Theo Hobson writes in the Guardian about A carnival of Christianity
The dominant trend of contemporary Christian theology might be called ecclesiastical fundamentalism. The one thing that everyone seems to agree on is the conceptual primacy of “church”. Postmodern theology explains that this religion is not an abstract system but a set of actual practices, performed (a crucial word) by various churches. Such is the current theological orthodoxy.
This evades the crisis at the heart of “church”. All forms of church define a Christian as one who belongs to this special society. In practice, that means accepting the authority of a particular institution. An institution must have rules; it must promote an orthodoxy and exclude people who want to think or behave differently. The problem is that Christianity is about a vision of total peace, of universal brother- and sisterhood. It is meant to oppose authoritarianism, legalism and exclusion. Was not the kingdom of God announced by Jesus betrayed by authoritarian institutions?…
Christopher Howse writes in the Telegraph about Pottering round old churches
Jonathan Sacks writes in The Times on the London bombings, Terrorism dishonours any cause which it claims to represent
Johann Hari wrote this, originally in the Independent but now available on his blog, The attacks on London – and the battles to come
9 CommentsJudith Maltby writes in the Guardian today about the need for women bishops in the Church of England, Time for bishop’s move. She concludes:
The debate on women bishops is not, at its heart, a matter of internal governance, but about what sort of sign the Church of England wants to be to the world. How can a church which continues to bury the talents, which have been freely given to it, stand as a sign to our neighbours of God’s bounty? Will we put our trust in our “achievements” or in God’s scandalous generosity?
The talents have been given to the church by an open-handed God – a God who, contrary to our way of thinking, knows that the more grace you give away, the more there is. One hopes that, in York, the Church of England will resist the temptation to break out the shovels.
Geoffrey Rowell, who has written elsewhere this week on women bishops, write in The Times about Cassian, in Chastity of mind is the bridle of our rampaging desires. This includes the following passage:
As desiring animals we human beings are curious to know, and the old Genesis story of the fall of Adam tells how forbidden knowledge led to expulsion from the garden of innocence. It is the story of the growing up of all of us, and equally a recognition that knowledge has power for good and evil. There is promiscuous knowing as well as promiscuous relationships.
The explosion of information technology, the unfettered and unregulated “knowledge” that the internet offers, demands of us ascetic disciplines, of a piece with ancient spiritual wisdom though having new applications. To be overwhelmed by tsunamis of emails, to communicate simply at the touch of a button just because it is possible, is a modern form of unrestrained desire. We need to learn a chastity of communication, a disciplined and loving sensitivity, in this area as in many others.
Newman and the leaders of the Oxford Movement emphasised the importance of “reserve” in communication. Mystery is destroyed by over-definition, and no less through salvation by slogans. God reveals himself gradually, and the wisdom of God can only be learnt by patient pilgrimage. To know another person we have to learn to attend, to listen and to receive. So it is with the God in whose image we are made.
In the Telegraph Christopher Howse has been reading this article in the Church Times and so writes his column on The vicars who sacrifice goats
Two fascinating items from the USA:
A recent New Yorker article profiling Patrick Henry College in Virginia, GOD AND COUNTRY by Hanna Rosin, plus some helpful links from Doug LeBlanc including an Independent report.
A column that first appeared in the New York Times by John C Danforth Onward, Moderate Christian Soldiers.
1 CommentThe Guardian has a godslot column today by Richard Harries Jaw jaw on just war. It also has a column by Mark Lawson titled One miracle too many and subtitled The US is a theocracy suffering from galloping spiritual inflation.
The New York Times recently carried a major article What’s Their Real Problem With Gay Marriage?
Margaret Atkins writes the Credo column in The Times under the heading Beware the sword of rash judgment cuts both ways
In the Telegraph Christopher Howse’s column is Pegging out love’s laundry
The CEN has an interview of John Sentamu by Jonathan Wynne-Jones in two parts, here and here
14 CommentsRichard Chartres writes in The Times about church finances. In Church coffers are half full, not half empty he writes in part:
ALL Barchester has been roused by reports that a cash crisis in the Church of England could lead to a cut in clergy numbers by up to a third, with worshippers being directed to meet in one another’s homes. This doomsday scenario is mistaken, but despite Archdeacon Grantly’s derisive snorts, it is good to have a serious debate about the present state of the Church of England…
…The report which gave rise to the initial press reaction will be discussed by the General Synod next month. Its main thrust is that “the key challenge facing the Church is not financial but the need for it to develop a more dynamic mission emphasis”. This is the point on which we need the real debate to be focused.
The inhibiting factors have to be faced. One is the way the Church does its business, with the postwar explosion of boards, synods, councils and committees, all involved in a carousel of consultation,. John Sentamu, the new Archbishop of York, as Primate of England is just the right person to tackle this plate of spaghetti. His appointment is very good news…
Over in the Guardian Jane Shaw writes about the Anglican Communion in Rival bids for the Anglican franchise, and she concludes her column with:
…There is a new set of alignments, in which people want to be with other people who read the Bible like them more than they want to unite with all other Anglicans. These alignments cross national boundaries. We might call this the confessional versus the communion.
The bullying behaviour of those united in an alignment to oppose the North American decisions suggests that they have no interest in the integrity of the communion unless we all think like them.
The Windsor report, the 2004 document meant to sort out the divisions within the communion, attempts to do that by changing the nature of the communion. We need to be clear about that. We will go from being a “fairly loose federation of kindred spirits, often grateful for mutual fellowship but with each province reserving the right to make its own decisions”, as church historian Henry Chadwick described the communion in 1993, to one in which, as the report says “no province, diocese or parish has the right to introduce a novelty”.
Local differences, or dispersed authority as we understand it in Anglican terms, will have no place in this more authoritarian global structure. Someone’s version of Anglicanism will prevail, but whose? Who will own the Anglican franchise?
Christopher Howse in the Telegraph discusses Prayer and God’s rescue plan
6 CommentsAlex Wright, who is religion editor at IB Tauris has written in the Guardian godslot about Landscapes of the spirit
Christopher Howse in the Telegraph writes this week on Crying out for vengeance
In The Times Jonathan Sacks, who has today been knighted, writes about volunteering in Lifting others, we ourselves are lifted
This month in Harper’s Magazine Jeff Sharlet has a major article: Inside America’s most powerful megachurch. This was discussed in last week’s Church Times Press column by Andrew Brown in Where they queue to get in
Pastor Ted has been getting a lot of publicity lately in the USA, follow the links from The Church of No Questions
There’s a second article in that same Harper’s issue, Feeling the hate with the National Religious Broadcasters
5 CommentsThe process of inculturation in southern Africa has led some priests to introduce animal slaughter. Michael Bleby reports in Bringing new blood into church
There was also a related news story by Bill Bowder, Blood used to welcome ancestors
For many unmarried couples, christening of their children is a substitute for another service, Alan Billings finds in Why baptism parties are getting bigger
Boycotting Israel, especially its universities,would not have helped anyone, argues Ed Kessler in Sense triumphs in boycott row
1 CommentMike Russell, the Rector of All Souls Episcopal Church, San Diego, California, recently wrote the following short essay to explain why section B4 of the Windsor Report does not reflect the classic Anglican position on the authority of Scripture, which is to say the position of Richard Hooker.
Reproduced with Mike’s permission
For his credentials on Hooker see here
Another essay in the same vein is here
John Wilkins a former editor of the Tablet writes in The Times about the former editor of America in Full symphony of voices needs to be heard
Over at the Telegraph regular columnist Christopher Howse writes about FD Maurice in Moonshine and Spitzfindigkeit (another article occasioned by this same biography was in the Church Times recently)
In the Tablet Isabel de Bertodano interviews Cardinal Rodríguez of Honduras in Africa’s Latin champion
Both the Church Times and the Tablet have editorial opinions on the French vote against the European constitutional treaty:
Church Times Why the French voted no
Tablet Europe must go back to basics
and for good measure Giles Fraser added ‘Non’ also to Anglican bureaucracy in his op-ed column in the Church Times
0 CommentsRobin Gill wrote about human embryo cloning in Knowing the facts of life. He is Michael Ramsey Professor of Modern Theology at the University of Kent.
Another feature article was Understanding Akinola by Canon Dr Stephen Fagbemi who is Honorary Curate of Murston with Bapchild and Tonge, in the diocese of Canterbury.
Addendum: The Nigerian Vision Statement mentioned is here (hat tip to KB)
Theo Hobson’s new book ANARCHY, CHURCH AND UTOPIA: Rowan Williams on church was reviewed by David Martin.
And edited extracts of the recent Fulcrum talks by Tom Wright and Jane Williams were printed. Full versions still available here
6 CommentsLast weekend, Trinity Sunday, Geoffrey Rowell wrote for The Times
Divine love may prosper in our daily chores
During the week, AKM Adam, who teaches at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary near Chicago, wrote this:
Truth, Error, and Varieties of Dissent
Subtitled Is it even possible to err, theologically? How would we know?, it has provoked interesting comments, both on his own blog and at titusonenine
Some earlier posts by AKMA on current Anglican disputes are also of interest:
Things To Come and a follow-up Still Working On It
More recently, Power and Powerlessness of Stories
In another vein completely, Jonny Baker recently wrote is it possible to get a church of england diocese to change? which discusses change in the Diocese of Lichfield.
0 CommentsLast week there was a major feature on FD Maurice ‘He was an inspiration for social witness’ by Jeremy Morris.
There was also this substantial extract from Mary:Grace and hope in Christ and this article Why there’s nothing to fear about Mary by Nicholas Sagovsky. (He also wrote that week on the same topic in the Tablet).
The previous week, there was a major article by Nicholas Holtam Vicar of St Martin-in-the-Fields, London about his parish church: Looking beyond the church. (This was an edited extract from this year’s Eric Abbott memorial lecture.)
Another feature that week concerned the cleaning of St Paul’s Cathedral: St Paul’s — how clean is this house?
0 CommentsThis weekend, there is no shortage of columns expressing Anglican views on the recently published ARCIC statement:
Peter Carnley preached this sermon in Seattle at the launch of the statement
Harriet Harris, chaplain of Wadham College, Oxford wrote this analysis in the Church of England Newspaper
Nicholas Sagovsky, Canon of Westminster, and commission member wrote this article in the Tablet
And the Church Times opinion was expressed in this leader
From the Roman Catholic side:
John Allen of the National Catholic Reporter interviewed Archbishop Brunett
Sarah Jane Boss of the University of Wales, Lampeter, wrote this article in the Tablet
And the editorial opinion of the Tablet is here
Christopher Howse in the Telegraph writes about Corpus Christi processions in England in Stepping on sweet herbs.
Roderick Strange writes about Pentecost in Fire of the spirit enlivens and forges bonds. Also in The Times Nick Wyke writes about Christian Aid Week in The collectors who believe in life before death.
Obituaries of Hugh Montefiore are in all the newspapers:
The Times
Telegraph
Guardian
Elsewhere, this lengthy (40 page)article, A Personal View of Anglican Uniatism, available only as PDF file, by Aidan Nichols, has attracted some attention.
Mark Harris has written for the Witness about moratoria, in Roses among the Thorns: The African Anglican Bishops’ Communiqué.
1 CommentChristopher Howse reviews a book by Rowan Williams: A life story to die for. The title of the book is Why Study the Past?
Jane Williams gave a presentation to the Fulcrum conference, and the full text is available: The Holy Spirit in the World. The CEN wrote about it Fulcrum hears plea for unity:
A passionate plea for Christian unity against the background of the crisis in the Anglican Communion, was made by the Archbishop of Canterbury’s wife, Jane Williams, at an evangelical conference last weekend…
The other speaker at the conference was Tom Wright whose presentation is also online: The Holy Spirit in the Church.
In The Times there is an article by Gordon Urquhart All aboard the lean, clean, missionary machine which discusses the relationship of the new pope to movements such as Opus Dei and the Neocatechumenate.
Pope Benedict is one of the staunchest supporters of the so-called “new movements”, the fundamentalist, traditionalist groups which began in southern Europe and grew exponentially in the second half of the 20th century, particularly during the reign of John Paul II — Opus Dei, Focolare, Communion and Liberation (CL), the Neocatechumenate (NC), Charismatic Renewal and others…
A column published earlier by two William Temple experts Alan Suggate and Wendy Dackson on the Via Media Dallas website: A Letter to Archbishop Rowan Williams.
And, Sarah Dylan Breuer’s notes of Diocesan Convention: Roger Ferlo’s first keynote and Roger Ferlo: second keynote:
0 CommentsThe official topic of this talk is “The Authority of Scripture”, but the unofficial title of this talk is “The Bible: Who knows what it means?” Who has the authority to interpret scripture, and who holds interpreters accountable? And why does it matter so much? What makes this text different from all other texts, that we spend so much time pondering questions like, “who knows what it means?” Who cares what it means, and why?
One of the most interesting factors in the current General Election campaign is the way that the polls have barely moved over the weeks since Parliament was dissolved. It may still be that the result on Thursday will prove them inaccurate (electors often tell pollsters how they would vote in an ideal world rather than one in which their own self-interest is at stake) but it does suggest that most of us have not changed our intentions as a result of the campaign.
Actually, I think that is a good thing. The search for and promotion of political policies is not something that should be compressed into a few frenetic weeks. It goes on all the time as parties evolve their strategies and commitments and try them out on the public. There have been no major surprises in the manifestos, and the arguments for and against specific ideas have been well rehearsed with us in advance. The campaign itself, and thank God it’s much shorter in the UK than in many countries, acts primarily as a check and balance. It ensures that the parties don’t pull any rabbits out of the hat. The last thing democracy wants is for some issue to emerge at a late stage. It isn’t good for short term impact to affect long term decisions about who should govern us. We saw that in Spain not long ago, when a terrorist attack was planned to gain the most influence in the late stages of an election, and it wasn’t a positive experience.
What the campaign has done is to focus us on the broad thrust of the main parties involved. Rather in the manner of our Victorian antecedents, who used to depict virtues in human form in the stained glass windows of our parish churches, I’ve increasingly begun to see each of the campaigns as a personality in its own right.
The Conservative campaign is the “bloke in the pub”. He’s a familiar figure, always ready to reduce complex arguments down to populist sentiment. He likes to imagine that we must all be thinking the same as he, because it really is quite self-evident. Labour reminds me of a certain type of local official. You can find him in the spheres of education, social services, benefits, health or other “caring” professions. Convinced that he knows better than we what’s best for us, he is prepared to offer or hold back information just as much as it suits his case. And he’s unable to extricate himself from targets – even when they are riddled with perverse incentives. The LibDem entity is by contrast a clean shaven, earnest evangelist (beards and sandals have moved over to the Greens these days). He offers something plausible, superficially appealing, and which clearly makes sense to him. But it leaves his hearers unconvinced that it would all work out so well in practice. In my own constituency the only other contestant is UKIP. I’m still trying to decide whether this personality is the Conservative one’s slightly loopy best mate or the same chap himself when he’s had a few more drinks and is prepared to tell us what he REALLY believes. (There’s a separate debate to be had as to why all the personalities are quite definitely male.)
The point of those caricatures, which I hope you will excuse as the nearest a person who can’t draw can get to a cartoon, is that all three of the main campaigns have their value. But all three remain significantly flawed. And that is exactly as it should be. We should be suspicious of any political organisation that seems too perfect. And we should expect to be governed by people and institutions no less imperfect than ourselves. The choice between the bloke, the official and the evangelist is a real one. And in some ways it’s a deeper choice than between the particular policies and arguments which have so signally and so properly failed to shift our intentions over these last few weeks.
1 CommentTwo bishops write in today’s newspapers:
Geoffrey Rowell on Age of Benedict must be one of Christian unity
The election of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI predictably provoked anxious comment in the Western media because of his role as a defender of orthodoxy. Was he not someone who had said that non-Roman Catholic churches were not churches in the fullest sense? Yet in a fascinating conversation I had with him some three years ago he said that an ecclesial community, because it is ecclesial, must have the marks of the Church, and that Anglicans had them in a very deep way. Faced with the challenge of secularism in Europe, Christians needed each other for the work of mission: “No one of us can do it alone.” In answer to my question about how he understood the celebration of the Eucharist in churches — ecclesial communities — whose orders the Catholic Church did not recognise as valid, he replied that in such celebrations there was indeed a true feeding on Christ, and therefore there was a real and transforming grace.
I remembered that warm conversation when I studied the new Pope’s first message at the end of the conclave. He spoke of the grace of Christ in the Eucharist as that which must sustain and transform. He spoke of his own “primary commitment” and “compelling duty” to work towards “the full and visible unity of all Christ’s followers”. Expressions of good feelings, he said, are not enough; concrete gestures are required, and above all “ that interior conversion which is the basis for all progress on the road of ecumenism”. All are summoned to a purification of memory to receive the full truth of Christ, whose searching judgment at the end will ask of us “what we did and what we did not do for the great good that is the full and visible unity of all His disciples.”
Kenneth Stevenson An Anglican dispatch to Rome
But just how far is Pope Benedict XVI likely to go in the wider cause of Christian unity, or indeed to build some bridges (the meaning of the word pontiff) in his own church, which, under the surface, seems as much in need of its own ecumenical movement as the Anglican communion?
My litmus test comes from some of the advice given by one of his predecessors, Pope Gregory the Great, to an earlier archbishop of Canterbury. In AD597, Augustine arrived at Canterbury from Rome with a mandate to heal the wounds of Christianity, at the time divided between Celtic, Old Roman and Frankish, and to evangelise the recently arrived Anglo-Saxons. Gregory advised him to take a moderate line with the different Christian groups, provided they worked together and accepted his authority.
But his advice about what to do with pagan temples was even more intriguing: do not knock them down, just destroy the idols inside them, and replace them with Christian symbols.
I have frequently thought about those words, as they seem to me to have a wider application. When Christianity meets new terrain, as it has done before and will do again, it needs to enter the constructs and mind-sets of the people concerned – and not destroy them. But then comes the more tricky process of ensuring that the old idols inside are replaced by Christian truth.
Of course, analogies break down. But I cannot help thinking that the new pope’s track record, the result of his early formation, is based on a profound mistrust of new ideologies.
Yes, consumerism and relativism can run riot and become their own kinds of dictatorships. But they are themselves only the demerits of what could be deeper merits – that faith has to be appropriated (not just given), and that 20th-century European history has so many deep scars that many people find it hard, if not impossible, to trust any kind of authority, which has to be at least partly won and not simply assumed.
Controversial German theologian Uta Ranke-Heinemann explains why she’s glad that her former classmate has been made pope. Read this interview with her: A Humble Intellect (hat tip Andrew).
Martin Marty Considering Pope Benedict XVI
And here is A Mennonite look at the Holy See
Christopher Howse writes about a long-dead cardinal in Cardinal home from the Hill
0 CommentsThis weekend Rowan Williams visits Rome again, this time for the inauguration of the new pope. Earlier reports were incorrect, and he is in fact the second modern archbishop to attend such an event. The first was Donald Coggan in 1978.
Meanwhile, some more commentary on the new pope from British newspapers this week:
In the Guardian:
Stephen Bates Back to the future with Joseph Ratzinger
Andrew Brown The last pope from Europe
Julian Baggini Grey matters
Mark Lawson Holier than thou
In The Times:
Stephen Plant Prophecies and the challenges that follow
…Yet, writing in 1995, that modern-day Cassandra, the liberal historian Felipe Fernández-Armesto, already foresaw Benedict’s election (or that of someone very like him) and with it the challenge he must now take up: “The effect (of Christian fundamentalism) will be mitigated if the Catholic Church — the world’s biggest and most widespread communion — keeps up what may become a unique commitment to moral absolutism in defence of human dignity, individual freedom, social justice and the sanctity of life. Yet the tempters who are always cajoling the Pope to compromise will probably triumph — not when the present pontiff dies, because the long life in office of John Paul II has strengthened the moral fibre of the cardinalate, but in the next pontificate after that.”
The first part of Fernández-Armesto’s prophecy is likely to be unpopular with anyone who cannot tell the difference between intolerance and the steadfast defence of absolute truth, or who are liable to mistake moral and theological precision for the ruthless maintenance of tradition. In this camp is pretty much everyone, Catholic and Protestant, agnostic and atheist, who thinks that the Vatican’s consistent anti-modernism is a terrible hindrance to human progress. But the second part of Fernández-Armesto’s prophecy will upset those who believe that because the Church has resisted modernity in the past it can go on doing so in the future…
Daniel Johnson The best man for the job
As usual, the BBC got the story all wrong. The task for the new Pope is not to take sides between liberals and conservatives. Nor was that the choice the cardinals faced in this extraordinarily rapid conclave. All cardinals are, by definition, conservative.
No, the great issue for Pope Benedict XVI is the one that he set out in his remarkable sermon at the preconclave Mass in St Peter’s. Does he wish to lead the Church down the primrose path of secularism, following the Christian heartlands of Europe in their descent into moral relativism, or does he intend to turn towards the new missionary Church of Latin America, Africa and Asia, to reaffirm the faith of Christ, the faith of St Peter, the faith of John Paul II? That is the real choice.
What the fight against communism was for John Paul II, the fight against rampant secularism will be for Benedict XVI. And all those anti-papist commentators who protested at the attention given to John Paul II’s illness, death and funeral will be gnashing their teeth once battle commences.
…Pope Ratzinger will be even more controversial than his predecessor. He began life under the Weimar Republic, which collapsed because it took moral relativism to extremes and succumbed to the secular ideologies of Left and Right.
…Where I do expect movement during the Ratzinger pontificate is on ecumenical relations with the Orthodox and perhaps also Protestant churches. The last Pope opened up this Pandora’s box, bringing several of the smaller Eastern churches back into the Catholic fold. If the battle against the intolerance of secularism is to be won, Benedict XVI will have to find a way of reaching out to his fellow Christians to make common cause…
Richard Owen Myths, challenges and censure: Pope Benedict XVI gets to work
…Setting out his vision for his papacy as he celebrated his first Mass as pontiff in the Sistine Chapel, Pope Benedict told the cardinals who elected him on Tuesday that he would reach out to other religions such as Islam — provided that there was “reciprocity” — and continue to implement the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
In gold and white vestments, seated before Michelangelo’s Last Judgment and speaking in Latin, the man who once dismissed other Christian churches as improper said that his primary task was to work to reunify all Christians and that sentiment alone was not enough.
“Concrete acts that enter souls and move consciences are needed,” he said. He wanted “an open and sincere dialogue” with other religions and would do everything to promote the ecumenical cause, a reference not only to Anglicans but also to Orthodox Christians…
In the Telegraph:
Charles Moore Pope Benedict has a sense of history
Christopher Howse The Pope and Luther agree
In the Independent:
Catherine Pepinster A German Pope chosen to save Europe
Newspapers writing about the Pope:
Leader in the Guardian Pole of Poles
Leader in The Times Power of faith
Leader in the Telegraph Christianity in a Godless age
Christopher Howse The Victorian way of death
Jonathan Sacks John Paul’s blow against a virus of the soul
The Tablet has an article by the Italian commentator Marco Politi
A man ill at ease in his own century
More Tablet articles here
In The Times Bishop Basil of Sergievo writes the Credo column: His presence in Man can make gods of us all.
Richard Chartres writes in the Guardian about Bonhoeffer: a martyr for our collective soul.
Two views on the Pope: in the Independent Catherine Pepinster editor of the Tablet asks Do we really need this spectacle of the dying? and in the Telegraph Christopher Howse has Warm embrace for Sister Death.
The Guardian also has Colin Morris on Jerry Springer – the Opera in Jerry’s last judgment.
Another Times column discusses the forthcoming memorial service for Gypsies: Shunned victims of the ‘forgotten Holocaust’.
Keith Ward writes in the Tablet about Resurrection and Science in The quantum leap.
The Church Times editorial this week reminds us about Jim Callaghan’s gift to the Church of England, but last week’s Easter leader. should also not be missed.
1 CommentTwo columns from Saturday’s The Times
Geoffrey Rowell on Story which transforms both living and dying
…The Christian Church dares to proclaim that here, in this life and this death, we encounter God, the source and the sustainer of all life and being, emptying Himself, coming down to the lowest part of our need. Today, Holy Saturday, is the most paradoxical day of the Christian year, a day when indeed God is dead. In love He chooses freely to know our dying, and Christian devotion and imagination speak of Christ descending to the place of the departed, shattering the imprisoning gates and chains and bars of Hades. Tomorrow, Easter Day, the nothingness of today explodes into a fullness of life, which is a new creation, blowing history open. The horizon of our human life is no longer death, but risen life in Christ.
This is the overarching story, “the one story only which will prove worth your telling”; for it is the story of the God who made us, and loved us, and in thirsting love has re-made us. Easter is indeed about the resurrection of Christ — which is neither a descent from or denial of the cross, nor a resurrection of relics, but a new creation, a transfiguration of human life and history. Easter touches us with eternal life, and the Lord who breathes on His disciples on the first Easter evening, is the Lord who is still the Lord and Giver of life, making of His Church an Easter people. This indeed is a love and a life which will never let us down and will never let us go, an overarching story which transforms both our living and our dying. “Christ is risen and the demons” — the dark, imprisoning powers of every kind — “are indeed fallen!”
Richard Harries on From cold, rolled stone to blood-streaked man
…The Christian West gradually lost its earlier reluctance to depict Jesus rising from the tomb. And there have been some very remarkable depictions, not least Piero della Francesca’s mural in the town museum in Sansepolcro. Aldous Huxley described it, without qualification, as “the best picture in the world”. For him it expressed the humanist ideal. He saw in the Christ figure, with its beautiful, muscled body, like a Greek athlete, a Resurrection of classical reality. More haunting than this is the resurrected Christ by Bramantino, now in Madrid. This Christ, still partially swathed in his white winding sheet and bathed in moonlight, has an unearthly pallor, except for the wounds and eyes, bloodshot with tears, staring directly at the viewer. This is a Christ that still bears the marks of death. By contrast, as Huxley observed, Piero’s Christ looks all set to live a fully human life on the human stage.
Not surprisingly, perhaps, 20th-century Christian art was dominated by depictions of Christ tortured on the cross. There is of course the sheer difficulty of depicting the resurrected Christ in a way that is not crass and literalistic. No less significant is our scepticism about any suggestion of a happy ending. Iris Murdoch once wrote that “all that consoles is fake” summing up the attitude of a culture soaked in Freud. Some of the most successful depictions focus on the relationship of the risen Christ with one of His followers, as in Graham Sutherland’s Noli Me Tangere in Chichester Cathedral. Equally good is the supper at Emmaus by Ceri Richards, above the altar at St Edmund Hall in Oxford. It is a fine picture, and avoids over-literalism by having Christ at the table against the background of a great cross of yellow light, emerging from it but not fully tangible. One of the disciples looks startled, the other slow and sceptical…
The Guardian on Saturday had Geza Vermes give his view of the passion chronology in Death in the afternoon.
In the Telegraph Christopher Howse had Embracing in a watery grave.
Paul Handley wrote in the Independent about The Christian gift is to convert despair into humour
1 Comment…The oddness of today takes on a greater significance if we adopt the argument of those who say that, in essence, we live permanently in Holy Saturday. We are sinful, and yet saved; saved, yet sinful. The act that rescued us from evil has taken place, and yet evil persists, and we are caught up in it. On a spiritual level (whatever that is), we must confront our complicity in the murder of Christ. The biblical record suggests that Jesus allowed himself to hope that death was not inevitable. After all, a palm-waving crowd had cheered him into Jerusalem when he arrived to confront the religious authorities. We have seen plenty of examples from Eastern Europe in recent months of the power that can be wielded by an unarmed opposition leader if he has the active support of the masses. But, although the orange-waving crowds took courage from each other, the decision to camp out in a draughty square had to be taken by each frightened individual. And this is us. We are not, as a rule, the psychopaths who bang in the nails; we are members of the crowd of followers who stand around and watch the tragedy unfold.
Our sins aren’t even bold, or Faustian. We are simply the ones who melt away; who, when Jesus is taken, suddenly find other things that need our attention. Freedom Square, the Martyrs’ Square are empty, when all that was needed to turn tragedy to triumph was our presence.
Living in Holy Saturday is to live with this raw knowledge of ourselves. We work hard, partly to distract ourselves, partly because we feel the need to atone. And yet, as we work, a miracle is happening, has happened (tenses have little meaning here). The more we know ourselves, the more we know ourselves to be forgiven. The Christian gift is this: to turn despair into humour. In classical theatre, the technical definition of a tragedy is a drama in which the hero dies. If he doesn’t, then it’s a comedy. Because the resurrection has happened/will happen, we are living in a unique, divine comedy. Instead of being depressed about our failings, we are invited to see them as absurd, comic; and to laugh at ourselves is to accept forgiveness…
