Part 348. It's all in the mind, isn't it?

 My journey of deconstruction has led me to the conclusion that there is no objective truth.   Concepts such as morality, natural law, divine law, and human rights are not of  metaphysical origin: they are creations of the human mind.  We may choose to to live a life of love, of kindness, of humility, of caring.  We my choose to support and campaign for concepts of human rights and social justice.  However, we should not delude ourselves into believing that such concepts are the creation of an objective agency external to humanity.  The temptation is to cloak such concepts with a veneer of objectivity or universality: of being god given, or an element of a natural order.

What matters are the choices we make. My choice is to try to follow and promote the concepts of love and justice attributed to Jesus.  It doesn't matter who Jesus was, it is the ideas ascribed to him that matter. 

Part 347. How did I deconstruct?

 It was not my intention at the outset to deconstruct my beliefs.  Nevertheless it happened.  Three main elements in the process were:

* Seeking to understand the bible.  The conclusion I drew was that the bible is not the inerrant word of God, nor were its authors inspired from God.  Attempting to understand the context in which the authors  wrote I sought to interpret the underlying concepts contained in the text.  Finally I came the conclusion that I would apply the ideas of the postmodernist Jacques Derrida, namely that words mean what the reader or listener takes them to mean.

* Defining god.  I came to the view that it is an impossible, indeed pointless, task to define god.  Whatever god may be in our minds it is beyond our comprehension, beyond metaphor, beyond symbolism and most certainly beyond anthropomorphism.  When we pray, to what are we praying?  To ourselves,  to our personal concept of god telling us what to do?

*  Following the message of Jesus.  We can each discern concepts and their application found in the teaching of Jesus as set out in the synoptic gospels.  It doesn't matter if Jesus was an actual person, or a myth, the texts being written many years after the concepts were formulated.  What does matter is the overriding concept of love for all, for justice, for preferential treatment for the poor, marginalised and discriminated against.  It is a powerful message that does not need support by any claim of supernatural origin.

Each person comes to their conclusions on the meaning of scripture, god and Jesus.  There is no right or wrong interpretation and we should not presume to claim to have the correct understanding, nor should we seek to influence others with disparaging comments, nor by flaunting an air of superiority, nor by being arrogant.  

Part 346. Tackling poverty.

The poverty of the poor is not a call to generous relief action, but a demand that we go and build a different social order.

Gustavo Gutiérrez 

The causes of poverty are many and complex.  The effects of poverty  on individuals, communities, social cohesion and government policies also are many and complex.  For many trapped in poverty life is difficult beyond the imagination of the better off.  Sadly many poor people view their position with resignation and apathy.  Some live in fear of bailiffs, loan sharks and social services.  Many are depressed.  

The overriding  problem is that no long-term solutions are on offer.  Instead short-term palliatives and relief is provided.  Essential as this is, it deflects from campaigning for radical change to the priorities of government in the economic and social spheres.  Investment is required to improve education and training, to enhance medical services to tackle the causes of illness, to plan for better housing and environment,  to tackle anti-social behaviour, to improve public transport, to provide jobs and increase wage and benefit levels. 

Apart from material manifestations of poverty there also are other underlying issues.  Racial, ethnic and sexual discrimination has to be combatted if a society is to reduce marginalisation and improve social cohesion.

Followers of the way of  Jesus seek his kingdom on earth, one where we love all our neighbours and achieve social justice.  It is a call to action.  Jürgen Moltmann puts it thus:

"I accept Jesus Christ as my saviour" diminishes the Gospel into an introverted  and  self-centred individualism.

  

Part 345. Inherited poverty and homelessness. The Big Issue.

In the last forty years  I have been an owner-occupier, a lodger, homeless, a sofa surfer and a private tenant.  During this period I have been also a councillor serving on the housing committee of a local authority, an housing association director and a director of a faith based voluntary organisation providing accommodation for up to two years for single homeless individuals whilst providing assistance for them to become self supporting.  

I agree fully with the statements in the article below.  The author is correct in making the link between inherited poverty and homelessness.  There are of course many other factors that lead to homelessness and these need to be addressed.  I support the Big Issue and the direction of travel it is embarking on.

John Bird

11 Dec 2024

Christmas threw up something interesting that we had realised only after we launched the Big Issue. It was the idea that homeless people didn’t just need a home. That, as we called it, “Homelessness was the tip of the social iceberg.” It was the presenting problem. It’s what you saw, but it hid a myriad of problems that often started when people who later fell homeless were born. That they inherited poverty and were coming from behind before they even began the human race.

It was interesting finding ourselves in competition against other homeless bodies that kept going on about more hostels, more beds and more rooms for the people caught in homelessness. And us saying that if you don’t sort out the ridiculous situation of housing people but not addressing the issues of how they became homeless they would end up back out on the streets.

There was a definite revolving door. Most of the people who got put into hostels and used the facilities offered by homeless organisations had been there before, and often on multiple occasions. So people were being kept in an eternal returning.

Unfortunately that is the situation even now, although there is always evidence that people have fallen into homelessness for the first time. But there, on too many occasions, are the seasoned homeless back again, although at times they have been hostelled or housed.

That is why the Big Issue started raising the issue of homeless prevention and homeless cure. We were working in the emergency and we could see how destructive and self-destructive homelessness was for all. We had to try and drag the world towards homeless and poverty prevention. It’s something that we continue to do in our editorial work and with me in parliament.

Now, of course, it is a given that you need to address the reasons why people become homeless. When I say a given I mean that everyone seems to accept it. Each government since has accepted the idea that you cannot just put people in a hostel or a room in a flat and hope for the improvement of their lot. Housing First is one of the major innovations that has grown since our launch in 1991.

What are the solutions to homelessness?

Housing First: What can Finland teach us about tackling homelessness?

The idea is so simple and so necessary: you wrap people around with support – social, mental, physical – when you house people. And thankfully the Scottish government has got behind it. Various other authorities are musing on it, and Manchester under Andy Burnham is taking seriously the whole idea of getting the demons out of people’s lives that caused them to fall into the needs of homelessness.

Yet frighteningly many of the frightening realities come back: it is largely a class issue. That people born into poverty that puts people on the back foot at birth need extra help to break that inheritance. Otherwise it is likely to lead to a lifetime of dislocation.

That’s why we need Big Issue even more because we are not seeing a wholesale drive to prevent the occurrence and reoccurrence of poverty inheritance. 

Up until the Big Issue’s first Christmas there was little signs of the public getting behind homeless people. Begging threw up too many problems for people. They were not relating to those in the street. Those begging and asking for alms. And then the Big Issue came along and suddenly people could talk and relate to rough sleepers, hostel dwellers and people in the margins. It was extraordinary how quickly the public bought into the idea that the Big Issue was giving people a legitimate means of making money and therefore they were working and earning their own money.

I don’t think any of us who brought the Big Issue into being ever thought we were challenging the thinking around homelessness – you need more than a home – and allowing the public to support people in the street.

Of course, times have moved on and we have had to innovate. We have had to include people caught in poverty and do more around helping those who are vulnerably accommodated. And if we don’t help them they fall into homelessness. There are deep, deep issues now, post-Brexit, post- the cost of living crisis caused by the Liz Truss regime; by the incredibly mad increase in housing costs and the continuation of the low-wage low-investment economy that we live in.

That the 2008 financial crisis was paid for by squeezing local authorities of their social support money and caused an increase of burdens in the NHS, our schools and other parts of the welfare system. Not to forget the damage done to us by the Covid crisis.

Big Issue itself will have to make major changes in how we work because of the new problems thrown up by new levels of destitution – 33 years is a long time to be on the planet, but still there are big issues needing to be sorted. The biggest problem is the lack of central coordination of government, public and charity coming together to kick a hole in preventing homelessness and the poverty it comes from. It’s still all scattergun and will remain so until government abandons its inherited responses to poverty that have yet to work.

John Bird is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Big Issue. 

Part 344. The way it is.

There was a time when I was recently divorced, penniless, homeless, unemployed and living many miles from my home town. I was sofa-surfing in properties situated in an area of multiple deprivation.  Eventually I secured employment, accommodation and rebuilt my life.  It was a torrid time but I had some advantages: a degree, a driving licence and determination to climb out of the morass I had walked into.

For me poverty and destitution are not concepts. They are a reality I have experienced.  The desperation, despair, fear and depression that comes with poverty is very real. Many in such a situation perceive no way out or end to their misery or misfortune.  It is a life sentence with little prospect of parole.  It is a life in chains created by a society that cares little for them.  Mitigation may be available in the form of foodbanks,  warm areas, soup kitchens and free clothing. But such provision does not resolve the causes of the factors leading to poverty and destitution.  The so-called safety net is not fit for purpose.

For followers of Jesus the imperative must be for systemic change to achieve social justice and indeed bring his kingdom on earth.

Part 343. Action is the antidote to despair.

Caring for the poor by creating a just economy is not optional for Christians.

Anon

How do we create a just economy and do away with poverty and destitution?  How do we overcome the divisive effect of poor and wealthy regions in the United Kingdom?

The answer to both questions is: political action resulting in the passing of legislation. How do we secure the requisite political action?  Learned reports ad nauseum, petitions, campaigns seemingly have little impact on the electorate or the manifestos of the political parties. Very little has changed in the thirty years I have been active in the social justice sphere.

Below is a passage from the BIG ISSUE published on 9th December. Lottie Elton 9 Dec 2024

Blackpool has the lowest male life expectancy in the UK. 

People in the most deprived parts of the country are now expected to die up to a decade sooner than people in wealthier areas.

Shocking new figures have exposed stark life expectancy divides across the UK. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), Blackpool now has the lowest male life expectancy in the country – the first time since records began in 2001 that Glasgow has not come bottom of the rankings.

A baby boy born in Blackpool between 2021 and 2023 is likely to live for 73.1 years. In affluent Hart, Hampshire, the life expectancy for baby boys is 83.4.

Glaswegian girls born during this period have the lowest life expectancy in the country, at 78.26 years. Meanwhile, girls born in Kensington and Chelsea are expected to live to 86.46.

The rankings are evidence of a “clear geographical divide,” the ONS has warned. The 10 areas with the highest life expectancies for both women and men were in southern England. The vast majority of areas with the lowest life expectancy were in Scotland and northern England. And the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has warned that it shows the “devastating impacts of poverty on life expectancy”.

Joseph Elliott, Lead Analyst at JRF, described the figures as “shocking but not unexpected".

“Not being able to afford essential items like enough food or heating robs people of options and dignity but also impacts their health. This in turn puts pressure on public services in more deprived areas, which are staggering under the weight of hardship,” he added.

“If we want people’s health to improve, we need to hear how the government intends to immediately bring down hardship as a first step. But we also need to see the longer-term change that’s needed if everyone in our country is going to have the same chances of good health, regardless of where they live.”

A JRF spokesperson on social media added that “being born into poverty could take years off your life. This is not OK.”

In the vast majority of areas, life expectancy has fallen since the COVID-19 pandemic, with 70% of areas seeing an overall decline. “We are yet to see a recovery from the decrease in life expectancy we saw during the pandemic,” the ONS explained.

Yet in deprived areas, the downward trend has been ongoing for years. In Blackpool, for instance, life expectancy has dropped 18 months since 2014, when it was 74.7 for men. 

During this time, austerity has slashed local council funding for preventative health services. According to a report tabled to Blackpool council this year, the local authority has roughly £1,400 less per person to spend on its population than it did over a decade ago. Its public health grant has been cut by £10 per person since 2013.

Last week, academics from the University of Glasgow published a book linking regional disparities in life expectancy to government policy.

In Glasgow – until this year repeatedly the city with the lowest male life expectancy in the UK – spending pressures have wiped nearly half a billion pounds over the council’s budget over the last 10 years. 

In their book Social Murder? Austerity and life expectancy in the UK, Dr David Walsh and professor Gerry McCartney explore how such cuts impact health – and argue that the decline in life expectancy evidences a “dereliction of duty from those in power”.

“Life expectancy is about more than just health – it’s about the kind of society we live in,” Dr Walsh said. 

“And in the early 2010s, after decades of continual improvement, life expectancy in the UK stopped increasing, and for a great many it actually declined. This is something that simply should not be happening in a wealthy society.”

The previous Conservative government’s austerity spending cuts shaved nearly half a year off the average person’s life between 2010 and 2019, research out earlier this year revealed.

The Big Issue has previously reported on disparities in ‘healthy life expectancy’ – the number of years a person can expect to spend in “good health”. Across the UK, the healthy life expectancy gap between the healthiest and unhealthiest local authority is 23.5 years for women and 21.2 years for men.

it brings shame on our society that we are prepared to accept this state of affairs. How do we energise people to demand change?  Have the interests of the better off been protected and advanced at the expense of the poor? Yes has to be the answer.  How should secular and faith organisations respond?

Below are my previous posts on poverty.  

Part 173. Shocking. 23rd October 2023

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has funded the production of a report entitled: Destitution in the UK 2023. It is sombre reading, it is shocking. The report, in full, is available online and I commend it. Please read it.

The report states 1.8 million households equating to 3.8 million individuals live in destitution. Destitution is defined clearly in the report. Indeed there is an underclass in the UK as defined by JK Galbraith in a USA context. Galbraith said we have the means to overcome destitution, politically we prefer not so to do.

The situation is a damning indictment of the political process and the Civil Service. It is also an indictment of religious bodies. The latter are good at providing bandages but are reticent in attacking those causing the wounds. Religious bodies should be leading campaigns demanding change. No longer is the cry sustainable that religion should keep out of politics.

Christian churches need to engage with the political process, to shout out for social justice, to show leadership in the pursuit of His Kingdom on earth.

Part 187. Another damning indictment. 11th December 2023

In Part 173 reference is made to the report of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation entitled Destitution in the UK 2023. The report paints a shocking picture of the failure of the political process to alleviate and tackle the causes of extreme poverty.

Last week the Social Justice Commission of the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) published its report Two Nations: the State of Poverty in the UK. It is further evidence of the failure of politicians to tackle poverty issues in any sustained meaningful way. The report tells of a widening gulf between main stream society and a depressed and poverty-stricken underclass. Shades of JK Galbraith. The gap is wider than it has been since Victorian times and risks becoming a chasm. The Chief Executive of CSJ states a strategy is needed to go after the root causes of poverty: education, work, debt, addiction and family. The report adds crime, poor housing and health to the list.

The Commission's membership includes Lord King. Former Governor of the Bank of England.

Tim Farron. Former Leader of the Liberal Democrats.

Andy Burnham. Former Labour minister and currently Mayor of Greater Manchester.

Miriam Cates. Conservative MP for Penistone & Stocksbridge.

(Cates is an evangelical Christian. She has been touting Tory MPs to oppose any proposals to ban conversion therapy and is no friend of the trans community. A former chief at CSJ she is married to a minister of a church supporting conversion therapy.)

Sadly, the latest report is likely to gather dust as have many other reports on the causes of poverty. There will be wringing of hands and expressions of concern but doubtless failure to tackle the systemic issues. As Galbraith noted society has the means to deal with the issues, it is unwilling to pay the cost. Instead there will be minor adjustments to alleviate the symptoms but nothing meaningful to tackle the causes.

From a Christian perspective we are told by Jesus to love our neighbour. Bishop Desmond Tutu said we should stop pulling people out of the river: instead we should go up river, find out why they are falling in and put a stop to it. The churches are very good at pulling people out of the river but woefully inadequate at demanding systemic change to stop them falling in. Christians individually and collectively should campaign vigorously in the political arena for systemic change to overcome poverty. Somehow I do not believe the denominations will engage politicians with the determination, passion, perseverance and zeal that is required to force change. But change is needed, urgently.

Part 222. Poverty: a stain on the nation. 26th January 2024

Yesterday, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation published a further report on poverty in the United Kingdom: UK Poverty 2024. The essential guide to understanding poverty in the UK. It is another truly shocking report and further clear evidence of the need for the campaign by the churches to demand government takes urgent action.

It is shameful that poverty levels are so high. The report is easy to find on a search engine and I have downloaded the Foundation's news article, which contains a download link to the report, to my Facebook page: John Hopkinson Theology Page. It is a long detailed report and well worth close study.

*Please take a look at the Let's End Poverty website: letsendpoverty.co.uk. it is brimful with campaigning ideas and action. Better still, join the campaign.

Part 291. Another damning report. 17th June 2024

Hardship, poverty and destitution should have no place in an affluent society, yet it looms large in Britain. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation published today another damning report: The impact of hardship on primary schools and primary and community healthcare.

It is an indictment of the political process that it enables this situation to exist and continue and also of a wider malaise in society. Faith and secular organisations have united to campaign against poverty, sadly with little impact on politicians, media and society. Read the election proposals and propaganda coming through your letterbox. How much is devoted to the subjects of poverty and destitution? Very little I surmise. The reality is as identified by JK Galbraith many years ago: we have the means but lack the will to effect change. 

Part 313. Here we go again. Another report on poverty. 23rd August 2024

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has published a report: Living standards, poverty and inequality in the UK: 2024. It is a long, detailed document containing many statistics. It is sober reading.

The report is the latest in a long line of reports over the last fifty years that between them have attempted to identify the scope and causes of poverty, destitution, deprivation and inequality. The conclusion to be drawn is that precious little has been achieved to diminish or eradicate the problems.  

There is a recurrent theme: the need for political will to make systemic changes to achieve both short-term palliative and long-term structural change. There is the need also for joined-up thinking to tackle issues across a wide area of activities: housing, health, education, training, employment opportunities, pay, social and care services, environment and planning. Shades of the Bains Report!.

It is imperative that secular and faith organisations continue to press politicians to implement legislation to achieve systemic change. JK Galbraith in the 1960s wrote, in the USA context, that politicians had the means but lacked the will to effect the necessary changes. So it is in the UK sixty years later. 

Part 342. Love your neighbour: duty of care

I am of an age when the inescapable reality of one's mortality sinks in.  It is inevitable: I  accept it with equanimity.  Friends and colleagues have died and my time will come.  My belief is that death is the end, no after-life in heaven or hell.  So, I do not order my life in order to secure a passport to heaven.  I refuse to accept the blandishments of purveyors of the concepts of metaphysical theology, doctrine or creeds. 

Instead, I seek to follow the teaching ascribed to Jesus encapsulated in the command to love your neighbour as yourself.  Loving your neighbour is inclusive: no exceptions.  It does not recognise boundaries.  All fall within its remit.  Furthermore it is not limited to supporting people at the point of need.  It extends to seeking the sweeping away of the causes of oppression, exclusion, marginalisation and poverty.  It is a demand for systemic change to achieve social justice.

Systemic change involves challenging those with the power to effect change: politicians, church leaders, business leaders. Such challenges are a threat to the established order and are likely to be opposed vigorously.  It shifts the balance between the haves and have-nots.  Any shift towards social justice requires extension of the concept of duty of care.

This will be the subject of later posts.  Here is an example to be going on with, hopefully to whet your appetite.  In the UK thousands of families live in destitution.  Previous posts have referred to reports on this situation.  The demand should be that families are lifted out of destitution and the way of achieving this is for the state to owe such families a duty of care to ensure their lot is improved.  It would require legislation to impose a duty on government to achieve this objective.  The extent of such a duty and its enforcement would be delineated by the legislation. 

 

Part 341. A paradigm shift

Over the years I have moved from a conservative evangelical outlook to one grounded in liberal, progressive, radical and deconstructivist ideas.  I have shifted from labelling myself as a Christian to describing my views as following the teaching ascribed to Jesus, with an emphasis on promoting systemic change to achieve social justice.

Liberation theology developed by Gustavo Gutierrez  and Leonardo Boff has been a significant influence, as has the Christian socialism of Martin Luther King Jnr and Desmond Tutu.

Recently I read the following quotation by the late Tony Benn, a Christian Socialist and Labour Party MP.

Socialism is the flame of anger against injustice and the flame of hope that you can build a better world.

I concur.  

.

Part 340. For info.

 My posts 332 to 339 summarise my current theological thinking.  I have nothing further to add and have no desire to engage in repetition.  This is my final post on theology, at least for the time being,  Future posts will concern the ongoing battle for equality within The Salvation Army and the disputation within the Church of England over Living in Love and Faith.

I intend to post on the subject of the interrelationship of politics, economics, law and sociology in the context of social justice issues.

Part 339. Faith and certainty

 In Hebrews 11:1 we read:

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Revised Standard Edition.

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see, New International Version

The fundamental fact of existence is that this trust in God, this faith, is the firm foundation under everything that makes life worth living.  The Message

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. King James

So, what is it that is hoped for and how certain can we be that our hope will be realised?  Or not?  I will write only from my point of view.  My starting point is that I do not believe in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, metaphysical or anthropomorphic god. Nor do I believe in being consigned to heaven or hell when I die.  Therefore I do not need to conduct my life in such a way as to ensure I realise my hope, indeed the certainty, of reaching god in heaven.

I surmise that Jesus articulated a set of ideals to be acted upon and that evidence of this is to be found in the synoptic gospels. These documents are not to be taken literally but as an expression of a way of thinking and living.  They express the need for love, for helping the poor and marginalised in our society and the imperative of action to achieve change.  My hope is that by our deeds we shall see loving our neighbour in action, both in terms of assisting individuals at point of need and systemic change to achieve social justice.   

Part 338. Omnibus post.

This post gathers in one place three short articles setting out my current thinking on theological/faith matters.

Part One.

2023 was quite a year for me. I dispensed finally with the last vestiges of fundamentalist literalist conservative evangelicalism and embraced, for me, new ideas. What "my theology' is now I don't know or care but most certainly it is orientated in the progressive/liberal, maybe even the deconstructive, direction.

It has been so liberating to escape the clutches of detailed conservative evangelical biblical exposition and replace it with the broad principles of Jesus as reported in the synoptic gospels. The two Great Commandments fulfill all earlier teaching and asks of us to love God and love others. The teaching of Jesus, to follow him, to seek His kingdom on earth through love is a simple yet profound concept.

I have given up regularly attending bible study groups. Instead I look forward to attending groups seeking to discern what it means in practical terms to follow Jesus, to understand how love should show itself to to the marginalised and discriminated against in our society. The shift that has taken place in my thinking is one of moving from private piety to public proclamation of the need for systemic change in our society. I accept that showing love entails meeting present needs and many faith groups provide a wide range of loving support for people in straitened circumstances or on the receiving end of discrimination. But simply propping up the system is not enough. Followers of Jesus should campaign for change, to sweep away the rotten systems and attitudes causing so much hurt and misery. Jesus confronted religious, legal and political systems and so should we. But do we? Do we seek instead comfort in our church congregations and the feel-good factor of direct assistance to individuals. I believe we all do in varying degrees and I do not criticise for one second anyone for so doing. But in our heart at least we should pray for His kingdom to come and empowerment of individuals able to campaign for change.

Churches are very good at studying and preaching on the minutiae of bible passages. What is lacking is studying how the two Great Commandents are to be put into effect. How do we challenge those in power to effect systemic change? How do we empower individuals to rise up and campaign for change? Have the lessons of Liberation Theology been understood and applied? Sadly I have my doubts. Too many good people are enveloped in the comfort of churches rather than going into the world and challenging its assumptions and systems.

Part Two.

No longer do I claim to be a Christian. I describe myself as a follower of the teaching of Jesus. The recorded teaching is in the synoptic gospels, the books of Matthew, Mark and Luke. We have to be mindful that the texts of the three books probably are evidence of an oral tradition that developed following the death of Jesus, and also now lost earlier documents. What we do know is that the three books are not contemporary to the time of Jesus and are not verbatim reports of the words of Jesus. It is important to understand the historical context of the synoptic gospels and the underlying motivation of each author. We bring our own understanding to the words of literature and I acknowledge the contribution of postmodernists such as Jacques Derrida.

My understanding of the teaching of Jesus is not based on the myth of inerrancy nor on a literalist reading of texts. Rather, we should engage in seeking to ascertain the principles to be discerned from the reported actions and words of Jesus.

My starting point for this seeking is the two great commandments that may be summarised succinctly as Love God, love others. Simple yet profound.

God is beyond our comprehension. God should not be anthropomorphised, not given human attributes. God is in all things including us. We should love: our world, all humanity. We should be in wonder of the universe: of all creation. God is the great unknown, filling the void our minds cannot comprehend. But God is not some great judge in the sky. Such a god is a human creation designed to coerce individuals to behave in ways specified by those with power to enforce their will. 

Let us consider God's kingdom of heaven as a human construct, as an ideal. Jesus calls on us to follow him and work to bring this ideal on earth: make an ideal a reality. This ideal is grounded in love for all humanity, for inclusiveness, for justice. Read the bible through the lens of love. His message incurred the wrath of the economic, political and religious establishments. He dared to upset the settled order, to call out oppressors, sentries and gatekeepers. He was a radical yet peaceful revolutionary. The fair society was to be achieved through love: not through violence.

The message is clear. Following Jesus requires us to challenge the causes of poverty, discrimination and marginalisation. It is essential to confront those wielding power and demand systemic change. Many who profess to be Christians have retreated into a private piety bubble chasing the chimera of Pauline theology rather than face up to the challenge set by Jesus. Many seek to have a foot in each camp. Who is to say one path is preferable to others? Certainly not me. Belief is a personal matter, not to be imposed by conditions set by others.

Part Three.

I seek to understand and promote what it means in a Christian context to campaign for systemic change in society to tackle the issues of poverty, discrimination and marginalisation. I have been influenced strongly by the writing

 of Oscar Romero, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jnr, Desmond Tutu, Leonardo Boff and Gustavo Gutierrez et al. Reading their work is both humbling and exhilarating as they developed a theological basis for campaigning to change established political, economic and social orders. 

We really must go beyond acting as bringers of relief through such activities as foodbanks, debt advice, homelessness hostels etc, etc. I do not belittle any activity which brings relief at the point of need. It is essential activity done in love for humanity. However as Desmond Tutu said: we must stop pulling people out of the river and find out why they are falling in and put a stop to it. In other words, prevention is better than cure. But there is more to do than repair faults in existing structures. We need to promote wholesale root-and-branch change, a paradigm shift in attitudes and actions in society. As did Jesus.

Jesus was no armchair critic nor, as we describe it now 'a keyboard warrior'. He was out in the community: disputing, engaging, orating and doing. Love in action.

So how do we act? How do we overcome bigotry, hatred, destitution, misogyny, homophobia, discrimination and marginalisation? In my opinion we have to mount challenges to those holding the levers of political and economic power. We have to engage and campaign for systemic change which inevitably involves changing priorities and redistribution of resources.

We should welcome working with secular organisations in campaigning for a common cause.  

It is not easy. We have to be prepared for the long-haul, to hitting brick walls, to being abused and derided. Our faith, our belief in loving our neighbour, gives us the strength to continue. Following Jesus is not easy. He demanded we pick up our cross daily and follow him.

Part 337. My chains fell off...

The Charles Wesley hymn: And can it be that I should gain  has the following lines:

my chains fell off, my heart was free

I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

When I was a visiting speaker at conservative  evangelical free chapels/churches this hymn, along with:

O for a thousand tongues to sing

and

Love divine, all loves excelling

were sung often. The tunes were liked, the words reflected the theology and doctrine of the fellowships/congregations.

As I moved away from conservative evangelical fundamentalism towards liberal, progressive, radical and deconstructivist theologies the words quoted above came to mind. Indeed I did feel that the stifling, restrictive chains of fundamentalist conservative evangelical doctrine and theology had fallen away: I had been released and was free to explore and articulate theological concepts based on the love of neighbour and social justice. 

Part 336. On God and scripture

In my opinion there is no anthropomorphic nor metaphysical god living in heaven. God is not an external entity 'out there'.  God is beyond description or definition. God is of and in our imagination and in this sense, to us, is real. In prayer we make supplications to the god of our imagination and respond as we deem appropriate.

Scripture is an human construct, no inerrancy, no literal word of God, no guiding Spirit. Scripture assists in our understanding the ideas of some of our forebears, and this may help in determining our ideas and actions.

Followers of the way of Jesus, progressive Christians, appropriate the statement 'love your neighbour' as the primary concept of faith. Prayers and actions perceive Jesus as God at work in all of us, in all creation.  it is this that drives progressive Christians  to campaign for social justice, for systemic change, for equality, for equity,  for an end to poverty, marginalisation, discrimination and exclusion.  In other words, nothing less than the heaven on earth of our imagination.

Part 335. I concur (2)

The function of prayer is not to influence God, but rather to change the nature of the one who prays.

Soren Kierkegaard

Part 334. I concur (1)

I concur with the concepts set out in the following quotations.

The poverty of the poor is not a call to generous relief action, but a demand that we go out and build a new social order

Gustavo Gutiérrez 

His teachings and behaviour reflect an alternative social vision.  Jesus was not not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.

Marcus Borg 

Christian theology needs to speak of social revolution, not reform; of liberation, not development; of socialism, not modernising the prevailing system.

Gustavo Gutiérrez.

Part 333. On following Jesus.

In my opinion we should promote the principle of loving our neighbour and campaign for inclusion and eradication of the causes of poverty. These objectives will only be achieved by collective action, by campaigning for systemic change, by challenging those with power to effect change so to do.  Expressions of hope, or assisting individuals at point of need, although necessary and worthy, will not trigger change.  To paraphrase Desmond Tutu: we should stop having to pull people out of the water, we should go upstream and prevent them from falling in.

There is no objective set of human rights. Declarations of human rights are of human origin, not of a divine nor of a natural law origin. Human rights are subjective concepts with no supernatural nor metaphysical basis.

Following the way of Jesus is not to place trust in a metaphysical entity.  Rather it is a determination to help those in need and to promote social justice by following concepts attributed to Jesus by the authors of the synoptic gospels.  They may be read as a manifesto. 

Part 332. Following Jesus: nothing more, nothing less.

Consider this remarkable fact: in the Sermon on the Mount there is not a single word about what to believe, only words about what to do 

and how to be.  By the time the Nicene Creed is written, only three centuries later, there is not a single word in it about what to do and how to be - only words about what to believe.

Robin Meyers

Sad, isn't it, developing myth and metaphysical concepts of God:  rather than following the way of Jesus. My theological journey has taken me from the former to the latter.

Marcus Borg expresses it thus:  

It is a way of being Christian in which beliefs are secondary, not primary.  Christianity is a "way" to be followed more than it is a set of beliefs to be believed. Practice is more important than "correct beliefs".  Beliefs are not irrelevant; they do matter.  But they are not the object of faith. God is the "object" of commitment - and for Christians, God is known as Jesus.

It is important to understand in reading the synoptic gospels that we are considering the concepts being advanced and should recognise the documents as being not infallible and/inerrant, but as a collection of myths, memories and other texts selectively edited by the authors.

I have argued before in this blog that the Bible is a human construct. Marcus Borg states it well:

I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understanding and affirmations, not statements coming directly or somewhat directly from God...I realised that whatever "divine revelation" and the "inspiration of the Bible" meant (if they meant anything) they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority.

Follow the way ofJesus, love your neighbour, campaign for social justice.

untitled

£5.00 wager on Bishop of Dover being next ABC. 

Part 331. The Canterbury Stakes

The process for selecting the next Archbishop of Canterbury is underway as potential candidates parade ready for the off. It is fruitless to speculate who the runners will be and certainly foolhardy to name an anticipated 'winner'.

The declared runners are individuals selected for a shortlist. The process of selection is opaque. Those on the shortlist are interviewed by a committee and a choice is made. The person selected must receive at least a two-thirds majority. Herein lies a potential problem.  Currently the committee charged with selecting the next Bishop of Ely has failed to reach a decision as it is hopelessly divided. Could this be repeated in the selection of the next Archbishop?

The Church of England currently is riven with disunity over the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process. Conservative Evangelicals are pressing for a new province within the Church and threatening to depart if it is not forthcoming. How will this affect the selection process both in terms of shortlisting and choice of the committee's preferred candidate?

Will all the shortlisted candidates be current diocesan bishops? Will any suffragen, area or flying bishops, or bishops outside the CofE make the list?

Will consideration be given to individuals outside the broader episcopacy such as university theologians, deans, canons, parish priests etc?

Will ethnicity or sex be a significant factor in the selection process?  Should the Church seek to move away from a managerialism emphasis by seeking an individual with extensive pastoral experience particularly in areas of deprivation?

So many imponderables. Speculation will be rife, suggestions for 'suitable' candidates promoted and negative publicity for 'unsuitable' individuals.  Whoever does become the next Archbishop will face seemingly intractable issues to deal with. It could be a poisoned chalice and it may be the daunting nature of the tasks ahead will deter some, if invited, from engaging in the selection circus.

Part 330. What a week that was!

On 5th November Donald Trump was elected to be the next President of the USA.  The Republican Party gained control of the Senate and looks likely to retain control of the House of Representatives.  The Supreme Court has a majority of judges of a conservative disposition.  So much for 'checks and balances'.  Faith groups are worried that the new administration will target deliberately and adversely deprived and marginalised individuals including migrants, LBGTQ, the ill, those seeking abortions and the poor.  Instead of supporting what Galbraith defined as the underclass they will be in the firing line for attack. Say goodbye to achieving social justice through systemic change.

Thursday saw the publication of the Makin Report.  It is an analysis of the shocking lack of action and disregard by the leadership of the Church of England into complaints, accusations and allegations concerning abuse of individuals.  The utter failure of the safeguarding system is exposed as is lack of meaningful response by the higher echelon of the church.  There is a petition circulating calling on the Archbishop of Canterbury to resign.

Finally some good news.  I attended my first meeting of Radical Pilgrims Kent and Sussex. A thoughtful, loving and caring group of individuals.  I 'discovered' this group through the Progressive Christian Network GB.

Part 329. Jurgen Moltmann and Gustavo Gutiérrez

This year has witnessed the death of two of the leading theologians in the field of social justice: Jurgen Moltmann and Gustavo Gutiérrez. 

In Part 286 I published the following:

In the 1990s I read Theology of Hope (1964) by Jurgen Moltmann. It was a major influence on my thinking as at the time I was studying for a diploma in theology.

His obituary published in The Daily Telegraph on10th June 2024 had this to say:

"Jurgen Moltmann was the most significant Protestant theologian of the 20th century.  

"The basis of Moltmann's work was his conviction that true theology must always be related to concrete human situations and that the teaching of Jesus about the Kingdom of God requires of his followers commitment to the overthrowing of everything in the social order that is contrary to its demands. This led him to personal involvement in peace and other demonstrations.....and close association with the Liberation Theology movement in Latin America, where his work was specially valued by Catholic theologians.

"The message was of a God whose coming in the world lay not in some distant future but was a present reality, thus offering both hope and challenge."

The news of Martin Luther King Jnr's assassination propelled Moltmann into an interest in black theology and becoming a strong supporter of the USA civil rights movement. Moltmann's wife, Elisabeth Moltmann-Wendell was a prominent supporter of feminist theology.  

I published an obituary and appreciation of the theology of Gustavo Gutierrez in Part 327.

The theology of Moltmann and of Gutiérrez had a profound effect on my thinking at a time I was studying for a diploma in theology.  It led to my being active in secular and faith organisations promoting social justice  and also those providing support  individuals at point of need. 

Jesus told us to follow him and to love our neighbour. Action, not mere intellectual assent. We are called to action.

The poverty of the poor is not a call to generous relief action, but a demand that we go and build a different social order.

Gustavo Gutiérrez 

Part 328. Out of the silo.

I have posted before on the need to consider the interactions of politics, economics, law, cultural and social trends, ethics, and theology both in terms of practice and theory.  This post has been triggered by the recent death of Gustavo Gutierrez, the 'father' of Liberation Theology, and the following statement by  Noam Chomsky.

'I think it only makes sense to seek out and identify structures of authority, hierarchy, and

domination in every aspect of life, and to challenge them; unless a justification for them can be given, they are illegitimate, and should be dismantled, to increase the scope of human freedom.'

This statemen set off thoughts on the interplay of Liberation Theology, the Sociological School of Jurisprudence, and Marxist Theory. However before delving into this, a few words on gatekeepers, sentries and guardians.  People with power: politicians, senior state employees, leaders of business and trades unions, church leaders, media owners and others in positions of authority have a self interest in maintaining the status quo and using it to their advantage. It is in this context that those seeking to achieve systemic change have to engage and hopefully achieve positive results. The power of the state should not be underestimated.  The state doles out patronage and demands loyalty from the recipients.

Two potential allies of those seeking systemic change may be some faith organisations and the judiciary.  However this may well not be the case.  The rise of Liberation theology was triggered in part by the failure of the Roman Catholic Church to engage with the poor and instead to cosy up to government.  The judiciary cannot be regarded in some nations as truly independent and even when it is judges have, according to Oliver Wendell Holmes, 'inarticulate major premises' that basically are attitudes derived from their background and class.  In the United Kingdom the use of judicial review to oppose decisions of government and other statutory bodies enables challenges to authority.  However judicial review can only delay proposals, the courts have no power to instigate change. So the judiciary is not a driver of systemic change in this regard.

But let's not be too despondent.  In common law jurisdictions the principle of certainty and  being bound by decisions in earlier cases is enshrined in the statement that judges are bound by precedent. If that was what happens is true the common law would never have been shaped to deal with modern society. Judges do make law.  The major achievement of the Sociological School has been to inculcate the idea that the law must respond to current public, social and public interests and resolve cases where those interests do not coincide. Clearly this is in conflict with the concept of certainty. Adopting this approach may help alleviate the worst of systemic social injustice but usually governments have to legislate in order to effect change.

Marxist legal theory posits the opinion that law is the product of economic forces, the state and its laws are instruments of class oppression and wil wither away in the Marxist utopia.  The reality is somewhat different! However Marxism does bring to the forefront some of the causes of systemic injustice.

Gutierrez was wrongly lambasted by some in the Roman Catholic Church as promoting Marxist Theory.  It was a caricature of his position that is stated so well in the following article by Joseph Nangle OFM.

I came to know Gustavo in 1968, when he already was recognized as an outstanding scholar. He invited me with dozens of other ex-patriot priests working in Peru to weekly conversations centered on our pastoral work.

From the beginning Gustavo’s methodology gave evidence of what would become known as Liberation Theology, although at that time the phrase had not as yet been articulated.

He would invite us to share our day-to-day experiences as parish priests – the ordinary and sometimes dramatic events in our ministries. He was a great listener and for an hour or more at these meetings never interrupted us.

Toward the end of our sessions then, he would summarize what he had been hearing, but never correcting us or giving directions as to how we should be conducting our parish work. Instead, he would tell us that what we were sharing was the “raw material” of his theological reflections.

Looking back on these weekly meetings, it is clear, whether or not any of us realized it, that a new theological methodology was emerging, one that was simple and profound: an inductive, “reality to conclusions” process rather than the traditional deductive approach which repeated the tenets of the faith and applied them to every given situation.

A back story about this “new way” was one I heard years later. According to this account, several Latin American priests who had been sent to study theology in academic centers of Europe during the 1960s (the years of Second Vatican Council), returned home and began teaching. They quickly saw that “were answering questions no one was asking.” That gave rise to the obvious question: where does one begin to theologize in a way that is pertinent, appropriate, relevant to Latin America?

Gustavo Gutiérrez was a leading figure in this process. He discerned that lived experience, reality, what is going on, is a proper starting place for theological reflections which then had the task of wrestling with the follow up question, “What does God’s word have to say about each of these situations.” His questioning extended beyond personal matters to much broader issues. Much later he would put it this way: “What do the Scriptures have to say to ‘non human beings,’ impoverished people living in a world (Latin America in this case) where they are considered useless, nameless, even non-existent?”

Gustavo began expressing that what we were doing in our sessions was elaborating a “Theology of Development.” However, as I recall, he quickly laid aside that idea and suggested that our pastoral work with and for these “non-human beings” was connected with the Exodus story in the history of salvation; that our pastoral efforts were about that same movement – from slavery to freedom and dignity. A theology of liberation!

This concept and its consequences spread quickly through the post-Vatican II Latin American Catholic Church.* Thanks in great part to Gustavo’s influence and with the backing of the institutional Church, new kinds of pastoral practices began:

a preferential option for the poor guiding every aspect of our catechesis, sacramental life, bishops’ pastoral letters, lifestyles

an expanded spirituality based on a reading of the Gospel in the light of “structural, systemic, institutionalized injustices”

a growing awareness of the causes for the chasm between the “haves” and the “have nots,” both people and nations

preaching the “full Gospel”

I and millions more were fortunate beneficiaries of this, thanks to a spirit-filled thinker and firm believer in the Word Incarnate: Gustavo Gutiérrez, OP. Bless him now as he journeys home.

*It was not by any means universally accepted, however, but that is another story.

Joe Nangle OFM is a Pax Christi USA Ambassador of Peace and the 2023 Pax Christi USA Teacher of Peace. As a member of the Assisi Community in Washington, D.C., he is dedicated to simple living and social change. Joe also serves as the Pastoral Associate for the Latino community at Our Lady Queen of Peace, Arlington, Virginia.  

Part 327. Gustavo Gutiérrez

Edited version of The  Daily Telegraph obituary dated 24 October 2024. The Guardian obituary and other commentaries on the theology and impact of Liberation Theology may be read on the Facebook Group: Liberal, and and deconstructivist theology.

Father Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino, seismic Catholic reformer who launched ‘liberation theology’

His movement was investigated by the modern equivalent of the Holy Inquisition under John Paul II, but his ideas entered the mainstream

Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino: taught that poverty is not something to be accepted, but a challenge to be overcome, and the structures that bring about poverty are 'structures of sin'

 

Father Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino, who has died aged 96, was probably the most original and contested theologian of the 20th century, who made an enormous contribution to Catholic thought through liberation theology, a term he himself coined.

Though opposed by many within the Church itself, liberation theology still had a lasting effect on Catholic life as well as a profound influence well beyond the confines of Roman Catholicism.

Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino was born on June 8 1928 in Lima, Peru. He grew up in poverty, and in his teenage years was afflicted with osteomyelitis, a painful inflammation of the bone marrow, which meant that he was confined either to bed or to a wheelchair. He endured this thanks to prayer, reading, and the company of his family and friends, he later said. The poverty of his surroundings was to have a lasting effect on his thought.

Father Gutiérrez was small of stature, unassuming and humble in demeanour, and gifted with a sense of humour. His original ambition was to be a psychiatrist, and he first studied medicine and literature at the National University of Peru, while also being involved in Catholic Action, a group dedicated to spreading the ideals of Catholic social teaching. But he soon felt drawn to theology and the call of the priesthood. He was eventually ordained at the age of 30, by which time he had been to Europe, and studied at the Catholic University of Louvain, as well as the Catholic University of Lyon. 

During this period, he worked under or studied all the big names in contemporary theology such as Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, Marie-Dominique Chenu, Edward Schillebeeckx, Karl Rahner, Hans Küng and Johann Baptist Metz, all of whom would go on to be the formative influences of the Second Vatican Council.

In addition, he became familiar with the work of the leading Protestant theologians of the day such as Karl Barth and Jürgen Moltmann, as well as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Lutheran pastor who had been hanged for resisting Hitler. While the Catholic Church’s seminarians were still using outdated Latin manuals, generally written in the 19th century, Gutiérrez was way in advance of most of his contemporaries.

Gutiérrez in 2003: much of liberation theology – a concern for the poor, the importance of social justice, and the idea that salvation was not purely otherworldly – became mainstream, largely thanks to his pioneering work

Gutiérrez was to spend most of his life in academic institutions, such as the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, with various visiting professorships in Europe and North America. His groundbreaking work, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation was published in 1971, an English translation appearing some two years later. It was this work that essentially launched the movement known as liberation theology.

Liberation theology was, and remains, a movement that works from the bottom up, using lived experience as a basis for theological reflection. The lived experience in question was that of the people of Latin America, the overwhelming majority of whom were mired in seemingly insoluble poverty.

Rather than theology originating in the cloister, it is theology originating in the slum. Poverty is by no means something to be accepted, but a challenge to be overcome, and the structures that bring about poverty are characterised as “structures of sin”. 

The essential watchword is that “True orthodoxy is orthopraxis”, or, in more accessible terms, that right beliefs must be put into practice. This approach was a useful antidote to a Catholic theology that often seemed cut off from the world and the experiences of ordinary people, or worse, which saw the problems of the world as something to be meekly accepted rather than changed.

Much of Gutiérrez’s writing was dense, erudite and somewhat inaccessible, but this did not stop non-theologians characterising him and other liberation theologians – for a movement was soon born – as Marxists, or, more critically, as Catholics who had imported Marxist concepts of class struggle and dialectical materialism into Catholic theology, and undermined it from within in the process.

This was in fact a caricature of what Gutiérrez was doing, but the oversimplified criticism stuck, and brought conflict with the authorities in Rome, as well as fierce opposition from those in Latin America who saw liberation theologians as turbulent priests fomenting rebellion against the landowning class and the interests of big business. Political opponents did indeed have a point: liberation theology, with its “preferential option for the poor”, was seeking to detach Catholicism from those who sought to maintain the status quo.

As the 1970s wore on, liberation theology became more and more popular, and entered the mainstream of Catholic institutions. Gutiérrez became a hero to those who were standing up for the oppressed in Latin America, in the Philippines, and to a lesser extent in Africa. In Europe, no theological course was complete without a reference to the theology of liberation. Liberation theology also became the one theology acceptable to European Leftists who were otherwise not enamoured of the Catholic Church. However, there were dissenting voices, and in high places too.

John Paul II, though a supporter of liberation in Poland and Eastern Europe generally, as well as a stern critic of unregulated capitalism in his social writings, was wary of the way liberation theology, as developed by Gutiérrez and his followers, was making seemingly uncritical use of Marxist categories of thought. This resulted in an investigation into Gutiérrez’s work by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Holy Inquisition), the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog, leading to a report published in 1984 authored by Cardinal Ratzinger, later Benedict XVI, a theologian of similar calibre but very different bent to Gutiérrez himself.

This highly nuanced document took the emphasis on class struggle to task as incompatible with Christianity, while stressing the traditional doctrine of the Church as means of salvation. Yet it found many aspects of liberation theology of merit. It could hardly do otherwise, as concepts such as “structures of sin”, the belief that sin is not simply an individual act, but can become a corporate one too, were presupposed in the writings of John Paul II himself.

Gutiérrez, ever the faithful priest and servant of the Church, took these criticisms of his theology in good part. When Pope Francis, the first Latin American pope, succeeded the former Cardinal Ratzinger, the subject of liberation theology, thought by some to be a spent force, came to the fore once more, as it was widely thought that, as Cardinal Bergoglio, Pope Francis had been an opponent of liberation theology. 

In September 2013, Francis received Father Gutiérrez in the Vatican, though what was said between them remained private. This visit was interpreted as a coming in from the cold for the then 85-year-old theologian. But in 2015, at a press conference in the Vatican, Gutiérrez gently corrected this idea: liberation theology was not in need of rehabilitation, he said, because it had never been condemned in the first place. Indeed, many of the key concepts of liberation theology – a concern for the poor, the importance of social justice, and the idea that salvation was not purely otherworldly – had become mainstream, largely thanks to the pioneering work of Gutiérrez himself.

Father Gutiérrez was loaded with honours for his work: these included, apart from numerous professorships, election to the Peruvian Academy of Language, appointment to the Légion d’honneur and election to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, as well as the Príncipe de Asturias award from the Spanish government.

In 1998, already an old man, Father Gutiérrez joined the Dominican order, motivated in part by his admiration for Bartolomé de las Casas, the 16th-century Dominican friar who had fought so strenuously for the rights of indigenous peoples in Latin America.

In an interview in 2013, he remarked of his difficulties with the Vatican in earlier decades thus: “I learnt that you ought not to lose your sense of humour, a virtue that helps you not to feel as if you are at the centre of the world or a perpetual exile; not to take myself too seriously, which keeps you from becoming bitter. I like to laugh a lot, and I think this has helped me in difficult times. One should get on with it, without feeling indispensable, because theological reflection will carry on without me too.”

Father Gustavo Gutiérrez Merino, born June 8 1928, died October 22 2024

Part 326. A ramble.

In the 1980s I read Faith in the City, a report commissioned by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Robert Runcie. It was a study in deprivation and marginalisation in urban areas and listed recommendations on how the Church of England should press for change to overcome the causes of poverty and exclusion.  It was followed by Faith in the Countryside.

One aspect of the earlier report intrigued me: the call for not simply 'ambulance' work, helping individuals at point of need, but also a demand to engage with politicians to tackle causes of the ills set out in the report.  The report made reference to Liberation Theology. Thus it was that I became much more aware of and drawn to the writings of Gustavo Gutierrez and Leonardo Boff. I was drawn into reading the ideas of Jurgen Moltmann and then into the writings of Martin Luther King Jnr, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, James Lawson, Desmond Tutu, Dominic Crossan and Richard Rohr. 

Gutierrez, Moltmann and Lawson died this year. They leave a legacy of love, and hope, for the downtrodden, the oppressed, the marginalised and discriminated against.

Alongside the importance I attach to social justice issues and the need for Christians to engage in demanding systemic change has been a shift towards support for concepts found in liberal, progressive, radical and deconstructivist thinking.  Thus it is that I have been influenced by concepts articulated by, amongst others, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Jacques Derrida, Don Cupitt, Marcus Borg, Walter Brueggemann, John Robinson, Jim Rigby, Jim Palmer, Colin Coward and John Caputo.

I no longer describe myself as Christian.  I seek to understand, follow, and promote the concepts of love and social justice attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels.

Part 325. Call my bluff. Will the bishops fold?

I detect an element of desperation in the following statement by John Dunnett. When a poker player has a poor hand it is not recommended to raise the stakes. A bluff may be called with dire consequences.  I cannot see the House of Bishops folding. It almost as though the CEO of the Church of England Evangelical Alliance is going 'all in".  A risky strategy.

The statement is a demand for a Third Province. If it is rejected what then?  Does the departure lounge await?

"Following countless conversations with members of CEEC, General Synod, the Alliance and many others, I've noticed widespread consensus about what the so called PLF ‘provision’ or ‘reassurance’ needs to deliver, as the House of Bishops have chosen to proceed with their proposed changes regarding Living in Love and Faith. 

Let me highlight just three of them for you:

 

ONE We need to be in a part of the Church of England that has one biblical doctrine of sex and marriage. It's just not possible to hold two contradictory doctrines side by side. 

 

TWO We need to have bishops who believe, teach and lead out of orthodox convictions. Bishops who believe and uphold biblical teaching. Laypeople are saying to us, that's the kind of bishop they long to be overseen by. Clergy are saying that they need to be licensed and overseen by such bishops. 

 

THREE We need to guarantee what you might call ministerial pathways for the future. By that I mean securing the ongoing supply of people, being trained for ordained ministry, the ongoing supply of clergy, being appointed into parishes.

 

And of course, we're talking here about the guarantee of future appointment of orthodox bishops. We don't want anyone to be barred from ordination, parochial ministry, the episcopacy, because they can't, in good conscience, use or allow the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith. 

 

And if the provisions that are being explored and possibly brought to General Synod cannot guarantee at least those three things, then we have to see it as insufficient provision. So… 

 

> Please do pray for the challenging meetings that are currently going on about how Orthodoxy can be provided for, secured, going forwards. 

> Please do pray for those who are feeling vulnerable, even being squeezed at this time because of their stand for orthodoxy. 

> Please do pray for wisdom for those who are having to live out the reality of impaired fellowship at this time."

John Dunnett, National Director CEEC

Part 324. Personal opinions (2)

I was active in the voluntary sector as a trustee, director, volunteer, employee and self employed for 30 years, mostly in the  fields of poverty, debt, mental health, community engagement and homelessness.  Most of my activity was with faith and secular charities.

Twelve years ago I started attending my local Salvation Army corps as I was impressed by the work of the Army with the deprived and marginalised. Two years later I became an Adherent.  Latterly I became disenchanted with the Army as it failed to become inclusive on matters of sexual orientation. I had been prepared to pay little attention to the Army's doctrine that is conservative evangelical. However as my theological stance has shifted considerably in recent years that, together with its lack of movement on sexual orientation issues, led me to resign as an Adherent.

Readers of this blog will have noted the changes in my theological ideas.  It is a mish-mash of liberal, progressive, deconstructivist and radical thoughts.  A work in progress.  Underpinning it is my desire to follow Jesus and love my neighbour, not simply by intellectual assent but by practical action.

Part 323. Personal opinions.(1)

This blog does not seek to promote opinions with a view to influencing people to support them.  It is a commentary on how I perceive what is happening and what should be happening in the world.  I do not set out to be provocative, nor do I seek to act as a gatekeeper of "the truth".  It's more a case of finding it helpful to me to commit my thoughts to paper.

Evangelical free churches, The Salvation Army (TSA) and the Church of England (CofE) have been major influences in my faith journey. For many years I attended and preached at free churches.  Basically it was a diet of biblical fundamentalism and conservative evangelical doctrine.  However over time I became convinced that the most important element was to follow Jesus and love your neighbour. And so I slowly drifted away from the free churches and landed in the CofE.

What a glorious mish-mash of theology and ecclesiology!  High church, low church, Anglo-Catholics, liberals, and conservative evangelicals rubbing along with the odd elements of friction and yes, loathing.  Unity in diversity.  The CofE found a mechanism (flying bishops) to preserve an uneasy peace when it decided to ordain women.

 Now battle has been joined on the issue of church blessings for couples in same-sex civil marriages. There is an orchestrated campaign afoot for the creation of a new province within the CofE, not based on geography, but on an opinion that to permit such blessings is a fundamental breach of the CofE's doctrine and tradition and a refutation of biblical truth.

There is the threat of schism and departure from the Church.  How much of this is mere sabre-rattling is hard to tell.  Loss of homes and church buildings will doubtless make clergy think very carefully. The issue is having a debilitating effect within the Church which it can well do without given falling congregations, deteriorating revenue and major safeguarding issues. The vicar of the Church I attend has stated support for the blessings.

To follow: The Salvation Army.  Also  my theological shift.

Part 322. Significant change?

The UK & I Territory of The Salvation Army has decided that, in addition to officers, it will employ staff on contracts of employment to lead corps.  What will be the terms of contracts? Will they be attractive enough to encourage individuals to apply?  

One downside is that the contracts will not offer long-term security whereas officership does. As the Territory's Chief Personnel Officer (CPO) puts it:

Employed spiritual leaders will have more self-determination in terms of where they live and serve, provided that there is an opportunity for ministry in their chosen location. However long-term security will be less sure as, if the need or a role ceases or a different strategic direction is taken, they would not be automatically moved to another appointment as an officer would.  

The CPO states:

This change has emerged as a pragmatic response to missional need at local level, but it is also the result of a strategic decision rather than a reactive response.

Make of that what you will.

Part 321. What to believe?

What to believe? by John D Caputo is an interesting volume on radical theology.  It is in the context of seeking (and never finding) words to conclusively 'explain' or 'define' God that Caputo writes.  The following statements may be of interest.

REALITY IS A PLACE LANGUAGE CANNOT QUITE GO

Many people avoid the word "God" because the symbol is so easily misunderstood. Everyone means something a bit different by the word. It is always important not to fall asleep into religious argon. Religious language is a poetic attempt to capture in words what can often only be experienced in silence. 

Whatever our source of being is, it is beyond the verbs and nouns of human thought. Words may lead us to the threshold of this experience, but only silence can truly experience reverence before a fitful ocean or starry night.

When biblical poetry said, “Be still and know that I am God,” perhaps it was reminding us that the word “God” is a symbol, not an idea or definition. The symbol “God” is a place marker reminding us there is always a mysterious infinity between our clearest distinctions, something infinitely deeper than our most profound value, and something infinitely larger than our vastest understanding

Language is incredibly important when it comes to communication but we must never forget that reality is a place language cannot quite go. 

To reduce the symbol “God” to a mental image means to lose the awestruck experience to which the symbol may refer. The symbol refers not to a belief but to an awareness, not to linguistic understanding but to a sense of awe most reverently expressed by silence. 

The Persian poet Rumi had a teacher named Shams Tabrizi who made this point very well I think:

“Most of the problems of the world stems from linguistic mistakes and simple misunderstandings. Don’t ever take words at face value. When you step into the zone of love, language as we know it becomes obsolete. That which cannot be put into words can only be grasped through silence.”

JIM RIGBY

“I have in lectures often described this interesting situation by saying: we never know what we are talking about. For when we propose a theory, or try to understand a theory, we also propose, or try to understand, its logical implications; that is, all those statements which follow from it. But this, as we have just seen, is a hopeless task : there is an infinity of unforeseeable nontrivial statements belonging to the informative content of any theory, and an exactly corresponding infinity of statements belonging to its logical content. We can therefore never know or understand all the implications of any theory, or its full significance.”

Karl Popper, 'Unended Quest', Chapter 7.

KARL POPPER 

"We are now in a position to see why it is inherent in Popper's view that what we call our knowledge is of its nature provisional, and permanently so. At no stage are we able to prove that what we now 'know' is true, and it is always possible that it will turn out to be false. Indeed, it is an elementary fact about the intellectual history of mankind that most of what has been 'known' at one time or another has eventually turned out to be not the case. So it is a profound mistake to try to do what scientists and philosophers have almost always tried to do, namely prove the truth of a theory, or justify our belief in a theory, since this is to attempt the logically impossible. What we can do, however, and this is of the highest possible importance, is to justify our preference for one theory over another. In our successive examples about the boiling of water we were never able to show that our current theory was true, but we were at each stage able to show that it was preferable to our preceding theory. This is the characteristic situation in any of the sciences at any given time. The popular notion that the sciences are bodies of established fact is entirely mistaken. Nothing in science is permanently established, nothing unalterable, and indeed science is quite clearly changing all the time, and not through the accretion of new certainties. If we are rational we shall always base our decisions and expectations on 'the best of our knowledge', as the popular phrase so rightly has it, and provisionally assume the 'truth' of that knowledge for practical purposes, because it is the least insecure foundation available; but we shall never lose sight of the fact that at any time experience may show it to be wrong and require us to revise it.”

Bryan Magee, 'Popper'. (The US-edition of the booklet has the title 'Philosophy and the Real World: an Introduction to Karl Popper).

BRYAN MAGEE

Part 320. My Facebook posts

I administer a Facebook group entitled Liberal,  progressive and deconstructivist theology.

There you will see posts on mostly progressive, liberal and deconstructivist theological  topics. There are posts also on controversies and disputations within denominations, mostly centred on inclusion issues.

A significant number of posts are on social justice issues. They highlight the activities of faith and secular organisations campaigning for changes in government policy, both in terms of alleviating the effects of social injustice and systemic change to overcome the causes of discrimination, marginalisation, poverty, destitution and deprivation.  Clearly this requires campaigning for political action. These posts are, for followers of Jesus, illustrative of the application of the commandent to love your neighbour.

Overall my hope is that the posts illustrate faith in action from liberal, progressive and deconstructivist standpoints.  

I have also a page entitled John Hopkinson Theology. it is somewhat similar to the group mentioned above except it does not have posts on the activities of faith and secular organisations on social justice activities. Instead it concentrates on a broader range of theological discourse.

Part 319. More delay

The Salvation Army in the United Kingdom and Ireland Territory is struggling. Corps are closing, some are surviving without full-time officers and may be lucky to be led by  part-time officers or officers coming out of retirement.  There are more posts to be filled than personnel available. Retirements continue to outstrip cadet recruitment. The Army claims to be inclusive, but it is not and stands accused of hypocrisy not least from many within its ranks.

The Territory established the Membership Working Group to consider matters concerning membership of TSA including the Soldiers Covenant, criteria for adherence and associated Orders and Regulations.  The Group presented its report and recommendations to territorial leadership at he end of August.  Only a privileged few know the content of the report and the recommendations.  

The report is being delivered to International Headquarters for consideration by the international leadership.  Sometime in 2025 territorial leadership will update the Territory on outcomes of the ongoing consideration of the report by the territorial leadership.

Sadly the wider membership is not going to see the report and recommendations now. Nothing has been published indicating that the Territory intends to invite comments on the recommendations.  No transparency. 

Meanwhile, the downward spiral continues.

The hope is that inter alia there will an end to discrimination based on sexual orientation, and improved officers' terms of service.

Part 318. Inerrant, inspired.....or not?

The origins and status.of the bible have been considered a number of times in this blog. The following quotations are on these themes.

The Christian story does not drop from heaven fully written. It grew and developed over a period of forty-two to seventy years.  This is not what most Christians have been taught to think, but it is factual. Christianity has always been an evolving story. It was never, even in the New Testament, a finished story.

JOHN SHELBY SPONG 

It is not honest to say those who follow the law of love don't care about scripture as much as those who take the texts literally. 

The whole idea of one clear interpretation of the Bible to which every opinion must kneel is a product of the power hungry framework of European colonizers, not on the inventive creative spiritual interpretations of scripture’s Middle Eastern authors. 

There is certainly one reality that undergirds us all, but that reality is to be found in our actual interactions not in the clear definitions of any one philosophy. We cannot understand ourselves in the same way we understand objects because that kind of objectivity leaves out the very subjective consciousness we are trying to understand. 

Sartre called our efforts to reduce ourselves to objects so that we might avoid the ambiguities of life “bad faith.” We are not computers in search of the right code, we are biological critters who mistakenly think themselves to be independent from the web of life. 

Our task in religion is to re-connect with our source- be that source spiritual, biological or cosmic. My rule of thumb for religion is: if obeying scripture makes me stupid and cruel, either it is wrong, or I am reading it wrong. Either way, we must often disobey the letter of a law to seek out the spirit of goodness, truth and beauty. 

I do not believe slaves should obey their masters. I do not believe the world was created in seven days. I do not believe we should stone witches, or anyone else. I DO believe we must pick and choose from scripture with love and truth as our interpretive devices or we are better off leaving the text behind as a relic of an earlier day. 

If scripture is not used as roots out of which to grow, it is a dead tree anyway. Any religion must be dismissed as “bad faith” if it does not call us to radical honesty about our world, wildly creative expression of our own hearts, and to work for justice for our ENTIRE human family.

JIM RIGBY

“The question about the sources of our knowledge (...) has always been asked in the spirit of: 'What are the best sources of our knowledge--the most reliable ones, those which will not lead us into error, and those to which we can and must turn, in case of doubt, as the last court of appeal?' I propose to assume, instead, that no such ideal sources exist--no more than ideal rulers--and that all 'sources' are liable to lead us into error at times. And I propose to replace, therefore, the question of the sources of our knowledge by the entirely different question: 'How can we hope to detect and eliminate error?'  

The question of the sources of our knowledge, like so many authoritarian questions, is a genetic one. It asks for the origin of our knowledge, in the belief that knowledge may legitimize itself by its pedigree. The nobility of the racially pure knowledge, the untainted knowledge, the knowledge which derives from the highest authority, if possible from God: these are the (often unconscious) metaphysical ideas behind the question. My modified question, 'How can we hope to detect error?' may be said to derive from the view that such pure, untainted and certain sources do not exist, and that questions of origin or of purity should not be confounded with questions of validity, or of truth.”

KARL POPPER 

I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understandings and affirmations, statements not coming directly or somewhat directly from God.....I realised that whatever "divine revelation" and the "inspiration of the Bible" meant (if they meant anything), they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority.

MARCUS J BORG 

Properly understood the Bible is a potential ally to the progressive Christian passion for transformation of ourselves and the world. It is our great heritage. Along with Jesus, to whom it is subordinate, it is our greatest treasure.

MARCUS J BORG

My point is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are not smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now dumb enough to take them literally.

JOHN DOMINIC CROSSAN  

When it comes to the Bible, the question is always going to be how one should interpret it. Unfortunately, there is more than one answer to this question depending on who you ask. Even before a single verse of the Bible is read, an argument will ensue about the proper way to interpret it. In seminary I had a class on biblical hermeneutics. We were mostly encouraged to apply a literal interpretation. 

The literal interpretation asserts that a biblical text is to be interpreted according to the “plain meaning” conveyed by its grammatical construction and historical context. The literal meaning is held to correspond to the intention of the authors. This type of hermeneutics is often associated with belief in the verbal inspiration of the Bible, according to which the individual words of the divine message were divinely chosen. 

There are other ways people have interpreted the Bible. In the history of biblical interpretation, there are four major types of hermeneutics: literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical. Oddly enough, there is even debate and argument over how to define each of these four interpretive approaches. 

So, before a single verse in the Bible is read, there will be an argument about what interpretive approach should be used, followed by an argument about how these interpretive approaches should be understood and properly applied. That's a lot of arguing! 

The issue at hand is who or what determines a Bible verse's meaning? 

Exegesis and eisegesis are two conflicting approaches in Bible study. Exegesis is the exposition or explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis. The word exegesis literally means “to lead out of.” That means that the interpreter is led to his conclusions by following the text.

The opposite approach to Scripture is eisegesis, which is the interpretation of a passage based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. The word eisegesis literally means “to lead into,” which means the interpreter injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants.

Theology's little secret is the claim that "exegesis" is being done, when in fact it's always tainted by some "eisegesis". In other words, there is no objective interpretation of Scripture. All biblical interpretation is subjective. 

There are at least 14 Factors that influence how one interprets the Bible:

1. Your views regarding the inspiration of Scripture.

2. Whether you would favor a literal or figurative interpretation of any given passage.

3. Your knowledge and awareness of other “related” Scriptures dealing with the same issue, including the immediate context and the broader context of the entire body of Scripture.

4. Your knowledge and understanding of the background and motivation of the writer.

5. The way in which a given interpretation fits into your over-all theological belief system.

6. Your level of understanding of the original language in which the text was written.

7. The various interpretations and commentaries to which you have already been exposed.

8. The ways in which one processes information - a Western cerebral approach, an Eastern intuitive approach, and others. 

9. The degree to which you are willing to accept logical inconsistencies as part of your belief system.

10. Your willingness to change your views in the light of new information.

11. The degree to which you are satisfied with your current views.

12. The amount of time you are willing to devote to your theological study and inquiry.

13. The unwillingness to consider alternative interpretations that diverge from your religious tradition.

14. Your overall view of God that has been conditioned by many different life experiences and relationships.

Based on the above variables, does it surprise anyone that there are many different ways the Bible is interpreted? This is especially problematic because many people view the Bible as something to be "right" about.

Our best interpretations of the Bible are subjective. That's not a criticism. We just have to know this is the case. People start with their own subjective presuppositions about what the Bible is, such as: 

- the Bible was meant to present a coherent theology about God and is a piece of coherent doctrinal exposition

- the Bible is the inerrant, infallible and sole message/"Word" of God to the world

- the Bible is a blueprint for daily living 

People will often say, “My authority is the Bible.” It would be more accurate for them to say, “My authority is what they told me at church the Bible means.” That's not meant to be overly snarky. It's just the reality of it. There has never been a singular or unified interpretation of the Bible. 

One's theological understandings are shaped and formed by their religious sub-culture or tradition. Throughout history there have been varying Christian views on even the most fundamental doctrines associated with the Christian faith such as the divinity of Jesus, existence of hell, God as a supreme being, the doctrine of original sin, and the Trinity. The idea that there is an enduring core theology that is accepted as "Christian" is not true. What is "Biblical Christianity" to one person is not to another. 

Progressive theologians, as a countermeasure to a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, find a way to interpret every Bible verse through the lens of love or through the lens of their understanding of Jesus. Though they can't claim their approach is "right", I believe it can be argued that it produces a more redeeming result, which should not be taken lightly. 

Jesus was a sage and story-teller, and did not ordinarily take his point of departure from texts of Scripture. In his core sayings and parables, the Scriptures are conspicuously missing.

Neither did Jesus write anything, or instruct his apostles to record what he said or did. It was not Jesus who commissioned the writing of the New Testament. Instead, Jesus confronted the religious leaders, finding them guilty of what amounted to Bibliolatry – the glorification of a scared writing. 

One can take the Bible as a literary anthology—a collection of varied literary genres written by multiple authors over the span of many centuries. The Bible is an Epic, telling the saga of humankind. It speaks to the central themes of our existence, including life and death, good and evil, the nature of reality, meaning and purpose, the non-material or transcendent dimension, suffering and flourishing, love and hate, politics and religion. The saga includes both the ugly and beautiful things we do in the name of God. It’s a story that is still going strong.

Personally, I think the originality of the story the Bible tells makes it a fascinating and profound piece of literature. In the beginning God creates the universe, gives life and orders everything, gradually fades into the background, hands the keys over to a nobody in Palestine who cobbles together a small group of peasant followers, and single-handedly sparks a revolution against the institution of religion, which results in his execution.  

The Bible is based upon the construct of theism and anthropomorphism as its primary literary vehicle for expressing the reality of "God." Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, or intentions to non-human entities. Theism views God as a sentient consciousness which witnesses, governs, judges, forgives, and outlives. 

Keep in mind, that the word "God" is a linguistic marker to identify an ultimate reality that cannot by definition be fully comprehended. Consider the possibility that the word and concept of "God" is a metaphor itself - that the construct of theism is symbolic of a higher power, governing force, creative energy, vitality or essence behind or infused into all existence.

But even given all of that, because of how the Bible was abused to damage many people spiritually and psychologically, it may never be a piece of literature one will be able to embrace meaningfully. That's okay too. 

The ultimate authority of one's life is not the Bible. The highest truth is not confined between the covers of a book. It is not something written by men and frozen in time. It is not from a source outside oneself. One's ultimate authority is the voice of truth within one's own innermost being.

JIM PALMER 

   

I