We have an opportunity to change our approach to, or destroy life. Change is something that civilisations by their very nature resist. Because change means, very often, loss of power for those who have it, a disimillation of the status quo. FW De Klerk, for me the greatest pioneer of change in my life time. Not that it was recognised because all the plaudit went to Nelson Mandela. it was De Klerk who released Mandela form prison, it was De Klerk who abdicated his position and his power, his authority and influence. It was De Klerk who was forgotten by history.
To react and embrace change we need to be able to discern the signs of the times. But many do not. they list and resist change for their own sakes, blindly going about their daily business whilst all the apparatus of change has already occurred before them which they do to see. Yes, there is a long process, a pilgrimage if you like, and many have lost their lives in the preparation for change, but when change actually occurs it is those people who have recognised the signs are ripe.
I fear, in the words of Bill Hicks that mainstream religion and particularly Christianity is irrelevant because it has not held on it its core principles (although I fully recognise what I believe are its core principles are very different to many other perhaps more conservative opinions) and therefore not been able to adapt to ever changing cultural evolutions. Because humanity is evolving continuously, we have been given the ability to have imagination, to express free thought, to invent a new religion if we wanted to, and if we wanted to, what would it be? A compassionate religion based on a compassionate God. Which is ironic because that is our religion int eh first place. And yet, how do we express that religion ? What do people think the church is concerned about?
How does our liturgy reflect what we believe? How does our governance reflect what we believe? The Jewish religion from which we come, has at its core the expression of faith in liturgy through all the senses, not just one. Our liturgy should embrace all the senses because we are all different and for some, some senses are stronger than others and therefore we should predominate at just one because we exclude those for whom that sense is not as strong. WE disable so many because we won’t recognise that the expression of our faith needs to change and evolve. If we discern the signs of the times, we as a church would be a prophetic voice, challenging the establishment , challenging the status quo which is destroying our plant.
We need to stand up for what we believe in, we need to challenge, but it is lamentable that most of what we are concerned about is church, is not others but ourselves. Who are our members, and what we do on a sunday. So wrong. That is not what Jesus taught us to be about. We are like Nicodemus an admirer at least, perhaps disciple of Jesus. Maybe like him we have a pure heart but we have it so wrong because we worry about the wrong things. it is lamentable that the organisation that calls itself the body of Christ is so far removed from being that body, a body that was emaciated, suffering and rejected, despised by the world.
Now it is just an irrelevance because it has become more concerned with itself rather than the vision it was given as its commission by Christ almost 2000yrs ago. We are so concerned with inconsequential, like sexuality. People, are people, individuals and yet anybody who expresses a liberal view of sexuality is seen as being somehow unChristian. We need to get back to what Christ taught, two simple laws, not the 613 laws of the Old Testament and we need to let our liturgy reflect what we are about, if we don’t we shall surely die, and die needlessly, when actually we do have so much to offer, if only we would let go of the crap we cherish so dearly.