Worship thoughts

by Richard on February 8, 2010

Two separate but related posts from the blogosphere.

First, there’s David Keen with an important reminder that “dead” worship isn’t always all that it seems. (Actually, it’s this comment from maggi dawn that makes the point, but let’s not split hares)

Second, Banksy Boy reveals a conversation with a Christian musician which provides insight into why modern worship songs aren’t as good as they might be

Yeah…worship songs are “shipped in” to many churches… every now and again they get a new delivery. All the way from California or Australia (and Sussex!). Like crates of CocaCola being delivered. Now Cola is nice to drink once in a while, theoretically I’ve got nothing against it… but what about local ale… or beautifully matured wine from the local vineyard, real food that we all cook together, here and now? Where are the songs of THAT church? THAT town? THEIR hearts? How good would it be for people to find THEIR song, not the x-factor, big screen, ‘every song sounds the same’ song.

There’s something to this, I reckon.

{ 3 comments }

A little light humour

by Richard on February 8, 2010

Shamelessly lifted from Digging a lot

A little girl walks into a pet shop and asks in the sweetest little lisp, “Excuthe me, mithter, do you have any wittle wabbits?”

And the shopkeeper bends way down and puts his hands on his knees so he’s on her level, and asks, “Do you want a wittle white wabby or a wittle bwack wabby? Or maybe that cute wittle bwown wabby over there?”

She in turn puts her hands on her knees, leans forward and says in a quiet little voice, “I don’t fink my pyfon weally cares.”

{ 1 comment }

“Without hope we cannot live”

by Richard on February 8, 2010

Richard Vautrey is in Bethlehem.

{ 0 comments }

Sometimes you just have to state the obvious

by Richard on February 8, 2010

PamBG reminds us that different languages use different words.

You would think that needs saying, but some folk still don’t get it.

{ 3 comments }

Hymn of the day

by Richard on February 7, 2010

What shall I do my God to love?
My loving God to praise?
The length, and breadth, and height to prove
And depth of sovereign grace?

Thy sovereign grace to all extends,
Immense and unconfined;
From age to age it never ends;
It reaches all mankind.

Throughout the world its breadth is known,
Wide as infinity;
So wide, it never passed by one,
Or it had passed by me.

My trespass was grown up to heaven;
But far above the skies,
In Christ abundantly forgiven,
I see thy mercies rise.

The depth of all-redeeming love
What angel-tongue can tell?
O may I to the utmost prove
The gift unspeakable!

Come quickly, gracious Lord, and take
Possession of thine own;
My longing heart vouchsafe to make
Thine everlasting throne!

Charles Wesley

{ 2 comments }

Methodist blogging

by Richard on February 6, 2010

The latest roundup of the Methoblogosphere from Allan Bevere.

{ 0 comments }

The smallest of seeds?

by Joel on February 6, 2010

In Mathew, Mark and Luke, Jesus shares the parable of the mustard seed, which he describes as the smallest or least of the seeds. In truth, there are several seeds smaller than the mustard seed. I have read in many places that the orchid seed (weighing by some accounts as less than a microgram, or around 28 millionths of an ounce) is the smallest and that there were seeds smaller than the mustard seed that Palestian farmers would have been familiar with. Some write that Jesus was limiting himself to seeds sown by farmers of the area. Particularly for those who believe that everything written in the Bible must be absolutely factually correct, I find a number of explanations, from Jesus referring only to seeds sown by farmers, or only seeds found in the locale of Christ’s preaching. In some translations, at least one of the Gospel translations refers to the mustard seed as the smallest in or on the entire earth.

Sunday, I’m teaching a Confirmation class session in which the parable of the mustard seed is shared as part of a growing in faith lesson. It occurred to me that I may be asked by a confirmand if the mustard seed really is the smallest. If you were or have been asked that question, how would or did you reply?

{ 5 comments }

Global warming sceptism

by Richard on February 5, 2010

A survey suggests that Climate scepticism is on the rise in Britain.

There has been an increase in the number of British people who are sceptical about climate change, a poll commissioned by BBC News has suggested.

It showed that 25% of those questioned did not think global warming was happening, an increase of 10% since a similar poll was conducted in November.

The percentage of respondents who said climate change was a reality had fallen from 83% in November to 75%.

That’s not entirely surprising. we’ve just gone through an extended cold period, and some forecasters are saying there’ll be a return to Arctic conditions next week. That’s bound to cause a bit of doubt, despite the fact that it’s irrelevant. (Weather, not climate)

There’s also been a bit a bit of irresponsible journalism about the mistakes that have been found in the IPCC report. What’s ignored that it was the scientists themselves who found, reported and corrected those errors. All the (so-called) sceptics have been able to do is jeer from the sidelines.

So it’s worth reminding ourselves that the science of climate change still presents a powerful case for the human influence of human activity on the world’s climate, and the need for action pn this is as urgent as ever.

I’m just saying.

{ 5 comments }

Theological education

by Richard on February 5, 2010

Ben Myers asks What is theological education for?

What the church really needs is not cleverer or more relevant or more professional ministers, but women and men who know how to pray and how to bear witness. Nothing could be simpler; nothing more demanding. For true prayer and witness spring only from a life that has been formed in the way of discipleship

Do I hear an Amen?

{ 5 comments }

Teenagers don’t blog

by Richard on February 5, 2010

No real surprises for anyone with teenage offspring here, but it is interesting to see some numbers put to it. It seems that teenagers aren’t big bloggers. They’re not much in to tweeting either. What it amount’s to is that teenagers aren’t big content creators

Let’s face it: Teenagers haven’t had the time to build up expertise, life experiences or a career that would merit content creation. Without that expertise, fewer people are inclined to listen to what they have to say, and without that knowledge, teenagers have less to talk about.

As my colleague Barb Dybwad also brings up, a teenager’s social circle is far smaller and more closely defined than an adult’s network. Perhaps this is why more closed networks like Facebook are more appealing to teenagers than Twitter, which is a completely public experience. Blogging was a more intimate experience a few years back, which could also explain why more teens have abandoned personal blogs over the last few years.

Figures from research done by Pew Internet show that

  • 14% of online teens now say they blog, down from 28% of teen internet users in 2006
  • 52% of teen social network users report commenting on friends’ blogs, down from the 76% who did so in 2006
  • The prevalence of blogging within the overall adult internet population has remained steady in recent years

This certainly chimes with my experience as the father of a (just about) teenager. She, of course has a blog — a father’s influence?! — but Facebook is a far more important medium to her and her friends. Messaging via text rather than the interweb as such is the most important communication channel in her world by a considerable margin.

What does this tell us? That teenagers are different, for one. But we knew that. That we need to talk to teenagers differently from adults? I think we knew that, too. Certainly, it tells us that it is no longer enough for a church to have a blog, still less a static web page, if we are hoping to find a way to talk to the teenagers in our community.

Perhaps it tells us that the Church has a lot of catching up to do.

But I think we knew that, too.

{ 4 comments }

Missionaries charged with child kidnapping

by Richard on February 4, 2010

Haiti has charged 10 US missionaries with child abduction and criminal conspiracy for allegedly trying to smuggle 33 children out of the country.

I’m sure their hearts were in the right place and they went to Haiti with the best of intentions. But you can’t just take children. You can’t.

{ 3 comments }

Dave Walker hits the iPhone

by Richard on February 4, 2010

It’s only a day or two since I mentioned Dave Walker’s rise to the dizzy heights of a cartoon in the Guardian. Not content with that, the fine fellow now has his own Dave Walker iPhone app.

Any chance of an Android app, Dave?

{ 2 comments }

No profiteering from debts of the poorest

by Richard on February 4, 2010

As the “Vultures bill” approaches its second reading in parliament, John Cooper is urging us write to our MPs to encourage their support.

Do it now.

{ 0 comments }

Men At Work done for plagiarism

by Richard on February 4, 2010

An Australian court has ruled that ripped off the signature flute riff of their 1983 hit ‘Down under’ from a Girl Guide song written in 1934.

Seems a bit harsh to me, but what do I know.

It’s still a great song.

{ 4 comments }

Following on from the recent post citing Richard Lischer on “the gospel of technology” …

Source: The Christian Century

In recent years PowerPoint has become a dominant force in worshiping communities across the theological and liturgical spectrum. In churches smitten with the Microsoft wonder, its power to affect the sensibilities of worshipers and thus to shape congregational identity is almost never discussed.

A tacit assumption is that PowerPoint computer presentations are merely a means to an end, a value-neutral tool used for innocent, perhaps even noble purposes: enlarging text for the hard of seeing; reducing the demand for and thus the production of printed materials; and bringing younger people, who spend much of their lives in front of screens—TV, computer, cell phone, PDA—into worship. But PowerPoint is not value-neutral. As information design analyst Edward Tufte has argued, PowerPoint promotes a kind of cognitive style that routinely disrupts, dominates and trivializes content.

Just as a typical PowerPoint presentation in an IBM boardroom too readily elevates format over content (”chaotic, smarmy and incoherent chartjunk,” according to Tufte), PowerPoint in worship reproduces the same “stacking” of information, the relentless sequentiality that divorces content from context, the disposition toward consumption and commercialism, and the ethos of a sales pitch….

PowerPoint also conditions worshipers to act and react in visceral ways, so that the character of their bodily actions and emotional responses are at times downright Pavlovian. The screen, not the altar or cross, becomes the all-consuming center of attention, an object of intense fixation which triggers predictable reflexes and behaviors. When PowerPoint malfunctions, for instance, people become nervous and lost; they become conditioned to worry that it will malfunction. They find themselves thinking more about the screen and the technician at the soundboard than about the God whom they’ve come to worship and the larger worshiping body of which they are a part.

Indeed, PowerPoint makes worshipers less aware of the persons around them; they engage in less eye contact and other forms of human interaction for fear of missing something on the screen….

To use PowerPoint in worship is to unwittingly set up a competition between what’s projected on the screen and the human voice doing the preaching, praying or singing. And it’s a contest that PowerPoint always wins because, as Richard Lischer has observed, when the brain is asked to listen and watch at the same time, it always quits listening. What PowerPoint enthusiasts see as enhancing the worship experience—projecting pictures of water during a baptism or images of fire and wind on Pentecost—is instead a form of sensory overload that manipulates emotions and stifles imagination. It is difficult to cultivate an awareness and appreciation of ambiguity and mystery in worship when images are projected at strategically timed moments in the liturgy for the purpose of instructing worshipers what to think and feel.

Because PowerPoint has become central to worship in many churches, it is now common to find more technology experts than persons knowledgeable about liturgy involved in planning and leading worship. This is a trend that goes hand in hand with the church’s general infatuation with corporate business models—as evidenced in recent years by the invention of a new breed of minister: the executive pastor armed with an M.Div. and an M.B.A. The co-opting of these models and practices is not an innocent borrowing that leaves the inherent assumptions and biases of the corporate world behind.

And so questions beg to be asked. In regard to the increasing use of PowerPoint in churches of all shapes and sizes it is worth pondering: What understanding of the purpose of worship does it assume? What are the personal and communal tendencies it encourages? What sort of culture does it create? What kind of people does it produce? If Christians believe that the church and the worship it offers to God ought in some ways to counter the norms and practices of the surrounding culture, then what does it mean that after spending so much of our time each week in front of computer monitors, cell phones, and sports bar TVs, we come to church on Sunday and happily position ourselves in front of the biggest screen of all?

To be critical of the prevalence of electronic media in worship is not to be nostalgic or wistful for a time when worship was untainted by modern technology. The church at worship is always historically situated and unavoidably shaped by the realities of time, place and culture. (A pipe organ, after all, is a product of technology.) And in case I seem too much the rigid, humorless Luddite, it is important to say that there may be occasions or circumstances when computer-generated visual aids might be used meaningfully in worship. For instance, prior to the start of a service, projecting scripture verses or art appropriate to the day’s themes may help to settle and center worshipers, discouraging the chatter and fidgeting that often persist up to the start of the service, and encouraging the whole community’s focus on the worship to come…

My aim is not to condemn categorically all uses of technology in worship; that is neither desirable nor possible. But worshipers and worship leaders do need a more sophisticated and thorough understanding of the multiple effects of PowerPoint in worship, and in a great many cases a more judicious and limited use of it is in order.

The first question, then, is not how we can get rid of computers in worship, but, rather, whether we are paying sufficient attention to the ways in which computer technology in worship forms and shapes us. For if faithful Christian discipleship requires that we attend carefully to all aspects of our lives—that we reflect deeply and continually on how we are shaped by what we do (and don’t do)—and if we’re to resist the easy formulas and shallow pieties that distort and trivialize the church’s witness in the world, then ongoing attention to what we do in worship (and how we do it) is vital to such intentional discipleship.

Debra Dean Murphy is director of Christian education at Fuquay-Varina United Methodist Church in suburban Raleigh, North Carolina, and is author of Teaching That Transforms: Worship as the Heart of Christian Education (Brazos).

{ 28 comments }

Celtic Christianity

by Richard on February 3, 2010

The subject of Celtic Christianity is liable to raise strong emotions in some (calm down, Kim!), but if you are interested in Celtic worship, liturgies, saints, prayers or beliefs, you might like to take the questionnaire at Celtic Christianity Today. It is part of an academic project by Professor Leslie J. Francis and Revd Gill Hall.

Blogging friends: I’d take it as a huge favour if you were able to share this link through your blog. Thanks.

{ 0 comments }

Fair Trade: Green & Blacks 100%

by Richard on February 2, 2010

I’ve been a fan of Green & Blacks chocolate for ages. It’s expensive of course, but the best stuff usually is, and I’d far rather have a small bar of G&B than a larger bar of something less good. Their chocolate bars are organic and Fair Trade, but their drinking chocolate (which is excellent) does not have the Fair Trade mark*. Their splendid range of organic chocolate products includes Maya Gold which carries the Fairtrade mark, but is a shame that the rest of the range does not — something of a fly in the ointment.

Now it is going to change.

The Fairtrade Foundation today welcomes the move by Green & Black’s to switch its entire range of chocolate bar and beverage products to 100% organic and Fairtrade in 30 countries by the end of 2011. The move will open up many new opportunities for Fairtrade farmers in developing countries .

Harriet Lamb, Executive Director of the Fairtrade Foundation says: ‘Green & Black’s launched the first product to carry the FAIRTRADE Mark in 1994, the Maya Gold chocolate bar. We are delighted by this new chapter in our relationship as it demonstrates the company’s ongoing commitment and means that even more cocoa farmers from the Dominican Republic and other developing countries will be able to participate in Fairtrade. In addition to cocoa, Green & Black’s will source other organic Fairtrade certified ingredients such as sugar, vanilla and coffee for its ranges, opening up new markets for Fairtrade farmers around the world.’

As well as its existing Maya Gold suppliers, the move will see an increased focus by Green & Black’s on building Fairtrade programmes with co-operatives in the Dominican Republic, resulting in Fairtrade premiums of approximately £300,000 a year.

Great news — worth celebrating with a bar of choccie!

* Corrected in response to a comment by Rachel

{ 6 comments }

Methodists and Social Media

by Richard on February 2, 2010

Pete Philips reports the outcome of the Methodist Council discussion of social media

he Council has accepted the guidelines with a couple of amendments - firstly to remove the phrase ‘after the meeting’ from the citation of the Chatham House Rule. This allows for discussion of public documents prior to the meeting which would otherwise have been banned. The second amendment allows for an ‘open review’ of the guidelines now accepted and the development of a summary version of them similar to the Civil Service guidelines.

This second amendment is really important, I think. The summary will be the thing that’s actually used by most people and it will need to be very carefully worded. More important still will be the open review. Bloggers will have a key role in this. Let’s keep it gracious.

Update: Dave Warnock posts his own summary of the Council meeting

However, I hope that as we work through the review process we will also be able consider how we can engage with social media during meetings in ways that are healthy from a governance perspective while improving our openness, transparency and immediacy. For example my experiences of blogging and tweeting in meetings is that they greatly increase the care with which I listen, something that is surely to be welcomed.

And Dave Faulkner adds his thoughts

I find this hopeful, too. We shall see how Conference debates this in the summer. I might have preferred more than an ‘invitation’ to the Connexional Team to keep the guidelines under review, but I trust there will be people in the Team and on the Council who will take sufficient active interest in the matter to ensure this is not forgotten. I also think the summary will be a good move – so long as that concentrates on values, not legislation.

I’d like to echo Richard’s call for gracious participation by bloggers in monitoring and discussing this. There is no reason why that cannot be so. Indeed, it should be so for us as Christians. I know there are times when I’ve flown off the handle about something and clicked ‘publish’ or ’send’ too quickly, but a Christian approach would involve consideration before publication. That needn’t mean a lack of debate, as I see it. We don’t need to become like the Chinese public looking over their shoulders at the secret police when weighing their words for the western media.

{ 4 comments }

Dave Walker hits the big time

by Richard on February 1, 2010

with a cartoon on the Guardian’s ‘Comment is free’ site.

Congratulations Dave! Don’t forget us little people.

{ 0 comments }

Pay attention!

by Richard on February 1, 2010

Justin Wise:

There’s a Subway in town that has a sign on the sneezeguard which says, “Please refrain from using your cell phone while in line.”

This comic brilliantly illustrates why–People zone in on their phones and zone out of reality. The poor sandwich artist simply wants to know what toppings you’d like on your Meatball Marinara. Meanwhile, you’re trying to knock off Jared as the Mayor. The sign could also simply read, “Pay attention!”

Let us never be people who are so preoccupied with our digital lives that we miss the tangible reality right in front of our faces.

{ 0 comments }