I get excited when I hear myself saying something that just sounds like it’s going somewhere…

Like tonight… a friend and I were talking about spirituality and religion.  her initial question related to the fact that many different people pray to different Gods - All?h, Yahweh, Vishnu, Jesus, etc. - and they all find a measure of help in doing so.  how do we make sense of all these different experiences of the divine?

- one common response is to simply reject and condemn any expression of faith other than your own.  This response works well for some, but for people who work with or live with (or are married to) people who believe differently, this no-compromise approach could lead to hurt in homes, families, friendships and communities.

- another response is the “many roads up the mountain” view of religion.  this view is all-embracing - suggesting that the different names for God, and religious expression, are all ultimately leading a person to the same destination along a different path.  This view works well for those who don’t want to condemn people who are different to them.  But it doesn’t really honour the vast differences and distinctiveness of the different world religions.

As I was talking with my friend I suggested some ideas that seem to be an alternative to both the above positions.  I don’t think it is a middle-road, but rather quite a different way of thinking about the spiritual journey.

We humans have notoriously “made God in our own image” (I think Frederich Schleiermacher first suggested that idea).  There is a lot of Talk about God.  But we need to distinguish between Talk about God and God’self.  Surely we must all agree that all conversation about God is limited by our human understanding.  Language cannot fully or finally contain mystery.  Our words only point to the mystery.

By saying this, I am not suggesting that God is not Real.  The reality (or existence) of God is not in question.  Faith takes the Creator, the Source, as a foundation of all conversation.  We kind of take it for granted.  Asking “Does God exists?” is not even a consideration.  Without the Source, there wouldn’t be anything to ask a question.  So the question (and the questioner) assume there is a Source.

But what is in question is how helpful our Talk about God is.  There is a lot of talk.  And there is a lot of difference and disagreement.  Some people say God is like this… others are sure God is like that…  and no-one is willing to give an inch.  Some people even say “there is no God” - which seems like a different category of statement at first, but ironically it turns out to be a part of the same Talk about God.  And the surprising thing to discover is that the so-called “Atheists” have valid things to say about religion, faith and God!  They are some of the most ethically and morally convicted people in society…  and some highly regarded spiritual teacher once suggested we should “judge a tree by the fruit it bears”…

Athiests have recognised, along with many contemplatives and mystics, that Talk about God can easily degenrate into a powerful idolatry.  We worship our idea of God.  Our God loves Jews (or Americans or Christians or straight people or “born again” people or whatever WE decide…) and hates others.  Our religion becomes a prejudice of our own making.  There’s very little about it that is connected with the Source.

So contemplatives and mystics suggest that a good way to God is the apophatic way.  this refers to the way of negation.  the apophatic way senses that God is being - to be experienced, not an idea to be described or understood.  Along with talking about God goes pictures, symbols and complex rituals and practices.  Instead the apophatic way embraces simplicity and silence.  In the silence (and the negation of thoughts, ideas - our mental activity and agility) mystics seek encounter with the very being of God.  Be still and know (read experience or encounter) that I Am God.  I Am.

The cataphatic way - the way of affirmation - celebrates what can be known, spoken, proclaimed about God.  This is the way that celebrates scripture as revelation.  Lots of words.  And also Jesus as the Word of God.  It’s no surprise that the cataphatic way loves preaching.  There is conviction and certainty.  These are the evangelists.  They have a truth to proclaim - because it can be heard, considered, accepted (or not), believed and therefore received.  Jesus is the Truth - and that truth feels a lot like a set of ideas (teaching) about life and God that ideally must be believed, accepted as true.

I think both ways have insights to offer, and both have grave dangers.

The apophatic way is in huge danger of a withdrawal from the everyday experiences of ordinary people.  (This might, in part, explain why so many ordinary people embrace the certainty and mindlessness of certain expressions of the cataphatic tradition.)  The cataphatic way must answer for many expressions of faith that lack compassion and actually encourage judgement, condemnation and self righteous religion.

I believe we need to distinguish between God and our Talk about God.  Keeping that distinction allows us to embrace both traditions.

The distinction is made from the apophatic insights that all descriptions about God are deficient - they can never contain the whole truth.  But, the distinction also honours the cataphatic tradition - in that it allows us to continue our Talk about God.  We need a language.  We need symbols, and songs and words and conversations and doctrines etc…  We aren’t mystical saints living in some higher plane.  We are ordinary people with the need to share together in community a common life of worship and service.  So we embrace Talk about God with one proviso - we never equate our Talk about God (and the conclusions we draw) with God.  We always remember that our conversation is limited.  It is connected with Reality - but it isn’t the whole reality.  It is vitally in touch with the Source - but it never contains or totally grasps the Source.

If it needs a description,  perhaps this “way” could be called honouring mystery in the midst of the ordinary.  A bit cumbersome…  perhaps someone can suggest a word to describe this “way”…

one last thought:  colossians 1:19 says that “in him (Jesus) the fullness of God was pleased to dwell”.  could it be that the bible presents us with a “way” in Jesus, that honours both traditions - the immanence and tangibility of Jesus, Emmanuel, God incarnate…  affirming the cataphatic way.  but also, the recognition that Jesus is in many ways limited in ways God is not (e.g. God is omnipresent while Jesus squeezes the fullness of God into time and space.)  So Jesus represents this apophatic insight - that there is mystery and wonder beyond the Jesus we can see. (and hear and follow…)  The Word is more than enough - everything we need to know about God.  But it doesn’t delimit God - God remains the Creator God, ground of our being, Source, that is mystery, beyond our full and final comprehension.

let’s talk! (about God)

I don’t believe that going to church can earn you a place in heaven. Church is sometimes not heavenly at all! So why do I pour myself into building Christ-following community?Every spiritual journey may be unique, but no spirituality is complete without the challenge to move from me to we - from a preoccupation with self to a new appreciation of self amongst others. And it’s not a simple or easy journey.

Many of us are involved in groups, but things can be largely superficial. The group has never faced a difficult conflict or ventured beyond the safety of superficial topics and conversations. M. Scott Peck, in his book A different Drum reflects on the stages of community building. He suggests that an event – planned or unplanned – usually throws the group into Chaos. This is potentially painful or frustrating. People are tempted to withdraw from the group. Many people move to other churches when a church community goes through a difficult time. Chaos can be hurtful and disorientating. And yet it is also a necessary stage leading to the next important stage: Emptiness.

Peck uses the word Emptiness to refer to the Jesus call to sacrifice. Before real community can be born, all of us will need to let go of something. Peck invites everyone in the group to ask themselves: “what do I need to empty myself of?” Before real community can be born, we will need to carefully navigate through the difficult waters of Chaos and Emptiness…

The good news for those of us who long for real, safe, healing, generous, meaningful community is… it’s possible. It isn’t just an idealistic dream. Real Community may not be as “pretty” as we hoped… getting there is arduous. But it is real. And in a world of superficial facades and masks and pretence… something real is valuable. Like an old worn pair of jeans: not the smartest pants in the cupboard, but always our favourite! St John’s continues to call people from the safety (and loneliness) of our self-ish ways into the challenges and complexities and joys and benefits of community – from “me” into a real expression of “we”.

[ref. Peck, M.S.  The Different Drum  Touchstone:NewYork, 1987]

and yet i sit here in front of the computer trying to think of something to say.

in a way I want to write about weariness because it’s seldom really explored.  and yet, being in that worn-out state doesn’t leave one excited about “reflection”.

some of the world’s best poetry has been written during the most painful moments of people’s lives.

i have holiday coming up and leave due to me so there is light at the end of the tunnel.  but I also know how disastrous burn-out has been for so many friends.

one of the pressing voices in my life is the voice of responsibility.  consumer church has set professional pastoral workers up to take a large load of responsibility.  but it’s probably not fair to blame the church entirely.  what kind of people accept that kind of responsibility???  (a certain kind of person who starts out wanting to make a contribution and ends up trying to make other people’s contributions for them…?)

living from peace seems less thrilling to me.  conviction and passion are in many ways linked to the thrill of the deadline.

responsibility

and leading.  leading is tiring too.  seeing and reflecting on the life of a church community with the future in mind.  thinking beyond this week…  considering the “big picture”.  it’s often exciting!  but with a community so invested in the status quo - so reluctant to consider change, so slow to speak about growth and development…  it’s a tiring thing thinking about the future and realising that (in so many ways) we’re waking up about 15 years too late to address the “signs of the times”.  all indications are that a generation has all but given up on church.  and what do we think about that?  well, we haven’t even considered there might be a problem…

i agree that leadership is something of a idol in the church today - as if a leader can transform a church single-handedly…  that is probably the legalistic (perfectionistic, lacking in grace) idol that whips pastors till they burn out…  but leadership does take it’s toll.

then there’s the challenges of family.  (in some ways i see the wisdom of a celibate priesthood).  I can’t help the woman i am married to get the children ready for church, into the car, out of the car, mind them through a service with awfully long periods of silence…  and the incredible challenges of raising children, introducing boundaries and discipline and respect and dignity along with tenderness and grace and spirit and passion.

I think trying to work out how to balance discipline with flexibility as a parent to my son might be the most difficult thing I have ever had to do.  I have seldom lost my temper in the preceding decade, but have done so weekly for the past year.  It’s tiring trying hard and feeling that you’re not making too much progress.  (one thing that helps is being told he’s “an angel” when he’s with other people… nice comments on his report card from his teacher about his manners… etc.)  But it’s tiring having to face the emotions this boy stirs up in me!

hey!  and these are not unique challenges.  i know I’m not alone - as if my life of work and home, career and family are any more difficult than any other person who is trying to hold the tension of many varying responsibilities.

i remember SARK - in one of her amazing books - recommending napping!  maybe i’ll try that…

and let you know how it goes.

there are just so many reasons to go.  i really want to believe that i will stay (no matter what) but hey, you never know.  never say never.

but, if I’m going to stay, then i want to stay well.  i don’t want to stay, but full of cynicism, negativity and pessimism.  I want to stay with hope.  I want to stay, with a confidence that I have something to contribute to the country of my birth.

same with the community of faith of my birth.  i am fast realising that people of my age are not commonly found in churches today.  we are a scarce commodity.  not more valuable for our scarcity unfortunately.  the generation of which I am a part has largely lost faith in organised religion.

there are just so many reasons to leave.  i really want to believe that i will stay (no matter what) but hey, you never know.  never say never.

but, if I’m going to stay, then i want to stay well.  i don’t want to stay, but full of cynicism, negativity and pessimism.  I want to stay with hope.  I want to stay, with a confidence that I have something to contribute to the community of faith i call home.

so here’s to engagement - to growing confidence that will provide the platform from which to reach out - to keep on giving and investing and contributing and venturing…

and here’s to good news - the stories that are so often be neglected in our negative and previously-privileged milleu.

and here’s to faith - that desperately scarce commodity in a world of bad news stories.  faith is to keep on in the face of the barage of reasons not to!

and lastly, here’s to compassion - a distinctive response to bad and painful and disappointing news in a world of pessimism and negativity.  it might sound cliched to say “let’s pray about these situations” but if prayer is primarily about learning the heart of God (and not trying to influence the heart of God) then compassion will always be the marked and distinctive response of the community that bears faith and hope and charity.

here’s to this planet and this body, this town and this country, this place and this space…

right now,

and forever.

i want to know

• who reads all that legal stuff?
• do the people who write it expect us to?
• if not, is it binding?
• why do “critical updates” for software you already paid for and legally own (along with clicking on “AGREE” when you first installed it) require further legal contract?
• do i really have a choice to NOT AGREE?
• can i click AGREE and argue later that I did so in order to gain access to the software, but not with any intention of entering into legal contract because it’s unreasonable to ask a person to read 93 pages every time their pc (automatically) downloads updates…

the more interesting thing than the challenges of living ethically in a digital and internet age is the issue of trust.  we who like to think of ourselves as highly rational, never entering into a situation without consideration of the facts, display a lot of willingness to trust - perhaps not in traditional ways, like trusting a partner or trusting the divine…  and yet it’s still trust.

what if we were to discover that less of our life (our choices, our circumstances, etc.) is determined by “facts” than we like to think… and much more of our life than we recognise is actually determined by trust?

kairos is a way of living.  it honours the present.

I say, if God can’t be found in the present, he won’t be found.

We may be tempted to go looking for God in other circumstances.  We may be tempted to go and sit at the feet of some swami in India.  but God (truth) is not more apparent or real in India or Tibet or any particular holy shrine.  If you can’t find God where you are, you’re not going to find him in India!

We may be tempted to go looking for God in other times.  We may read about the early church in the book of Acts and wish our lives away, desiring to rather have lived in that time. Or we could fantasize about some utopian future and wish our life away in favour of the dream.  but God (truth) was no more present back then than in any other time in history.  If you can’t meet with God today, you’re not going to suddenly awaken to intimacy tomorrow.  Intimacy will begin today with the desire for it.  For even “the desire to pray is prayer itself” (dom chapman)

We may be tempted to wait for a better season.  We may be struggling with pain and despair, a period of depression or physical sickness, or suffering the loss and longings of bereavement.  And we may be tempted to think that the invitations of Jesus are just too hard to be meant for now…  We’ll wait for an easier time to begin to listen and follow.  There will be no easier time.  Nor a better time to begin to listen to the gentle invitations, intended not to constrain but to free, not to confound but to guide and heal…

kairos: now is always a good time to begin…

this morning i read a story about a woman who has significantly affected the current US presidential race. 61 year-old Mayhill Fowler - a financially contributing supported of the Obama campaign - joined a volunteer journalistic programme that gave many ordinary “untrained” people an opportunity to report on the campaign. the programme, initiated by The Huffington Post, is called “Off the Bus” and was designed to give ordinary people an a voice.

So when Mayhill Flower got into a private fund-raiser and recorded Barak Obama speaking about the bitterness of certain American communities, she was placed in an awkward position.  She was disappointed that he sounded like those people that buy into generalisations about certain communities. But she had also followed him around and covered his campaign out of her own pocket (with no allowance from the Huff Post) - motivated by a desire to see him become the next president. She knew that reporting what he had said would hurt his campaign. She sat on the story for 4 days reflecting on what she should do. Finally she published the report and news quickly spread.

Was it journalistic integrity that won out?

Are the ethical rules of journalism changing? (she didn’t announce herself as a “journalist” but then she also isn’t being paid, so one could argue that she’s just an ordinary person - an ordinary person with a laptop and a wireless internet connection… increasingly powerful tools to influence history it seems…)

Should journalists announce themselves so that politicians are aware who they are speaking to? Or, is this revolution of information and the ordinary person’s voice making politicians more honest?

the thing that most impacted me about the story was that she was not paid - not even for her costs. She travelled around and reported at great cost - all at her own expense.

What motivates a person to do that?

What makes you do what you do? Do you love what you do? (would you do it even if they stopped paying you?)

are we agreed that nudity is not bad - not in and of itself.  actually it’s quite nice.

are we also agreed that sexuality is a gift.  a treasure.  again, not bad, in and of itself.

(those who roundly condemn pornography without any pause to acknowledge the closely related components - sexuality, nudity etc - will probably further compact the damage that has been done to a generation of people who were so afraid of sexual sin that they were unable to embrace the gift of sexuality and struggled to enjoy pleasure.)

what makes pornography a tricky issue is that those that produce it are reflecting things that are not in and of themselves bad or wrong.  in fact, the sexual revolution that has made porn so freely available is a movement that is based on a positive premise: sexuality should not be denied or suppressed.

nudity is beautiful.

sexuality - the suggestion of it - is attractive, even obsessive.  it’s a strong force.

i believe that a holy spirituality will integrate a balanced and healthy affirmation of the body: exercise, eating, rest, and… a place for passionate and caring sexuality.

one of the scary things I was taught at Sunday school was that on the Last Day everything would be revealed - that God is going to put my whole (miserable) life up on a big screen for everyone to see. (probably like a drive-in screen. Data projectors weren’t invented back then…)

this terrified me.

at first.

slowly it’s dawned on me how liberating it will be to be known. sure, there will be embarrasment and shame. but then relief will quickly take it’s plac. no more hiding. no more secrets.

and honest relationships. if there are still people who will talk to me after the screening of Barry Goes Bananas, well then, they are truly gracious people!

ok, so move the idea of transparency into daily life. you get drunk on saturday night. you embarrass yourself. monday morning you tell your colleagues at work - that you a) got drunk and b) aren’t totally proud of your behaviour… maybe some shame, a little bit of embarrassment…

next thing someone who was at the party sms’s your colleague to say “you’ll never guess who totally embarrassed themselves at the party on sat night…”

your colleagues response is: ja, heard about it, he told us, and yip he’s pretty regretful…

gossip kind of loses it’s edge.

it’s dangerous and scary to value transparency (like i felt here) but maybe it’s more dangerous and threatening in the long run to NOT …

“owning” something doesn’t ensure that it can’t be lost or takne by someone else.  and if someone else takes it, does it then belong to them?

do we own the land on which our house it built?  what does it mean to say that the land is mine?  obviously there is a sense in which the land belongs to me because there are soceity rules governing access to that land.  i can restrict access based on my title-deed.  but in the greater scheme of things, can I say that the land is mine?  earth-quakes and floods tend to make fun of title-deeds.

and our bodies?  human rights express the right of every person to safety and the freedom of their own body.  i am fully supportive of the desire to support and protect those basic human rights.  but ultimately those “rights” are again undermined by death.  my body is “mine” until that confidence is undermined by sudden illness or death.

divorce reminds us to be cautious about speaking about “my wife”…  we often speak like a person can own their spouse.

and children…  when they leave home, they challenge our sense that they are ours.

i think we need a huge re-think on the matter of ownership.

(for our own well-being, as well as the well-being of people in the light of increasingly materialistic and consumeristic ways of doing life)