The Human One(s)

The Human One(s)

Isn’t the whole idea just a bit absurd?
The idea that God is human. ?
Sure it begins with a baby. Perfect in every way.
Young, new, fresh, full of future potential, hope,
Isn’t it the same with every baby born?

Yet the idea that. God is in the flesh? Well-that’s something else isn’t it?

What does being flesh offer us but the challenges of growth and aging.
Back pain, bone disorders, arthritis, tinea!! failing eyesight, increasing deafness, headaches, and a one directional momentum of flesh toward the earth. While still attached. And that’s just me!

These images are a far cry from the baby in the manger. But didn’t we all begin like that? I wonder how the story might be different if Jesus had come as a 55 year old?

Scripture says, “the word became flesh” and lived among us.
So of all things we are told, God decides to have a human body.

The absurdity of this idea, that God would do such a thing led to a movement of Gnostics in the early church.
They held the idea that Jesus didn’t really have a human body. He was just pretending or that he just appeared to have.
It grew out of the idea that flesh and spirit could not coexist. So they convinced themselves that Jesus was not fully human after all. He just appeared to be human. We now look back at this as one of the great heresies of the early church.

The more I think about my own physical condition the more I can see where they were coming from. What kind of God with any self respect would become human when it meant the inevitable fragility, and weaknesses of the human body. Surely, this was a lousy idea from the outset, and we haven’t even mentioned the social issues involved such as, proving oneself as God, or convincing the target group of followers, let alone the cynics of the divine in human form.

Yet Its not like it hasn’t been done before, the pharaohs of Egypt, by all measure of the propaganda proclaimed themselves as Devine, even the roman Augustus’ around the time of writing John’s gospel liked to be considered Devine, even to the point of him being given a virgin birth? How is this different?

Maybe the Gnostics were on to something, for the same reason most other religions never get this part of Christianity. It almost seems more reasonable to seek a God that transcends the broken human physical reality.

It truly is tempting to totally spiritualise it all, and imagine that God is completely other. That God is somewhere else and simply floats around as some kind of unimaginable force.

The positive side of the otherness of God is that it keeps us humble. That we are always reminded that God is beyond our definitions, our theologies, our religious ideation or projections. It can keep us humble.

But the Christian story holds this in tension with the very stuff of earth. The nature of ourselves. The nature of humanity. It takes seriously the story of the creation that when God breathed into the earth and created in God’s own likeness, we were born and divinity exists and is present in human form.

The story of word becomes flesh, is that in pointing to Christ, God points at us. Each of us born, physical, active, alive, becomes the new possibility of the divine incarnation in the world. The Jesus story is our story. That’s why the angels sing, that’s why we look at Jesus and are amazed, not because it all happened this way so long ago, but because it points to our situation or situations here and now. This is why Paul would claim the incarnational truth that we have been so slow to understand, “It not I that live but Christ that lives in me”.
Isn’t this perhaps why Jesus in the gospels was so often called “The Son of Man” which in today’s language would be translated, “the human one”.

In Jesus what we see is what the divine being born of flesh looks like. It looks like, flesh and blood, it looks like, advocating for justice, it looks like compassion to people in need, it looks like, breaking cultural boundaries to care, it looks like challenging the religious conventions that limits Gods love. It looks like, working for justice even under duress or being punished. It looks like a challenge to the status quo. It looks like us when we get it right.
And its this that makes Christmas all the more important and to be celebrated.
For when I look around, I see hope. The hope of Gods birth again and again. The hope in every face of Word becoming Flesh.

Mary and the Male Feminine

The Magnificat is one of those texts that not only set the scene for the Gospel of Luke, but challenges conventions of its day, Moreover it has a similar effect today.

 For too long in the Christian tradition, Mary, even though held up as an important figure as the mother of Jesus, especially in parts of the catholic tradition, has too often been framed simply as either a model for women or for the patriarchs and men of the church, the model woman.  Here she is compliant, serving, meek, quiet, gentle, affectionate, submissive and even though she was but a teenager, the tradition has boxed her into a certain kind of character and therefore seen her choosing, God’s path, her decision or ‘YES’ moment as one that was easy or expected of her.

 Rosemary Radford Reuther, suggests that what we have been told about her in this way is not the person presented in the text but  a dumbed down expression of the male feminine.

The male feminine is all those qualities that men have tended to suppress in themselves and then project onto women. We even almost hear it articulated when men call each other girls jokingly for some apparent lack of strength or ability. A terribly derogatory cultural form of sexist behaviour that many of us bloke’s have needed to come to terms with.

 That’s my confession for today, and please understand I do not see this as a laughing matter. Just glad that I have had the wisdom of others to teach me how it diminishes us all!!

 Reuther suggests that by projecting these qualities onto women, what men are doing is actually expecting women to compensate for men’s own sense of inner alienation from their full human potential. So the nurturing and affective qualities particularly are seen as the women’s realm instead of seeing those qualities as simply being human.

 The suggestion is that too often Mary has simply been a cultural and religious symbol of this projection. She becomes the idealized nurturant mother, cut off from the qualities of sexuality and strength that often make men feel uncomfortable or threatening, submissive in accepting these cultural roles and assumptions and therefore confirming the male view on the world and the male dominance of it. When women are also only receiving this view they are just as trapped and alienated as this Mary. Mary then  becomes fictitious, distorted and if not impossible for women to follow, a diminished version of possibility.

 Yet in the Magnificat, Mary stands out and potentially breaks through all this. Mary is presented as a theological symbol not just for women but for humanity. Here she is not simply a representative of a good woman, but of a liberated humanity. A recipient of Gods grace,  but more as a participant and leader and in the revolutionary transformation of history on behalf of the poor and the oppressed. Mary becomes a representative of all the victims of society, the victims of oppression, of social expectations, of purity laws, and also a model of a strength of will with possibility that comes to all of humanity in the engagement of God.

 This young woman saying ‘yes’ to the spirit of God, the way the story is told, we now know was not a simple submissive agreement. Instead it involved, the probability of bringing shame on her family. The possibility bringing a stoning upon both her and her betrothed. The possibility of separation from her community. She would have been very aware of these consequences and if not her, the first hearers of the gospel would have been very aware of the cultural expectations, purity laws, and consequences.

 The willingness to carry the potential of Gods incarnation within our being and bringing it to birth may or may not be life threatening for us, yet, it will always be important.

Saying ‘yes’ to God may not bring shame on our families in the same way, especially for us in our post Christian secular societies, yet it could well mean making choices that our families will not understand.

Mary here becomes for us a model of our humanity in relation to God. A model that is not so meek and mild, not so submissive, but a model of our humanity that makes hard choices to see Gods revelation in the world.

 Moreover, For Christ to come, God could not have done it without her. God needs the womb within which the embryonic Christ can grow. And in case you miss the metaphor, this includes the men .

 The celebration of Christmas is not just what God in some generic way comes into the world and does. It is what God comes and does in us. For Like Mary as a symbol of our humanity, in relation to God, It is the incarnate God that grows and develops in each one of us if only we would say ‘yes’.

Based on article by Rosemary Radford Reuther posted on Sojourners Sermon Prep website. Here

Bromley by Bow

There is no doubt that Bromley is an amazing enterprise. Andrew Mawson simply made connections with people, and saw the assets (People)that existed in the community. With the connections he brought together the available Gov’t funding opportunities with his church and the possibilities soon emerged.
This process however did not happen over night. It took 25 years to get the centre to a point where it is today.
To begin Andrew basically opened the space in the church and the church hall to the community. You will see in the photo the worship space that sit during the week in the middle of a childcare kindergarten space. The kids play around it and on sundays or when there is larger amounts of people the space adapts opens up, spreads out, they bring in more chairs up to two hundred and can change the way it faces of is used. During the week there is a another chapel/prayer room as a quiet space for the week. In other parts of the building, the space was turned into a health centre with resident doctors, chosen because of their wholistic approach to health, artists in residence, arts therapy workshops and a cafe that operates commercially.
The centre has beautiful gardens and courtyards the health centre reception was full of art pieces and on the whole felt good to be there. It was a stark contrast to the health centre in St Paul’s way built by the Gov’t. The whole place seemed to have an integration and a concern for the whole person, and treating people with a respect that can often be hard to find in Gov’t services. At it’s heart was the church community, whose influence and values infiltrated the whole place. What ever faith people were from didn’t seem to matter and the gardens outside were also full of story art and sacredness. The art was often telling stories of significant people who had been a part of the centre from it’s inception. The telling of stories, the creation of art tables etc all woven into a place where people were valued and community existed. In this place of relative poverty, it was an oasis.
What was the church relationship to this? It is not the right question really. It was all the church or as I said in a previous blog, the Event was evident everywhere. Surely this is what we long for?

Keep off the Grass!!!

Keep Off the Grass!!!

We were offered an Christian historical guided tour of the centre of Cambridge. Here we learnt of the incredible history of the church in Cambridge and the amazing world of scientific achievements of many that were educated here or even resided in Cambridge. that the stimulating process of education and the mentoring that goes on along the way is hugely successful and has led to great inventiveness and creative understanding. There is also a sense in which Cambridge celebrates and honours the achievements of its “fellows” in statues, images and plaques. One sign that is the most common however is to Keep Off The Grass!
During the tour typical of a curious almost rebellious Aussie, I cheekily asked the guide who was obviously a very learned man, for what reason must we keep off the grass if it is not to do with simple wear and tear from the multitudes that visit regularly.
He did say that he didn’t tell us because it wasn’t important.
I was perplexed then, it’s not important but KEEP OFF THE GRASS.
I later found out that the reason, which I thought may give me a reason to stay off as some reasonable explanation turned out to be quite different. The reason as I understand it now is all about status. The Fellows of the college are allowed to walk on the grass but nobody else is. It evidently has a long tradition as a mark of status and privilege.
If I had of known that then it probably would not have helped and perhaps why they don’t tell people (especially Aussies)? There is a part of me that almost wants to walk On the grass in response.

It is funny how tradition often seems so antiquated. Perhaps because it is. Some times in the church we feel like attempting to do new things is a bit like challenging these age old traditions along with the ones in communities that aren’t so old but have become the “how We do it”. Fresh expressions is an attempt at having permission to step on the grass. Not because it is rebellious so much as because it’s natural for people to want to. To experience the grass rather than just look at it, or hear about it. Some times fresh expressions get it a bit wrong or make mistakes but that will happen. Today we heard from a couple of real people, that have found a new life in faith due to the release from the restraints of the traditions. It was refreshing, and challenging as it comes from a part of the church that I sit a bit uncomfortable with. None the less, the experience for these young people cannot be denied.
Surely then the grass is for all to experience.

theology of the event

Theology of the Event
This term I have borrowed from John D. Caputo who writes about it in his book “The Weakness of God”. Rather than attempting to explain the principles myself, see below the outline given on  the Amazon web page for the book. In this way, The event in my mind is the very thing we desire or long for, the change, the movement, the transformation, the consequence of the existence of what we call call God. In the case of the Willow or for that matter Bromley by Bow,   
In different ways they both express an this kind of Event? Yet in my view  the Willow struggles to see the Event in front of them as that transformative activity of God to be embraced as that which resides within the name of God that we desire. That is why the question “I this church” is an important one. For the church is that community that would for all intents and purposes celebrate the Event, or moreover participate in the the mission of the Event.

“Applying an ever more radical hermeneutics (including Husserlian and Heideggerian phenomenology, Derridian deconstruction, and feminism), John D. Caputo breaks down the name of God in this irrepressible book. Instead of looking at God as merely a name, Caputo views it as an event, or what the name conjures or promises in the future. For Caputo, the event exposes God as weak, unstable, and barely functional. While this view of God flies in the face of most religions and philosophies, it also puts up a serious challenge to fundamental , tenets of theology and ontology. Along the way, Caputo’s readings of the New Testament, especially of Paul’s view of the Kingdom of God, help to support the “weak force” theory. This penetrating work cuts to the core of issues and questions — What is the nature of God? What is the nature of being? What is the relationship between God and being? What is the meaning of forgiveness, faith, piety, or transcendence? — that define the terrain of contemporary philosophy of religion.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0253218284/_0-20

St Paul’s Way

St Paul’s Way.
We began our introduction with Andrew Mawson, by looking at this street named St Paul’s Way. At one end of the street was a catholic church and at the other was an Anglican. In the street was a combination of venues like, a school, health centre, retail shops, and housing. if I have it correct, Andrew due to what he did at Bromley by Bow, was asked by the council to come in and see what he could do. Here in St Paul’s Way Andrew did not have a church but with the churches at either end of the street he had hoped that he could build relationships with the vicar and priest to catch the vision. 3 years later and all that seems to have happened here is a some Daisies growing in one patch of the garden and a sign Gateway to heaven being painted.
However he met Atol not sure if this is right) a local entrepreneur who owned the chemist in the street and began to dream with him a little. I find it interesting that it can be easier to connect with people outside the church sometimes than those with in it.
Along the way the school was a disaster in Andrews language. It had an appalling pass rate, the culture of the school did not encourage learning and the teaching culture was that it was more important to be friends with the students than to teach. (not sure what the other side of this argument is). Andrew however is not afraid to speak plainly about the situation. he developed a trust framework, sought permission to take over the school basically with local and business minded people, and received permission to do so.
In Two years the school has been rebuilt, the student have an increase in pas rates of 40%, and the whole spirit of the area seems to be lifting. It wasn’t,t obviously all easy. They had to sack many teachers, and introduce a new attitude and culture to the school. They are including local entrepreneurs on the board of the trust and making connections to thief health centre and local bushiness.
at the same time, the health centre in the street was a shimozzle. And the local 75% Bengali population were suffering. Through an honesty about the dire situation in this community and a business framework, Andrew has facilitated a whole new environment. He is also intricately involved in improving the local housing as well in which some of it could virtually be described as third world.
The local churches don,t really see it as there role, or how to be involved, yet transformation of the community for a people clearly in trouble is apparent all over it. The journey there is only beginning but it is interesting to see how an enterprising model and approach is having significant impact and in that street, with or without the church.
Some of the lessons here are;
1 person with vision, can achieve a whole lot.
It isn’t necessarily the church that will join in the party.
It needs a long term commitment. Maybe 10 years.
Making the connections with people are what seems to be key.
Need to be able to make hard decisions.

Church and the Event of God

The first of our visits to what we might call ‘Missional Church’, was to the baptist community called The Willow. Here we saw a great example of making the most of funding opportunity and needs in a community suffering. The willow establish almost what we in Australia are calling family centres and usually funded by gov,t through local councils. one of these is being built next door to St Kilda Parish Mission. It is an interfaced approach to children’s health well being and early learning through infant health, play groups, kindergarten, family planning, and integrates this with a cafe and information for families of local services. If I understand it correctly the land was available in the church grounds and the finding was available, then in consultation with the community the centre was established. The minister, played a crucial role in bringing the different aspects of it together, and facilitating a structural model for the different agencies and church to manage it through a trust, and MOU’s or service agreements. These agreements are really important as they are specific enough to know where each partner sits in relation to the trust. the trust is dominated by church members, and leases the space to the services. The building was quickly put up with a modular design and whilst looked ok for what is , but would probably have a limited life as a result. however there was a lot of flexible space with opening walls and child friendly spaces.
However, pin conversation with the church, the obvious question arose for me and others of us visiting, what is church. The church community with a new minister, and what I would call a conservative theology, tended to separate the centre for the church and it seemed didn’t really see now where it fitted in the context of church. Is the church the Worshipping community that allows community services and encourages them on site but has an arms length relationship with them, or is the church the whole experience. It was noted by one of our group that the church didn’t have anyway of opening onto the centre and with no natural link between them the relationship between the church community and the centre’s life seemed a little strained. It seems to me if you see the whole as all part of the church or the Event of God then it changes the way you relate to it. It is no longer us an them but us. This is a really important theological shift when considering partnerships. In partnerships we are enjoined in relationships which lie at the heart of the whole event.
I will write next about the Bromley experience as I think it offers the other theological framework and approach which also is revealed in the architecture.