All posts in category Articles

The Cult of the Meme

This article first appeared in The Call in 2014.

__________

Behold I will do a new thing
(Isaiah 43:19)

American feminist poet, essayist, and critic Katha Pollitt once said the following, which is now a widespread ‘meme’ on ‘social media’ on the internet:

“When you consider that God could have commanded anything he wanted – anything! – the Ten [Commandments] have got to rank as one of the great missed moral opportunities of all time. How different history would have been had he clearly and unmistakably forbidden war, tyranny, taking over people’s countries, slavery, exploitation of workers, cruelty to children, wife-beating, stoning, treating women – or anyone – as chattel or inferior beings.”

Now the main problem with quotations like this, or quotations of any kind in the context of social media, is just that – their context. Somewhere like ‘Facebook’ is full of things like this – even Christian ones – that are the on-screen equivalent of the ‘sound bite’ or the slogan. They are passed around by whomever feels that they conform to their ‘confirmation bias’. None of these ‘memes’ is a good basis for a thesis, or for a debate from the contrary viewpoint. I dare say that Katha Pollitt herself would rather her statement above be taken in the context of her wider writings and pronouncements.

It’s all too easy to give the instant comeback to her statement and say that the things she advocates are implicit in the Ten Commandments, but to be fair to her she did say ‘clearly and unmistakably’!

The first thing that needs to be said is that God is not about morality. Morality is a purely human thing, and is changeable. The very word comes from the Latin ‘mores’, meaning ‘custom’, and from that it is plain that ‘morality’ is something that conforms to the culture of the time and place in which it is found. It is not and never can be an absolute.

God could, of course, have started by creating a world of puppets, unable to do anything but obey his laws. But then we would have been his toys and not his children. He made humanity first of all, in our innocent state, to live with him in the garden that he had created. But we listened to our second teacher – the serpent – became self-aware, ashamed of our nakedness, no longer innocent. At that point God could have scrapped everything and started again. Instead he sent us out into the world. We would be free, but it would be hard going, because the world he sent us into was and is a dynamic place, a place where things happen, a place with hard edges.

But one day we would have before us the way back to that life with God.

That was not the letter of the Ten Commandments, although they were what might be called a ‘type’ or a ‘figure’ – something that reveals a little of the nature of something greater to come. The Ten Commandments were originally laid down for a group of nomads wandering through the wilderness – the Children of Israel, a little flock whom God had raised from the world to remember him. The Ten were part of a complex system of laws and performances, suited to a small remnant of fallen humanity, a system which by its imposition would keep God in their minds. The Ten were, if you like, part of the ‘small print’ of a Covenant between God and the Children of Israel.

Could it be that God was aware (indeed, how could he not be?) that even these chosen people were imperfect, and would sometimes lose sight of their side of the Covenant?

He sent his prophets amongst them, some to warn them of the consequences of their backsliding and disobedience, some to promise that one day all their struggles would be over, some even to warn their oppressors. But even if he had said, explicitly, “I forbid war”, how could self-aware, ashamed-of-nakedness, no-longer-innocent humanity have obeyed that commandment any better than they obeyed the others?

One day he sent the Way back, he sent the Word – the very power by which he had created the world (see the first chapter of John’s Gospel) in human flesh – his son Jesus Christ, who proceeded, to the surprise of the Children of Israel and to humanity as a whole, simultaneously to strengthen and to drive a coach-and-horses through the Ten Commandments. The things he preached took people aback, and they still do to this day – particularly things he took from the Law of the Covenant between God and the Children of Israel and prefaced with “But I say unto you…”

Katha Pollitt wanted God to have commanded no war, for example; would the following be ‘clear’ and ‘unmistakable’ enough?

“… whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment…”

“…resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also…”

“… love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you…”
(from Matthew 5:22, 39, 44)

How could Jesus make such ‘impossible’ commandments? Because he was the Way back to living in unity with God. because he gave to humanity the Holy Spirit, and wrote his law by that Holy Spirit not on tablets of stone, as the Commandments were that were given to Moses, but upon the human psyche. And it is by that Holy Spirit that the faithful, who freely give themselves to be led to the Father by the Son, can hear and obey the commandment not to go to war.

Some people may still ask why God could not have done this wonder from the very beginning. Why wait? Why let bad things happen? Any of us, unbeliever or believer, could ask this from a purely human understanding, from a point of view that humanity is the most important thing in creation. But that would be to give in to that second teacher, the serpent…

Friends, even an article of this length is not enough to address the serious questions raised by Katha Pollitt – and they are serious questions that have troubled believers and non-believers alike. Perhaps in pointing the way to answers we can, however, counter a little of the cult of the meme.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 12/08/2019  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 12/08/2019

https://plainquakers.org/2019/08/12/the-cult-of-the-meme/

Christ in the Stable

This article originally appeared in The Call in the last month of 2013.

__________

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

Luke 2:1-7

The account in Luke’s Gospel of Mary and Joseph’s arrival in Bethlehem, and their having to be accommodated in a stable because there was no room at the inn, is as familiar a piece of modern culture as any Biblical extract could be. It is difficult to imagine how many schools and steeplehouses will have children acting out the story at this time of year.

It was this very cultural familiarity that made it stand out on the popular British TV show ‘QI’ recently. ‘QI’ is a kind of quiz show that celebrates pedantry. Quizzmaster is the erudite Stephen Fry, and the contestants are usually stand-up comics or other celebrities known for their quick wit. When Stephen asks certain questions, if one of the contestants comes up with an answer that perpetuates, say, a common ‘urban myth’ or wrong assumption, lights flash klaxons sound, and points are deducted for a wrong answer. On this particular occasion, Stephen asked why Mary and Joseph had gone to Bethlehem. One of the panellists said “To take part in a census”, and the lights started flashing and the klaxons sounded. Stephen Fry went on to explain that there had been no such census, and that the story had been included in order to legitimise Jesus as the Messiah, who, according to prophecy, was supposed to be born at Bethlehem.

In short, Stephen Fry said that Luke was a liar.

How likely is that? Gospel writers did not go in for writing their autobiographies, so very little is known of Luke. He was most likely a Greco-Syrian physician from Antioch. It is also possible that he was a Gentile rather than a Jew. If we ascribe to him the writing of the Gospel that carries his name, and also the Acts of the Apostles, it is clear that he was not of the generation that actually saw and met Jesus. Many academics have, however, praised the historical accuracy of his writing, citing his descriptions of towns, cities, and islands, and his correct use of titles. His writing is certainly partisan – he wishes to promote faith in Jesus Christ – and must be viewed through that filter. However, even if he was not a Jew himself, as a close companion of the Apostle Paul, he must have been well aware of the Commandment ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness’. Would someone like this tell an outright lie?

There have always been academic difficulties about the historicity of the Gospels. Luke’s account of the nativity places it at the time of the principate of Augustus, during the Syrian governorship of Quirinius (Cyrenius). This does clash with other Gospel accounts, which mention Herod the Great, who died in 4 BCE. There is no account of a census covering the whole of the Roman world at that time, nor even of a regional registration by a Governor. Most modern scholars give the opinion that Luke was mistaken. A generous interpretation would be that he was recording what he had been told by a source he trusted (scholars referred to this presumably oral origination as the ‘L source). In Western learning, however, oral sources have always been regarded with suspicion – for example, the assumption that because many African peoples had entirely oral histories, their accounts of their own history may be disregarded or treated as legend. Many a Christian has asked, “Why do people treat Jesus worse than they treat Socrates?” when the heritage of both has come down to us from their followers rather than directly.

In 1931, the academics J R R Tolkien and C S Lewis were discussing ‘myths’. At the time Tolkien was a Roman Catholic, and Lewis an agnostic (though he later became an Anglican).

“Myths are lies,” said Lewis.

“Myths are not lies,” replied Tolkien. Materialistic progress, he went on, leads only to the abyss, but the myths we tell reflect a fragment of the true light. The Christ story functions as a myth, just like the Scandinavian myths that he and Lewis loved, with one difference – the Christian myth was true. As Lewis put it later:

“What Tolkien showed me was this. The story of Christ is simply a true myth; a myth working on us in the same way as the others, but with the tremendous difference that it really happened.”

Does this, then, solve the problem of the disputed accuracy of Luke’s nativity account? Should there be a concern that this particular circle should be squared? Let us look at it another way: does anyone reading this article doubt that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God? Is there any reader to whom this is not a profound and wonderful truth? Is there a reader to whom Christ is not a living presence, Lawgiver, King, Shepherd, Priest, Guide, Saviour, Light? Is there a reader to whom this is not the absolute, undilutable truth?

Luke’s account has Christ born in a stable in as humble circumstances as could possibly be. Shepherds, simple folk, come to see him, and in other Gospels he is visited by philosophers from the East, marking the beginning of his earthly existence with precious gifts. Few confuse the ‘truth’ of these accounts with verifiable ‘fact’, nevertheless they are true, this was the beginning of Christ’s life on earth.

If our focus continues on this, however, will we miss Christ’s heavenly glory? In an epistle to Friends in 1657, our ancient Friend George Fox said this.

“We must not have Christ Jesus, the Lord of life, put any more in a stable among the horses and asses; but he must now have the best chamber, the heart; and the rude, debauched spirit must be turned out. Therefore let him reign whose right it is, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost; by which Holy Ghost you call him Lord, in which Holy Ghost you pray, and have comfort and fellowship with the Father and with the son. Therefore know the triumph in it, and in God and his power, (which the devil is out of), and in the seed which is first and last, the beginning and ending, the top and corner-stone; in which is my love to you, and in which I rest.”

Amen.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 10/10/2018  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 10/10/2018

https://plainquakers.org/2018/10/10/christ-in-the-stable/

Don’t be ashamed of Christ

For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away? For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.
Luke 9:25-26

Some of you may have read a recent newspaper article in which it was stated that “The Quakers” are considering dropping any reference to the word “God” in their meetings, literature, publicity, etc.

As so often happens with newspaper articles, clarity and accuracy is sacrificed for the sake of brevity. In the context of the article, “The Quakers” refers only to the body in the UK properly known as Britain Yearly Meeting (that body also affects the title ‘The Religious Society of Friends in Britain’, as though claiming exclusivity to name and territory). BYM has inherited the organisation and property of the Society of Friends, though, for a long time, it has abandoned the Society’s faith and testimonies for ones based on worldly values. We know BYM folk to be well-meaning people, but being well-meaning is not enough. Indeed their well-meaning-ness has gained them the respect of the world – but what does that profit them if that respect is gained at the loss of their soul. Their organisation may continue to function, but it will never again live.

We take no pleasure in their failure. Their being named in the context of the article, however, means that those of us who are not associated with them but who bear the same outward name – “Quaker” – are obliged to work doubly hard to re-affirm that BYM does not speak for us, nor does it speak in the name of Quakerism, nor does it express the ground of our faith in Jesus Christ.

We do not have creeds that we recite, as the churches of the world do, but we do find unity in the statement our ancient friend George Fox made to the Governor of Barbados in 1671, as reproduced below.

“We own and believe in God, the only wise, omnipotent and everlasting God, the Creator of all things in heaven and on earth, and the Preserver of all that he hath made; who is God over all, blessed for ever. And we own and believe in Jesus Christ his beloved and only begotten Son, in whom he is well pleased. And we own and believe that he was made a sacrifice for sin, who knew no sin, and that he was buried and rose again on the third day by the power of his Father, for our justification, and that he ascended up into heaven. This Jesus who was the foundation of the holy prophets and apostles, is our foundation and we believe there is no other foundation to be laid but that which is laid, even Christ Jesus who tasted death for every man, shed his blood for all men, is the propitiation for our sins, and not ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. We believe that he alone is our Redeemer and Saviour. Christ Jesus the Alpha and Omega, the First and Last. He is (as the Scriptures of Truth say of him) our wisdom, righteousness, justification, and redemption, neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. He rules in our hearts, by his law of love and life, and made us free from the law of sin and death. We have no life but by him, for he is the quickening Spirit, the second Adam. He is our Mediator who makes peace and reconciliation between God offended and us offending. He being the Oath of God, the new Covenant of Light, Life, Grace, and Peace, the author and finisher of our faith. This we say is that Lord Jesus Christ, whom we own to be our life and salvation.”

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 10/05/2018  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 10/05/2018

https://plainquakers.org/2018/05/10/dont-be-ashamed-of-christ/

“Beware of Low-flying Bigots! “

The following article appeared in The Call in 2013
__________

Some sects of professing Christians maintain that no believer should go by any other name than ‘Christian’, because that is what the early Church knew themselves as, citing the Bible as their prime evidence for this. However, let us look at where this word appears in the Bible. It can be found in three places:

Acts 11:26 “And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” This Greco-Latin word Χριστιανός /Christianus was undoubtedly given to believers by the pagan population of Antioch, most likely as a dismissive term, and was not how they addressed or thought of each other and themselves.

Acts 26:28 “Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” From Paul’s audience with King Herod Agrippa and Roman Procurator Porcius Festus, we learn that the Rome-educated Agrippa, brought up in the Jewish faith, comes close to an intellectual, outward assent to the Apostles testimony that Christ fulfilled the Prophets. He uses the word common amongst outsiders – ‘Christian’ – but Paul does not use it. Rather, he distinguishes between the outward perception and the reality. “I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day were both almost, and altogether such as I am…” (Acts 26:29) “Such as I am,” says Paul! Not one who may be outwardly labelled a ‘Christian’, but one who can say “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20)

1 Peter 4:16 “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God…” The previous two usages of the word prepare the way for this. They are super-ficial, they do not show an understanding of what it meant to be a disciple, to be a member of the early Church, to be a ‘saint’. When a person suffered for being a ‘Christian’ he suffered not because anyone truly understood that to which he was bearing witness, but because of what they perceived him to be. Disloyal, a fanatic cultist, a bad citizen, a traitor to the Emperor, a blasphemer, a performer of erotic rites (‘love feasts’), an eater of flesh and drinker of blood, even a fire-raiser and an atheist. The early Church had a message of love and salvation, but many were deaf to it, hearing and seeing only the superficial ‘Christian’.

It has been claimed that the name was adopted by believers, maybe as a convenient identification, or maybe to take the sting out of it as a term of reproach. This is not unlikely, and the term ‘Christian’ is one with which most believers, including ourselves, are comfortable. Thus it came into being in the same way that 17th century disciples became known as ‘Quakers’ first as a term of abuse and then by adopting the name. But still, there is no more scriptural evidence to suggest that ‘Christian’ was divinely ordained than ‘Quaker’ was, save that providence may have led the way into each. In Peter’s time, each assembly of believers (and not the building in which they assembled) was known as a Church, and its congregation as ‘saints’. Peter himself called them “a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people…” (1 Peter 2:9)

By contrast, these days the term ‘Christian’ seems to be a very broad and liberal definition. Rather than insist on the nomenclature and criticise anyone who doesn’t, it behoves us to strive to be ‘as Paul was’, when he appeared before Festus and Agrippa.

There is a danger in adopting a name levelled slanderously at us. Nowadays the most frequent term used by outsiders is ‘bigot’. This is mainly due to our testimony with regard to a single issue. But our testimony is one of God’s love. “How can you claim to ‘love’ us,” ask our detractors, “If you do not agree with our self-image and with our socio-political agenda?” Hard as it may be for them to understand – we simply do! In the famous parable, the Samaritan simply sees a man beaten and left for dead by thieves and helps him. He never once asks the man who he is, what his ethnic heritage is, what his sexual orientation is, what his class or political beliefs are, what his religion is, whether he is an honest man or himself a thief. He simply helps him, and at his own risk.

That was one of Christ’s models for what a person who was ‘as Paul was’ would be like. His charity would be unthinking and unhesitating, informed by no bigotry. But there would nevertheless be things to which he could not, in all love, assent without shattering the peace of God in his conscience. To label this kind of person a ‘bigot’ is to redefine the word by bending it wholly out of shape. What part of a believer’s testimony to telling the truth would it be if we ever accepted this term as being divinely ordained for us, or even convenient to adopt?

“Whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way…  Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.  Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” (Matthew 5:22-26)

We put this question: For our righteousness to be greater than that of the scribes and Pharisees, how would we ‘agree’ with an adversary who has insulted us in this way? What canst thou say?

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

 

by plainquakers on 11/08/2017  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 11/08/2017

https://plainquakers.org/2017/08/11/beware-of-low-flying-bigots/

Be silent , O all flesh.

This article was first published in The Call in 2011.

__________

“Dear Friends,

In the stillness and silence of the power of the Almighty dwell, which never varies, alters, nor changes, but preserveth over and out of all the changeable worships, religions, ministers, churches, teachings, principalities, and powers, with the power of God, which keepeth over all this, to the kingdom of Christ, that is everlasting.”

(George Fox, Epistle 201)

It is unlike us to lead on George Fox. Worthy though our ancient friend was, and though he was both an apostle of Christ in his time and an elder and apostle to us now by his writings, we do not preach George Fox. We preach Christ. We preach the same Christ that Fox preached.

George Fox never founded the practice of silent worship; in fact it could be said that far from founding it he found it! It was the practice of a group known as the Seekers, who came into being in the 1620s, probable influenced by the preaching of the brothers Walter, Thomas, and Bartholomew Legate. This group of people had come out of all the forms and hierarchies of established religion, broken, poor in spirit (that wonderful state in which one realises that nothing, even one’s standing in a church, even one’s piety, even one’s works, even one’s humility, is of any value to God and in realising that takes the first step heavenward; “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:3), and knew that their only hope was Jesus Christ. Their silence was one of waiting and hope – “Be silent, O all flesh, before the LORD: for he is raised up out of his holy habitation.” Zechariah 2:13. It was a silence and a hope that George Fox knew and recognised, and there is no better way to hear this than by his own testimony:

“But as I had forsaken the priests, so I left the separate preachers also, and those esteemed the most experienced people; for I saw there was none among them all that could speak to my condition. When all my hopes in them and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could I tell what to do, then, oh, then, I heard a voice which said, ‘There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition; and when I heard it, my heart did leap for joy.

Then the Lord let me see why there was none upon the earth that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give Him all the glory. For all are concluded under sin, and shut up in unbelief, as I had been; that Jesus Christ might have the pre-eminence who enlightens, and gives grace, and faith, and power. Thus when God doth work, who shall hinder it? and this I knew experimentally.

My desire after the Lord grew stronger, and zeal in the pure knowledge of God, and of Christ alone, without the help of any man, book, or writing. For though I read the Scriptures that spoke of Christ and of God, yet I knew Him not, but by revelation, as He who hath the key did open, and as the Father of Life drew me to His Son by His Spirit. Then the Lord gently led me along, and let me see His love, which was endless and eternal, surpassing all the knowledge that men have in the natural state, or can obtain from history or books; and that love let me see myself, as I was without Him.” (GF, Journal, Ch1)

To meet in the silence of the flesh in those days was a matter of prophecy. It was prophecy to the sufficiency of Jesus Christ, before whom all things made by human invention are worthless. From that silence before the Lord all other things proceeded – prophesying, praying, preaching, teaching, singing – according to the anointing of the Holy Spirit. “All ye Friends, that wait in that which is pure in itself, which cannot lie, which doth not change, wait upon God, for God doth not change, and let all flesh be silent before the Lord, that the life may speak in all; then the mouth of the Lord is known, and God is exalted and glorified with his own work, which he brings forth.” (GF, Epistle 43).

Fox speaks of “them that are come to silent meetings… to feed there” (Epistle 131), meaning that such things as were broken and blessed by the Lord were to be had as spiritual sustenance at such meetings as observed the commandment “be silent , O all flesh”, but we know that early Quaker meetings, whilst ‘silent’ in that way were far from ‘quiet’ in another. The prophesying, praying, preaching, teaching, and singing all filled the air with sound.

Where does that find us today?

A Friend coined a word for religious proceedings which delighted the senses – he called it ‘religertainment’, a combination of the words ‘religion’ and ‘entertainment’. A second Friend replied with another coining – ‘religaxation’ – a combination of ‘religion’ and ‘relaxation’, by which he meant a meeting in which the silence does nothing more than soothe the senses. Each is a manifestation of the personalisation of religion. The disciples waited with ‘one accord’, taking the words from Acts 1:14 and 2:1.

We are a small and isolated people, our meetings are small and largely quiet. Perhaps that is meant to be so, perhaps we are keeping a particular, if small, candle of prophecy burning to let other professors of Christianity know that Jesus Christ is sufficient. Perhaps we are like a small number of soldiers ‘holding a line’ in the Lamb’s War. Our silence must therefore be the silence of all flesh, and if we are quiet that must be the outward testimony to the inward silence. It must be at the Lord’s command, and must be broken when we are commanded to speak, to prophesy, to preach, to pray, to teach, or to sing.

Someone unused to Friends’ worship recently asked “Why are Friends not more exuberant?” He had been invited to the funeral of a Friend which took the form of a meeting for worship (albeit within the discipline of the liberal body where the name of Christ is rarely heard). He was surprised to find that no one spoke, and at last felt impelled himself to stand and speak about the deceased person. He left at the end somewhat dissatisfied, but perhaps he had not considered that it had been the Lord’s will that he and no one else should speak on that occasion. Who knows?

One last thing about the appeal to the senses in worship. When we are come at last to Jesus Christ and know his love and salvation, the whole world has a different feel and scent to it. It is fresh to our senses, fresh to our intelligence, as it is to be seen with the refreshment of our spirits. There is nothing amiss with what may be given in worship pleasing the sense or the intelligence, but only if that measure of pleasing is according to the Lord and not according to us. There is nothing wrong with singing or with ‘exuberance’ as long as it is in answer to the clear prompting of the Lord. It is not to be an end in itself, either to impress or please a visitor or to delight ourselves. If we sing the words of the Psalmist or of Whittier or of Wesley it should be because the Lord has given us those words to sing. Otherwise we are not in the same spirit as were the Psalmist or Whittier or Wesley when the Lord led them to write their words. Take heed however, Friends, that the prophecy we are given may not always delight us nor be agreeable to the world.

“Therefore silence all flesh, and see your own ways be clean.” (GF, Epistle 47)

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 18/06/2017  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 18/06/2017

https://plainquakers.org/2017/06/18/be-silent-o-all-flesh/

Putting your trust in princes

The following article was published in The Call in 2011.

__________

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Romans 13: 1-7

The above passage from Scripture is often quoted by those who insist that a Christian should be a law-abiding, quiescent citizen of wherever he or she lives. After all, the guidance which the passage gives is unequivocal.

Critics of this view object that it makes the reign of Adolf Hitler somehow ordained by God, and his waging of unjust wars of conquest, his persecution of political opponents and racial groups a ‘terror to the evil’ works. This is something which would be difficult for any intelligent person, believer or not, to accept – that Hitler was ‘a revenger to execute wrath on him that doeth evil’.

At the time of Hitler’s rise to power the German pastor and theologian Martin Niemöller, and many like him, initially supported Hitler because they shared his anti-communist beliefs. But when Hitler declared the state’s supremacy over religion Niemöller became the leader of a group of clergymen opposed to Nazism. In 1933 his group inserted a clause in their founding charter to the effect that any dismissal by the state of one of their pastors on the grounds of his having Jewish ancestry should be refused. By 1937 Niemöller was interred in a concentration camp and was not released until 1945.

These famous words against political apathy are ascribed to him: “First they came for the communists, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, but I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, but I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.” It is not certain where and when he first said those words; many people have offered other versions, but the words above are the ones that Niemöller himself claimed as his own.

These words of Niemöller’s are a world away from the quiescent citizenship in defense of which Romans 13 is most often cited. The deeds of many who have defied – one may even say ‘resisted’ – the laws of their countries are also a world away. These countries have included the most despotic and the most apparently democratic. Where their requirements and laws have been seen to run contrary to the commandments of Christ then Christians have stood against them, have refused to acquiesce, have demonstrably not rendered tribute, custom, fear, and honour.

The Apostles Peter and John were commanded by the High Priests Annas, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus, they replied: “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19-20); yet surely these men who commanded them not to speak were higher powers of the Jewish church, and Peter and John were subject to them?

It is a common complaint, or indeed a matter of scorn in the mouths of those who do not believe, that one can prove anything with a Bible quotation, and that diametrically opposite viewpoints can be supported by Scriptural text. This is, of course, entirely true! The Bible has been used to excuse all manner of things, according to human wisdom.

But Scripture itself is not a product of human wisdom but of God’s. There are many professors of Christianity who hold that the only interpretation of Scripture allowable is what is plainly seen on the page, thus declaring that man’s wisdom which did not produce Scripture is the only wisdom that may interpret it. It is that viewpoint and no other, however, which gives rise to the criticism from others that the Bible may be used to support any argument. Paul may say one thing in Romans 13 – the Psalmist says “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help” (Psalm 146:3).

Certainly there is a level at which Scripture is a simple and plain witness to those who have not yet had the baptism of the Holy Spirit. However there are things within Scripture – its apparent contradictions for one – which remain mysteries to human wisdom no matter how assiduous a study is made of them. In those cases it is necessary to acknowledge that as the Lord’s Holy Spirit made them mysteries then the same Holy Spirit alone can open those mysteries. To run ahead of the Holy Spirit in interpretation of Scripture is both to take away from it and to add to it, both of which are cursed in Revelation 22:18,19.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 19/12/2016  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 19/12/2016

https://plainquakers.org/2016/12/19/putting-your-trust-in-princes/

They that wait upon the Lord…

The following article was published in ‘The Call’ in 2010.
__________

And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead. Matt 8:21,22

Readers, today is the day of your visitation. As you look at this page, you have come to a point in your lives where you have to make a choice. None of you is exempt from this – it applies to those of you who consider yourselves religious, as much as those of you who do not.

The choice is this. You stand, as it were, at a fork in the road. In one direction is a broad, flower-strewn path, bordered by every delight and diversion you can think of, every reward of “success”, every lottery win, everything by which the world measures worthiness – but the distant horizon is dark. That is the path of selfishness, and down it stroll people who repeat, “I’m not such a bad sort, really. I’m not such a bad sort, really…”

In the other direction is a narrow path of no apparent beauty, just a steady climb. But on the horizon a light shines; and it seems to shine not only in the distance, but also it illuminates the path, so there is no mistaking where to put your feet. And it seems to call to you, it is familiar somehow, there is a light in your consciences which grows in answer to the light ahead. There is something terrible about the light, because at first all it seems to illuminate in you are things you would rather forget; but the more you look at the light, the more it seems to offer a way out of these things, a kind of cleansing.

Even now you can still refuse the call! You can still shrug off the familiar feeling, and jog merrily down the broad, easy, well-trod path, picking up gew-gaws as you walk ever closer to the darkened horizon.

The choice is yours!

This article is not an exhortation to join a sect, not even to join Friends in Christ if you are not already members. It is not a demand that you read the Bible (although that would be a very good idea!). It is a plea to you to fix your eyes on the light – it shines inside you, and it will never let you down! It is he who said, “I am the way, the truth, the life,” Jesus Christ, and he has come to meet you, spirit to spirit.

This article is not an invitation to come along to a chapel or mission on such-and-such street, not even to meetings of Friends in Christ if you do not already worship with us. It is a plea to you to wait in silence (that means to let your worldly concerns slip away from your thoughts), and let the light of Christ grow in you. You can do this anywhere, even in your own homes.

This article does not suggest that you “get religion” (religion means talking to God, or rather at him!), but that you accept the gift of faith (faith means listening to God!). The people who put this before you did not hand you an outward map to a meeting room, but an inward map – and only a rough one at that – to point to the narrow path and to the light.

People do all sorts of things with their lives – they join the rat-race, they play football, they take part in religious activities, and so on. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength. The converse is true – they that do not wait upon the Lord, or wait upon some other thing or idea, shall not renew their strength.

Today is the day of your visitation. Today is the day of your choice. Today you stand at a fork in the road.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 05/06/2016  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 05/06/2016

https://plainquakers.org/2016/06/05/they-that-wait-upon-the-lord/

Some words on Gospel power

The following article was published in ‘The Call’ in 2010.
__________

“Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.” Matthew 5:13

An English Friend, in a note written after travelling in Gospel ministry in the United States in the 1990s, said:

“During my travels I saw many periodicals in Friends’ houses which were from mainstream evangelical sources; and though the writers may well have been honest and tender – and the Friends certainly were – the doctrines in those periodicals were in many cases those which the first generations of Friends had been led away from, as being built upon sand.

I was invited once to watch an evangelical preacher on television. What struck me more than anything was not his preaching nor his doctrine, of which I remember little, but his white shirt, his immaculately knotted necktie, his orthodontistry, his winning smile, his neat hairstyle, and so on. There might have been life in his work, but I couldn’t see it.

However, I also visited a place where youngsters with learning difficulties gathered. I call them youngsters because they were each reckoned to have a mental age of five, though they were in their teens and early twenties mostly. At one point they were doing what they called their ‘craft’, which entailed coulouring and cutting out pictures of biblical figures, and attaching tabs to make them stand upright. One young man – lanky, and I guess rather unprepossessing – suddenly announced to his immediate neighbours ‘I have Jesus in my heart’, and then went round his friends asking each one “Do you have Jesus in your heart?’ At each affirmative answer he smiled and chuckled with delight, so much so that I was struck deeply by this, and the words of our ancient friend George Fox were recalled to my mind – ‘What canst thou say?’ And also the scripture words ‘Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has perfected praise’.

Not many days after this episode, I was at present in a Meeting House for their business meeting. A concern was raised about reaching out to the local community, and ideas were expressed; it became like a brain-storming session, and less like a meeting in the Lord’s presence, and I began to feel very uneasy. I looked across to a good friend of mine, a faithful woman, and saw that she was deep in prayer.

Suddenly an elderly Friend rose. In his time he had been a greatly-gifted and recorded Gospel minister, but of late a stroke had quietened and weakened him, so that he did not often hold much conversation with folk, let alone speak in meeting. I do not recall the words that were given to him, but I do recall that they were powerful prophecy. When he sat down the meeting was quiet again, brought back under the Lord’s discipline, and business continued prayerfully.

On that occasion the words came to me ‘And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams’.

Great indeed is the LORD, and greatly to be praised in the city of our God, in the mountain of his holiness, and blessed is the LORD for letting me see such things. Small they may seem to those who go about in earthly greatness and splendour, but they are miracles.”

Although we do not preach up George Fox, but rather Christ the Head of the Church, we do find GF’s writing to be truly prophetic and worth reading and repeating. These lines from Epistle 318: “And keep your testimony for your men and women’s meetings, in the power of God, by which you are gathered out of the apostasy, and over it, into the everlasting gospel order, as was in the apostles’ days. Which gospel is not of man; but by Christ, the spiritual man” are such, when we consider the wreck that has been made of gospel order in some places – even some places that claim our society’s name. Rather than seeking the wisdom that is of the world, let us hope to be more like that naïve youth, and like that elderly man – such as the world counts as nothing, but who are loved and blessed by the Lord, and who praise and serve him.

Amen.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 01/10/2015  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 01/10/2015

https://plainquakers.org/2015/10/01/some-words-on-gospel-power/

What therefore God hath joined, let not man put asunder

(This article appeared in The Call in 2009)

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
John 2:1-10

At their recent annual convention the larger, liberal body which also takes the name ‘Friends’ gave its support to marriages between people of the same gender. At our Yearly Meeting, which happened a handful of weeks later, the subject did not even come up. You may ask why that was.

There is no doubt that the matter is a ‘hot’ social topic, one about which there is much pressure, and about which there is much public debate, with views for and against expressed forcefully by their proponents. How can something which is so much to the forefront of the public consciousness not be on the agenda of a church that reaches out to the world?

In the Apostle’s letter to the Romans we read: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” (Romans 12:2). The implication – no, the clear meaning – of this is that the Church, of which Jesus Christ is the living Head, is not conformed to the world, does not dance to the world’s tune, does not necessarily give priority to things which are high on the world’s agenda; on the contrary, the Church listens, with an open heart and mind, to the voice of the Shepherd, and lets him be its Guide, it’s Teacher, it’s King – the setter of it’s agenda, one could say.

The Lord may speak to the Church at the time the world calls ‘Christmas’, for example, and say: ‘Remember my death on the cross, and my resurrection’. Or he may speak to the Church at the time the world calls ‘Easter’ and say: ‘Remember my birth in the stable’. He may come amongst the assembled Church at times when the world mourns, and say: ‘Rejoice!’; or when the world rejoices he may say: ‘Mourn!’ At a time when the world agitates itself with such-and-such a matter, he may come amongst the assembled Church and calm them; and when the world is calm, he may stir up his Church.

Everything which the Church does in response to the Lord – even its expectant waiting upon his presence – preaches the gospel. Every last thing, small or large! This includes witnessing the marriage of two people, whom he has brought together. The witnessing is to be part of the preaching of the gospel, and the marriage itself is to be part of the preaching of the gospel.

An important message to the world on the subject of sexuality, marriage, and indeed of anything, is that no one – gay or straight – has any right to foist an agenda onto the Lord. No one, gay or straight, has a right to try shake God by the throat and say “I demand that you sanctify and justify me exactly as I am!” It doesn’t work like that. Someone who comes in pure fear of the Lord says, like the publican in the temple, “God be merciful to me a sinner”, giving his or her all to God – right down to those cherished socio-political agendas – willing to give up all, to die if necessary, to be crucified and risen with Christ. Nothing in any person, gay or straight, is to be hugged close and held back; God will have us totally, and anything held back becomes an idol!

There is a well-known text in scripture, at the head of this article: “What therefore God hath joined, let not man put asunder.” Friends, the facility with which ‘man’ puts asunder marriages, even those in which the couples have had solemn words spoken over them by a priest or by a civil functionary, is testimony to the fact that in the world God frequently does not join these people; equally, the loveless marriages which are endured on a point of ‘religious’ principle are a testimony to the same. Whilst we believe that ones word, once given, should be kept, we can see that humankind is a weak vessel, and human strength alone is not to be relied upon in such cases. Far from widening the ‘right’ for two people to come together by choice, it is the lot of the Church – perhaps – to narrow it, to bear witness that only a man and a woman truly joined by God are not to be put asunder; and by doing this, by bearing this witness faithfully, even if we do so at the expense of our own inclinations, opinions, and agendas, the Church preaches the Gospel.

Let this be added as a footnote and as a caveat. Friends in Christ, by our coming before the Lord in worship and in our daily lives, endeavour to give up all and become the Church. This is not ours by right, nor by desert, but by Grace alone. Do we fail? Of course we do, time and time again; but we are willing to throw ourselves on the Lord’s mercy time and time again. Once we felt led to witness the marriage of a couple, in hope and in trust. That marriage eventually failed. Did that failure preach the Gospel? Or was it perhaps a lesson given to us, so that we would learn first hand the feeling of our own weakness? Who can say?

What can be said is that such a circumstance has made us more willing to bow our heads and to accept humbly the agenda of our Ruler, the ever-present Lord Jesus Christ. It is him whom we preach – we are nothing, Christ is all.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 28/06/2015  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 28/06/2015

https://plainquakers.org/2015/06/28/what-therefore-god-hath-joined-let-not-man-put-asunder/

Neighbour

(This article appeared in The Call in 2009)

And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour? And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
Luke 10:25-37

The familiar Bible story printed here tells us a lot. Jesus is in the company of people who make a point of debating with him. The first speaker is described as a “lawyer”, meaning one well-versed in the Laws of Moses. The passage says that this lawyer wanted to challenge Jesus, to test his knowledge and integrity. Nevertheless the lawyer asks pertinent questions, important enough to record in Scripture as more than an example of Jesus outsmarting one of his adversaries.

During the time of Christ’s mortal ministry, anyone familiar with Scripture would have known the words “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself”. Again the evangelist gives the lawyer selfish motives for asking a follow-up question, but again it is pertinent – “Who is my neighbour?”Jesus then tells this famous story, of the man waylaid somewhere along the highway from Jerusalem to Jericho. He cuts his questioner to the quick, by citing two other learned and pious men – the priest and the Levite – as being ones who would not stop to help the unfortunate.

When help comes to the injured man, neither he nor his rescuer stops to wonder who the other is. It is almost irrelevant that the latter is a Samaritan, and that we only assume the former is a Jew (all Jesus says is that he is “a certain man”). All that the rescuer knows is that here is someone in need of his help; all that the victim knows is that he is being rescued.

The identity of the two is more relevant to the listeners, and in particular to the lawyer, for to an educated Jew like him, the rescuer might well have represented an anathema, a heretic, certainly someone ethnically dubious.

He was, in fact one of the Šāmĕrîm (שַמֶרִים) which literally means ‘the keepers of the Law’. To the Judaist of the 1st century, a Samaritan was unorthodox in his religion. To a Samaritan, his was the true observance of the Law, as his people were Israelites who had not been taken away to Babylon, but had remained in the Promised Land, and therefore their religion was untainted by foreign influence. Was there more to Christ’s choice than simply picking someone whom the lawyer might have despised? Was it because the rescuer, in having mercy on the thieves’ victim, was the one who had truly obeyed the Law?

But there is a point at the end of this episode that readers tend to ignore, a turning-round through a hundred and eighty degrees of how the story is usually intetpreted.

The lawyer asked “Who is my neighbour?”; Christ asks him “. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?” The lawyer answers “He that shewed mercy on him”. Then Christ says: “Go, and do thou likewise”.

Do you see the shift? The lawyer had asked who was his neighbour. Christ asks who was the victim’s neighbour! Not only is the story here about how the we should behave to one in trouble, but also about how we should love the neighbour who helps us, no matter who that person is.

What is the equivalent of that Samaritan today? Someone gay? A Muslim? An atheist? Who? It doesn’t matter. There is a time and a place for speaking to such things, and that time and place is made known to us by the Lord. At other times we are instructed to love those who, for a reason maybe not known to them, obey the Law and show mercy to us. In such people there is obedience to the Law which is written on the hearts of humankind, obedience to the Light which enlightens all who come into the world. Such people, again at a time and in a place appointed by the Lord, are our neighbours, and we are bidden to love them as we love ourselves.

With how small a step might one such person, now our neighbour, be or become our enemy? There are those in the groups named above and from elsewhere who, at times past or present, have been challengers of the Church. But they too are loved by the Lord, who so loved the world. If we find one such – or many – coming to us as an enemy rather than as a neighbour, we are commanded to a different step of love: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”
Matthew 5:43-45.

Lessons of love, Friends, may be the hardest lessons for anyone to learn; but to the Church – those who hear and obey the Voice of the Shepherd – they are essential.

.

.

.

__________ 

Please note that any advertisements that appear on this or any other page on this web site are the responsibility of the platform provider and do not constitute an endorsement by Friends in Christ of any product or service advertised.

by plainquakers on 17/10/2014  •  Permalink
Posted in Articles
Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by plainquakers on 17/10/2014

https://plainquakers.org/2014/10/17/neighbour/

« Older Posts