On Monday evening I went to a public meeting put on by the Mosques and Miracles crowd. It was well attended - 600 or so. Interestingly, unlike most Christian gatherings there were mainly men.
Mosques and Miracles has stirred up some comment in Christchurch by some who see it as intolerant. That is not what I want to talk about.
Prior to it coming I raised the issue as to why we should put time and effort into learning about Muslims when there are only 35000 in the country compared to 1.3Million who claim no religion? The session on Monday evening has done nothing to answer that question.
The speaker, Daniel, had a fascinating story to tell. Unfortunately, there were times when I wasn't sure whether he was speaking in the past or present or about whom he was speaking. His main message seemed to be that Islam was a religion that laid unique claims to the world and all in it and we better be aware of that. Frankly, Christians have known about that for many hundreds of years. The message was not new. Why then, do some think we should hear about it now in New Zealand?
The sceptic in me says that we are hearing about it because some in the church have bought into the political agenda of some in the West that have made much of the muslim world into the "enemy" (axis of evil). It is because Christians in NZ have bought into the "War on terror" without putting it into the greater context of God's plan for the world. New Zealand has had only one terrorist attack and that was the French 20 odd years ago. We are not particularly threatened by Muslim extremists as a country. As Christians - Muslims are not converting large parts of the population that we should be concerned. We have much more to be concerned about those in Malls on a Sunday rather than those in Mosques.
Over those 600 people on Monday night I wonder ...
How many had a Muslim friend?
How many prayed for a muslim they knew?
How many had spoken to the veiled woman who dropped her children off at school at the same time that they dropped their own children off?
How many had showed some hospitality to the new muslim immigrants or refugees?
How many had talked about Jesus with a Muslim?
I ask these questions because I suspect the answer is "precious few."
We should not be attending Mosques and Miracles out of fear, but because we seek the tools and information that will help us show love and proclaim the gospel to these people. This is the approach Archbiship Akinola takes in Nigeria - and he lives in a country where large parts of it are under Sharia law. Evangelism, not the sword, is how he is winning over the country for the glory of God. We should take a leaf out of his book.
While we are at it, we need a conference on Malls and Miracles to put the evangelism of the millions of unchurched, unsaved New Zealanders back front and centre of the churchs' agendas.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
A story: Choosing the best insurance
Following the end of their lives there were three men approaching the Great Underwriter and at the door of his Office they were met by the Chief claims inspector, Chief Peter.
The first man approached Chief Peter and he handed over not one, but one hundred and one life insurance policies. It appeared that he had been to every life insurance broker on the planet. He had taken out a policy with anyone and everyone who had said they were underwritten by the Great Underwriter. He was supremely confident that at least one of his claims would be validated by Chief Peter and he’d be allowed able to live forever in comfort. Chief Peter took a handful of his policies and began to leaf through them, tut-tutting as he did. The man began to get nervous and asked Peter – “What’s wrong?” Peter said – “I’m sorry but these policies are not valid.” “But the brokers all told me that they were valid. OK, so I had to fulfil a few conditions for some of them whilst I was alive, like not eating meat or praying five times a day, but surely at least one of them I did all right,” replied the man. “Oh, you certainly did Ok according to what the brokers said,” said Chief Peter, “but the Great Underwriter doesn’t use brokers and doesn’t underwrite any of these policies, so I’m afraid you can’t enter.”
The second man approached Chief Peter. He had nothing to hand over, but he did have a very confident look about him. He said to Chief Peter, “Gidday Chief, how’re ya going? I’m sure you’ve got me somewhere on file.” Chief Peter, who was used to people turning up without their policy documents, took down his details and pulled out his latest techno-wizz, handheld computer (he’s always been one for the latest gadgets). After a few moments he turned to the man and said, “I’m sorry but you are not listed as a policy holder?” “What do you mean not listed?” said the man, “I’ve paid my dues – I’ve been a good man, always prepared to give someone a helping hand, not ripping anyone off, trying to tell the truth.” Chief Peter had another look at his computer and replied – “Yes, I can see you tried pretty hard, but frankly you fell well short of the perfection required by the Great Underwriter. You know, the Great Underwriter wanted you to succeed but you never accepted the message that it is not something you can do on your own – you could never do enough to pay the premium– you did need to take out the policy on offer.” The man’s self-confidence burst like a bubble and he turned and slowly walked away.
The third man approached Chief Peter. He shuffled a bit, and wouldn’t look the Chief in the eye. He handed over a scruffy looking piece of paper and said – “I couldn’t pay for the premium myself so I signed up with this bloke who said he’d pay the premium for me – I think he lives here.” Chief Peter, thought ‘Here we go again – someone else who’s great uncle Herbert is meant to have the inner line an short cut to the Office.’ But when he looked at the piece of paper and checked on his computer he nearly jumped for joy and his face broke into a big smile and he said to the man – “Come in, come in, you are most welcome.” The man hesitated, “Are you sure?” Chief Peter said, “Of course I’m sure – the Great Underwriter himself paid for your premium – the cost was huge, but worth it. As you know you could never have paid for it yourself – all you did was to recognise that and accept the gift. Well done.”
John Pickering, December 2004
The first man approached Chief Peter and he handed over not one, but one hundred and one life insurance policies. It appeared that he had been to every life insurance broker on the planet. He had taken out a policy with anyone and everyone who had said they were underwritten by the Great Underwriter. He was supremely confident that at least one of his claims would be validated by Chief Peter and he’d be allowed able to live forever in comfort. Chief Peter took a handful of his policies and began to leaf through them, tut-tutting as he did. The man began to get nervous and asked Peter – “What’s wrong?” Peter said – “I’m sorry but these policies are not valid.” “But the brokers all told me that they were valid. OK, so I had to fulfil a few conditions for some of them whilst I was alive, like not eating meat or praying five times a day, but surely at least one of them I did all right,” replied the man. “Oh, you certainly did Ok according to what the brokers said,” said Chief Peter, “but the Great Underwriter doesn’t use brokers and doesn’t underwrite any of these policies, so I’m afraid you can’t enter.”
The second man approached Chief Peter. He had nothing to hand over, but he did have a very confident look about him. He said to Chief Peter, “Gidday Chief, how’re ya going? I’m sure you’ve got me somewhere on file.” Chief Peter, who was used to people turning up without their policy documents, took down his details and pulled out his latest techno-wizz, handheld computer (he’s always been one for the latest gadgets). After a few moments he turned to the man and said, “I’m sorry but you are not listed as a policy holder?” “What do you mean not listed?” said the man, “I’ve paid my dues – I’ve been a good man, always prepared to give someone a helping hand, not ripping anyone off, trying to tell the truth.” Chief Peter had another look at his computer and replied – “Yes, I can see you tried pretty hard, but frankly you fell well short of the perfection required by the Great Underwriter. You know, the Great Underwriter wanted you to succeed but you never accepted the message that it is not something you can do on your own – you could never do enough to pay the premium– you did need to take out the policy on offer.” The man’s self-confidence burst like a bubble and he turned and slowly walked away.
The third man approached Chief Peter. He shuffled a bit, and wouldn’t look the Chief in the eye. He handed over a scruffy looking piece of paper and said – “I couldn’t pay for the premium myself so I signed up with this bloke who said he’d pay the premium for me – I think he lives here.” Chief Peter, thought ‘Here we go again – someone else who’s great uncle Herbert is meant to have the inner line an short cut to the Office.’ But when he looked at the piece of paper and checked on his computer he nearly jumped for joy and his face broke into a big smile and he said to the man – “Come in, come in, you are most welcome.” The man hesitated, “Are you sure?” Chief Peter said, “Of course I’m sure – the Great Underwriter himself paid for your premium – the cost was huge, but worth it. As you know you could never have paid for it yourself – all you did was to recognise that and accept the gift. Well done.”
John Pickering, December 2004
Thursday, July 19, 2007
The Castle in the Forest
A Book Review
"The Castle in the Forest" by Norman Mailer
Little Brown, London, 2007
Frightening, sickening, compelling, brilliant, vulgar are all adjectives that apply to "The Castle in the Forest." Mailer has taken Screwtape and made him the ugly, voyeuristic, devious, devil he really is. If you find reading CS Lewis's Screwtape letters a difficult experience, as I do, then expect this to be ten-fold worse.
The story follows the early few years of a young Austrian boy in the late 1890s. One is alternately sympathetic towards and sickened by the boy and his family. The knowledge of the monster, Adolf Hitler, that he grew into is always there in the background.
The story is told through the eyes of a devil who had responsibility in the region. That sounds as though it is mere fantasy and easily dismissed. But, it is the shear realism Mailer brings to this devil and his works that is frightening. How the devil uses sex (not his - that going on between family members) for his own ends is both vulgar and all too honest and very very hard to read.
What is really compelling is the monologues of the devil ... they peel back the layers of defensive "good feelings" about humans we try and build up around ourselves and expose us without mercy. Like Lewis's Screwtape, one is never sure, though, how much truth there is in these monologues. Here are some samples ....
p76 [speaking about humans] "The seek to be free. They often remark ...'I want to discover who I am.' All the while we devils guide the people we have attracted (we call them clients), the cudgels [this is the devils' name for Angels] contest us and many a particular individual does his or her best to fight off both sides. Humans have become so vain (through technology) that more than a number expect by now to become independent of the Lord and the Devil."
p99 "... we do look for the lowest common denominator to any truth"
pp215-6 "Injustice was a yeast to inspire hatred, envy, and the loss of love. For rare was the man or woman who did not possess an intense sense of the injustice done to them each day. It was our taproot to every adult. It was a fury in every child. Our work would fall apart if humans ever came to brood as intensely upon the injustice others might be suffering."
p394 "There is a good reason why it is difficult for any man or woman to picture their own death. The soul, I would offer, does expect to be immortal."
p398 "... self pity is the lubricant we use most often to smooth the entrance of the heart into the uglier emotions."
Nagorno-Karabakh: A forgoten country
Nagorno-Karabakh is a small Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan. The people are mainly Christian and were the subject of attempted "Ethnic cleansing" by Azerbaijan. In fact, the term "Ethnic cleansing" was first used about them. The Armenians, are, of course, one of the first Christian "people-groups."
The international community seems to have largely forgotten them.
They are now trying to hold elections - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6905670.stm for a report.
The international community seems to have largely forgotten them.
They are now trying to hold elections - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6905670.stm for a report.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Statements of the week
Theological insight of the week
"People aren't enjoying the All Blacks anymore and that is a sin!" Tony Veitch, CloseUp 16 July 2007
Duh! of the week
"I hope politicians will stop playing politics ..." Dr Pippa Mackay, Morning Report 17 July 2007
Logic of the week
"This one is way more smaller than that one, because that one is way more bigger" K, aged 5.
"People aren't enjoying the All Blacks anymore and that is a sin!" Tony Veitch, CloseUp 16 July 2007
Duh! of the week
"I hope politicians will stop playing politics ..." Dr Pippa Mackay, Morning Report 17 July 2007
Logic of the week
"This one is way more smaller than that one, because that one is way more bigger" K, aged 5.
Anglicanism in New Zealand - can it survive?
Below is a letter from David Pickering in response to other letters by JS Fisher, an Anglican Priest, in the Christchurch Press. The point of putting it here is that it clearly states the foundations of Anglicanism and suggests that they are being radically challenged by some. The question I have is are there those in the younger generations who really care anymore about the foundations of the church who will stand up and say so? Has the modern propensity of living for the now with scant regard for the past so infused the church, that Anglicanism as it has been for generations is all but dead in the water and at the mercy of those with the most political power to push it where they will?
Dear Sir,
The Christian church has from its inception been firmly based on the revelation given in Scripture. The doctrines enshrined in Scripture have eternal verity that may not be twisted to meet the convenience of a later age. This is firmly entrenched in Anglican Canon Law. The unhappiness that the Anglican Church is experiencing at present is not, as J S Fisher claims, the result of a small group of questionably loyal church members who want to impose their will on the church. The unhappiness is because some Anglican Church authorities have wilfully moved outside the church’s mandate. Latimer Fellowship, which Mr(s) Fisher vilifies, is but one of many voices calling the church to order.
The declaration by Anglican clergy of their willingness to obey their appointed superior is dependent on that superior acting within the generally recognised regulations of the church. What do loyal Anglican congregations and clergy do when their bishop or diocese moves outside the church’s heritage? They try to call these authorities back to the church’s orthodoxy. Which is precisely what many of us are trying to do.
Yours faithfully,
David Pickering.
my PS -some useful links:
39 Articles of the Anglican Church
NZ Canon Law
Dear Sir,
The Christian church has from its inception been firmly based on the revelation given in Scripture. The doctrines enshrined in Scripture have eternal verity that may not be twisted to meet the convenience of a later age. This is firmly entrenched in Anglican Canon Law. The unhappiness that the Anglican Church is experiencing at present is not, as J S Fisher claims, the result of a small group of questionably loyal church members who want to impose their will on the church. The unhappiness is because some Anglican Church authorities have wilfully moved outside the church’s mandate. Latimer Fellowship, which Mr(s) Fisher vilifies, is but one of many voices calling the church to order.
The declaration by Anglican clergy of their willingness to obey their appointed superior is dependent on that superior acting within the generally recognised regulations of the church. What do loyal Anglican congregations and clergy do when their bishop or diocese moves outside the church’s heritage? They try to call these authorities back to the church’s orthodoxy. Which is precisely what many of us are trying to do.
Yours faithfully,
David Pickering.
my PS -some useful links:
39 Articles of the Anglican Church
NZ Canon Law
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
