I wouldn't start from here.

 There is an old joke, one version goes like this:

A tourist lost in the countryside asks a local the way to the city. The answer: Well sir, if I were you, I wouldn't start from here.

I was reminded of this whilst reading a book by Adrian Alker: Is a radical church possible? Adrian has been a Church of England priest for over 35 years, founded the St Mark's Centre for Radical Christianity in my home city of Sheffield and was Chair of the Progressive Christianity Network Britain of which I am a member.

Whilst there is much to commend in the book I finished my reading with a sense that it failed to convince that a radical, as distinct from a liberal/progressive, church is possible.  The author accepts the thesis of Marcus Borg (amongst others) that the bible is a purely human construct.  The author engages in what I consider to be a forlorn and unnecessary attempt to scrutinise the bible to seek out the historical or 'real' Jesus. He draws out very well the way the books of Matthew and Luke state the central thesis of the teaching ascribed to Jesus, namely that the commandments to love God and love neighbour are the underlying principles of the Jewish scriptures and are to be followed in preference to the restrictive rules of the Law.  However the influence of postmodernism is not as evident as I expected, in particular the application of the ideas of  Jacques Derrida to reading, understanding and applying language.  Don Cupitt’s ideas in respect of Kingdom are considered.

For me, the starting point of my journey is not with an understanding of the historical Jesus, nor the intricacies of  the development of principles from rules. What matters are the principles themselves, how to apply them now and hope as to how they will be applied in the future.  Understanding the source and biblical commentary underlying the principles, whilst of interest, is not a prerequisite for their application. 

The Christian faith for many is no longer the stick of the fear of hell, nor the carrot of eternal joy in heaven. In its place is a desire to follow the principles ascribed to Jesus in a document called the bible.  Who Jesus was (is?) and who (plural) composed the text of the bible is interesting but it is not where I start my journey to the Kingdom.

A sense of disappointment.

 I have been reading The Heart of Christianity by Marcus J. Borg. His analysis of the two paradigms is interesting and persuasive.  The earlier paradigm sees Christianity as grounded in divine authority.  Divine authority for Protestants resides in the bible: for Catholics there is in addition the authority of the church.  The later or emerging paradigm sees the bible as  historical, metaphorical, sacramental, relational and transformational. 

Stark differences, central to which is the opinion (or belief) that the bible is a divine product with divine authority or,  contra, it is a human response to God.

Readers of my blog understand I am in the latter camp, the bible is not to be understood as statements of literal fact laid down by God or inspired by God, nor is faith a matter of living life  in the belief that we are saved for a heavenly afterlife. Instead the bible is a human guide to living our lives in service to humanity, to bring His kingdom on earth, a kingdom of love and support for the less fortunate, the deprived, the excluded and discriminated against.

My overall impression of the thesis advanced by Borg is one of admiration for a clear exposition of the emerging paradigm.  However, there is also a nagging doubt that manifests itself in  my sense of disappointment at the emphasis he places on the importance of the bible.  

Never heard a sermon on this.

The Church of England's Book of Common Prayer contains a service entitled Evening Prayer, although it may be known in some parishes as Evensong or Choral Evensong.  Readers of this blog understand that I do not subscribe to most of the doctrines of the CofE in their literal sense but recognise their value as metaphor, symbolism and myth.

Following the reading from the Old Testament the congregation say or sing Magnificat taken from Luke 1: 46-55.  I have never heard a sermon based on these verses either in the CofE or any other denomination.

The BCP states verses 52-53 as follows:

He hath put down the mighty from their seat: and exalted the humble and meek.

He hath filled the hungry with good things: and the rich he hath sent empty away.

The New International Version of the bible has it thus:

He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble.

He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty.

The Message puts it like this:

He knocked tyrants off their high horses, pulled victims out of the mud.

The starving poor sat down to a banquet, the callous rich were left out in the cold.

Powerful stuff.  A call for inclusion, for justice.  Highly political and theatening to the established order of religion and state.  But it was not new, it reflects a major strand of thinking in what Christians call the Old Testament.  For those of us who seek systemic change in society to achieve social justice  the words quoted above are but one part of a range of teaching on inclusion and justice attributed to Jesus by the writers of the synoptic gospels.