We knew we had been visited just before Christmas.
And now our "review" has gone live.
Statements like "They have a lively sense of church community with outreach at their heart. Their many ministries, both domestic and international, are far too numerous to mention here. One definitely senses that they are a very busy church." are definitely not as bad as some churches get.
While Terry got the thumbs up for his welcoming statements "Good morning and welcome to Barnabas Community Church, especially if you are visiting here today. Elder Hotchkiss went on to explain about the church and how the service would be, including songs and the offering. Very good really."
And overall:
"How would you feel about making this church your regular (where 10 = ecstatic, 0 = terminal)?
7 – This is a lively church with a passion for worship, but this may be a difficult place for anyone who doesn't want a full-on experience straightaway but needs to find a way in slowly.
Did the service make you feel glad to be a Christian?
Yes, it did. Overall we enjoyed being part of this time and seeing that sense of desire in people."
I could get all defensive about some of the points made but will try not to. Almost all can be answered fairly quickly, not least the majority of the car park being reserved for disability badge holders, but there you go.
I will take 7/10 and the main complaint being they thought the welcome was OTT. There are worse things to be accused of.
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Media. Show all posts
Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Saturday, 2 January 2010
The Mystery Worshipper
Well, we have officially been "Mystery worshipped" by a "Ship of Fools" contributor. This happened a few weeks ago in December.
We can look forward to our review appearing in the new year.
Reading through other reviews it is quite difficult to ascertain whether we are going to get a complete sledging or they may have quite liked it. Reading some of the discussions on Ship of Fools this year it is obvious that the Newfrontiers name is mud, which does not bode well. That said, some contemporary Churches have good reviews, so I guess it depends who does the review and how it went on the day.
Whatever the frailties of the concept, and for me part of it does not sit right, at least we will have outside eyes and ears giving us an opinion. I do hope nothing really unfair is written, but I guess that is the point of having a review. Whether it feels unfair or not we need to work out why it made them feel like that and what we can learn from it, even if all we can learn is to take no notice of Ship of Fools reviews!
That said, if it is a great review then we will probably want a copy for our Church magazine, so who knows?
Sunday, 18 October 2009
Dudley Outpouring on the BBC
The Revival Fires Church got slammed on the BBC this week for claiming healing.
This was BBC 1, prime time, in the west midlands. It is the first ten minutes.
I found it very hard viewing, for all manner of reasons.
On the one hand I believe in healing, that God heals, that some people are healed.
I also know Churches are under the spotlight regarding healing claims.
I think Trevor Baker is a genuine guy. I don't believe he is deceitful. He used to minister near here in Telford and was a real blessing to many people.
On the other hand, some of the things other bloggers commented on regarding the whole approach, such as the way the offering is administered, are ruthlessly exposed and highlighted by the programme.
I just wish there were some medical records available for the BBC. Without them, any healing claims are open to questioning, and add in the cynicism of the age and a bit of cash washing around and it is a perfect storm for a programme like that.
This was BBC 1, prime time, in the west midlands. It is the first ten minutes.
I found it very hard viewing, for all manner of reasons.
On the one hand I believe in healing, that God heals, that some people are healed.
I also know Churches are under the spotlight regarding healing claims.
I think Trevor Baker is a genuine guy. I don't believe he is deceitful. He used to minister near here in Telford and was a real blessing to many people.
On the other hand, some of the things other bloggers commented on regarding the whole approach, such as the way the offering is administered, are ruthlessly exposed and highlighted by the programme.
I just wish there were some medical records available for the BBC. Without them, any healing claims are open to questioning, and add in the cynicism of the age and a bit of cash washing around and it is a perfect storm for a programme like that.
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
Working Together, an appendix
Too much talking, too little action from me recently on this subject.
Until now.
7500 A5 flyers will be distributed within Shrewsbury by various Churches involved in running an Alpha Course this September, including about 2000 by us. This is a project I have chaired, with big hopes for future ways we can co-ordinate, publicise and grow our witness within the town.
I am really excited about what we can achieve for God by working together.
For those who like to stereotype newfrontiers Churches as not really working with others maybe this is food for thought? Of the six Churches represented one would not consider itself to be wholly evangelical, five would, three would be paedobaptist, three would be credobaptist, two have female curates who are currently leading the Church, three would lean to the complimentarian side at differing levels, there would be different levels of charismatic leaning, and one is led by someone who is a bit odd.
I think Alpha has a role to play as an agent for witness on the local church level, and agent of renewal within the Anglican communion and an agent of unity on an interchurch level, so i am really pleased we are doing this.
Until now.
7500 A5 flyers will be distributed within Shrewsbury by various Churches involved in running an Alpha Course this September, including about 2000 by us. This is a project I have chaired, with big hopes for future ways we can co-ordinate, publicise and grow our witness within the town.
I am really excited about what we can achieve for God by working together.For those who like to stereotype newfrontiers Churches as not really working with others maybe this is food for thought? Of the six Churches represented one would not consider itself to be wholly evangelical, five would, three would be paedobaptist, three would be credobaptist, two have female curates who are currently leading the Church, three would lean to the complimentarian side at differing levels, there would be different levels of charismatic leaning, and one is led by someone who is a bit odd.
I think Alpha has a role to play as an agent for witness on the local church level, and agent of renewal within the Anglican communion and an agent of unity on an interchurch level, so i am really pleased we are doing this.
Saturday, 29 August 2009
In the news (again)
A couple of weeks ago we were front page news.
A photo linked to that story was used the next week, and in the main daily paper.
This week in the letters page of the same paper there was a letter by (presumably) a local Christian under the heading "Church is working for the good of society".
It was a response to a previous letter that had evidently been bashing Christians / the Church.
He asked this question:
"How different would Shrewsbury be without the activities of Christians today? Let me cite just a few examples: Isaiah 58 and the Ark working amongst rough sleepers and the disadvantaged, the impact of Barnabas Community Church and of the Convent on the marginalised poor of the town, work carried out by all the churches in the areas of youth work, work among older people and holiday clubs, work with prisoners and their families, fair trade work."
I am really pleased to be serving the kind of church a fellow Christian can cite, publically, as an example of caring for the marginalised poor of the town. As we continue to train money advisors to help those in debt, and plan a Harvest Service for September which will be in support of our Debt Relief project called Basics Bank.
I think what touched me most was that in some small way we had been an encouragement to others within the body of Christ.
A photo linked to that story was used the next week, and in the main daily paper.
This week in the letters page of the same paper there was a letter by (presumably) a local Christian under the heading "Church is working for the good of society".
It was a response to a previous letter that had evidently been bashing Christians / the Church.
He asked this question:
"How different would Shrewsbury be without the activities of Christians today? Let me cite just a few examples: Isaiah 58 and the Ark working amongst rough sleepers and the disadvantaged, the impact of Barnabas Community Church and of the Convent on the marginalised poor of the town, work carried out by all the churches in the areas of youth work, work among older people and holiday clubs, work with prisoners and their families, fair trade work."
I am really pleased to be serving the kind of church a fellow Christian can cite, publically, as an example of caring for the marginalised poor of the town. As we continue to train money advisors to help those in debt, and plan a Harvest Service for September which will be in support of our Debt Relief project called Basics Bank.
I think what touched me most was that in some small way we had been an encouragement to others within the body of Christ.
Thursday, 30 July 2009
Front Page News
About 34,000 homes this week will have a copy of The Shrewsbury Chronicle.
On the front page, you will find this "exclusive" news about a local Church.
We would have had a photo too but a smiling 81 year old butcher stole that spot!
I think it is excellent on so many levels
On the front page, you will find this "exclusive" news about a local Church.
We would have had a photo too but a smiling 81 year old butcher stole that spot!
I think it is excellent on so many levels
- We want to tell our story
- The Church is newsworthy
- There are clear benefits for people outside the Church
- The people of God are generous
- The Church is engaging with modern culture/media/technology
Thursday, 19 February 2009
Cross Talk 26th February 2009
For publication in the Shrewsbury Chronicle: circulation 15,000 (approx)
Recent news reports tell of charities concerned that their donations will reduce because of the current economic climate, on top of a reduction in revenue from investments. The same charities are reporting that the demand for their services is increasing due to the difficulties people face in this time of recession. It seems a terrific shame that at the point of greater need in our nation the resources to help are shrinking.
That got me thinking about the role we, as Christians, and Churches play. In Shrewsbury The Ark Project, Isaiah 58 Project and Shrewsbury Christian Mission all work in different ways to help those without housing or in extreme poverty.
Other projects such as the Basics Bank at the Barnabas Centre help those in debt. Churches run all sorts of activities for the elderly, who are particularly vulnerable in winter in a time of financial hardship. Parent and Toddler groups and children's activities are helping families with younger children.
The Fairtrade Shop on St John's Hill allows us an opportunity to promote trade justice with other nations in a time of upheaval in world trade. Churches raise thousands of pounds every year for charities in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, South America, through larger agencies like Christian Aid, CAFOD and Tearfund or through activities like Trinity Churches in Meole Brace helping fund school buildings in Zambia.
Events like Soul Purpose in North Shrewsbury and The Noise in Bayston Hill see people actively looking to serve local people.
All of these, and many others not mentioned, help to express the love of God to those around and put our faith into practical action. Let us respond to the current economic situation by giving more, sharing more and doing more, as a blessing to the community in which we live and as a witness to Jesus.
Recent news reports tell of charities concerned that their donations will reduce because of the current economic climate, on top of a reduction in revenue from investments. The same charities are reporting that the demand for their services is increasing due to the difficulties people face in this time of recession. It seems a terrific shame that at the point of greater need in our nation the resources to help are shrinking.
That got me thinking about the role we, as Christians, and Churches play. In Shrewsbury The Ark Project, Isaiah 58 Project and Shrewsbury Christian Mission all work in different ways to help those without housing or in extreme poverty.
Other projects such as the Basics Bank at the Barnabas Centre help those in debt. Churches run all sorts of activities for the elderly, who are particularly vulnerable in winter in a time of financial hardship. Parent and Toddler groups and children's activities are helping families with younger children.
The Fairtrade Shop on St John's Hill allows us an opportunity to promote trade justice with other nations in a time of upheaval in world trade. Churches raise thousands of pounds every year for charities in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, South America, through larger agencies like Christian Aid, CAFOD and Tearfund or through activities like Trinity Churches in Meole Brace helping fund school buildings in Zambia.
Events like Soul Purpose in North Shrewsbury and The Noise in Bayston Hill see people actively looking to serve local people.
All of these, and many others not mentioned, help to express the love of God to those around and put our faith into practical action. Let us respond to the current economic situation by giving more, sharing more and doing more, as a blessing to the community in which we live and as a witness to Jesus.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Can we be "Honest to Darwin"?
Shrewsbury is awash with Charles Darwin.
In the bicentenery of his birth, the Darwin festival is fully prepared, half a million of taxpayers money has been set aside for publicity, there are Darwin 2009 flags on the lamp posts around town and anything and everything seems to be pointing to the big man.
No, not THE BIG MAN in our sense of the word, but the man from Shrewsbury who some people suggest "killed God".
Based on my experience of the living God I have always found that description of Darwin somewhat crude, both in the assumption that God is somehow dead and the implication that it is because of Darwin. I am sure if God had died it would have taken a bit more than a chap from a little town in between somewhere near nowhere and Wales to kill Him.
But how do we respond to the onslaught from neo-darwinists who take his theory, stretch it, flog it, sell it and use it to sell a godless philosophy?
This is why I am excited about "Honest to Darwin" happening here in Shrewsbury later this month. Many Christians simply do not know how to respond to the challenges made by neo-darwinist philosophy that so insidiously lay claim to branches of science.
The aim here, is that by using the science itself, and the outcomes of the science, that we can challenge the philosophy while recognising the contribution made by science.
The media seem interested too. BBC Shropshire's website covers the whole Darwin thing in some depth and the Intelligent Design response has got some exposure on their main page, as well as in an article.
I have a hunch that if we really want to be listened to then we need to present an approach well worth listening to. If the discussion is about the science then let us use the science to provoke the discussion. If we want to challenge the philosophy then we need to present a philosophy worth holding. If we can use "their" science to do so, then we are taking the battle to them like never before.
I think the greatest threat to neo-darwinism is going to come within the science itself.
In the bicentenery of his birth, the Darwin festival is fully prepared, half a million of taxpayers money has been set aside for publicity, there are Darwin 2009 flags on the lamp posts around town and anything and everything seems to be pointing to the big man.
No, not THE BIG MAN in our sense of the word, but the man from Shrewsbury who some people suggest "killed God".
Based on my experience of the living God I have always found that description of Darwin somewhat crude, both in the assumption that God is somehow dead and the implication that it is because of Darwin. I am sure if God had died it would have taken a bit more than a chap from a little town in between somewhere near nowhere and Wales to kill Him.
But how do we respond to the onslaught from neo-darwinists who take his theory, stretch it, flog it, sell it and use it to sell a godless philosophy?
This is why I am excited about "Honest to Darwin" happening here in Shrewsbury later this month. Many Christians simply do not know how to respond to the challenges made by neo-darwinist philosophy that so insidiously lay claim to branches of science.
The aim here, is that by using the science itself, and the outcomes of the science, that we can challenge the philosophy while recognising the contribution made by science.
The media seem interested too. BBC Shropshire's website covers the whole Darwin thing in some depth and the Intelligent Design response has got some exposure on their main page, as well as in an article.
I have a hunch that if we really want to be listened to then we need to present an approach well worth listening to. If the discussion is about the science then let us use the science to provoke the discussion. If we want to challenge the philosophy then we need to present a philosophy worth holding. If we can use "their" science to do so, then we are taking the battle to them like never before.
I think the greatest threat to neo-darwinism is going to come within the science itself.
Wednesday, 4 February 2009
More Buses!
I am enjoying this, and building on yesterdays foundation I have a few more ideas.
From proof I have spent too much time reading The Simple Pastor
To a slight dig at Christian charismania:
And my current favourite...
Some cracking entries keep appearing all over the blogdom of God. I love this one found here.
From proof I have spent too much time reading The Simple Pastor
To a slight dig at Christian charismania:
And my current favourite...
Some cracking entries keep appearing all over the blogdom of God. I love this one found here.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
God Buses - choose your slogan!
Peter Kirk put me onto this rather humorous gadget here (which rather turns the whole atheist bus thing on its head, when the Christian blogging community go nuts for it).
and it got me thinking.
What if Arminians started advertising on buses?
Or have have a bit of fun at Mark Driscoll's expense...
Rick Warren?
And for me...
And finally...
and it got me thinking.
What if Arminians started advertising on buses?
Or have have a bit of fun at Mark Driscoll's expense...
Rick Warren?
And for me...
And finally...
Monday, 29 September 2008
10 Blogging Commandments...
The Evangelical Alliance have published their "Ten Blogging Commandments" which came out of the recent "Godblogs event in London.
The Times have picked up the story here and commented here
Some people aren't impressed, such as Dave Warnock with some interesting criticisms while some who were at the event are a bit confused as to what was published.
Personally - I can see how this started out as a good idea but I am unsure the Times article is actually good PR. It feels a little bit too much like airing our dirty laundry in public without actually adding much to help.
I am relatively new to blogging. I have been a moderator of a football messageboard for 5 or 6 years now, which has over 500,000 posts on 47,000 topics in 4 years, but only recently entered the blogging world having been interested by the blogs of both my brother Jon and Phil Whittall.
Here are a few of my personal observations, and if I am honest, disappointments:
1) I have been surprised at the strength of criticism on some blogs. It seems very odd, that less hurtful things are said by rival football fans trying to be offensive, than fellow Christians trying to represent a different viewpoint. In fact, it appears that some blogs / bloggers only exist for the purpose of running down other people / ministries / theological positions etc.
2) "Christian bloggers" seem to have a subculture of their own, and within that culture there are very definite groups or further subcultures so it is far too easy for new people to be dismissed. I deliberately look at blogs that differ from my own position on subjects to be stirred on the issues and engage with thinking that is different to my own. Some blogs appear to be , or are moderated to look like exercises in backslapping by a particular clique and anyone outside of that sphere gets run down too quickly.
3) It appears that many bloggers don't want to discuss things, they just want to prove their own rightness. A fantastic example of a blog that does not fall into this trap is complegalitarian which really has become a place for genuinely effective discussion.
4) "Unity" is used as both a bomb shelter to hide in once a fight has been started and also a tool to prevent further discussion. To some it is a trump card to play once you have had your ounce of flesh. You can say whatever you want then hide behind "unity" - but only after breeding disunity through false accusation or deliberate misinterpretation of someone else's viewpoint. It appears that people want you to respect their right to believe what they do and therefore uphold unity, while withholding the right to say whatever they want about your position without any negative reaction, which would of course, be you bringing disunity... So "unity" becomes a means of bullying rather than the foundation of a conversation, which is no unity at all.
5) Blogs don't really allow for personality in the same way that speech does. People say things in a way or with a strength way beyond what they would say to someone's face. People know me as a pretty easy going, humorous, fairly sensitive chap. At uni my nickname was "Jolly Dave". I wonder if that has made it across into cyberspace.
This is a humorous take on the ten commandments that brings a bit of joy back into the conversation.
On a more personal level, these are the basic presumptions I want to move forward with:
1) Hear the person - not their background, denomination, church background etc.
2) Not to use inflammatory language. It just does not help whatsoever.
3) Guilt by association is not guilt at all.
4) Don't question their motivations - even the person who is the most wrong on a subject needs to be engaged with as a fellow believer trying to get it right. I hold that because one day I may find myself as the most wrong - even though I know I am trying to get it right.
5) Don't write off 99% of what someone stands for on the basis of the 1% you disagree with. Most of us have more in common with each other than we think, and even where we disagree, we can still learn how it works for someone who holds that view.
Forgive the fact there are only 5. I may add more, but that will do for now. More to the point, forgive the times I stray from my own list.
The Times have picked up the story here and commented here
Some people aren't impressed, such as Dave Warnock with some interesting criticisms while some who were at the event are a bit confused as to what was published.
Personally - I can see how this started out as a good idea but I am unsure the Times article is actually good PR. It feels a little bit too much like airing our dirty laundry in public without actually adding much to help.
I am relatively new to blogging. I have been a moderator of a football messageboard for 5 or 6 years now, which has over 500,000 posts on 47,000 topics in 4 years, but only recently entered the blogging world having been interested by the blogs of both my brother Jon and Phil Whittall.
Here are a few of my personal observations, and if I am honest, disappointments:
1) I have been surprised at the strength of criticism on some blogs. It seems very odd, that less hurtful things are said by rival football fans trying to be offensive, than fellow Christians trying to represent a different viewpoint. In fact, it appears that some blogs / bloggers only exist for the purpose of running down other people / ministries / theological positions etc.
2) "Christian bloggers" seem to have a subculture of their own, and within that culture there are very definite groups or further subcultures so it is far too easy for new people to be dismissed. I deliberately look at blogs that differ from my own position on subjects to be stirred on the issues and engage with thinking that is different to my own. Some blogs appear to be , or are moderated to look like exercises in backslapping by a particular clique and anyone outside of that sphere gets run down too quickly.
3) It appears that many bloggers don't want to discuss things, they just want to prove their own rightness. A fantastic example of a blog that does not fall into this trap is complegalitarian which really has become a place for genuinely effective discussion.
4) "Unity" is used as both a bomb shelter to hide in once a fight has been started and also a tool to prevent further discussion. To some it is a trump card to play once you have had your ounce of flesh. You can say whatever you want then hide behind "unity" - but only after breeding disunity through false accusation or deliberate misinterpretation of someone else's viewpoint. It appears that people want you to respect their right to believe what they do and therefore uphold unity, while withholding the right to say whatever they want about your position without any negative reaction, which would of course, be you bringing disunity... So "unity" becomes a means of bullying rather than the foundation of a conversation, which is no unity at all.
5) Blogs don't really allow for personality in the same way that speech does. People say things in a way or with a strength way beyond what they would say to someone's face. People know me as a pretty easy going, humorous, fairly sensitive chap. At uni my nickname was "Jolly Dave". I wonder if that has made it across into cyberspace.
This is a humorous take on the ten commandments that brings a bit of joy back into the conversation.
On a more personal level, these are the basic presumptions I want to move forward with:
1) Hear the person - not their background, denomination, church background etc.
2) Not to use inflammatory language. It just does not help whatsoever.
3) Guilt by association is not guilt at all.
4) Don't question their motivations - even the person who is the most wrong on a subject needs to be engaged with as a fellow believer trying to get it right. I hold that because one day I may find myself as the most wrong - even though I know I am trying to get it right.
5) Don't write off 99% of what someone stands for on the basis of the 1% you disagree with. Most of us have more in common with each other than we think, and even where we disagree, we can still learn how it works for someone who holds that view.
Forgive the fact there are only 5. I may add more, but that will do for now. More to the point, forgive the times I stray from my own list.
Thursday, 11 September 2008
Dear Blue Peter...
A friend emailed me the other day, asking if my middle initial was "E".
It is.
In the Sunday Express this week there was an article about a recently published booked called "Dear Blue Peter" about all the letters and pictures sent to Blue Peter over the years.
One morning, aged about 5 and off school ill, I had written to Blue Peter. I expressed sadness Jack the cat had died and asked for a new cat. They shortly brought in Willow as a replacement. I then did a picture of George the Tortoise waking up from his long hibernation.
A few weeks later my friend Ben called to tell me my letter had been read out on Blue Peter. I had missed it! I was gutted! I did get a Blue Peter badge though - a great source of pride for a child of the eighties.
So on we roll, I missed it, I never saw it, and I rarely think of it except in icebreakers when people want to know something interesting about me.
But then, on Sunday, the bottom corner of the page, David E Matthias, with his picture of George the tortoise in the Sunday Express! I assume that the photo is actually in the book itself, so will be buying a copy.
In the mean time, I looked up the book, and found my picture is even on the BBC website here!
So there you go, I sent that picture in 23 years ago and thought I had missed the five minutes of fame it had brought me, but it looks like it will be preserved forever in a new book.
I wonder if there is any way of finding that episode of Blue Peter?
It is.
In the Sunday Express this week there was an article about a recently published booked called "Dear Blue Peter" about all the letters and pictures sent to Blue Peter over the years.
One morning, aged about 5 and off school ill, I had written to Blue Peter. I expressed sadness Jack the cat had died and asked for a new cat. They shortly brought in Willow as a replacement. I then did a picture of George the Tortoise waking up from his long hibernation.
A few weeks later my friend Ben called to tell me my letter had been read out on Blue Peter. I had missed it! I was gutted! I did get a Blue Peter badge though - a great source of pride for a child of the eighties.
So on we roll, I missed it, I never saw it, and I rarely think of it except in icebreakers when people want to know something interesting about me.
But then, on Sunday, the bottom corner of the page, David E Matthias, with his picture of George the tortoise in the Sunday Express! I assume that the photo is actually in the book itself, so will be buying a copy.
In the mean time, I looked up the book, and found my picture is even on the BBC website here!
So there you go, I sent that picture in 23 years ago and thought I had missed the five minutes of fame it had brought me, but it looks like it will be preserved forever in a new book.
I wonder if there is any way of finding that episode of Blue Peter?
Friday, 5 September 2008
Hope 08 Shrewsbury
54,000 reasons for Hope.
That is it, I just put the finishing touches to a 4 page wrap around of our local free newspaper, which we have purchased as local Churches as part of the Hope08 initiative in Shrewsbury, for delivery to 54,000 homes in the town and surrounding villages.
That is 54,000 homes, representing well over 100,000 people, who we are sending a message of hope to.
We are talking about being good news in practical ways - local Churches working with young people, trade justice, the environment, the homeless, those in poverty overseas.
And we are talking about "stories of hope" - local people whose lives have been changed through faith in Jesus. And we are explaining the reason for our hope, Jesus Christ.
I have led an editorial team of 5 people from different Churches to bring this project to fruition, which has been both a priviledge and a pressure, but I think we're done now.
The Hope08 slogan says "Do more, do it together, do it in word and deed". Well this is over 20 churches of all denominations, in a united display of being the body of Christ, in the largest collaborative project locally in recent times, and showing what Christians "do" as well as what God has "done" in us.
Please pray for this, as they hit those 54,000 doormats, for those 54,000 households where 54,000 messages of hope will fall on September 18th.
That is it, I just put the finishing touches to a 4 page wrap around of our local free newspaper, which we have purchased as local Churches as part of the Hope08 initiative in Shrewsbury, for delivery to 54,000 homes in the town and surrounding villages.
That is 54,000 homes, representing well over 100,000 people, who we are sending a message of hope to.
We are talking about being good news in practical ways - local Churches working with young people, trade justice, the environment, the homeless, those in poverty overseas.
And we are talking about "stories of hope" - local people whose lives have been changed through faith in Jesus. And we are explaining the reason for our hope, Jesus Christ.
I have led an editorial team of 5 people from different Churches to bring this project to fruition, which has been both a priviledge and a pressure, but I think we're done now.
The Hope08 slogan says "Do more, do it together, do it in word and deed". Well this is over 20 churches of all denominations, in a united display of being the body of Christ, in the largest collaborative project locally in recent times, and showing what Christians "do" as well as what God has "done" in us.
Please pray for this, as they hit those 54,000 doormats, for those 54,000 households where 54,000 messages of hope will fall on September 18th.
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
What can we learn from Lakeland?
I wanted to draw a line under my blogging on the subject of Todd Bentley and Lakeland but Phil Whittall's excellent post Todd Bentley, Revival & Discernment really got me thinking.
His ten point analysis gives much food for thought. And I am trying to make it personal to me - not what can we learn in a "know it all" way, but what can I learn in an "as I work out my own salvation with fear and trembling" kind of a way.
1. We should let history give a name to what is God is doing. Really early on, in fact way too early on, it was called a 'revival' and Dudley was called an 'outpouring' and named by those involved. To my mind that is a big presumption and to be honest God's work rarely needs man's PR to make it a success.
Good point - instead of predicting the "next big thing" and chasing after where it is supposedly at, let's chase after God and His purposes and His call on our lives and see how history judges us.
2. This was the first 'revival' in a media age. There is no question in my mind, that this event was the first of its kind which spread virally and was 'sponsored' by a TV station (God TV) and that this was not always good. While, this TV channel is run by Christians it is still a TV channel. Sadly for us, being on TV is a still seen as a sign of legitimacy which shows that we still have a fairly naive and immature approach to media. Being able to watch in on the internet or on TV does not make it any more or less genuine.
I think I was already pretty cautious about the Christian media at large, and will be more so now. No matter how good the intentions, we are always getting an agenda. The same goes for conferences, books, speakers etc etc. Keeping a broader vision and staying connected widely across the body of Christ help us to have a context. "Power evangelism" is going on at St Andrews Chorleywood in the ministry of Mark Stibbe and others. UK Anglicans, on the front foot, seeking God for healing and conversion and seeing it. That is exciting - God is at work in such a variety of ways - but by their nature media channels push us into focus on the smaller amount of locations and ministries, creating an imbalance.
3. TV inflates and exaggerates. Saying you have a potential audience of 400 million people is very, very different from the number of people that are actually watching. Right now I have a potential readership of billions on this blog, in reality the number is one or two less than that.
The numbers game is a false economy. TV coverage focuses on the end of the camera, God's Kingdom perspective focuses to the ends of the earth. Let's consider the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, the Church across the world. Not the millions looking to the one, but the one, me, looking to the millions, the millions of my brothers and sisters around the world on mission, under persecution, in poverty. The only one we should focus on is Jesus.
4. What is the deal with the nightly meetings? This seems to have become a modern mark of revival. Where did that come from? I've no idea why intensity has become more important than longevity but it has. It certainly accommodates demand, but it seems to me that saturation often does more harm than good and in the case of Lakeland we became saturated faster than ever before. Why do we exhaust so quickly what we want so badly?
Church programmes quickly overtake relationships. Do our structures consume or release, take or empower, bless or burden? Are our churches so resource hungry that our mission falters? Isn't mission supposed to be about getting out there and meeting people were they are not sitting here and expecting them to come to us? This challenges me more and more as I can get sucked into church activity daily and nightly - but always want space for my friends.
5. We made it about a man. Again. Todd Bentley may very well have a supernatural gift from God to heal people, this is not a good reason to let him preach dozens of nights in a row. It is not a good reason to let him exhort people to give. It's not a good reason for much except getting him to pray for the sick (although preferably without punching, kicking, kneeing, slamming or whatever). Why can't we let the gifted preacher preach, the prophet prophesy and the healer heal? So once again our shallow need for celebrity, and plenty of other causes, gave one person far too much prominence, where it was dangerous for him and dangerous for the campaign he was involved in.
More and more I see this play out. People really do want to make it about a person. I think this is where Ephesians 4 ministries are so vital - people need to play to their strengths. It is never about one person, one ministry - some of the variety is the beauty of being in a body. Let the musicians play, let the evangelists preach, let the teachers teach, let the pastors look after people and let the administrators try to fill in the gaps! Being right in one area doesn't make someone right in everything. I think Phil's blog, and his heart cry, needs & deserves much wider airing than it currently has. We need different prophetic voices in the Church raising their voices and being heard - but not a "one size fits all" approach. Phil's got a message on living simply, he has a challenge to materialism. But that doesn't mean he is the right person to speak on "power evangelism" - get Mark Stibbe to do that! Let's release each other and honour the good, not expect everyone to do everything.
That is why I enjoy the Brighton conference - as I have friends in India and Africa who I can hear from and catch up with. The range of speakers is a blessing - someone working in Russia, someone working in South Africa, Someone from Seattle - not just my little bubble.
Eldership is a team ministry. Leadership is a team ministry. People say to me "Are you part of Martin Charlesworth's Church"? What a false question. Nope - I am part of Jesus' church. Martin leads the eldership team of our local expression of it.
6. Charismatics want revival the easy way. Still. We desperately want people to be saved without us preaching to them, healed without us praying for them, discipled without us befriending them, enriched without us sharing with them and the nations reached without us going to them. So when one man came, we went to him instead of to HIM.
Do I pray for things I am actually not willing to be part of? Do I look to people instead of God? Do I bask in the reflected glory of the ministry of others, rather than take up my own cross and follow him? Will I cross the oceans to hear a preacher when I won't cross the street to greet my friend? The heart of the great commission, Go, Make disciples, baptise them & teach them. God doesn't "do" revival on his own - otherwise he wouldn't have given us a blueprint or a mandate to reach the nations for Christ. But that mandate starts in our Jerusalem, then our Judea and Samaria, then the ends of the earth. Am I praying for revival in Samaria while not obeying my commission in Jerusalem? Is revival now a spectator sport, not a life consuming mission?
7. We're looking in the wrong places. It seems to me that our eyes are fixed on America, hoping revival will come from there. It has the right language, the media channels and millions of Christians ready to give a leader national prominence and millions of dollars. When God decided it was time for Jesus to come he didn't send him to Rome but to Bethlehem. If we could be bothered we should be talking to the Chinese, the Indian, the African.
So true. We play it safe. They look safe so they must be safe. When I look around in heaven I am not going to see a room full of educated polite white people - so why does my bookshelf contain the majority of books by polite educated white Christians? Why are the blogs I read mostly polite white educated Christians? We all know about the Chinese Church but what are we learning from them?
There is a sinister side too: The level of "voice" someone has can be shaped by money and viewing patterns, not necessarily fruit or integrity. I am setting myself up for a fall if my ministry, or my theology, or my relationships are too heavily reliant on one person or a few people.
8. Why can't we have good doctrine and great power? Personally I'm tired of this split where those with good doctrine see so little dunamis while those with all the dynamite just blow themselves up with it because they forget that theology actually is important after all.
Too true. I want to see both. I really do. We need people working in teams better. Let the teacher teach, the prophet prophecy and the healer heal. It does not have to be the one person, it is one body. I need to play my role in that body with what God has given me, while honouring all parts of the same body. Too often the single person approach to ministry means you only get a single track gifting: let's be a people moving in power and honouring Scripture, and that means all of us involved as a body.
9. Wacky, is well, wacky. God has every right to use methods and people that do not conform to my expectations. His wisdom can appear foolish to me, but that doesn't mean that everything that is foolish is from God. That would be, well, foolish.
We must not throw out something because we have not seen it before. When Jesus walked on water the disciples didn't reject him because the "biblical" way would be to part the water with a staff! But I always consider why Paul spent so much time structuring "orderly" worship rather than allowing God to "just do His stuff".
10. Sadly, we love being fighting to be right. I think blogs can be helpful places to get reactions and think through issues, it also becomes an easy way to take cheap shots and demonstrate a stunning lack of grace, charity, forgiveness, wisdom or discernment.
Yes that is true. Type "Todd Bentley" into google, or even "Todd Bentley Marriage" and you see a civil war within the blogosphere which is a tragedy. I read blogs by people I disagree with to broaden my thinking and challenge my assumptions. To engage not to attack. I know I am not right on everything, I am just trying to work out which bits!
His ten point analysis gives much food for thought. And I am trying to make it personal to me - not what can we learn in a "know it all" way, but what can I learn in an "as I work out my own salvation with fear and trembling" kind of a way.
1. We should let history give a name to what is God is doing. Really early on, in fact way too early on, it was called a 'revival' and Dudley was called an 'outpouring' and named by those involved. To my mind that is a big presumption and to be honest God's work rarely needs man's PR to make it a success.
Good point - instead of predicting the "next big thing" and chasing after where it is supposedly at, let's chase after God and His purposes and His call on our lives and see how history judges us.
2. This was the first 'revival' in a media age. There is no question in my mind, that this event was the first of its kind which spread virally and was 'sponsored' by a TV station (God TV) and that this was not always good. While, this TV channel is run by Christians it is still a TV channel. Sadly for us, being on TV is a still seen as a sign of legitimacy which shows that we still have a fairly naive and immature approach to media. Being able to watch in on the internet or on TV does not make it any more or less genuine.
I think I was already pretty cautious about the Christian media at large, and will be more so now. No matter how good the intentions, we are always getting an agenda. The same goes for conferences, books, speakers etc etc. Keeping a broader vision and staying connected widely across the body of Christ help us to have a context. "Power evangelism" is going on at St Andrews Chorleywood in the ministry of Mark Stibbe and others. UK Anglicans, on the front foot, seeking God for healing and conversion and seeing it. That is exciting - God is at work in such a variety of ways - but by their nature media channels push us into focus on the smaller amount of locations and ministries, creating an imbalance.
3. TV inflates and exaggerates. Saying you have a potential audience of 400 million people is very, very different from the number of people that are actually watching. Right now I have a potential readership of billions on this blog, in reality the number is one or two less than that.
The numbers game is a false economy. TV coverage focuses on the end of the camera, God's Kingdom perspective focuses to the ends of the earth. Let's consider the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, the Church across the world. Not the millions looking to the one, but the one, me, looking to the millions, the millions of my brothers and sisters around the world on mission, under persecution, in poverty. The only one we should focus on is Jesus.
4. What is the deal with the nightly meetings? This seems to have become a modern mark of revival. Where did that come from? I've no idea why intensity has become more important than longevity but it has. It certainly accommodates demand, but it seems to me that saturation often does more harm than good and in the case of Lakeland we became saturated faster than ever before. Why do we exhaust so quickly what we want so badly?
Church programmes quickly overtake relationships. Do our structures consume or release, take or empower, bless or burden? Are our churches so resource hungry that our mission falters? Isn't mission supposed to be about getting out there and meeting people were they are not sitting here and expecting them to come to us? This challenges me more and more as I can get sucked into church activity daily and nightly - but always want space for my friends.
5. We made it about a man. Again. Todd Bentley may very well have a supernatural gift from God to heal people, this is not a good reason to let him preach dozens of nights in a row. It is not a good reason to let him exhort people to give. It's not a good reason for much except getting him to pray for the sick (although preferably without punching, kicking, kneeing, slamming or whatever). Why can't we let the gifted preacher preach, the prophet prophesy and the healer heal? So once again our shallow need for celebrity, and plenty of other causes, gave one person far too much prominence, where it was dangerous for him and dangerous for the campaign he was involved in.
More and more I see this play out. People really do want to make it about a person. I think this is where Ephesians 4 ministries are so vital - people need to play to their strengths. It is never about one person, one ministry - some of the variety is the beauty of being in a body. Let the musicians play, let the evangelists preach, let the teachers teach, let the pastors look after people and let the administrators try to fill in the gaps! Being right in one area doesn't make someone right in everything. I think Phil's blog, and his heart cry, needs & deserves much wider airing than it currently has. We need different prophetic voices in the Church raising their voices and being heard - but not a "one size fits all" approach. Phil's got a message on living simply, he has a challenge to materialism. But that doesn't mean he is the right person to speak on "power evangelism" - get Mark Stibbe to do that! Let's release each other and honour the good, not expect everyone to do everything.
That is why I enjoy the Brighton conference - as I have friends in India and Africa who I can hear from and catch up with. The range of speakers is a blessing - someone working in Russia, someone working in South Africa, Someone from Seattle - not just my little bubble.
Eldership is a team ministry. Leadership is a team ministry. People say to me "Are you part of Martin Charlesworth's Church"? What a false question. Nope - I am part of Jesus' church. Martin leads the eldership team of our local expression of it.
6. Charismatics want revival the easy way. Still. We desperately want people to be saved without us preaching to them, healed without us praying for them, discipled without us befriending them, enriched without us sharing with them and the nations reached without us going to them. So when one man came, we went to him instead of to HIM.
Do I pray for things I am actually not willing to be part of? Do I look to people instead of God? Do I bask in the reflected glory of the ministry of others, rather than take up my own cross and follow him? Will I cross the oceans to hear a preacher when I won't cross the street to greet my friend? The heart of the great commission, Go, Make disciples, baptise them & teach them. God doesn't "do" revival on his own - otherwise he wouldn't have given us a blueprint or a mandate to reach the nations for Christ. But that mandate starts in our Jerusalem, then our Judea and Samaria, then the ends of the earth. Am I praying for revival in Samaria while not obeying my commission in Jerusalem? Is revival now a spectator sport, not a life consuming mission?
7. We're looking in the wrong places. It seems to me that our eyes are fixed on America, hoping revival will come from there. It has the right language, the media channels and millions of Christians ready to give a leader national prominence and millions of dollars. When God decided it was time for Jesus to come he didn't send him to Rome but to Bethlehem. If we could be bothered we should be talking to the Chinese, the Indian, the African.
So true. We play it safe. They look safe so they must be safe. When I look around in heaven I am not going to see a room full of educated polite white people - so why does my bookshelf contain the majority of books by polite educated white Christians? Why are the blogs I read mostly polite white educated Christians? We all know about the Chinese Church but what are we learning from them?
There is a sinister side too: The level of "voice" someone has can be shaped by money and viewing patterns, not necessarily fruit or integrity. I am setting myself up for a fall if my ministry, or my theology, or my relationships are too heavily reliant on one person or a few people.
8. Why can't we have good doctrine and great power? Personally I'm tired of this split where those with good doctrine see so little dunamis while those with all the dynamite just blow themselves up with it because they forget that theology actually is important after all.
Too true. I want to see both. I really do. We need people working in teams better. Let the teacher teach, the prophet prophecy and the healer heal. It does not have to be the one person, it is one body. I need to play my role in that body with what God has given me, while honouring all parts of the same body. Too often the single person approach to ministry means you only get a single track gifting: let's be a people moving in power and honouring Scripture, and that means all of us involved as a body.
9. Wacky, is well, wacky. God has every right to use methods and people that do not conform to my expectations. His wisdom can appear foolish to me, but that doesn't mean that everything that is foolish is from God. That would be, well, foolish.
We must not throw out something because we have not seen it before. When Jesus walked on water the disciples didn't reject him because the "biblical" way would be to part the water with a staff! But I always consider why Paul spent so much time structuring "orderly" worship rather than allowing God to "just do His stuff".
10. Sadly, we love being fighting to be right. I think blogs can be helpful places to get reactions and think through issues, it also becomes an easy way to take cheap shots and demonstrate a stunning lack of grace, charity, forgiveness, wisdom or discernment.
Yes that is true. Type "Todd Bentley" into google, or even "Todd Bentley Marriage" and you see a civil war within the blogosphere which is a tragedy. I read blogs by people I disagree with to broaden my thinking and challenge my assumptions. To engage not to attack. I know I am not right on everything, I am just trying to work out which bits!
Monday, 18 August 2008
Christians & the Media
Getting the Christian message across in the media is a challenge. As we have seen at North Shrewsbury Community Church and as I have recently seen on national TV on the programme "Make me a Christian".
My posts on the Todd Bentley situation help explain my concerns with some elements of the "Christian" media.
So when I saw this video on Youtube I wasn't quite sure what to make of it.
On the one hand, what a great opportunity. On the other, how corny is that! Is it a great witness or a cheese-tastic sell out? Or a bit of both?
I can't help feeling uncomfortable when I see people singing a popular christian song apparently on the basis of its popularity amongst many of the "target audience", not the meaning of the song. And yet it is a wonderful song that glorifies Christ being sung to millions of people - what a fantastic witness.
What a shame then that by the time it came to the American Idol "Give back" show "Jesus" had been toned down to "Shepherd". What an oddity - the PC worship song, ideal for "non religion specific" worship. Barmy.
Although Joshua Harris helps to explain the situation on his blog here, here and here. There is always more than meets the eye.
I know for years Christians have said things along the lines of "If only we could get Christian worship into the mainstream" and stuff like that. Everyone had to buy Delirious singles the same week, and more recently download a Tim Hughes song in the same week to try to catapult our favourite worhsip leaders onto the national stage, but we never really got anywhere with it. I remember being asked to do with same with a Kendrick song back in the day. And yet all along elemtns of the church has maintained an undignified distance from Sir Cliff Richard. Whether you like his style or not - he is ridiculously popular and very very clear.
Few seem to know about the faith of Joseph Simmons (The "Run" in "Run DMC"), and no-one knows how to pigeon hole U2 and the journey members of their band have been on. The same people who want a Christian in showbusiness for the sake of witness are probably the same who would lambast their every move and judge their every statement and end up banning their kids from listening to their music.
Then along came "Mary Mary" and got to number 5 with this corker, and gazumped every mainstream christian artist wanting to break the charts.
If you're going to get more "Christian" songs in the mainstream, let's have them sung by Christians, popular by their own merits (not our plans to hijack a chart) and make sure the words sound a bit like this:
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
In the corners of my mind
I just can't seem to find a reason to believe
That I can break free
Cause you see I have been bound for so long
Felt like all hope is gone
But as I lift my hands, I understand
That I should praise you through my circumstance
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
Everything that could go wrong
All went wrong at one time
So much pressure fell on me
I thought I was gonna lose my mind
But I know you wanna see
If I will hold on through these trials
But I need you to lift this load
Cause I can't take it no more
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
Been through the fire and the rain
Bound in every kind of way
But God has broken every chain
So let me go right now
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
My posts on the Todd Bentley situation help explain my concerns with some elements of the "Christian" media.
So when I saw this video on Youtube I wasn't quite sure what to make of it.
On the one hand, what a great opportunity. On the other, how corny is that! Is it a great witness or a cheese-tastic sell out? Or a bit of both?
I can't help feeling uncomfortable when I see people singing a popular christian song apparently on the basis of its popularity amongst many of the "target audience", not the meaning of the song. And yet it is a wonderful song that glorifies Christ being sung to millions of people - what a fantastic witness.
What a shame then that by the time it came to the American Idol "Give back" show "Jesus" had been toned down to "Shepherd". What an oddity - the PC worship song, ideal for "non religion specific" worship. Barmy.
Although Joshua Harris helps to explain the situation on his blog here, here and here. There is always more than meets the eye.
I know for years Christians have said things along the lines of "If only we could get Christian worship into the mainstream" and stuff like that. Everyone had to buy Delirious singles the same week, and more recently download a Tim Hughes song in the same week to try to catapult our favourite worhsip leaders onto the national stage, but we never really got anywhere with it. I remember being asked to do with same with a Kendrick song back in the day. And yet all along elemtns of the church has maintained an undignified distance from Sir Cliff Richard. Whether you like his style or not - he is ridiculously popular and very very clear.
Few seem to know about the faith of Joseph Simmons (The "Run" in "Run DMC"), and no-one knows how to pigeon hole U2 and the journey members of their band have been on. The same people who want a Christian in showbusiness for the sake of witness are probably the same who would lambast their every move and judge their every statement and end up banning their kids from listening to their music.
Then along came "Mary Mary" and got to number 5 with this corker, and gazumped every mainstream christian artist wanting to break the charts.
If you're going to get more "Christian" songs in the mainstream, let's have them sung by Christians, popular by their own merits (not our plans to hijack a chart) and make sure the words sound a bit like this:
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
In the corners of my mind
I just can't seem to find a reason to believe
That I can break free
Cause you see I have been bound for so long
Felt like all hope is gone
But as I lift my hands, I understand
That I should praise you through my circumstance
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
Everything that could go wrong
All went wrong at one time
So much pressure fell on me
I thought I was gonna lose my mind
But I know you wanna see
If I will hold on through these trials
But I need you to lift this load
Cause I can't take it no more
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
Been through the fire and the rain
Bound in every kind of way
But God has broken every chain
So let me go right now
Take the shackles off my feet so I can dance
I just wanna praise you
I just wanna praise you
You broke the chains now I can lift my hands
And I'm gonna praise you
I'm gonna praise you
Wednesday, 13 August 2008
Todd Bentley sadness
Todd Bentley and his wife have seperated.
And so the blogosphere goes into overdrive like vultures around a carcass.
Some of the posts in a thread like this fill me with hope, but most of them, especially early on, fill me with anger. Do not read them if you are easily offended, please. That first page is really quite painful to read.
The "I told you so" movement sweeps into full view, this is an example of many, although ones like this list some useful observations even if I don't agree with everything they say.
This is the saddest video of all I have seen from Lakeland. It was not that long ago at all.
Big questions for those apostles, Peter, John, Bill, Che, Rick etc on the stage that night.
1) Did they know the Bentleys were having relationship troubles?
2) What have done to support it?
3) What are they going to do for them now?
These were the promises over him: what are they going to do for him now?
Many people think that this "commissioning" was just people wanting to get on the stage of the next big thing. That is a harsh accusation, so prove them wrong guys - go to his aid, he needs you. You "stood with him" on the stage in front of hundreds of millions of viewers in tens of countries, now "stand with him" in the gutter.
I have a really heavy heart when I think about this, and my frustration is at both sides of the discussion.
To those who attack Todd - Why is the christian army the only army in the world who shoots our own wounded?
To those who support Todd - Why do we lift people up so high that all that is left to do is to fall?
We have the right to ask questions, really tough, pertinent, timely questions - "Apostles" at that service, ICA, God TV - what are you going to do to help Todd and what are you going to do to help those following him?
We have the right to ask questions about the money, the angels, the use of scripture, the style etc but one by one, by their own merits.
But critics of Todd - what would you like your christian brothers and sisters to do if you fall in some way? This is not the time to kick a man when he is down, it is time to lift truth and light and grace above human failure.
The fallout from this could be really huge, the damage to people's faith huge, the division caused massive. No-one wins.
As I ponder this situation my own response is this:
1) Pray for Todd
2) Pray for the reconciliation of their marriage
3) Pray for the children
And to seek to learn from it. Not getting off on a self righteous "I told you so" and not giving up on the power of God at work in witnessing to the glory of His son Jesus through signs and wonders.
I think we can only really deal with something like this if we:
Look to Jesus,
look to scripture,
look to wise counsel,
and look at our own hearts first.
NB: I have amended the post to be clearer in what I am trying to say based on comments received. I also removed a link to an unverified source, including a whole previous post, in response to Peter Kirk's fair challenge in the comments section regarding only focussing on verified statements, which I take on board now, and for the future.
ADDITION: This link was posted in the comment to an article by the editor of Charisma magazine
And so the blogosphere goes into overdrive like vultures around a carcass.
Some of the posts in a thread like this fill me with hope, but most of them, especially early on, fill me with anger. Do not read them if you are easily offended, please. That first page is really quite painful to read.
The "I told you so" movement sweeps into full view, this is an example of many, although ones like this list some useful observations even if I don't agree with everything they say.
- We’re not to focus on outward appearances
- We’re to exercise discernment, regardless of the manifestations and preaching taking place from the pulpit
- There will always be examples like this
- Pray for Todd Bentley
This is the saddest video of all I have seen from Lakeland. It was not that long ago at all.
Big questions for those apostles, Peter, John, Bill, Che, Rick etc on the stage that night.
1) Did they know the Bentleys were having relationship troubles?
2) What have done to support it?
3) What are they going to do for them now?
These were the promises over him: what are they going to do for him now?
Many people think that this "commissioning" was just people wanting to get on the stage of the next big thing. That is a harsh accusation, so prove them wrong guys - go to his aid, he needs you. You "stood with him" on the stage in front of hundreds of millions of viewers in tens of countries, now "stand with him" in the gutter.
I have a really heavy heart when I think about this, and my frustration is at both sides of the discussion.
To those who attack Todd - Why is the christian army the only army in the world who shoots our own wounded?
To those who support Todd - Why do we lift people up so high that all that is left to do is to fall?
We have the right to ask questions, really tough, pertinent, timely questions - "Apostles" at that service, ICA, God TV - what are you going to do to help Todd and what are you going to do to help those following him?
We have the right to ask questions about the money, the angels, the use of scripture, the style etc but one by one, by their own merits.
But critics of Todd - what would you like your christian brothers and sisters to do if you fall in some way? This is not the time to kick a man when he is down, it is time to lift truth and light and grace above human failure.
The fallout from this could be really huge, the damage to people's faith huge, the division caused massive. No-one wins.
As I ponder this situation my own response is this:
1) Pray for Todd
2) Pray for the reconciliation of their marriage
3) Pray for the children
And to seek to learn from it. Not getting off on a self righteous "I told you so" and not giving up on the power of God at work in witnessing to the glory of His son Jesus through signs and wonders.
I think we can only really deal with something like this if we:
Look to Jesus,
look to scripture,
look to wise counsel,
and look at our own hearts first.
NB: I have amended the post to be clearer in what I am trying to say based on comments received. I also removed a link to an unverified source, including a whole previous post, in response to Peter Kirk's fair challenge in the comments section regarding only focussing on verified statements, which I take on board now, and for the future.
ADDITION: This link was posted in the comment to an article by the editor of Charisma magazine
Monday, 11 August 2008
The ASA vs North Shrewsbury Community Church
For those not following this story, the best summary is found on Phil Whittall's blog here and here.
Now I am particularly infruriated by these circumstances, for the following reasons.
1) Dr Matthias is my Dad
2) Phil is my mate
3) It it so utterly, unbelievably ridiculous
Now, it would have been better to either insert the word "retired" or "former" in the description of the doctor, granted, but I think the ASA really have shot themselves in the foot if they are suggesting a retired medical doctor cannot call themselves a medical doctor on the basis of whether they hold current GMC certificate.
Will Professor Steven Hawking just be known as "Mr" on retirement? Will Rowan Williams be "Mr"? Do other medical doctors still use Dr in front of their name after retirement? Of course they do!
So the ASA have adjudicated that a trained medical doctor, of 35 years experience, having practiced for 20 years on the estate were 2,000 leaflets were distributed by a Church was attempting to "mislead" people, the majority of whom would be his former patients, into believing he held a current GMC certificate through the expression "I am a medical doctor"? I suppose they needed a success and changing "am" to "was" sorts that out for NSCC but it is pedantic in the extreme.
I propose that any member of the ASA panel, if on their way home from the meeting were travelling by train, and the passenger next to them had a heart attack, and they cried out "Is there a doctor here" would turn away the offer of help of a doctor with 35 years experience on the basis of him not holding a valid GMC registration document! I live on this estate and people are baffled that Doctor Matthias, who treated them for 20 years, who helped when they were pregnant, or when they were babies, who sent them for that cancer scan, has just got done for claiming to be a doctor, when he was, and is.
So on to the Church. Is it really irresponsible to say "Come and be prayed for because God heals" on the basis that it could prevent people from seeking medical advice?
What a complete red herring.
a) If they were suggesting not to take medical advice then why did they require a MEDICAL DOCTOR to verify the healings taking place?
b) At no point during the publication did they do anything to suggest it was to be done INSTEAD of visiting a doctor. All healing are to be verified by a doctor - meaning every person who claimed a healing would be told to go and see, erm, a doctor!
c) People always complain that claimed "miracles" are not medically verified. Now a Church is being pulled up for suggesting a doctor has verified the miracles. So Church should be silent if they cannot verify healings AND churches should be silent if THEY CAN verify healings.
From the ASA website
Religious organisations may make some claims about healing only if it is clear that they are referring to spiritual, not physical, healing.
In the ASA’s experience, those types of marketers have been unable to provide documentary evidence to prove the efficacy of their services; they should neither imply they can deliver results that they cannot deliver nor guarantee results unless the terms of the guarantee are clear.
One complaint made against a church said that:
"The complainants, one of whom pointed out that advertisers who claimed an ability to cure specific medical conditions would be required to hold substantiation, objected that the claims "MIRACLES" and "HEALING" were misleading and irresponsible, because they could not be scientifically proven and preyed on the credulity of vulnerable people."
So here is a Church, claiming healing, verified by a retired medical doctor of 35 years, being told it is irresponsible, not because the healing cannot be verified, which they have been, but because their verification is irresponsible and means people won't take up "qualified" medical advice, presumably off someone like a medical doctor of 35 years.
I am really interested to see how it all works out. How does it work when slimming world show a verified candidate who has lost weight and it has been verified. Does that stop people seeing a doctor about their weight / diet? Is that "irresponsible"? "Mrs Jones from Pontefract has lost 3 stone in 12 weeks, just in time for her summer holidays" is one thing - but if she had been to the doctor instead she may have found that she had diabetes as well.
What I have learned from this is as follows:
1) The ASA are going around in circles and there is no consistency of approach except to imply churches claiming healing in the name of Jesus are doing something irresponsible, or even bad.
2) God does heal today and people are being healed in the name of Jesus, including at my Church in central Shrewsbury, and at North Shrewsbury, and we have doctors and opticians who have verified this. Some of whom even have a current GMC certificate, out of interest.
3) Someone has complained about this and given the Church a much greater level of publicity than one could ever hope for in a print run of 2000 leaflets. I look forward to the next "Beautiful News" which fulfills the pedantic requirements of the ASA and raises the profile of God and His people in this area.
4) The Evangelical Alliance are on the case and looking to ensure future judgements are fair and clear. Let's pray for them.
I think people need to be wise, and I am sure Phil and others will have taken on board this judgement and refined their wording. But if news of over 200 teenagers healed at the Newday camp last week is anything to go by, ASA versus any Church is going to be a regular feature because God is at work, people are being healed, doctors are verifying it and we are not going to stop telling people about it, although we may run the wording past a few people in future!
Now I am particularly infruriated by these circumstances, for the following reasons.
1) Dr Matthias is my Dad
2) Phil is my mate
3) It it so utterly, unbelievably ridiculous
Now, it would have been better to either insert the word "retired" or "former" in the description of the doctor, granted, but I think the ASA really have shot themselves in the foot if they are suggesting a retired medical doctor cannot call themselves a medical doctor on the basis of whether they hold current GMC certificate.
Will Professor Steven Hawking just be known as "Mr" on retirement? Will Rowan Williams be "Mr"? Do other medical doctors still use Dr in front of their name after retirement? Of course they do!
So the ASA have adjudicated that a trained medical doctor, of 35 years experience, having practiced for 20 years on the estate were 2,000 leaflets were distributed by a Church was attempting to "mislead" people, the majority of whom would be his former patients, into believing he held a current GMC certificate through the expression "I am a medical doctor"? I suppose they needed a success and changing "am" to "was" sorts that out for NSCC but it is pedantic in the extreme.
I propose that any member of the ASA panel, if on their way home from the meeting were travelling by train, and the passenger next to them had a heart attack, and they cried out "Is there a doctor here" would turn away the offer of help of a doctor with 35 years experience on the basis of him not holding a valid GMC registration document! I live on this estate and people are baffled that Doctor Matthias, who treated them for 20 years, who helped when they were pregnant, or when they were babies, who sent them for that cancer scan, has just got done for claiming to be a doctor, when he was, and is.
So on to the Church. Is it really irresponsible to say "Come and be prayed for because God heals" on the basis that it could prevent people from seeking medical advice?
What a complete red herring.
a) If they were suggesting not to take medical advice then why did they require a MEDICAL DOCTOR to verify the healings taking place?
b) At no point during the publication did they do anything to suggest it was to be done INSTEAD of visiting a doctor. All healing are to be verified by a doctor - meaning every person who claimed a healing would be told to go and see, erm, a doctor!
c) People always complain that claimed "miracles" are not medically verified. Now a Church is being pulled up for suggesting a doctor has verified the miracles. So Church should be silent if they cannot verify healings AND churches should be silent if THEY CAN verify healings.
From the ASA website
Religious organisations may make some claims about healing only if it is clear that they are referring to spiritual, not physical, healing.
In the ASA’s experience, those types of marketers have been unable to provide documentary evidence to prove the efficacy of their services; they should neither imply they can deliver results that they cannot deliver nor guarantee results unless the terms of the guarantee are clear.
One complaint made against a church said that:
"The complainants, one of whom pointed out that advertisers who claimed an ability to cure specific medical conditions would be required to hold substantiation, objected that the claims "MIRACLES" and "HEALING" were misleading and irresponsible, because they could not be scientifically proven and preyed on the credulity of vulnerable people."
So here is a Church, claiming healing, verified by a retired medical doctor of 35 years, being told it is irresponsible, not because the healing cannot be verified, which they have been, but because their verification is irresponsible and means people won't take up "qualified" medical advice, presumably off someone like a medical doctor of 35 years.
I am really interested to see how it all works out. How does it work when slimming world show a verified candidate who has lost weight and it has been verified. Does that stop people seeing a doctor about their weight / diet? Is that "irresponsible"? "Mrs Jones from Pontefract has lost 3 stone in 12 weeks, just in time for her summer holidays" is one thing - but if she had been to the doctor instead she may have found that she had diabetes as well.
What I have learned from this is as follows:
1) The ASA are going around in circles and there is no consistency of approach except to imply churches claiming healing in the name of Jesus are doing something irresponsible, or even bad.
2) God does heal today and people are being healed in the name of Jesus, including at my Church in central Shrewsbury, and at North Shrewsbury, and we have doctors and opticians who have verified this. Some of whom even have a current GMC certificate, out of interest.
3) Someone has complained about this and given the Church a much greater level of publicity than one could ever hope for in a print run of 2000 leaflets. I look forward to the next "Beautiful News" which fulfills the pedantic requirements of the ASA and raises the profile of God and His people in this area.
4) The Evangelical Alliance are on the case and looking to ensure future judgements are fair and clear. Let's pray for them.
I think people need to be wise, and I am sure Phil and others will have taken on board this judgement and refined their wording. But if news of over 200 teenagers healed at the Newday camp last week is anything to go by, ASA versus any Church is going to be a regular feature because God is at work, people are being healed, doctors are verifying it and we are not going to stop telling people about it, although we may run the wording past a few people in future!
Make me a Christian? TV Show
I watched this TV show last night on channel 4, and found it all rather irritating.
A good review is found here.
It felt like a list of rules and regulations being presented.
I never read Jesus say "Come to me, and you will have no sex, no abortions and all will go well with you"
For all the talk of the christian faith being about Jesus, rather than a list of rules and regulations, sometimes the rules and regulations do seem to get highlighted above all else.
I don't think anyone should "fix" someone and "make them a Christian" by teaching them a set of outward behaviours. If anything that would be teaching them a lie that they just need to fit in as best they can with a moral ideology and they will be ok. Jesus had harsh words for the pharisees who did that.
I think faith in Jesus brings a strong moral ideology that we need to defend - but on the basis of faith in Jesus rather than maintenance of external behaviours.
The woman at the well had an encounter with Christ that had huge implications for her moral behaviour. I want to see people have an encounter with Christ - the rest follows.
And yet this show was a brilliant opportunity as I watched it with two friends who are not Christians and it led to a great opportunity to explain what I believed and why I believed it. They were the first to pick up and say "Just saying he isn't going to go out drinking won't change anything", and they were right.
Because everyone knows you can fake external behaviour - "if it doesn't matter in your heart then it doesn't matter."
A good review is found here.
It felt like a list of rules and regulations being presented.
I never read Jesus say "Come to me, and you will have no sex, no abortions and all will go well with you"
For all the talk of the christian faith being about Jesus, rather than a list of rules and regulations, sometimes the rules and regulations do seem to get highlighted above all else.
I don't think anyone should "fix" someone and "make them a Christian" by teaching them a set of outward behaviours. If anything that would be teaching them a lie that they just need to fit in as best they can with a moral ideology and they will be ok. Jesus had harsh words for the pharisees who did that.
I think faith in Jesus brings a strong moral ideology that we need to defend - but on the basis of faith in Jesus rather than maintenance of external behaviours.
The woman at the well had an encounter with Christ that had huge implications for her moral behaviour. I want to see people have an encounter with Christ - the rest follows.
And yet this show was a brilliant opportunity as I watched it with two friends who are not Christians and it led to a great opportunity to explain what I believed and why I believed it. They were the first to pick up and say "Just saying he isn't going to go out drinking won't change anything", and they were right.
Because everyone knows you can fake external behaviour - "if it doesn't matter in your heart then it doesn't matter."
Sunday, 27 July 2008
A face for Radio
I was up early this morning before Church to talk to Radio Shropshire about the gift days at Barnabas.
This is the link here.
You have to fast forward to 1 hour and 10 minutes in - listen out for Genesis singing - I am up next.
It seemed interesting that I was about to speak on the feeding of the 5000 at our Sunday service, and there I was talking about the provision of God to our Church and hearing the response of the interviewer who just could not get his head around the remarkable generosity of God's people.
This is the link here.
You have to fast forward to 1 hour and 10 minutes in - listen out for Genesis singing - I am up next.
It seemed interesting that I was about to speak on the feeding of the 5000 at our Sunday service, and there I was talking about the provision of God to our Church and hearing the response of the interviewer who just could not get his head around the remarkable generosity of God's people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)