The Death of Christian Britain: “What’s Theology?”

Before my recent move to England, I was told repeatedly that I would be surprised at how secular Europe has become. To that end, I’m inaugurating a new series of posts on this blog—inspired by a book from a few years back—called “The Death of Christian Britain.”

My introduction to the secularization of Europe actually happened on the ship that we took over here. My wife and I wanted to celebrate a Eucharist on a Sunday morning. We approached the purser’s desk and explained what we wanted to do: “We’d like to have an Anglican or Episcopal Eucharist service on Sunday.” The man behind the desk—who was German—looked at us uncomprehendingly. It was clear the words “Anglican,” “Episcopal,” and “Eucharist” totally flummoxed him.

“You know,” we said, “we want to have a mass.”

He did understand that word. “There’s a Catholic mass every day on board,” he said.

“But we’re not Catholic,” we said. “We want a Protestant Eucharist.”

“Oh,” he said, now getting it. “The captain will hold some sort of”—he paused, looking for the right word before hitting on it—”multicultural service on Sunday.”

“You mean, ‘ecumenical’,” we said.

“Yes, that,” he said, now completely uninterested. He referred us to the entertainment director who helped us set up the service.

Today, we went to set up a bank account. The woman who was helping us needed our professional details and I said I was a student.

“What do you study?” she asked, as she needed the information for her records.

“Theology,” I said.

“Oh,” she said, “what’s theology?” She added hastily, “I don’t need it for my records, I just want to know what it is.”

I had not expected this and fumbled for an answer. “Well,” I said. “I guess the classic answer is ‘faith seeking understanding.'”

“Oh,” she said. “Sounds interesting” and went back to filling in the details.

In 30 seconds or less, how would you have answered her question?

Before too long I hope to have another series on this blog: the Renewal of Christian Britain. For now, however, secularization is much easier to spot!

“So, Lord, please keep things broadly the same / Frankly, revival would drive me insane”

The Archbishop of the Church in Wales, Barry Morgan, last weekend addressed the Church’s Governing Body about the recent review the church commissioned to review its structure.

The actual review—which came out in July—is more detailed than the Archbishop’s speech. I looked at the review in July and had several thoughts on it then so I won’t write about it again.

But I did want to post the poem that the Archbishop ends with:

Lord, won’t ya keep things broadly the same

Frankly, revival would drive me insane

I’m busy, I’m tired so I’ll ask you again

Lord, won’t ya keep things broadly the same.

 

Lord, keep us from the unknown

I know that I’m damaged, but I’ll leave it alone

I’m busy, I’m tired and I’m injury prone

But Lord, please keep us from the unknown.

 

Lord, won’t ya keep us quite uninspired

At least, please wait till we’re all retired

I’m busy, I’m tired, to be quite so fired

So Lord, please keep us quite uninspired.

 

When we said ‘Lord, have your way

and change us so we follow’

Can’t you see it was irony

That’s now gone rather hollow.

 

So, Lord, please keep things broadly the same

Frankly, revival would drive me insane

I’m busy, I’m tired, so I’ll ask you again

Lord, please keep things broadly the same.

And then the Archbishop says:

And Jesus’ response to that is quite simple: “If you would be my followers, that just isn’t possible”.

Amen.

Religious discourse in an age of “I have no need of you.”

I came across this Facebook spoof the other day:

(And that’s only part of it: you can see the rest of it here.)

This spoof is funny—and depressing—because it is true. Particularly as the American election enters its final weeks, it seems my Facebook feed has become dominated by such threads. And it’s not only on Facebook. More and more, people in this country seem to believe that things would be best if the other party just disappeared. Everyone is saying—effectively—”I have no need of you.”

The trouble is that sometimes discourse in the church mirrors a little too closely discourse in society. In this regard, I am reminded of San Diego Bishop James Mathes’ article in the Daily Episcopalian a few days ago. In it, he reflects on what a Christian commitment to discourse—especially at such a polarizing time, politically—might mean:

It begins with a commitment to discourse, especially with those with whom we differ. It continues with great care with the words that we use and the judgments that we make about others. Our common conversation about things of importance should be imbued with prayer. It requires more questions of inquiry than assertions of our own position—positions we should hold gently.

In all of this, the blogosphere is presently problematic. Read, react, respond is the norm. I wonder what would happen if we read, meditated and pondered, asked only questions of inquiry for a few days, and only then positively expressed our place in the conversation. Blogging could quickly take on the character of discourse and transformation.

And here is my dream: that our larger society would take note of how Episcopalians discuss the hard questions—how we speak with care and listen in deep, searching ways. As they observe us, they would see who we are as the body of Christ and how we treat each one another. As they see us, they will want to know more about the one whom we follow. I yearn for that kind of church: quintessentially Anglican and truly inclusive.

Although Bishop Mathes’ article drew quite a lot of critical reaction, I think he’s on to something. The way Christians talk to one another—and to others—can be part of the church’s counter-cultural witness. Rather than taking a posture of hostility to those who espouse different views, I think Christians are called to take a posture of relatedness.

Two reasons immediately spring to mind:

  • The other person in the conversation is made in the image of God. Surely, this is worth something. Rather than looking to tear that person down, perhaps we might concentrate on looking for the image of God in them. This can be awfully hard to do.
  • It is basic New Testament theology that we need one another to be whole. “I have no need of you” is precisely the thing we cannot say to one another, as Paul teaches in I Cor. 12. It is relatively easy to say this to people who have traditionally been excluded or whom we agree with. It is quite another thing—though no less important—to say that to those we cannot seem to find any common ground with. But that exactly the challenge the Gospel lays before us.

These can be challenging tasks. For instance, a posture of hostility towards Adolf Hitler seems quite justified. There has to be a genuineness from all involved in the conversation for this to work.

Still, I don’t think I’m the only person who is tired with the state of political discourse in this country. If it is not depressingly predictable, it is utterly vapid. I share Bishop Mathes’ hope that people could look to the church—Episcopal or otherwise—and say, “Look at them. They disagree on some issues but that does not take way from their commitment to discourse with one another and a sharing of a common life.”

I hope for a church where issues matter and are openly debated but not at the expense of the relationships we share by virtue of our one baptism in the one body of Christ. In this context, it’s worth remembering that Jesus’ prayer in John 17 is a missional prayer: “that they all may be one…so that the world may believe.”

It may be a lot to hope for. But I think there’s deep evangelical potential in it.

“Progressive Evangelism” and proclaiming the Gospel afresh in every generation

I was once in the customs and immigration line at Heathrow airport with the Rev. Otis Gaddis and watched as he struck up a conversation about faith with two other people in line. It was a sight to behold and I was filled with admiration for how skillfully he was able to do so. So it is no surprise that Otis—and several other of my former classmates—are among those profiled in a recent article about “progressive evangelists” in the Episcopal News Service.

“It [progressive evangelism] assumes that Christ is already present,” Gaddis said during a recent telephone interview. “The goal is not to bring people to church but to reveal the presence of church between you and the person you’re talking to.”

This line from Otis reminded me of something Max Warren, the former general secretary of the Church Missionary Society (and no “progressive” about evangelism or much of anything else) once said. He noted that the first thing a missionary should do when arriving in a new place is remove his shoes because he is standing on holy ground. That is, wherever we go, God has been there before us.

It reminds me also of Stephen Bayne, the first executive officer of the Anglican Communion, who once told a group of missionaries: “missionaries do not go out into the world to introduce the world to God or He to it. He is already there; He has been there from the beginning; He is standing waist deep in history, calling us to join Him. For the mission is His and not ours.”

I love that image of God being “waist deep in history.” God is already out there. We are going to join in. The progressive evangelists profiled in this story remind us that as much as we’d like we can’t do so on our own terms.

The ENS article provoked this comment from a Tom Swift:

Neither Jesus (“Go and make disciples of all nations”) nor Paul (“I preach Christ and him crucified”) would recognize this as evangelism. Christian evangelism is sharing the good news that sin and death have been overcome by the death and resurrection of Jesus. “Changing peoples’ minds and belief systems” is exactly the point! Such good news must be spoken with great love and respect for the other person’s values and beliefs, but it must be spoken to be evangelism.

This critique, I think, is helpful. I am reminded of Desmond Tutu’s line about the need to “share grace gracefully.” Particularly for Episcopalians—who have long made central our membership in the catholic church—a conversation about faith is not enough. A line like this

Progressive evangelism is not, however, about converting or getting people to church, he said.

can be a little worrisome, if you think about it. On some level, we believe that the grace that is in the sacraments needs to be shared broadly. Evangelism, at some point, has to be about “getting people to church.” (Or, even better, “converting” them.)

One of my favourite churchy slogans is “Proclaim the Gospel afresh in every generation.” The generation of which people like Otis and Adrian and Matthew and I and so many others are a part of bears this burden like every other generation prior to ours.

What’s interesting is the way in which the conversation started by evangelists in this article focuses so much on method: how do we proclaim? In this case, the answer seems to be by showing up in places where folks don’t expect the church to be. It’s also defined negatively, as in, not like those other, more conservative denominations.

I think what is missing from the conversation in the church these days is a focus on the third word in this slogan: Gospel. What is the Gospel we have to proclaim? What is the good news that people need to hear in this world? In what particular form does the good news of Christ’s death and resurrection need to be proclaimed? What is the kerygma—to use the word Paul uses—that we want to share?

These are the questions that still need to be addressed.

Episcopal Journal review of Grace at the Garbage Dump

Episcopal Journal has a two-page spread in its September issue about my book, Grace at the Garbage Dump: Making Sense of Mission in the Twenty-First Century.

Since EJ is first and foremost a print publication, it can be hard to read its excellent articles online. But I’ve got permission to post the two pages dealing with Grace. You can read them by clicking on these links. (You’ll get .pdf files when you do.)

“God’s grace can be discovered in unexpected places,” Episcopal Journal, September 2012, p. 13

Episcopal Journal, September 2012, p. 14

Do you subscribe to Episcopal Journal? It’s a wonderful publication and an important example of the kind of thing we need in the church if we’re ever going to understand one another a bit better.

International travel and seminary education

Yale Divinity School asked me to write a short article on how my international travel experience affected my education.

It is a fact of the twenty-first century that the church is growing most rapidly outside its historic heartlands of Europe and North America. As future leaders of that church, it’s our job to learn about—and learn with—our sisters and brothers around the world. Only then, I am convinced, can we truly know “the whole gospel.”

You can read the whole thing here. How has international travel changed your views on the church, your faith, or the Gospel?

One article, two great books!

Yale Divinity School’s monthly newsletter has an article that features not only my book, but that of my friend and fellow writer, Stephen Register:

In the spring of 2011, Stephen Register ’11 M. Div. and Jesse Zink ’12 M.Div. had only an academic course in common. Now they share more than a line on their transcripts: both turned writing projects that they started in Lauren Winner’s Institute of Sacred Music workshop “Spiritual Autobiography” into published books.

“The class,” Register said, “was essential for bringing my voice to a place where I finally felt comfortable writing.” Before the seminar, Register said that as a writer he was “like a young filly, who just hadn’t found [her] legs.”

Zink echoed that description, calling the workshop “one of the most memorable courses I took at Yale.”…

The support they felt as students continued as authors when both returned to New Haven in April for a lunchtime reading and book signing that emptied the shelves of the Student Book Supply.

“It was surreal,” Register said, “Coming back and having folks turn up meant the world, but it wasn’t much of a surprise: the same friends and teachers that had been faithful to me during school were right there for me as a writer.”

Have you seen Stephen’s book yet? It’s available for (a surprisingly inexpensive) download on Amazon.

All the ordering information about Grace at the Garbage Dump is right here on this web site.

“Anglocostalism” in Nigeria and Obstacles to Anglican Unity

One of the most important developments in the world church in the last few decades has been the rise of neo-Pentecostalism, sometimes called the “Born Again” church. These denominations, particularly prevalent in Africa, are marked by their concern with spiritual healing, the preaching of the prosperity gospel, fixation on a world of good and evil forces, and much else.

What is perhaps less remarked upon is the way in which these neo-Pentecostal churches have influenced the historic mission denominations, including the various provinces of the Anglican Communion. This is one of the main things I learned on my travels in the church in Nigeria last summer. (The observations prompted the post, “What is Peter Akinola Afraid Of?”)

The Journal of Anglican Studies has just published my article, “‘Anglocostalism’ in Nigeria: Neo-Pentecostalism and Obstacles to Anglican Unity,” which takes a close look at how what it means to be Anglican is changing in Nigeria.

Here’s the article’s abstract:

In the last several decades, the religious landscape in Nigeria has been transformed by the rise of neo-Pentecostal or ‘new generation’ churches. These churches teach a gospel of prosperity, advance an oppositional view of the world, focus on a supernatural arena of spiritual forces, accord a unique weight to the Bible, and practice a charismatic worship style. One result of the presence of these churches has been to change the face of Anglicanism in Nigeria. Concerned about the possibility of diminished influence and prestige, the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) has responded to neo-Pentecostal churches by adopting more of its rivals’ beliefs and practices. This paper argues that this changing environment explains, in part, Nigerian opposition to efforts at global Anglican unity and argues that it is impossible to address the future of the Anglican Communion without first understanding the on-the-ground religious context in Nigeria.

It’s an academic article, which means it’s a bit longer than a regular blog post, but I hope you’ll have a read through. Already, in the few weeks since the article went online, I’ve been pleased with the e-mail conversations this article has generated with people in the Nigerian church. I’d be happy to expand those conversations to folks elsewhere.

As I have travelled in the world church, I’m repeatedly reminded of just how little we know about each other around the world. This article—and others like it, still in the pipeline—are efforts to help increase that sense of mutual understanding.

On display

My post about seeing my book on display in Toronto prompted a friend to send this picture. Grace at the Garbage Dump on display in the library of the University of New Brunswick, St. John. There it is, right there in the middle of things.Is Grace at the Garbage Dump in your library? You can check WorldCat to see what libraries have it (quite a few—including one in New Zealand!—already do). If not, why not request your library order a copy?