Author Archives: Paul Inglis

About Paul Inglis

Paul Inglis is a long time member of the Uniting and Anglican Churches in Australia. He recently retired as the Community Minister for Dayboro and Mt Mee Uniting Churches, just north of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. He accepted an invitation to become the Queensland's first Uniting Church Community Minister and continued in that role for more than 10 years. Previously he had been a State primary school teacher, school principal for 11 years and then Lecturer in Education at the Queensland University of Technology for 25 years. He has served on UCA Assembly, Synod, Presbytery and Congregational Councils. In retirement he is actively involved in family, church, and community. His commitment to 'progressive' Christianity emerged from contact with the late Professor Rod Jensen who founded the Lay Forum in 2004 and from his experience in ministry with people seeking an authentic faith. Paul's PhD from the University of Queensland is in Adult Learning.

CHRISTMAS… AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT GIG TO CHRISTIANISE!

From Rev Rex Hunt

Christmas and Popular Culture.
I preached/gave this at a Unitarian Fellowship in Sydney last Sunday.

[Comments welcome at ‘Leave a reply’, above]

I’ll call him Merv. A young Sydney Anglican minister fighting Christmas crowds.
Looking for a special gift at one shop,
a toy another place, a card at still another.

Eventually he finds something he likes, or more importantly,
that he thinks someone else will like.

The salesperson wishes him a ‘Merry Christmas’ as she hands back his purchase and change.
Merv responds with a smile and a cheerful, “Have a materialistic Christmas.”

Apparently the saleswoman misses the sarcasm,
for she returns the smile before moving on to her next customer.

Pleased with his protest, Merv moves on, too.
Not only is he determined to avoid the frantic shopping crowds
that seem to grab everyone else in December,
he will make a statement as well.

oo0oo

The Christmas that Australians celebrate today seems like a timeless weaving of
custom and feeling beyond the reach of ordinary history.
Yet the familiar mix of cards, carols, parties, presents, tree, and Santa
that have come to define December 25 is little more than 135 years old.

In 1788 when the First Fleet arrived from England, Governor Arthur Phillip not only established a penal colony he also won the land for ‘protestant’ Christianity. (Breward 1988:2)

According to some historians Phillip saw religion as a “useful package of warnings and admonitions that supplemented the cell, chains, the lash, the gallows, or the rewards and remissions for good conduct.” (Blainey 1987:429)

Hence christianity was in the main rejected by the convicts and only slightly embraced by the free settlers in latter years. Which has led others to conclude that in Australia, Christianity has always been rather a casual affair. And at best, the nation was only ever superficially christianised.

As an event in Australian society, Christmas in the early days of the colony held little importance. Unless Christmas Day fell on a Sunday a holiday was not declared. And the day was usually celebrated with a compulsory Anglican church parade or, if punishment had to be administered to a convict, perhaps a reduction in the sentence was ordered.

It would appear that on Christmas Day in 1788 a convict was arrested for stealing and,
because it was Christmas Day, had his sentence of 200 lashes reduced to 150.
At other times, a double share of rum and rations was offered.

It wasn’t until the mid- to late- 1800s that much of what we in Australia identify as ‘Christmas’ was really celebrated.

And this came about as the result of the influence of several events, primarily in England and America, including changes in technology, the development of the ‘penny post’ system, and
at least three samplings from within popular culture:
(i) an imaginative poem written by a protestant American minister of religion for his three daughters, called ‘A Visit from St. Nicholas’;
(ii) some art sketches inspired by that poem, along with a series of commercial advertisements for an American soft drink manufacturer, and
(iii) a Christmas morality story published in England by Charles Dickens
originally called A Christmas Carol, in Prose, Being a Ghost Story of Christmas.

Much later, when Christmas did begin to influence the social and religious life of the colony,
it was mostly through secular ‘nostalgia’ rather than religious leanings.

Old customs and symbols such as the tree and presents were yearned for, and the arrival of food stuffs and other items were eagerly awaited as ships from England docked in December.
These old traditions were never totally abandoned, but aspects of the festival were ‘Australianised’ and became increasingly nationalistic. Australian Christmas Card art competitions were held, with cash prizes. The small tree, aptly named ‘Christmas Bush’,
which was growing in great abundance around Sydney, became a popular substitute for the fir (Christmas) tree.

And while American artist Thomas Nast introduced a ‘winter’ Santa Claus to the world in the 1860s, some enterprising Australian artists a few years later, gave him a cooler ‘summer’ outfit,
complete with kangaroo driven sleigh.

It was a big transition to form a southern Christmas in peoples imaginations when for so long the Christmas imagery focused on the north with mid-winter snow on a fir tree and a log fire in the grate!

Continue reading

Pre-publication extract: Starting all over again. Yes or No?

George Stuart (Singing a New Song) has kindly given us open access to his yet to be published book.

Starting all over again? Yes or No?

A faithful questioning of all I have been taught
about God, Jesus, Creation, Humanity,
Prayer, Sacrifice, Life after Death, Heaven
and the Bible.

From the Conclusion and after a far ranging practical and interesting discussion questioning eight decades of traditional church teaching:

What comes next for me?
I have taken up the challenge presented by Dr Val Webb in her recent book ‘Testing Tradition and Liberating Theology’ where she states that her aim …’is to help lay people in particular to see that there has never been only one way to think about God and that traditional arguments have often been held in place by power and authority against other more refreshing theologies. My aim is to keep people ‘doing their own theology’- finding something that works for them and is transforming in our contemporary world.’

I hope I have not betrayed her trust in regular church-goers. Unlike most regular church-goers, I have had a formal theological training and I have probably done more theological reading and solid Bible study than most others so I suppose I am not really representative of the great bulk of people who still attend church services. Even so, not being an academic theologian, a biblical scholar nor historian, I still have this urge to make a response of my continual questioning. Some of this has been very difficult for me, but Val Webb has challenged me to find my faltering, and partially-informed voice.

So how do I respond to all this ‘faithful questioning’, concerning the exercise of my discipleship? Am I virtually saying that the Bible has got it wrong about a theistic God? Am I saying the early church fathers got it wrong about Jesus? Am I saying that the church, for hundreds of years has been preaching the wrong message about the Cross and God’s Plan for Salvation? To an extent I suppose I am. Some might say that is very arrogant. I’m not sure how to respond to that accusation. All I can say is, that this is where my study, my searching and all my ‘faithful questioning’ has led me.

Sometimes I feel I am betraying the church and Jesus. Sometimes I feel I have been betrayed by the church and its teachings. I never feel betrayed by Jesus.
So what is the outcome? In many areas of my belief I perceive I have had to ‘Start all over again’. However, I believe I am now in a much more belief-satisfying and Jesus-centred situation than before.

I have tried to argue my positions logically. I have included smatterings of cosmology, psychology and natural sciences in my comments. I have spoken of my experiences as nearly determinative for me. I have tried to state issues as I have perceived them to be, from a church-goer’s perspective. I have relied on new for me, and old information. I have tried to be rational in what I have proposed. I have concentrated on what I see as common sense, plausible and reasonable for my day and age.
I also realise that if I had been brought up as a Buddhist or a Muslim or in any other faith, I would probably have a completely different set of beliefs but I hope I would still be ‘faithfully questioning’ everything. There must always be the ‘Yes. But…..’
And in my continuing questioning journey I believe that

• I must allow both logic and dreaming to have a voice.
• I must embrace both the ‘possible’ and the ‘impossible’.
• I must allow science to be heard alongside poetry.
• I must consider new information but not let it silence wisdom.
• I must not allow the past to dictate the present or the future.

All these have a contribution to make to my human response to Mystery.

Having worked through these eleven major areas of my ‘faithful questioning’, I believe that if people shared only one of these concerns, they might find it sufficient reason to turn their back on the church and leave. I believe that altogether, these concerns could form a very solid basis for very serious consideration to do just that. I could expand further on my reasons for ‘clearing out’ so much, but I wish to state that I think my present beliefs are more Jesus-based. I also wish to correct any impression I may have given, that I feel there is nothing in the Christianity I have been taught which excites or inspires me. That is not the case. There is much, and it all has to do with Love; that which is an emphasis I experience in my church affiliation today.

What keeps me in the church and continuing to struggle with it, is the story of Jesus. For me, it would be good for the church, in its doctrine, its teachings and its practised liturgies, to concentrate more on the human Jesus and less on the distinct and often distant God. I believe we would then be on much more relevant and helpful ground. So I hope I have presented alternative ways of understanding and practising the faith of my childhood, youth and following years, even though in some areas of my questioning I have had to ‘Start all over again’.

So, endless questioning. Maybe some rather pointless. Continuing reappraisal. Maybe some rather dodgy. More rejections. Maybe some rather challenging. More affirmations. Maybe some rather bold. More journeying with Jesus. Maybe most of it rather exciting but always challenging.

All together, if it helps to nurture me and you as disciples, to bring love to blossom, to spread justice and mercy, to encourage ourselves and others to live abundantly, then all of this endeavour may have been worthwhile. If not, it has all been a waste of time, both yours and mine!

Let me conclude, remembering a saying of Jesus, “I tell you this; unless you turn around and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of Heaven.” So I appeal to the little child in me and each of us.

Do you know this rhyme?

Scintillate. Scintillate. Globule vivific.
Feign would I fathom thy nature specific.
Loftily poised in the ether capacious;
Strongly resembling a gem; carbonaceous.

You may not. However, I think you may remember this one.

Twinkle. Twinkle little star.
How I wonder what you are.
Up above the world so high;
Like a diamond in the sky.

I believe both rhymes are important. ‘To scintillate’ is significant and ‘to fathom’ can certainly lead to spiritual growth. I also wish to affirm that both ‘to twinkle’ and ‘to wonder’ are profound.

Let us twinkle for ourselves, Jesus and most importantly for others around us. Let us love. You in your small corner and I in mine.

The way we live is more important than what we believe.

My warmest greetings. Grace and Peace. George.

oOo

Homily: The Older Christmas Story

THE OLDER CHRISTMAS STORY
Homily given by Terry Fitzpatrick on the first Sunday of Advent

at St Marys In Exile South Brisbane 02.12.18

Today I would like to examine the theological origins at the heart of our Christmas celebrations. And I wonder if it is time to be telling the older Christmas Story. Starting at the beginning I reflect on our Gospel today from the opening lines of John’s Gospel.
“In the beginning was wisdom…”
I deliberately used the feminine noun wisdom (Sophia) instead of masculine noun, word (Logos) in an attempt to return to the original text from which the writer of John’s gospel borrowed. It is widely understood by many biblical scholars that author of John’s gospel borrowed heavily from the wisdom literature to write the gospel. According to biblical scholar James Rendel Harris, “The origins of the prologue to John’s Gospel was probably a re-casting of a hymn in honour of Sophia, divine wisdom, echoed in the eighth chapter of Proverbs and the seventh chapter of Wisdom of Solomon.”

In understanding the older Christmas story we must get beyond even our Judaeo-Christian roots to a much bigger story.

Speaking of things in the beginning allow me to share a little story about a Steel company looking for a new beginning and a bit of a shakeup hired a new CEO. The first thing the new boss was determined to do, was to get rid of all the company slackers. On a tour of the facilities, the CEO noticed a guy leaning against a wall. The room was full of workers and he wanted to let them know that he meant business. He asked the guy, “How much money do you make a week?” A little surprised, the young man looked at him and said, “I make $400 a week. Why?”
The CEO said, Wait right here.” He walked back to his office, came back in two minutes, and handed the guy $1,600 in cash and said, “Here’s four weeks ‘pay. Now GET OUT and don’t come back.”

Feeling pretty good about himself the CEO looked around the room and asked, “Does anyone want to tell me what that goof-ball did here?” From across the room a voice said- he’s the Pizza delivery guy from Domino’s. Probably not the fresh beginning the new CEO was looking for.
Origins of Christmas.

Before I introduce you to the older story of Christmas allow me to examine our present origins of Christmas. As we approach Christmas I wonder increasingly how to make sense of it. I think I have found a way which I will share with you. I would like to acknowledge the work of Michael Morwood, theologian and educationalist, who has assisted me in my reflections. Some of you may be wondering what I am speaking about. Give me a moment to explain myself.

Christmas has come to mean the celebrations of the birth of Jesus, the incarnate one, the one from heaven, the God who becomes flesh, who comes to rescue us from our sins and for those who believe, provide a doorway/gateway back to God and for those who don’t find the doorway, an eternal life awaits in a not very pleasant place called hell.
Wow! What sort of God is that?

Do we really want to still promote that God in any shape or form? Where and when did this understanding of God arrive, and who or what does it serve?

From my wide reading I have come to see that it was a gradual emerging phenomena that came with the move from hunter-gatherer life-styles with deep connections to creation, to the rhythm and cycles of life and where the sacred resided. In order to survive and for heathy connection and understanding and preservation of the environment meant better chances of survival.

The move to agrarian, settler lifestyles, to the bigger gatherings of small villages to towns and cities meant the need for proper crowd control and the promotion of moral codes and standards for living together in close proximity. Here we witness the rise of the priestly class, middle management, between God and humankind. The sacred and divine which was once found in nature, in the rocks, rivers, and the movement of the tides and breezes, now resides in another place beyond this world which became known in the Judaeo- Christian tradition as ‘Heaven’. Over time we were told by the priests that it becomes increasingly difficult to get to this place unless certain beliefs and actions were performed and lo and behold for those who did not fulfil the prescribed requirements an eternal life of punishment and hell.

The priests developed elaborate rituals and actions which could placate this increasingly ANGRY GOD. We were informed that we were fortunate to have these go-betweens who knew how to please God and how to get people into heaven and how to avoid hell. How to bless things to make them holy and sacred. Life of this earth was only a trial to get to the ultimate prize of heaven. For in the famous Hail Queen of heaven prayer which many Catholics would have said reciting the rosary about life on this earth. We were, “poor banished children of Eve mourning and weeping in this valley of tears.” Life on earth was an exile and a trial and was not sacred in any shape or form, unless a priest made it so.

In the famous carol, ‘O Holy Night’ we hear in the opening lines, “long lay the world in sin and error pinning, till he appeared and the spirit felt its worth. A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices…”
Jesus breaks open the doors of heaven by dying on the cross for our sins. It is only now thru this action we can gain access to the sacred, and the priest accesses Jesus and pleads with him now because Jesus sits on the right hand of the Father and has special access. When the priest prays all his prayers it is, “through Christ our Lord. Amen.” And only through Christ because we are still not worthy.

Let’s examine some of the words in our popular carols if you have any doubt that this is at the theological core of our Christmas celebration.

FIRST NOEL In the last stanza of this carol
“Then let us all with one accord,
sing praises to our Heavenly Lord
that hath made heaven and Earth of nought
with his blood mankind has brought
Noel, Noel, Noel, Noel
Born is the King of Israel”
HARK THE HERALD ANGLES
“Hark the herald angles sing
Glory to the newborn King
God and sinners reconciled…”
Later on
“Born to raise the sons of earth
(not the daughters)
Born to give them second birth
Hark the herald angles sing
Glory to the new born king”
AWAY IN A MANGER
Last stanza “Bless all the dear children In thy tender care
And take us to heaven (that is where we encounter the divine not in this valley of tears, this place of exile) To live with thee there.
WE THREE KINGS (second last stanza)
“Glorious now behold him arise
King and God and Sacrifice (Jesus will pay the price, make the sacrifice so we can get into heaven) Alleluia, Alleluia Earth to heav’n replies”
THE OLDER CHRISTMAS STORY
All through our carols these small minded sentiments about the divine are central. But these narrow minded sentiments were not always central in Christianity. Throughout the ages the mystics, poets and deep thinkers have seen through this pantomime. Meister Eckhart writing in the 12th century,
” we find God in everything alike, and find God always alike in everything.”
Gregory of Nyssa writing in the 4th Century,
“When one considers the universe, can anyone be so simple- minded as not to believe that the divine is present in everything, pervading, embracing and penetrating it”

This thinking expressed by Gregory of Nyssa was more prevalent in pre-Constantinian times, but with the rise of the Constantinian church with its symbiotic relationship with State power, and becoming the moral guardian and sustainer of law and order in the empire through its reward and punishment theology, crowd control was assured.

It was not only Christianity who used this method of control through its religious class, it is found in other empires such as the rise of the Muslim empires for example the Ottoman Empire. But the mystics always broke through, we are most familiar with Rumi and Hafiz ,
“Stop acting so small, you are the universe in ecstatic motion” Rumi

We hear from Abdallah ibn Tumart writing in the 12th Century,
“Time does not enfold God
Space cannot hold God
Intelligence cannot conceive God
Imagination cannot conceive God
Absolutely nothing is like God”

These embracers of the silent world could intuit and know something beyond the world of the mind, the small critical judging mind, obsessed with whose in, whose out etc. I have spoken of in the past, where Jesus invites us beyond. To repent, to metanoia, to meta from the greek, to move above. The noia, the mind, the small judging critical mind to the bigger mind, the mind which can be truly present, Aware and Awake to this world, this amazing earth on which we live and move, this amazing body which we inhabit.

A body made up of 60 trillion cells with each cell made up of one thousand million, million, million, million atoms. Every night we replace 10 trillion cells no wonder we wake up tired in the morning. This body we inherit from a story which goes back to the beginning of the universe 13.8 billion years ago, and in particular our earth and solar system 4.5 Billion years ago when the great Super Nova imploded on itself generating the right amount of heat to create the elements we needed to produce an earth, Carbon, magnesium, potassium, Zinc, Sodium, iron…etc…

In this, Consciousness came into form, God, the word, wisdom, became flesh,,,as we heard in John’s Gospel. But much than flesh, not limited to the human, but all of life infused with the divine. Every common bush as we find in the words of Elizabeth Barret Browning,
“Earth is crammed with heaven (the sacred)
And every common bush afire with God (Consciousness)
But only they who see take off their shoes”
Or in the words of Gerard Manly Hopkins
“The universe is charged with the grandeur of God”

This is the incarnation story that the mystics, the poets and deep thinkers could see.
This is the older Christmas story we must celebrate. For Christmas is about celebrating the divine in our midst. A presence which has never left us.

A world infused with the presence of God, consciousness, the sacred, the divine. Not trapped in some heaven, where we may or may not encounter after death. Who is controlled by middle men who say what is holy and what is profane.

The universe story is our Common Story it belongs to everyone, not one culture or religion possesses it, its story we are learning about day by day, it’s unfolding, it invites wonder and awe.
In the words of the famous eco-theologian Thomas Berry” it’s the first time in human history that we have a common story”

And what a story this is. An older Christmas story which belongs to everybody.
Far more wonderful than we could ever have imagined.
I believe the mystics saw this, Jesus saw this, and hopefully many more. It’s a story that can unite us, it invites us to care for this earth which is infused with the divine.

This is EMMANUEL!
The beloved is truly with us and has never left us.

oOo

St Michaels Collins Street Melbourne calling a Minister of the Word

Our friends at St Michaels , the thinking person’s church, and the VICTAS Synod of the UCA have asked us to circulate this notice:

St Michael’s Uniting Church in Melbourne, Australia has commenced the process of Calling for the sole position of Minister of the Word. This position will be advertised within Australia and internationally to ensure the most excellent person is called.

We would appreciate if you would please distribute this email and the attached advertisement for Minister of the Word to anyone in your network you believe to be suitable and interested in this position.

St Michael’s is a vibrant, city church which has a unique Mission and Vision for the
21st Century. We are committed to an innovative and progressive theology which supports our spiritual and psychosocial wellbeing, environmental stewardship, and community outreach.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Kind regards,

Rev Alistair Macrae
Convener
Joint Nominating Committee
3rd December 2018

Applications are invited for the position of Minister of the Word St Michael’s Uniting Church Melbourne

An opportunity exists to lead and guide a receptive congregation, in a prestigious city church to its next phase of spiritual growth and development.

The congregation of St Michael’s is looking for a minister who embraces contemporary, progressive Christian theology.

St Michael’s enjoys a vibrant arts and music program which is integral to Sunday services and other scheduled events.

You must be a very well researched and inspiring preacher who understands the opportunities a well-resourced church can offer.

You need to demonstrate:

  •  Strong leadership ability and dynamic communication skills
  • Your ability to inspire, energise and facilitate growth and commitment in the congregation, the life of the Church and its missions locally and globally
  • A commitment to ongoing theological education, integrated with knowledge of other disciplines and contemporary thinking including promotion of psychological health.
  • How you have supported pastoral care initiatives, with insight into emotional and spiritual support.
  • Your experience, creativity and innovation in the development, management and evaluation of community projects.
  • Your capacity to work collaboratively with others in the Uniting Church and beyond.
  • Understanding of the dynamics of a city Church where all are accepted, and there is focus on the worth and dignity of every human being.

Applications Close February 27th 2019

For further information or to apply please contact:

Rev. Sue Withers Placements Secretary placements.secretary@victas.uca.org.au

About St Michaels:

St Michael’s is a unique church in the heart of the city. Unique for our relevant, contemporary preaching that embraces inner wellbeing as our core message.
Sunday services include a mix of traditional and modern presentations. Inspirational music is integral, and most Sunday services include guest musicians, who perform in-between readings.
St Michael’s offers a wide variety of experiences for growth and change. It is a place which affirms and encourages the best expression of who you are and who you can be, not only through the Sunday service but numerous wellbeing programs and our commitment to counselling and psychotherapy.
We believe faith, spirituality and a meaning to life are vital ingredients for our health and wellbeing and that there is a need to get hold of a more authentic religious understanding and to express it more confidently and diversely.
Sunday services commence at 10 am.

 

oOo

An Explanation for the Abrupt Ending of Mark’s Gospel

One for the scholars and scripture explorers!

An Explanation for the Abrupt Ending of Mark’s Gospel
by Peter E. Lewis

(See author bio at the end of this article. Comments are welcome. Click on “Leave a reply” above.)

The gospel attributed to Mark is the shortest of the canonical gospels and there are features which suggest that part of it is missing. Although it is generally considered to be the earliest gospel the date of its writing is disputed by scholars. For the purposes of the argument presented here it will be assumed that it was the first gospel and that it was written at an early date in Rome. Rome is the most likely provenance given the strength of the early tradition and the fact that in the pericope about the widow’s offering (Mark 12.41–44) the author explains to the readers that her two small coins were worth a quadrans, which was a coin that circulated only in Italy. Moreover, the fact that Jewish customs are explained in Mark 7.3 indicates that the author expected that at least some of the readers would be gentiles.
The literature concerning the ending of Mark’s gospel is vast, and to engage in conversation with modern scholars in all aspects of the problem would inordinately expand the scope of this article, the purpose of which is to concisely present a new explanation for the abrupt ending of Mark’s gospel. It will be argued that Mark had written about the parentage and birth of Jesus but this information was on the first page which was removed when someone pulled off the outer leaf of the codex, thus removing the first and last pages of the gospel. Moreover it will be explained how the original ending of the gospel seamlessly followed on from Mark 16.8. The original ending is reconstructed and shown to be an appropriate ending to the gospel.

[Endnotes: 1,2,3]
Mark’s gospel ends at 16.8 in two ancient manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (both from the 4th century), and Eusebius (4) and Jerome (5) both state that there was nothing more in most of the manuscripts available to them. The 4th-century Sinaitic Syriac version also ends at 16.8 as does the 12th century manuscript 304. In the other extant manuscripts, however, there is either an additional short ending (6) or long ending (7) or both (8). In those manuscripts with both endings the shorter ending always precedes the longer ending.
Some modern scholars believe that the longer ending is what Mark originally wrote (9). They point to the patristic citations of the longer ending as early as the second century (10). Scholars who find an ending at 16.8 incredible have suggested that the last page of the gospel is missing. Bruce Metzger considered it most probable that ‘the Gospel accidentally lost its last leaf before it was multiplied by transcription’ (11). James A Kelhoffer argued that the longer ending was added in the second century (12). Nicholas Lunn points to sectarians who were opposed to physical resurrection and considers that ‘their deliberate removal of the resurrection narratives from copies of Mark circulating in Egypt would seem to be the most probable cause of the textual problem’ (13). N. Clayton Croy considered that the beginning and end of the gospel were lost because of accidental mutilation (14). J. Keith Elliott considered that Mark’s original gospel was accidentally shortened within the first fifty years of its composition and the later additions to the end and the beginning could have been made in the second century. He speculated that Mark’s original composition was ‘a genealogy or a birth narrative of Jesus and even of John’ (15). In a more recent article he is convinced by Kelhoffer’s argument that the longer ending is a second-century apocryphal text, and states, ‘[W]e must make it clear that it was inappropriately cobbled on as a conclusion that can scarcely be said to develop or belong to vv. 1-8’ (16).
Although Mark might have originally written his gospel on a roll or scroll it would soon have been produced as a book (codex). Graham M. Stanton states that ‘use of the codex in the middle of the first century is perfectly possible’ (17). L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson state that parchment notebooks (membranae) were in use in the first century BCE (18), but the notebooks would also have been of papyrus. Although no surviving manuscript of the New Testament is earlier than the second century, they are almost all in codex form (19). According to Harry Y. Gamble, ‘Most early papyrus codices are constructed on the single quire method’ (20). An example he mentions is P75 from the third century which had the gospels of John and Luke in a single quire of 144 pages. As Mark’s gospel is the shortest gospel it could have been written on only one quire. Therefore, if the last page is missing, the first page would be missing too.

[Endnote 21]
The beginning of Mark’s gospel as it is preserved in the most ancient manuscripts has several problems associated with it, which indicates that it might not be the original beginning. These problems include the following:
1. The first sentence is ‘The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God’, and (as Moule explained) if the first page of the gospel was missing then a statement like this would be necessary at the top of the new first page. If the outer leaf of the codex had been deliberately removed for some reason, this sentence would mean ‘This is the beginning of the gospel, and not any other text.’
[Endnote 22]
3. In Mark 1.1 the word ‘Christ’ as part of the name ‘Jesus Christ’ does not occur elsewhere in Mark’s gospel. The word does occur but it is not used in this way. Because the name ‘Jesus Christ’ is common in later writings it suggests a later hand in this instance.
4. The title ‘Son of God’ is absent from Codex Sinaiticus and some other manuscripts (23) but it was probably originally in Mark 1.1, which was written after the removal of the outer leaf of the codex. If the leaf was removed because Mark had described Jesus’ birth as natural, which the gentile Christians in Rome could not accept, ‘Son of God’ in 1.1 indicates the purpose of their action. Unlike the unclean spirits in 1.24 who acknowledged Jesus in a spiritual sense, the gentile Christians in Rome were referring to impregnation by a god, as was the Roman centurion in 15.39, because of the absence of the article.

6. Mark 1.2 is a mistake. The prophet Isaiah did not write the prophecy in this verse. It was written by Malachi, and is Malachi 3.1. It is unlikely that a writer would begin an account with such a blatant error. It can, however, be explained if the first page had been removed by someone and Malachi 3.1 had been at the end of the page and connected grammatically by ‘just as’ to the following quotation from Isaiah. That person then added Malachi 3.1 to the beginning of the new first page. This suggests that the person was not knowledgeable about the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament) and was probably a gentile. Copyists of this mutilated and roughly corrected gospel began to realize that this was an unacceptable error and a number of ancient manuscripts such as Codex Alexandrinus, as well as all the Byzantine manuscripts, have ‘in the prophets’ instead of ‘in the prophet Isaiah’. Various other explanations have been proposed by modern scholars for the insertion of Malachi 3.1 at the beginning of Mark’s gospel. For example, William Lane states that ‘it is commonly regarded as a very ancient gloss, interpolated into the text at so early a stage that it has left its mark on the entire manuscript tradition’. (24)
7. Who is this ‘Jesus’ who is suddenly introduced in Mark 1.9? Such an abrupt introduction might have been because Mark assumed that his readers knew who Jesus was, but ‘Jesus’ was a common Jewish name at the time. Although the later gospels of Matthew and Luke, which were largely copied from Mark, have long passages (often conflicting) about the parentage and birth of Jesus, there is nothing of that in Mark. Where someone was born and who his parents were would have been of considerable interest to ancient readers. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is mentioned by name only once in Mark’s gospel (Mark 6.3) and Joseph is not mentioned at all. It is the thesis of this paper that Mark had written about the parentage and birth of Jesus but this information was on the first page of his gospel, and when the outer leaf of the codex was pulled off the first and last pages were removed. It is unlikely that the outer leaf just fell off accidentally or was lost through wear and tear, as some scholars have suggested.

Continue reading

Reflection: The Wind, Jesus and Me

 

Jesus and his Disciples stand in a fishing boat on the Sea of Galilee.

There is a bible story that tells of Jesus in a small boat at sea with a few friends. The sea became extremely rough due to strong winds whipping up large powerful waves that threatened to swamp the boat. All on board, except Jesus, were very concerned for their life. The story narrates that Jesus was in fact enjoying a nap in the stern of the boat where he was apparently very comfortable. The friends on board were actually disciples and they thought they knew Jesus very well and were generally of the opinion that he had supernatural powers not possessed by human beings. They thought Jesus may be able to do something to prevent them all drowning at sea, so they woke him up, chiding him about sleeping while they were scared out of their wits and needed his intervention.

Jesus woke, commented on their lack of faith and immediately spoke with the wind, commanding it to calm down and return the sea to a more manageable state that posed no threat of sinking the boat. The boat and all on board made it safely to shore.
I have narrated this story from childhood memory so it may not be 100% correct on all facts, but it serves well as a prompt to consider just what powers Jesus may have displayed during his life and asks me to ponder my own potential, my relationship with nature and therefore with GOD. I don’t offer a strict definition of GOD or categorise the apparent supernatural powers accredited to Jesus. Rather, by relating a recent personal experience and setting this beside the story already presented, I hope to prompt you to consider your relations with nature and GOD.
Three weeks ago I was helping my son David trim a beautiful tall tree in his backyard. I, being the lightweight, had the job of scaling the tree and lopping the branches, while David gave instructions from the ground and acted as safety officer. Prior to climbing I explained our intentions to the tree, hugged the tree with genuine feeling and requested its cooperation in keeping me safe while the haircut took place.

Things went well for about one and a half hours during which time we sent a number of very large branches to the ground, suspended on ropes to hopefully ensure no damage was caused to house, shed, fence, clothesline and of course myself and David. At this point I was suspended on a branch about 6 metres from the main trunk and 7 to 8 metres above the ground. There was only air between me and the ground; no branches to slow me down if I fell. Dave later commented that branch and others would not have supported his weight and that if I did fall, it would mostly likely result in broken bones rather than death. I certainly agreed with the first point and qualified the latter by adding, as long as I didn’t fall on my head (and yes I was wearing a hard hat).

But now to the wonderful part of the story; I was by this time a bit fatigued, a little sore and probably in need of a good cup of tea. Then the wind blew. A wind that was not really strong, but neither could it be described as gentle, as it resulted in my body being moved to one side so that I had to grip more tightly on the branch, hug it closely, and pull myself back to a secure position atop the branch. Initially, I did feel fear, but that lasted probably one second. Then I said to the wind, “Yes I agree, I am tired and should go down and rest. Thank you so much wind for prompting me, I will climb down”. As I said the word down, the wind ceased and I climbed down in safety.

The rest of the day went well; no accidents or damage was caused. About a week later something prompted me to reflect more deeply on my exchange with the wind. Perhaps it was the spirit of Jesus himself nudging me; it is so difficult to determine exactly what goes on in this inner life. It was this period of reflection that led to the recollection of the bible story recounted at the start of this experience.

There seemed to be some parallels here. Jesus had spoken to wind and wave and these natural phenomena did as he asked with the implied understanding that it is all very natural for the forces of nature to cooperate with Jesus. My experience in the tree was not nearly so dramatic and certainly did not represent any power over nature. But in both cases communication between human and wind took place. In one respect it could be said that my experience was even more wonderful than Jesus in the boat, for in my case the wind actually came to my assistance with gentle advice that I had not even requested. Most people probably do not find this credible, but it is consistent with my view of GOD being present in all things. And if this is so, then talking with and expressing wonder and love to trees and wind is synonymous with talking to GOD.

Considering GOD’s assurance that no matter the ups and downs of life, his love and support is unending and unbroken, then why would one not expect the wind to provide assistance even before you know it is needed.
The handwritten draft of this story was produced under a gum tree in my own backyard on a clear and still Sunday. As the writing was coming to a close I went deeper within; the wind blew gently on my face and transported me back to my son’s tree where I had been perched, there to show me that I had not been alone.

Peter Marshall

1st December 2018

oOo

A New Template for Religion ….

Following the posting of Michael Morwood’s New template for Religion on the Catholica blog a very healthy discussion followed. Following this discussion Michael posted a follow up summary of a set of core values.

Both make interesting reading.

  1. Michael Morwood’s New Template for Religion
  2. Michael Morwood’s Rethinking some of our core beliefs

Catholica, “an excitingly different way of looking at faith and spirituality”, can be accessed at;  https://www.catholica.com.au/

It is managed by Amanda McKenna and Brian Coyne.

oOo

DARE International Conference June 2019

Call for Papers: DARE Global Forum 2019 – Christian World Mission (CWM)

Discernment and radical engagement (DARE) are at the heart of the mission that makes CWM what it is. Through DARE, CWM partners with committed and creative thinker-practitioners of our time, signaling to ourselves and to the world, that our loyalty is to the God of life who calls us to take on the life-giving mission for which Jesus lived and died. DARE also comes out of the conviction that another world is possible. Another world free from the politics of hate; ideologies of supremacy; enslavement to the imperial logic; a world in which ecology could heal; security of children is a priority; strangers welcome each other; movement of people is a right and freeing; the elderly are treated with compassion and care.

For more information about DARE 2019 and the call for papers, click here

For more information about CWM, click here

For a YouTube presentation clip from the General Secretary of CWM (Rev Dr. Collin Cowan) click here  Dr Cowan is based in Singapore.

The Council for World Mission is a worldwide partnership of Christian churches. The 32 members are committed to sharing their resources of money, people, skills and insights globally to carry out God’s mission locally. CWM was created in 1977 and incorporates the London Missionary Society (1795), the Commonwealth Missionary Society (1836) and the (English) Presbyterian Board of Missions (1847).

DARE brings together the radical soul of discernment and sense-making in theology and biblical criticism; with the yearnings for signifying engagement that rise out of the slums of modernity and the valleys of despair, and the commitment to redemption songs that inspire disturbance at the hubs of power.

oOo

PCN Explorers meeting in Brisbane on Wednesday 28th November

Just 5 weeks to Christmas, but we will fit in one more PCN Explorers meeting on Wednesday 28th November – none in December of course!

In a previous email I suggested a meeting on Sunday 25th Nov, but had only a just a few who are interested in Sunday afternoon meetings and in particular, only 4 for the planned Sunday. For this reason, we have decided to cancel that date. HOWEVER, the topic is postponed to next year SO WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FURTHER NEWS ABOUT THE TOPIC OF EUTHANASIA. Seems like this topic will be one of interest next year as the State Government considers a change to legislation.

Wednesday 28th November

We will meet at 10 am at Merthyr Road Uniting Church for morning tea, fellowship and discussion. Since this is the period of Advent, leading up to Christmas, it might be a good time to reflect on these seasons of the year. As with the last gathering, there will be no ‘expert presenter’, but I am sure there will be plenty of people of diverse thought who can contribute their thoughts on the meaning of advent and Christmas.

Rev Rex Hunt has published Cards, Carols and Claus: Christmas in Popular Culture and Progressive Christianity which shares a brief story of the celebration of Christmas globally and in Australia and includes quotes from many authors. Hunt maintains that The festival called Christmas is a celebration still ‘under construction’ It is a weaving of story, myth, customs and ritual. From its inception, it has been debated, ignored, celebrated, banned, and from the mid 1800s, reinvented.

Here are some questions to get your thinking started. What is the significance of Advent that many churches observe? What are you waiting for? Is Christmas a time of devotion of just another festival? How do the Nativity narratives touch you? Do you have a favourite Christmas Carol or song? What words come to mind?

Maybe you could write no more than a page to bring to share with the group. You may have quotes from other authors that ‘speak’ to you. I certainly have one from Robin Myers that resonates with my thinking that I will bring.

I hope you can join us. I quick email to say you are coming is helpful (but not essential) so we know how many cups and chairs to put out. We are grateful to Merthyr Road Uniting Church for allowing us to use their central and versatile venue.

We continue to explore how to use language and music that speaks to 21st century people of a love that is relevant, not only sustaining our lives, but enabling hope, joy and peace to lift us above the mundane and allow us to live with all the human integrity we can muster. This too is our wish for your family and friends.
warm regards

Ross and Desley Garnett
drgarn@bigpond.net.au
Ross – 0409 498 402
Desley – 0409 498 403

oOO

Opinion: Is the new ‘orthodox’ theology historical heresy?

In an age when ‘truth’ is increasingly difficult to identify, and ‘orthodox’ theology has become increasingly literal, it is more important than ever to develop skills of discernment and critical thinking.

When I began reading history at the University of Queensland in 1966, I was introduced to EH Carr’s What is History? It was compulsory pre-reading for history studies and I am so glad I was introduced to Carr before I went too far into any critical studies, especially when doing theology and doctoral research into adult learning.

In 1955, it was Professor G Barraclough (History in a Changing World) who said “The history we read, though based on facts, is, strictly speaking, not factual at all, but a series  of accepted judgments.” Barraclough was a trained medievalist.

Carr reminds me of the challenge we are faced with in the current retreat to conservative and fundamentalist use of the scriptures to address the world’s problems. This has really emerged in the nineteenth century and now strongly influences politics and legislation. It is also a major cause of a great division developing in all forms of religion. He describes the nineteenth century heresy that history consists of the compilation of a maximum number of irrefutable and objective facts …. “Anyone who succumbs to this heresy will either have to give up history as a bad job, and take to stamp-collecting or some other form of antiquarianism, or end in a madhouse.” Carr said this in 1961.

History and Theology both experienced the emergence of nationalism in the nineteenth century and reflected a society’s new interest in science and the social sciences. But they both continued to be sources of moral judgment on public actions and worked as conservers of political authority and power. It has taken a major opening up of the scriptures to critical analysis, contextual and historical criticism, to find deeper understandings beyond the literal and the fundamental to serve a world desperate for ways to address the imperatives of life on earth rather than irresponsibly “leave them to God.”

The way in which theology is often used as a set of historical documents and facts that claim to be accurate without bias, and flawlessly presented as a set of truths, is of great concern. It does not allow for establishing relevance with an educated world that is sceptical of knowledge that it is not permitted to challenge. But all history is the history of thought….it is dependent on the empirical evidence available at the time and the writer’s world view. One needs to study the writer before studying the facts! History means interpretation and theology needs to be examined in that light also. So for Carr, (and myself!), history (and theology) is a continuous process of interaction between the writer and his or her facts, an unending dialogue between the present and the past.

But not only is the material under examination influenced by the viewpoint of the writer, it is also rooted in a social and historical background. This is now the growing focus for the writers of alternative histories who, often, tongue in cheek, paint a picture of a world that would result from certain events occurring differently. For example, what if the Roman Empire had not fallen … would it have been the model of a well-governed, prosperous, cosmopolitan society, moved beyond the economic problems that dogged it? Perhaps the world would have been more technologically advanced sooner as the stagnation of scientific enquiry achieved by the Church would have been avoided,  Instead of the intelligentsia putting so much effort into Christian religious doctrine and hoarding knowledge in closed monasteries there would be a freer circulation of information that allowed engineering to innovate much faster (Jerry Glover, historical researcher, UK). Reading for enjoyment some of this material (example pictured above), I can’t help but think that attempts to grow a following for ‘orthodox’ theology has employed similar techniques….imagine an alternative future and make the narrative build a consciousness of it.

The study of history has been liberated by making it more scientific – with demands on those who pursue it to be more rigorous and seek to explain and respond to the incessant question Why?. It has become relevant to a bigger audience. Theology needs to eschew the tendency to move inside the fortress walls and open itself to critical examination. Instead of being a field of study for ‘insiders’ it could, as some are already doing, shed doctrinal and institutional constraints and be a science of enquiry and critical thought that relates to everyperson. This would cast a new optimism on the Church where change is not to be feared, where reason is no longer subordinate to the existing order and progress in human affairs once again is on the agenda.

Paul Inglis 17th November 2018.

Feedback/comments welcome at “Reply” at the beginning of this article. Good to share thoughts with everyone rather than just to me as many have done.

oOo