Gaudete (or Rose) Sunday

Today is Gaudete (or Rose) Sunday, the third Sunday in Advent where we lay down the penitential a little and start to get excited about the prospect of the coming of the Lord and 'Rejoice' (for that is what gaudete means!

One of my favourite songs is Steeleye Span's rendition of the words below:

Latin	English
Gaudete, gaudete! Christus est natus Ex Maria virgine, gaudete!	Rejoice, rejoice! Christ is born (Out) Of the Virgin Mary — rejoice!
Tempus adest gratiæ Hoc quod optabamus, Carmina lætitiæ Devote reddamus.	The time of grace has come— what we have wished for, songs of joy Let us give back faithfully.
Deus homo factus est Natura mirante, Mundus renovatus est A Christo regnante.	God has become man, To the wonderment of Nature, The world has been renewed By the reigning Christ.
Ezechielis porta Clausa pertransitur, Unde lux est orta Salus invenitur.	The closed gate of Ezekiel Is passed through, Whence the light is born, Salvation is found.
Ergo nostra contio Psallat iam in lustro; Benedicat Domino: Salus Regi nostro.	Therefore let our gathering Now sing in brightness Let it give praise to the Lord: Greeting to our King.

But how many of those who are Christian are rejoicing today I wonder?

On a day when a foolish secularist proclaims that science dispels the myth of Christianity and denounces us as a bunch of 'Zimmer frame'  wrinklies I have to admit that I am (rejoicingly and joyfully) confused!

When Church finds others things to talk about!

I am rather confused regarding just what 'Church' is all about; for I naively thought it was generally all about Jesus and how He died for us (all) and His (God's) love and all that sort of stuff and yet I appear to be wrong.

What we are apparently supposed to talk about is women bishops and how we need to be seen to be concerned with equality and rights and issues of power and authority.

This morning I awoke to read that supporters of the consecration of women feel that the time has come for 'compromise to be abandoned' and listened on my radio to clerics explaining how we needed to be seen to be doing what society views as 'the right thing'.

I am surrounded by people (from outside the Church) who want to talk about same-sex marriage and  by those (within it) who are sticking their fingers in their ears and singing loudly ('I can't hear you, I can't hear you!").

Actually, here's what I thought we (the Church) should really be doing today:

Talking about Jesus

Looking like Jesus in all that we do

Living like Jesus in both public and private areas of our life

Loving like Jesus loved (sacrificially) and lives (lovingly admonishing, enabling and accepting)

But it seems that, if what I hear and read are true, I am indeed merely confused!

Effective Church - a matter of class?

One of the challenges that face any church is that of getting the members to be engaged and active and I am have always been told that a large part of this relates to the issue of class.

Having been in middle and working class churches and lived in areas that ranged from posh to project I have always been challenged by the issue of class and what it means. After all, the Gospel is there for all people and this means that none are excluded or marginalised and yet when I worked with working class folk in London I found that a number of things happened when one of the community came to Christ and became part of Church:

1. They were totally committed and gave everything they had to the point of truly sacrificial giving, 

2. They only had to hear of, or identify, a problem and before you could convene a church council to discuss it, it was done (or at least being taken care of),

3. Although they had low paid jobs and were, in the main, typical working class/blue collar workers, they were full of initiative and invention, and

4. They were introduced to middle class ways and soon became (according to family and friends anyway) posh! Three course meals, cheese and wine and other outward trappings became the norm for the convert and rather than equip them for heaven, we appeared to be equipping them to eat at a Berni restaurant rather than perhaps for heaven

An interesting fact in every community, be it city, town or village, is the fact that social deprivation is usually restricted to certain areas. There is always an 'other side of the tracks' community with its challenging folk and low paid workforce.

Church in Hackney was decidedly different to that in Chingford and church in some parts of Kensington and Chelsea was more different still.

Where the population of a place is limited to working class and aspiring working class and middle class relates purely and simply to the cost of the house, church appears to be a difficult thing to grow and equip people for. What we seek is lifestyle changes but what we get is a hobby that involves church. The people are happy to be directed and yet struggle to work off of their own invention and this leads me to think that to be healthy, perhaps a church does need its directive, middle class / upper class movers and shakers.

Is homogenous church, in terms of class, actually impotent church?