Author: Ian Harris

This was a very interesting session.  Liturgy originated as the term used to describe the unpaid work undertaken in service of the people of the city.  So in modern terms its volunteering; in the service other others; it is an activity ie work, given freely – unpaid.  So liturgy can’t be separated from the Community its activity serves and plays to both mystery and meaning ie ‘heart and head’.

In the church worship context, liturgy is the form of the whole of the service not just the bits where the congregation and the leader interact.  We identified approx 25-30 forms of activity in which the congregation and the leader could ‘work’ together.  To be most effective the ‘work’ of the congregation should aim to stimulate the 5 primary senses.

Liturgy should start quietly and gradually build up to a climax, give a feeling of a journey, going somewhere not just meandering.  The aim is to nourish the human spirit with words, images, music, scents; we noted that the ear enjoys repetition (hence the use of a standard service words and format eg use of the Anglican prayer book).

We now realise that the natural world is so unexpected, amazing, incredibly complex that there is no need to invoke a ‘super-natural’ dimension.  Mayman notes “Engaging in a progressive Christian liturgy enables us to tell a story in profound opposition to the individualism, consumerism and militarism that marks our world.” And further “Practicing liturgy invites us to live differently …. So we may live grateful for life, and compassionate towards other beings, open to mystery.”  We say Amen to that.

We started the year by considering the Foreword and Introduction to this large collection of short essays and writings which, according to the sub title, constitute “A handbook on ‘progressive’ Christianity”.  These introductory pieces provide a background to the rise and fall of ‘contemporary’ theology from the mid 19^th century, the rise of ‘fundamentalism’ and the growth over the last 50 years of more conservative beliefs.  On page xxi, five characteristics of progressive Christianity are suggested:

 What are your reactions to these five characteristics?

5 Nov to 3 Dec 2012  We considered selected passages which considered the Bible as a series of stories which ignite the imagination – not a record of definitive facts and events – and therefore require (re)interpretation to fit the present context and understanding, the universal experience of ‘beginnings’ and ‘endings’, creation (evolution) is an ongoing phenomenon.

We considered selections from Chapt 2 ‘What do we mean by Theology?’  It is the author’s contention that formal religion has only existed for the last 5000 years i.e. since the advent of agriculture.  [This was also postulated as the time when warfare developed – as opposed to inter tribal skirmishes.] It surprised the group members that theology is essentially a Christian concept – with no parallel in other religions.  If one’s sacred book is regarded as God’s Word, then there is no need to seek out its wider, underlying or contextual meaning!  A 12^th Century definition of theology was ‘faith seeking understanding’.

The author then covers the relationship (?) between theology and spirituality – a search for meaning.  Do humans require something to fill the void created by the decline in formal religion?  Could this something be spirituality?  Spirituality existed long before religions; it is an integral part of being a human.  The search for meaning has an enduring quality; religion serves a transitory and temporary purpose, which the author exposes, we have outgrown.  The group thought that we are too close to this transition (if it is one) to determine the validity of the author’s ideas.

The next section identifies the recent influences on contemporary theology – Liberation Theology, Feminist Theology, Creation Theology and Multifaith Dialogue.  These sections offer a good summary of each.

Theology now starts with the human experience and works to wider horizons of life and reality rather than the traditional approach of starting with God and working ‘down’ to rules for humans to follow.   Theology has to involve a dialogue with the world of our time.

We enjoyed a good stimulating discussion with a provocative text.  Hopefully next week should be equally rewarding.

The group has not been asleep since the last posting but the scribe has been away – and missing the sessions!

This is an intriguing book written to attempt to re-interpret ‘theology’ in the light of the advances in our understanding of the physical world over the last century or so since Rutherford.   It is not an attempt to reduce theology to ‘quanta’!

For this first week we considered Appendix One which exposed 12 Principles of Quantum Theology. Is life, the universe and everything determined by the uncertainty identified by Heisenberg’s principle?  Is this uncertainty the source of ‘creativity’ at the material level (the universe) as well as in us?

The chapters in the book do not mirror the 12 principles set out in the Appendix – so more about them as we explore later this month.

Over the last four weeks we’ve considered the 4 studies in this little booklet.  It has promoted plenty of discussion about its meaning which for us required an interpretation into the terminology of the 21^st century and a re-imagining into contemporary times.  This has caused considerable debate.  The author reflects a largely conservative position.

The overall message however is very appropriate and fitting – it is we need to understand the ‘WHY’ we/the church exists before we can tackle the HOW and the WHAT.   The latter are very much easier than the former.  Once the WHY is identified, then the How and WHAT follow and can and should be continually measured against whether they are helping to fulfil the vision set out in the WHY.   

Our session was based on the first chapter of this book, which is entitled “The heretical book of the Bible”. Because of the topic, this was an informative exercise rather than a discussion.

This first chapter is an introduction to the theme, before the subsequent dialogues, where the author engages in a “discussion” with Ecclesiastes, who lived over 2000 years ago.

An explanation is given of the method by which the Bible came into being as a collection of individual writings, each intended to be read on its own, and often contradicting other books.  This is very much the case with Ecclesiastes, which undermines much of which is traditionally preached from Christian pulpits. It openly questions the validity of the doctrine (held by Jews, Christians and Muslims) that God rules this universe in a loving way that ensures justice for all.

Some background to the place of Ecclesiastes in the Bible was provided.

The traditions of ancient Israel developed along four parallel paths.

For Jews, the most authoritative stream of tradition is found in the first five books, known as the Torah or Books of Moses.

The second stream describes how the monarchy emerged out of the primitive tribal structure, and then focussed on the dynasty founded by David.

The third stream of tradition was the Prophetic. This was initially short messages thought to have come directly from God.

The fourth tradition is now referred to as the Wisdom stream, which was developed by the sages. These writings show no interest in official religious beliefs and practices, and we would now describe them as secular.  The work of the sages is found chiefly in Proverbs, some of the Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiasticus, and the Wisdom of Solomon.

Geering pointed out that from the cultural tradition of ancient Israel, three quite independent religious communities evolved, and in each, one stream became dominant.

In Judaism, the Torah remained central, with the priests expounding the law.

In Christianity, it was the Davidic royalist tradition, with Jesus being seen as the Messiah, the anointed successor to David.

In Islam, the prophetic tradition dominated, with Muhammad being acclaimed as the greatest and last of the prophets.

However the Wisdom stream was neglected and even rejected by  Jews and Christians. Only in the modern secular world has the Wisdom stream, being more secular than any other writings, come into its own.

More information is provided about the Wisdom writings, in particular raising the issue of the finiteness of human existence, and the relevance of these writings to us today.

Notes by John M

John explored biblical themes on work looking for models which could be used as the basis for a 21^st century theology for the workplace.  His surprising conclusion was that neither the family nor household were suitable spiritual models to take into the workplace.  The bible does not provide good role models comprising a family unit of ‘mum, dad and 2.4 children’. Four household codes can be identified in the New Testament – but these do not fit well in today’s more open and equal society e.g. the role of women.

Does this mean that there is no role for spirituality in the workplace? Some of John’s characteristics of spirituality especially struck a chord with me e.g. a surplus of meaning, things kept out of balance, open-ended directionality, fundamental instability is a prerequisite for all growth and change, no blueprints.

John then identified some examples of good practices in a work context from the OT.  These were used to derive a model for workplace/organisational spirituality based around Skill, Willingness, Opportunity, Acceptance and Recognition.  The individual brings skill and a willingness to work and be engaged with the enterprise; the organisation provides opportunity (to work using the skills), acceptance of the individual and what they have to offer and recognition of the contribution made.

In discussion we noted that the Church as an organisation doesn’t measure up very well to these ideals; when they are attained – even if only for a short time – the organisation makes real progress and is a good and rewarding place to be.  Members experience suggested that the role of the leader was a key element in creating these conditions – or killing them completely!  Organisations need to identity and nurture such leadership.

The discussion was based on pages 202 and 203 of L Geering’s book ‘Such is Life – A Close Encounter with Ecclesiastes’ where he sets out 7 marks of secular or humanistic thought.  These formed the basis of some fine questions – responses to which showed we were not in full agreement with Prof Geering’s line of argument.  The 7 questions were:

1. What do we understand by “divinely revealed knowledge”, and is it the only source of reliable knowledge? This of course depends on ones interpretation of ‘divinely revealed’.  We decided that this had to be wider than the Bible.  How are we separate from god?  Are not our thoughts at times ‘of god?’

2. Do we feel bound by any set of absolutes handed down from the past? We thought that some absolutes are the likes of compassion, justice, mercy, relationships were worth holding on to and espousing.

3. Do we believe that the “physical universe constitutes all that is”?  No because this doesn’t take account of human creativity in music, art, technology, admiring a sunset, being moved to describe something as ‘awe-some’.

4. Does the evolving knowledge of human origins preclude an acceptance of a spiritual dimension? No – see compassion and creativity above

5. As the boundaries of time and space expand infinitely how do we understand human life and death? Heaven is unproveable – it could exist in other dimension(s) which we haven’t yet worked out how to perceive.  Consider the analogy of infrared and the impact IR and radio astronomy has had on visual observations.  Some existence after death is a widely and fondly held ‘hope’.  The truth is we don’t know.  What seems clear is that it is not physical in the sense we experience life.

6. Chance and uncertainty are integral to quantum theory – how does this play out in human development and in the events of history? One can either ‘surf the wave’ of the surrounding events or take a more deterministic approach.

7. How do you think an understanding of the spiritual dimension of the cosmos developed? An evolving awareness of ourself and our relationships to others, to a hope that the relationship might be renewed after death. The seeming punishments dealt out by nature were determined as vindictive – what have we done to deserve this?