You Can't Please All Of The People...

... all of the time.

I've been gone along time again. Truth be known, I've been fairly exhausted in focusing my thoughts on other writing projects including preparation for my preaching efforts. Ive been feeling intellectually, spiritually and emotionally... somewhat drained.

But the hour is late (and I don't just mean that I'm typing in the midnight hour). A lot has happened recently in politics and it requires comment... so I had better at least try to weigh in with a semi decent effort.

Before exploring my motivation for writing this piece, lets look at the fundamental cause of the recent political troubles - the scandal over MP's expenses.

What has happened is simply disgusting. There is no other word that sums it up so succinctly.

Disgusting.

That so many of our parliamentary representatives have been caught red handed, angers the public deeply... and rightly so. I think deep down many people knew or at least suspected on some level, that this was going on...but just got on with their own lives... but it's now, when financial hardship begins to pinch that this issue is particularly sensitive (though I personally believe it should always be so). I think what has offended the public most deeply, is the fact that those who have been caught (to whatever extent), have actually tried to defend their position.

"I acted within the rules at the time" they cry. So what? They knew full well that the rules were wrong but they were content to ignore that little fact as they used the letter of the law to completely wallpaper over the spirit of the law.

The worst offenders have pledged to step down at the next election and have written cheques to pay back what they have stolen (for lets name the act for what it is).

Frankly this is not enough.

I don't agree with David Cameron's stance of using the outrageous crimes of his parliamentary brethren to get a general election (though it looks like events are conspiring to that effect anyway, irrespective of his appeals). It is not the time to make political capital out of this steaming mess (he knows his party is far likely to be less severely damaged by electoral disaffection).

However, I do believe that immediacy is needed. If it happened in any other workplace, the culprits would be on a charge of gross misconduct and out on their ear... and this should be no different.

I believe in every case where there is provable deliberate fraud, there should be a By Election... no matter how many seats that affects. Furthermore, as a gesture of goodwill, I believe the politicians should follow the biblical example of Zaccheus. He was the tiny taxman who defrauded his community out of their hard earned coinage. However, upon meeting Jesus... Zaccheus had a change of heart and offered not only to pay back what he taken... but to multiply it fourfold.

I'm sure if you suggested it to the MP's caught in scandal, they would be spitting their tea out at this suggestion... but here is my point. Giving back what they took, merely shows a grudging acknowledgement that they were caught red handed. It is not an act of contrition. True repentance requires that we go over and above what is expected of us on paper... we actually need to demonstrate a change of heart by what we choose to say and how we choose to act.

What is required for the main parties to regain some serious trust... is for someone to stand up and make some really tough calls... REALLY tough ones. Although Cameron has made a few steps along this road, none of the main party leaders have truly been active on this... or taken any risks. They promise reform but that takes time... and as the Bible teaches, you shouldn't put new wine in an old wineskin (or in this case "new rules in corrupt parliaments").

However, I wish to move on to my main point - tomorrows elections. There is a great fear and concern that the disaffection felt by so many over the sleaze allegations and expenses scandal will lead to the public abandoning the main parties and leaving several local and European seats ripe for picking by the hands of dangerous fringe parties such as the BNP

In fact, such is the concern that... last week the two leading ministers in the Anglican Church stepped forward and made a direct appeal against the BNP.

When I heard the joint statement issued by the Archbishop of Canterbury - Rowan Williams and the Archbishop of York - John Sentamu that decried the BNP, I was deeply impressed.

Yet unbelievably, there was a barrage of letters in the press complaining that the Church of England should not be telling people how they should vote.

Under ordinary circumstances, I would normally agree... but these are NOT ordinary circumstances and the British National Party is NOT a normal political party.

We are living in extraordinary times... politics is in a state of complete upheaval. The row over MP's expenses has broken wide open.

Lets not forget that following the Holocaust, Pope Pius XII was strongly criticised for not speaking out against the persecution of Jews... in fact he did apparently make some critical statements... and gestures, but his contribution is largely regarded as too little too late and mostly given when it became politically safe/convenient.

Whether you believe his actions were sufficient or not, my point is that people were critical of him for not acting in the face of such an oppressive destructive political beast as Nazism.

Yet now, people are criticising churchmen for doing the opposite. Are they insane? Do they not see the parallels? It is absolutely right that the Church stands up against the BNP, particularly when it is a known fact that the party is making insidious attempts to win over Christians who are (rightly) annoyed at the prospect of political correctness seemingly stifling public expression of belief.

The BNP even claim Christ is on their side:

What would Jesus do?

Are they serious?

Let me punch a fundamental hole in their argument...

Jesus Christ lived as a Jew in a nation occupied by a foreign invader, one which despite allowing Jewish culture to continue... made sure it's own cultural ideas were firmly imprinted upon the land. How did Jesus treat these foreigners... did he endorse the idea of insurrection against Rome?

No he didn't.

Jesus Christ even went as far as healing a Roman official's son.

However, we are talking persecution are we not? So how did Jesus react to persecution... did he throw his lot in with the Zealot guerrilla terrorists?

No.

Jesus allowed the Romans to mock him, beat him to a pulp, flog him and crucify him... and he still had the loving audacity to call upon his Father to forgive them.

Ultimately, Jesus does not make a good poster boy for the BNP... and neither should any of us who are Christians.

You see if Jesus and his apostles (following the ascension) had not accepted outsiders... the Christian Church would be nowhere near as significant in size as it is today. Peter would not have met Cornelius, and salvation would not have been known among the gentiles. Similarly Paul... if he had not immersed himself in the many cultures of the Roman Empire provinces, would not have been able to use his observations of their customs, in proclaiming the Gospel to them.

And let us not forget that in following Christ, we admit we are aliens and foreigners on this Earth... and our "nationalism" is in the final analysis, reserved for God's Kingdom.

However, I don't need to go into a long and drawn out theological diatribe as to why Christianity is not compatible with the BNP's "policies".

All I need is Christ's summaries of how we should treat others around us:

"Love your neighbour as yourself"

"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

Matthew 5:43-48

If you have been tempted to vote for the BNP... or even if a small part of your heart sympathises with them; I urge you to take a good look again at the scripture above and pray about it. Weigh your heart against God's Word and see if in all good conscience, your position is defensible?

I make no secret of my vehement opposition to the very existence of the BNP and I feel burdened to speak out against them because of my conviction that evil succeeds when good men fail to act.

May God bless you all

N

Christmas Conundrums

I decided to write this blog in response to the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent comments on BBC Radio 5 as reported in the Times, with regard about the level of truth in the Christmas stories.

Before saying anything, I should point out that Rowan Williams actually does believe in the Virgin Birth himself, so his aim was not punch holes in the bottom of his own boat. His intentions were good - he was aiming to make the gospel message less hard to swallow for people on the outside.

Dr Williams is quite correct in his assertions about the Magi, we do know very little about them... and we have embellished who they were somewhat - but I do not doubt they made their accredited appearance; their gifts would have provided the resources necessary for Joseph, Mary and Jesus' time of refuge in Egypt. I also know that one of the reasons Matthew included them in his narrative, was that he was aiming to point out right from the very start that Jesus had come to be the Gentile Messiah as well as the Israelite one.

It's also true that we don't know exactly what was in the stable at the time of Christ's birth. I would hazard a guess that there were animals in there, because of the fact that Jesus was placed in their food trough upon birth.

It's also true that the weather in the Middle East is not the same as British weather...and that Jesus was not actually born at this time of year. The move to celebrate Christ's birth in December was a political one. However, you could argue that Jesus is like the British monarch, he has his actual birthday and an official one too. He is the King of kings, so it is totally appropriate as far as I am concerned.

As to stellar behaviour, the simple truth is we don't know what astronomical event was being observed, nor how the Magi with their background had decided to interpret what they had witnessed. The biblical narrative suggests that they reached Jesus later in his development, not whilst he was a baby. That doesn't mean that we have to dismiss the idea... we merely have to accept that there are other ways of understanding the star. Some are recorded here on Wikipedia.

However, the main controversy I wish to address is the issue of the Virgin Birth. Dr Williams believes in it... but according to a 2002 survey of 2000 Anglican clergy, many of them do not personally accept it, some do not even believe in the resurrection! I find that statistic quite disturbing, it is one thing to struggle with a theological concept as a believer... it is quite another to ask others to accept a belief you do not hold yourself. Some, like the chaplain who was denouncing the nativity as myth, are worse; they actively encourage people NOT to believe in the Virgin Birth. One wonders why they signed up in the first place. If you can't accept the basics of Christian belief... what business do you have shepherding a flock of Christ's sheep? It is being a blind guide to others. I sometimes think (whetther they are aware of it or not), that the reason behind some of these people's ministries is not divine calling... but self righteousness - "the Church is wrong, but I am right... I will show them". That is ego on the throne and not God.

Back to the Virgin Birth and I personally feel that it is pretty important.

If Jesus was born of a human union... there would be nothing to make him any different to us. He would be a sinful human because he would carry Adam's sin. He had to be perfect, he had to be supernaturally born in order to be free of the sin that he came to deliver us from. He also had to be human so as to be able to represent us. He had to be our righteousness and in his resurrection, our mediator.

The chaplain I spoke of yesterday and referred to above, spoke scientifically about our knowledge of conception and how it biologically works... but he missed the point. He was trying to rationalise the birth of Christ based on the observed scientific reproductive process with regard to a normal human child; not that of God translating himself into a human body. We have seen in cloning how genetic data can be completely removed from an egg and replaced with data from another being. There are so many different ways we could look at it scientifically and still not understand exactly what happened. You cannot reason everything out with God... sometimes you have to just accept it's above you... and run with it.

I disagree to an extent with Dr Williams. I do believe it's important to accept the virgin birth...I do agree that people who struggle with it shouldn't get hung up on it. Crucially what I am saying is that I don't believe you make Jesus Christ any more accessible by watering down who he is.

In 2005 Jamie Oliver had a problem with making school dinners. He wanted to replace turkey twizzlers and Frankenstein foods with real wholesome food... however he had to contend with school budgets. It came down to him saying something like "you could reduce the cost and get cheaper ingredients to a degree... but you could only do it so much. There comes a point where the end product isn't what you are advertising it as it anymore."

That's the problem the church faces if it constantly waters down the Gospel. It won't be proclaiming the Gospel any more... it'll be some other message; cleverly packaged but devoid of the power that only God could give it. I'm all for making the Gospel accessible - how many times have you seen me use popular culture or allegory here, in order to get the message across in a more understandable way? The one thing I won't do is change the essential message at the heart of the Gospel and that's because the message of the cross is God's wisdom and not man's. It is foolish to understand the Gospel on the world's terms, you have to accept it as God gives it to you. He took on human form and he died to deliver us from our sins.

Many of you here will go to church in the next 24 hours and hear the words from the following passage you hear every year... because it might be the only time of year you go, which is entirely your choice and privilege. However my challenge to you is to look at this passage and contemplate what it means to you personally, who is this child to you?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.

He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known."

John 1:1-18

May God bless you this Christmas. May you know him more deeply than you have ever known him.