EMERGING CHURCH

This is not something anyone ‘joins’ or defects to from their inherited faith tradition. It is not an ideology and it is most definitely not an institution or a structured organisation.

The beginning point of the movement is the experience of human beings. It is not born of a philosophy, theology or metaphysics, which begin with first principles and then deducing down to us. It starts at the other end, with the longings of the human heart, and moves back toward God. It begins with an awareness bringing a change in thinking and feeling about structured and organised religion because the longing for love, truth and beauty so intrinsic to humanity has not been met by many, many people.

Christianity is good, yet some 2000 years later it has not achieved the goal of being a beacon of light to all Nations. Individuals, mostly now canonised by the institution, have made an indelible impact in the world at large – and not only positively for the common good of people. The development of the institution known as Roman Catholicism brought about only divisions, despite that the whole point of Christianity was union, communion…! We have the Roman Catholic, Orthodox Greek, Constantinople and Russian Churches as well as approximately 30,000 Christian denominations and sects – starting with the Protestant Reformation.


This movement, named ‘Emerging Church’, seems to have had its origins in this divided Christianity. It is a global recognition that the vision of living out Gospel values and principles should outweigh any difference in opinions about the means by which we are a chosen People of God. It is also recognition that the ‘label’ was a good place to begin but experience and maturity in our relationship with the Christ, the human face of our God, showed or rather drew Christians to look for ways to cementing relationships, all working for the same goal: a living relationship with a consistently loving, merciful and awesome God.


Within this movement there can be no hidden agenda; there is no need for any one to be superior to another; there is a basic commitment to Christian principles and values; there is recognition that no one is doing or saying anything perfectly. It may sound like relativism but it is not because it is rooted in our individual inherited faith experience. It is a testament to Christians growing up because they are seeking to heal and not divide… neither between themselves, other groups and the whole world of difference cultures.


We should be humble in the presence of others, humble in the light of our own weaknesses, faults and omissions. Historically, mainstream Christianity under Roman Emperor Constantine was to actually change sides. We were no longer a church of the poor and marginalised. Our faith was transformed into a “view from the top”. Thereafter it was hardly ever our religious leaders who got it right down through the ages. More often it was the rebels and radicals who called the Church back to the Good News for the poor (both spiritually and physically poor). St Francis will probably be called not only the patron of ‘emerging Church’ but the originator in this most profound way of being!


The one thing ‘Emerging Church’ has in its favour is that there will be no wasting of time and energy on labelling, judging and condemnation of others because it is a movement drawn by the Spirit. It will succeed only by being faithful to Her and if it becomes an institution it will have failed!

This is where it all began!

This post is based on the teachings and talks of Richard Rohr OFM

EMERGING CHURCH

FEAR NEEDS ADDRESSING!

Unless you address your fears, allowing God to address your fears, you’ll never recognise them yourself and undoubtedly be trapped in them. [A slightly adapted quote originating in a recorded talk ‘The Passion of God and the Passion Within’ by Richard Rohr, from an excerpt published in his book Radical Grace.]

If I look back with hindsight, it becomes clear that I had to deal with my fears before I could ‘do love’, even try to do the loving thing.

My primary fear for a large part of my life was that I would not be able to manage on my own. Although I have always given my children as the reason for staying so long in a dead-end relationship with their father, the real fear had its root in low self esteem. Of course, it was also true that I could never have left my children while they were at primary school level.

But I was really trapped by my fear. I had bought into the belief that I could not cope on my own. As a married woman it was easy to be sure of the soft place to fall if something turned out wrong. This I had actually experienced.

Eventually I was faced with the clear insight – a matter-of-fact voice saying in my head: “What are you hanging onto? You don’t have a marriage”. Only then did I find the courage to act. I took the first step towards changing, starting to believe in an autonomous, self-sufficient and responsible self.

But after the divorce and living on my own, the refrain would surface at some level, from time to time.

However, I did advance in my career quite successfully. Materially I was able to buy my apartment and later a company vehicle was included in my salary package. The troubling fear did not raise its head very often.

Then everything changed, somewhat ironically with the coming of our new political dispensation. The small company that employed me was under the umbrella of a large corporate company and a decision was taken to reintegrate with the parent company. I knew with little doubt that my situation would change. I would not necessarily be less secure as an employee but that my integrity as a person would be challenged.

One of the main reasons, there were probably several, why new Management were less appreciative of me is because I had a policy of stepping up and voicing the concerns of the then “voiceless” – those who had been previously disadvantaged. I specifically gained as much knowledge about the CCMA and it purpose. I also joined the appropriate Union.

With hindsight and looking at the big picture (which I am not going into at present), it became clear to me with the way management handled and treated me, that fear was the force behind it. This insight gave me a huge injection of power but at the same time caused me to feel sympathy for these men. Nevertheless, this insight did not make the ensuing ‘battle’ any easier.

I am not sure when the whole picture actually fell into place. I am sure that upon recognising Management’s fears, I was compelled to look hard at my own worst fears. I not only faced them but realised, with the grace of God, that I actually had nothing to fear.

This time given to addressing my fears started then with the realisation that the corporate world, as I knew it, was driven by fear. The fear of loss of control, the fear of loss of esteem (because mostly they defined who they were by the company title), all this led to a loss of security which consolidated their fear.

A second disciplinary hearing was brought against me – with charges mostly trumped up. Management were determined to rid themselves of the thorn in their side. But truth and honesty – together with the commitment not to trample on the dignity of others – won finally. Although I experienced victory, my new insight into the workings of the corporate psyche, told me that actually no one really won.

It would not be correct to say that I have lived a fearless life since then but my fears are more easily recognised and hopefully put to good use.

I pointed out at the beginning that fear has to be recognised, and then God allowed in so helping address and transform it, so that one can then fearlessly choose to do the loving thing. Clearly my conviction grew in my dealings with the unsavoury corporate world, that I must never do or say anything that affected the dignity of another person detrimentally. Likewise, I knew I could stand up victoriously defending my own integrity.

Loving all others is simply a commitment to respecting where people stand, not trampling on human dignity; allowing them space to think, feel, believe as they choose and putting space between myself and anyone who refuses or is unable to do the same for me.

My Spiritual Family!?

Pope Benedict XVI is our Holy Father, our spiritual Father but do we really believe that? Does it matter if we don’t? I know that even within the ranks of Catholicism there are a number who do and maybe a lot more who don’t believe it matters. In answer to both questions, there will be positive and negative opinions.

So the din of verbal posturing will continue. To what end?

Jesus insisted that His Father was Our Father, giving a definite family slant to faith in the one, living God. He, the Divine Son, promised and prayed earnestly that we should believe in Him: one in the Father and the Father in Him. Accordingly our faith in Jesus (our baptism into Christ) makes us one in Jesus, and collectively One Spiritual Family.

The first Christians understood this perfectly. The evidence is in Acts that they came together, selling whatever kept them apart. All the faithful had equal status. The leaders gave their lives to the service of the Word. Underpinning this covenanted family was the belief that the second coming of Jesus would come soon and this belief consolidated them in solidarity with one another. They bonded as family both physically and spiritually. Gradually the conviction of imminent parousia must have been lost because the way Christian practice developed, the bonding in solidarity also eroded. St Paul was busy spreading Good News to various cultures all over the Middle East. He was able to sustain the bonding with the original group in Jerusalem somewhat by encouraging communities to give them material support.

More or less, this has continued down the ages. Only now the earthly authority of Christ is in Rome (or so we are led to believe).

It is only now becoming evident to all who have access to the media that Christians are a very divided lot – a dysfunctional family!? Catholics are not of one mind and one finds little constructive faith in the Family of God; the family envisaged by Jesus. Every moral and social issue facing the Church results in a spectrum of voices.

Did erosion of the spiritual Family precede the erosion of family life in societies globally? Or was it the other way around? Either way, knowledge alone is not going to help us turn things around! (According to Einstein: imagination is more important than knowledge!)

There is a degree of entertainment in all the verbal posturing between so-called conservatives and progressives. This is sometimes amusing and oftentimes sad. The focus is always on issues with a subsequent loss of the overall picture of Christianity. We need to be a family trying to find common ground, a solidarity that overrides differences of opinion - opinions and beliefs affecting our choices – so long as the choice has an element of compassion: an overriding will to Love.

This reflection was sparked by a number of sources in The Southern Cross [14-20.04.2010] listed below**

Anthony Egan, SJ sheds some light on the purpose of the Church by saying that: ‘The age of the Church laying down the law for society is over.’ A responsible father does not simply demand obedience. He would find a way to persuade, to enable, to empower the son or daughter to choose that which is beneficial to all concerned. A spiritual father does not condemn, but presents all members with moral values and principles, consistent with his own behaviour, acknowledging that this may not be seen to be a solution but in the long run is beneficial both to the individual and the community at large. He uses charitable persuasion which is consistent with truth so that members make choices freely and autonomously. This is also consistent with the principle of religious freedom.

The whole purpose of the Papacy for me (and all levels of fatherhood arising from it) is to act with the integrity of the Holy Founder. It is this integrity which is seen to be lacking in the eyes of so many. The trusted voice of the Father has been jeopardised by the failure of the Church to work with the laws of the State in the critical area of abuse of minors.

Fr Egan believes – like many of us – that this integrity can be regained with hard work. Who is going to be the hero or heroine to step up to the task?

John Thavis confirms that the Pope’s solution to what is seen as a crisis of faith is to propose that Christianity is a religion of Love, not rules. The pope is endeavouring to lead people back to a love of Truth (God) by showing them a God of Love.

The world (including many Catholics) look only for the inconsistencies between what is taught (said) and how it is lived.

Take as an example the very public papal Easter Mass recently when, in an attempt to rally around the pope in the light of a barrage of criticism, Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the dean of the College of Cardinals, said in an unprecedented salutation to Pope Benedict: “Holy Father, the people of God are with you, and they do not allow themselves to be impressed by the current petty gossip, or by the ordeals that occasionally strike the community of believers.”

Horribly unloving!

We have no reason to doubt the journalistic integrity of John Thavis.

We have one God, one Church, one Holy Father but not one faith! The Holy Father needs to lead the dean of the College of Cardinals into the truth of Christianity being a religion of Love.

If a man entrusted with one of the highest positions does not see the wood for the trees, how is integrity to be regained? How are we to turn things around?

The real People of God are in desperate need of a spiritual Father willing to first put his own house in order.

In trying to promote Love and Truth, our Pope has written much about what is not Love. A clear example of what is not love is Cardinal Sodano’s attempt to minimize the survivors of abuse who have been soul raped. It shows neither love for the Pope, for himself or for anyone fighting for some sort of integrity, responsibility and accountability in the matter of abuse by clerics.

I hope the Editor of the Southern Cross is right about Pope Benedict being a Pope whose only aim is to be a shepherd, a teacher and pastor, thus emulating a God of Love. Any Holy Father must be seen to be leading people to God’s Love so as to learn that love is at the centre of our faith.

This becomes very hard to believe when everything is undone by confusing statements emanating from pseudo fathers in the Vatican.

There is no interest for me in speculation about how historians will define this present papacy. What is VITAL to me now is whether we will have a hero stepping up to do whatever is necessary to redefine Christ as our only Messiah – now and forever.

**http://www.scross.co.za/
• Pope Benedict XVI in modern society by Anthony Egan, SJ
• Editorial - Pope Benedict’s legacy
• Pope’s first five years by John Thavis
• Vatican Spin caught the pope unaware by John Thavis
• Tlhgale: Church’s image is ‘in ruins’ Front Page report

SPIRITUAL BEGINNINGS

AN IMPORTANT STATION ON THE JOURNEY

Bridging the Gap between Informal Settlements and the Church.

A pilot course organised by Diakonia’s Informal Settlement Monitoring Group

Attending this course was a transformational experience on my Spiritual Journey and I want to preserve the memory of it. It was a practical rather than theoretical or academic course, the purpose being to help parishes interested in ministering in informal settlements; to help Christians living in such settlements to build up the church in their own area as well as minister more effectively to their communities.

The course ran on Saturdays from 18/6 to 3/12/1994 with an exposure trip to the Piesang’s River Informal Settlement. I attended as a member of my Parishes’ Justice and Peace Committee.

An article was first published in the Southern Cross (21/8/1994) based on a brief report that I submitted. I reproduce below the article as published – but with slight insertions to clarify details. This report was based on the exposure visit to the Informal Settlement where we contributed to the cost of lunch being provided. The organisers had arranged for a bus to transport us to Piesang’s River some 50 kms from the centre of Durban.

THE SOUTHERN CROSS ARTICLE:
Informal Settlements course changes Christians’ outlook
DURBAN – The first session of a June 18 pilot course on informal settlements has changed the outlook of those who attended.

The course was the product of a group of interdenominational lay people and ministers of religion. This group joined forces some years ago to bridge the gap between the Church and the informal settlements and to help overcome misconceptions about squatters.

Participants from various churches, ministers and deacons, were taken to the Piesang River Settlement to experience life in an informal settlement.

There they were given a demonstration of brick and block making. This project is part of the resident minister’s upliftment programme. Bricks are mostly used to build the church and community centre, although some are also sold.

In small groups, participants visited a shack dweller, Eunice Ndaba, who answered questions in her tiny dwelling. Answers were interpreted from Zulu by a Methodist Minister from Umlazi, Simphiwe Mdolo.

According to one participant, Rosemary Gravenor, that hour was a “humbling experience.” She said all identified the many needs in the settlement, including a need for crèche, schools, clinics, water, fuel, refuse removal and toys.

“We also tried to verbalise what we as the Church could do to meet needs,” she added. Suggestions included skills training, self-help projects and making people more aware of needs.

Earlier during the day, Professor S Bekker had given participants a background to informal settlements in the Greater Durban Area.

He noted that people in these settlements were those who ad adapted to survive under the apartheid system.

Participants were told to focus on the manner in which people had been forced to live and not the people themselves, who “are no different to those more fortunate who live in formal settlements.”

Professor Bekker noted that the permanence of people in the various settlements also differed. The Mariannhill settlement, for instance, developed as a permanent settlement as it was able to resist the defunct Group Areas Act and also because it is close to Pinetown, an area with work opportunities. Inanda settlement, however, experienced 50% turnover of families each year, due to employment further afield, conflict within the community, violence and family ties.

He said it was difficult to build community spirit in an impermanent community, but semi-permanent settlements usually have highly organised voluntary government associations.

Within all informal settlements, voluntary associates were formed to decide on behalf of the community, he said.

The S A Catholic Magazine Trefoil also printed an article.

Piesang River settlement is beyond Ntuzuma. It is situated on the slope of a hill, the lowest point being the stream where the residents obtained water. There were no formal roads and considerable erosion contributed to the dirt tracks being even more hazardous.

The experience was not only momentous, it changed my perception about poverty and it opened my eyes to the hidden evils of the policy of apartheid.

Professor Bekker’s briefing** earlier that morning on the difference between ‘squatters’ and informal settlements, showed that the latter had been allocated land – usually an unwanted, poorly fertile tract, but well out of sight of any main road. The only facilities provided were promises and enough cement to lay a concrete slab on which settlers erected a dwelling at their own expense.

The location and history of any settlement were factors which influenced their permanence and stability. The more stable the community, the more effectively it was managed by the community. Voluntary formal committees managed the community and supervised the in-migration of new families.

On the bus ride to Piesang River settlement, we took a road which is marked to go to Ntzuma. I was dumbfounded at the number of houses – all situated close to one another with very little land in between. Miles and miles of houses – shacks or imijondolo as they are known locally – as far as the eye could see. How could anyone know how many people were housed in this Greater Durban Area?

On arrival we made our way to the community centre. This was the local minister’s work-in-progress and for which the block making machine had been acquired. It was only a shell, no doors or windows were fitted and the roof was a large tarpaulin!

The members of the Civic were all present to welcome us. They were mostly women, the elders of the community. We were assured that we were safe and would always be welcome – as long as the Civic were approached beforehand. They informed us that even during the worst times of unrest and violence in KwaZulu Natal, they had remained a peaceful and caring community. If any family or person did not conform to the principles by which the community lived, they were asked to go (and, if necessary, were forcibly removed). Because there was communication and consensus within the community these principles were guarded and protected for the common good.

We went into small groups so that it would be more manageable for a visit to any one of the resident’s homes. This had been agreed by the residents beforehand. The group I was part of wound its way to the house of Eunice Ndaba. She answered our questions quite freely telling us how long she had been there, that she was a Methodist and many other personal details. One of the most memorable answers was an explanation of how they helped one another – especially the immediate neighbours, in times of illness and unemployment. No one ever went hungry or without someone to take care of a child. The saddest thing we noted was that there was a shebeen (drinking place) and we were told that the young men of the community mostly had the greatest difficulty with trying to make the best of a very poor situation.
Afterwards we came together again in the community centre to share our many different experiences. This whole hands-on exercise broadened our horizons and left indelible impressions – the spirit of honesty, hope and discipline shone on the faces of all, including the much loved little ones.

It not only altered perceptions around poverty and cultural differences, but radically changed how I thought of Christianity. I had found Jesus Christ alive and well in a place that our Western culture would never call sacred: amongst the poor, the weak, the disadvantaged and marginalised!

And that was at the beginning of a course which was spread out over six sessions.

I have scanned into a computer file on Informal Settlements, the summarised reports given by three independent witnesses to Informal Settlements (both the organisers report obtained from the individual and my own): Anne Voce, Sizakele Mkhize and Alice Ngema. I have done the same with other details from these sessions by scanning the report I did for my [then] Parish Council at St. Joseph’s Morningside. This report had several highlights: one being an informal unplanned meeting with two political leaders on a visit to Malukazi near Isipingo. We were able to question both the Inkatha and ANC representatives. Later we visited one of the Independent African Church meetings which was, to say the least, a profound culture shock. It did leave me with the impression that African people are warm and welcoming, thrilled to have outsiders visit, dance and pray with them.

Yes, these are memories I never want to lose.
What follows is my background to this profound experience - written long ago - which may throw a light on my obvious search for Jesus Christ in my life.

WHAT’S MISSING?

For many years I kept returning to the question in my mind: ‘something is wrong, something is missing’. I found the answer only when I stopped looking for it from others.

As a cradle Catholic, I went to Church as a matter of rote until I came to terms with the fact that my marital relationship with the father of my children was far from ideal. Because I was deeply unhappy I turned to God and church became more meaningful as a source of strength and comfort. I endured because I did not believe then in divorce. My ultimate conclusion, however, after several years of seeking a solution was that I did not have a marriage. It was then relatively easy to see no sense in clinging to something which was non-existent.

After divorcing [1985], my question still persisted and I was encouraged by my Parish Priest to seek out others in a similar situation: divorced, single parent women. I also believe that being encouraged to go through the process of annulment – not for the yeah or the nay of it – turned towards soul-searching, looking inwards and examining self, the beginnings of a spiritual journey. I was hardly aware of this at the time.

The question still remained, despite new beginnings and new friends. I started avidly reading spiritual self-help books.

At the end of 1989 after returning from my first visit to Europe, I realised that I was mildly but chronically depressed. Another Priest recommended a psychologist and therapy was ongoing on a regular basis for many years. At the same time, I became even more active in my Parish community. I was involved with the initial core group in the movement within the church called Renew. There was great satisfaction in this just as I had begun to experience with the Single Parents Group which primarily affected my social life. Renew showed that when committed to faith sharing, an overall upliftment took place concurrently with the depth of bonding, a experience of solidarity with others in a outreach movement grounded in prayer. I gained on all fronts a tremendously.

Still, I joined a Bible Study Group which was also known to consist of practitioners of the Charismatic movement.

The original question had simply shifted from personal relationships to community. I was still seeking an answer.

I attended a Life in the Spirit Seminar. The insistent question remained and I still wondered what was wrong with my belief, my religion, with Catholicism, with most other Christians? What is missing?

By 1993, I was involved with the Justice and Peace group in the Parish, apart from the original commitment to a Renew prayer group. The J & P group was facilitated by a very close friend who was one of those rare people, difficult to resist any request calling for a commitment. I also represented J & P on the Parish Council.

It was during late 1993 or early 1994 that I heard – via our outside connections to J & P – that Diakonia was planning a Workshop on Ministry in Informal Settlements. I signed up together with another member of J & P. I was markedly disappointed when the course was postponed till after the elections!

When the course commenced in June 1994, I attended and have written elsewhere on my experience, especially the exposure to an Informal Settlement. Suffice to say here that I think I know what has been missing: I have been looking for Jesus in the wrong places! Jesus is simply where he always was when he walked the earth: with the poor, the homeless, the marginalised, the sick, the weak, the voiceless. It is so simple yet ironical but still so difficult for our materialistic first world 20th century society to grasp. I no longer have a stomach that can bear having to listen to privileged people generalising about ‘them’; nor for those who have no faith, either in themselves, their communities, and the present leaders of our country!

I have loved Jesus actively most of my life but it took half a century for me to realise that I have loved him only with my heart and that I need to love him as much with my mind; with a total commitment of my will. It is easy to love the Jesus of the Gospel with our hearts but it is hard to make a commitment to walk with him amongst the filthy dirty conditions we have condemned the poor to live in. I am sure that He wants us to walk with Him as community. He chose twelve as his “ideal” nucleus community, we must need far more that twelve and that leads me to my next reflection on CHURCH as community.

1995

۩

THE CHURCH : A BRIDGE BETWEEN GOD AND PEOPLE?

Why does the Church exist?

To bring the message of Christ to all people and to build the kingdom of God. This is its supreme and destined task. It is therefore not an end but a means. It was not the Church which “God so loved that he gave his only begotten Son” but the WORLD.
Someone said “The Church exists by mission as fire exists by burning”. What is our mission?

Christ chose the Cross so that the Cross could work for his supreme end – the building of God’s Kingdom in the world through us; through our hearts. OUR ONLY AIM is to reach out to ALL people.

The success or failure of the Church is not to be determined by the state of its buildings, or the size of its membership, but solely by what it is doing to reach the poor, the untouched, the marginalised… The maintenance of our church is obviously necessary but when this becomes an end in itself, it ceases to be a true Church.

Our Church on the weekend is full of people, faithful in attendance and service who are obviously far from the Spirit of Christ because all they have heard are words. They just go to Church, and do Church work. You know them, looking mostly stiff lipped and unhappy, and beetling off home as fast as they can go.

Where is the cross and repentance, where is the blazing light of the risen Christ, where is the message of conversion, commitment and new life. It has been said that Christianity has truly been called a religion of sense, that one cannot live in the presence of the risen Lord, and of his fiery Holy Spirit without a continuous graceful excitement burning in our souls. So where are lives being turned around? Why don’t we get excited, why are we not inspired; why don’t we find exactly what is needed to live as Christians each day? Someone also said religion was either a dull habit or an acute fever!

We are proud of our historically authentic ancestry; we are exposed to sound theology from ethically wise priests and are part of an organisationally well-run institution, but what is being said, what is being preached from the heart and centre of the Gospel? If it is, why are we not listening?

Why is our organised Catholic Church so reluctant to look for its answer in “no-go” places, at the place where the Holy Spirit is working with non ideal (imperfect) human beings and producing communities that live, really try and live Christianity?
I know, we know, the Holy Spirit is at work. Why do we lack the courage to listen, to seek… The Holy Spirit is strangely democratic and works in situations not quite approved of by some people. There are movements today, as in other times, where the Holy Spirit is at work. They are arms of the Church and work with Church just as far as the Church will let them.

We get all fired up when we have a parish mission – why do we lose the momentum. If we look at the history of conversion, turning our lives around; being awakened, has never come from “ecclesiastics getting together to ‘do something’ but from inspired nobodies whom the Church at first ignored, perhaps even condemned and then (when the following was powerful enough) took over and finally ‘domesticated’.

When faced with a challenge, we either try to meet it or we turn away from it (even then perhaps determine to fight that which presented the challenge)!
What is blocking our way forward?

Is it because we think the great organisation is everything, the small organism is of no importance? Is it also because if we did investigate and join with the Holy Spirit, we would have to change our lives radically and we draw back in craven fear?
It is not the strength of the Communists, the devil, the masses or of any real or imagined enemy that holds us back – it is our own weakness. Those who believe there is nothing more to learn, no need to move out of our own parish/community, they are their own worst enemies. We lead lives that are a sad mockery of apostolic, spirit-filled, life-transforming Christianity.

The Churches of Europe are mostly empty because all they offer is a shopworn, dull, lustreless religion. The clergy and laymen are devoted to the inadequate ways of organisational religion. These men and women are not only ‘conservative’ about faith, which is right, they are ‘conservative’ about their own growth and willingness to change and learn, which is wrong.

I HAVE ALSO EXPERIENCE SPIRITUAL INEPTITUDE AND INEFFECTIVENESS;
I HAVE ALSO FELT HUMBLED BY THE COMMUNITY SPIRIT AND COURAGE DISPLAYED BY THE MARGINALISED.

I will go so far as to say we sin because there are people who can at least give us a glimpse of a much better way, a glimpse of what real awakening might be at a personal and community-wide level – and we turn away!

We live in a fast world. Everywhere is great scientific achievement. There is fear in every sensitive heart as well as lack of trust in our leaders, our fellow beings. There is loss of regard for other persons (particularly for people considered inferior) and easy dismissal of the spiritual as irrelevant or even non-existent. There is vague, intense bitterness, gnawing loneliness, rebellion – besides the fact that “most people live lives of quiet desperation”. The world needs a new language, a language that it will heed again, which will have to come with a freshness, stimulus and shining sparkle.

We know something is wrong: what, then, shall we do?

We look for security in large bank accounts and material things, yet we know that we cannot serve two master. Christ asks that we submit our choices, our very lives to Him. He does not try to stop us doing anything we choose but that we submit the choice to Him for guidance as to what is right and what is wrong.

We admit our failures as Christians but at the same time thank God for what good comes from our actions in spite of our choices. We should get down and pray, for forgiveness and reconciliation. We go and pray where the Holy Spirit leads, with those who are the poorest of the poor but rich in Spirit. We learn from them, we come to know Jesus firsthand and experience transformation. We will know we are going in the right direction because we will go – again and again – to gain strength, that essential quality acquired only in fellowship with spirit-filled people.

I am only looking at the privileged, financially secure churches in the ‘suburbs’ that I am familiar with. We have plenty of money to buy, but we are afraid to pay the price for real community!

CLIMATE CHANGE

REFLECTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES

Scripture sheds light on the reality we are experiencing today. The reality of the harm we are doing to our universe.

Despite the rumours of a scam with regard to the source, the cause of climate change – primarily in the form of global warming, the facts and the visuals far outweigh any doubts one would like to muster. The doubts are, in reality, a form of blindsiding, wishful thinking, denial…

Where scripture comes in is the emphasis given to the fact that God finds creation all “good”! The Divine Son confirms that it was for him, and by virtue of our relationship to Jesus Christ, for all humanity that creation came into being.

We cannot exist in our existing human form outside of creation.

The prophets use ‘nature’ to emphasize two important facts: God’s benevolence and God-in-charge. Isaiah especially uses imagery from nature to explain God’s action in the world. We have interpreted scripture in terms of moral behaviour; behaviour primarily towards others and God: relationships! We make this mistake, both now and historically, of not using our responsibility for the earth and all that God found ‘good’ for the greater glory of God. Rather, erroneously interpreting the gift as: for the enrichment of self!

Our error is in thinking that everything belongs to us and the original intention of the Creator was relegated to second place. We got the cart before the horse. Ironic that religion probably came into being and developed because of humanity’s inability to predict nature.

Since the time of Moses and the Decalogue, we can look back and ask: How have we loved the Creator with all our heart and all our souls, which Jesus Christ emphasized?

We effectively slapped God in the face and misused the Name of God. The Name does not simply denote the ‘person’ of God but all that came into being with humanity as the crown! The being of God is in all that God created.

Copenhagen December 2009. At this most important gathering yet, in the history of humanity, around the state of our accountability to creation (i.e. to the Creator), what are the values driving the actions? Seems to me it boils down to only one value behind all the rhetoric: how much will it cost? What will it cost?

That is Mammon responding to what belongs to God.

Even if a miracle occurred and all the major nations involved could agree that they owe it to the equality of life for every living creature, (never mind any possible future generations), what could be done to reverse the crises? What solution could be found that benefited everyone clinging to life today?

We chose a path many moons ago – blindly - and only God has the solution. Who willingly in the New Testament healed the blind? What does that say to us TODAY?

If one thinks of the earth as the womb of humanity it is becoming a most dangerous place for creatures to be. It is the greed and selfishness of man (the male) that has brought this about. Women are also responsible for the omission in standing up and voicing responsibility as companions to men. Women, generally, have a greater formative power on the values that are imbued by their children.

Someone wrote: We do not think ourselves into a new way of living; we live our way into a new way of thinking. I would say to all who have crucial decisions to make regarding climate change: you do not talk yourselves into a new way of living; you act your way into a better way of thinking and being (leadership and leaders).

Where are the pro-lifers in all this? What are our religious leaders and teachers saying and doing? What can doctors, scientists and other professors do besides provide a band-aid, factual information or philosophies?

We need a prophet, yet we Christians should know that the last of the prophets is the Divine Son of God. We don’t want to hear His message of love; it would show, in reality, that we are powerless without God.

This reflection was born out of Isaiah, chapter 45.