. St. Leonard’s, on Lime side, has witnessed a sudden increase in attendance since reports that communion bread and wine have started to taste like honey.

A church member said "It was wonderful: we had this really up lifting communion service, and when I tasted the bread I couldn't believe it - it was sweet!" Another said "I saw my communion bread just dripping with honey and the wine reminded me of the syrup of figs I used to have when I was young. I knew then that God was just blessing us."

When asked what was happening at his church the minister, the Rt. Rev. Verity Vaughan said "The Lord has just chosen to Bless us. Our God is a God of abundance. This blessing has just done marvels for people’s faith. One week we had communion every night. People are just flocking in and lives are being changed and Christ is just being glorified.

After communion people are seen licking their fingers to remove traces of the holy food. Some have said that the pews are getting tacky due to contact with sticky fingers. There are unconfirmed reports that people have been seen licking the pews and even the fingers of those communicants who have been privileged to receive honeyed sacraments.

One investigator, a member of the local Voltaire society, said of the sticky pews: "Yes they were sticky, but then the varnish on those pews is years old and is probably decomposing". He also said that there was a rumour of someone bringing in a Jar of honey but he was unable to confirm this. Several years ago he investigated a case not unlike it at an Eastern Orthodox church where it was claimed that Christ's face could been seen reflected in the wine, but the clerics didn't like it because the Wine took so long to distribute.

Father Patrick O'Rumme, priest of the nearby Catholic Church, said that he took the whole thing with a pinch salt: "These Charismatics are forever looking for some new miracle. The Bible says that the communion elements are Christ's body and blood, not honey and syrup". He declined to comment when asked if at his church they tasted of meat and blood.

A representative of Ebenezer Chapel on the other side of town said "Our corrugated iron premises are damp and cold and sometimes our bread goes moldy, but we're not worried. It's what it means that counts not what it tastes like. During the war we once had to use silage bread and red cabbage water".

The Bishop of the diocese, Dr. Tannington-Hyde, was unavailable for comment. A Spokesman said that the Bishop was chairing an ecumenical conference on feminist liturgical needs at this moment in time and his situation was sticky enough.
Esat@news Agency January 2001
More than one person was either convinced or unsure that the above report was genuine. I can hardly blame them. The only thing that gives the game away is the corny name of the Catholic Priest. Everything else is completely plausible.

The Open Gospel

In March of 2000 I endeavoured to produce a pithy statement that summarised my view of the kernel of Christianity. Rather than annunciate an exclusive and purist formula defining some Christian sub-grouping I was anxious to forge an inclusive statement giving account of the hostile demeanor often adopted by Christains sub-cultures toward one another. I came up with the following statement. It is a bit formal and legal sounding, perhaps because I wanted to make it as bullet proof as possible.

***

The "Open Gospel" is a term I use to indicate that the common, defining, distinctive, and primary phenomenon of Christianity is not its patchwork of sometimes mutually hostile church subcultures but the underlying Gospel message, a message which, unbounded by cultural barriers, diffuses laissez-faire style through populations spawning a variety of church communities. These communities, which may or may not be independent of one another, display varying degrees of development, spiritual health and quality of culture. The net result is that no one group or subculture (Thank God) can claim to have privileged access to the Gospel message, or to have sole agency in its propagation, or to be the only group expressing the spiritual life and gifting that it gives. Inevitably, some Christian communities will vociferously claim that they are either the best and most faithful representatives of the Gospel, or perhaps its only representatives. Self praise is, of course, no recommendation and anyway such claims are little more than bluster because they are impossible to enforce: It is now five hundred years since the Roman Catholic church started to lose the power to enforce its claim to being the sole distributor and representative of the Gospel. But even at the height of Roman Catholic political power it would seem almost impossible to attain complete control of a message that can pass quietly from mind to mind. Thus, it is exceedingly difficult to enforce monopoly claims upon the Gospel, even under conditions favouring such claims. Clearly the Good News is out, and groups who maintain they have exclusive rights to it can simply be ignored by other groups who have taken it to heart and made it their own, in all its fullness. Some Christian sub communities will undoubtedly retain their mutual prejudices toward one another and express a partiality as to who can or cannot claim to possess the fullness of Gospel truth, anointing and gifting. But The Word is like a seed borne on the Wind of the Spirit; who can control either? What God gives no man can take away. (I John 2: 20 & 27)

The idea of the Open Gospel is, for me at least, a source of great consolation as it helps reduce the significance of the contentions surrounding parochial religious elaborations of particular cultural realisations of Christianity. Those elaborations are sometimes beautiful and fascinating, sometimes helpful, sometimes essential, sometimes relevant, sometimes indifferent, sometimes quaint, sometimes outdated, sometimes comical, sometimes bizarre, sometimes tasteless, sometimes tacky, and, unfortunately, sometimes malign. Whether we are talking of the decorative trappings of ritual and vestment, or obsessions with mystical gnosis, or strict adherence to fancied biblical ordinances, or interpretations which use the Bible to contrive rigid blueprints for arranging life and church, we have here behavioural forms which, whilst they may not be absolutely wrong, are often championed by those who protect them with a jealous religious zeal. Thus, Christians who live beyond the religious subcultures defined by these behavioural forms may find themselves being bullied by sectarian Christian zealots who will accuse them of being disobedient to the Divine order. These zealous Christians may even regard the testimonies of other Christians as void or at best substandard. But a high view of the Open Gospel allows one to rise above Christian infighting and to be less phased by Christian cultural forms whose sectarianism stands in ironic contrast to the message that has spawned them, a message which passes from ear to ear jumping the boundaries separating communities. The Open Gospel is a majestic vision of the essence of Christianity, a vision which not only sees the Gospel as being, at the very least, the world's best bet for a revelation of the meaning of life, the universe and everything, but also an allusion to timeless and lofty principles from which the vagaries of Christian ethos and culture do not detract.
c. T. V. Reeves March 2000

The Plain Truth

With the apparent demise of the optimistic modernist belief in ‘Grand Narratives’, postmodern ‘Little Narratives’ abound. In fact narratives are getting smaller and smaller as is evidenced by the latest book from brilliant and innovative secular theologian Julian O'Gobstopper. O’Gobstopper has spent 4 years on a work entitled “The Nihilist's Bible”, a monumental tome consisting of 2257 pages of blank paper. “As a nihilist theologian and philosopher” says O'Gobstopper, “I have spent many years thinking about nothing and this book is the result. It is a definitive statement of today's progressive and utilitarian philosophy. It moves us away from the authoritarian and didactic assumptions that books should contain content. This book strongly affirms the ambiguity of everything. It leaves the plot open, free for the reader to complete within the parameters of his or her experience, and to impute whatever meaning and truths (s)he wants.” Asked whether the book classified as fact or fiction O'Gobstopper replied that the distinction between fact and fiction was itself a fiction.

Although not exactly a challenge for the presses, the spelling checker and the indexing software, the publication wasn't without its production problems. Proofreaders claimed the proofs gave them headaches and a variant of “snow blindness” as they checked the volume for typos, and page make-up compositors walked out angry that content-free books could set a precedent in publishing that may lead to a loss of jobs. A Union spokesman stated, “It was aw-right for the Luddites, at least they had sommit to smash, but what do my members do when there’s now’t to hit out at?”

O'Gobstopper's book:Starting (and finishing) with a blank sheet.

A sample page from O’Gobstopper’s scholarly work is illustrated below:

.

.

.

.

.

.

(This space has been intentionally left blank by VNP typographic staff)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

(The above article was first published in the December 2004 edition of VNP)

Don’t Try this at Home

Many churches will be impressed with the latest house group study book “Facing Up to Change”, with its full range of “In yer face” activities. In the introductory study the home group is asked to sit quietly and contemplatively in a room illuminated only by a candle. But the meditative peace is not long lived; the candle turns out to be, in fact, a disguised November 5th “howling thunderclap” and a short spurt of sparks is followed by a head splitting whistle terminated by a deafening report. Participants are then asked to continue to sit quietly and contemplatively until the acrid smoke clears and the sounds of the dying fades before considering some soul-searching questions. Now you might think that all this would be a great introduction to the manner of Christ’s return and our preparedness for it; but no, “Facing up to Change” gives anything that threatens to be a theological can of worms a wide birth and instead puts the inscrutable inner life of the heart under the spot light. Accordingly, as explosions are the most rapid form of change known to man, this is the cue for a series of probing questions on facing change:

Are you prepared for sudden and unexpected changes?
Did the firework disturb your comfort zone?
Can you maintain your cool in the face of change?
Does change make you feel nervous?

Other stimulating study-activities in the book include a custard pie fight (Study 3: “Taking the stick when you lobby for change”), a piano smashing competition (Study 4: “Putting up with discordance”) and a snail race (Study 7: “Getting those boring old f*rts moving in the Spirit”). At the end of the study book you will be sure to want change; at least a change from all those courses and talk about the need to change.


(The above article was first published in the June 2001 edition of VNP)

Moshing Mayhem ... Coming to Your Church Soon

For those of you who like to be set alight spiritually with church action songs, I’ve come across a real corker. Imagine the sights and sounds that might accompany this one:

*

God has such love, such love,

He lives in heaven above.

God is so big, so big,

bigger than a big fat pig.

We can have lots of fun

because of Jesus His Son.

I want to leap and bound

and just run around, around.

I going to jump and jump,

and tell all I bump.

I’m so happy, so happy,

I could mess my nappy.

I'm going to shout and shout,

like a lager lout.

You’ll get a clout

if you don’t jive about,

and with words inane

praise His name

till an absolute pain,

and then start over again.
*
If your church tries this one make sure a St. John Ambulance is present before it does. If you are of a nervous disposition or have an easily offended sense of taste I suggest you give church a miss that day. Now that’s something you can do that an all powerful God can’t: when the going really gets embarrassing, corny and tasteless, He, being omnipresent, just can’t slope off but has to stick around and endure it. Long-suffering God? You bet!

Moshe Pit Heaven

Ben's in there somewhere, but I'm damned if I can see him.

Damned? Surely he's not that bad?

(The above article was first published in the June 2001 edition of VNP)

Soul Searching

Rev. Randle J. Schmaltznegger, the ebullient American spiritual dynamo, counselor extraordinaire, evangelist supreme, recently ran a retreat for Christian leaders under the rubric: “Loosing your Heart and Soul to God: the Passion and the Intimacy”. But in a debacle that has been described by one rival American evangelist as the valley of the dry bones in reverse, Schmaltznegger's retreat leaders, having been relieved of their hearts and souls stormed out of their secluded Mid-West venue as the retreat turned into an attack, creating havoc in the surrounding area. As ever, an undaunted Schmaltznegger sussed the spiritual problem immediately and in a riposte stated firmly that “One of the leaders failed to claim the victory in his home life and allowed Satan to find a way into our retreat - this leader admitted to me that his son has a friend who once played with Pokemon cards”. Police using Abrams tanks, B52’s and tactical nuclear weapons, eventually brought the situation under control.

Danger, Evangelists at work: “Anyone seen our Lost Souls?”

(The above article was first published in the February 2004 edition of VNP)

Character Assassination: A Stibbe in the Back

If you needed proof that Christian infighting can sometimes be at least as vicious as that found in politics, with accusations of sleaze thick in the air, check this story out: Mark D Smith in his book “Testing the Fire”, a closely argued analysis of the mid nineties Toronto blessing, reports the words of Mark Stibbe, a Christian leader who favoured the “Carpet Blessing” (so-called because the blessing involved lying around on the carpet making strange noises). Stibbe, it seems, was displeased with anything less than an enthusiastic acceptance of the blessing and felt urged to make his own accusation of sleaze toward Christians who were critical of it. So what did he accuse his fellow believers of? Handling Slush money? Initiating smear campaigns? Visiting dodgy addresses under cover of darkness? Lying under oath? No, it was none of these sins, common in politics, which after all can be dealt with and forgiven. Instead he warned fellow Christians “To be very careful not to commit the unforgivable sin – namely blaspheming against the Holy Spirit”. Now that's serious sin; a lot of Stibbe’s fellow believers were critical of the “blessing” and therefore he effectively accused them of committing the dreaded unforgivable sin of Matthew 12:31! Accusations of sleaze don’t come worse than that!

(The above article was published in the first VNP of April 2001)

Fighting Christians

The September edition of Christianity magazine carries a letter of mine which really sums up my perspective on Christianity. I wrote the letter in response to the editorial written by the editor John Buckeridge in the July edition of the magazine. Here is my letter:

***

In response to the editorial in the July ‘Christianity’ let me say that I support John Buckeridge’s policy of including a mix of articles that are less than good news and/or touch on controversy. For example, if the policy of ‘Christianity’ is to tell it as is, then the sharp disagreements existing between many Christains should be represented. After all, the Bible itself is frank about controversy amongst believers (Gal. 2:11, Acts 15:39). Christians are the beneficiaries of one universal message of salvation, but the various Christian subcultures hosting that message may split acrimoniously over such things as tithing, the history of creation, church structures, blessings, and healing etc, as recent correspondence in ‘Christianity’ suggests. We must be honest about the real state of affairs in Christendom.

But there is good reason for this state of affairs. The Christian view is that salvation is not attained through visible membership of a single highly integrated religious group. Many religious cults see it that way but true Christianity is different, being first and foremost a personal response demanded by the message of redemption. A faith such as Christianity, which majors on message rather than membership, is not easily confined to one tight knit group of people because, like any freely diffusing message, it can cross partisan barriers and take root where it wills. In Christianity where message is primary and membership secondary, there is a consequent trade off between freedom and disharmony. We may, of course, find disharmony unacceptable and do all we can to bring accord, but it is a fact that ‘The Church Invisible’ is distributed over a wide cross section of sometimes squabbling Christian subcultures. The quasi-Christian cults shortcut this problem, of course, with a very strict selection and management of their member’s beliefs, and when tricky questions are asked this is taken as evidence of unbelief. In contrast, real Christianity is no toy town cult, but has all the rough edges of a work in progress.

In line with ‘Christianity’s’ policy of handling difficult material I was gratified to read Adrian Plass’ article on healing (May). This article challenged the conspiracy of silent pretense and religious spin sometimes surrounding the subject of healing and which is reminiscent of the emperor’s new clothes.

However, it seems that John Buckeridge was criticised for editing a magazine that occasionally breaks the silences over awkward questions. This criticism used some spiritually intimidating language, which included accusations of unbelief and a call to repentance. Not only does this kind of criticism show just how partisan evangelicalism can get, but it also indicates that the temptation to arrive at a contrived harmony using the methods of the cults – namely, through silence, pretense and spiritual bullying – is never far away. If Christianity went down that road it really would be in trouble.
You may be able to quarantine a membership, but you can’t quarantine a message.

Communicating by Ozzmosis

Dr. Beardsly Bugbeard, liberal and bearded Bishop of Botchester (affectionately called “Bugrug” by his progressive clerics) is updating his diocesan liturgy by encouraging the use of swear words during Sunday worship and sermons in the churches of his diocese.

“We stiff upper lip English”, said the Bishop scratching his beard, “need to connect with our passions and express our feelings. The use of sentence intensifiers in church liturgy is one way we can get our message across and identify with workingmen and women in the community. If expressive expletives are good enough for the noble working classes they ought to be good enough for us middle class church(wo)men”.

The “Johnny Rotten” memoirs are required reading for new curates who ultimately have to sit an examination in the meaning and use of expletives and compose services that make imaginative use of “heavy duty language”. Curates also do a course at Botchester University’s sexology department with the Prof Trevor H. E. Pitts where they can learn the “adult” names of body parts and practices they never dreamed existed. The Good Bishop did the epilogue at the end of Channel four's “Osbourne night”. By the time of the epilogue, however, the bleeping machine had overheated and exploded so Bishop Bugbeard, who refers to bleeping machines as “the enemy of free speech” was able to deliver the full text of his message without censorship. The channel 4 phone lines were crammed by outraged stand up comics whose jokes about prudish church people are now obsolete. When VNP asked the Bishop to comment he said he had no time for a politically incorrect and reactionary blog that promulgates Victorian values. In any case, he said, he had to get to a commissioning service to the swear in a new curate (You bet). Takings at the Bishop's churches, however, have rocketed as he has shown no signs of decommissioning his swear boxes.

In the Nick of Time

Contemporary Christian evangelicalism has had a poor prophetic record if my sampling of it is anything to go by, just as bad as the Jehovah’s Witnesses in fact. If you like long shot odds then betting on the fulfillment of “prophecy” is the game for you. So folks, here’s the form so far on “prophecies” that have come to my notice:

1. The Mt Carmel prophecies affirming 1975 as a “significant” year.
2. That revival would sweep the southern part of England, as did the hurricane of 1987.
3. That this or that person would be healed from terminal cancer (and never did).
4. That there would be Christian revival shortly after Princess Di’s death.
5. The Spring Harvest prophecy that Westminster Chapel would be the center of a great revival in 1996.
6. That the millennium bug would be the precursor of Global collapse in the year 2000.
7. That Southern England would experience a devastating Earthquake.
8. That “big things” would be happening in the UK shortly after the July 2005 Benny Hinn rally in Norwich.

As a rule these often highly public “prophecies” are quietly dropped and anyone with a retentive memory is the enemy of those who support the ministries who put out these "prophecies". I haven’t particularly gone out of my way to seek out duff prophecies – they found me rather than I found them. So how many more are out there hiding themselves away in shame? I daren’t Google “Kansas City Prophet” for fear of what I might find. However, things are looking up. Before I could say “Kansas City Prophet” I got news of a “right on” prophecy. In the August 2006 edition of “Christianity” magazine ex-Christian rock musician Ian “Ishmael” Smale, now a children’s worker, tells a fascinating story of meeting at the end of the 70s some then unknown Irish musicians in a Brighton pub. Ian takes up the story:

“They were saying God had showed them they were going to be very big. They had scriptures and prophecies, but I looked round and there was nobody else in that pub. But they obviously got the prophecies right”

Really? Trouble is, I don’t follow rock music closely, so without cribbing off the Internet I haven’t got a clue about this group. Ian says that the lead singer was called “Bono”. I think that even if I met Bono I wouldn’t know him from Old Nick

Cut Me Some Slack

My church requires people applying for membership to go through a kind of informal interview with some well-respected church member like myself, who then brings a report to the church meeting. Sometimes I feel that there is something about this church membership business that I haven't twigged yet, and such were my feelings when I did my first and last church membership interview, an interview that turned out to be an absolute disaster. With the naive enthusiasm of a beginner I was hoping that my interviewee would not be a boring person - you know, sort of person who has worked as an assistant light switch operator all his life and keeps every issue of "Soup label collector's world". I'd much rather blow the church meeting away with a spiritual rags to riches report about a drug crazed street mugger of indeterminate species now awash with blessings in the Spirit.
Anyway, with a name like "Mr. Sebastian Horn of Great Twitchingham Hall" at least my interviewee sounded interesting. Lightning struck the teetering tower of the west wing as I made my way up the mile long overgrown drive of Mr. Horn's run down but very prestigious looking mansion. The clock struck 12 as I got to his front door, which seemed to sense my presence and creaked open of its own accord. The butler took my coat and then flew away with it.
"Good evening Mr. Horn" I said as I entered his cavernous hall.
"Good evening Mr. ReeveSSSSssss", he said, his reply tailing off into a hiss. "The name's HornSSSSsss actually, with an 's' on the end, just like yours. Can't you see I've got two of them?".
Mr. Horns described himself as a Stoker. "Coal?" I queried, "What, in these days of gas and electricity".
"Coal is not the only thing that makes a good roaring fire!" he said trying to suppress his smile as if endeavouring not to expose his teeth. Mr. Horns asked me if I smoked and I said that I did not. He said he always smoked. I then noticed wisps of smoke rising all round him.
"I've been trying to get into a church for a long while" he continued "and, I am sure, Mr. ReeveSSSsss, you can help me."
"Well I'll see”, I said. "Tell me about your conversion."
"Me and the Lord go back a long way. Great friends you know, he knows me well. But I haven't seen him for a bit. I tried to get hold of him a few years back and give him a proposition but I wasn't able to nail him down to anything."
I asked Mr. Horns what he saw himself contributing to church life.
"I have my own very effective three point sermon", he said as he gently fingered the funny looking pronged decoration on the end of his cast iron staff, "and I can't wait to use it!".
I informed Mr. Horns that the church needs to be in possession of all the facts before it can make a decision about his membership.
"Possession!" he snapped. "I quite like the sound of that! There'll be a plenty of that if I get my way". He went on to add: "Don't spend too much time deciding. I'm a bit short on time nowadays and I don’t want to wait until kingdom come. However, I'm sure someone of your calibre, Mr. ReeveSSSssss, will not disappointment me. If you succeed the world is mine to give; should you fail ...", Mr. Horns then gave a meaningful look at his staff and added, ".... you will find my three point sermons very convincing and to the point".

As I left I felt a strange tingling in the spine. Something about Mr. Horns gave me the creeps. The clock struck mid night as I passed through the door - where had all the time gone or had no time at all passed but very slowly? When I handed in my report to the good reverend gentleman who pasteurizes my church he seemed none too pleased.
"Well Mr. Reeve," grouched the good Rev. who, unlike the polite Mr. Horns, habitually addressed me in the singular, "I don't think we will be putting this report before the church". He obviously thought I had missed something important and I was never offered the job again. I don't know what the trouble was as Mr. Horns seemed as keen as any one I have met to get his place on the membership and do his bit and he clearly had the sort of resources to win friends and influence people. So keep an eye out for him in church; he is very distinguished looking - unlike the Devil, of course, who comes in disguise and is difficult to spot.

God of Abracadabra?

Let me give you an example of why I so often find myself at odds with contemporary evangelicalism. Today, I was in church listening to a visiting preacher. This preacher rightly stressed the daily pastoral and devotional endeavours of the church as it seeks to “come to the unity of faith” and “the stature of the fullness of Christ” – a work of creation if there ever was one, as the church moves incrementally toward the goal, metaphorically speaking, of a “full grown man”. In short we find ourselves to be agents of Divine labour inside an act of creation. Our first person experience of this work is of a process of great complexity and effort. Words like progress, process, gradualism, and change readily describe this act of social creation, a project composed of a myriad steps forward (and sometimes backward).

And yet so often when these evangelical preachers talk about the act of Genesis Creation they revert to a magical paradigm. Here God is portrayed not as a workmen but a magician whose mere words, like magic spells, bring about Creation. “God”, you will hear them say, “Speaks things into existence at a mere word”, and the example sometimes given is that of Genesis 1:16 where it says “He also made the stars”. This verse is interpreted to mean that God is so powerful that He just "spoke the stars into existence" in an offhand way. Rubbish. The Genesis 1 creation account is of a phased incremental work, of which the Bible uses an umbrella Hebrew word related to our expression “to make”. This same word is also used of created entities within the Creation account, as for example when it says, “He also made the stars”. Hence it is likely that the making of the stars was itself a phased process. In short Creation was a recursive activity that breaks down into finer and finer detail as you zoom in on it. God’s commands, like some highly complex computer algorithm, have detail and sub-detail - they are not magic

Is this just a theoretical nuance? That, I doubt. The visiting preacher may have a different take on Genesis 1 to myself - fair enough, Christains can agree to disagree. But look at how the preacher was using his view of Genesis 1. To him the God of Spells who has the power to “just talk things into existence” was evidence of “how great God is”. Presumably then, the logic of this position demands that a person such as myself who doesn’t accept this illustration has an impoverished view of God’s greatness? Is the next logical step to then use this view to sort out the spiritual elite from the goats and to thereby partition the Church?