Christian

What is a good church? One of the leaders in a former church that I had an association with said that “busy people are happy people and busy churches were happy churches”. For him a good church is one which has a packed program every week. That means that the premises are used every night of the week and the members never have time to get bored or for idle hands get into trouble. In some ways that sounds right but then I remember that his family had broken up and his life at work was a disaster because he was a perfectionist in everything and had little time for the imperfections of others. Then I remember that the church is cluttered with the casualties of this kind of philosophy. The result of this is to make the church inward looking: pre-occupied with keeping the machinery of the church going to the neglect of those outside the church door. If the church of Christ is to more like Christ then the balance between being inside and outside the church building has to change. For Jesus Christ the task was to help the outsiders become insiders. The way to do that is not by providing ever more programs but by getting alongside people.
A good church is one which encourages and equips the members to be involved in the community where they live. A good church is one which has a desire to serve its community and to play the role of fellow citizens: our role is neither to sit in judgement nor to be patronising in doing things for the community, to make it a better place. Our role is to be like Jesus and to work with and not for or in the place of the community. There are lessons that we can learn and lessons we can teach. There is no distinction between the sacred and the secular: the Hebrews believed that all of life was sacred and as the new Israel we too need to have a more holistic view of life and a less truncated view of the bible and the biblical story. Yes we want to be a better church but we will not be that by staying inside the church building, we need to get out there and get our hands dirty, if need be. The sad fact is that within one year of a person becoming a Christian they, usually, loose all meaningful contact with their former friends and then we wonder why we are losing contact with people who are outside.
The latest sensation on Yourtube is the story of Christian. He was a lion. Yes a lion. In 1969 two friends saw him in Harrods in London so they bought him for the equivalent of £3,000. Christian became their pet: they took him for walks through the streets of London on a lead and he played with them in the house and went in the car for drives. Once he got too big for the home they persuaded a local Moravian minister to allow him to play in an old graveyard. The fact that Moravians don’t have headstones was a great help: they say, quite correctly, that death is the great leveller, so the markers are laid flat on the ground. But pretty soon he became too big even for that and so they had to face the fact that they would have to provide a better living arrangement: the possibilities were either the Zoo or the circus and neither of these was acceptable to them. It was then that they came into contact with George Adamson through the actors, Bill Travers and Virginia McKenna the stars of Born Free. Adamson and his wife Joy were the people who had released Ailsa the lioness back into the wild in Kenya. Eventually Christian was introduced into the wild also. What is so amazing about this story is that after a year of being separated from his old friends he still recognised them when they returned to Kenya: on the film there is no hesitation once he saw who they were and the reunion is very moving.

What can we learn from this? One lesson is that the lion remembered because of the relationship that was built up between him and the two men. We cannot build relationships with people from a distance: Jesus came to be among us. When our churches learn that lesson will people not sit up and take

What next?

Can you even begin to imagine the pain of Kate Carroll? She kisses her husband, Steve, goodbye as was her custom on that morning that would change her life:or rather would be the end of it, as she later described it. When he returned it was in a wooden coffin. Here was a woman who loved her husband, and a man who loved his wife: he was her life. Why did these people decide to make their bid for "freedom" and notoriety by taking his life? Can anyone ever say, least of all the one who pressed the trigger. to them he was just another collaborator. He was a "uniform" that was all that mattered nit a husband, not a son, not a father or grandfather. He will never retire, never feel the frustrations of the credit crunch or fight for the right to choose without coercion the political identity of his country.

If this action was designed to make Gerry Adams words, "they haven't gone away, you know" come back to haunt us they succeeded. if they were intended to revitalise the lost pipe dream of the revolutionary republicanism, they failed. In the wake of the death of three defenders of the state the public, the too often silent majority, has risen up to say, "no more" , we want, we demand peace for our children and grandchildren. Like Jesus said about the poor, they will always be with us. We will, for a considerable future, have the disgruntled minority who cannot live with democratic decision. But what next? After the rallies and after the shouting is done, what can we do next to minimise the minority?

It seems to me that for Jesus Christ people were more important than political principles or political dreams. it seems to me that the answer to our situation has to be about getting on with those that we disagree with. The mistake of the dissidents is to imagine that you can force unity, you can coerce people into a United Ireland. I wonder when Ireland has ever been united? I would like to propose a way for Ireland to be truly united; when hearts are united. Put simply for all to understand that means that relations are the bedrock of real prosperity and progress and political affinity. That means that actually the way to unite people is for us to learn to be friends. we need to take hold of the big picture, we need to put our smaller political aspirations on hold with the knowledge that that journey will change us both. It is always difficult for me to disagree with my wife and I certainly would not do that in public. why so? Just because I love her and I want her to agree with me. If I really want the best for us all why can i not call a moratorium on the status of this province for a period so that we can learn to live together without agitation and the complications of nationality? There is no need to change my dreams, just put them on hold for the betterment of all or am I afraid that these dreams will not stand the test of time?

Sorry but we all need time to come together without the fire of my heritage being questioned or threatened. Why can we not just learn about each other's culture and each others sports and accept that in some things we are the same and i others different, is that so bad? I get annoyed when people can only see nationality in monochrome when it is colouful and integrate. I am unashamedly an irishman, in fact i am an Ulsterman, if not a Belfast man. yet I have also a strong feeling of belonging to these islands-I am British by birth and by upbringing. I am a Presbyterian Christian but we do not have all the answers and have made many mistakes and I have come to appreciate my catholic brothers.

Why would you not take the time to learn about your Irish/British, Protestant/Cathoic neighbour. Maybe if we really did concentrate on becoming friends we might be able to move forward in a more satisfactory way. God sent His son to die for the world, not just this part of it. In fact as we have been fighting the Christian population has moved south and east;we are only just begining to realise that the majority of Christians do not have white faces, nor do they speak English, more likely they have brown or Chinese faces and they speak a very different language as their national language-wake up and smell the coffee!

The Long, Lost relative

Foreword
This paper is written for the professors of the Bakke Graduate University in Seattle as part of an assignment for the Doctor of Ministry program, but to the “Research and Resources” committee of the Board of Mission in Ireland, of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. The aim is to describe some aspects of the Orthodox model of ministry and mission and to set out some lessons we can learn. This is paper is the conclusion of extensive reading and a visit to Turkey and Romania with a group of other students, professors and Romanian Orthodox Priests. We began in Istanbul, made our way to Cappadocia and Ephesus before traveling through Bulgaria and into Romania to Bucharest and Iasi. We walked in the footsteps of Paul and saw the ancient remnants of the Church of Jesus Christ before observing and experiencing the living church in a former communist country. These are my own personal reflections. This was never intended to be a tourist trip but more of a pilgrimage and an opportunity to experience and rediscover our long lost family in the Orthodox tradition. It turned out to be a very long pilgrimage but these experiences and reflections were made with a group of people who have come to know each other better because of the many hours we spent together on the bus. We came to admire and wonder at the physical endurance of Paul who made the same journey without modern transport.
In seeking to understand this church, which has been isolated from the west since the split with Rome in 1054, we will look at its doctrine and practice. One becomes very aware of the distance between us but also the faith and practices that we share: it’s not always clear that in using familiar words we understand the same familiar things. J.I Packer reflects this line of thought when he describes the perceived distance between |Orthodoxy and traditional Evangelicalism, using the words of the ballad, ‘’It’s a long way to Tipperary, it’s a long way to go’’ . George Bernard Shaw said much the same when he described the usage of English on both sides of the Atlantic as ‘’a common people separated by a common language’’. The average person is not familiar with the Eastern Orthodox Church, we are not taught about it and so the assumption is made that there is little, if any, difference between the Christian and the Roman Catholic Christian. It is my contention that there are similarities as well as differences that we can learn from and even adopt to make valuable contributions to any living church for the glory of God.
I wish to take this opportunity to thank those who journeyed with me on the Orthodox Trail and those who have helped me along the way and in the process of producing this paper and pray that it will help someone somewhere on their journey through life.
Dogma, the practical theology of Orthodox Faith
Before investigating some of the beliefs of Eastern Orthodoxy we need to give some consideration as to what we understand it to mean by ‘’orthodoxy’. The literal meaning of Orthodox is that it is the right teaching or right worship, being derived from two Greek words: orthos (right) and doxa (teaching or worship). As the false teachings and divisions multiplied in early Christian times, threatening to obscure the identity and purity of the Church, the term Orthodox quite logically came to be applied to it. Hence we have then term applied to Judaism with Orthodox Jews As opposed to Reformed or liberal and orthodox Protestants in contrast to liberals. The Orthodox Church considers itself as something of a guardian of truth against all error and schism, both to protect its flock and to glorify Christ whose body the Church is. Another way of considering Orthodoxy is to think of it in the light of those churches which call themselves ‘Orthodox’ meaning those churches who belong to a loose federation of churches who split from the Latin church in 1054AD [some of them are aligned to the council of Chalcedon and others opposed] giving special honour to the see of Constantinople. They were part of the eastern flank of the Roman Empire, where Constantine had his capital. After the historic split with Rome it became detached and developed an independent identity. Today, because of mission and political decisions, there has developed a Diaspora throughout the world but especially in the United States of America.[check this definition]. We will be using the second of these understandings in this discussion.
We are what we are because of what we believe and so in studying Orthodox faith and practice we need to reflect on the theological perspectives that make her what she is. When a people are separated by thousands of years it is quite natural that they should take some time to get to know each other once they have been re-acquainted. Before our trip we spent much time in reading about the life and faith of Orthodoxy but we have also been in discussion and spent time with those involved in ministry. In seeking to get a basic understanding of the dogma of the church one of the books we read was ‘’Introducing The Orthodox Church’’ by Anthony M. Coniasis . This covered such basics as liturgy, prayer, scripture, salvation, the sacraments and the controversial areas of Mary, the saints and the use of icons. Like other churches the Orthodox see themselves as the ‘’one, holy, catholic and apostolic church’’: they consider themselves,’ as the only way, and the truth to be the guardians of that truth for over 2,000 years. For a deeper understanding of dogma we read ‘’The Experience of God’’ by Father Dumetru Staniloae . This gives, not only a deeper understanding of Orthodox faith but also a different way of understanding dogma, which in turn gives us a better understanding of the nature of this church.. For Orthodoxy, dogma is not about those rules and regulations of the faith that are rigid and fixed. In some of the English translations the ‘’Dogma’’ was omitted from the title for fear that it would be understood only in the western way. For Father Dumitri this is not about a bald exterior appeal to the magisterium but…’’to indicate the inner coherence of dogmatic truth and the significance of each dogma for the personal life of the Christian’’ He goes on to say that what is needed is a ‘’concrete theology’’. For him theology presumes a personal relationship and that makes it less theoretic and more dynamic than the normal, western Dogmatic Theology.: it’s not about placing beliefs in various boxes, it’s more about living an integral faith where each part of the faith relates to all the others.
In studying the theology of Orthodoxy we find both continuity and discontinuity with ourselves and with the early church, at least as we understand it. Unlike the western or Latin Church the Orthodox have not been subject to the Reformation nor the Renaissance and they were never influenced by the Age of Reason and governance has not been by dictate of Pope or prelates but by the collective decision of the church: the Patriarch is merely the first among equals, as is the Moderator of the General Assembly, with his brother bishops. Anthony M Coniasis writes that ‘’The holiest moment in the church service is the moment when the Church-God’s people-strengthened by preaching and sacrament-go out the church door into the world to be the Church. We don’t merely go to church; we are the Church’’ . This view is similar to the Roman Catholic practice as the priest declares at the end of the Mass, ‘’The Mass is ended, go and serve the Lord’’. The division and schism of 1054 represents the separation of the brethren and a very long period of isolation, which has been aggravated by the historical events, such as the sacking of Constantinople in the thirteenth century by the knights of the Fourth Crusade. One of our problems is that we think by using the same word s we are meaning the same thing but that is not always the case. J.I Packer makes this point in his foreword to ‘’Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism’’ when he says
A venerable British ballad [or was it Irish?] begins by declaring, ‘’It’s a long way to Tipperary, it’s a long way to go.’’’. Substitute for Tipperary the desired togetherness between, on the one hand, North America’s evangelical church- as the great cluster of evangelical denominations, freestanding Bible churches, and evangelical networks within the subevangelical mainline are currently called-and the western outposts of the Eastern Orthodox communion on the other, and words of the song fit with ominous exactness: indeed, ’’it’s a long way to go.

Continuity
Theology of Mary
There are apparent similarities with the Western Church in the theology of Mary and the saints but also discontinuity when we begin to unpack what the words actually mean: for the Orthodox Mary, the mother of Jesus is Theotokos, the God bearer and any icons of her are always with the child, Jesus. In Orthodoxy Mary is never alone and she is always pointing to the Son of God she is looking inwardly in contemplation. She is not holding the child. The child blesses her for her willingness to be the one who brought him into the world. In the Latin Church Mary is seen alone. In Orthodox understanding Mary gives Jesus the place of priority and honour which is in line with our reformed view. [picture of Mary here?]
Ian Bria takes this further by saying that ‘’an ecclesiology which does not include Mary the mother of Jesus is unbiblical.’’ We may have to take this as a valid criticism in that we do not give Mary the position of honour that she has in scripture as the one ‘’most highly favoured’’. Timothy Ware states that anyone who fails to honour Mary is usually someone who does not really believe in the incarnation. He tells us that the Fathers of the Council of Ephesus insisted that Mary be called Theotokus because honouring her would safeguard a right doctrine of Christ’s person. He says that ‘’anyone who thinks out the implications of that great phrase, ‘The word was made flesh’, cannot but feel a profound awe for her who was chosen as the instrument of so surpassing a mystery’’
The Communion of the Saints
Like the Roman Church Luke there is a theology of death which means that life is not defeated or interrupted by death: the Church is quick and dead, militant and triumphant.. There is little practical evidence to show that we believe in a church militant in our practice: we remain orthodox in our liturgy if not in our praxis. Some believe that we ignore the saints who have departed unless they were born in the nineteenth century and were sent out as missionaries. To some we act as if nothing of any importance happened before the Reformation if not prior to the Revivals of the nineteenth century. More familiar to us is the view that the Church is not the building rather it is the gathering in the name of Jesus and the fellowship of the saints which means that a Christian is never alone. Upon entering an Orthodox sanctuary one becomes immediately aware, we are told, of the great cloud of witnesses spoken of in the book of Hebrews: they are on the walls and on the roof and on the Iconostasis, which is viewed as a window onto heaven. To those of an evangelical and minimalist view it appears to be more of a barrier between the clergy and people. The saints are very important to any Orthodox worshipper because they are part of the triumphant church. . Just as evangelicals look with great reverence to the Old Testament patriarchs and to the missionaries of the eighteenth century so the Orthodox looks to the Patristic Fathers with veneration. In visiting the region of Turkey known as Cappadocia we were reminded of the Cappadocian Fathers and the part they played in making of the church. In our reading we were reminded of the part played by the patristic thinkers in the theological formation of John Calvin .
The Trinity
Then there are similarities with the evangelical world too. We have the world of Orthodoxy to thank for giving us a focus on the Trinitarian nature of God. All too often today we observe those Christians who pay little attention to the Fatherhood of God and give too much on Jesus [they tend to be Reformed Christians], those who give all the attention to the Spirit [charismatic or Pentecostal] and then there are those who deny the trinity altogether and we call them Unitarians, while the Orthodox are very careful to hold on to the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, ever three, ever one. In the Trinity we have the model for fellowship and partnership which results in service. It’s in the Trinity that we get the imperative to serve and to engage with each other. It’s in the trinity that we are reminded that ministry is all about relationships: our relationship with God, the triune God and our relationship with other human beings. We are all made in the image of God and that means we are fulfilled when we are like God, this is what the Orthodox call ‘theosis’, or the process of deification, what we prefer to call sanctification. This is what gave the Celtic Christians their relational ministry: this way of doing evangelism makes the person more important than the program and is more person-directed and less aggressive, more Christ-centred because the centre is not what we are doing but on Christ Himself. This is the approach we have taken in our church when we set up our prayer table in the community market. In this approach we allow people to come to us and request prayer rather than being direct and aggressive. As the Father relates to the Son and as the Spirit energizes the Son and makes sure the will of the Father is done so there is inter-dependence on each other, and that is how we are to relate to each other. Out of this approach we empower people rather than make them dependent, they become inter-dependent. In any community every member should have responsibilities and gifts for the benefit of the whole body.


Incarnation
This Trinitarian approach also leads on to the Incarnational approach of the Orthodox. In the incarnation the son of God came to earth as a real man, of flesh and blood. He took on our humanity, cleansed it and transformed it into a holy and glorious humanity. God became like us that we might become like Him. The flesh is important and not to be despised, rather we are to give thanks for it: the Romanian Orthodox, we soon discovered have a great facility for moving easily from the holy to the earthly, they can worship and celebrate without any difficulty. It is because of this incarnation emphasis and their trinitarianism that they thought it important to work and worship and study in the monastic settlements, so on these settlements there were sanctuaries with elaborate icon pictures along with libraries and refectories and fields to work in. In this model there is a holistic or integral approach rather than a pietistic, individualistic and private faith. The church building and the liturgy is designed to be heavenly and God –centred so that the worship becomes a drama: gospel is processed through the door of the iconostasis and the priest is dressed in his finery with the cloud of witnesses looking in the presence of the icon of the Theotokos and the pantokrator on the doom of the roof [God is panokrator or creator]. In ‘’The Liturgy after the Liturgy’’ Ion Bria makes the starting point that the word, ‘liturgy’ has its derived meaning in the words leiteros meaning public, and ergon, meaning work. He goes on to say that ‘
’the liturgy is not just a commemoration of Christ’s ministry to the world, teaching, healing, feeding the people; it is the realization, in each new context, of the history of the world, of ‘what the lord has done’ [psalm 64:8]|The faithful can see with their eyes and hear with their ears and hearts the message of the gospel in the symbolic language of Jesus…Again, this is a matter not just of visualizing the Word of God, but also of partaking the Body of Christ for the forgiveness of sins and for eternal life’’
In the participation of the people in the liturgy there is an appeal to all the senses: to sight as they see the architecture, the icons and the actions of the priest; to smell as the sweet fragrance of the incense rising up in worship; to hearing as the y hear the bells in the liturgy, as they listen to the singing, telling the story and the words of the priest and the reading of the Gospel and preaching of the word; to touch as they venerate the icons and feel the bread; and to speech as they respond in worship and as they bless themselves in the Trinitarian blessing. For Orthodoxy worship is central to life and living and does not remain in the sanctuary. How often do we need to remind ourselves, in the west, that worship is intended as our spiritual sacrifice, not to be restricted to church, not something we leave in the pews but in everything we do. If we believe in the Trinitarian God then we will follow His example of relational service. Worship is more than singing a few songs and praying a few prayers, it’s about the way we live. Music is of vital importance in the worship of Orthodoxy. In this heavenly drama that can last up to 150 minutes without seating the singing of the liturgy becomes vital. Listening to the harmony which tells the drama it is easier to attend to and remember than the spoken word. From blessing themselves to entering church the Orthodox believer remains thoroughly Trinitarian. Getting the worship right will lead to the right way to live. Like the Celtic Christians life and faith is relational rather than programmed, the ‘’Gospel Driven Church’’ becomes the ‘’Community Church’’ driven by the triune God. Many evangelicals are time driven: we have trained our people to come to worship which will fit into the lifestyle they have chosen. This may well be to do with the music of their choice or the liturgy that suits them best or even the length of the service so that once the magic hour arrives they are keeping an eye on the clock.
Worship
For Orthodoxy it’s not about the time spent in the sanctuary. There is an impulse for the faithful to be totally involved in the action of the liturgy. There is a desire to see, to enter into the holy place, to concelebrate and to take Holy Communion. It’s not a matter of time, but of moving towards the throne to praise in the presence of God. Ian Bria says that it is impossible to be uninvolved. Personally I can verify this. In a visit we made to a church in Iasi I felt caught up in the worship, by the beauty of the singing, by the spirit of worship in the place. Several times I wanted to leave but felt the tug to remain. I had no idea what was being said but that did not seem important. I was struck by the desire of the faithful to be there and to take the blessed bread with them. I was struck by the humility expressed by the women who stayed on their knees for long periods of time, blessing themselves, not in a way which seemed calculated to use the least possible amount of energy but reaching from their heads to the ground. At another church I was struck with a mixture of admiration and suspicion as I saw some women crawling on their hands and knees, blessing themselves in the name of the Triune God making their way through the icon of the virgin and child, pleading for health and healing. We in the reformed tradition remain suspicious of such practices, naming this as superstition and earning their salvation: do they not know that Christ forgives as we ask? But then I find myself asking ‘’how do we express our humility?’’ I think we would be too proud to humble ourselves .Metropolitan Anthony covers this in ‘’School for Prayer’’ saying that if we wish to pray we must start with a certainty that we are sinners in need of salvation. We need to realize that we are naturally cut off from God and that we cannot live without him. All we can offer is our longing to be changed that we may meet him. He says that ‘’prayer is really our humble ascent towards God, a moment when we turn God wards, shy of coming near, knowing that if we meet Him too soon, before His grace has had time to help us to be capable of meeting Him, it will be in judgment’’ Such real humility is not always at the top of evangelicalism
Vertical faithfulness
The Great Commission of Matthew 28 is seen as vertical faithfulness rather than horizontal persuasion. For most evangelicals the Great Commission drives them on so that ministry becomes an objective to be reached: targets are set as to how many can be reached with the message this week or this year, we seek to pack as many as possible into the church or the theatre or the tent. For Orthodoxy the target is to pass the faith on to friends and family that they may pass it on to their children and their children’s children. That seems like something Paul said in 2Timothy 2:2. For many generations now the Presbyterian Church has played lip service to this approach: the practice, on the other hand, has been less committed: we have made such demands on members to spent all their waking hours in the church that spending time with family and being in the community has become a rarity with the resulting outcome that we have become detached from the community in which we live and, worst of all, estranged from our families. We have become too individualistic and private and personal, failing to understand that our Trinitarian faith means we were intended to be the corporate body of Christ, and to have fellowship with one another, bearing one another’s burdens. In seeking to be faithful to the Great Commission we have actually become disobedient and have distorted it. Surely this command of Christ is both vertical and horizontal. There are some implications of this vertical faithfulness that local churches need to attend to.
Then there is the thorny question of the unity of the church. It was Jesus’ prayer in John 17 that the believers would be one but as the years go on then fragmentation becomes greater. In the ‘’Liturgy after the liturgy’’ we read that,
One of the issued raised by the liturgy after the liturgy is the question of Christian unity. It was Jesus’ prayer in John 17 that all the believers should be one: today we are more fragmented than ever, not just across the denominations but within them also. For may years now the Orthodox have kept the World Council of Churches together given the absence of the Roman Catholic Church. By their presence they have demonstrated a commitment to church unity. Since the early years of the infant church Christians from the east have been in the vanguard of doctrinal purity and guardianship, hence the ecumenical councils that defined the divinity and humanity of Christ an other important doctrines we now affirm. On the more local scene the division among local churches whom largely share the same core values is a real obstacle to the gospel and the cause of Christ. While we cannot merely sweep aside the differences between us we should be deliberate and intentional in the engagement we have with those with whom we disagree. In 1974 the World Council of Churches meeting in Bucharest pointed to the necessity of churches working together in communion which would reflect in history the Trinitarian existence of God Himself. It goes on to say that,
The church is meant precisely to be that. Mission, therefore, suffers and is seriously distorted or disappears whenever it is not possible to point to a community in history which reflects this Trinitarian existence of communion. This happens whenever the church is so distorted or divided that it is no longer possible to recognize it as such a communion, or whenever mission is exercised without reference to the church, but with reference simply to the individuals or the social realities of history.
This means that getting our ecclesiology wrong may well make mission impossible. We need to have a correct view of the church, not as something separate from daily life but as an integral part of life. Our worship is another way of preaching the gospel to a secular world. This was highlighted at the W.C.C meeting in Canberra in 1991which spoke of the fundamental nature of the Christian life in sacramental terms.
Every worshipping community should be a model for an inclusive community. Worship space needs to be designed so that all people are able to participate fully. A lively ministry of hospitality, welcoming all in the name of the Lord, is most important. The plea of young people for forms of worship and celebration which fit their culture must be taken seriously.
With the attitude of intentional engagement there will be opportunities to agree and to disagree and to witness to the power and love of the Trinitarian God. Hospitality means being open to the thoughts and traditions of others, it means an openness to light from any quarter with the spiritual faculty of discernment. In our working with churches outside our comfort zone we have tended to isolate ourselves and remain aloof with the danger of remaining closed to the work of the Spirit of God.
Discontinuity
Some of the difficult areas of belief and practice include icons, the place of Mary and the saints and the attitude to tradition. At the beginning we quoted the ballad, ‘’It’s a long way to Tipperary’: recalling icons, is one of those areas were the distance seem the greatest. When a westerner looks at an icon he sees something quite weird, he sees something which evokes feelings of idolatry and exaggerated, cartoon-like thoughts. When the case for icons is put forward it appears very reasonable but the problem is that observation leaves us less than satisfied. This is an important topic because in a post modern society art and music have a very important place in worship and if we can learn from that we should.
Iconology
The trouble with icons and iconology is that we can only look at it from a western point of view. For the Orthodox there are three purposes in using them: one is to create reverence in worship, the second is to instruct those who cannot read; and the third is to serve as an existential link between the worshipper and God. The point is made by the Orthodox that while the Hebrews have always rejected any visible representation of God they did not appreciate that the use of letters can do the exact same thing: for example the use of Chi-Rho and HIS stand for Christ and Jesus respectively. St Basil said that ‘’what the word transmits through the ear, that painting silently shows through the image, and by these two means, mutually, accompanying one another…we receive knowledge of one and the same thing.’’ We are to understand that the Orthodox has two gospels: the one is visual and the other is the verbal to appeal to the whole person. The idea of icon has also become more a feature in the lives of people in popular culture: the communist regime of the USSR made it their practice to display photographs of their leaders to keep people focused on the right issues and the other is contemporary use of icons which act as windows to their programs; we understand that in the Presidential election in the USA on November v4th 2008 many African Americans took pictures of their forebears with them into the voting booths with them as a way of including them in this momentous event; then we are also reminded of the iconic nature given to celebrities and the description of Jesus Christ by the Apostle Paul as an icon of God long with his call for all the faithful to be like Him.
When it comes to prayer there are important lessons for us to learn from the Orthodox Christians and some things which call for critical thought. Take a look at the list set out by Anthony Coniasis and you can only agree that here we have a treasure for us to meditate upon. Here are just a few of these gems of understanding, taken at random, to demonstrate the wealth of wisdom as to the nature of prayer:
• Prayer…uplifts and unites human beings with God [St Gregory Palamas]
• Prayer is our personal communication system with our home base
• Prayer is opening the door of our hearts to receive the Holy Spirit
• Prayer is not bargaining with God, trying to convince Him to change. It is, rather, our asking Him to change us so we see His ways and His plans more clearly
• Prayer is raising my eye to God lest I begin to think that I am the highest point in the universe.
At the heart of eastern Christianity there is mysticism, there is a call to go beyond the cognitive thought forms that we in the west have iconized . There is much here that we can agree with and much that must challenge us. Theophan the Recluse calls for the worshipper to come before God with ‘’’the mind in the heart’’ He says that we need to pray with the mind but also with the heart. He says that we must pray with the mind so that it is not merely words, but the heart has to feel what the mind is thinking. Metropolitan Anthony says that ‘’unless the prayer which you intend to offer to God is important and meaningful to you first, you will not be able to present it to the Lord’’ He sets out three types of prayer: spontaneous; short vocal prayers and ready-made prayers. Discounting the possibility of being spontaneous all the time and rejecting set prayers he talks of the need for which is rooted in conviction. He suggests learning the Psalms by heart so that they can be used, drawn up from the well whenever they are needed and of the Jesus prayer. None of the above should present us with any problems and the idea of practicing daily prayer devotion at each end of the day should encourage us all. Coniaris sets out the daily cycle as one way of putting this into practice. Where many evangelicals have difficulty is with prayer to and with the saints.

What lessons can we learn?
Having tried to tease out any family resemblance I want to try to suggest some practical lessons we can learn from our long, lost relatives. To do this we will need to set out some of the features of the family. Firstly there is the Trinitarian doctrine, which sets the context for much of what is Orthodox Theology and practice. From the fellowship of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit comes the monastic communities. Since the fourth century monasticism has been organized into communities, some surviving to the present day. The monastic initiative was the response of the believers to the spiritual struggle. They went to the places that others would not go to. They took the gospel to those places where it had no gone before. When the gospel was taken to Russia monasteries appeared immediately; when the communists left Romania the monasteries began to multiply. Michael Oleska tells us that when Russia, Central Asia and Siberia were settled it was not by adventurers or frontiersmen, as in America, but by monks who went to the remotest corners of Eurasia to continue the struggle against the devil, in the world and within themselves. John Binns reminds us of the problem when discussing Eastern approaches to theology: the words used are often used by east and west but have different meanings. It is also useful to note that both sides have different ways of understanding the nature of this theology. In the east the understanding is not about an academic knowledge but of personal knowledge. Dumitru Staniloae makes the same point when he declares that dogmatics is about ‘concrete theology’…a theology of experience’’ this is not about abstract systems nor philosophical theory but the expression of personal experience and a living encounter with the divine. John Binns quotes the words of Evagrius of Pontus who described a theologian as one who prays and one who prays is a theologian. The reason for this is that theological understanding has developed in the Monasteries rather than the universities, in the rough and tumble of daily life rather than in the ivory palaces of academia. We must wonder how the increasing importance of the universities may influence the life of the church in the days ahead or if the strong link with monasticism will act as a practical bulwark. It would be a mistake to think of the eastern monasticism as remote and distanced from church and people. The fact is that from the very beginning, and we saw this in Turkey, the monasteries were tightly linked to the community. This is seen in the fact that they were centres of learning, places of hospitality and places of work. In times of economic difficulty they provided employment, places for prayer and contemplation. They had their origins in the gospel call to complete commitment and to leave family and friends. I the trinity there is a call to service and interaction. They saw themselves as ‘’white martyrs’, called, not to die, but to give up all for Christ’. John Binns reminds us that the first monks we re just ordinary people who committed themselves to live as the people around them lived. There was nothing very unusual about them. They lived in groups or alone; they ate the same food, wore the same clothes and did the same work as the people around them. Their aim was to live as an alternative communities so as to be critical friends, sometimes challenging, at other times encouraging society. It was in the monastery that people found training and education and sometimes employment. In the early days membership was flexible: monks could leave the monastery and work m in the community and community people were able to join the alternative community for a [period of time. This was an intentional community. we have to ask the question, especially in those places which are often considered God-forsaken, where are the intentional communities in our western societies? These communities were so successful at what they did that they attracted financial support from government and people with great resources. They even played a part in the national defense, making the point that all defense is not military but also spiritual. Emperor Basil II wrote: ‘what foundations are to a house and oars are to a boat, the prayers of the saints are to the Empire. Who can doubt that what the sword, the bow and military strength could not achieve, prayer alone has brought tom pass easily and splendidly’
Stemming from Monasticism we have another feature which is their servant attitude. This also stems from the emphasis on the incarnation. In the triune relationship there is the interaction and mutual service of their fellowship which explains their desire to serve. In Christ God planted Himself in our world, the tabernacle with humanity for a while. Unlike other kings he came to serve rather than be served and it is the responsibility of every Christian to do likewise: not that they speak of responsibility but rather of doing what should come naturally. In the various countries where Orthodoxy is found you will find the liturgy in the national language. You will also find a strong nationalist spirit. Sometimes the question is raise as to how the eastern European nations managed to keep their religion going. The answer to this question raises another characteristic which is that of a survival mentality: in Ireland we call it stubbornness. What that means in the Russian and Romanian context is that they choose to be with their people instead of holding on to religious purity. A pietistic view in Belfast has denuded the community of vibrant Christian witness today.
When Dumitru Staniloae was asked about the cost of surviving communism he said it was two-fold: fear and lies. The persecution was great and they had to pretend to be faithful to the atheist regime. The alternative was top resist, remain pure but be destroyed and be of no use to their people. The Romanian Patriarch during the Ceaucesu years decided to collude rather than resist and this choice was accepted by the population: when he resigned after the revolution the people persuaded him to return because they understood his decision. The same course of action was taken in Russia. The affect in Russia and Romania was to outlast communism: as in China the philosophical premise of Leninist-Marxist ideology was seen to be defeated. The premise was that eventually the success of communism would destroy the foundations of the church and that would lead to a rejection by the people. Unfortunately, for the regime, this did not work out and that was re-enforced when they turned to repression and persecution. When the communists left the church was there to pick up the pieces.
Next, we see that they are clearly intentional in their engagement, both with those they agree with and with those they disagree with. This is illustrated by their involvement in the ecumenical movement where they have held the foreground and in the way they have decided to stay in communities. Where are our intentional communities engaging with the enemy as well as with friends? We have been slow to join the discussion table. We have deserted those communities which need people to fight the spiritual battles which face them every day and that helps to explain why there is a major dislocation of church and community.
Another feature, already mentioned elsewhere, is their grounding in the saints, especially the patristics. They have a clear view of their place in history as the people of God: they are part of a long line of saints who have held true to the faith. While this history can imprison, as it tends to do with us, it can also liberate and inform. The ruins and relics in Turkey and elsewhere can give rise to hope as well as to despair as they consider the sovereign will of God
Application
Having suggested some features of our Orthodox brethren let’s spend some time in setting out how we can benefit from them. Living in a post modern world we need to consider how we can make more use of, and, appeal to the senses. The way we live and worship is very cognitive and while it is necessary for us to have strong minds as well as strong bodies we need to become more holistic in expressing our faith. While we may have difficulties in using icons as a way to focus the worshipper’s mind on Christ we may be able to use art in other ways. In our church we already have a stained glass window of Jesus but we may be able to highlight it more often using creative methods.
In thinking of the great cloud of witnesses we can include the example of the early church fathers along with the missionaries of the nineteenth century.
In thinking of mission we can take the approach of other congregations, along with our Orthodox brothers of making the worship service be the place to help people to become disciples of Christ and leave the liturgy with the understanding that the service has only begun.
Following the implications of the incarnation we need to be intentional in our approach to community. One of the strategies used by John Perkins is to call Christian people to relocate in tough urban communities. We need to attract those people who can, and will, be open to minister and live in the most difficult places, be they in the inter-faces of our cities or in the rural border areas. We can decide to make housing available in areas of acute housing shortage without giving up ministry opportunities. We could set up Intentional Christian Communities in the various areas of Urban Belfast, and why not on the Crumlin Road? In a community which is so segregated into Protestant and Catholic, Nationalist and Unionist we need models which can give example to how the two major traditions in Belfast can live together in harmony. If an experiment in integrated living is to succeed and space is to be shared we will need to create communities which have a certain degree of protection and control. Here is one suggestion or line of thought which is worth considering for our congregation and community:we could use our site to build some housing. A chaplain/warden and other necessary members of staff would be appointed. Places could be allocated with a mix of Christian and non-Christian people, young and old. A cross community aspect would be both essential and inspirational for the greater community. At the same time we could go into partnership with statutory services to build a sports hall/community hall which could also be used by the church.
This would be a renewing resource because it would get regular funding from government and it would dove-tail with the both the Vine and the other churches in the Greater Shankill Community-if it was thought appropriate we could be done with leadership coming from the shankill worship centre. We could be in partnership with the Shankill churches / or with Immanuel-there are models in the US [e.g. Redeemer Presbyterian in New York] and the Vine would play a vital part.
This would enable us to keep the present congregation going and keep a foot on this important arterial route. At the same time the outreach could go on, in parallel with the Vine and other congregations. Being intentional means that we have decided to do this rather than just let it happen. We have decided that we need to attract some Christians who will live in community to help us to model what it means to be a Christian in the urban community. Who else is going to be prepared to live in the places that even Christians have left. Living in community makes it all the more possible. If we were able to build as high as the church then we could have all the more accommodation. There would also be the possibility of extending the services in the future.
Outreach at the vine would be more likely to attract non-Church people. Alpha type courses as well as other topical services. This can only be of encouragement to the other churches and to the Vine-there is no need or desire to do what others are doing.
While the development of a worship centre’s on the Shankill Road is a laudable idea it would be even better if there were people living in community. Along with the work on the Shankill this could be an urban community, where in-service training could be received and students placed to find out the realities of urban life in Belfast.

1. We can also seek to be critical friends to both community and government. This has already begun but what we need to do, by way of intention, is to make it clear to the community which feels deserted by the church is that we are committed to and actually passionately love our communities. In the best practice of development principles we would seek to work with people rather than for them.
We could also make places of spiritual retreat available all the time: turning desert waste places into spiritual oases. We need to consider how to make our worship glimpses of heaven. Our sanctuaries should use the best of art and music and appeal to a many of the senses as is possible, given our theology and they should be as open as possible that people can make use of these sanctuaries.
We need to take biblical reality much more seriously: for them Pentecost is a continuing reality.
We should also consider the implications of vertical faithfulness in our models of ministry. As Presbyterians we speak often of the importance of family and of the responsibility of the family in passing on the faith to the next generation rather than delegating this to the local fellowship. One of the people in the UK to take this seriously has been the of Rev William Still of Gilmartin Parish Church in Aberdeen. Here the congregation is freed to work in the community as active members of the community and to minister to their families. In many of our Presbyterian congregations the expectations on the minister are very high which has tended to make people dependent rather than mature and active. I am not sure if these expectations are driven by ministers or by their congregations or by both. The effect is to increase the pressure and stress on the minister. We have forgotten that the work of ministry starts at home and when it looks outward it requires ministers who are well rounded people; people take time to think and pray and are not afraid to take creative opportunities to meet people where they are. We need to think out of the box. Too often we think, like the institutions we serve, in straight vertical lines. Too often we are overly concerned with our part of the Empire we call church when we need to take the rest of the body of Christ into consideration. We need to ask how to help one another in the spiritual battle.
In seeking to be faithful to creation we should seek to build any new plant using environmentally friendly actions. We should also be concerned with social justice issues so that we will stand up for those who are oppressed in any way.
Conclusion
In this paper I have tried to tease out the family resemblances and to look for lessons to be learnt. A church which has kept the faith for over 2,000 years, through years of persecution by Ottoman and Communist regimes is worthy of investigation, at least. I wonder how we would have fared if we had been the ones who had suffered what they have suffered?

INSIDE OUT

Some time ago my wife gave me a funny look. You may not think that as being particularly strange, not when you know me and you know my wardrobe “elegance”. What was funny was that somehow I had managed to put my jumper on “inside out” or was it “outside in”? That’s one way of getting more use out of it. It’s a bit like the case of the student who never washed his socks; he just recycled them in the wash basket! Who is to decide what is the right way anyway? My guess is that there are night clubs in Belfast where you would not get in if you wore your clothes that way, whether the article was a stripy jumper or not
That got me thinking about how important it is, or is it, to look well and to do things which look good. Some people are very concerned about the way they look so they spend hours getting ready to go anywhere: they have to wear the right clothes, having everything colour co-ordinated. Most women need to have their make-up on first thing in the morning and men who would not be seen dead without their latest electronic gadget. For me the most important thing in the morning is breakfast and taking the dogs out for their walk.
I guess the normal thing now would be to remind us all that God looks at the heart and not the outside appearance and that is we concentrated on that it would be a better idea than thinking of how we look. That would be normal and true but I want to take a sidewise glance at this from another angle. We are all too familiar with the decline in numbers attending the institutional churches. I only say the institutional church because that is where my experience is and not on those churches which are emerging in various places. Sometimes I feel very defeated by the downward trend and then I have to remind myself, to quote Jonesy in Dad’s Army, “don’t panic, don’t panic”.
This is where I come back to the truth I learnt from my wardrobe malfunction. Unless we in the church are ready to turn our churches “inside out” or “outside in” we are never going to make a difference in our society. What I mean by this is that we need to keep our focus on God and on Jesus Christ in particular but we need to draw alongside people. We need to put the community back into the heart of the church. Presently our church buildings tell the world that we are different, set apart, a place where ordinary people do not go. Jesus Christ was always part of his community. I want our building to say to the world, “you are welcome” I want the Christians to say to the world, “church is a place of sanctuary, of peace and of acceptance”. We are not a private club; we are a people who are literally on the move. I know that the worry is that if we do not take care of ourselves we will lose our edge. Can we not leave the health of the church to the God who owns the church? Can we not trust God so that as we become more community minded He will look after our spiritual health or is that ok for missionaries in Africa and different for us in Belfast? Why not, for example, share our buildings with the community?
It’s time for all Churches to turn the inside out. Maybe my mistake was worth making after all!

Christmas is coming.....

"Christmas is coming and the geese are getting fat, please put a penny in the old man's hat".
Will it happen this year? So many people are coming to the realisation that there are very difficult days ahead and giving to others might be too much. Some people are keen to quote the adage "Charity begins at home". Actually that adage goes on to say, "but doesn't stay there". Over the last number of years we have been encouraged and have been only too happy so to be so, to spend, spend and spend. Now we are realising that the good times have gone or were they the good times? Those of you who are Christian believers will know that we were created to be with people, we were created to have fellowship with other people. The creative God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit is a creative one who made each of us to be involved with one another.

No man is an island. The poet John Donne said, "No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee"

The Psalmist said much the same thing when he said "precious, in the sight of the Lord, is the death of one of His saints" [Ps 116]. That brings us to the credit crunch/recession or whatever you want to call it and the unfortunate companies who have fallen foul of the economy:the list is growing all the time, with Woolworth and MFI being the latest companies to call in the Administrator. After our greed we are reaping the fruit. That brings us to the problems of the Presbyterian Mutual Society:why have we, in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, not held our hands up and simply acknowledged that while we have no connection in law with the Mutual we have a moral obligation to stand with our brothers in distress? It is a sorry day when a church denomination decides to distance itself from brothers in distress for fear of being held responsible.

The irony is all the greater at this time of the year when we will be asking people to be generous in giving to the Presbyterian World Development Fund. The fundamental principal of a Mutual society is that all the members are accountable to each other and hep one another. When some panicked and withdrew their shares to lodge it in a bank, guaranteed by government the whole society suffered. What was intended to help everyone has let everyone down because we lost sight of our mutuality. The old man's hat is empty. We hope that everyone we get as much of their money back as possible is not all give time but if not we can always restort to that old chestnut of a question, "What Would Jesus do?"

In the early church we are told there were no poor people because when anyone had need they sold their property and gave the proceeds to the poor. What do Bible believing Christian Presbyterians, of which I am one, say to that? The challenge this Christmas for those of us who are "lucky" enough to live in the rich world, is can we have a good Christmas without as much money as usual; a question that the majority of the world have long ago come to terms with. Happy Christmas and a great new year!

A Nation at last!

40,000 people crossed the Jordan on that fateful day. In the wilderness they were a group of loosely organised tribes, when the stepped on the land on the other side they were a nation. The text uses the Hebrew word “goy” instead of “am”. The difference is not always clear but it seems that “am” refers to the blood relationships of a people while “goy” describes the political unity. As they crossed over the ceased to be a wandering band and became a landed people who would have to be dealt with as a political entity-a nation at last. In the next book, the book of Judges we get a very different picture where we read that “every man did what was right, in his own eyes”-this describes a time of disunity and the fractures of a community in need of help-that would describe the Protestant community in North Belfast if not the whole of Northern Ireland.

We are deeply divided-we have so many different denominations and congregations within the same denominations, we have so many political and community divisions. Ever since the Reformation as with the introduction of divorce, it would seem that the line of least resistance automatically leads to break up- if I don’t agree with the way you are doing it I will set up my own church or my own party or group. On the face of it I can understand how that would be the much easier approach but I fail to see how God is glorified by it. I fail to see how relationships can be mended if that is the attitude.

Only a king, like David, was able to bring Israel together as they had been in Joshua’s day. Only David could give them vision and common purpose-here in Joshua’s day you could say that he acted like the king even though he was not the king-that was a position that only God could fill-but as God told Joshua so he told the people. What the protestant, loyalist, unionist communities need today is a sense of vision and common purpose instead of the parochial, tunnel vision that we have. Only a realisation of our spiritual need will turn the clock and make the difference and unite us all-and that would unite more than just the unionist family it would have radical implications and effects on the whole community.

The Hebrews had a keen sense of unity and the big reason was that at this time in their history they were following Yahweh. Their leader was in tune with God and they were in tune also. Time and again the story speaks of ALL ISRAEL-

3:1,”...all the Israelites set out...”

v7 ...”Today i will begin to exalt you in the eyes of ALL ISRAEL...”

v 17 “The priests who carried the ark....stood firm .....while all Israel passed by....;

4:14 “That day the Lord exalted Joshua in the eyes of ALL ISRAEL; they revered him

What we notice here in this story is a keen sense of UNITY. Those who know about revival in tor prerequisites of revival down the years is a spirit of Christian unity-this is not a forced unity but a unity based upon a common cause-here it is crossing the river to take the land.

Something else we notice about this crossing of the river Jordan is that they have a keen sense of history or a common memory.

When a member of the family dies memory becomes very important. When someone gets married past memories become important. The closer the family ties the deeper the memories and the closer the ties. Memory is essential to who we are-the person who losses their memory losses the sense of who they are. Without qa common memory there can be no community. The crossing of the Jordan plays a key part in this new community because it is a shared, meaningful memory but these events are more than mere history-they explain why these people are as they are-

As they remember the exodus and the crossing of the Red Sea-with the sea being cast aside to allow the people to go through so this is repeated in the Jordan River- as the priests take the Ark of the Covenant into the middle of the river so the dry land appeared God honoured their faith in doing exactly what he told them.

The reason was a that they might always fear the Lord your God”

The purpose was for them to see the POWER of the Lord-later in John’s Gospel we are told

“Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ and by believing you may have life in his name”

These are not mere wonders of the world, they are signs of the Lord, signs that remind us that he is still all powerful, still living and still the Lord.

If we took a quick look at the key points in the history of Ireland we might learn something about who we are. Would we be able to see the hand of god in it?

There are a lot of people who live on this island who know little more than “Derry, Aughrim, Enniskillen and the Boyne” when it comes to our shared history. Or, on the other side more than the Boyne, Doll’s Brae and Bloody Sunday.

It is very educational to take a swift look at the key dates

Going back to the days of the kings of Ireland we find that after Brian Baru the island is divided and fighting among itself, even then. When the potential contenders for power fled to England they sought the help of the Normans and with their arrival in the 11^th century everything changes. With the arrival of the earl of Pembrooke the French become the landlords-he became better known as Strongbow.

- In 1170 King John was rewarded for his loyalty to the Pope by being given both England and Ireland as his Fiefdom

- In 1315 Edward the Bruce became king, he was the brother of Robert The Bruce

- Then in the 16^th century there is the battle of the Boyne which changed the face of Europe and Britain found herself allied with the pope in defiance of King Louis of France who supported James.

- In 1798 there was rebellion

- 1803 Rebellion

- 1845 the Great Famine

- 1864 the first rioting in Belfast

- 12^th July 1867 was the first Orange parade baned

- 1872 more rioting in Belfast

- 1850 saw the fall of Charles Stuart Parnell

- 1903 the foundation of the Independent Orange Order

- 1905 Sein Fein founded

- 1913 UVF started

- 1914-18 the First World War when Irish men fought side by side in the trenches

- 1919-21 Anglo Irish War-Independence

- 1921 Truce

- Violence at the 12^th parade with 23 killed and 200 homes destroyed

- 1922 violence in northern Ireland with 232 killed and 1000 injured

- Special powers passed

- Civil war in 26 counties

- 923 End of Civil War

- 1933 Special powers passed

- 1935 rioting in Belfast 23 killed

- 1936 Public Order Act

- 1949 Free State becomes the Republic of Ireland

- 1956-62 IRA campaign in Northern Ireland

- 1965 Sean Lemass, Irish Prime Minister] visits Belfast-welcomed by Terrence O’Neil and opposed by Rev Ian Paisley[founder of the Free Presbyterian Church and the Democratic Unionist Party]

- 1967 NI Civil Rights Association formed

- 1972 Bloody Sunday and Bloody Friday

- 1971-75 Internment Powers

- 1973 Sunningdale Agreement

- 1974 Ulster Workers’ Strike

- 1981 Republican Hunger strike [these Republican prisoners were demanding political status]

- 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement

- 1987 Enniskillen bomb[placed by the IRA on Remembrance Sunday]

- 1993 Frizell’s Fish Shop bombed [a Republican bomber walked into this fish shop and left a bomb]

- 1998 Omagh Bomb [this was the biggest single atrocity in the troubles with 31 people killed, including two unborn babies]

There are many other key events in our history which have contributed to who we are- It is a history which is immersed in violence and manipulation, by attempts at reconciliation which failed , followed by more attempts, they are events which have knocked this community and many others unto the back foot so that most of the time we re-act rather than act. Thousands lie dead and injured and relationships and trust have been shattered, some beyond repair and it will take many years to get us back to some degree of normality BUT this is who we are and God has not left us, he is still here and our task is to follow Him and to build a better history that our children and grand children can look back on with more satisfaction.

As Christians we have another story and another history which is just as valid- this one is also violent and is also about treachery and disappointment but in this story we see God’s hand at work directly and decisively-he has made a new future possible and so we too have our stones as memorials-we have the breaking of bread which reminds us of the pain and suffering of Christ but also tells of His resurrection and return. “do this in remembrance of me” Do this until I return

We too have baptism which tells the story of washing and of sealing and of immersion as the one who died and rose to eternal life.

We have our personal memories of the day we first gave our lives to Christ and of those dates when we surrendered ourselves to service of Christ and His kingdom.

Can you tell the story of how God has worked in your life?

Then we have the exaltation of Joshua-it was promised in chapter 3 and now it has happened in chapter 4.:14

Why is this important? As Joshua is exalted before all the people so the people are exalted. They needed a leader and God gave them this one.

Paul says at the end of Ephesians 6 “pray lastly for me....”

L:eadership can be a lonely place to be-Jesus tells us that the leader who does not exalt himself will be exalted-Joshua was not one to parade his position-he took the position with true humility and so God exalted him-as I have said before a good leader has to learn to be a good follower-so the best army leaders are those who were in the ranks, taking the orders. A good leader is not afraid of getting his hands dirty. A good leader takes orders and that is what Joshua did,

Joshua was revered all his life just as Moses was-in the ordination service we are told to respect the minister “for the sake of his work”

Joshua was a kind of prophetic figure who took the word and passed it on to the people- today the preacher is given the same task-to present the word in a prophetic way which means he needs to show his people how it is relevant today

To do this he needs the prayerful support of the congregation-

· to prepare he needs time to think and pray-a sermon cannot be prepared on the back of an envelope and it takes time to seek how it applies today

· To be bold in presenting Jesus Christ and the power of his resurrection

· He needs to read and to be stimulated by others

· He will need to help his congregation to understand how to study the word for themselves

Joshua's Commission

God told Joshua- You are the man to lead my people to take possession of the Promised Land. Standing on the brink of greatness God speaks to Joshua. He builds up his confidence by talking to him - one thing we notice about this story as opposed to the stories of other nations is that the central figure here is not Joshua but God, the stories that are told are told so that the people will be built up in their faith in Yahweh and Joshua’s task is to lead them to trust God, he can’t do that for them but he can point in the right direction-that is the task of the church today and the task of every minister of Christ-as we meet today we seek to help one another to trust God in the week ahead.

-words can be very effective when in the hands of the master craftsman- not always for good-Hitler was a man who knew how to incite people to a hatred which resulted in violence and eventually the attempted annihilation of 6 million Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals. In John 1 we have the words of John as he tells the story of redemption, calling Jesus the word or Logos, the way that God communicates to humanity. Joshua took the commission of God and used it to communicate to the people the vision of the future. If a nation or a people are going to be all that they can be they need a vision and their leaders need vision. Joshua was such a man of vision. Like his friend Caleb he was not going to be deterred from crossing the Jordan just because they people already there were bigger than they were, just because they were stronger and better armed. He was undeterred because he really believed that the God of Moses was faithful to His promises and able to keep them.

A leader needs to be a person of vision-that is not to say that he never has any doubts-he does but when he leads the people he leads them inspite of those doubts. He reminds them that even when circumstances look bad he is still going to trust him and follow him and lead the people he leads to follow him.

The man of vision will help his people to see these adverse circumstances through the lens of CHALLENGES to be achieved rather than a problem to defeat him. He never understates the situation, never pretends that all will be well when that is not true but what he does is he makes sure that the people have the faith to continue and overcome the problems and rise to the challenges. The challenge presented by Joshua is to start on a new destiny, Egypt is behind-it was about bondage and slavery-as they prepare to cross the river they prepare for this new life of freedom BUT they have to take up the challenge and move forward knowing that the battle will be great but VICTORY is secure and assured.

There have been times in the history of Britain when the situation looked bleak and God has raised up the right person for the time- most people will say that in 1941 Winston Churchill was one such man-not that he was a man of faith, apart from in himself , but he was able to mobilise the nation in fighting against the tyranny of Hitler-because he saw him as the great threat to democracy he led the nation to put all other concerns and differences of opinion behind them to oppose the COMMON enemy. The nature of his speeches were not to understate the problem but to emphasise the strength of the British people to hold the fort til the Americans changed their minds and joined the struggle and eventually overcame the enemy.

Joshua was such a man of destiny and Israel was about to receive her destiny. Today we are living in a time when the enemy really wants us to give up and go home-to surrender the territory that belongs to our king. Over the years since the end of world war two we have seen an increasing tendency for the nation to become more secular and our city of Belfast and this community is at the sharp end of the struggle.

If we look at ourselves we can understand the problem-

· We have little money in the bank BUT we are not poor

· We have buildings which are too big for our purposes- they were build at a time when the community was much bigger-so when we meet together we sit all over the place and remain distant from each other and appear to be happy with that

· Because of legislation we have property which needs renovation-not just repairs to the buildings but renovations which bring them up to standard in terms of disability access, health and safety and fire regulations not to mention protection against burglary and vandalism.

· And on top of all that we are over serviced by Presbyterian churches not to mention the other denominations in the area-currently we have 8 Presbyterian churches and many other churches and missions.

Like in Joshua’s day there are some who have lost the stomach for the fight and are ready to hoist the white flag-they are too big for us, there are giants in the land.

It is noticeable that Churchill made the problems of wartime Britain a virtue and a strength-he did not under state them or ignore them, he told the nation that the British bulldog spirit would win the day

He promised them “blood, toil, tears and sweat” . He told the House of Commons

“we have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind, we have before us many, many months of struggle and suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by land, sea and air. War with all our might and with all the strength God has given us, and to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime. THAT is our policy.”

Before a leader can inspire he needs to be inspired himself and while Churchill was not a man of great faith he was inspired by the horror of possible defeat and God used him as the man for the moment-Joshua, on the other hand had the hand of God on his shoulder and had faith in God, such that he could call the people to join with him in crossing the river. He had personal experience of this God Yahweh:

· He had been with Moses at Mount Sinai when Moses was give the 10 commandments

· He witnessed God’s presence going ahead of the nation in the cloud

· He had watched God lead them out of Egypt and provided for them in the wilderness.

As we read the story we can be encouraged by the action of God leading His people to take the land promised to them we too can claim the promise of eternal life. In the first few verses of chapter one we have the

COMISSION of God to Joshua

God calls him and commission him- in the army officers are commissioned to lead and to ensure that the orders of the General Staff are carried out-they need to be people who can lead and who are equipped to make sure that the strategy and orders become a reality as they fight the enemy. His commission was to lead the people across the river . When a soldier is commissioned he is given the authority to act and he is given the means to ensure that it happens-so a soldier is given his rank but also the men under his control-so when he gives orders it is as if the CO were giving them as far as the foot soldier is concerned.

When Jesus commissions the disciples he says “all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples....”

So when I tell another person about the gospel I am doing what God has commanded-Jesus cam with this authority and he has given it to us. WE have no need to overstate the case, no need to make the big sell by exaggerating or even lying, all we need to do is to tell the truth-“the truth will set you free” Sometimes Christians feel the need to overstate the case by telling interested people that if they become a believer they will never have another problem and life will be great-we are never promised any such thing-when we do this we are behaving like people who don’t really have faith or believe our message-that has been the problem for modern China-as she has felt the need to open up to the world and as Marxist Leninist principles have declined in the lives of people they have felt the need to put the best foot forward and always show modern China to be the best-in the process we have the situation of the Olympics were one little girl was told she had d a good singing voice but was not pretty enough so another would mine before the thousands and the cameras while the other girl sang the words-there is no need for us to do such things. Our responsibility is to preach the word in season and out of season an we do that with words and with our actions

In telling them, repeatedly to be strong and courageous Joshua is telling a disheartened and battered people that they can be encouraged and strong because God is with them and will never leave them. The people of Joshua’s day were discouraged because the sin of their fathers had caused God to keep them in the wilderness until a new generation came along and the readers of the written history, possibly during the return from exile were also discouraged by their exile which was also because of sin-sin is sometimes very attractive in the short term but there is always a heavy cost long term. WE too are discouraged because of falling numbers and low income so we need to hear again that God has already given us the victory-we are not victims we are victors

In commissioning them he also gives Joshua his COMMANDS

Deut 7:7-12

He wants them to know that it is best for them to obey God-Moses gave them the Decalogue and Joshua tells them to follow it-never to forget the words and to keep it at the forefront of their minds and actions.

We too are called to do the same-but as we obey God we have another Joshua before us- we have the second Adam, Jesus Christ who makes the commands more than a mere list of

do not-he makes the commands chiselled in stone into a covenant of flesh-

Are you ready to cross the Jordan? Ready to fight the good fight? Are you ready to give your tears and your sweat and your blood-we do no one any favours by making the challenge small-its a big challenge to go and take the enemy on-our struggle is greater than in 1941- its not a mere physical fight but its against the spiritual forces of evil. Joshua used the fighting men to lead the way and forge a way in the land. Today it does not matter how old you are or how young you are, it does not matter how strong you are- we begin by recognising the enemy and all his power and there are still giants in the land but are you ready to take on these forces? God promises to be with us and to give us the victory-the alternative? Give in, go away, surrender the battler and loose the land, this land to the devil-what do you want to do?