Painting Fakes

For some reason I've been listening to Paul McCartney's Silly Love Songs .   It's one of those songs that refuses to leave once it's in your head, even when you try to drive it out with lashings of punk rock or Pink Floyd. I didn't like this song when it first came out in the mid-1970s.  At the time I thought this was because it was silly and superficial.  I was a very serious teenager.  Now I think I was just too immature to appreciate it.  For a start, it's not as simple as it seems.  There's a lot going on beneath the surface.  A jaunty bass rhythm, a horn section counterpointing with lush strings, interwoven harmonies and counter-melodies.  McCartney was (and is) no fool musically. Then the lyrics provide a joyous piece of self-satire, as well as a cheerful poke in the eye for people like his ex-mate John Lennon who seemed to take the art of pop music a lot more seriously than he did.  He asks, "why not have fun?"  Lennon always seemed to

Over the past week I've been watching, in a half-hearted way, the coverage of the Commonwealth Games in Delhi.  Most of the world, even people in the Commonwealth, take no interest in this little colonial remnant.  Aussies love it because our athletes get to win a lot. So why am I only half-hearted?  I think the main reason is that Australian coverage of the event is so poor.  Australian broadcasters have determined (I'm not sure by what means) that Australian audiences are only interested in watching Australian athletes.  It's not that we just get to see events where Australians are competing.  It's that we only get to see the Australians, full stop.  For instance, an Australian, Fabrice Lapierre, won the mens long jump at these games with a jump of 8.30 metres - a full 60 centimetres shorter than Bob Beamon's 1968 effort .  Was this a surprise or was he the favourite?  Who did he beat?  Did he blow the field away with his first jump, or lag before coming thro

I've spent the last couple of weeks working my way through The Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand, a historian from Tel Aviv University.  You couldn't call it an easy read, as although well-written it's very heavy on scholarship, but it's certainly been worth the effort. His basic thesis is that the "Jewish people" is not a long-standing, distinct nation or ethnic group, exiled from its homeland and now returning, but a diverse group of people of varying nationalities united by their religion.  The concept of the Jewish nation was, on his reading, created by the Zionists from the mid 19th century onwards in the context of the rise of "nationalist" ethnic histories around the world and most particularly in Europe.  I'm not in any way qualified to assess his arguments, but I certainly found them compelling.  At risk of oversimplification, let me summarise. 1.  The early stories of Israeli history as presented in the Bible - the sto

Somewhere around 1971 or 1972 one of my dad's friends gave me a pile of English sports magazines.  It was one of the best presents I ever got, although I think he was just clearing out junk.  There was a set of something which may have been called Football Monthly , and a pile of something that could have been called Sports Illustrated although it didn't have any swimsuit models.  They spanned a period from 1967 through to 1970, including the 1968 Olympics and the 1970 World Cup, both held in Mexico. I read those magazines over and over again,  partly because I would read anything and partly because I loved sport.  I was still young enough not to be blase about the unfolding drama.  The writers speculated about who would win the World Cup and patriotically promoted England's chances.  Then they gushed about the brilliance of the eventual Brazilian winners, and mourned the moments that cost England.  They ran over the form guide for the blue riband events in the Olympics,

My relative and fellow blogger Luke recently floated the idea of an " Abraham line " - anything in Genesis before Abraham could be seen as mythical, anything after essentially historical.  Intense discussion followed. I've been thinking about a different kind of line.  In my late teens we had a guest speaker at our youth group on the subject of "cults". By this term, he meant those minority Christian sects who believe things outside Christian orthodoxy - Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Seventh Day Adventists and so on.  At one point in the discussion he made a distinction - one of these (I forget which) he regarded as Christian, the others not.  Various books on "cults" were doing the rounds and each of them had a different definition of a cult, and a different list.  Some included the Catholic Church, put in the non-Christian pile because it doesn't teach salvation by grace alone, and because it teaches idolatory in various

After my possibly over-long catalogue of quotes in which people give the church a caning, here's something more positive to warm your heart.  It comes from one of Australia's most celebrated alcoholics and writers, Henry Lawson . Several of the stories in his collection Joe Wilson's Mates feature the outback parson and missionary Peter M'Laughlan.  This is how he is introduced in "Shall We Gather at the River". I once heard a woman say that he had a beard like you see in some pictures of Christ. Peter M’Laughlan seldom smiled; there was something in his big dark brown eyes that was scarcely misery, not yet sadness – a sort of haunted sympathy…. Towards the end of his life if he went into a “rough” shed or shanty west of the Darling River- and some of them were rough – there would be a rest in the language and drinking, even a fight would be interrupted, and there would be more than one who would lift their hats to Peter M’Laughlan. A bushman very rare

As a teenager I read and loved Lloyd Douglas's books about Jesus, The Robe and The Big Fisherman.   When I say these books are about Jesus I mean they were set in Jesus' day, and he appears in them.  The Robe centres on the commander of the soldiers who are on duty at his crucifixion, while The Big Fisherman takes its title from the apostle Peter who is its main character.  Douglas, a devout Christian, did not attempt to portray Jesus in much detail.  Even in the story of Peter he is a distant, mysterious figure, unimpressive at first sight but profoundly affecting on closer encounter.  What motivates Jesus, what his inner thoughts are, what struggles he undergoes, remain a mystery.  Jesus in these stories is not a person, he is a presence, known almost exclusively by his influence on others. Jim Crace, whose other novels have been mentioned in this blog before, has no such reserve.  As far as I know he doesn't follow any Christian faith and if he does this novel does

Following on from my little catalogue of reasons why people might hate Christians, here's an interesting thought from Jackson Browne .  "The Rebel Jesus" was recorded with The Chieftains for a Christmas album.  I don't know how much theology Browne knows, but he's managed, by accident or design, to write a fabulous liberation theology Christmas carol.  After describing a happy Northern Hemisphere Christmas, he moves on to the person it's all about. Well they call him by 'the Prince of Peace' And they call him by 'the Savior' And they pray to him upon the seas And in every bold endeavor And they fill his churches with their pride and gold While their faith in him increases But they've turned the nature that I worship in From a temple to a robber's den In the words of the rebel Jesus Well we guard our world with locks and guns And we guard our fine possessions And once a year when Christmas comes We give to our relations

I've finally got around to reading Erich Maria Remarque's classic novel of World War 1, All Quiet on the Western Front.   Among other things, I learnt that its German title, Im Westen nichts Neues, properly translates as "Nothing New on the Western Front".  A piece of irony completely in tune with the book itself, and a direct quote from the final page of the book: ...a day so still and quiet along the entire front line that the army dispatches restricted themselves to the single sentence: that there was nothing new to report on the western front. The English title, so thoroughly embedded in our vernacular that it would be impossible for any publisher to change, carries a different kind of irony.  The novel reverberates with the sound of artillery and gunfire.  It has one of the best openings of any book I've read: a scene of satiety, the company recently relieved from the front line, their bellies full after a huge feast.  And on top of it all we&#

This is the last of these reasons and perhaps you're sighing with relief that there's an end in sight for all this negativity.  The good news will follow!  In the meantime, I've saved the biggie for last - joylessness , hypocrisy and shallowness pale into insignificance. I thought of this one (not for the first time by a long shot) while listening to The World Turned Upside Down, a much-covered song by Leon Rosselson made famous by Billy Bragg .  It celebrates a 17th century act of rebellion by a group called "the Diggers" who set up a commune on land owned by wealthy landowners (guilty of "the sin of property") with predictable results.  Their thoughts on the Church: They make the laws To chain us well The clergy dazzle us with heaven Or they damn us into hell We will not worship The God they serve The God of greed who feeds the rich While poor folk starve There's more than a little of Mr Brocklehurst in this, but there's so much

After joylessness and hypocrisy  this one is a little out of the box, and it's not really hate, more just contempt.  It comes from Tom Waits 1999 album Mule Variations and it's called " Chocolate Jesus ". Don't go to church on Sunday, don't get down on my knees and pray Don't memorise the books of the bible, got my own special way I know Jesus loves me, maybe just a little bit more I get down on my knees every Sunday, at Zarelda Lee's candy store Got to be a Chocolate Jesus, make me feel so good inside Got to be a Chocolate Jesus, keep me satisfied Don't want no Yabba Zabba, don't want no Almond Joy There ain't nothin better suitable for this boy Well its the only thing that can pick me up, b etter than a cup of gold See only a Chocolate Jesus, can satisfy my soul When the weather gets rough and its whisky in the shade Best to wrap your saviour up in cellophane He flows like The Big Muddy, but that's okay Pour him ov

To continue with the subject of why people might be hostile towards Christians .... A second reason is a strong feeling that the Christian church is riddled with hypocrisy. My text for today is from Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte.  Early in the story Jane's aunt introduces her to the principal of the boarding school to which she is to be banished, Mr Brocklehurst. …I looked up at – a black pillar! – such, at least, appeared to me, at first sight, the straight, narrow, sable-clad shape standing erect on the rug: the grim face at the top was like a carved mask… There is no mistaking the fact that this man is a vicar, or that he is forbidding.  He then humiliates her with a series of questions about her religious practice, and explains to her aunt Humility is a Christian grace, and one particularly appropriate to the pupils of Lowood; I therefore direct that especial care shall be bestowed on its cultivation among them. I have studied how best to mortify in them the worldly

Speaking of Richard Beck, he also posted recently on the art found in his local Christian bookshop.  Most of it looks something like this. He comments on why Christians feel they need to put words (in particular, Bible verses) on their artwork.  Many of his commenters wonder why all the art is so kitchy. I thought of this because the winners of the Australian Blake Prize for religious art have just been announced.  Lo and behold, the winner of the Prize for Human Justice, Age 36 by Fiona White, has its own accompanying text. Not quite a bible verse, and unlike the horse poster it can be taken a number of ways.  On the surface, the man in the picture is the victim of a human rights abuse.  But is that a halo around him?  Or the fire of the Spirit?  Or is he just getting burnt? Other entries somehow managed to be religious without an accompanying verse, Biblical or otherwise.  Like the winner of the overall award, If you put your ear close, you'll hear it breathing by Leo

For those of you who haven't yet found Richard Beck's "Experimental Theology" blog, his latest post is a good place to get acquainted.  He suggests that a hypothetical church, struggling with the issue of gay marriage, might commission those of its members who are passionate about the issue to found a daughter church in which gay unions are treated identically with heterosexual unions.  This would be taking a great risk and they could be making a mistake.  But they are acting out of love and out of a passionate belief that this is what God wants them to do.  He then suggests what God might say to them about it when they finally face him and are called to account for what they did.  It's thoughtful and thought-provoking.  Check it out.

Christians are often surprised to find that there are many people in the world with a passionate hatred of Christianity, and that these are often people who have a past connection with the church.  It surprises us because most of us spend a fair amount of time with other Christians and we know they are no better or worse than other people.  While this is disappointing - surely the followers of the God who is Love should be at least a little better than average - it hardly seems a reason for active animosity. I've been noticing that in our culture there is a strong thread of critique of the church, and if we listen carefully we can understand the animosity a little better.  So I'm going to give you some examples.  They're not scientific or representative, but they illustrate what many people feel. My first is one of my favourite poems of all time, William Blake’s “The Garden of Love” from Songs of Experience. I went to the garden of love And saw what I never had seen

There's a fierce discussion going on over on Simone's blog about choices in education and specifically whether you should choose a "Christian" education or engage with the State system.  I wanted to comment but it ended up too long so I've posted here instead.  As usual, life is more complex than our theories and in fact schooling choice is a very complex thing. In our schooling system there are five options, as opposed to the discussion which seems to mainly revolve around their being two. It’s actually more complex than this, because each school is different. This range is then doubled because parents will make at least two schooling choices, one for primary and one for high school – more if they move or if they make a mistake the first time. The high school choice usually involves some input from the kid too. The five options A State school – either local, or a non-local school which has some feature particularly attractive to that parent or child (lik

So after one of the least inspiring election campaigns in living memory, Australia looks like it's about to have a hung parliament , which will be way more interesting than the campaign itself.  Most countries in the world have this situation all the time, and parties have to negotiate to form a government.  Our politicians aren't used to this, though, so it it will be interesting to see how they go.  I think there are a few things we can learn from this election. If the major parties don't appear to be very different from each other, electors will find it hard to make up their minds.  In this campaign the two parties have outdone each other on who will reduce the debt fastest, who will "stop the boats" (we're not stupid, we know neither can really do this), who will better manage health and education, and so on.  So we're left to try and decide who will do this more competently, and of course we don't know. If we can't make up our minds we a

I think we need a break from all this heavy gauge ethical and ecclesiastical discourse.  So, in my little bits of spare time I've been travelling the weird and wonderful world of The Cyberiad, quotes from which keep appearing at random on the header of this blog.   This is a collection of tales by the Polish science fiction writer Stanislaw Lem , most famous in the English-speaking world as the author of Solaris .   Nothing could be less like Solaris than these fractured fairy tales, set apparently in the far future in a universe mostly inhabited by robots.  The central characters are two "constructors", Trurl and Kaplaucius, friendly rivals, tricksters who can make a machine for any purpose if the price is right.    Beware if you try to cheat them of their fee!  They get themselves both into and out of deadly scrapes much like the wizards and demi-gods of more traditional mythology.  Lem uses these tales to present oblique, quixotic and often highly perplexing views

We did a fascinating activity at church this morning.  We read the story of Nehemiah and the Israelites rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem.  Then someone got us all to line up around the edge of the church and represent the walls.  Each of us, they said, is part of the walls of the church.  Each of us play our part - whether we preach,  play music, go out as missionaries, make the morning tea, mow the grass, or just turn up, each of us is vital to the whole. Like all good visual/tactile activities, it made me think, and here is what I thought. 1.  The work of the church is in the world, not in the church What was left out of the list was as interesting as what was included.  On the list were all the activities that go on within the church institution, from the least prestigious and visible to the most.  All are equally valuable and important.  So far so good. What wasn't on the list was anything that took place outside the "church".  If the church is a body with a

In my first post on this subject I looked at what Paul said in his letter to the Galatians on the subject of the Law.  This time I'd like to have a look at what Jesus says on the same subject in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7). I recently read somewhere that this sermon could be described as "the best of Jesus".  In other words, Jesus probably didn't say all these things at once, he said them seperately and the author of Matthew put them together.  If this is the case, Matthew took a lot of care over it because the whole is so much more than the sum of its parts.  I know you're not supposed to have favourite sections of the Bible but I have to confess that this is the place I come back to most often, ever since I first read it in my teens and was blown away by the depth of its moral vision. The Sermon on the Mount is a sustained critique of the  torah as practiced in Jesus' day.  He starts by affirming his respect for the law in the

This Labor Party election flyer appeared in my mail-box yesterday.  My expectations of electioneering are quite low so I rarely react strongly but this one definitely got under my skin! Sustainable Australia: We are ensuring a sustainable Australia with tighter control of our borders and record investments in solar and other renewable energy. Since when was detaining aslyum seekers or diverting them to an as yet un-named third world country a sustainability initiative?  Is this what we get now in place of an ETS?  Get real, Labor Party!

A spirited discussion about gender over on Simone's blog has led me to think for the thousandth time about Paul's attitude to law, so I thought I'd share some thoughts.  This post comes with a warning - you may find its contents heretical.  It's also a little long, but then it's a big subject. The usual and orthodox view of how to read the New Testament is that Paul's instructions (and those of the other apostles) to the various churches in his letters are commands, and that these are generally binding on Christians everywhere and for all times, with a little allowance (but not much) for cultural change.  Paul is referred to as the chief lawgiver of the Christian church and his writings more than any others are the foundation of the long tradition of canon law. I have a problem with this view, and its this.  Paul himself made some very strong negative statements about law in general.  Would he have liked his words to become a new law? Let's start with

Fran Boydell says When Jesus inaugurated his kingdom it was not as people imagined.  It was upside down.  It was inclusive of unexpected people. What if the new heaven and the new earth is also different from our imaginings?  What if our resurrection bodies are as diverse as the ones we have now?  What if the lame will leap for joy because someone helps them?  What if the dumb speak because they have been included in the conversation and the deaf hear because we all care desperately to make ourselves understood to each other?  After all, who decides what is the perfect body, or the perfect mind?  What if this inclusive community celebrates everyone the way they are because God has glorified us in our diversity and we know how to live caringly, carefully and joyfully together? From "Enabling Education for All" by Fran Boydell, in Zadok Perspectives, No 107, Winter 2010.

Lately I've been catching up with the weird and wonderful delights of King Crimson, still going (with ongoing personnel changes - no-one could work with Robert Fripp for 40 years!) and still making thought-provoking music.  Here's the lyrics from the one of their earliest - 21st Century Schizoid Man, from "In the Court of the Crimson King", made around 1969. Cat's foot iron claw Neuro-surgeons scream for more At paranoia's poison door. Twenty first century schizoid man. Blood rack barbed wire Politicians' funeral pyre Innocents raped with napalm fire Twenty first century schizoid man. Death seed blind man's greed Poets' starving children bleed Nothing he's got he really needs Twenty first century schizoid man. Some of the imagery dates it, especially the "napalm fire" from the Vietnam War era.  Yet some is really timeless.  The last verse hits me every time - our blind greed, our addiction to the acquisition of usel

I've just spent the afternoon setting up a Wordpress site to publish the songs I've been writing for my church over the last couple of years. Nothing too flash and still some more to be posted (as well as many not written yet) but feel free to check it out and use the songs if you like them.

I'm really enjoying Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes by Kenneth Bailey. Here's one of the little pieces in it that really struck me. I wrote a while ago about the message of the book of Ruth being that the law should be interpreted generously and inclusively, and that being about David's ancestors this story provided a model for the governing of Israel. Bailey draws attention to a similar story about David's descendent Joseph in Matthew 1:18-19. His (Jesus') mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Because her husband was a righteous (or "just") man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. This was not just tact. The Old Testament punishment for a woman caught in adultery was stoning to death, and John 8:1-11 shows this was still practiced in the first century. Joseph, knowing that he's not the father of

I recently read Strength to Love , a collection of sermons by Martin Luther King . I was blown away by his eloquence, the coherence of his vision and by his passion. There are quotable quotes on every page. I'll give you a few to whet your appetite. God has two outstretched arms. One is strong enough to surround us with justice, and one is gentle enough to embrace us with grace. (from "A Tough Mind and a Tender heart") The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a non-comforming minority. (from "Transformed Non-conformist") Never must the church tire of reminding men that they have a moral responsibility to be intelligent. (from "Love in action") He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love. (from "Loving your enemies") If an American is concerned only about his nation, he will not

Us Aussies are still a little dazed at the sudden replacement of our Prime Minister on June 24th. After a few weeks of low level rumours about a challenge to his leadership, it was announced on Wednesday and was all over by Thursday, with Kevin Rudd not even contesting the vote in the end as he realised he was a long way off having the numbers. The coup is unprecedented in that Rudd is still in his first term, was hugely popular up until the last 12 months, and hasn't been caught out in any sort of misconduct. His failure is purely political - his party just decided that they couldn't win the next election with him as leader. Our new PM, Julia Gillard, has immediately set about getting rid of the various issues standing between her and success. A lot of people have expressed admiration for Julia Gillard as both the first woman and the first redhead to become Australian Prime Minister, and at her apparently more personable, natural style of relating to people. Even when Rudd w