And for me this is enough for now

"For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven.", so claimed the preacher in the book of Ecclesiastes. Of all the books of the Bible, Ecclesiastes is my favourite; it fits my cynical worldview. Not for me the name it and claim it theology of the word of faith movement. There's is an easy believism that replaces true faith with a decerebriated Christianity. I've heard, seen and experiences too many "promises" that have not been fulfilled. Promises that seem to be predicated on giving more; it seems that the only people who benefit from such a theology are the recipients of the flock’s misplaced largess.

No, not for me the empty words of faith, and the mantra like repetitions of good reports and claiming the promises.

I believe, but I do not know what I believe. I am a Christian but what does that mean? For some like Geering, and Cupitt it is a non-theistic, non-supernaturalistic faith. Yet such a faith is disingenuous. I much prefer the honest atheism of a Mackie or Dawkins to the lukewarm non-believism of the "sea of faith".

A while back I was in Thailand. I was attending a church conference of my former cult the World wide Church of God. While in Thailand I encountered for the first time an alternative world view, that of Buddhism. I visited Wat Po and saw the reclining Buddha. I learnt a bit about its precepts. The middle may was attractive, but I did not become Buddhist. As a philosophy there was much I admired but the middle way seemed like too much hard work. So I moved on.

After the WCG split I wandered and found myself at a charismatic Anglican church. I found people who accepted me. Yet even there I found myself unable to truly connect. My story was outside the parishioners’ comfortable middle class experience.

Every now and again I visit other places. The energy of Pentecostalism reminds me of what I grew up with. There is a sense of purpose and direction. But it comes at a cost; the suspension of one's critical faculties. I see all the manipulations that I experienced in my old cult at work, so I move on.

I am now 45, well on the way to middle age. By this time I thought that I would have had a few answers to the questions of life. But no. Instead I echo the same question that the preacher asked - "What do people gain from all the toil at which they toil under the sun?"

I am a Christian. I believe in the virgin birth, the death and resurrection, the atonement. All of these I believe in. Everything else is uncertain. And for me this is enough for now.

A long time back

It'd been a long time. It's not that I haven't had things to talk about; I have. But I have not felt that motivated. too many things going through my head. I had just been away down south for a week. I hoped it would clear my head, but I have returned with more thoughts than ever buzzing round in my head.

Still it was nice to get away apart from picking up some mild food poisoning at a dodgy Thai restraurant on the first day, making me feel sick as a dog for a couple of days. I almost didn't make due to a small coming car incident, but the panel beater was able to repair the ding in time. I stopped off for a couple of days in hanmer before heading down to Chritchurch. The central part of Hanmer has become like a mini Rotorua with motels congregating around the theremal pools. Due to the food poisoning I didn't do much though i did soak in the hot pools for an hour.

The weather was variable; going from t-shirt weather on the first day to sleet, hail and snow when I was in Christchurch. I took my mother out for her birthday to a quaint restraurant which played live music. The food was not very adventurous, but very nicely cooked. And the staff were very friendly making us feel at home. My mother enjoyed it.

I spent a day knocking around Picton before heading back to Wellington. Again another close shave with food; the restaurant I had dinner at was absolutely appalling. It should be a crime to cook food so badly (but at least no food poisoning this time). I caught the last Bluebridge ferry over. Picton had been fine, and still with no wind; a nice quiet day to chill out. Sailing through the sounds in the dark is surreal; apart from the odd light on the shore or a passing boat all was totally dark, and disorientating. Yet it was a clear night and due to the lack of town lights the night sky was amazing.

But when we hit the strait, there was a real roll on, and by mid strait the wind had become a howling gail. Everytime the ferry hit a wave the whole ship shook and shuddered. To pass the time I watched "Journey to the Centre of the Earth". It was a remake of an earlier film. The original was much better, but at least it passed the time. We entered Wellington harbour one hour late. Then home to find all was as I left it. The next day I heard that all the ferrys had been cancelled due to the weather.

Another moral conundrum

Another interesting story I read recently.

The Pope of the Roman Catholic Church on his visit to Africa was reported as arguing against the use of condoms as protection against getting infected by HIV. According to the report Pope Benedict argued that condoms made the problem worse. In this the Pope is reinforcing traditional Catholic teaching on human sexuality, in which the only legitimate place for sex is within the confines of monogamous heterosexual marriage and all forms of birth control are sin.

Africa has one of the highest rates of infections of the virus in the world and in recent years health workers have advocated "safe-sex" via the use of condoms to reduce the infection rate. The response of the advocates of "safe-sex" to the Pope's pronouncements has been one of horror, arguing that the Pope has shown an ignorance of the cultural reality that has lead to the high rates of infection. By condemning the use of condoms, the Pope’s critics argue that he has set back the anti-AIDs programme by years.

Evangelicals do not necessarily see the use of birth control as sinful. But they agree with the Catholic Church’s teaching that the only place for sex is within the confines of heterosexual marriage. Thus many conservative evangelical groups have also been highly critical of the safe-sex message seeing it as advocating promiscuity leading to higher rates of STIs.

Condoms work by placing a barrier in the way of transmission of the virus between sexual partners. But they are not 100% effective. It is accepted that there is a failure rate even if used correctly. Annual average failure rates resulting in pregnancy have been estimated as between 10% - 36%. And when there is a failure there will be a transfer of body fluids that carry the risk of transmitting the HIV virus.

Thus the only 100% effective way to prevent sexual transmission is abstinence. But abstinence would require a major shift in sexual behaviour. And changing sexual behaviour within any group is very difficult. Even within Evangelical teenagers who have taken the purity pledge of no sex before marriage a large number lose their virginity before marriage. It has been estimated that such pledges have only a 5-10% success rate. The pressures of living in a culture that places a low priority on chastity overwhelms the good intentions expressed when the teens made the pledge. And each sexual experience carries the risk of infection with an STI such as HIV.

What then for Africa and its millions of AIDs sufferers? Should one take the morally pure road, and teach an abstinence only message which fails to take into account the cultural realities. Or should one accept the culture as it is and see condoms as a harm minimisation measure (a sexual equivalent of a clean needle exchange programme amongst intravenous drug users) despite its high failure rate?

A moral condundrum

The other day I read a newspaper report of the tragic case of a 9 year old Brazilian girl who was raped by her step-father which resulted in the girl getting pregnant with twins. Two medical doctors looking after the girl decided that it would be better for the physical and mental health of the girl that she had an abortion. Both of the doctors and the family of the girl were catholic, and the Catholic Church has a strict teaching against abortion and on learning of what happened, Archibishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho excommunicated both of the doctors as well as the family of the girl. The family member whose selfish and repugnant act had resulted in the girl getting pregnant, as well as no doubt causing severe psychological and emotional trauma was not excommunicated. According to the Cardinal quoted in the report the reason for excommunicating the doctors and the family members while not excommunicating the girl’s abuser was that the killing of the unborn twins was a much greater sin than the rape of the girl.

The case raises a number of thorny moral dilemmas for conservative Christians, most notably is whether an abortion unacceptable in all cases. Is the life of the unborn so sacred that the health and well being of an innocent child like the nine year old in this case must take second place? For though she was physically is capable of conceiving, is she emotionally able to cope with an unplanned pregnancy at so young an age on top of the trauma she suffered from the rape. And is she physically able to carry the twins to full term without putting her own health or even life at risk.

It is my view that the emotional and physical health of the girl takes precedence. Therefore I would support the actions of the Doctors and the family of the girl against the teachings of the church.

The second dilemma is how to deal with the perpetrator of the abuse. At the heart of Christianity is the idea of unmerited forgiveness. All have sinned and come short of God's standard but through the atonement all can be forgiven. But how is possible to reconcile forgiveness with an act that involved a violation of trust at its most basic level. As adults we need to protect our children. At the same time as Christians we are called to forgive all offenses, no matter how serious and repugnant.

The question I have is is it really possible to forgive in a case such as this. I know that I would find forgiveness in this situation difficult, if not impossible.

I'm not religous

I find it strange that evangelicals deny that they are religious. For evangelicals are very religious. But many play the game of denial equating religion with "human created rituals" as though many of the rituals they follow somehow fell from heaven complete and pure in form.

The hypocrisy of this position was again brought home to me last night when I caught up with a work mate and one of his friends at the Southern Cross Bar. Over a couple of wines the conversation ranged far and wide and eventually came to religion. At this point my friend mentioned that I was religious (my friend's an agnostic and on previous nights we have discussed the topic of god over a couple of wines). By not trying to deny that I was religious I was able to talk about God and find out what each of my colleagues thought. If I had denied that I was religious then I would have rightly been seen as a hypocrite and the chance for an open and honest discussion would have been lost.

I also wonder what certain religion denying evangelicals would have thought of having a couple of wines or beers in a pub with unbelievers. Maybe they would be too comfortable in their heaven sent and pure "non-religious" rituals to step in the door of a pub with the unbelievers and let a drop of alcohol pass their lips.

Wired

I'm feeling a bit wired at the moment. This morning started with a funeral of the brother of a friend of mine who died in the last few days. As a rule I hate funerals, and this one was no different. It was also one of the funerals that seemed to drag on for ever, and due to work I left before the end.

I hadn't had much to do with him in recent years, but I did go to a youth camp with him many years ago and ended up rooming with him. I remember he could tell tall stories and make them so believable you'd think they were true. So it was no surprise he got into sales and ended up very successful owning and operating one of the biggest car sales yards in Wellington. He had it all; a successful business, a beautiful partner, great kids. And just as he was reaping the rewards of all his hard work he was gone at just 40 years of age.

Then I was off to work which was uneventful until just near the end. Then things got interesting which often happens in my line of work. Things can be so quiet, then chaos. So I ended up having to sort out an incident just when I hoped to easing down to the end of shift. And when you have a shift like that it always takes a while to unwind and still the mind, hence why I am still up past the midnight hour.

But tomorrow (or should i say today) is another day :)

Time

The other night Huggies was filling out a form in which she had to fill in which age group she belonged to. Filling it in she exclaimed how old she felt, this coming from someone who was born in the year that I sat UE (the precursor to NCEA), to which I exclaimed "if that makes you old what does that make me".

Age it seems catches up with us all. My attempts to not grow up have failed dismally, as one of the clients I work with points out when he has me on about all the greys hairs that are coming though. And he has a point. I could try anti-greying treatments but that would only mask what is going on underneath. Time as they say stops for no man.

Do I have the same dreams as when I was in my twenties. Yes and no. Some dreams I've achieved, others have faded away into oblivion. Others are still there, unfulfilled like some sore that never heals. Then there are new ones. What will become of these? Will they be fulfilled? Will they die? Will they become another sore, another source of pain and frustration?

They are all questions that only time and God can reveal. In one sense it would be easier not to dream, much less painful, less frustrating. But to not dream is to not live.