Tuesday 17 May 2011

Manic street preachers - the horrible sound of the Gospel

I could hear him as I left the church office door, as I meandered down to pick up my pasty and head to the allottment. To be honest, I knew in seconds who it would be, and it was! It's never been a very nice sound (I'd seen and hard him before, but never spoken). People used to say to me as I trained for Christian Ministry that "people need to come under the glorious sound of the Gospel" and I used to smile and think "what the heck does that mean, maybe its secret code", but this was not glorious, and it didn't seem like the Gospel. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against evangelists coming to town, and I'm not against street evangelism, and I guess - in the right context, planning and build up, I'm not even against street preaching, but I for one don't know anyone who has personally come to faith through a street preacher, there and then, in location, so to speak.
Now, you need to know that I have a standard practice with street preachers in the town where I Pastor a church - I always go up to them, challenge them as to who they are and where they are from, and what they are doing. Then I follow up always with the phrase, "but we didn't know you were coming!" And today, in town, thats what I did. The man was shouting so loud: it's the kind of style I don't want to be associated with, and he was wearing dark "bible black" glasses, and as is usual, there's a wife in tow, sweetly smiling doing the paperwork. So I said "hello" to the shouting preacher, and he was so loud, he ignored me. So then I tried the dear wife - using the usual routine. "Oh, you'll have to ask him - "Peter"! So I stop him mid flow (thank goodness - peace at last) and I follow it through - "we didn't know you were coming". Then follows a typical set of responses I could have written in a book: who are you, I've had run-ins with other church leaders in this town, I've been angrily told to leave various near by towns - blah, blah, blah! But I take the gentle approach - "if you had told us you were coming, we could have been ready so that we could stand ready to disciple any who come to faith in our local churches." So, he thinks I'm on his side ..So I push forward with my sincere theology of evangelism - conversion is never only about evangelism, it's about discipleship. Never do evangelism without ready follow up mechanisms in place! I even tell him how many churches there are in the town - he doesn't know!! (to me, the fact he doesn't know is an insult and show's he can't be bothered and doesn't see Christian faith beyond the end of his own nose and his narrow experience). He doesn't even know what tribes (flavours of church - denominations) there are in the different styles of church! He listens, I suggest I raise his name at the next churches together meeting (I know what they'll say), and I tell him that in this town we work together in lots of ways - Anglican, Baptist, Methodist, Roman Catholic, House Churches. And then he rants about some churches being "not biblical" - he mentions "the toronto blessing" and how he's against it (I have his full measure now and know a good few churches where he'd fit in well - the dying ones!) and he would never work with some. So, we swap contacts and we end politely and peacefully. Interestingly, as I collect my pasty, he and his wife hitch up their bags and "leg it" down the street away from everything - fascinating! What was all that about?
Why share this? Well, some reflections: he said "we just go from town to town preaching the gospel." He suggests this is biblical. Actually it's not. Paul would for example, always ask the leaders of a town for permission, or he would find out who the wealthy folk were and speak to them, before ever starting mission. Actually, these guys who are not based in churches, doing local evangelism where they live are generally "dangerous" people and put more people off Jesus and the church, and I wish they would stay away. Then also, for me, and I am convinced that it's biblical - evangelism and mission are always relational! People need to know who you are and trust you. They need to talk with you about the weather and be asked about life and stuff, before ever you start talking the Gospel. And then, the Gospel generally smells and tastes good - it generally attracts because God is good and the Gospel is true and can be talked about - but not shouted by an angry man in dark glasses condemning this and that - if, you can actually hear what he is saying! And lastly, and I have learnt this over the years, that people generally know how broken, hurt and failed they are in their daily struggles - I rarely find people are attracted to "fire and brimstone shouting" that tells them how worthless they are. I guess, at best, it's a performance to watch and say "I've done that!" (kind of like going to the theatre or a rock concert), but people won't engage with such a performance because it's kindof theatrical.
But they might respond to a conversation about a warm, loving, merciful, healing God who created them and loves them and who showed the full extent of that love in being broken for them on a cross, and rising from the dead. He makes people fully human every day, and it's nothing to shout about!
Manic street preachers - please leave my town! Leave the effective evangelism and mission to us!

Wednesday 11 May 2011

Are we a denomination or aren't we?

So, are we a denomination or aren't we? And, does it matter anyway? I ask this question, because I've seen this now in several recent Didcot publications where they have used literally the word "denomination" and I've heard it said at BU Council. And the truth is, no! We are not. We are - and its in our title dear friends, "A Union of Independent Churches." Denominations are seen in other groupings - see for example Anglican, United Reformed and Methodists, although the latter might describe themselves as a Connexion. Why blog on this? Well if we are not one, please don't call us one. And we are not one, and its not even about being a technicality. For me, a denomination - when all is said and done, is primarily reflected in central funding, most of all in the stipend. Most Minister's being paid centrally. But the BU is not this. There are of course secondary issues - those of theology and practice, and even ministry [aka leadership] [aka hierarchy][nb "Senior Ministers" - lets not go there, these are not Baptist Principles either!]. But if that's where we are headed and its inevitable that we are heading there, then that's a different matter, and lets have the debate and discussions. But until that day, we are not a denomination! So don't call us one.
Why get "hot under the dog collar" about this? Well, because I think some would want us to be one, and see our national offices as being symbolic of an HQ or maybe even a command base. And certainly, in recent years many aspects of centralisation have become apparent - BU Council used to be in charge, but now it is the Trustees within the Council that are. More and more standards of good practice are being demanded of Ministers and Churches in how they to act, administer and behave, and all these are set in place by our national offices, and are of course a good thing. So is this a kind of inevitable "creep" towards denominationalism? Is it all just a matter of time, and before long we'll be there, either by the back or the front door?!
I hope not! For a start, our strength as a missional people lies in our independance and our inter-dependance. The Spirit of God is always at work in different ways amongst our churches bringing life and growth, which is why at our heart, in the statement of principle, "Each church is free under the guidance of the Spirit to discern God's will for them." The importance of the individual church, its members and its mission must never be underestimated - we have these or we have no Union! Centralisation is, as history often shows, the short road to bureaucracy, decay, stagnation and decline. And we see these things, I would argue in denominational structures. I think - and I pose these as questions, the time may be right to ask if this is where we are headed as a Union. Do we want less centralisation, and more focus on the local church and its association? Can Didcot resource the churches as a smaller outfit and at less expense? Do some need reminding that they key heart to the Union is not HQ, but the local church and its local mission and ministry?
But above all else, until the day comes that we become a denomination, please don't call us one!

Saturday 7 May 2011

Consumer Christianity

I feel today that I could write about many things - thats the dilemma perhaps about writing, and potentially blogging. But floating in the mind this morning is that subject of Consumer Christianity. Apparently, as I read in Dr Pat Took's sermon yesterday (President of the Baptist Union this year), there is an O2 advert doing the rounds that says "the world revolves around you!" Which, Pat says is the worst possible concept - how borring, and what an awful prospect! To have the world revolve around you or me. No! And I reflect that when all is said and done, Jesus has called us not to a bed of roses and a comfortable ride, but to a life of sacrifice, servanthood and committment. Now I suggest that those last 3 words - if they summarise discipleship, are for the most Christians - offensive and challenging words. Why? Because the gospel of consumerism - of comfort, easy rides and nothing too challenging, of - as the Burger King Adverts say - "having it my way" have been bought into by many. He is not a God that I can control or shape to suit, but he is a God who requires nothing less than my all - my life, my breath. For me, thats a tough call. Will I make it? Don't know! But he requires every part of my life - my thoughts, my energy, my finances and I could go on. Don't sign up to anything less!