Mike's musings

Status:witness

On Good Friday, the churches in our town have a march of witness through the town, and driving to our service this morning, I suddenly thought: "what can we do as online Christians?" I'm going to encourage all Christians I know who have an online presence using Twitter, or Facebook, or similar, to make their first status of the morning of Good Friday a simple one. I'm not asking that it stays the same all day, though I'd suggest that it's kept for an hour or so.

On Good Friday, make your status simple:

I am a Christian.

Labels: christianity

Something from Moo

For Moo, much of the woman debate is about preservation of male power and hierarchy (don't forget that "hierarchy" is government by priests...). And I don't disagree. She read this after a long discussion over supper, and so I thought I'd post it: Face to faith from last Saturday, by Rabbi Elizabeth Tikvah Sarah. It's worth a read:

"Is Anglicanism a form of progressive Christianity - and if so, what are its progressive credentials?"

Labels: christianity, Moo, women

SecondLife

Check out the Ulfilas project. Good stuff going on, and it's interesting.

Labels: christianity, inclusiveness, secondlife

Christ is my business

Someone said this to me recently, and it struck a cord. I'm involved in business, and I think that the work I do isn't anti-Christian, or unethical, and the colleagues with whom I work closely actually have a very strong ethical stance on many issues. In fact, I think that the work we do can do a great deal of good. But it's about generating profit, and wealth, and is that bad? This is a long, hard question, and a big question. Surely wealth creation allows society to pull itself up into a better (more technological?) position? The problem is that this is rather a second or third order derivative: where can we find a close action which is good, and clearly Christian?

Well, I'm employed, and I can keep my family in relative luxury. We (our company - but we, our family, in fact) employ other people. We allow them to create wealth (and keep their families in relative luxury, too). And our products keep other people employed. And they keep yet more people's data and money safer, too.

Those are all good things, but how do they sit alongside Christ's commandments on money and wealth? It's been pointed out (by Richard Harries and John Atherton among others) that the Old Testament is a lot more positive about profit and wealth creation than the New Testament is often read as being. I just don't know. I find myself worrying, often, whether I'm making excuses for making money and being rich. I don't love money, I really think I don't. And, over the last few years, have less and less interest in goods for their own sake. And that's despite being a gadget freak.

So, I guess part of the question is whether we're willing to accept those second and third order derivative Christian outcomes. And how much are we willing to stand up for the first order effects damage that our work can cause? I really believe that the first order damage for my work is minimal. But then there are issues such as power consumption, environmental effects, etc.

It never stops: you can keep chasing the guilt. One of the things that Alan (who said "Christ is my business", and didn't mean it in this way) said was that we can't allow guilt to rule our lives. We have to live out the good, and make the most of that. Wise words from a wise man.

Burn them

On a lighter note, I took a quiz on Facebook today, to find out how Calvinist I am: "How Reformed are you?". It turns out that I'm "Truly Reformed". The outcome of this seems that I should be out burning Arminians, which mainly means my Methodist friends. Oh, well.

Labels: christianity, humour, work

Visigoths ahoy!

"What," you may ask, "have Visigoths got to do with Christianity or Paganism?" Those are the topics of this month's synchroblog, and so you'd hope that I'd be writing about something vaguely relevant. And, as it happens, I am. I really don't know much about paganism (Sally's is likely to be a better blog to read on this - see below), certainly in the modern world, but the 21st century is not the first time that paganism has raised its head. I'm certainly not going to try to draw similarities between the beliefs of earlier pagans and modern-day pagans - but I think it's worth remembering that the rise of Christendom in Europe was not without problems in its history, and it wasn't just the Islamic Moorish empire that caused it problems.

In 410AD, the Visigoths sacked the city of Rome. They were a pagan people, and the Rome of the time was Christian, all other religions other than Christianity having been officially banned in 391AD, just 19 years before. It appears that the Visigoths, under Alaric I, showed remarkable clemency towards Christians, their buildings and posessions. There seem to have been a variety of different reasons or the Sack of Rome, and the issue of religion may not have been a major one.

Why is this relevant? Maybe it's not. I just thought that it was worth reminding ourselves that Christianity is not the only belief system with a history in Europe - even if the history of Christianity is more continuous, certainly in the mainstream. And Christianity has dealt with the challenges of paganism before. The way we deal with the challenges of other faiths is, hopefully, significantly more enlightened and more based on dialogue these days. We should try to remember that the Visigoths showed at least some clemency towards Christians, and that it seems to have been based on respect. I think that's an important work to bear in mind.

Respect seems a much better way to deal with challenges than aggression - and I want to be careful about the word "challenges". As a Christian, I believe that the faith I profess provides a unique revelation from God, and that Jesus Christ's life (incarnation), death and resurrection offer human beings a sure route to God. But I'm being led more and more to an understanding that God has given us many different ways to Him/Her. We have to listen and discuss. We can try to convince. But we have to listen. And that's not only to the Abrahamic faiths (Christianity, Judaism and Islam), nor only the other major world faith (Hinduism, Buddhism and others) but also to other belief systems and faiths, including paganism.

You may wish to consult the wikipedia entries on Alaric I, Ancient Rome and Visigoths for more information.

Synchroblog

Today is a "synchroblog" on the subject of "Christianity and Paganism". If you've liked what you read here, or, more particularly, if you didn't, and you'd like to read some other opinions, please visit one of the other participating blogs:

• Matthew Stone at Journeys in Between
• Christianity, Paganism, and Literature at Notes from the Underground
• John Smulo at JohnSmulo.com
• Heathens and Pagans and Witches ... oh my! at Calacirian
• Sam Norton at Elizaphanian
• Erin Word at Decompressing Faith
• Chasing the Wild Goose at Eternal Echoes
• Visigoths Ahoy! at Mike's Musings
• Belief and Being: The difficulty of communicating faith at Phil Wyman's Square No More
• Steve Hollinghurst at On Earth as in Heaven
• Undefined Desire at Igneous Quill
• A Walk on the Wild Side at Out of the Cocoon
• Observations on Magic in Western Religion at My Contemplations
• Tim Abbott at Tim Abbott
• Spirituality and the Zodiac: Stories in the Cosmos at Be the Revolution
• Rejection, Redemption, and Roots at One Hand Clapping

Labels: christianity, synchroblog

Work and Christianity

I read an excellent article today for our next ERMC weekend. It was about how people relate their work and their church. Some want to separate their lives between work and church, some would like to find a way to make them closer. Some see work as only a means to be able to work for the church. Others would welcome a chance to use their work skills in a church context, but find those skills pushed away. I need to think really hard about this: it's really opened some doors for me. Once I've thought harder about it, I'll post some more.

Labels: christianity, ERMC, work

Lapsed, and in SecondLife

I couple of days ago someone contacted me about some scripting in SecondLife, and we got together last night. In the end, all the stuff she wanted to do just worked, so there was nothing for me to do, but we got chatting afterwards about what we do in SecondLife. The Christianity thing - and ordination - came up, and we had a fascinating talk. She described herself as "a lapsed Anglican", and we got chatting about why. There were a number of things, including Bush and Blair (who call themselves Christians), the "yes-man" attitude of all the priests she's known, the "safeness" and "utterly unspiritual" nature of church in her experience, and problems reconciling the Old and New Testaments. She felt that doubting, or asking questions, wasn't acceptable, and was surprised by my opposite views: I hold the opinion that we have a responsibility (to God) to ask questions and to delve into the mysteries of the world and of theology. We had a good discussion, and I hope that, if nothing else, she feels that the church isn't as anodyne and hypocritical as she previously thought.

If you're reading this, I hope this is a fair description: I'll see you in SL...

Labels: christianity, secondlife

Triumph of respect over intolerance

As you'll see on the Stonewall story, earlier this week, the Lords (the House of Lords, part of the UK's government) threw out the suggestion that the Bill to enforce equal rites for homosexuals should be amended. The amendments were basically to allow those people who don't approve of the sexual practices of certain people to discriminate against them. (Not, in my view, quite the way Jesus (known as "the Christ") would have behaved). It shouldn't be assumed that all Christians were for the amendments, as many protested against.

I'm hugely relieved and happy. I don't really have much more to say than that: that's where I stand. I'm happy to engage with people who disagree...

Labels: christianity, homosexuality, sexuality, tolerance