Part 273. Speak up!!

There is no true commitment to solidarity with the poor if one sees them merely as people waiting passively for help.  The goal is not to become the 'voice of the voiceless' but rather in some way to ensure those without a voice find one

Gustavo Gutierrez 

The Church must fulfil her duty of accompanying the poor and of being the voice of those who have no voice.

Oscar Romero 

There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there never must be a time when we fail to protest.

Elie Wiesel

All of us must be messengers of the Lord and of the Spirit, working to transform the society in which we live.

Oscar Romero 

A church that doesn't practice political advocacy for those being marginalised is simply being a tool of the status quo and the Powers That Be.

Mark Sandlin 

Part 272. Don Cupitt

When visiting a Church of England vicar in the early 1990s I commented that one might discern when a priest was ordained by looking at their bookshelf heaving with volumes acquired at theological college but little or nothing published since. Not so said the vicar directing me to books written by Don Cupitt. He added that his views, and those of many of his fellow priests, accorded with those of Cupitt, but he would not admit to it publicly.  

Very little mention is made of Cupitt today in progressive, deconstructive or liberal theological circles which is a shame given the major influence he had on the thinking in said circles.  He embraces the postmodern and the influence of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Jacques Derrida is clear in his writings. A non-realist Cupitt denies the existence of an independent metaphysical God. There are no objective truths, there is only our language and from that the meanings and interpretations humanity has developed.  In the words attributed to Jesus we discover our own understanding that many construe as a liberating force for good.

It is in this context I commend the article by Colin Coward that follows. Beautifully composed, it is, to my mind  a powerful and persuasive argument for non-realist thinking and progressive theology.

Unadulterated Love

Transformational Christian Life

Colin Coward April 23, 2024

I was born in 1945. As I’ve recounted before, in 1957 aged eleven I was intuitively confident that I desired the company of other boys, knowing that the other boys in my class were being attracted to girls. I rejected what I understood to be the taboos of my family, my church, Christian teaching, Biblical authority and the authority of God that desire for someone of the same sex was abhorrent to God, sinful, an abomination. My arrogant independence of mind meant that in rejecting the teaching of all these authorities I was determining that the Church, the Bible and God were in the wrong when they condemned my sexuality and my emotional desires. 

Five or so years later and certainly prior to my eighteenth birthday, the result of my rejection of what conservatives name as orthodox, traditional, Biblical teaching in relation to homosexuality meant that I had carved out a freedom myself to question everything else in the teaching of the Church that didn’t make sense. It was a huge relief when Honest to God was published because I already knew that I didn’t believe that God was a being or that Bible stories of a virgin birth, angels, miracles and appearance after death were accounts of things that actually happened. Despite this, I had been confirmed and was deeply involved in the life of my local church and later in the life of the diocese. A decade and a half later I was accepted for training as an Anglican priest. No questions were asked about my faith or my sexuality. Theological college initiated in me an increasingly deep and personally important contemplative spiritual life. The foundations of my experiential, contemplative, activist faith were enhanced and deepened by my practical experience as a curate and parish priest in the 1970s and 80s.

It was the quality of life and the friendship of people in my parish church and diocesan networks who nourished and inspired me. My church social, theological and intellectual life was rich and energised. The Christian community and my network of friendships were more important than anything else. I learnt by experience that Christian life woven around the Gospel message of Jesus Christ was the way in which the lives of individuals, communities and human societies were being inspired and transformed. 

 It was obvious to me that either everything about Christian faith had to be true or that little or nothing was true. In my forties I decided to live “as if” everything was true, not believing that all the events and stories recounted in the Bible were literally true. . I committed myself to live “as if” it was true because the practical life of the church was good and nourishing. I didn’t know for sure what was and wasn’t true about Christian teaching. There was great beauty and power in the metaphors, mythical stories and wisdom teachings, yes, but my conviction of the value of Christian faith and life was rooted in my personal experience and intuition.

Non-realist faith

I had what I would now understand to be a non-realist, non-theistic, humanistic religious faith. It was faith not in the doctrines and dogmas of the Christian Church but in a way of life exemplified by Jesus and manifest in the Gospel accounts of his life, teaching, wisdom and practice. I did not believe in a supernatural, interventionist God. Freedom within the Church of England to believe in God in this way was its great, spacious gift to me. I recognised in the Church of England’s Jesus a person who set out to recruit a group of men and women to whom he gave the freedom to think differently. They had the insight and courage to continue to think and live differently after he was crucified.

Today’s Church of England is a deeply troubled institution. As a contemplative, spiritual gay man, I am less secure now in trusting that the Church provides a safe, nourishing, enriching, healthy environment in which to live and explore faith. It is no longer obvious that today’s God and Jesus are trustworthy inspirations for healthy, spiritual, nourishing Christian faith. Prejudice and abuse have become systemic. The overcoming of prejudice and discrimination against women and LGBTQIA+ and black and disabled and disempowered people is no longer a fundamental element of Christian life, faith and vision.

This contemporary reality has driven me to re-examine my Christian basics. What is “God”? What is “God” really like? Is it no longer acceptable to live “as if” Jesus’ teaching about the essence of God in the Gospels is true? The Church of England now has great difficulty distinguishing between healthy and unhealthy patterns of life, behaviour and belief; between healthy and unhealthy theologies, constructs of God and understandings of the wisdom, teaching and life of Jesus of Nazareth.

I can see the changes that have taken place over the nearly eight decades of my life with greater clarity now, mapping the more recent changes in our Anglican ideas about God. The essence of hope for the future lies in the wisdom and lives of people on Earth. This is the only place where wisdom and Mystery can ever come to be known – and will always be evolving.

Our individual human responsibility

The most important value in any religion lies in its ability to affect the quality of our lives for better and not for worse; not to indoctrinate us with a belief system, creeds and dogmas, but to open us to our personal glory as created, conscious beings living on a finite planet in a universe with apparently infinite dimensions. Religions are doing “the work of God”, nurturing the divine energy of creation and evolution, when they are providing people with the resources and nourishment to grow and flourish, to know ourselves well, to become compassionate, integrated, emotionally aware, relational, loving, self-giving, visionary people. What God is “like”, therefore, is like the something that informs and inspires our individual lives. That something is, of course, the medium within which we are born, live and grow; our parents and extended family, our immediate social network and society, our culture, our location and moment in history, our education and religious background. All these elements are variable and uncertain, fragile, subject to human insecurities and prejudices, sometimes toxic, sometimes deeply creative and healthy. We can too easily become entrenched in our cultural norms and values, emotionally dependent, addicted to our dominant tribal conditioning. Our freedom to develop a healthy spiritual life and practice is essential, incorporating self-examination and reflection, self-awareness, contemplation, learning to nourish and value the essences of love, goodness, wisdom, truth, justice and compassion with which each of us is endowed.

Listen to everything until it all belongs together and you are part of it

Three decades ago I moved from being a parish priest to become a full-time campaigner, a ‘contemplative activist’, three decades in which the conceptual environment of the world in which I live has changed dramatically. The reality of evolution has become integral to my world view and my conception of Christian faith. More recently, the seamless nature of everything in creation has become a vital theme. We are born into an evolving universe and over the course of our lives our faith and the faith of the Church will continue to evolve. We are part of a seamless whole, coinherent, co-creators in life. Whether we are conscious of this or not, we are seamlessly involved with all members of the human community, embedded as we are in the emergent environment of our fragile biosphere.

Our Christian foundations of faith are always evolving, “shaking” as Paul Tillich noted eighty years ago. The seamless reality of creation and life of which we are very slowly becoming aware is being strenuously resisted by reactionary movements in religion, politics and economics. Seamless awareness requires us to move beyond our inherited, traditional, orthodox models of dogma and doctrine towards more human and humane, experiential, inclusive, relational models. Progressive Christian movements understand that the new seamless vision of life requires us to reappraise our inherited models of human gender and sexuality. The foundations of Christian faith are enshrined in the concept known as God, revealed in the life of Jesus Christ and manifest in the mystical presence of the Holy Spirit. In the evolving seamless awareness of all matter and life in creation, I find in Jesus’ life, wisdom, teaching, practice, parables and relationships, a model for the values and ideals common to the necessary wisdom and health of all humanity. The ultimate seamless harmony of all faith traditions has to exemplify and seek the well-being of every individual life and of our mutual lives on this planet. Human flourishing is the path to which we are all called.

Institutional religions and the institutional Church are finding this evolutionary step, the call to listen to everything until it all belongs together and we are part of it, very difficult to imagine, let alone adjust to and integrate in its teaching and practice. Sexuality, gender, inequality, economic injustice, the climate crisis, how people function and malfunction, emotionally, physically and spiritually, the well-being of our planet and environment, globalisation, artificial intelligence and the manipulation of what we take to be reality, dysfunctional political and spiritual leadership, are all requiring us to make sometimes massive adjustments to our lives in faith.

Part 271. Further musings.

Those who peruse my Facebook pages:

John Hopkinson Theology &

Theology of Social Justice 

will have noted 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 writings 

 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 270. Musings

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 269. Jottings.

I rarely attend services at my local Salvation Army Corps and I have stopped attending bible study meetings. I miss listening to the brass band at services and discussion at bible studies. I ceased attending as I no longer believe in the theology and doctrine of the Army and am dismayed at the stance on LBGTQ+ issues summarised as "inclusive at the door, exclusive at the core".

The people at the Corps are most welcoming. I attend the weekly lunch club and activities such as sales.  I am impressed by the social work of the Army but feel it should do much more campaigning on social issues. I have been an Adherent for ten years but do wonder how long I can continue. 2024 may see  major changes  in position on the criteria for officership in the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory and if that be the case I shall probably not resign. 

Part 268. Well said Bel Cassie

An interesting article by Bel Cassie. I concur with the thrust of the article.

'I’m a “let’s just get it done right now” person. And the whole narrative around how long any kind of organisational or systemic change takes, is quite frankly exhausting. Especially when barriers appear to be consistently erected instead of eradicated. 

So what’s the middle space that we can meet in? Where is the point of ‘compromise’ that keeps the advocates from losing heart without pushing those who are not “ready” too far beyond their capacity too quickly*? I have some thoughts. Education is a place to start. And the creation of safe spaces in which to have the conversations that matter without fear of recrimination. And I don’t think “opt in - this tool is available for you to utilise if you are interested” is going to cut it anymore. When it comes to diversity and inclusion - across the spectrum (meaning all minority groups, disability, multicultural AND LGBTQI+), at this juncture in history education and training are vital. So, I’m game if you are, let’s have the conversation. If the spaces aren’t provided, let’s create them.'

*I would argue that there comes a time when people need to be pushed into discomfort, whether they are ready or not, if meaningful change, change that is edifying and affirming - even if it is scary, is going to occur

Part 267. Human Rights.

A definition taken from Wikipedia.

Human rights are moral principles, or norms, for certain standards of behaviour and are regularly protected as substantive rights in substantive law, municipal and international law.

The United Nations claims as one of its great achievements  the creation of a comprehensive body of human rights laws.

The United Nations charter is persuasive but not legally binding. In the UK the Human Rights Act 1998 gives legal effect to the European Convention of Human Rights and therefore is legally binding on  the courts with a right of appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

ECHR judges have engaged in judicial creativity to expand the range of activities covered by the Convention (a recent case has brought environment/climate change within its ambit). The Convention has taken on a life of its own divorced from the supposed intention of its original authors, in much the same way as the meaning of USA Constitution  has been moulded by the judiciary.

The UN states human rights are rights inherent to all human beings. But are they Inherent? Is this simply a nod in the direction of natural law and natural rights theories, or a deliberate intention to claim some natural or metaphysical basis for human rights?  Bentham was in no doubt, any attempt to invest human rights with a natural law underpinning was a 'nonsense'.

Our concept of what are human rights might well be influenced by moral values based on religious beliefs. However it is a mistake to believe that religious moral values are God given and by extension  natural values. Scripture is human understanding of God. It is not inerrant nor to be interpreted literally. 

Part 266. I concur.

This article. posted on the Facebook page Kissing Fish Book  is deserving of wide publication. I believe the author to be Roger Wolsey.  The post articulates arguments with which i concur.

"A big part of why many are leaving the Church is because they aren’t aware of progressive Christianity or progressive Christian congregations. Granted, this isn’t the only reason – but it’s tragic that so many folks aren’t aware that there is a form of the faith that many of them would actually like a lot.

Whether or not there is a literal heaven, we are Christians not for the sake of some future reward/glory, but rather for the sake of living faithfully to Jesus and his Way here and now — for the sake of experiencing and partaking in salvation/wholeness and the Kingdom of God here and now. Faith isn’t fire insurance to avoid going to “hell.” We seek to follow the religion *of* Jesus not the religion *about* him.

Progressive Christians believe that Jesus *is* “the way, the truth, and the life,” and we believe that all who follow Jesus’ teaching, Way, and example, by whatever name, and even if they’ve never even heard of Jesus, are fellow brothers and sisters in Christ and his Way.

That said, we’re rather enamored by the uniqueness of the Jesus story and we invite others to join us in sharing that specific journey — even if we feel no dire need to convert them.

It is this non-exclusive approach to our faith that many young adults find compelling. So we’re evangelistic even as we’re not.

Ultimately, let’s just be as faithful as we can and not worry about “the Church dying.” We have no fear of death for we follow a savior who gave it all up for the sake of others. Indeed, if we do anything to “attract” people out of desperation on our part, it’ll be fruitless. It’s like dating someone who is insecure and anxious — not attractive. Let’s just boldly be who were are — and maybe even more so — yes, more so.” ~ RW, author, K.F.

Part 265. Uncomfortable reading?

An interesting commentary by Major David Cavanagh, a major post holder in The Salvation Army.  I concur with the thrust of his comment.

'According to Alan Hirsch, Howard Snyder identifies “ministry to the poor” as a characteristic of apostolic movements, and cites The Salvation Army as an example of this. He further comments that movements almost always “involve” people at the grassroots level and actively “involve” the masses.

It seems to me that this conflates two rather different things. While The Salvation Army has always had a bias to the poor (ministry to/for the poor), in the early days this was carried out to some extent, by converts who witnessed to their peers. Today, in many settings, it is middle-class Salvationists who minister “to” the poor and deprived, who are passive recipients of these ministries, rather than being actively involved in them and caught up in the redeeming dynamic of personal transformation offers by the gospel…..if truth be told, these ministries are often directed by middle-class Salvationists and largely carried out by men and women of good will whose only connection to The Salvation Army and the gospel is through their volunteering.'

The commentary reflects my personal experience of a number of corps. Whilst one may quibble over what it means to be middle-class it is the case that many Salvationists have a much more comfortable lifestyle than the poor.  It is 'ambulance work': givers and recipients. However, we must be mindful of the caveats articulated in the commentary. The general thrust of the argument does not apply in all settings and there are examples of involvement and direction from within the community of the 'poor'.  That said there is a disconnect that the Army must strive to overcome if it is to rediscover its passion and motivation to bring the love of Jesus, spiritual and material, to those it seeks to serve.  The Salvation Army must be perceived to be of,   with and for  the communities it serves or wishes to serve. 

Part 264. Questions for the powerful.

Questions for those who hold the reins of power: politicians, financiers, economic leaders, judges, trade union leaders senior church figures, administrators.

Those who are powerful have to remember the litmus test that God gives to the powerful. What is your treatment of the poor, or the hungry?  What is your treatment of the vulnerable, or the voiceless?

Desmond Tutu 

As followers of Jesus we are to  challenge the powerful, we must challenge systemic social injustice, we must demand change.