friarmike

Simply Live

I am intrigued at something that has popped up on the Evangelical Alliance site. It is an invitation to ‘Simplify’. The introductory message states, 

“Simplify is a call to discipleship; to examine the spiritual hold money has on our lives by taking a month to consciously spend less and give more.

For one month, we will live on the amount of money we would receive if we were on benefits. We'll learn how to Simplify - to make the most of our time, relationships and money - from people who already live on less, and we'll give the money we save away to support those who have no other option”.

Now the movement to ‘simplify’ is well established globally and there are myriad internet sites where a lively and often creative debate is being pursued. However, one month on an equivalent to benefits payments I am not sure really does justice to the concept. I think the words of Jesus quoted on the site were more to do with a lifestyle resembling God’s kingdom than perhaps the change 31 days of effort might achieve. 

The ‘Simplify’ website then encourages us to, ‘examine the spiritual hold money has on our lives’. I think for me, and many, money has a purely material and security hold on my life. My battle is that when I consider its spiritual hold I discover very little spirituality in my interaction with money. However, when I consider simplifying my life I am captivated by the spirituality of both life and time. My life and my time can be too easily engaged with the pursuit of wealth to pay debts, mortgages, leisure pursuits etc. etc. Nothing wrong in these per se, but perhaps there is a challenge about how the pursuit itself shapes and dictates my response to the type of lifestyle and timestyle I can adopt.

The month ‘Simplify’ have adopted is October. I am not sure if the pension contributions and other financial benefits, e.g. share dividends and October’s stock increases, are also being relinquished in the attempt to live off benefits. I am not sure what the benefits level is either. Money saved, the ‘simplify’ site states, should be directed to some charity or other - hopefully one where all the staff are also participating in this month of financial sacrifice.

Whilst I do not want to simply pour cold water on the idea, perhaps a series of regional conversations on the why and how to simplify, the gathering and publication of some very real stories of people who have both chosen and been forced to simplify their lives, a critique of capitalism as an effective global economic engine, as well as an honest and transparent review of the compensation packages charities set for their staff, could lift this challenge beyond the disconnected exploration by various individuals or socially networked groups such as church congregations.

Simple living is of no particular moral or ethical good in and of itself. However, if there is some creative and constructive social benefit that is embraced by the individual or group then the consequences can be enriching for the individual and for society at large. However, I think this would be something more than a months ‘project’. Please can the church take a step beyond and provide leadership ahead of gimmicks - for all our sakes!

Last Brick in the Wall

It was a number of years ago as Revelation church passed through its self styled restructure in which Portsmouth and Bognor congregations became separated from Chichester, that I took a decision to 'go back to basics', to quote a former British P.M. This involved grasping hold of all my theological perspectives, my worldview triggers, and my own personal frameworks and revisiting what I believed and why I believed it. I would then seek to rebuild from the foundations upwards.

This has proved a very creative process, one enhanced by the journey Katey and I traversed with her pilgrimage with MS. In short it opened my eyes to my own spiritual blindness and my assumptions based on little other than holy hearsay and authoritative proclamations - but on whose authority? The rewards are many, most notably a wonderful contemplative life engaging with the Triune God and effective engagement with my neighbourhood. 

However, just recently, and greatly helped by the journey with the London Make Believe community (not sure this word is accurate but it is how we style ourselves) this year in London, I recognized that perhaps a nasty little hidden persuader had been lurking in the shadows of my diseased mind. The light was suddenly shone upon it and I gasped as I realised this was close to the very central core of my raison d'etre. It was my confident embrace of community as a central core to Christian practice. "Oh no",I thought, "perhaps even this is simply an assumption carried over from my sixties days of pop socialism and hippy happiness".

Now I cannot deny the 30 years of extended household were a terrific learning curve. Nor can I disguise the fact that economically, emotionally, practically, and spiritually this has not massively impacted upon my own development as both a disciple and as a human being. There have been huge numbers of mistakes, but the learning has been carefully mined from such errors. I would not have been challenged and become empowered through the process of disempowerment that committed relationships create.

But I wonder if I have literally assumed too much. That community will in and of itself produce mission and godly lives. The evidence is very much against it. Maybe people don't opt for community because actually it creates for many far more problems than it solves. Certainly since katey's departure to glory, and my commitment to leave the friary 'fallow' for a year, this decision has proved to be an excellent time of growth. Many relationships have naturally withered away - and this is no bad thing for they will only be contributing elsewhere with strength, vigour and creativity - but new relationships are emerging very slowly, like the early buds of spring, for the future journey.

One assumption I had made with my understanding of the church as a community of the faithful, as opposed to just being the faithful, was that following my release from the life of a full time carer the Christian community would call me back into position in serving God. However, this has not happened and the learning again is that it is my application and understanding of community that must change. Or alternatively of course I can move myself and seek to join an effective community - the Bruderhof, or the Simple Way. 

So the realisation, whilst being painful, has helped me realise all this way into Christian maturity that the hidden persuaders that so completely shape our view of the world, ourselves and the biblical message, have up to this point exercised an unhelpful hold over my ability to think Christianly and serve God effectively.

I hope that this is the 'last brick in the wall that I am now, with great difficulty, tearing up with my bare hands. 

Of course it is unlikely to be so but I can but hope. This has proven to be the most painful of encounters since so much of my foundational biblical understanding was forged on passages like those depicting the first Christians at the end of Acts 2 & 4. Still it may well be that beyond community lies the fruitful role of the solitary - thoughts that now captivate me and will, I trust, be fruitful as I meditate upon them.

Problem is I am not sure where to go post community - but one thing is for sure with faith first you leap and then you grow wings. Well Here I GoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOo.....................

How Faith Varies by Church Size

Just thought the following was a useful discussion starter around our many and diverse meal tables. I have simply copied and pasted the article in full. Worth reflecting upon.

A new report from The Barna Group, based on interviews with more than 3,000 adults, shows that congregational size is related to the nature of a congregation’s religious beliefs, religious behavior and demographic profile. There are clearly significant differences between the smallest and largest of Protestant churches in terms of the theological beliefs of adherents.

The survey results discovered the following:

• On 17 indicators of religious belief and behavior examined in the research there were statistically significant differences between churches of 100 or fewer adult attenders and churches of 1000 or more adult attenders. The only item tested in which there was not a distinction was whether the church attender had prayed during the past week.
• On all 9 of the belief statements tested, attenders of large churches were more likely than those engaged in a small or mid-sized congregation to give an orthodox biblical response – e.g., the Bible is totally accurate in all the principles it teaches, Satan is not merely symbolic but exists, Jesus led a sinless life, God is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the world who still rules the universe, etc.
• On seven of the eight behavioral measures, attenders of large churches were substantially more likely than those of small churches to be active. (These included behaviors such as attending church in the past week, reading the Bible in the past week, volunteering at their church in the past week, etc.) The average difference related to these seven behaviors was 17 percentage points.
• There were significant differences on six of the ten demographic attributes examined. Specifically, larger churches were more likely to have college graduates (a 22 percentage point difference between those who attend churches of 100 adults or less and those who attend congregations with 1000 or more adults), affluent attenders, and children under 18 living in their home. Adults attending Protestant mega-churches were also more likely to be registered to vote and to be registered as a Republican (a 16-point gap compared to adults attending churches of up to 100 adults). Those who attend small churches were more likely to home-school their children.
• Young adults were somewhat more likely to attend mega-churches than to affiliate with a congregation of any other size. In contrast, adults in their sixties or older were less likely to attend a church of 500 or more attenders than to regularly participate in a smaller church.
• Overall, the profile of demographics, beliefs and religious behaviors was strikingly similar between congregations of 500 to 999 adult attenders and that of congregations drawing 1000 or more adults. Similarly, congregations with fewer than 50 adults were generally similar regarding most indicators to congregations with 50 to 100 attenders.
• The point at which congregational belief profiles were mostly likely to diverge was when churches reached the 200-adult range. Those who attend churches of 1000 or more adults are significantly different from the congregations of those attending churches of as many as 200 adults in relation to six out of the 10 belief statements explored.
• The religious beliefs and behaviors of people who attend house churches, which average about 20 adults in attendance, are more similar to the results for large conventional churches (i.e., more than 500 adults) than they are to the outcomes among those who attend small conventional churches (i.e., less than 50 adults).
• Despite the substantial attention focused on Protestant mega-churches, such congregations draw about 9% of adults who frequent a Protestant church. In contrast, 41% of adults attending a Protestant church associate with a congregation of 100 or fewer adults. An additional 23% can be found at churches of 101 to 200 adults, 18% associate with bodies of 201 to 499 adults, and 9% can be found in churches of 500 to 999 adults.

Because the study did not examine the point in life or the church at which a particular theological perspective was embraced by respondents, the research results do not mean that larger churches are more likely to provide congregants with conservative biblical views. The research also discovered that the patterns are different among Catholic adults, who are more likely to attend mega-churches than are their Protestant counterparts.

Religious Beliefs of Protestants, by Congregational Size

(N=1,334)

Belief description*	1-100**	101-200	201-499	500-999	1000+
Bible is totally accurate in all the principles it teaches	60%	63%	70%	67%	75%
Have personal responsibility to tell others your beliefs	41	44	47	53	61
Your religious faith is very important in your life	82	83	90	88	90
Satan/devil is a living being not just a symbol of evil	30	29	36	38	51
A good person cannot earn a place in Heaven	33	39	47	48	55
On earth Jesus Christ did not commit sins, like other people	49	50	59	65	74
God is the omnipotent, omniscient creator who rules all	81	81	86	86	90
Born again Christian (see definition below)	63	64	69	81	75
Evangelical Christian (see definition below)	9	11	21	24	25
Number of respondents in this subgroup	547	306	247	120	114

* these are descriptions of the actual survey questions, not the wording of the questions actually used in the research.
** Adult attendance on an average weekend

About the Research

This report is based upon telephone interviews conducted by The Barna Group among three nationwide random samples of adults. In the course of the 3,014 interviews conducted, each churched respondent who attends a Protestant church was asked to estimate the number of adults who attend their primary church on a typical weekend. These surveys were conducted between January 2007 and November 2008. The range of sampling error associated with the total sample of adults is between ±0.8 and ±1.8 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The estimated sampling error for each of the segments related to church attendance ranged from ±2.3 to ±9.1 percentage points. These allowances do not include other types of error (known as non-sampling error) that can occur in surveys, such as errors arising from question wording, question sequencing, and the recording of responses.

“Born again Christians” were defined as people who said they had made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that was still important in their life today and who also indicated they believed that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “born again.”

“Evangelicals” meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “evangelical.”

The Barna Group, Ltd. (which includes its research division, The Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization that conducts primary research on a wide range of issues and products, produces resources pertaining to cultural change, leadership and spiritual development, and facilitates the healthy spiritual growth of leaders, children, families and Christian ministries. Located in Ventura, California, Barna has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. If you would like to receive free e-mail notification of the release of each new, bi-monthly update on the latest research findings from The Barna Group, you may subscribe to this free service at the Barna website (www.barna.org). Additional research-based resources, both free and at discounted prices, are also available through that website.

© The Barna Group, Ltd, 2009.

Participation requires Participation

Just back from the final Make Believe weekend in London. Certainly for me this has been the most productive in terms of personal development I have participated in. It has provoked me to explore the nature of friendship quite intentionally, and I am sure there will be much to say about this into the future.

However, one immediate thought following the final group feedback session. This revolves around the opportunity for participation, which the group agreed had not been effectively facilitated throughout their eight weekends together. I certainly might have expected this since it is facilitated by people who have learned their craft in a form of christian religion that is both hierarchical in style and narrowly orthodox in praxis. Hence the ease with which dependency of the 'congregation' upon the 'leadership' is established, whilst fear of believeing outside the limits of 'orthodoxy' promotes silence rather than creative comntributions.

Driving home I was reflecting on this and wondered if evangelical/charismatic christianity attracts a certain personality type. This would be the sort of person who actually wants to invest their responsibility for decision taking onto the shoulders of someone else. The fact that churches that offer very clear and prescribed belief sets appear to be the ones that grow and are recognised for having large congregations may support such a thesis. They also provide every 'service' that a congregational family might require and quickly become a sunday one stop shop for all the families practical and spiritual needs. They do quite literally provide 'church services', much as Granada do along our national motorway network.

Obvioulsy, this might explain why I find a level of both irritation and boredom with such contexts. Nothing wrong with the folk who gather or the style of what they do, but the lack of stimulus to think through scripture and the utter lack of mystery frustrates me and leaves a deep dissatisfaction in my soul.

So back to Make Believe. A group conditioned by such experiences of church from a young age, submiited to conditioning camps throughout their early adult life (on top af an educational system that requires a 'right' answer in preference to a thoughful one) might be forgiven for wondering if they have the right to interrupt a presenter, or contribute personal reflections. However, without such spontaneous interventions truth can become institutionalised all too easily.

I do trust having raised the question helpfully in their feedback these students do not return to their pews and fail actively to interrupt a religious expression that is sleepwalking its way into irrelevancy and ultimate death.

Is what we wear what we believe?

So Sarkozy sees the burka as a sign of female 'subservience' and does not want women to be allowed to wear them across France (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8112821.stm). The very description he uses suggests something about his belief system, western, secularist, politically correct. The burka, he added, does not represent, '...the idea the French republic has of women's dignity'. No! I guess this is best represented by the culture of keeping both a wife and a mistress. At least in Islam you officially keep wives but no mistresses.

Still the debate is somewhat irrelevant isn't it? Does fashion reveal belief in any other than a bad way? A monk may do good work, a priest offer a lifeline to a bereaved family, but does the habit or the dog collar provide any added value today? 

Surely the merit of a belief is in its effect upon the 'believing' individual and the experience of the 'unbelieving' neighbour. Well that's what I get from the story of the good Samaritan. 

I cannot but wonder why those commending religion take up so much time first arguing with their co-religionists over objective expressions of truth that lie beyond reason and its handmaiden of proofs, before then engaging in over emotional argument with those of a different religious persuasion. All it takes to demonstrate the value of a belief is the experience anyone has of it. If I need a burka, a cross, an orange tunic to announce that I am both holy and right then I probably haven't got any contribution of value to make to society. What's more I am most likely neither ho;y nor right! If I just seek to be a friend, do some good that reflects my belief, and if asked provide a simple explanation, that is surely sufficient.

As a follower of Jesus I must confess with some shame that too many years have been taken up with designing the perfect Christian model, and too little just living as invited to by Jesus. My wife, Katey, as she battled with MS, quickly ran out of interest in what we believe as an objective fact and enjoyed experiencing the substance of that belief with those who dared to journey with her. She may have been dressed in outrageous garments by official carers short on time and searching for easy clothing solutions but let me tell you what Katey ended up wearing bore no resemblance to the wonderful women she was.

I am not convinced that what we wear tells anyone anything about what we actually believe - there is a better way to illustrate that. Its what each of us does moment by moment as day gives way to day.

The Sufficiency of Silence

I realised, once prompted by a friend, that I had not 'blogged' for a while. This caused me to reflect and the title of this blog formed itself. I find great pleasure in silence these days, something that surprises me even more than my friends. Not a silence that necessarily removes all background noise such as the traffic passing by, rather a ceasing from constant reasoning and an overwhelming need to get something done. I encounter the divine in the series of moments joined together to forge the flow of time, or rather in the silence out of which they are birthed.

Yesterday was the longest day, 21 June. As is my practice I took myself down to the seafront around 10.00 PM to observe the slow departure of daylight from the sky and the inevitable, if gradual, return of night. Left with my own space and surrounded only by the gentle sounds of sea on shingle and the occasional laughter of excited seafront revelers, I was overwhelmed with the vast magnitude of life within creation, and the impulse just to sit and experience awe and amazement crafted a memorable moment with the divine.

It only remains to say that I have been guilty of creating my own fair share of noise over the years - goals, visions, motivational calls, rallying cries etc. etc. Now I prefer to remain silent and let the silence do my talking for me. Those who have ears to hear will be greatly encouraged.

Direct Democracy

As Douglas Carswell MP speaks enthusiastically about 'Direct Democracy' in response to the current nightmare in Westminster, The Jury Team have selected their candidates on the basis of popular choice for the upcoming Euro elections. It would be important to pause and consider the recommendations for Direct Democracy  as an antidote to irrepressible political party control and ineffective popular government.

I have started to wonder why it is that large Christian organisations and churches do not lead the way in this. We affirm that we subscribe to the view of every member being essential, and to the fact that many people laid down their lives to ensure the scripture was translated into English and made available to 'everyman'. This liberated the control over the interpretation of the scriptures from the hands of the literocracy. Ever since similar self appointed cliques have sought to seize back control, distrustful of the ability of everyday Christians to grow in spiritual maturity without their advice and intervention.

It would prove refreshing to see some church leadership actually consult and give voice to their membership. However, as with Westminster, the problem lies in the control and allocation of the resources. The popular vote might not reappoint existing leadership, nor approve of the salary and ancillary packages crafted for their benefit. Better to leave it in the hands of carefully selected Boards of Trustees (A.K.A cronies), many of whom serve perennially ensuring that the gene pool is seldom refreshed.

The principle of open government and complete trust in the electorate sounds a lot like democracy. The complete trust shown by god in a garden in the newly created electorate is equally impressive. We appear to have lost our way in a self seeking search for power, wealth, and the unaccountable exercise of authority. More on this to follow.

Hormones

Following yesterday's blog I had a great evening with longstanding, faithful, and good friends. I was there with my good friend Scottie and we joined the extended household to consume food and share thoughts. My blog on 'Bravery' was introduced and I soon warmed to my theme. There is a strange process whereby my rational head suddenly engages with my emotions and the subsequent ignition produces rather too long passionate speeches. Oh How I need to be delivered from my preaching heritage!!

One thought that was interesting revolved around the extent to which my change of view was related to hormones! The point being that a variety of personal, emotional, and physiological factors could explain such a change of view. Obviously this is a factor. But it is one that confronts everyone as they navigate through life and not everyone has run out of patience with the 'neo-evangelical' merry-go-round.

However, I for one will accept it as a contributing factor. But I am not disappointed with my past exploits carried out under the name and in the service of 'neo-evangelicalism'. What I apologise for is holding a view that is palpably more idealistic than realistic, but that ideal was the very vision that enabled me to secure the adoption of two Vietnamese orphans from Whitehead detention centre (Hong Kong), visit Kurds on the borders of Turkey and Iran who had fled the gas attacks of Saddam Hussein in Iraq (no weapons of mass destruction? I think not), and securing safety for Turkish christians to meet across Turkey. Some of the things this vision inspired me to engage in. So I am pleased with these and with the vision that inspired them - just sorry that it is not adopted across the 'neo-evangelical' church as a whole to any greater degree than verbal assent.

Others I am sure will accuse me of special pleading because of my personal circumstances. So be it! My challenge back would be to embrace a humility that takes time and care to listen to commentators and review their comments rather than defend the status quo by immediately launching an attack. Listening can lead to learning, and learning usually improves everyone and everything. 

As for me I am off to explore hormonal replacement therapy, just in case I was meant to be a leader!

Bravery

Strange title but this is what has been playing through my mind just recently. With all the events last year I have reflected upon so many things. I am grateful for the space to do so and commend some solitude to all. I recognise this is so often a luxury and appreciate I just may be fortunate in finding such time.

This new year is a season of change for me personally not least because I have had to face some harsh realities. One of these that I conveyed to a friend earlier today involves what I perceive to be the complete and abject failure of my concept of church community. This is a deep and difficult realisation, which challenges 35 years of conceptual understanding that I have carried in my heart, sought to incarnate, and regularly communicated from many and various platforms. 

The bravery is about just saying, 'I was wrong'. The new church movement in which I forged my christian context is no less about institutionalisation than the very denominational bodies it assumed and claimed to be challenging in its birth and initial success. It seeks to make mission no more than a church department, embraces a conservatism in the face of fast moving cultural forces that can only secure its medium term isolation and irrelevance, and fails to implement a large percentage of its conceptual understanding and interpretation of the scriptures. How we need some honest conversation together if we are to emerge into tomorrow as a healthy church. However, perhaps too many of us are too deeply invested in the status quo to initiate or take kindly to such a conversation. We perhaps all need to discover again what it means to be brave.

As a result I am having humbly to hand all my theological conclusions and what has been my orthopraxis over to God and await to see how my mindset changes and in what ways my faith (still well and truly alive) will emerge and influence this next phase of my life. I am convinced there is something deeply wrong with the way the 'evangelical' church has developed and presented itself over the last 40 years, and I have colluded in this for which I believe I must humbly apologise. I cannot see that a church that is built upon the fragile foundations of consumer choice, personal peace and affluence (to quote Francis Schaeffer) can offer anything to a world that itself is prisoner to the mythology of consumer choice and now stares uncertainly in the face as we face a significant global economic downturn. 

Sadly even as this has enveloped us I neither hear nor read any insightful critiques upon which the christian community can make sense of the world they are in and plot a course to navigate in God's channel through stormy waters ahead. If the church has nothing to offer in such times then much of what we have assumed about the robustness of our faith and the commitment of the household of faith is redundant. 

For me this is a time when my grain of wheat must fall into the soil and die - a process one does not look forward to and one that is fraught with difficulties and mysteries. 

Models

Just back from a weekend involving a number of group dialogues. All fascinating and fun. However, it has left me reflecting upon a question to which I have drawn no conclusions, and indeed conclusions are probably unnecessary. 

Some of these conversations were on the ways in which as people we seek to engage together on a common purpose. More specifically they drifted into experiences within faith communities and churches. There were many personal experiences shared, good and bad, from a subjective point of view. 

What was fascinating was the unspoken desire to discover something that might effectively manage the collision created when different humans commit to occupy the same space and agenda. Almost a belief that such a space might be smooth and easy to live within. There might also have been a sense in which if it could be pioneered somewhere it could then be wrapped up, rolled out, and marketed as perhaps THE way of doing life together.

I have little reason to believe that such a 'model' could ever be designed let alone work. However, I was more taken by the desire to attempt such a thing. We are all uniquely crafted and have opportunity to live and express who we are on this mortal stage for a brief period. We ourselves contribute something of who we are to the space we inhabit and may be fortunate in engaging in a number of relational connections that enhance who we are and maximise our contribution. This latter can only come when we seek to communicate honestly with those few relationships what we know of ourselves and what we see our commitment and contribution to be. Then together we may well discover there is within the space between those relationships a certain equity that has the capacity to enhance each individual's performance.

I would assume such connections are limited in scale simply on the basis of honesty and depth of relationship required. I also assume that rather than a recognisable brand what emerges is a patchwork of distinctive expressions all birthing a unique descriptive.

So I have come away refreshed and comfortable with the fact that I am me, my friends are my friends, and we have the ability to live as we choose to live and to do so with energy and confidence. This is the start of a good week.