Sermon for Pentecost, 31st May 2009
David Moore*
I guess many of you will have noticed that I am not much of a singer. I have plenty of volume but I am somewhat inconsistent when it comes to the tune! I am also equally hopeless at doing accents. I just do not appear to have the facility for picking up and replicating sounds. Consequently I am thoroughly English when it comes to languages. When Dorothy and I travel abroad I push her ahead of me in the shops and restaurants. She, being a singer, is much better with the shapes and sounds of words. She is the audio/language member of our partnership and I am the visual/spacial counter balance.
So when it comes to Pentecost and people hearing in their own languages my heart leaps with delight, but also with incomprehension! What did happen on the day of Pentecost? How could it be that all these people could comprehend what was going on? I discovered an answer which made sense to me - by looking rather than listening.
Many moons ago a Jesuit friend of mine rang me one Friday evening and said "Be ready at 9.30 in the morning and get dressed to look as much like a Catholic as possible!" That was all he said - but the underlying excitement in his voice intrigued me and I agreed to go on some mysterious trip without further question.
The journey from my home was not long - a mile and a bit. It was to the local Catholic Centre - Pope John House. I was being taken to a private function attended by priests and nuns and hosted by the Roman Catholic Bishop of East London. I did not think I was doing much of a job of being a Catholic look-alike as none of the 150 or so priest and nuns were sporting large beards!
The guest of honour and speaker was Archbishop Helder Camara from Recife in Northern Brazil. Helder Camara a legend in his own life time! He was a household name around the world in 70/80s. His voice was not strong and I could not hear all that he said; at times his Brazilian accent was impossible to decipher. When he was lost for the English word, he simply slipped into Latin – which was not much help to me! However, he made an outstanding speech covering a range of topics and mysteriously I heard it all - somehow he was living a message and I saw and heard it all! But this was much more than being an enthusiastic or effective communicator - what he was saying 'came through'.
At one point in his speech he spoke directly to the Sisters - all head to toe in black. He told them – 30 years ago - that he was sure that one day their great church would ordain women as priests…. "Not in my life time and not in your life time, but we are people of faith, we live and work for what we will not see." Then with a mischievous twinkle in his eye he continued: "My dear sisters you can begin this very day your preparation for that great day. You can begin now by refusing to allow the male priest to boss you around. You can start living the future." You do this and others will take your place and take the next steps - live the future. As you can imagine, the atmosphere was electric. It was at that point I twigged - this was a Pentecostal moment. The electric - the flames - were as much to do with the resistance to the message as it was to the power of the speaker!
Pentecost pushes us to explore new boundaries, new relationships, new ways of being people in community. Pentecost rearranges our furniture, taking no account of our desire for neatness and order, even church order. Pentecost exposes fault the lines in society and in us as individuals. Think for a moment what it meant to a predominantly Jewish community of Christians to witness that Parthians, Medes, Elamites; inhabitants of Mesopotamia, of Judea and Cappadocia, of Pontus and Asia , of Phrygia and Pamphlyia, of Egypt and the districts of Libia; visitors from Rome both Jews and proselytes; Cretes and Arabs. In effect, virtually the whole known world.
Making sense of the cross-culturalism implicit at the Day of Pentecost makes the boldest adventures of our ecumenism appear modest, to say the least. We can but guess at the stresses and conflicts which had to be worked through for such a diverse group of people to seriously make sense of their life in Christ.
We face no less a task in our society. It would be all too easy for us today to shift all woes of the present time upon bankers or members of Parliament or the BNP. We Christians are part and parcel of the host culture of this land and we have hardly begun the serious work that is needed to sustain safe, inclusive multi-ethnic, multi-faith communities. On Tuesday this week the Dosti Lunch club will meet here in the Guildhall- all members from the Indian Subcontinent - I wonder what they have been feeling earlier this week with the British National Party broadcasting it views on prime time television. The majority of the members Dosti are older people - do you think they know deep in their hearts that if racial trouble occurred in MK we would be actively supporting/defending their interests. Standing with them against their enemies? Christians didn’t do much of a job defending the Jews when the Nazis broke the Synagogue windows.
If the Dodsti members do not know we are for them, then Pentecost is passing us by - for they will not have heard in their own language the love and grace we carry as the Body Christ for all people - in particular to those who come from distant lands - for they also are part and parcel of Pentecost! Pentecost is multinationalism!
I am not calling for knee jerk reactions - but for serious consideration of what Pentecost means for this City Centre Church. Are we a safe and welcome refuge for those whose traditions and cultures are different from our own - and if we are how are we communicating it?
Let me return to my encounter with Archbishop Helder Camara. When he finished speaking, the meeting room was being made ready for a Mass. The Archbishop wandered around talking to people. My friend dragged me off to meet him and introduced me as the only Protestant present. This slight man turned to me and embraced me with a hug far greater than his stature. Then pushing me away he asked what kind of Protestant. When I replied Methodist, he yelped like a puppy with delight, hugged me again, kissing me on both cheeks repeatedly. A few moments later he returned with a prayer book and said "we Catholics are very sinful people and you Methodists are so holy - I want you to lead us in the Mass by taking the confession and announcing absolution. He thrust the book into my hand saying, "your friend will explain it to you" and with that he was gone.
With more than a little trepidation I did as I was asked! Then when it was time for communion I remained in my seat - but he searched me out with his eye and beckoning me with his finger and I was the first to receive communion - bread from an archbishop and wine from a bishop! I tell you that not to arouse discontent as to the rules and customs under which we operate here - but to ask how we explore the possibility of such hospitality and grace to those outside our walls and especially toward those who faith is different to our own or of none?
I could add to all this by exploring the Milton Keynes Leipzig link and the content of our second reading - but you take home the service sheet and make time to read and think about it. This Church as progressive as we wish it to be, has hardly cut its milk teeth, there will be much tougher meat to chew in the years ahead. Only you can welcome the Christ of Fire into your inner self.
The Christ figure you passed on the way in to the worship was made for Pentecost 2000 and raises the question how we honour and respect other faith traditions whilst honouring and celebrating the dying/rising Christ. That will take a lot of listening and a lot of looking by us all.
The startling element of Pentecost is that it is a thumping welcome for all. Turning that welcome into practical political reality was as real a task for the infant church as it is for us. What an honour - we stand in the tradition of the apostles. But with diligence we have to learn our own lessons as did they!
*David Moore is a woodcarver and a Methodist minister and the preacher at the morning services at Christ the Cortnerstone on Pentecost Sunday. Prior to retirement he was the City Centre Chaplain in Milton Keynes
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Pentecost 2009: Leipzig reading
An ecumenical link has existed betweent Christians in Leipzig and Milton Keynes since 1987. An ecumenical group from Leipzig visited MK just last week. The visitors prepared themselves for their visit by studing a discussion paper prepared by Fulbert Steffensky, which in turn was discussed with thier Milton Keynes hosts.
This except, a third of the original lecture, will be read at Christ the Cornerstone on Pentecost Day.
The Church of Tomorrow: Fulbert Steffensky
1. Tomorrow’s church will be less connected to the state. We don’t know what will happen to holidays and Sundays. We don’t know if the name of God will be mentioned in the European constitution...
2. Tomorrow’s church will be smaller and poorer. No longer will it have at its disposal the vast resources for constructing its buildings, for academies and social facilities. This is a chance for the church to refocus. It can and will have to relearn who it is and what it needs to do.
3. Tomorrow’s church will be ecumenical. It will no longer allow the nonsense of confessional double structures. There won’t be a Catholic parish hall next to a Protestant one anymore, and a Catholic Nursing Home next to a Lutheran. The new ecumenism will liberate the denominations from the wrong and childish issues they are still caught up in today.
4. Tomorrow’s church will be less directed by the clergy. It will need the charismata of lay persons and voluntary workers and will be given much from them.
5. Tomorrow’s church will be more dominated by women. Because of that its theology will probably be more risky and diverse. Theological correctness and the trying to avoid making mistakes will play a lesser role.
6. Tomorrow’s church will be less determined by Eurocentrism. It will be influenced by other forms of piety and church services. On the one hand this is dangerous; on the other hand it’s an opportunity.
7. The members of tomorrow’s church will come from a society so far away from traditions, that they in turn will be able to devote themselves to the traditions of Christianity in freedom and without resentments. Breaking traditions leads to being open to traditions.
This except, a third of the original lecture, will be read at Christ the Cornerstone on Pentecost Day.
The Church of Tomorrow: Fulbert Steffensky
1. Tomorrow’s church will be less connected to the state. We don’t know what will happen to holidays and Sundays. We don’t know if the name of God will be mentioned in the European constitution...
2. Tomorrow’s church will be smaller and poorer. No longer will it have at its disposal the vast resources for constructing its buildings, for academies and social facilities. This is a chance for the church to refocus. It can and will have to relearn who it is and what it needs to do.
3. Tomorrow’s church will be ecumenical. It will no longer allow the nonsense of confessional double structures. There won’t be a Catholic parish hall next to a Protestant one anymore, and a Catholic Nursing Home next to a Lutheran. The new ecumenism will liberate the denominations from the wrong and childish issues they are still caught up in today.
4. Tomorrow’s church will be less directed by the clergy. It will need the charismata of lay persons and voluntary workers and will be given much from them.
5. Tomorrow’s church will be more dominated by women. Because of that its theology will probably be more risky and diverse. Theological correctness and the trying to avoid making mistakes will play a lesser role.
6. Tomorrow’s church will be less determined by Eurocentrism. It will be influenced by other forms of piety and church services. On the one hand this is dangerous; on the other hand it’s an opportunity.
7. The members of tomorrow’s church will come from a society so far away from traditions, that they in turn will be able to devote themselves to the traditions of Christianity in freedom and without resentments. Breaking traditions leads to being open to traditions.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
David Tatem, Low Sunday, 2009: Thomas
David Tatem's Sermon, 19th April 2009
If you were here on Easter Sunday, then you may remember that in my address I suggested that one of the things that the account of Jesus’ resurrection tells us is that reality is different to what we have always thought it was, indeed feared that it was, because of the apparent defeat of Good Friday. Instead, we are invited to celebrate the fact that against all the logic that says that ‘might is right’ and that you only have to have the strength and the means in order to be able to define reality the way you want it to be, the way that God has planned from the beginning will be the way that lasts, ultimately.
‘Low Sunday’ as this is traditionally known invites us to remember the story of Thomas whom we also traditionally call ‘Doubting Thomas’; the one of the disciples who has gone through Good Friday but has not gone through the Easter Day experience and is suddenly confronted with his friends who have undergone some amazing and baffling transformation in their state of mind and although he may not have heard of the term ‘mass hallucination’, we might wonder if he’s not well on the way to inventing it!
But lest we think that we’re just being told the story of a disciple who is weak in his faith – as if the others weren’t, let’s remember that John’s gospel is written to be read by people who have also not directly experienced the risen Christ in the way that Peter and the others had and whatever we read is intended to help those people and that we are those people too, as well as the readers of nearly 2,000 years ago. So it seems very clear that Thomas is one who we are intended to identify with and actually not simply because our faith may be weak but because it may be strong.
We can, of course, just take the story as of one who can’t believe it and who is convinced by the evidence and we can say well, if that happened for him, then it makes it possible for me to follow his example. Or we can go a little deeper and wonder if there isn’t perhaps more to it.
It’s helpful to start with Thomas’s declaration at the end of the account. ‘My Lord and my God’. It’s a very developed statement, a long way from a statement of ‘ok I’m convinced now tell me what it all means’, or even ‘thank God, I thought you were dead!’. This is of the order of ‘I almost had it all worked out, I could see the sense of what you were doing but then I wasn’t quite sure, but now it all falls into place, I know exactly who you are and what’s going on and to that I give myself utterly’.
The story of Thomas can speak not only to those who doubt but actually to those who inherently have a strong faith but need a coherent story of reality in which to have faith and that is a very contemporary situation.
Despite what seems to be the strength of the position of the modern atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins, there is a strong counter-current of people who are actively and positively exploring and discovering the coherence of religious faith, that is to say, it’s ability to not only make sense of the world around us but to provide a meaningful way of living in it and engaging with that sense.
The writer AN Wilson 20 years ago declared his ‘conversion’ to atheism and has in the past written about the sense of freedom and joy that he experienced at the time. More recently he has announced his re-conversion back to Christian faith and it is interesting to read the article published in the New Statesman at the beginning of April in which he describes the journey. It seems to have two parts to it; one is that ultimately he has come to the conclusion that the place to which he had gone was empty and meaningless and that he had come to see that the heart of the Christian story not only makes sense but makes sense of and gives a meaning to life. The other part is to do with his observation of the difference that has made to the lives of people he admires, not academics who have come up with convincing arguments but people who have invested their lives in their faith and the difference that has made. He mentions Ghandi, who although not a Christian in a formal sense lived a life utterly rooted in his faith in God and was influenced strongly by the life of Jesus and he speaks of the example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and other Christians who confronted the degenerate philosophy of Nazism to a point where Bonhoeffer could face his own execution with a serenity inexplicable in any other way than because of the sense that his faith made. I and I guess many others would want to expand on that and say that it was a faith which encompassed body, mind, soul and the world.
It is, after all, the difference that the resurrection makes that is what the resurrection is about, the difference it makes to the quality of life of those whose faith is rooted in it and formed by it. But lest we leave it on the personal level it is also the difference it makes to the way we engage with the world, as people like Bonhoeffer and countless others have done down through the centuries. If AN Wilson has made any mistake in what he has written it may be to focus on people as well known as Bonhoeffer and not to refer to the lives of people far less well known, of which there are an uncountable number. We could share our stories too, not perhaps as dramatic, but none the less real.
Perhaps that is another thing that Easter invites us to do; to share our own stories of the ways in which the resurrection of Jesus has made a difference to our lives and then others may be able to see how that difference in us has made a difference to others around us, or the world at large in one way or another. Even if, one day, we don’t make it onto the celeb pages of the obituaries (and I confess that often I don’t recognise half the names that are there anyway), we may make it into the ‘other lives’ section that at least one broadsheet has introduced – stories submitted by friends who have marked the difference that their friends lives have made, often in small but significant ways.
Thomas himself is not one of those apostles we have a huge amount of information about in his later life, unlike Peter or Paul. Tradition (and maybe some history) says that he went to India and preached the gospel there and founded a church. There is certainly a church tradition there which long predates the western missionaries. Originally the Mankara it is today known as the Mar Thoma church and its pattern of government and rituals are ancient indeed, so perhaps we can see there today the result of the difference that Thomas made, nearly 2,000 years ago.
Well, this place is well built and in 2,000 years time it may just be an ancient monument. But let us pray and commit ourselves to the thought that the difference we make may be more than just a memory but something still alive, still growing and still making a difference, because of Jesus Christ, our Lord and our God.
Amen
If you were here on Easter Sunday, then you may remember that in my address I suggested that one of the things that the account of Jesus’ resurrection tells us is that reality is different to what we have always thought it was, indeed feared that it was, because of the apparent defeat of Good Friday. Instead, we are invited to celebrate the fact that against all the logic that says that ‘might is right’ and that you only have to have the strength and the means in order to be able to define reality the way you want it to be, the way that God has planned from the beginning will be the way that lasts, ultimately.
‘Low Sunday’ as this is traditionally known invites us to remember the story of Thomas whom we also traditionally call ‘Doubting Thomas’; the one of the disciples who has gone through Good Friday but has not gone through the Easter Day experience and is suddenly confronted with his friends who have undergone some amazing and baffling transformation in their state of mind and although he may not have heard of the term ‘mass hallucination’, we might wonder if he’s not well on the way to inventing it!
But lest we think that we’re just being told the story of a disciple who is weak in his faith – as if the others weren’t, let’s remember that John’s gospel is written to be read by people who have also not directly experienced the risen Christ in the way that Peter and the others had and whatever we read is intended to help those people and that we are those people too, as well as the readers of nearly 2,000 years ago. So it seems very clear that Thomas is one who we are intended to identify with and actually not simply because our faith may be weak but because it may be strong.
We can, of course, just take the story as of one who can’t believe it and who is convinced by the evidence and we can say well, if that happened for him, then it makes it possible for me to follow his example. Or we can go a little deeper and wonder if there isn’t perhaps more to it.
It’s helpful to start with Thomas’s declaration at the end of the account. ‘My Lord and my God’. It’s a very developed statement, a long way from a statement of ‘ok I’m convinced now tell me what it all means’, or even ‘thank God, I thought you were dead!’. This is of the order of ‘I almost had it all worked out, I could see the sense of what you were doing but then I wasn’t quite sure, but now it all falls into place, I know exactly who you are and what’s going on and to that I give myself utterly’.
The story of Thomas can speak not only to those who doubt but actually to those who inherently have a strong faith but need a coherent story of reality in which to have faith and that is a very contemporary situation.
Despite what seems to be the strength of the position of the modern atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchins, there is a strong counter-current of people who are actively and positively exploring and discovering the coherence of religious faith, that is to say, it’s ability to not only make sense of the world around us but to provide a meaningful way of living in it and engaging with that sense.
The writer AN Wilson 20 years ago declared his ‘conversion’ to atheism and has in the past written about the sense of freedom and joy that he experienced at the time. More recently he has announced his re-conversion back to Christian faith and it is interesting to read the article published in the New Statesman at the beginning of April in which he describes the journey. It seems to have two parts to it; one is that ultimately he has come to the conclusion that the place to which he had gone was empty and meaningless and that he had come to see that the heart of the Christian story not only makes sense but makes sense of and gives a meaning to life. The other part is to do with his observation of the difference that has made to the lives of people he admires, not academics who have come up with convincing arguments but people who have invested their lives in their faith and the difference that has made. He mentions Ghandi, who although not a Christian in a formal sense lived a life utterly rooted in his faith in God and was influenced strongly by the life of Jesus and he speaks of the example of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and other Christians who confronted the degenerate philosophy of Nazism to a point where Bonhoeffer could face his own execution with a serenity inexplicable in any other way than because of the sense that his faith made. I and I guess many others would want to expand on that and say that it was a faith which encompassed body, mind, soul and the world.
It is, after all, the difference that the resurrection makes that is what the resurrection is about, the difference it makes to the quality of life of those whose faith is rooted in it and formed by it. But lest we leave it on the personal level it is also the difference it makes to the way we engage with the world, as people like Bonhoeffer and countless others have done down through the centuries. If AN Wilson has made any mistake in what he has written it may be to focus on people as well known as Bonhoeffer and not to refer to the lives of people far less well known, of which there are an uncountable number. We could share our stories too, not perhaps as dramatic, but none the less real.
Perhaps that is another thing that Easter invites us to do; to share our own stories of the ways in which the resurrection of Jesus has made a difference to our lives and then others may be able to see how that difference in us has made a difference to others around us, or the world at large in one way or another. Even if, one day, we don’t make it onto the celeb pages of the obituaries (and I confess that often I don’t recognise half the names that are there anyway), we may make it into the ‘other lives’ section that at least one broadsheet has introduced – stories submitted by friends who have marked the difference that their friends lives have made, often in small but significant ways.
Thomas himself is not one of those apostles we have a huge amount of information about in his later life, unlike Peter or Paul. Tradition (and maybe some history) says that he went to India and preached the gospel there and founded a church. There is certainly a church tradition there which long predates the western missionaries. Originally the Mankara it is today known as the Mar Thoma church and its pattern of government and rituals are ancient indeed, so perhaps we can see there today the result of the difference that Thomas made, nearly 2,000 years ago.
Well, this place is well built and in 2,000 years time it may just be an ancient monument. But let us pray and commit ourselves to the thought that the difference we make may be more than just a memory but something still alive, still growing and still making a difference, because of Jesus Christ, our Lord and our God.
Amen
Friday, April 24, 2009
John 1. 1-14: A conversation
David Moore
In 2001 I was listening to Radio 4 - Thursday morning and Melvin Bragg had his usual bunch of lively experts. This particular conversation was picking it way through the history of humanism in European thought and somehow stumbled across the work of Erasmus, the 17 century Dutch scholar, who began life as a priest before renouncing his belief to become a leading Humanist.
At one point the conversation hovered around Erasmus’ translation of John’s Gospel and in particular his translation of the Greek word logos. People with knowledge of the New Testament will recall the Prologue to John - In the beginning was the word .
However, Erasmus did not translate logos as word but as conversation. The scholars with Melvin Bragg agreed that this was a perfectly acceptable translation. I could hardly believe what I was hearing. Not only was this complete news to me, but I had recently retired and had formed a small Arts and Theology project with the name Colloquy .... conversation.
I rang my close friend Clive Scott, who had maintained his New Testament Greek over forty years, and asked him to make a translation of the John 1. 1-14 using the Erasmus translation for logus as the guiding light.
John 1. 1-14
COLLOQUY LOGOS CONVERSATION
Logos Commentary A CONVERSATION
These notes were attached to the first copy of the 'Logos as Conversation' text.
John 1. 1-14 The Introduction
I can hear some people saying that this is a paraphrase and not a translation. But I would dispute that. A paraphrase in this context is a 'filling out' of the traditional interpretation (translation) to try and cope with the transition from the Greek of the traditional interpretation into English. But this is not what I have attempted to do here. I have taken the premise that logos is to be understood as 'conversation' and then listened to the Greek in the light of that. It puts a different slant on everything. If the original readers heard 'conversation', what would they then go on to hear? Now put that into English. That is translation.
The first translators into English heard the Church Fathers (and their Greek Philosophy), and put that into English, most translations, if not all, build on that. We value the translation “Logos as Word”, because that dealt with the Jewish/Greek listening. The two translations need to be heard in stereo! I still think that these verses begin and end the introduction, and that everything which follows is the story which unpacks this introduction.
There are lots of things which I have heard in a new way. Using the idea of 'conversation' gives much more of the sense of things 'going on' to those first verses ... activity, harmony not unison, ie life. THIS was the life, this God mobility, this interaction which IS God. Quite a movement away from the Ian Paisley figure who speaks the WORD and it all happens. And so, if it is this mobility, the collaboration, this conversation, which is the life THEN IT IS THAT NATURE OF LIFE WHICH IS REVEALED AND IN WHICH WE CAN SHARE. This, being the introduction, has implication for the whole Gospel story. One would like to go on and translate the whole Gospel with this in mind.
There are a lot of things I have enjoyed discovering in this exercise. There is a wholeness about this passage which is often lost in our translations. The verses usually come out as a series of disconnected statements, but it is a very subtle whole, all linked together by words which carry the reader from one stage to the next. I have tried to capture that.
I liked using 'observe' because it captures the sense of 'see and do', 'perceive and follow', 'have faith and be a disciple', even though it sits rather uncomfortably at the end of the sentence in paragraph 2.
At the end, the use of the cliché 'a glorious opportunity not to be missed' cried out to be dismissed until one asks how else do you express 'grace upon grace' not to be heard as a Reformation theological statement, but as a response of wonder from those who got the message, saw the point, shared the life, grasped it, had faith ie perceived and joined in?
'The nature of life' is also a cliché phrase and you might have your own suggestion. But some other phrase must express the point that it is just that nature, the sort of life on offer, that concerns John. That is the subject of the introduction, and indeed the subject of the whole Gospel. The remarkable thing, the 'grace upon grace' is the astonishing call for us to be co-creators. This is where Introduction ends.
Verse 15. The Gospel now begins!
Thinking about the ways of hearing the word ‘witness’ in verse 15, confirms my hunch about logos as conversation.
If the subject is ‘conversation’ then one hears ‘witness’ not just as a pointer “Gosh, look at that”, but as an inviter, “here it is, share it.” One joins a conversation but not a proclamation. At the he heart of the Gospel there is always an invitation to join in, that is the Good News.
Clive Scott Colloquy ©
In 2001 I was listening to Radio 4 - Thursday morning and Melvin Bragg had his usual bunch of lively experts. This particular conversation was picking it way through the history of humanism in European thought and somehow stumbled across the work of Erasmus, the 17 century Dutch scholar, who began life as a priest before renouncing his belief to become a leading Humanist.
At one point the conversation hovered around Erasmus’ translation of John’s Gospel and in particular his translation of the Greek word logos. People with knowledge of the New Testament will recall the Prologue to John - In the beginning was the word .
However, Erasmus did not translate logos as word but as conversation. The scholars with Melvin Bragg agreed that this was a perfectly acceptable translation. I could hardly believe what I was hearing. Not only was this complete news to me, but I had recently retired and had formed a small Arts and Theology project with the name Colloquy .... conversation.
I rang my close friend Clive Scott, who had maintained his New Testament Greek over forty years, and asked him to make a translation of the John 1. 1-14 using the Erasmus translation for logus as the guiding light.
John 1. 1-14
It all arose out of a conversation,
conversation within God, in fact the
conversation was God. So, God started the
discussion, and everything came out of this,
and nothing happened without consultation.
This was the life, life that was the light of men,
shining in the darkness, a darkness which
neither understood nor quenched its creativity.
John, a man sent by God, came to remind
people about the nature of the light so that
they would observe. He was not the subject
under discussion, but the bearer of an
invitation to join in.
The subject of the conversation, the original
light, came into the world, the world that had
arisen out of his willingness to converse. He
fleshed out the words but the world did not
understand. He came to those who knew the
language, but they did not respond. Those
who did became a new creation (his children),
they read the signs and responded.
These children were born out of sharing in
the creative activity of God. They heard the
conversation still going on, here, now, and
took part, discovering a new way of being people.
To be invited to share in a conversation
about the nature of life, was for them, a glorious
opportunity not to be missed.
Clive Scott ©
COLLOQUY LOGOS CONVERSATION
Logos Commentary A CONVERSATION
These notes were attached to the first copy of the 'Logos as Conversation' text.
John 1. 1-14 The Introduction
I can hear some people saying that this is a paraphrase and not a translation. But I would dispute that. A paraphrase in this context is a 'filling out' of the traditional interpretation (translation) to try and cope with the transition from the Greek of the traditional interpretation into English. But this is not what I have attempted to do here. I have taken the premise that logos is to be understood as 'conversation' and then listened to the Greek in the light of that. It puts a different slant on everything. If the original readers heard 'conversation', what would they then go on to hear? Now put that into English. That is translation.
The first translators into English heard the Church Fathers (and their Greek Philosophy), and put that into English, most translations, if not all, build on that. We value the translation “Logos as Word”, because that dealt with the Jewish/Greek listening. The two translations need to be heard in stereo! I still think that these verses begin and end the introduction, and that everything which follows is the story which unpacks this introduction.
There are lots of things which I have heard in a new way. Using the idea of 'conversation' gives much more of the sense of things 'going on' to those first verses ... activity, harmony not unison, ie life. THIS was the life, this God mobility, this interaction which IS God. Quite a movement away from the Ian Paisley figure who speaks the WORD and it all happens. And so, if it is this mobility, the collaboration, this conversation, which is the life THEN IT IS THAT NATURE OF LIFE WHICH IS REVEALED AND IN WHICH WE CAN SHARE. This, being the introduction, has implication for the whole Gospel story. One would like to go on and translate the whole Gospel with this in mind.
There are a lot of things I have enjoyed discovering in this exercise. There is a wholeness about this passage which is often lost in our translations. The verses usually come out as a series of disconnected statements, but it is a very subtle whole, all linked together by words which carry the reader from one stage to the next. I have tried to capture that.
I liked using 'observe' because it captures the sense of 'see and do', 'perceive and follow', 'have faith and be a disciple', even though it sits rather uncomfortably at the end of the sentence in paragraph 2.
At the end, the use of the cliché 'a glorious opportunity not to be missed' cried out to be dismissed until one asks how else do you express 'grace upon grace' not to be heard as a Reformation theological statement, but as a response of wonder from those who got the message, saw the point, shared the life, grasped it, had faith ie perceived and joined in?
'The nature of life' is also a cliché phrase and you might have your own suggestion. But some other phrase must express the point that it is just that nature, the sort of life on offer, that concerns John. That is the subject of the introduction, and indeed the subject of the whole Gospel. The remarkable thing, the 'grace upon grace' is the astonishing call for us to be co-creators. This is where Introduction ends.
Verse 15. The Gospel now begins!
Thinking about the ways of hearing the word ‘witness’ in verse 15, confirms my hunch about logos as conversation.
If the subject is ‘conversation’ then one hears ‘witness’ not just as a pointer “Gosh, look at that”, but as an inviter, “here it is, share it.” One joins a conversation but not a proclamation. At the he heart of the Gospel there is always an invitation to join in, that is the Good News.
Clive Scott Colloquy ©
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Easter Intercessions 2009
David Moore
Introduction
The prayers of intercession this morning take their tone from the sculpture you passed on your way into worship this morning.
The sculpture comments upon attitudes toward Mary Magdalene and her place in the memory of the Church and reflects upon the uncomfortable aspects of resurrection.
Mary Magdalene become synonymous with, on the one hand, gross sentimentality, and on the other, the dubious nature of womans sexual morality. And so, by this crude and unjustified categorisation, the very first witness to the resurrection was perpetually sidelined!
However you might wish to reflect the fact that the meaning of the name Magdala in the Aramaic, is Tower eg strength, refuge.
End of each prayer:
We ask you, our Risen One, to burst open the graves within us this day, so that as women and men together, we may honour you by truly honouring each other. Help each of us grow, free us from all that holds us back, egg us on with renewed supplies of courage, humility and grace.
On this great day of liberation, it is in sadness and shame we whisper our prayers for Palestine, those with HIV-Aids, the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Italy, those in poverty, the hunger, caught up in warfare, the shame of the arms-trade, bankruptcy, repossession. We know deep in our heart that our levels of comfort and reward feed off the injustices which others suffer.
Risen Christ as you hear the echo of our voice in your empty tomb, remind us again that you are not there but alive and active in the world.
May the Christ, the one who rises, rise among us and within us, so that as individuals and as a community, we may discover both hope and actions to contribute to the future, that we will learn to live sustainable lives of imagination and joy.
We give thanks for the dogged persistence of Friends of the Earth, the Soil Association and the great tapestry of ‘green’ campaigners. Keep us faithful in small things but persistently hungry and willing to do more.
Risen Christ you greeted the grief-stricken Mary and turned her life around; affirming her as the Tower she already was, be with all those in need a Tower of Strength at this time.
Amen
Introduction
The prayers of intercession this morning take their tone from the sculpture you passed on your way into worship this morning.
The sculpture comments upon attitudes toward Mary Magdalene and her place in the memory of the Church and reflects upon the uncomfortable aspects of resurrection.
Mary Magdalene become synonymous with, on the one hand, gross sentimentality, and on the other, the dubious nature of womans sexual morality. And so, by this crude and unjustified categorisation, the very first witness to the resurrection was perpetually sidelined!
However you might wish to reflect the fact that the meaning of the name Magdala in the Aramaic, is Tower eg strength, refuge.
End of each prayer:
David Moore: We believe. Glory, gloryMysterious God, concealed in creation and revealed in Jesus, we have waited patiently and earnestly for this day - the day when we approach the open grave and discover once again for ourselves, not that it is empty, but that Christ is risen.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
DM: We believe. Glory, gloryLord Jesus, even as we focus on Mary Magdalene, the first person to know that you were alive, and even though the words ‘Christ is Risen’ is like honey upon our lips, we also carry the shame and regret that Mary become a byword for sentimentality and immorality and that her degrading continues to shadow our lives.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
We ask you, our Risen One, to burst open the graves within us this day, so that as women and men together, we may honour you by truly honouring each other. Help each of us grow, free us from all that holds us back, egg us on with renewed supplies of courage, humility and grace.
DM: We believe. Glory, gloryRisen Christ open the graves which exist within our own community at Cornerstone, free us from all that constricts, that the ecumenical flame may burn with renewed freedom, diversity and delight. May this Church be a place of welcome, gladness and new life for all people.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
DM: We believe. Glory, gloryOpen the graves which exist within our world, that we may harness and express the grandeur and intensity of your purpose for all people.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
On this great day of liberation, it is in sadness and shame we whisper our prayers for Palestine, those with HIV-Aids, the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Italy, those in poverty, the hunger, caught up in warfare, the shame of the arms-trade, bankruptcy, repossession. We know deep in our heart that our levels of comfort and reward feed off the injustices which others suffer.
Risen Christ as you hear the echo of our voice in your empty tomb, remind us again that you are not there but alive and active in the world.
DM: We believe. Glory, gloryMost earnestly we pray you to fill in the graves we currently dig for future generations - though our senseless and wilful misuse of the planet.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
May the Christ, the one who rises, rise among us and within us, so that as individuals and as a community, we may discover both hope and actions to contribute to the future, that we will learn to live sustainable lives of imagination and joy.
We give thanks for the dogged persistence of Friends of the Earth, the Soil Association and the great tapestry of ‘green’ campaigners. Keep us faithful in small things but persistently hungry and willing to do more.
DM: We believe. Glory, gloryFor the sick within our community at Cornerstone; for all of those whose life and well-being weighs heavy upon our hearts; we especially remember today a family of young children whose dad was buried in MK this week.
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
Risen Christ you greeted the grief-stricken Mary and turned her life around; affirming her as the Tower she already was, be with all those in need a Tower of Strength at this time.
DM: We believe. Glory, glory
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
DM: We believe. Glory, glory
Women: Christ is Risen.
All: Glory, Glory, Glory
Amen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)