Heavy with mist

In the garden
In the cool of the day
The Lord God came
Looking for those who
Struggled to hide

Untruths from the heat
Of the day, exposed
In the twilight, man:
Born in the morning
Undesigned for the night

That long imminent night
Of flaming swords
Of banishment. An exile
Kneading its strange magic:
A longing to return

In King’s Wood
In the cool of after-dawn
Boots on the hillside, up
To the flaking plaster
Triangulation point

I climbed and gazed East
Into the face of the sun
Or would have
But the air was heavy
Blurred with humidity

Birdsong, muffled in
A wall of water hanging
Just above the ground
Clinging to the sky
Saturating the world

Obscuring the sunrise
Until the heavy mist
Burned clear
And I,
With eyes open, saw

What was always there
The grass beneath my feet
A lone mushroom
A startled rabbit
A languid cow

And disinterested sheep
Mowing the hillside
Sung to by skylarks
And ancient warblers.
For a moment

I was no longer here
But home
In the farm tracks
And dry-stone walls
Of Eden

The Eleven O’Clock vi Cheddar Baptist Sunday 22nd June, 2025

Each day for the remainder of June, I’ll post The Eleven O’Clock and aim to answer the following three questions in short sentences and/or very short paragraphs.

1. Where am I?
2. What am I doing?
3. What am I thinking about and feeling?

Of course, I would welcome any comments, humorous, poignant, serious, or otherwise.

1. Third of four rows from the back of Cheddar Baptist on the left-hand side

2. Listening to a sermon with one ear and trying to decode what the preacher was trying to convey, in general and personally

3. In terms of the sermon, his aim seemed to be to distil a common theme from three very different bible passages: how to maintain our differences, as believers in Christ, without withdrawing from society, even if it means not conforming to the values and beliefs of society. True freedom. So I’m trying to decode his more poetic way of communication in contrast to the more expositional teaching I’m used to.

Feeling. It’s nearly 3 months since I moved to Winscombe. Every so often, I get waves of ‘the new boy’ syndrome. This morning was like that. After the service, I was involved in a number of conversations, but at 11, social confidence was running on empty.

p.s. U.S. bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities overnight. It was coming. Maybe the potential for that conflict to spill over into other nations is on all of our minds, even if it’s held at the periphery of conscious thought.

The Eleven O’Clock iv Not Filling a Kettle Friday 20th June, 2025

Each day for the remainder of June, I’ll post The Eleven O’Clock and aim to answer the following three questions in short sentences and/or very short paragraphs.

1.        Where am I?
2.        What am I doing?
3.        What am I thinking about and feeling?

Of course, I would welcome any comments, humorous, poignant, serious, or otherwise.

Post Four:

1.        Home.
2.        The literal answer: deciding it’s too late to fill the kettle, get wallet, phone, Amazon Return package sellotaped, sandals on, ready to walk to the PO and then to local barbers for 11.30 cut.
3.        Partly thinking how mundane today’s post will be and whether it’s OK to divert from a strict adherence to 11 o’clock on the dot? Replacing ‘deciding not to fill a kettle’ with describing my ‘fields and footpaths’ walk earlier in the morning. All that did serve to remind me that I don’t spend all my time in my rational mind, thinking, but, like Mary the mother of Jesus, and like all of us, I suspect, I also ponder things in my heart.

Feelings. If we are body, soul, and spirit, then ‘feeling’ can be through our physical senses – and I was feeling hot; it’s a muggy morning. Or we can ‘feel’ with our emotions – and I was on a fairly even keel. quite tranquil. Or we can ‘feel’ or sense spiritually – and I think, spiritually, I was taking a nap, having had an earlier workout listening to another Inspired podcast with Simon Guillebaud, this time interviewing Shane Taylor, an ex-violent man, often in prison, who was transformed after, in his words, Jesus walked into his life.

Tragedy in Eden

Thursday.

The glory of the Lord appeared today
In the form of forked lightning
And thunder
Coconuts fell all morning
Rebounding from the ground
All our creatures hid in places
I have never found

As evening fell, flashes of light
Lit everything up
In purples and white light
Wisdom spoke warning us
Of taking canoes out
On the river
But courage spoke also

It was Havilah that we paddled
To see the gold
Illuminated from inside and out
Soon, bathed in a yellow hue
Absorbing and filling us with strength
Eve scooped up the river water
And drank its light

Friday Morning

Eve returned early from
A morning stroll, eyes wide open
Rain fell, drenching her hair
The clouds, closer than normal
Looked disturbed
In her hand, a red peach
Dripping with juice and rain
I took the second bite

Friday Evening

Everything was familiar and yet
Distorted, the soil dustier
Eve’s forehead creased, and mine
A strange fear knotted
And knit us closer
It wasn’t love, knowing we could
Never re-attach the peach

The glory of the Lord appeared
Not as before, but
With tears and strange words
He walked away
Pulling our wooden canoe
For safe storage ‘Until…’
But we couldn’t hear the words

A Meditation on ‘Speaking the truth in love’ Ephesians 4v15

This is one of those verses in the New Testament that seems to attract a lot of comment…and humour. Humour, of course, because we all know when ‘speaking the truth in love’ misfires and is off kilter, when the truth is not spoken in love at all…but with barely concealed rage, or as a justification for gossip.

And then there’s a relatively recent distant relation to this verse as trotted out by embittered campaigners: ‘speaking truth to power’. Various supposed heroes of this variation are enlisted to bolster its image: Martin Luther King, Ghandi, and Nelson Mandela. But too often speaking the truth to power is accompanied with an undertone of aggression entirely absent from St Paul’s much-quoted phrase, either in its original context, or as a stand-alone aphorism.

Can we peer behind the jokes or the falsifications to find the true meaning of the original phrase?

First, love. Love includes a genuine desire for the good of the other, that they might prosper and grow and be enriched in life in all ways. Into that context, truth can be spoken. Genuine concern for the state of the other, what they are seeking, searching for, longing for, their hopes and dreams and fears; into that truth may be spoken.

However, if that love-motor is not running smoothly, it may not be sensible to assume any truth can be received; we need to be wise about what to say and what not to say…and when. The embittered campaigners above I was referring to, in their frustration and tears, long since abandoned any concern for the personal impact of their critical remarks, sledging, or banter. Their only concern is the success of their campaign and imposing their values on their opponents. How easy it is to fall into this trap.

Secondly, truth. Jesus spoke hard truths to the Pharisees: ‘You hypocrites’; ‘Blind leaders of the blind’; ‘Whitewashed tombs’ and so on…but he did not abandon his love for them. His heart was not hardened but soft, even if his words were sharp. It was, after all, to Nicodemus, who came to him at night, that Jesus shared his teaching on the need to be born again by the Spirit.

Love is a two-way street

Love is a two-way street. How much easier it is to receive ‘truth’ when we know the other person is speaking out of concern for us and not from some disguised form of self-protection, self-promotion, or self-interest. Jesus epitomises all that can be said about love, allowing his opponents to arrest, disfigure, and crucify him. Even on the cross, two indications of how much love was still in his heart were his cry, ‘Father forgive them, they know not what they do!’ and his request to John, his closest friend, who had abandoned him, to take care of his mother, Mary. No bitterness, only love. God will always raise up such.

The original context of the phrase in Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, ‘speaking the truth in love’ is about our journey to maturity, ‘that we may grow up in all things into Him who is the head – Christ.’

This verse is directed at believers. At disciples. Are our L-Plates ever removed as disciples? Five decades have passed since I found Christ or he found me. Mine are still attached. More so than ever, I am aware that I have barely begun to decode the depths of that four-letter word L.O.V.E.

Not just a walk

Gills and a gaping jaw
Caught in a fishing line
The creature’s freedoms
Consigned to memory

Impaired, struggling to rise
Oxygen-depleted blood
Baptised in despair,
Will, sapped to the core

Suspended between
The depths and the sun
Turning and twisting
On an axis it didn’t choose

And so it was as I trudged
Up Sidcot’s shaded gullies
To the nettle-bound radio mast,
Distractions, undoing and

Dulling the beauty of the
Horizon-wide, sun-soaked
Somerset Levels and St
James’s spire seeking heaven

Half a flock of sheep
For company in the shade
Looking on helpless to
Unthread the tangled line

Later, within a hymn
In a deluge of Spirit
My heart sings songs
Of untethered joy

Now I remember
The moss-covered walls
The poor arthritic ewe
A golden field of barley

And the soothing crunch of
Of gravel underfoot
On the final leg
Home

Shortcuts? There Are No Shortcuts

I wonder if our mental attitudes for getting from A to B alter as we progress from infants to teens and on to adulthood…and then to older-adulthood?

In the pre-SatNav, pre-smart-phone era of my teens, I was the navigator for my mother behind the wheel in our second-hand Fords, traversing the width of England and Wales from Kent and back home on various family holidays.

In my hand, I usually had an American WWII Gazetteer – my dad having been a Colonel in the US Army. It was a superb road map with all the A & B roads and white tracks accurately drawn.

The M2 was avoidable, the M4 hadn’t been opened fully, and the M25 was but a dream (nightmare?) so all but a few roads had remained unchanged.

I became adept at finding the shortest route, even if that meant the exhaust dragging dangerously on the ridge of grass occupying the middle of a minor road. Shortcutting had become a life skill.

Except that, in life, there are no shortcuts. From the Jews traipsing around the desert until a generation of faith and obedience took over from the shortcutters, to most (all?) men ignoring IKEA instructions, or athletes resorting to taking illegal substances to rescue a fading career…we all know the foolishness of taking shortcuts and acknowledge the wisdom of the less glamorous side of life: patience, planning, attention to detail, the slog, adopting a ‘marathon not a sprint’ attitude to life.

I’ve yet to meet many writers who rub their hands with glee when it comes to submitting work for line editing with all the amendments and corrections that ensue, or various steps (e.g. ISBN numbering) before publication…and that ghastly word ‘marketing’…I apologise for even mentioning it. I can feel collective ACW spines shuddering away.

So, here I am, sitting in yet another North Somerset café, sipping a decent flat-white, bemoaning a lack of cooked cheesecakes, with a laptop and time on my hands to WRITE…not slog through line edits, ideas for book covers, or steps towards publication or marketing.

But the passage of time has taught me to be more patient and submit, meekly, to the process.

I’m astounded by the work of line editors (shout out to Liz Carter) who, essentially, have the skill to make our best efforts look as if we’ve studied English Language to degree level – Respect!

I look back to my younger self – always trying to get from A to B by the shortest route in the quickest time – and can still see the joy in it, but I can also see the bodged kitchen units, the lack of revision before exams, the avoidance of emotional intelligence at times, and the fruit of taking shortcuts. Disaster.

No, bring on the horrors of all the writing process, from inspiration and ideas, from ISBN numbers to inventing marketing strategies. I’m ready.

Originally: Shortcuts? There Are No Shortcuts

Outsourced Love?

At each dawn chorus
Lewis Gwyn Knowle’s will stirred
Stiffening muscles and sinews
Grimacing against the strain
Of his unstilled bones.
Lewis, expressionless
Stood under a steaming shower
Devoid of thought
By sheer habit,
To wash the night away

It is always thus: cleansing
The pure emerge, brighter,
Hair and eyes sparkling
And if not so,
Then steady at least
Ready for the day’s toil
Whilst the memories
Of but a day ago are rinsed
Away to another world
Outsourced so we can be clean

In this green and pleasant land
Rid now of satanic mills and
Plumes of foul-smelling smog
A land of coal mines in cold storage
En route to carbon zero,
Environmental eyes sparkle
And if not, conscience quelled,
Guilt is outsourced
To another world
So we can be clean

And if we behave so
Does not God but wilder?
That Will forged in eternity past

That heavenly corporation
A nuclear fire of spirit
Outsourcing the spotless Son
Sluiced somewhere
Outside a city wall
Beyond the satanic mills
Of synagogue and temple
Like some blackened commando
Baptized in our grime
So we can be clean

So, Lewis Gwyn Knowle,
I wonder if imprinted
In some recess of mind
Whether you, imago dei
Whatever satanic foulness
Clings to you, hear a voice
Commanding your eyes
To look upon your clean
Transfigured self,
Made of the sunrise?

If you stumbled

If you stumbled over a diamond
What would you do?

I’d try not to jump up and down
I’d hide it in a shoe

A shoe! I’d sell it, be rich
Uncork the Champagne!

Oh! No! I’d rather keep it
And gaze on its light

Could I see it, my friend?

Only if you bend down
From such a great height

That I could not do
It’s beneath me to kneel

Such a shame, my friend
To the humbled, it’s revealed

Echoes of II Corinthians 4 v6-10

Faith spelt differently

It is a mistake to think of Jesus as a religious version of Superman, powered up differently, maybe, but powered up nonetheless.

The miracles, healings, and deliverances all seem to be works of power as if the Son of God, was powerful in himself, operating with spiritual power, not Kryptonite.

Jesus did have a source of power, the Holy Spirit, which he promised to the disciples:

‘You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you’ Acts 1v84

The problem is not that this is untrue, but that Jesus modelled a life of deliberate vulnerability to his disciples like a good apprentice, for them to copy.

Three chapters in Luke’s gospel: 8,9, and 10 illustrate the point.

In chapter 8, Luke describes the ministry of Jesus. In chapter nine, Jesus sends out the twelve disciples in like manner to do what they’ve seen him do, and in chapter 10, this is extended to seventy.

The verses below may be familiar, and been struck by the outcomes – often miraculous - of Jesus’s ministry and the disciples. Quite rightly. Miracles are hard to ignore. The gospel writers did not omit them!

Miracles are hard to ignore. The gospel writers did not omit them!

But we’re taking a peek behind the scenes.

In one memorable phrase, Jesus described his lifestyle after returning in the power of the Spirit from the temptations, ‘The Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head’ Luke 8 v 58. After early success preaching the gospel in Galilee, he was rejected in Nazareth and relocated to Capernaum,

‘Leaving Nazareth, He came to dwell in Capernaum’ Mt4v13

Moving house is stressful at the best of times, but Jesus’s departure was forced upon him by the congregation of his home synagogue, who had become so angry that they turned on him and tried to push him off a cliff!

And, after the initial welcome and success in Capernaum (e.g. the paralytic lowered through the roof), he rounds angrily on Capernaum, ‘Woe to you…Capernaum’ Mt11v23 and has to leave once again, as at Nazareth.

Jesus had become an outcast

The disciples had witnessed the power of the miracles, of course, and the preaching, but also the stripping away of all the traditional forms of support: a roof over one’s head, family, who thought he was ‘out of his mind’ Mk3v21, and synagogue. He had become an outcast.

‘Now it came to pass, afterward, that Jesus went through every city and village, preaching and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God and the twelve were with him and certain women who had been healed…and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susannah and many others who provided for him from their substance’ 8v1-3

No income – he folded his carpentry business.

No home – he had to leave his house in Capernaum.

No guaranteed supply of food, clothing, or shelter.

Open only to the welcome of others, like a sparrow finding a place to call home (Ps 84v3) amongst all the competing needs of other sparrows and wildlife.

In chapters 9 and 10, Jesus extends this twin walk of power and vulnerability to the twelve and then the seventy,

‘Then He called His twelve disciples together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases and sent them to preach the gospel and heal the sick…’Take nothing for your journey, neither staff nor bag nor bread nor money’ Luke 9 v1-6

‘After these things the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them two by two…carry neither money bag, rucksack, nor sandals, and greet no one on the road but whatever house you enter first say ‘Peace to this house’…’ Luke 10 v 1-12

They were instructed to stay, preach the gospel, and heal the sick, if welcomed, but if not, to wipe the dust off their feet and move on

In Philippians, Paul writes that Jesus, though equal with God, made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, he came in the likeness of men…he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

For the apostles and the seventy - and by extension, us, - whatever status we may carry, we may also find ourselves called to walk the path of deliberate vulnerability, not using any status to build the road in front of us, however legitimate that manipulative approach may be.

Paul speaks about this as an apostle:

‘If we have sown spiritual things for you, should we not reap materially? Others do, nevertheless, we have not used this right, but endure all things lest we hinder the gospel’ 1Cor 9 v 11f

Like Jesus and the disciples, Paul was open to and dependent on the welcome and gifts of others.

We are not the rich ones with something to give. We are voluntarily poor with only the welcome of others and the power of the Spirit as our source. We are likely to suffer rejection as much as a welcome, and be like Jesus, be a ‘man of sorrows and acquainted with grief’ one moment and ‘anointed with gladness above his fellows’ the next.

The emotional impact of a life of deliberate vulnerability is recorded in the gospels. Not only is Jesus not invincible, unlike Superman, he is not serene, as if one step removed from this world, living in a Zen state of perpetual calm. His lifestyle took its inevitable toll.

1. At the synagogue in Capernaum, when he healed the man with a withered hand, the people were offended because he performed the miracle on the Sabbath. Mark recorded ‘He looked around them with anger, being grieved at their hardness of heart’.

2. Though his emotional response to his family thinking he had gone mad ‘out of his mind’ Mark 3v21 is not recorded, it is not beyond reason to imagine the sadness He must have felt, even if tempered by his faith

3. Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit, Luke 10 v21. Again, we have no details, but it’s hard not to imagine smiles, laughter, singing, and dancing.

4. Jesus weeps over Jerusalem and Lazarus

5. In the garden before his arrest, ‘He began to be sorrowful and deeply distressed, ‘My soul is exceedingly sorrowful even to death’ Mt 26v37,38

6. After the resurrection, just as when he sent the disciples out, He appears and says, ‘Peace to you’. Just as before. Vulnerable, open to being welcomed, or not. We take it for granted that the disciples greeted Him because we know how the story ends, ‘while they still did not believe for joy’

The kingdom of God is not about food or drink, the best worship band, the most generous offerings, a large staff, or staging successful conferences. It turns out to be a willingness to be vulnerable and open to the welcome or rejection of those we meet, whilst having faith in the power of the Holy Spirit. Anything else follows on.

Deliberate vulnerability and faith in the power of the Spirit? It was the Lord who called the twelve and the seventy, it will be the Lord who calls us to a particular path. There is no manual.

Some work this out through everyday existence in the world, others go on a mission, or tread the Camino, or are called to ministry.

Paul again,

‘Gladly I will boast in my infirmities, in reproaches, in needs, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake. For when I am weak, then I am strong…that the power of Christ may rest upon me’ 2Cor12v9,10

1 Corinthians 12-14 The Love Sandwich

These three chapters elicit little curiosity from nominal Christians who think Christianity can be summed up as kindness to neighbours, dismay from Evangelicals who believe in the inspiration of Scripture but apparently not the inspiration of believers themselves, and child-like delight amongst Charismatic Christians who can be like children unwrapping gifts at Christmas.

And then there’s Paul’s statement about women keeping silent in church, which needs to be faced.

And the middle chapter, Love.

Paul is one for building arguments with a strong foundation or premise, and he does this in the opening verses of chapter 12.

‘You were Gentiles carried away to dumb idols, however you were led, but I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit’

Previous to their conversion from paganism, the Corinthian believers were used to ‘being led’ by a spirit and ‘carried away’ by such spiritual experiences. They have since abandoned their idolatry to believe in God through Christ and received the Holy Spirit.

Instead of any previous spiritual manifestations, Paul is reminding them that their heartfelt revelation and confession of Christ can only have come about via the Holy Spirit revealing the truth concerning Jesus.

That’s the foundation: that true believers are inhabited by the Holy Spirit.

He has stated this in earlier chapters of the letter, picturing the church as the temple of the Holy Spirit and, indeed, every believer’s body as a temple for the Holy Spirit.

The question then arises: how does the Holy Spirit manifest His presence in the church and in individual believers? Paul goes on to describe gifts and ministries that should be present in the church and the life of individual believers:

‘There are diversities of gifts but the same Spirit and differences of ministries but the same Lord’

The gifts of the Holy Spirit are then listed: word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith, gifts of healings, miracles, prophecy, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. And it is clear from 1 Cor 14 v 26 that Paul expects to see these gifts manifesting in the church when it gathers together.

‘Whenever you come together each of you has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, an interpretation…let two or three prophets speak…’

In my childhood, I was taken to the local Anglican church. The congregation consisted of ‘nominal Christians’ who, if they had any true faith, it was considered the Christian faith to be an entirely private matter. From my admittedly limited viewpoint, they were there ‘because it was Sunday’ rather than due to any deep convictions. The Creed was recited, but was it believed? I doubt it. Consequently, there was no evidence of the presence of the Holy Spirit in terms of the manifestation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Two miles from the Anglican church stood an Evangelical church that preached that when the canon of New Testament was completed and the apostles had died, the ‘perfect had come’. As a consequence, the gifts of the Spirit were for the early immature church, but now that we have the Scriptures, there’s no need for childish gifts such as speaking in tongues and prophecy.

‘We know in part and prophesy in part, but when the perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away with. When I was a child, I spoke as a child…but when I became a man, I put away childish things’

This argument and its corollary – opposition to the baptism of the Spirit after conversion – effectively put up a No Entry sign to the gifts of the Spirit. Consequently, there were no manifestations of the gifts in their church services and gatherings.

A further two miles from the Evangelical was a Baptist church.

The pastor and elders had all experienced the baptism of the Spirit many years after their conversions to Christ, some during Billy Graham’s crusades in their youth. Along with thousands of other believers in all denominations, having been baptised in the Spirit, the plurality of gifts and ministries of the Spirit began to manifest in individual believers and during church services.

Paul, in writing 1 Corinthians has had to tackle various issues within the church of immorality, division and party spirit, and ‘free for all’ chaotic worship services, in which believers were manifesting the gifts e.g. speaking in tongues and prophecy but, as with their inability to wait for others before eating, were all speaking in tongues and/or prophesying at once.

Paul’s analysis of their practice around the Lord’s supper and the chaotic use of the gifts was a lack of spiritual maturity and love.

He had already been blunt:

‘Brothers, I could not speak to you as spiritual but as fleshly, as to babes in Christ. I fed you with milk and not with solid food…and even now you are not able to receive solid food. You are still fleshly…there are divisions among you’ 3v1-3

Paul’s recipe for correction was not to stamp out the gifts any more than a parent would permanently remove toys from a child, but to keep directing the child to enjoy the gift at the right time…and tidy away! Moving beyond the analogy of children and gifts is the instruction to use the gifts not for yourself but to build others up, to build up the church:

‘You are zealous for spiritual gifts but let it be for the edification of the church…desire earnestly to prophesy and do not forbid speaking in tongues but let all things be done decently and in order’ 14v12,39,40

These three chapters are a Love Sandwich. Chapter 12 sits at the heart. It is often quoted at wedding services and is a beautiful description of the love we all need and all need to express to others.

So…next time you feel your heart thumping because the Holy Spirit has revealed something to you to share in the form, for example, of a prophetic picture or a prophecy of words or a song, it will be because the Holy Spirit is about to bless someone else – or your whole church. It is an awesome thing, really. Whilst it may be exciting, thrilling even, for you to initially receive the gift, the gift is actually only in your hands temporarily, it is to be passed on.

Like throwing a bouquet at a wedding, someone will catch it!

Occasionally, you may know who to address a gift to e.g. a word of knowledge, but in the context of a church service, it is less likely. Throw the bouquet!

Lastly, if this has not been within the orbit of your church experience, ask the Lord to reveal the truth of what the scriptures say and how to handle any revelations that come with love in your congregation.

______________________________________

PS ‘Let women keep silent in the churches, they are not permitted to speak but are to be submissive’ 14v34

Whatever your interpretation of this verse, please bear in mind that Paul has already stated in chapter 11 ‘…every woman who prays or prophesies…’ therefore, the verse in chapter 14 cannot mean a blanket ban on women speaking in church!

The best conclusion I can draw is to consider the context: Paul is attempting to bring order to chaos. It looks as if their gatherings were chaotic. If there was food, the Lord’s supper was being dishonoured as one group would eat before another. And spiritual gifts were being manifested with little attempt to ensure that everyone could hear and benefit. It had become a free for all. Within that context, maybe the women in the church had grown so frustrated that they’d grouped together and were using the time to talk to each other. Whatever the truth is, it is clear that Paul is not banning women from exercising gifts or ministries such as prayer or prophesying.

No prison walls

Sat there
On a cold grey
Flagstone floor
Alive, silent, safe
Insulated from…
A retreat of sorts

A cell, yet not
An anchorite’s
Barred domain
But reduced to
A seed state,
Waiting then

From outside
A softening aria
Breaches the
Solid defensive wall
Broken open by
Just a few notes

The seed
Beyond control
Discarding
Husk and flesh
Growing like a river
Towards the song

Stands up
Green and unsure
To open the door
To what lies beyond
There are
No prison walls

Patriarchy, 1Cor11, and head coverings

One of the significant cultural misadventures of our time has been to equate patriarchy with misogyny – the rule of men - with cruelty.

1Cor11 is a passage that appears to counter the anti-patriarchal thinking of our day, only to veer off into the rather odd context of head covering in worship and long hair, short hair, or no hair.

Can we extract anything useful from 1Cor 11, or is it best left undisturbed, like an untilled field, left fallow for a future age that can shed light on these strange verses?

Like any argument, there is little point debating the latter points until you’ve understood the fundamental starting point, the premise, of the argument. Paul constructs 1Cor11 exactly like an argument; there is a premise from which all his points about hair and head coverings follow.

The premise:

‘But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of any woman is man, and the head of Christ is God’ v 3

Have we relinquished the truth of this verse in the name of equality? Or in reaction and horror of misogyny: male dominance, cruelty, rape and all manner of abuse?

From Jane Eyre’s declaration ‘I am an independent woman!’ to Emily Pankhurst and the suffragettes, equal voting rights, the need to keep up pressure for equal pay for women, and ironically, the present-day fight by feminists to sharpen up the definition of a ‘woman’ so that female spaces (e.g. in sport) cannot be infiltrated by those born biologically male yet self-identify as women, the idea of patriarchy (submission to male rule) seems outdated and downright dangerous!

One of the offshoots of this cultural rebalancing has been, however, to undermine our confidence in the scriptures as the authoritative word of God. Have we, however, thrown the baby out with the bath water?

Let’s tackle ‘headship’ in verse 3 in reverse and ask whether ‘headship’ can be equated with oppressive rule.

‘…the head of Christ is God…’

If we explore the relationship between Christ and God in the gospels and other New Testament epistles, we see complete submission yet not a sniff of oppression.

‘Truly I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, only what He sees His Father do; for whatever He does, the Son does in likewise manner’ John 5v19

‘Let this attitude be in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God did not consider it robbery to be equal to God but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of man…and humbled Himself becoming obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross’ Philip 2v5-8

Here we see equality and yet voluntary submission. Christ as equal to God, nevertheless submitted to the Father, ‘taking the form of a servant’.

When the disciples ask Jesus about prayer, He answered by saying ‘Our Father’…and then ‘thy kingdom come, thy will be done’ so that they would enjoy the same relationship with God as He was showing them.

Investigating further, we might be troubled by the contradiction between Jesus’s relationship with His Father in heaven and our notions of freedom as pursued via the rise of the autonomous self or the cult of the individual, so:

‘For the Father loves the Son and shows Him all things that He does…for as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgement…’ John 5 v 20, 26,27

I am trying to find words to express the ‘scent’ of this relationship. There is a sweetness in it. A flow of love. Are we so fearful of losing control, of submission, of dethroning our supposed autonomy and individuality that we have lost the paradoxical nature of submission towards someone who loves us? In exalting the autonomous self, have we not impoverished ourselves of and lost freedom and peace? And authority. The paradoxes seem to pile up one on top of the other: submission resulting in freedom; submission resulting in authority; submission far from diminishing life turning out to be the source of life.

At the heart of the headship of God with Christ is love. The opposite of oppression.

The carry over to a man and Christ is the second crucial hinge upon which this argument swings.

‘The head of every man is Christ’

It is worth being reminded that Paul’s opening statement: ‘…I want you to know…’. Is critical to his argument. The truth concerning the headship of Christ over a man is not learnt naturally. To ‘know’ is far more than an intellectual revelation similar to, say, knowing what subtraction means and being able to do it. This is a deep spiritual truth that goes to the core of who we are as men, it requires spiritual revelation in our hearts not just our minds.

The core of this relationship between the man and Christ is love. Christ has loved me, loves me. Me! I may think I don’t deserve it, don’t nurture it, often neglect it…but the truth is He loves me. With the same outcomes for me as it was for Him: freedom, peace, authority and much else. As I submit to His rule over me, His rule of love, I end up doing what I see Him doing, saying what I hear Him saying, having His peace, His life, His authority.

Lastly, women.

‘The head of any woman is man’

But that head, the man, can only function well, if his head is Christ Himself, the woman is on the receiving end of all the benefits accrued by the man due to his relationship with Christ, and Christ, God. So the woman has love, peace, and freedom, and authority. Paul goes on to speak of women praying and prophesying…almost a dual carriageway to and from God. Speaking to God in prayer, and hearing from God resulting in prophecy.

There are faint memories of how deep this revelation ran in our society. In a crisis, e.g. the Titanic, it is the woman and children that are saved in preference to the men. A man gives up his seat for a woman on a train. Or holds the door open for a woman. These cultural traditions run deep and can, of course, become symbols of male dominance rather than acts of sacrificial love…but it is the latter that is intended.

Let’s tackle the head covering and hair aspects of this passage.

‘Every man praying or prophesying with His head covered dishonours his head and every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonours her head ’ v 4,5

Culturally, this is why it is almost instinctive still, for men to remove their caps or hats in church. But we must not be diverted from what we have learnt about Paul’s reference to headship. He is not talking about the brainbox on our shoulders, he is referring to the previous verse.

If a man prays with his head (Christ) covered i.e. putting a barrier somehow between Christ and God, he dishonours his head (i.e. Christ). No, when we pray as men, we need to recognise that our head (Christ) is equal to God and loved by Him. Whether or not putting on or removing hats, caps, or deciding on hair length accompanying or illustrating the spiritual truth Paul is trying to establish at Corinth in v3 is, perhaps, up to each individual.

It is so easy to throw out the baby with the bath water

The last point is important. The premise for Paul’s argument is, undoubtedly, verse 3, however verse 11 – which may appear to be contradictory or more in line with current cultural norms – is the measure of verse 3.

‘Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman of man, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes from woman; but all things are from God’

The cultural misadventure has been to confuse patriarchy with misogyny and patriarchy with inequality.

Christ is submissive to God and yet equal. The woman takes a man to be her head if Christ is his head. This is what Paul means by the apparently throwaway clause in v11 ‘in the Lord’. It is worth reminding ourselves to whom Paul is writing: Christian believers in Corinth. This is not applicable to those not in Christ…even if it might benefit wider society, who see it working.

Verse 11 certainly underlines our commonality and equality; we are not independent of each other across the gender divide, nor are we unequal. Nevertheless, neither of these important markers of human dignity, equality and gender identity, are undermined by submission as above.

This form of patriarchy, as modelled by Christ and God, is what we might call biblical patriarchy worked out through fathers, husbands, and elders. It is the opposite of misogyny, and fathers, husbands, and elders submitted to Christ and God’s love, detecting any such abuse from others would seek to correct it.

It is so easy to throw out the baby with the bath water. In an attempt to ensure that dreadful abuse is uprooted and prevented from recurring, it is no surprise that we might overreact.

What must not be ejected though, is the love of the truth and the bible states that ‘Your word is truth’ in reference to scripture.

Finally, I submit this to you as an honest reflection on these verses. I know I haven’t written a sequential commentary on each verse, or visited the Greek, and that further study is always required, but I hope that my small essay is thought-provoking, but not provocative for the sake of being provocative!

If you’ve read this from my website, you’ll have detected a long time ago that I carry XY chromosomes. I’m a bloke. And I know that I have been granted two ears and one mouth for a reason, so I’m very aware that as a man, I’m not ‘independent of woman’, and need to listen twice as hard as speaking.

Illusions of a Quiet Life

Not disappearing into a
3D-painted-non-hole
So convincing

Things not as they seem

A river, graceful and inviting
Tips over its end
And falls somersaulting

Lost in a desert
Fooled by a shimmering
Oasis, a mirage only

One day follows another, but
Not for God’s sleeping agent
Licensed to heal

The call, tearing a hole
In the liminal
Living from the other side

On earth as it is in heaven
There’s a noise
Some say it thundered

Dad-daughter 10K challenge 2024-2025…Post X11 May 11th 2025 Final Post: Bristol 10K

The day has finally arrived. The Bristol 10K start was 8.30 a.m. and Rachel, in London, ran an equivalent 10K around Hackney’s Victoria Park at 10.45.

The culmination of our dual efforts to prepare for a 10K in 2025.

All along, the aim was to be a provocation to each other. Maybe a better word, though too mushy, is an ‘encouragement’, especially in the darker and colder wintry months.

Yes, I will report our separate times innabit, but there’s more to running than the Sports watch strapped to your wrist, or, in my case, Strava on mobile, stuffed in pocket.

The Bristol 10K is like a mass gathering of eagles or vultures (take your pick) diving on their prey. More than ten thousand descend on the city centre, streaming from all points of the compass, with running numbers and Zone colours safety pinned to running vests and t-shirts.

Not sure why, but I was placed in the faster Orange Zone, so spent the whole 10K being overtaken by faster runners rather than overtaking. You’ll hear many telling the same story that ‘adrenaline on the day sees you round’ or ‘the atmosphere is so great, you get carried along by the cheering crowds’; I don’t want to douse these descriptions in cold water, but when you’re struggling to keep going after 7K (like me) cheering crowds such thoughts, I found, are pushed to the rear of one’s consciousness!

The weather has been stupefyingly wonderful throughout April and May. Wall to wall sunshine. But that meant, even by 8.30, it was rather warm. Too warm perhaps…but even warmer in Hackney when Daut 3 set off.

Stats

Dad: 59.50

Rachel: 57.08

So, hats off to Rachel! And to her the bragging rights belong!

However, I’m rather chuffed. My three aims (i) run without stopping (ii) under my age (iii) under 60’ if possible.

If you’re thinking I waited under the finishing gantry to just shave the 60’ mark…nope. Anyone watching would have seen a different story etched on my sweaty brow.

My ‘no beer, no bread’ fast is over. A cold Guinness was had upon reaching home

My ‘no beer, no bread’ fast is over. A cold Guinness was had upon reaching home.

Cheers, everybody! I’ve enjoyed seeing how widely spread these bog-posts have been read, and I hope you’ve been entertained and, just maybe, they’ve pushed you to find those old trainers and give a Parkrun a go, or a local 10K…or further.

The final word, though, I will give to Eric Liddell, the athlete who starred in the 1981 film Chariots of Fire – I can only very faintly add my Amens:

‘I believe God made me for a purpose, but He also made me fast! And when I run I feel His pleasure’

“Out! Out! Out!” Anti-Hamas Protests in Gaza bring some hope.

It is 8am on Thursday morning. I have just returned from a morning walk across fields and footpaths. It was full of beauty and charm, but surprisingly cold, and I’m downing a cup of tea to warm up and have two jumpers on.

During the walk, I listened to Saturday’s edition of BBC Radio 4’s From Our Own Correspondent. The main report was from Gaza and Israel, and it gave me a glimmer of hope that this ghastly and grisly conflict might be drawing to a close.

The report was classic BBC. It told a fundamental truth wrapped up in an editorial attempt to be unbiased. It failed, and thankfully so, because the comparisons between Israel and Gaza proved to be compelling rather than the similarities.

The premise for the programme was to compare and contrast the protests in Israel with those in Gaza. In Israel, mainly in Tel Aviv, street protests against Netanyahu’s military strategy call upon the government to do everything to return the 59 hostages remaining in Gaza. In Gaza, there are now also anti-Hamas protests, demanding Hamas to relinquish their grip on power, shouting “Out! Out! Out!” referring to Hamas not the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) Hamas' iron grip on Gaza is slowly slipping as residents protest - Hamas' iron grip on Gaza is slowly slipping as residents protest - BBC News

The comparison between the protests in Israel and Gaza, however, highlights the truth, that Hamas is a cruel and heartless organisation that is not only responsible for the despicable atrocity on Oct 7th, 2023 murdering unarmed Israeli civilians in a kibbutz and at the Nova music festival, but intimidating its own population, suppressing dissent through imprisonment, torture, and murder. Israel, by contrast, is a democracy and dissent and public protest carries no threat of false imprisonment, torture, or elimination.

Gazan’s, once too afraid to speak against Hamas, are now doing so, so desperate are they to end the suffering brought on their heads by Hamas’s attack and subsequent declaration of intent to repeat such attacks, continuing rocket fire into Israel, resisting the IDF, refusal to return the hostages, and, ultimately, their refusal to lay down their weapons, surrender, and leave.

But now, Gazan’s are rising against Hamas, I might have grown cold on my walk, not having taken a jumper, but my heart and blood, chilled by events in Gaza and Israel, has begun to thaw.

Hamas, as I have written before, should hang their heads in shame and leave Gaza

Hamas, as I have written before, should hang their heads in shame and leave Gaza. Whether or not one believes in the Palestinian cause, their actions on Oct 7th and since then disqualify them from holding power. They must go. And all the hostages must be returned. Iran, which has funded and backed Hamas, is primarily responsible for rebuilding Gaza, but its poisonous anti-Israeli policies preclude it from any political process in Gaza after the war.

The lie undermining the Palestinian cause is that the only way to achieve justice is to oppose Israel, politically and militarily. The bible, however, teaches a different course altogether…and one that takes enormous faith.

To Abraham, God said:

‘I will make you a great nation…I will bless you…and you shall be a blessing, I will bless those who bless you and curse him who curses you’ Genesis 12v1-3

Is Israel perfect? No. Is it a hostile neighbour? Yes, some groups within Israel are like Nabal, Abigail’s husband, a scoundrel, evil and wicked (1Sam 25) and who view the Palestinians as impediments, obstacles in their way to recreate an Israel that mirrors the shouts of pro-Palestinian marchers ‘From the River to the Sea’.

Nevertheless, the word of God slices through all these objections and places a challenge at the door of Palestinians, Tehran, Damascus, London, and Washington: ‘Will you bless Israel or curse Israel?’

In conclusion, my heart was warmed. Some hope again circulating in my body and mind that the present conflict will end. Hamas has to go. But what will replace them? And what spirit will inhabit them? What attitude will they have towards Israel?

On that hinges the future of Palestinian prosperity and Palestinian-Israeli relations for the next generation.

Do they want God’s blessing or Tehran’s?

Romans 12 and the autonomous self

I don’t know how many times I’ve read Paul’s letter to the Romans, but the slightly worn and discoloured edges of its pages in my bible give the game away. And yet I can’t say it’s my ‘favourite’ New Testament book. If pressed, I’d opt for 2 Corinthians, but that’s a subject for another day.

This morning, after I’d slogged round a 10K run, showered, recovered with a cuppa and a bowl of cereal, I sat down at my desk to read Romans chapter 12 – I’ve been reading through the New Testament more or less a chapter a day, and R12 happens to be the next one up.

Morning routine

So I read its familiar verses. And then saw something I hadn’t before. That’s what this short sketch will attempt to explore.

Paul’s route to writing Romans 12 is strangely different from the route the average Westerner in 21st Century has taken before reading Romans 12.

The aim of this post is a little like the spider in the bath. Can we climb out of our own cultural/philosophical bath to have a peek over the rim into Paul’s world…and thereby ‘see’ Romans 12 from a new perspective?

If we accept for the moment that what we perceive as the Universe came about many billions of years ago as a result of the Big Bang, we can equally propose that our Western culture has arisen from a Big Bang of Greek philosophical thinking, upgraded in the Enlightenment via its apostles such as Descartes (1596 – 1650) and Locke (1632 – 1704), and their philosophical offspring or disciples Voltaire (1694 – 1778), and Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804).

Just as we occupy the space-time continuum after-glow of the Big Bang, so we are we living in the after-glow of the Enlightenment Big Bang…despite the efforts of post-modern deconstruction.

Central tenets of the Enlightenment include Rationalism, Empiricism, the Autonomous self, self-respect, and self-love. Famous quotes may help bridge the gap between these vague assertions and the reality of our daily lives and influences upon our thinking.

Descartes – ‘I think therefore I am’

Locke – ‘Every man has a property in his own person. This, nobody has a right to but himself’

Voltaire – ‘The pursuit of pleasure must be the goal of every rational person’

Kant – ‘Enlightenment is man's leaving his self-caused immaturity. Immaturity is the incapacity to use one's intelligence without the guidance of another. Such immaturity is self-caused if it is not caused by lack of intelligence, but by lack of determination and courage to use one's intelligence without being guided by another. Sapere Aude! Have the courage to use your own intelligence! is therefore the motto of the enlightenment’

From this era came the French Revolution (‘Liberté, égalité, fraternité ) and the War of Independence resulting in the creation of the United States whose tagline in the Declaration of Independence: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’. The difference between the France that emerged from the Revolution was largely atheistic but tolerant of Catholic and Protestant Christianity, America was a Christian nation but tolerant towards other faiths and none. Nevertheless, all Western nations have been moulded by the creeds proposed in the Enlightenment, its light falling full square on individual liberty and individual autonomy.

‘No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind’

We are fooling ourselves if we believe we have arrived in 2025 without the past three or four centuries of philosophical thought influencing what we take for granted. Or worse, we think this generation has not been derived from the past.

St Paul, in the First Century, knew nothing about Rationalism or Empiricism, and the ideas of an independent self were as alien to him as they are to the most basic biblical world-views.

For Paul, the existence of an independent self is an illusion, and to pursue such an aim is to court trouble in the form of anxiety, anguish, and mental health as we end up fighting against our true nature…which is not to be independent. John Donne, the poet and priest, was a critic of the Enlightenment’s more extreme exponents: ‘No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main…any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.’

If Donne could see that we are involved in mankind, St Paul goes further and asks a more searching question; a question that makes no sense to us, so imbued are we with rational thought and the cult of the individual. The question St Paul asks is ‘Who are you in?’

And Paul is not alone. Jesus also.

It takes some mental re-engineering to even understand what being ‘in’ someone means. If we want to be generous towards the Enlightenment, we can certainly say it represented an improvement over the forms of authority that had become authoritarian by nature. Concepts such as the divine right of kings, absolute monarchy, papacy, aristocracy, and superstition were overturned and replaced by empirical data and observation as the basis of knowledge, and the exaltation of faith in reason over faith in God.

‘I am in the Father, and the Father in Me’ John 14v11

‘I am the vine and you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him, bears much fruit’ John 15v5

‘I do not pray for these alone, but also for those that will believe in Me through their word…that they may be one just as We are one: I in them and You in Me’ John 17v20f

‘It is because of God that you are in Christ Jesus…’ 1 Cor 1v30

‘As in Adam all die, so in Christ all are made alive’ 1 Cor 15v22

‘…our fathers were…all baptised into Moses in the cloud and he sea’ 1 Cor 10v1,2

‘…baptised into Christ Jesus…’ Rom 6v3

The human body is made up of trillions upon trillions of individual cells, each of whom are entirely unique, having their own function and contribution to the body. Imagine interviewing one cell and asking, ‘Are you alive?’ The answer would be a definite ‘Yes’. Ask, Whose life are you alive with?’, and despite their unique individual contribution to the body, the true answer is the name of the person in whom they live. So all the cells in my body are alive, not with their own life but with mine. And my life is a composite of all the life in each of my cells. Every cell in me is in John Stevens and John Stevens is in every cell.

So, when we say we are ‘in Christ’ it means that we are (a) not living an independent life (b) our life is the life of Christ (c) we are living in a community with others (d) therefore we share and participate in the history of the person in whom we are ‘in’.

This explains why Paul can say ‘I was crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live but Christ lives in me, the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me’ Gal 2v20

To Romans 12.

This morning the familiar words of Romans 12 were as they had always been, but it struck me with fresh force that this chapter is both autobiographical and entirely as a result of the transformation that occurred in and through Paul by being placed in Christ.

True doctrine cannot be separated from the person in whom the source of the doctrine has taken root i.e. Christ himself.

Listen to the drama in Paul’s words:

‘Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse’ v 14

I can only imagine the emotion Paul experienced as he felt compelled by the Spirit of Christ to write those words; apostolic words from the great persecutor of the church. And maybe, when the risen Jesus confronted Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus and said ‘you are kicking against the goads’ the goads that pierced Paul over and over again were the verbal or material blessings he received from those Christians he cruelly dragged off to prison or worse, were killed at his command.

‘If your enemy is hungry feed him, if he is thirsty give him a drink for in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head’ v 20

This was Paul’s experience in his pre-Christian days as the persecutor and his experience as a persecuted apostle of Christ, sharing in His sufferings.

‘Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good’ v 21

If one verse sums up Paul’s autobiography it is this.

To use the current vogue, Romans 12 is Paul’s ‘lived experience’ rather than a cobbled-together list of theoretical statements.

The point, though, of Romans 12 is that all believers, Jews or Gentiles, are in their own after-glow from the Big Bang of conversion to Christ, or, as the bible puts it, being placed ‘in Christ’.

To conclude, there is no autonomous self. It’s an illusion. We are either ‘in Adam’ and still hooked up to the liar in the long grass, saturated in an Enlightenment deception, and trying to achieve something that will wear us ragged, or, through the love of God in Christ, we can be reconnected with God, who places us in Christ, and begin to live His life, as characterised by Paul’s revolutionary statements in Romans 12.

Can Opener

Like other domestica:
Ink-filled pens
Sharpeners, staplers,
And can openers
You can travel for years
Before you meet The One

Then, in a moment,
The metal lid yields
A smooth easy incision
And what was beneath
Is open to the blue sky

A blade, disguised
As a music chord
A Monet, a mime, a
Dancer’s move,
A line in a love song
And I’m sliced open
Spilling the light
You’ve been packing
Inside

Little did I know, I am
A suitcase for the Almighty
On His travels

Until he finds you

The Pope’s funeral…Conclave…and Saints Saints? Who are you?

With the Vatican and her cardinals in full dress for the Pope Francis’s funeral and the Conclave, the world watches on, waiting for the white smoke announcing that there is a ‘winner’ and the Roman Catholic cardinals have elected a new pope.

We are about to be re-educated with Catholic terminology, ecclesiastical ranks, historical traditions…but essentially, the Cardinals are locked away (Conclave means ‘with’ a ‘key’) and someone has been given a Chemistry kit comprising of potassium chlorate, lactose, and chloroform resin to produces the white smoke when ignited.

(The recent film, Conclave, is an excellent re-enactment of the previous conclave resulting in the election of Pope Francis. Well worth a watch. Perhaps an even better film on Roman Catholic popery is The Two Popes).

One of the features of the Roman Catholic church is not only how it elects popes but who exactly qualifies to be canonized as a Saint.

Some facts:

• Only 83 of the 266 Popes have been canonized as saints

• The first 35 Popes were all canonized as saints

• During Pope Francis’s reign, he recognised 942 saints including the 813 Martyrs of Otranto

Roman Catholic doctrine regarding saints:

Catholics believe in the ‘communion of saints’ and that extends to those believers who have died as baptised members of the church. In other words the church - according to Roman Catholics - comprises of all who have been baptised, usually as infants, currently alive or have already died.

From among general ‘saints’, the Catholic church recognises that some have shown remarkable holiness or have miracles ascribed to them and are ‘venerated’ as Saints…not to be worshipped but neither simply as good examples to follow. These Saints are believed to be interceding in heaven for the church – the ‘communion of saints’ being more like a dual carriageway of communication than worship.

…the essence of the New Covenant/New Testament is the tearing down of all barriers between God and man…

What does the New Testament say about saints.

1. All believers are addressed as ‘saints’ e.g. Romans 1v 7 ‘To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called saints’ 1 Cor 1 v 2 ‘to the church of God, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints’ 2 Cor 1v1 ‘to all the saints who are in Achaia’ Eph ‘to the saints who are in Ephesus’ Philip 1 v 1 ‘to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi’ Col 1 v 2 ‘To the saints…in Christ…in Colossae

2. The Greek word ‘hagios’ translated ‘saints’ is the word used for ‘holy’ or ‘holiness’ and literally means ‘set apart’. God is holy. He is ‘other’. He is not a man. It includes moral purity, of course, truth and goodness, true righteousness.

3. Believers are therefore called ‘saints’ because they are ‘in Christ Jesus’ who is holy…not due to any innate holiness or goodness they may possess

4. Baptism in water does not baptise us into Christ. The phrase ‘baptised into Christ Jesus’ e.g. Romans 6 v 3 is a description of what happens when someone becomes a believer. In 1 Cor 1 v 30 we read ‘…of Him are you in Christ Jesus’. In other words, it is God who baptises us into Christ Jesus, it is an invisible, spiritual union that has occurred. Baptists and Catholics, and all between these extremes, need to come to terms with the fact that in Romans 6 there is no mention of water!

Is it right to venerate some saints as Saints with a capital S?

What Catholics (and Orthodox churches) do ceremonially, Protestants do by reputation, without the label Saint or St.

The danger of veneration is to deflect our direct communion with God through Christ by the Spirit towards communing with the saints in heaven and placing intermediaries in between ourselves as believers and God Himself whereas the essence of the New Covenant/New Testament is the tearing down of all barriers between God and man so that we are restored to direct communion with God, thereby rendering any intermediaries as unnecessary.

The danger of refusing labels is unreality. The truth is that many Protestants recognise some believers have led incredible Christian lives and, depending on one’s line up of heroes of the faith, we are all cheered on by ‘such a cloud of witnesses’ Heb 12v1.

Here’s some of mine: the Wesley brothers and George Whitfield, Hudson Taylor, CT Studd, George Muller, Rees Howells, Richard Wurmbrandt, Bonhoeffer, Watchman Nee, Brother Andrew, John Wimber, Colin Urquhart, and many others.

Nevertheless, the New Testament makes no distinction between ‘saints’, and it expressly teaches that through Christ’s death, resurrection, and ascension, we have been restored to direct communion with God; no intermediaries are required.

To answer the question – Saints? Who are you?

If you believe that Jesus rose from the dead and have committed yourself to Him, God has baptised you into Christ Jesus.

If that’s genuinely true, you need to be baptised in water to signify to the Lord and the world what God has done for you: that He has baptised you into Christ and thereby declared you as holy, as set apart for God, as a ‘saint’ in whatever village, town, or city that you live in.

And you need to be baptised in the Spirit – Jesus is the baptiser in the Spirit - so that, from now on, you are learning to trust in His life, His holiness to run like a river through you, bringing life wherever it flows, in you and through you to the world.

Final Comments

Roman Catholics believe that present day popes are in a direct line of apostolic succession dating back to St Peter – hence St Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

Whether you believe that or not, what has been recorded in Acts Chapter 2 is the first sermon after the resurrection, by St Peter, in Jerusalem as the Jews gathered for the Feast of Pentecost.

After he had preached about the resurrection of Jesus the crowd, ‘cut to the heart’, asked what they should do. Peter’s reply was:

‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized on the Name of Jesus the Messiah (Christ), for the forgiveness of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’ v 38

The message is the same to day as it was on the Day of Pentecost.

Easter Saturday

My early morning routine hasn’t varied a great deal for decades. It is far from remarkable but serves to get body, soul, and spirit unclogged from the inactivity of the night.

It is as follows: wake up with or without alarm, bathroom, exercises, kettle on, Radio 4, tea bag in cup, make cup of tea, pour cereal into bowl, add milk to tea and cereal, and retire to my study, write yesterday’s events and reflections in a journal, open bible and read a chapter, pray, finish breakfast, and attack whatever is top of the TTD list.

And every other day, an early morning run is inserted between exercises and kettle on.

Today it all went off-piste.

I woke up at 4 but thought it was 5. Five o’clock would have been ideal. The intention was to sneak in a 10K and pick up the rest of the routine before getting into the day, getting the house ready for an invasion of daughters and grandchildren. Poked head outside to find it was ridiculously dark, cold, and wet. Realised it was 4 not 5. Decided to postpone run by an hour. Listening to a podcast, I lay down on the settee…and woke up at 7am, too late for the run.

Grumpily, I picked up rest of the routine.

And read Isaiah 61.

Jesus quoted Isaiah 61 at the start of his ministry, having returned from the wilderness temptations and encounter with the devil in the power of the Holy Spirit.

‘The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me’, He quoted to his home town synagogue congregation in Nazareth, ‘because the Lord has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent Me to heal the broken-hearted. To proclaim liberty to the captives, the recovery of sight to the blind, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound.’

It is a prelude to and an explanation of the remarkable miracles of healing and deliverance that accompanied Jesus’ ministry, often to the poorest in Israel’s society.

What struck me today, Easter Saturday, was the contrast between the heady days of large crowds and astounding miracles, and the solitary body of Jesus lying in the grave, alone, the crowds having departed, and the disciples abandoning him through fear of the Romans.

We remember Easter Friday, Christ’s arrest, interrogation the night before, the crucifixion, and burial and we celebrate Easter Day, Sunday, to mark the resurrection, the stone rolled away, the appearance of Jesus to Mary Magdalene, the other women, and then Peter and John and the disciples, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, and doubting Thomas. Death defeated, Jesus stands amongst them and says ‘Peace’ and eats fish. He is not a ghost, the disciples fearing their own insanity are not imagining the resurrection; he eats fish and struggles with the bones.

But Easter Saturday?

This morning, when I thought about Easter Saturday, my initial thought was of darkness. The sealed tomb, of course, would have been dark, and if not stone cold, then far from warm. A few years ago, I stooped into the tomb in Jerusalem that fits the description and location of Jesus’ burial site. It was a blisteringly hot day, but cool in the tomb.

Dark, and still. The suffering of the cross, at last, was over. It seems there is nothing to say. An inert, deafening silence characterises Easter Saturday.

The disciples, maybe 120 men and women, are in shock, hiding in various locations in Jerusalem, unsure about what to do. It’s the Sabbath, of course, so inactivity deepens as the hours pass. Waves of grief, confusion, and fear, percolate through the minds and bodies of those whose hope had been shattered. Only days before, Jesus had ridden into Jerusalem with the crowds singing ‘Hosannah! The king of Israel’.

He is not a ghost, the disciples fearing their own insanity are not imagining the resurrection; he eats fish and struggles with the bones

As I sat here, with my cup of tea and cereal, reading Isaiah 61 and musing on the contrast between the crowds and a single body alone in a grave, a clue emerged in the final verses of the chapter like a doorway into the divine wisdom. A glimpse of light in the grim reality of the crucifixion and death of an innocent Man.

Like an overstuffed suitcase, Isaiah 61 is crammed with good news. The poor, the broken-hearted, the blind, the trapped…all are blessed individually and the whole nation of Israel is being repaired…imagine that…’they shall repair the ruined cities’ v4. And it seemed as if everything was on track for national renewal, but just at the last moment, the anticipated Isaiah fulfilment seemed to fall apart and go into reverse. One moment Jesus is riding into Jerusalem, the crowds proclaiming Him as the King of Israel - the clash between Jesus and the authorities had long been brewing - but the authorities suddenly get the upper hand, and the dream was dismantled and crushed.

But did they?

The clue is in the final verse:

‘For, as the earth brings forth its bud. As the garden causes the things sown in it to spring forth, so the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations’

So, the question is ‘how does a garden cause the things sown to spring forth?’ And the answer is simple. It is in the word ‘sown’. A seed falls into the ground.

Now Jesus’ parable makes sense:

‘The hour has come that the Son of Man should be glorified. Truly I say to you, unless a grain of wheat, a seed, falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much fruit’ John 12 v 23,24

The route to the glory, to the fruitfulness, to the national repair, was not to be Jesus the King of Israel triumphing over Herod, and then Rome, but as a seed, to die…the divine secret revealed all around us in every garden, orchard, vineyard, allotment, veg patch, flowerpot, if we have eyes to see.

It’s a different way to run a kingdom

Easter Saturday. Jesus, dead and buried, not only to be raised as one individual, but just as one apple pip can germinate to create a whole tree, a tree that produces many thousands of apples containing similar pips, or seeds, every year, so Jesus’s death would lead to many thousands, millions in fact, of similar seeds…the life of each believer.

This is true Christianity. This is the Easter hope. Not just that ‘death is not the end’. Not just that the resurrection of Christ is a historical fact, or that Jesus ate fish, but that Jesus is being reproduced in us if we have faith to believe what He has done for us and we abandon our futile attempts to be good…or evil.

To finish.

It’s been a while since I sowed any seeds. The next time I do, I will remember Easter Saturday, and how the whole world is being populated by fruit from one seed. It’s a different way to run a kingdom.