Monday, 28 February 2011

One for the Fans

Untitled

Not quite so cruel this time – I’ve even included a hint! The six pink boxes in the upper right corner of the grid, reading from the left and then turning down, spell out the inspiration for this one in an appropriately non-linear way…

And yes, the numbering is correct.

Across

1 Carry odd empty pot to tomb (5)
2, 14, 26-across One who takes along the fish designed to reach the stars?! (5,2, 5)
4 See 25-down
5 One that did not return, one that did, top chap, honest (5)
7 For some respect I've found a new angle on things (11)
11 Model sparred a round without red herring (5)
13 Speak cattily about me or Green (6)
14 See 2-across
17 Half of what Tom said to the setter (2)
18 To knock around with Jo and Uncle Noel (6)
19 Dense sound (5)
21 Drunk pig rattles harpy in stonework (11)
23 Lone wolf to take lad in?! (5)
24 His rector would settle for his singing! (9)
26 See 2-across
27 Angel, the psychic, has gout and amputates (5)

Down

1 Pin one out of pride - that's a thought! (7)
3 A multi-level home that sounds like you'd never feel comfortable? (5, 2, 6)
6 Roommate ships out for a complete change (13)
8 To go out and about - may return without a measure of material in regular pattern (13)
9 Got half a dozen points right for inspector (6)
10 Print club hurt (7)
12 Salesman covers area of cold-blooded types... (8)
15 …receives setback to his goal at first, instead offering new season patterns (13)

16 Set off boredom in unearthly fashion? (8)
20 The first rat already ate every layer (6)
21 Set off boredom in unearthly fashion? (8)
22 Make a mockery of medicine - or unhappy ending (7)
25, 4-across Eagle reports inns in disarray, impossible shapes designed 8-down (7, 9)

Tuesday, 15 February 2011

A Diversion

How might one profitably spend a day off? I don’t know, but this certainly was fun…

image

* I should probably mention that there is a theme, and that the theme affects how 15 of the grid entries appear. Not 16, though it could have been. And not 15 of the answers, because some answers are split on the grid.

Across

5 The underhanded action that strained trans‐Tasman relations rose, perhaps? (4)
7 Before rink widened alarmingly, 10‐down played there (2, 4, 6)
9 Sit around all weekend and sketch (4)
11, 26‐down In the manner of 4‐down, how to share a pair of model vases taken to a fight (4, 3, 4, 5)
12, 10‐down Actor from Casino influenced by 31‐across, perhaps (4, 5)
14 Live with decent Cage film (2, 3)
15 13‐down on trial, done for speed (8)
17 Near purchase 14‐across (2)
18 Can Orient Express carry this luggage ‐ it could go either way! (9)
20 A two‐way street leads to house, for example (2)
23 See 21‐down
25 Consider 32‐across upset about nothing (5)
26 Songwriter for Valli's group didn't use 5/4 as an outlet (4)
28 At the Beginning, God was eons creating, with this the likely result! (2, 4, 2, 3)
29 The note says what to do in a lifeboat (4)
31 Accurate from the start?! (5, 2, 5)
32 Great Dane had to go for a walk on the beach, or go 21‐down! (4)

 

Down

1 Take a stick to put down insurrection, and you'll end up with a shambles (8)
2 Father hangs around mixed pairs with kin, then takes off with ground pepper (7)
3 False attitude to entail getting into team (5)
4 Reflecting the sense of 16‐down, appropriately (9)
5 A group usually represented by its elders, so not about to take direction! (1, 1, 1)
6 9‐across a brilliant vehicle to turn into an art form (5)
8 All over with principal Oz dog found in capital after tipoff (4, 4, 2, 3)
10 See 12‐across
12 Positive hamburger is available in jail (2)
13 Come aboard yacht at the outset to reach the isle (3)
16 Now take the theme! (9)
19 Averse to a drawback?! (8)
20 The inspiration for first Beatles' hit, some say (1, 1, 1)
21, 23‐across A place to shelter from the storm, when muffled thunder on several sides surrounds the street (5, 3, 5)
22 Material used in shipping 18‐acrosses comprised of brown, unfinished paper (7)
24 Reported for intra‐venous drug use (2)
26 See 11‐across
27 Influenced by the vibe of the king's choice of footwear... (5)
30 … I met cobbler at his store (3)

Saturday, 25 December 2010

Season’s Greetings: Fit For a King

A sermon based on Matthew 2:1-12

image

According to legend, Theseus was the son of the King of Athens, who volunteered himself as a human sacrifice. Every nine years, the city of Athens was forced to send a tribute of seven men and seven women to be given as food to the Minotaur of Crete, a horrible monster, half-man, half-bull. Each decade, the flower of the youth of Athens was lost, and Theseus was determined to make an end to the Minotaur.

Through courage, inventiveness, and his spunky good looks, Theseus won the heart of Cretan princess Ariadne, and won victory over the creature. When his ship returned home, there was understandably great rejoicing in Athens, for they were free of their terrible burden.

They commemorated Theseus’ victory by preserving the ship he sailed in – for centuries, according to the ancient historian Plutarch. Over the years, however, the ship began to rot away – so as each plank grew unsound, the Athenians would replace it with a fresh one.

But this was Athens, the city of the philosophers, and it wasn’t long before someone wondered: if every plank of the ship had been replaced, was it still the Ship of Theseus? Or was it a new ship altogether?

The Ship of Theseus is one of the world’s oldest paradoxes. There are books written about different opinions on the matter. In the end, though, it’s fairly academic. It was only a boat.

But tonight we remember another paradox, of similar antiquity, but much greater significance. It’s the paradox of one king holding court from a feeding trough, while another king is caught with his nose in it. It’s the paradox of the first Season’s Greetings being offered by dumb animals. It is, as we saw, the paradox of Christmas.

There is much about the first Christmas that appears to make no sense – either to us, or to those who were there to witness it. And tonight, as well as tomorrow morning, we’re going to explore the paradox by seeing how different people reacted to the news – what kind of greeting they offered the season of the Christ’s birth.

We’ll start with the wise men. We sometimes sing about them as three kings, although the Bible never calls them that. It’s ironic, because what we are told is that they have come to worship a king. They’re foreigners, from somewhere in the East, which makes their visit an unusual occurrence. Dropping in on your enemies – well, that’s what neighbouring countries always were by default in those days – dropping in on your enemies to wish their new king well…it’s pretty remarkable.

You’d have to think it’s safe to assume that these guys didn’t travel the world offering gift packs to every royal heir who was born. They’ve come to see this one, this one especially. That’s what they call him – ‘the one’, the one who has been born king of the Jews.

These guys have worked out that this one matters. And because he matters, they want to treat him that way. They’ve come to worship him, to recognise his worth, his importance. It’s just what you’d expect the appropriate greeting to be if the king of the world had been born. Their actions are fit for a king.

What’s more, there’s a joke that Matthew’s included at Herod’s expense. When the wise men turn up looking for directions, Herod’s research unit finally provides the answer by quoting the prophet Micah, specifically the second verse of chapter 5. If they’d mentioned the third or fourth verse, they’d have read out Micah’s prediction that the arrival of Israel’s promised king would be marked by … you guessed it … the arrival of people from outside Israel to acknowledge him.

And if they’d read the first verse, there’s one more indicator: that the current king of Israel would be the recipient of a slap on the cheek.

Well, there’s an excuse to see how Herod takes the news. ‘Disturbed’ is the word that Matthew used to describe his reaction. He’s a bit churned up over it. He needs to know more, so he calls his crack team of researchers together. And this, in itself, is an indictment of King Herod. The core responsibility of a Jewish king was supposed to be that he would know his Bible well, so that he could his people in obedient lives that honoured God. Herod should have had no difficulty in finding the words from Micah himself. Indeed, given how violent his reaction is, you’d have to suspect that if he’d ever read Micah before, he’d have noticed this passage and taken preventative measures.

But instead, he’s taken completely unawares – and we all know what it’s like when that happens. We call it being caught off guard, because it’s the time when you don’t guard your response. Just the opposite, you end up reacting purely on instinct, responding how you feel. Like, for example, if someone gave me a terribly ugly necktie just before the service tonight, when I wasn’t expecting a present, and then asked me straight out whether I like it. What do you do? I’ve got no prepared answer; I don’t have the luxury of sending a thankyou note where after three hours of racking my brains, I’ve been able to thank them for the tie because it matches my Hawaiian shirts. So you end up saying the first thing that comes into your head: oh my goodness, that’s awful!

Herod’s caught just like this, and his response shows his true character. He doesn’t manage the fitting response; instead, he has a little hissy fit of his own.

But here’s the thing that I noticed; yes, it’s appalling that he orders the massacre of Bethlehem’s sons to protect his throne; yes, he’s a lowlife with little imagination for trying to trick the wise men into leading him straight to Jesus; but the thing that really gets me is that he calls them secretly to find out when Jesus was born. Secretly. He doesn’t want anyone to know that his murderous orders have a reason behind them. He’d rather that they just think him bonkers.

Herod’s beyond the pale, really – he’s so far from any of us (I hope!) that we don’t pay much attention to him. He’s the nut job that you read about to feel better about yourself.

But there’s one more group in the story that we haven’t looked at. Matthew tells us that when the Magi arrived with their questions, Herod was disturbed… and, he adds, all Jerusalem with him.

The whole city heard the news. We often think of Jesus’ arrival as coming in pretty much under the radar. Small town, hidden in somebody’s backyard, only a few shepherds to spread the story. But here’s evidence that the story broke widely. The whole city of Jerusalem got wind of Jesus’ birth, and so then they…

What?

Matthew doesn’t say. But I’m guessing that the answer is they did nothing.

They kept their heads down and got on with their lives. It’s a pretty common response, I think. You know, you steer between the two extremes…those wise men, well, they’re like stalkers, aren’t they? Tracking down an infant to present him with wildly inappropriate gifts, hanging around for photos with the family…it’s all just a bit too intense…sure, it shows they’re committed, but maybe they should be committed. And on the other hand, there’s the off-the-scale opposition of King Herod. He’s not just disturbed by the news of the Christ child, he’s disturbed, period. Off his rocker.

It’s not hard to see why many are attracted to a safer middle course. Yes, we pay our respects to Jesus, but from a distance. You don’t want to get too close. What kind of welcome do we give him? No cheers and whistles, no booing either, just a polite round of applause, not too loud or too long.

But think back to the story of Theseus again. He was the son of the King, accustomed to a life of privilege and comfort. But he gave that up to stand with his people. He was prepared to sacrifice his own life, if necessary, to free his people from their bondage, to save them from repeating the same deadly sacrifice time after time. Stripped of his royal power, he took on their monstrous enemy and defeated him with his bare hands.

It’s not too far from describing what Jesus did, in taking on human flesh, being born amongst us, taking up the battle against the forces of sin and death, and beating them, that we might no longer fear death.

When Theseus returned to Athens, he became king in his father’s place. The people honoured him then, and continued to do so throughout their history. He was their saviour king, and his people loved him.

How then should we greet the birth of our saviour? We may not have seen any star in the sky, but we know him to be the star of the story. We might never get named as wise men, but we know what is wise to do. Like them, we have come tonight to worship him. Perhaps, like them, we should make a careful search for the child. For our true king has come to us, and calls us to come to him.

Thursday, 16 September 2010

It’s a Bit Quiet Around Here…

image

I’ve been planning my version of 2011, and noticed a happy conjunction of dates.

Easter occupies the last Sunday in April. Not particularly good for those looking for a holiday after term 1, but there you are.

Mothers Day, as usual, is the second Sunday in May. I’m going to persevere with making this work for inviting mums.

That leaves us with the first Sunday in May sitting at something of a loose end. How fortunate, then, that Sunday 1st of May is the day before the 400th anniversary of the publication of the KJV. I’m planning to do a sermon on something to do with the doctrine of scripture – likely its perspicuity and our wealth of opportunity to read it! ‘The Ploughman’s Son’ is the title, referencing Mr Tyndale above.

(And it makes for some kind of link to ‘The Noble Wife’ the following week, where I think Marguerite of Navarre will be my worked example of Proverbs 31. Hopefully that will save me from cliché!)

 

There was lots of noise for Calvin last year – but I’m not hearing so much about 2011…

Friday, 10 September 2010

Defining Evangelicalism

It was asked, and a cut and paste was fairly easy.

My final year project at college examined the evangelical movement in post-WW2 English Anglicanism. I was attempting to assess whether things ‘went wrong’ and if so, how far; hence, a necessary step was to have a go at defining evangelicalism. I’ve never had a problem with self-confidence, and so after surveying all and sundry’s efforts, decided to come up with my own answer. I’m still quite happy with it, and it was really the only thing the marker liked in the whole project, so…

 

‘From the survey above, it is apparent that a blended approach is best, one that recognises that a definition of evangelicalism must incorporate both methodology and history in its essential features. Even given this, however, it is worth considering what controls the selection of components. The temptation to give this role to the priority of Scripture is strong, but at the very place where Stott might convince one of this, he goes deeper: ‘The hallmark of evangelicals is […] a submissive spirit, namely their a priori resolve to believe and obey whatever the Scripture may be shown to teach. They are committed to Scripture in advance, whatever it may be later found to say. […] They see this humble and obedient stance as an essential implication of Christ’s lordship over them.’[1] Beyond the commitment to Scripture is a recognition of divine sovereignty. Peter Jensen has described this as the key to a sharp definition of evangelicalism.[2] What is common to most of the attempts at definition already mentioned is their foundation in the sovereignty of God. This is literally the quintessence of Bebbington’s quadrilateral. To be even more precise, it is the sovereignty of God in the gospel: biblicism reflects God’s sovereignty in the revelation of the gospel, crucicentrism his sovereignty in its focus, and conversionism and activism in humanity’s response to the gospel. Similarly, Stott’s commitment to Bible and gospel – both tied to divine sovereignty – leads him to the Nottingham theme of obedience to Christ.[3]

Thus, if we accept that being evangelical means holding a Christian faith that responds to God’s sovereignty in the gospel, one more advantage is apparent. As the antithesis of sin, it is clear that nobody can hope to be perfectly evangelical; there must be a grey area that gives ‘room to move […] without resorting to disenfranchising one another.’[4] Evangelicals of different generations can be recognised as such, despite their different emphases, because these emphases consistently arose from their recognition of God’s authority. Different lists of evangelical essentials can be drawn up, as long as they emanate from this central point. Treating God’s sovereignty as it particularly relates to the gospel generates the evangelical method of the primacy of Scripture. And finally, the value of evangelical tradition can be weighed from this same perspective. Accordingly, the standing of the evangelical movement in the Church of England can be measured in terms of its faithfulness to this fundamental conviction.’

[The reference to Nottingham is to a gathering of evangelical Anglicans that’s usually thought to mark the point at which they strayed. I’d argue that they continued down a path already begun.]


[1] Stott, Essentials, 104.

[2] Peter F. Jensen, unpublished address, given at the 75th Anniversary Celebration of the Sydney University Evangelical Union, 8/10/05.

[3] Stott, What is an Evangelical?, 14.

[4] Thompson, ‘Saving the Heart’, The Briefing 151: 4.

 

So, that’s what I meant by a high view of God’s sovereignty. I think it’s what shapes who we are.

Thursday, 9 September 2010

New Horizons in Local Church Theology

St Peters Vertical LOGO

Sounds like an impressive book title. But no, I’m just working on next year’s preaching plans.

 

 

However, the new horizon bit is true. Our church has, in the space of the last couple of years, suddenly achieved a whole bunch of major goals that they’ve been working on for years. We now have a ‘rectory-standard dwelling’ next to the church (for us to live in, and it’s lovely), and come November, we’ll be made a ‘provisional parish’ (no longer a branch church of our neighbours up the road at Gerringong). 

In other words, in the living memory of some of our members, St Peter’s has grown from a half-dozen old ladies sitting up the back to a decent-sized church with a couple of congregations, and enough resources (people, time, money, property etc) to stand on our own two feet, metaphorically speaking.

It’s been a long time coming…and so now there’s a bit of ‘now what?’ floating around. All ambitions have been achieved. The last thing we want to do is sit back and cruise – this town is enough of a retirement village already!

 

So…it’s time to start looking for a new horizon – new things to aim at, under God. And I’m thinking that a decent chunk of a preaching program would be a good thing to get that ball rolling.

Here’s what I’ve come up with, thus far, in a very very draft sense. Comments welcome.

Being

9 weeks, 3 lots of 3

Weeks 1-3: Church

1. Who is the church? Where is the church?

2. What is the church for? Why is the church?

3. When is the church? How is the church?

(OK, so the grammar is a bit stilted, but you can get some sense of it)

Weeks 4-6: Our Church

4. An evangelical church (not just as a theological persuasion – but saying, who we are is based on the first three weeks and how the gospel shapes a church). But I’ll use the Douglas-Bebbington quintilateral to describe things: activism, biblicism, crucicentrism, conversionism, all held together by a high view of God’s sovereignty

5. A church for the Heads – ie all of our local community. We’re the only mainline church in town, so I figure I can claim it without controversy. Church should work for people of all ages/stages etc.

6. A church for all – not just our own patch, but also seeking to be for the Shoalhaven region/mission area, to be part of our diocese/local evangelical scene, and to be part of our world (ie ‘mission’)

Weeks 7-9: Us

Less developed, but basically growing out of the D-BQ (TM) – activism implies serving each other/others; crucicentrism a willingness/expectation to suffer rather than look after our futures; conversionism a personal commitment to God and his people; biblicism a love of the Word and obedience of it; sovereignty a dependence on grace expressed in prayer and more.

Friday, 27 August 2010

The Heisenberg Unpleasantness Principle

I'm doomemed. It’s Simone’s fault. Or mine, for talking too much. Somebody with so much to say is an easy victim.

So now I have to find ten things that make me happy, and in the process feel less happy about it. Frankly, I’m surprised. This is a form where you fill in your own numbers. She should have known better!

1. That God consistently deflates my ego. And doesn’t mind spending an eternity doing it.

2. Those times, once every few years, when the kids sleep through the night, and I wake up before them, having slept late. Small miracles are still miracles.

3. Thinking. I’m obsessive about it. I’m not claiming anything profound here – just that I can be having a conversation while the analytical corner of my brain is performing some kind of combinatorics exercise. Without distracting me too much.

4. Genuine time off – no chores to do, just completely discretionary time. Particularly if it’s enough to…

5. See  a movie. It needn’t be fantastic, but it’s nice to inhabit a different world for a couple of hours. But the best kind are by…

6. Alfred Hitchcock. Because he’s never boring.

7. Competing. Board games, trivia, anything that requires no genuine ability below the neck.

8. The totally novel, as in never-before-in-my-life, idea that it might be possible to increase my general fitness and wellbeing while exercising, and enjoy it. Courtesy of the new bike that I bought for Father’s/birth/Christmas/anniversary Day last week. It goes really fast. Even with me on it. And not just due to the effects of gravity when falling over.

9. Cheesy pop music. Not all of it, thankfully. But a strong keyboard, or a ballad, or Bono…and I’m a goner.

10. Reading the Bible, and finding once again something new, thereby demonstrating that God is not just cool but also eternally satisfying. And far better than Hitchcock!

 

Not too painful, then. That means I can tag people with a clear conscience. Well, the only active readers here that I’m aware of are Byron and Rach. Though I doubt Rach will be adding to that particular blog… And I’ll tag Andrew too, seeing as Simone didn’t!