Being a mother, wife and priest

The comments to this article by Rosemary Lain-Priestley make for interesting reading. Some of them are very sweeping. There is one that stands out for its graceful critique of the objections to women's ordained ministry, which I reproduce below:



This was written by Carrie Ford:


What you are pressing for is for the full humanity of the person who is priested to emerge - a form of incarnation of the sacred in however limited, hesitant or broken a mode which it emerges.


The fact is that the domestic humanity of maleness - as fathers, husbands, sons has disappeared historically. 'Doing life', reproducing the next generation, caring for childen and congregations was undertaken by 'clergy wives' who made the 'priestly household' work within Anglicanism, at zero cost to the organisation. Unsung and now in needing of being reframed.


I was in the first raft of women ordained as deacons in 1987, and at the time I had just given birth to my son, from whom I was separated for my pre-ordination retreat. My Bishop concluded that paid employment as a woman clergy-person would not be an option. I should not seek to undertake stipendiary work in any form, I was told by my Bishop, my 'vocation' was to stay home with my children.


So much has changed. Maternity benefits and job shares, the church is slowly, in its organisational framing, coming to terms with the implications of having ordained women to the Priesthood. But the full equality of women proclaimed in the Scriptures - and agreed by General Synod has real implications. When a woman is ordained she is not a surrogate man, nor an androgyne, there is a social context to her life which has not been taken on board. Nor have the implications of what Priesthood means in the 'domestic' realm - that of mother and of wife, and the dangerous realm of sexuality 'the totty' you mention now has been unveiled - and needs to be addressed.


This, of course, is an opportunity for re-imagining and living modern Anglicanism. The question is how many questioning women, and women are roughly 40% of the ordained clergy in the CofE today, does it take to bring in real lasting change.

I like Carrie's challenge to us all at the end.

Carrie also writes:

The General Synod of the Church of England went to enormous expense in terms of people's time and theological reflection to hammer out the argumentation from the three perspectives of Anglicanism on this - Scriptures Tradition and Reason. From Genesis through to the first ressurection appearance to the (Apostle) Mary who was told to go and tell her fellow disciples that Christ was risen, along to the Baptismal cry of Galatians 3:28 that in Christ ALL are equal, and equal inheritors of the charism of God's blessing and empowerment. The Church of England House of Bishops and Laity have settled this issue. As Christ said on the Cross - It is Finished.

Now we need to get on with the business of realising that equality in the life of the Church and its potential ministry into wider fractured communities.

This is why ongoing bickering within the Anglican Communion once that debate has been completed (as has gone on around 'permitting' women into the Episcopacy is deeply frustrating and completely diversionary.)

The challenge for the church today is to realise quite what it means to say that in Christ all are radically equal, and to work through what paying attention to the full reality and implications of our differences really means. That is the revolutionary pattern of Christ. It impacts on ethnicity, sexuality, gender, class, abilities, all those areas which the Equalities and Human Rights Commission are now paying attention to. If the Churches will not pay attention then the Secular arm of the State will - and for that we should marvel and be grateful.

That is why paying attention to Christ's modeling of what the kingdom of God means, is So tough. It is truly revolutionary to any world which chooses to make maleness the site of authority, the font of all wisdom, or the sole pattern of how the sacred is to be mediated.

Mark Carey, New Wine North and Mission

Working under the heading: "Kairos. Now. Releasing communities of followers in the mission of Jesus."

Parish buildings have disappeared where Mark is operating and a new name has been established, which for some still needs the appendage - church. It takes time, I guess. He will be without the old structures of a PCC etc. Diane Kershaw has been working for him, I was at Bap with Diane, she will be ordained into the Order of Mission.

What is the 'Order of Mission'? It has existed for 6 years since April 2003 under David Hope.  There are members throughout the world. Diane talks in her recent paper about how we live in days of great upheaval...leaving us unsure of how to communicate the gospel...in this fast changing world...The Order of Mission has links to the past...Celtic nuns....Salvation Army...protestant ministry organisations. Herein lies their heritage. They live in simplicity, in a reworking of the ancient vows of chastity, poverty and obedience.

Is there any other way of living than being missional, Mark wonders. He suggests we can not split discipleship from mission. 

There needs to be an emphasis on 'becoming missional'. Maybe we only 'become'.

C Peter Wagner describes what it is to be a disciple of Christ. Mark is very pro-active about networking. There seems to be an ever-widening circle - to Christ, to the body of Christ and to the work of Christ in the world. Missional reaches outward beyond your own personal relationship with Jesus. He is involved in accountable networks and this seems to be a place where ministry ideas can be tested out against the wider body of Christ.

He encourages us to make purposeful connections, to network, if we are to stay fresh. Engaging with others fosters this. We are also encouraged to give up control, live in the tension of not having the answers. We are in a sense helpless and in the acknowledgement of this, we seek to work in His strength instead.

Isaiah 55:8 The Lord's word coming to the people in this way. We seek definition so that we can reflect and analyse but by doing this Mark wonders whether we are seeking to control the intervention of God. But He gets involved and gets messy. It is more effective than our reigning him in and making everything neat and orderly. Connecting with people is no doubt fraught with difficulties. Mission is worked out in encounter with people.

Mark cautions us not to go along with the people who are 'rubbishing Fresh Expressions'. We need to see what God is doing here. We need to engage in new ways in these times. Excellent, I am pleased to hear this.

We need to live seeking the revelation of God. The bread is DAILY - God gives daily - this is great! This surely centres us on the here so that we do not become fixed on future goals, which might not be achieved. This sounds healthy. We are encouraged to ask ourselves where we see His Kingdom coming in.

The Order of Mission encourages its members to take on a rule of life.
For the Order of Mission, they use the idea of 'life-shapes'. Kairos is Jesus' first proclamation in Mark - the time has come to turn to God. We need to make decisions without prevaricating. He wants to see a generation of children growing up to make discipled and missional decisions; aing generation that is bombarded with all sorts of choices.

There is a sense that he is wanting to bring an order out of the potential chaos of life so that we can be freed up. Mark suggests a missional person seeks to live a rhythmed life, an attractive life. We will be challenged. Keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus is the only answer. We have to watch our reactions to our changing circumstances. We have to guard against the dramatic. God is the first to whom we must turn. We should live not in a way defined by our culture but by the Bible  and John 15, abiding in Christ:

You are my friends if you do what I command. I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. This is my command: Love each other.

We must seek to work out of a time of rest and restoration - this sounds spot on and I have been thinking a lot lately about our rest times and the retreating to rest in the father's presence that Jesus examples.

Alan Hirsch talks about how mission is the organising principle. Mark 1:35-38:
'Let us go somewhere else... so that I can preach there also. That is why I have come.'

Missional leaders need to be decisive and not distracted. Mark wonders whether issues in human sexuality might be one distraction from the church's missional impetus.

A Mission-shaped church statement which sounds like something Chris Wright would say, I'm not sure, Mark shares with us:
"It isn't the church of God that has a mission - it is the mission of God that has a church"

The culture and our way of speaking into it - we need patience; think about the mustard seed. The feeding of the five thousand reveals that Jesus can do a lot with a little.

Mission caveats:
It is okay to fail. We need to make judgment calls and close things that are not working before new things can grow.
We should expect joy - this is life-affirming and the stuff of adventure - hooray!
It is about ensuring we engage purposefully, discipleship - bring things out into the light, confront and deal with it (Matthew 18). It is hard to do this. Takes courage.
Intentionally share life with those who have been given to you in relationship under the kingdom. Spending time with people of peace is a part of being church and being missional.

Let's dance....

We are looking at how we do friendship with David Runcorn this morning. How do we connect with one another against the backdrop of this highly sexualised culture that we live in? The Church often hits the media for its reflection on sexaul issues. It speaks against and into our highly sexualised culture.

As usual I am spinning off from this with much of my own thinking.

We are looking at something fundamental - friendship is a basic human need.

We live in a particular place if we live in this community (St John's)- we might need to have a very strong hold on how transitional this place is. We are passing through. We are passing through, more fundamentally too. I think sometimes in some of our friendships we are also passing through. There is a need there and we might be called away at anytime, after all God can not be depleted but we can. How do we cope with change and which friendships will sustain us and remain? Which have a longevity? Are they always supposed to have longevity?

How will we sustain friendships in first post?

We will all seek different things from our friendships. We spend some time thinking about what makes a good friend.

On whom do we project our friendship ideals? We are connecting particularly with social networking and chat rooms and yet perhaps we are more isolated than we ever were.

David tells us how Tim Lot has explored friendship in 'White City Blue'.
David tells us that if we google 'loneliness' there are 9.5 million sites in .28 seconds.



Nouwen has explored friendship and loneliness.Ourselves, others, God - how we relate and to whom. How do we journey from loneliness to solitude, from hostility to hospitality and from illusion to God?

What does friendship look like? We can stand guard over each other's space. We can allow each other to be free. I think my marriage has changed in this regard from something possessive in which our very identities were bound up with one another to something, where by grace, and we have a long way to go yet, we are guarding each other's space. We do not have to be at the centre of the other's space to demonstrate love. In fact, it is often in the relinquishing of our place at the centre that we love one another.

Currently, I am protective of my husband's football commitments. There is nothing shallow about the needs that are being met in this space. He plays three evenings a week and God is honouring our choice to have this be an event in the week. This is a place of physical exercise, a release of endorphins, it is a place of self-esteem, my husband plays a good game. More importantly, it is a place of bonding. The game is brought before God, sealed in prayer. He plays for college. It is working as a space for outreach as some of his friends come along to play too. It is a place of revelation and growth for those who come and play football with people about whom they have developed prejudice which is being broken down. One of the friends invited is starting to understand now that this God whom we worship, whom he doesn't yet know, is interested even in the way that he plays football. Football can be played to the glory of God.

My husband is protective of my fellowship and worshipping spaces. He understands my commitment to friendships that I also run virtually through blogging and social networking. From a much more secure space now than when we were first married because we are Christian brother and sister as well as man and wife and this brings a new dimension into your relationship, he wants for me to thrive and connect in these spaces and have time to explore them and so there is a freedom like there never was before.

Only God can fulfil our deepest longings for unity, not husbands, wives or friends and yet he gives us this, is this because our union with God is not complete either until the eschaton? (My own thoughts).

If we look at Genesis, it is not good for the earth creature to be alone - remember the androgyny - Adam is not man until Eve is woman and he understands his difference.

I have been exploring this ache and the sense of frustrated incompletion. We are bewildered and also complemented by each other's difference. Look at Adam's desire for something that complements him which is not fulfilled by any of the animals. When he realises what he doesn't want, God gives him Eve after a deep sleep.

Who are the lonely? Not something or someone out there. It is personal. Humanity is driven by a desire to satisfy this ache. Where does wholeness come from - it is in reaching out but it is not without risk. It makes us vulnerable. Adam and Eve will hide from each other and God. We live in this world which is not what we want it to be. We seek to be reconciled to this feeling of incompletion but is that again looking for a wholeness that will not be granted here on earth. I am sure, we will feel this tension for the whole of our earthly lives. It is an open wound, I feel, and sometimes it is swathed in ointment and cloth and sometimes the cloth becomes frayed and the cold air gets in.

So in our communities

• Counteracting the idealism - the Christian ideal of wholeness and unity which is actually so ephemeral. 
• We need to enter the struggle together and be real about it.
• How do we navigate friendship within ministry?
• We will have multiple roles. 

This is an interesting article from Lee Abbey: ‘On a Cliff’s Edge’: Actualizing Luke 8:22–39 in an Intentional Christian Community on the North Devon Coast By L. J. Lawrence. Free sample Expository Times. It is not hugely penetrating but it explores the transitory nature of our community life.



David Runcorn finishes by showing us a fab video of a guy called Matt Harding who dances against many famous backdrops of the countries he has visited in the world. For me, it conveys the amazing sense of connection and yet difference - for when the corporate dance is over, we return to dancing on our own! Interestingly, for my own sense of what I understand about myself, a deep longing for the corporate, I sense the joy far more of the corporate dance than the dance Matt dances on his own. Have you ever even felt jealous of the perichoretic unity of the Godhead? I have. God is never alone - Father, Son and Holy Spirit and yet isn't it interesting that he should desire to make us - so what does that say about God - incomplete in his completion! Always hoping that we too would be in greater union with him.

Next essay

I want to write about what we do with our atonement theology when we are ministering in a pastoral context to women who are victims of abuse. Any book recommendations?

The Holy Spirit

'The Wind blows wherever it pleases....' (John 3:8). There is certainly the sense of mystery here. We can not quantify the Spirit or comfortably explain how and when and s/he works. That s/he does work, we do not doubt. She is Christ's gift to us from the Father. The east and the west have differed in terms of whom they think sent the Spirit. The East have thought s/he proceeds from the Father and the west from the Father and the Son.

I wonder what these models have done for our articulation of the Spirit and whether in some of our expressions of Christianity, the Spirit is thought to be somewhat subordinate to the Father and the Son?

Eros and Thanatos

Restless yearning

I am doing some interesting reading on grief counseling and I want to collect a few quotes here so that I can mull them over and write something helpful. Just whom I am helping I am unsure. I wonder if with much of our ministry, as we seek to grow in compassion and walk alongside the other, we seek also to understand ourselves, placing our own hand snugly inside of Jesus' hand as he walks beside us. In the God economy, his love knows no bounds and so in him healing others through us, he does not leave us confused, empty and bereft and yet the journey towards enlightenment, fullness and union is a long one.

So Freud described 'human suffering as an expression of the tension between Eros, the drive for union, and Thanatos, the tendency to separate and dissolve,' (Examining the dominant model: What's the problem, Silvermann and Klass, p.7).

This I find interesting and I wonder if for many Christians it is felt in that eschatological tension of the now and the not yet. We seek perfect union with God and yet it is frustrated by our condition.

Jesus' promise

Do I believe what I have just written? Perfect or imperfect union with God through Jesus in the power of the Spirit? I am unsure. I am back from 'worship' now (7pm FOG Focus on God) and I have listened to how Jesus certainly does not promise us a life without suffering, in fact, on the contrary, he says in John 16:33 that 'In this world you will have trouble.'

But He also says, 'But take heart! I have overcome the world.'

Through Jesus, we are put into right relationship with God and into community with the Father. But I still find it is frustrated and frustrating. How do we come to terms with this? We take everything that we are and what we suffer to the Father, through Jesus, by the Spirit, in prayer. I think that that is the only answer I have come up with so far. We are then led into a place where we will come to know 'the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, [that] will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus (Phil 4:7).'

If you're like me, however, you will have to continually ask for this to be given. We are so leaky, aren't we? 

 Patton describes how:
For Tillich, the difference between Jesus and the saints [that's us according to Ephesians 1, remember] is that in Jesus there are no moments of separation from the "Spiritual presence" or from transparency to the divine, whereas with others there are moments of separation.

Pastoral care in Context: An Introduction to Pastoral Care by John Patton, p.71

In chapter two of Silvermann and Klass, I read about how 'modernity is characterised by a machine-like model of the self. Modernity is a reaction against romanticism, which valued deep interpersonal bonds that could not be broken ...'

I understand that this book is exploring the grieving process but I aim to also think in terms of our relationship with God. I wonder if modernity also infected a Christian's 'right' relationship with God, in that, emotion and romantic attachment were to be guarded against and where post-modernism expects encounter with God which supplement feelings of his realness and communicate his love to us intimately and experientially, modernity called for a rational, intelligent articulation of God.  I think the modernistic expression of Christianity, in which I was nurtured, made for a machine-like response. There was something mechanical about the answers to the questions I had, there was less room for vagueness or for exploration, there was a denial of the ecstasy, whether that be joy or pain and there was an emphasis on the controlled.

I am searching now for a happy medium and it is amazing that God is having me learn about this in nearly everything I read at the moment. To use a cliche, everything really is all about Jesus, isn't it?


God and satisfaction
I am reading now about 'The Psalms and the Life of Faith and 'The Formlessness of Grief' by Walter Brueggemann. I like the way he talks about how 'Israel's speech presumes a history of interaction, of speaking and hearing that gives life.' (p.90). He talks about a 'covenantal address'.

I think that we can recall occasions that are very specific in our lives where we have asked and God has spoken, from within a context of trust that this does indeed go on but is not always made so obviously manifest. We can journal our divine encounters and these can act as life-giving memories when we hit the dry times. Do you go on dates with God? Does journalling or blogging help you to record your walk with God so that you can articulate and reflect on his presence in your life? Do you find these encounters easy to articulate and easy to share with other people?

Jackie Searle Dean of Women's ministry and 'How does it feel to be a female priest?'

Today was one of those amazing 'Lord you are so faithful...I think I am going to explode with joy' days. The reason being, before I really acted upon God's call on my life, two women became a part of my journey. I followed Christina Baxter before meeting her at college at Lambeth 08, following as it was live-blogged and posting my reactions as it progressed and it was thrilling. I became aware that Jackie Searle was Dean of Women's Ministry in Derby and she would be able to help me with a few issues I had. But I never actually met Jackie until she came to college this week. I 'went it alone', if you like, aware now that if I had visited Jackie she might have helped me with my journey, which instead I painfully worked out on my own with God, perhaps this was what I had to do, who knows.

These two women captured the attention of all the St John's students as they discussed with us the way forward for Women Bishops and the feelings this sensitive issue has thrown up for them in ministry over the years.

Rev'd Jackie Searle was born into a Christian family with a father who was in the Brethren Church. All the women wore hats and only the men were able to speak in church. After she relocated with her family as a teenager, the local Anglican vicar visited and the family experienced renewal as the Anglican priest prayed for them to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Jackie joined a very energetic youth group which was a part of a church in which women could prophesy and speak in tongues but leadership roles, at this point, were still very much occupied by men.

Jackie Searle trained as a teacher and joined the CU at university. The leader was male as you would have expected. Despite the lack of female leadership examples, the church she attended nurtured her in her vocation as she felt called to ministry within the C of E. Women could be deacons at this time. The vicar was prepared to test out her calling and the ordination journey began.

At Jackie's theological college, there were other women there studying and female ordinands in other years, but she was one of only two women in her year who were training for ordination. They would be ordained deacon but when the men were ordained priest a year later, Jackie and her friend would not be.

Jackie was ordained deacon in 1992 and then married David Runcorn in the November and in General Synod that year women were able to be ordained to the priesthood. The Act of Synod brought in the phrase 'a period or reception' and this did seem to be latched onto by those opposed to suggest the decision could be rescinded. There were experiences then of pain and joy as some men refused to continue with Post-ordination training because there would now be women present.

At the time of her ordination, a number of women being ordained in the country were pregnant but Jackie was the first priest in this country to give birth. It strikes us all as somewhat amusing that the women being ordained that year were advised not to be too overtly feminine with dangly ear-rings or such like; Jackie was 8 month's pregnant and I guess there was no concealing that, no matter how generous the gown!

Encouragingly, Jackie reflects on how the C of E has allowed opportunity for flexible working and maternity leave and has been a good and a fair employer.

She is vicar of St Peter's, Littleover, Derby and has been Dean of Women's ministry for the last three years. She reflects on what ordained life has been like as she has watched the Church work through its issues over female priests and bishops. Synod has worked to keep those who disagree on board. All her ordained life, she has lived with the act that has allowed parishes to opt out of having women as ordained ministers. Flying bishops have been granted to these parishes.

What is the effect of this?

She explains how you just get on with it but because of the provision, it seems that the C of E can discriminate against women. She wonders whether God has perhaps called some of us to work in this painful situation and she recognises that there is pain on the other side too.

Jackie explains movingly how the idea of there being women in C of E leadership is not an issue 'over there', it is an issue that is embodied. It is at 'the very core of her being'. At this point, I think there are a few of us whose hearts are beating very loudly in our chests with the stirrings of what this means for us. She describes how in sharing a platform with people who do not share her views, in so much as for them her orders are invalid and her ordination 'didn't take', and that people taking the sacrament from women are not really receiving it – does something far deeper. It says something about you at an ontological level; about a woman and who she really is.

She reflects on how it feels when the visible presence of the hierarchy of the Church of England is completely embodied by men. 'Where are the women?'

'After all it is not good for the man to be alone' and she draws on Gal 3:28 and explains how surely we are all under 'the head who is Christ'.

Aware that business is an unsatisfactory parallel to church-life, Jackie reflects, nevertheless, on how the secular world is articulating what it gains from having women in leadership roles. There is a different context and purpose here but the qualities that women bring are being recognised. She wonders whether the church will see that we miss these things in our corporate church life? This is a corollary to her explanation that there are theological reasons and human reasons why we should have women bishops. She explains the findings in a recent book about the positive contributions women are bringing to the boardroom.

She wonders about the kind of leadership we need for the 21^st century with the feeling that if we are to be a mission shaped church, we need women bishops and she explores how our culture is staggered that we are even battling with this issue. Other areas of Europe have been consecrating women for years now. It is normal and yet we are far behind.

Jackie reflects on the scriptures and Joel 2:28. She describes how Jesus turned the water into wine where the jars are symbolic of all that has come before and he doesn't smash the jars but he refills them. David Runcorn will flesh out beautifully the rest of this meditation on John 2 in our worship time, as a college, later that evening.

Jackie explains how she wants us to have women bishops in the Church but not at any cost. However, she has lived a long time with the act of Synod and there should be no need to safe-guard people from women's episcopacy. The word 'safe-guard' is in itself a loaded word. She explains how women should be consecrated on the same terms as men, we are messing with the very definitions of episcopacy if this does not happen.

At this point we listen to Christina Baxter who explains the possible outcomes of the work that the General Synod will do in July, and the consequences. She highlights how important the next round of General Synod elections will be and I sit and think about that article I reflected on here, a while ago, about Rod Thomas and his hope that Reform will make sure that it gets itself healthily represented on the next General Synod, if it can, so I understand what is at stake.

I will not go into all of Christina's details here, only to say that, of course, we are waiting on the Revision Committee and I think that we are all hoping that there will not be too much more of a delay but this is very important and it has to be right.

Jackie answers questions, one about male headship which caused some of us to shuffle uncomfortably in our seats. She answered very graciously and set her answer firmly within the what the scriptures reveal to her about that issue. She also reflects on the accusation that by appointing women to the episcopate, the Church is giving in to the liberal agenda. She recognises that there are debates about how we approach reason and tradition and scripture, the Church is also exploring issues over homosexuality but we need to keep the issues distinct and look at what scripture says about women as we engage with the women issue. She finishes with a reflection on the C of E and how it is wonderful for the range of voices and the diversity – but we have to recognise that men and women are both made in the image of God and equally called by God. (Hooray, I think to myself and smile, knowing that I can ask questions later of Christina and Jackie later over coffee in Christina's office – what a privilege!)

...so God brought me full circle as I explored these issues with the two women who, unbeknown to them, had had a significant part to play in my journey towards priesthood, I still have all of the training to do yet and who knows what God might do but I feel as though I am in a more stable place, whatever happens along the way, for the witness and courage of these two pioneering women. Thanks be to God!

WOW WOW WOW WOW

Whole wounds

Here we are again - it is Wednesday which is a very special time of the week in college, where we get to explore a little more about the nature of our amazing God and our relationship with him.

Last week we learnt about embodied ministry and with Tim Hull we have learnt about the platonic split between the body and the soul, which is, of course, not the biblical picture.

How has our discomfort manifested itself? In disparagement of the body, the oppression of women...? What do you think?

Rowan Williams talks about the body in the Holy setting and its integration.

David looks at the proportional imbalance between the way we venerate men and women (the saints) in our common worship. We need to redress this balance - here is his challenge to us!!

We are reflecting this morning on how sexuality can be a very divisive topic within the Church. I wonder if we even have to invent a new language for its discussion. This topic has frayed ends. How are we going to live with the unfinished nature of this garment with which we are clothed so completely, it is part of our very make-up? We can not catagorise sexuality which functions within singleness and marriage and of course, as we are aware within many other relationships.

Angela Tilby explores the openness and the vulnerability of sexual expression.
Recommended reading:

Tilby, Angela. 1997. "When Harry met Sally: Orgasm, Morality and Mysticism". In Intimate Affairs: Spirituality and Sexuality in Perspective. Edited by Martyn Percy. London: Darton Longman and Todd, 42-51.

I would like to read this sage article.

Angela Tilby has spoken about it being a 'purging of our pride' experience.

Sexulaity transcends our physicality and spirituality is bound up with the physical, therefore there is an overlap, a huge overlap between prayer and spirit and community and relating to another.

Last week we thought about the spirit struggling against the body with which it is often unacquainted with the often very obvious manifestations. Do our sexualities and spiritualities similarly struggle against one another?

Christianity has often used the language of sexual intimacy to explore its relationship with God and yet caught itself up in an unhealthy abstaining from the act itself. Taking on rules of abstainence within marriage, is this biblical? Sexual expression was good in the original creation. There is some place inbetween. At this point we think about the need for a new language.

Reference is made again to Jim Cotter who speaks in terms of a 'love-maker' triune God.

When we perceive of Adam and Eve we miss the corporate coming together of two communities in one flesh.

Paul, of course, takes the image of the union of a man and his wife and as an image for Christ and the church.

God's is a passionate love - I get this. Both are drives to LIFE! Sexulaity without spirituality can be very empty. I wonder, do you invite the Holy Spirit into the intimacies of your marriage bed? Emm...now there's one to ponder.

Loving others for themselves should be our drive. Sexual expression is not so spiritual when it is about self-satisfaction.


Realities and temptations and boundaries is a sub-heading under which David Runcorn explores some of the following ideas. He imagines that denial sought enables all our energies to concentrate on the love of God and know him completely (or as completely as we can) in all his loving holiness, so even in denial there is a seeking of the passionate, vital life, the intimate life. At least this is how I have spun off with this idea.

But what about shared life?
David challenges us to construct a vision statement about what we want the world to know about what we are celebrating and seeking.


David Runcorn explores, as Rosemary Lain-Priestley did, in the Times Online article on 15th January the vulnerability. She talked about discernment.

If we are drawn to someone and understand that there is a yearning there that might express itself inappropriately, we perhaps need to look at what that relationship is giving that perhaps is lacking elsewhere. We can not just kill, murder, negate the feelings, they will not disappear. We have to be disciplined enough to explore what is going on so that we can look for opportunities to learn about God and other people and ourselves and our deepest needs.  We need to seek God's grace.

Our culture doesn't help us to develop intimacy in friendship. We will explore this more next week.

Jim Cotter is very sensitive in his exploration of wounded sexuality. At these times we need to discover a sacred in the touch first, a gentle tenderness. When the wounds are healed, passion can occur again.

Christ's 'This is my body which is given for you' - we have a passionate and a tender God. Cotter explains how we have been created as sexual beings - be glad in it!

It is 'fundamental and ordinary and exceptional'. (Jim Cotter)

So much to think about.

Thank you.

"Our gender and sexuality are always present in the room. "

H/t Canon Christopher Hall

There is a very good article on Times Online about Rosemary Lain-Priestley's life. She is a mother, wife and priest. She discusses what this has meant for her and how she has been interpreted by those around her: unusual, unexpected and even 'totty' for which they are grateful.

She articulates neatly what I have been exploring recently with my soul-mate at college and in seminars which have touched on the subject and provoked my thinking. Rosemary Lain-Priestly simply says: "Our gender and sexuality are always present in the room."

We are looking at the Pastoral Cycle at college and learning how to listen. We are looking at Christian counselling models and Gestalt therapy. We are practising in threes listening to one another and we are quick to forget that we are in a constructed situation and lots of passions and vulnerabilities are being shared. However, in my three, we are all women. In pastoral ministry to men, there is always that vague rustle of another dynamic in the room and I think that Rosemary Lain-Priestley understands this in her simple articulation of her realisation that with men she 'navigated a careful path ... acutely aware of the necessary limits of pastoral intimacy.'

There is a very careful negotiation of words and actions so that the love expressed is not perceived as another kind of love, which is not in many ways another kind of love or at least it shouldn't be, only that that other kind of love is expressed in a God-honouring way within a framework of monogamous Christian marriage and fidelity, so that whilst we do indeed enter into Christian ministry as embodied people, the body needs negotiating.

As men minister to women and women minister to men, it might be construed that there displayed is a level of intimacy at which the world raises its eyebrows, but this says more about the lack of love in our world and how it has been sullied. In these interactions, there is risk and vulnerability but Jesus knew this only too well. He allows the woman with the alabaster jar to pour the oil all over him and anoint him for burial and kingship. The disciples were horrified.

To love one another in Christ and declare it between the genders involves a great deal of trust that this love is of God, it is bodily for how else can it be expressed but it is contrary to the bodily love with which the world seems obsessed and uses to sell us perfumes of a different kind from the anointing oil, or cars or even chocolate ice-cream!

We need to love each other as bravely as Jesus did in the beauty of Holiness, putting on the garments of gestures and words that glorify God and one another, which reveal to the world, by their finery, that there is indeed another kind of intimacy for which the world is so hungry, yet only satisfying in ways which fray the golden threads of those garments, leaving something tatty and naked in its wake.

Anybody, somebody, the Body, my body

Today we are constructing a theology for embodied ministry. Over the next couple of weeks we are focusing on how we might redeem how we think about our sexuality and bodyliness, if that's a word.

David Runcorn prompts lots of thinking for us and I am sure it helped to free some of us. Afterall we will be taking the whole of us into Christian ministry.

I wonder what this means for us?

Before I started the next paragraph of this reflection, my brain constructed the words 'Superficial as it sounds, for me it raised...' until I realised that if I am thinking that this is superficial, I am so very obviously falling into the very trap which this seminar is aiming to make us conscious of: that it is so tempting to value more our thoughts and all that 'soul-stuff' over anything associated with surface and body, so I guess I need to keep reflecting on these things. So without the 'Superficial as this may sound...' I will proceed:

For me it raised questions about how I present myself to the world. How do I feel about the fact that I present myself 'made-up' and suitably high heeled to the world (the heel suiting the occasion, more or less, but rarely 'flat'). Should I be 'free' of make-up and heels? I have been challenged to give these things up to see what it would mean to me. Do I honour God more with a naked face? David Runcorn explains how 'Praising God in the beauty of holiness' is about putting on your finest garments to praise the Lord. Is this just want I want to hear? So am I presenting the best version of myself to the world in which I meet with God in the people he has formed in his image? Ah, that's my motivation, or am I just stuck in a habit about what I should look like? Do I care about what I look like for the wrong or the right reasons?

We think about how Christianity has perceived of the body. There is a biblical view of the body but there is the 'church's' view of the body. How do Christians feel about their bodies?

David recommends prayers and meditations from Jim Cotter 'Prayer at night – a book for the darkness'.

I wonder how much my physicality is a reason for rejoicing or lamenting?

How much do we celebrate or denigrate the body?

Does this topic raise different questions for the genders? Have women more freedoms than men expressing touch? For men there are cultural repercussions about what is acceptable.

For men there is a lack of vocabulary about body issues, a lack of creative attention to the body. How do men come to feel about their bodies in the world and within faith? It is not addressed by Christian literature to the extent that it is for women.

God speaks to us through the physical. David Runcorn explains how 'matter matters to God'.

With Tim Hull, we have been learning that it is platonic and not biblical to try to escape the body.

Our bodies are extremely important. David Runcorn explains how only 7% of our communication is verbal. We need to be aware of our bodies. By the very nature of the incarnation, we can not escape the fact that the body is good. We see how Rubem Alves explains how 'God wants a body like ours' which struck me as a novel turn of phrase with interesting consequences.

David recommends 'The Good Listener', a biography exploring the life of a woman who has founded a centre for those who have experienced torture and abuse. She is called Helen Bamber. He shows us how Toni Morrison's 'Beloved' beautifully explores people in their fleshiness.

We are asked to reflect on what happens when the Spirit meets the body. What happens to us? It is often very obvious. Have you seen people overcome by the Holy Spirit? There can be a shaking and a trembling and a groaning. David Runcorn wonders if it is the meeting of two aspects of ourselves unacquainted and struggling against one another. I must admit I had never thought about it this way before and this has added something to the way I feel about how I feel when I so obviously feel the manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Yes, I am conscious about  the repetition of the word 'feel' here, the nature of such an experiential relationship with God throws up lots of issues for me). To be honest, I am not sure I want to think of it in this way, in terms of a struggle but it might make a lot of sense. I hope I am not struggling too much against God, but possibly I am. Emm....

Rubem Alves explains how maybe we have constructed a theology of finding God beyond, at the end of the body, when in actual fact God becomes in the body, he takes on flesh.

We need to redeem the misapplications of a misunderstood 'sarx' theology. Our salvation is bodily. God became incarnate. There is no dichotomy. There is no flesh/body split.

...so as ever, with David Runcorn, I leave another of his seminars feeling as though I have begun another adventure, affirmed and yet challenged, comforted and discomforted but perhaps a little more open, self-aware and aware of God than I was before. 

Gestalt or something like that

I have been reading about Gestalt therapy and finding it fascinating. So far I am coming to understand the I-it and the I-Thou states. The I-it if I am interpreting it correctly seems to be a solitary state: reflection, feelings, concerns about making the self understood by others. The I-Thou seems corporate but painful. It is in the relating of the I to the other, to another that the I understands themself as a distinct person with distinct ways which perhaps until then they had thought were either indistinct or universal.

I relate to how Friedman describes how through surrender to the trust in a one to one relationship there is '...the existential and ontological reality in which the self comes into being and through which it fulfills and authenticates itself' (Friedman, 1965a p.xvii).

It is strange how only in encounter with someone different do we realise that we are a distinct personality with distinct traits, we know this because the other person has different traits to us.

However, the one to one, accountable and counseling relationship also involves risk. Of course, there is usually trust and I find anyway that the idea that other people might come to know what I have said is something about which I worry little. What is more scary is the actual outpouring of all that is within. It spills somehow messily in front of me, like a liquid that I can not scoop up. When I am in spiritual direction or tutorials, after I leave, I am sometimes confronted with an image of the person who has just listened to me, in which, like some kind of macarbre cartoon, they have a flip-top head. I flip their head back and scoop back out all of the 'me-stuff' I have just spilled which they have consumed and even given me an opinion about and I take it back and stuff it back where it belongs, in me and start to guard it again protectively, until the next time.

The next time, to my relief, there is less to scoop back and more to leave with them, there is more room inside me for God, so what a relief that is.

I am meditating at the moment on Jesus' emptying of himself. I am hoping to lose something of me to make more room for more of God and looking at the kenosis is how I can come to think about some of this. Of course, it was very different for Jesus who was divine and yet also human. Jesus did not grasp at equality with God, even though he was equal to God. I understand this grasping in humanity as the place where our ego projects itself. The great thing about God is that he values us so much, we know this because of the incarnation but I know that we need to lose our lives in order for them to be saved.

It is all a long, learning process. I think that when we surrender some of our own engineering of the moment, our plans, when we let go of what we are predicting as an outcome, we are more open to the surprise that is God's direction of the moment and how much better that moment is when God reigns.

Words, word, the Word

Christina Baxter has a prayer with which I really resonate. It asks that in our encounter with the written word, we might meet the Living Word, even Jesus Christ himself. Another significant Christian in my journey asks that we might receive from God the love that he wants to pour out upon us in the form of his Spirit.

I have had other experiences in my Christian life, where my study of the word has been a study of the word without that emphasis on the living Word and the Spirit that I find draws me closer to God. It almost seems as if the study of the word is a study of words. There can be right answers for which an expert needs consulting, there can be tensions when opinions about meanings are varied. At these times, I am uncertain about what happens to the word, but it feels painful. I was interested to read that Edwin Muir (1956), as he meditated upon the worst features of Calvinism said: 'The Word made flesh is here made word again.' I think I understand a little of what he means and it is probably not just a result of the worst aspects of Calvinism as Muir knew it, but something we all have to be aware that we are capable of doing.

My own experiences of this concur with Muir's, in that I was accessing a rather Calvinistic expression of Christianity. I need to think about this some more.  know that Calvin did not give a lot of space to theology regarding 'inspiration' but perhaps I need to get to know Calvin a little better so that he might be someone with whom I associate a more helpful expression of the Christian faith (?)

We are joy to him too, this idea blows me away

Another liberating crisis?

Picture from The Telegraph

This is the way that our country looks at the moment, which is pretty remarkable. All of this snow involves us in some decision-making, which is probably just a reflection of the decisions we make every day but in exaggerated form.

As Roslyn Karaban, PhD explains in her book CRISIS CARING A Guide for Ministering to People in Crisis :

The word crisis comes from the Greek word krinein meaning “to decide.” ... Too often we have thought of and ministered to someone in crisis as if crisis is primarily, if not exclusively a danger, overlooking the opportunity for growth. 

Yesterday, at college, we worked with the Reverend Jolley, I know, what a great name! We reflected on our old place of work and thought about which aspects of it were 'kingdom work' and what God might have been doing through our work to bring transformation. We also looked at how our old jobs challenged us, our Christian ethic or limited us so that we were not able to declare openly the reason for the hope that lives within us.

We shared experiences as a group (there are about 35 of us, first year ordinands). We isolated one thing to wrestle with and that was whether there was a 'working for'/'worshipping God' dichotomy. At first we were unsure and thought about how work is good as we see in the creation narrative, not a consequence of the Fall, just that after the Fall it is less fruitful. But we also decided that sometimes we seem to serve the work, consider its success, somehow connect less with God than we had hoped. We all decided that working FOR God (many of us had worked for Christian organisations) and working WITH God can feel different and have different outworkings and when we work WITH God we more fully worship him.

In my group we thought about John 21. We thought about how often the main pressure we faced in our old occupations was the pressure to work beyond our natural limitations. The Church can ask this of us too. We have to recognise our limitations because in that way we will honour God who knows our limits and knows exactly how to bless us and others through them.

In John 21, the disciples have caught nothing. All night long they have been fishing the lake to no avail. Their nets are empty, they must be exhausted. No doubt, they have a remit to fulfil. They are required to deliver their catch to the markets so that they might earn their livings and satisfy demand. How many of us in that situation would have continued to fish throughout the next day too?

But after daybreak, Jesus standing on the beach, says to them:
'Children, you have caught no fish, have you?'

We all face this at some time or another. What do we say in return? I am working on it but I am one of those people who seems to need to qualify everything. Do we not justify our failures sometimes, waffle through lengthy excuses? But look at the disciples' reply. It is a simple 'No'. This is the only word that they speak. Their next words are 'It is the Lord!' where we sense with them their relief and joy.There is something liberating about that 'No', that we too need to say this. That God can work through the 'No'. That we must admit our limitations. our seeming failures out of which God can bring fruit, or fish in this case!

After their 'No', the disciples are open to God. They are ready to rely upon him completely, they have surrendered their own determination, they are waiting on his grace, they are open to listening to him, aware that they can not do this alone and they are instructed clearly and emphatically as a consequence, no riddles here, no ambiguity, no...'take time to interpret what I mean', they are simply directed to drop their nets on the right side rather than the left of the lake.

The are obedient. They still have to work and it is still hard, but now they are working in cooperation with God. Now the nets are so heavy they can hardly lift them, there is still struggle here but it is a joyful struggle. Imagine those flapping tails, the salt-water spraying everywhere, the laughter and the abundance, for abundance is what there is.

They must have sat by that fire on the beach afterwards and counted those fish: there are 153!

Not only will they fullfil their remit for the markets, they are nourished also on the very fish they have have caught as they sit and eat with the Lord.

When we work in conjunction with the Lord, he will not leave us hungry. When we work in cooperation with the Lord, we will struggle for this is the nature of work in a fallen world but he will not leave us broken. When the disciples pull up their nets, they must have been amazed, their nets are in tact, even under the strain of such a huge quantity of fish; they are undamaged.

Sometimes we might need to say 'No' like the disciples before we can say 'Yes' to God. Sense the liberation of the 'No', where we admit our own limitations. Rather than feeling like we are letting people down, we might just wait and trust to see what God will do next. His is the plan, we are but his co-workers. His is the work but he invites us to lift the nets, his is the catch but he invites us to row with him, and we share in the feast.

In a crisis, there is the opportunity to decide, to say 'No', and 'this is outside my control', for many of us the weather will cause this crisis, something so much larger than our will and desires, our aims and agenda stands in our way, like those waters not relinquishing their fish. When we have the grace to accept, we might leave room for God to work, God might just provide the help that we need whether this be in his provision of the patience we need to relinquish our plans to him, now dashed or whether its in his provision of that directing other, 'turn your wheel, let me help guide you out, I'll clear your driveway, we'll travel together, have a lift with me' or 'today, we'll just stay home, the world will continue to turn without us...'

Mums 'The Word' blog has been updated

Click here

Undeveloped thoughts on 'The Liberating Crisis'

I came up with this phrase this morning and there is much more thinking that I need to do about this, but if I waffle it through here, I can come back to it and develop it (reason 91 to keep on blogging, although you might come to different conclusions regarding your reading).

Anyway, once again we have been thinking about 'a rule of life'.

So when things are outside our control and our rule of life is broken, how might we feel about this?

How much are our rules of life really about God, we might need to ask ourselves this kind of question frequently in order to prevent ourselves from serving the rule rather than God, or serving a shadow by serving the rule which does not actually mean we are serving the reality of God.

Now, might it be that God breaks in to break our rule, for was it his rule in the first place?

When God breaks in, we are helpless and have to depend on him.

The inner struggle of my will is negated in this impressing of a reality that is so much bigger than my own sense of what constitutes reality.

Reality has otherwise been what I consider real, now when God breaks in what he considers real confronts me.

His breaking in (in the form of someone else's acute need, or even, dare I say it, not wanting to be accused of Pantheism, in this weather we have been having) prioritises, re-orders, demands all of me in a way that the details of my life, over which I was previously in control, did not demand of me, for is that not the reason I created a rule for my life, so that I could manage it?

Now I do not manage, I am not in charge, God is. This is the crisis of liberation, for in that crisis I am truly free, to be, in the confrontation of the crisis, really who I am, seeing more of God, living in the very presence of the present moment. 

How much are we domesticating God, managing God, alloting God a portion when we create a rule of life, in which at set times we attune ourselves to his will and our praise of him, if at other times, we consult him never at all? Is it because human nature is so limited that we can only serve him in this way?

We yearn to serve him with every fibre, every second. Are we? How is that possible? Is it possible?

Orthodox?

Ooh, I've been categorised!

ORTHODOX

Emm, I guess.

Nice to be back in the top 50 again, whatever Dave Kerr threatens us with ;-) Anyway dearest Dave, I remember you were pretty chuffed about your technorati status (scroll to the end of his prayers) that time, a while back. (I'm just jealous ;-), Technorati will not even recognise my blog, I've messed up my html so much.) Last Christmas Dave blessed all us bloggers, this year he is cursing us, so it all sounds like that whole biblical cycle thing we get to learn about.

Anyway, let me plug the only other woman in the biblioblogs top 50. She has a brilliant blog in terms of its aims. Read her 'about' page. For those of us studying Hebrew (not me, it clashed with Greek), it looks to me like she's got some seriously helpful stuff on her site.

Visit Karyn

....only other woman....oh yep...come on women...we can blog about the Bible too!

Seeking the road much travelled

 
Reflections on the threshold of the New Year by David Runcorn available at FULCRUM.

LOL connections

Emmm!
Quite a few of us at college, seem now to be writing essays with facebook open in a window behind as we work, I often do this. I also sometimes take a break from an essay by looking at the thoughts of my 'friends' in the sidebar on my blog.

I wonder if I rationalise all of this with the thinking that I am still on topic. I break from OT prophets to read something from Mark Goodacre on the New Testament or to see what Jon Swales is working on over at Trinity. I might look at Brian McLaren's latest revelation on facebook or catch up with Peter's reflections as a Down Under Anglican.

At the same time, though, I am aware that I am also looking for connection and conversation, it can get lonely writing essays and in a sense this is what we are all looking for, always...connection.

So in some ways I do lament and imagine a golden age, when instead of logging on and linking in, tweeting and updating status, Mrs Wotsaname just popped in through my open front door to see if I wanted a chat and a cuppa before we clean our front door steps together. Well, perhaps not the cleaning doorsteps thing, but you know what I mean...


In a world that is so connected, how connected are we really feeling, I wonder.

It's also occurred to me that us incessant scribblers and bloggers and essayists (for if college didn't set the titles, I'm pretty sure I would be writing them anyway) might be motivated by something altogether very different (ht Steve Hayes):

Henri Nouwen, with Thomas Merton, were the first 20th century Catholic writers on Christian Spirituality to be widely read among non-Catholics. (And each of them was criticized for 'never having an unpublished thought.' 'Like Merton', says this biographer, [Nouwen] seemed to feel that, unless he was writing things, he wasn't fully experiencing them.

I resonated with this from the review of Nouwen's biography, which Steve Hayes has commented upon. With the rest of the portrait presented in the review of the book about his life, here, we find the story of a very troubled man. Some of this I think we sense in his 'Return of the Prodigal Son', which I am half way through, and I must admit less captured by than I imagined I would be due to my preconceptions about the book, knowing nothing about Nouwen the man at the point I was given it. Now I know a little more, it might colour the second half of the book for me as I listen out for Nouwen's angst.

If anything, it all points to the fact the the Lord can pour his Spirit through creatures that wrestle so much with a sense of human longing, that no matter how perfect we are in Christ, the marr of the fall is acute and acutely felt particularly by some of us who orientate our lives around the gospel.

In the light of what I have also been reading about clergy bullying by parishioners (I'm not so sure about the idea of Bishops bullying clergy but perhaps that's because in Mike Hill and Alistair Redfern, I have only known such exemplary and godly examples) and from what I am learning in my module about 'the pastoral cycle' and that clergy can become very isolated people, it does seem surprising that we are expected not to have problems like the rest of folk, in actual fact, is it not that we are very conscious of how messed up we are because of the gulf that exists between what we represent and what we actually are?

It does worry me, that there might be two results of a dog collar:

1. That I am thought to be immune to problems or should somehow be sorted because if I am representing Jesus then I had better scrub up pretty well.

2. That I am perceived to be so out of touch with 'the real world' because of squewed ideas about holiness and separation.

I say this, because, you know, I think this is what I used to suspect about people in dog collars a few years ago.

I think I want to see ministry liberated from being a top-down hierarchical, active to passive set-up, so that at the end of the day, we are only declaring by taking upon ourselves the identity of the Church a willingness to come alongside people so that we all journey together, so that as with Jesus, whose humanity is sorely missing from some of our expressions of the faith, we do not forget that we are all, like Henri Nouwen, struggling human beings, struggling together and, by God's grace, to His side.

Fascinating!

...that Reform and Awesome are to sit around tables tomorrow and discuss women's ministry from a biblical perspective.

So seriously would love to have gone along to that one!!

Another wish list conference I have missed.

This blog was born out of response to Reform and their teaching, hence the 'revising reform' name, a natural consequence of my spending a lot of time swatting up on, or revising Reform. A while back I could have passed an exam in Reform I knew so much about them. I have to say, I have rather got over that now ;-) hence, the rather unsubtle justification of the name of this site to the somewhat strained Re (about) a vision (egalitarian) and Re (about) transformation. I figured that a blog focussed on protest was perhaps not the most positive contribution I could make to the Anglican blogosphere, so slowly I covered more aspects of ministry than just my explorations of various evangelical positions on the question of ordained women.

I will get on with joining Awesome now so that I do not miss out in the future on the potential learning opportunities for engaging with evangelicals of different perspectives. No doubt, I would contribute my two-penn'orth, even if it was only in my own head!