What did they bring back from the war?

What did they bring back from the war?

Some came back with heroic stories, of bold actions which won battles and rewarded medals.

Some returned with stories of the camaraderie and comradeship they had found in battle – a new community which for many stretched across enemy lines, with a sense of solidarity with the troops from the other too.

Some brought back from the war a heightened sense of right and wrong, a politicised view of life, as never before critical of God and of State.

Some brought back forms of madness, shell-shock, despair, anger which would never heal.

And yet others brought back silence; as if all they had experienced had numbed them. And the families of these combatants developed the skill of listening to the gaps, learning from what went unspoken.

My great-grandfather was one of these. The man for whom I was named, John Cyril Davies, was a First World War Survivor. A ship’s carpenter on the Cunard passenger liner Lusitania which was torpedoed by a German U-boat off the coast of Ireland in May 1915.

1,198 passengers and crew lost their lives that day, but my great-grandfather was one of the 764 who survived. I’m told that he never spoke of the events; but he did have a totem, an item which he brought home with him – a lock of a young woman’s hair, which he kept in a box in the attic but again never told the story of whose it was or how he came to have it. …

– from my talk What did they bring back from the war?, a reflection for a service of hymns, somgs and readings called ‘Till the Boys Come Home’, remembering the lives of the 43 Corton Denham men who returned from World War One and have no memorials.

 

What did they bring back from the war?

Reflection for ‘Till the Boys Come Home’

Sunday 30th November 2014, Corton Denham

A Service of Music and Readings to Remember with Gratitude the lives of the 43 Corton Denham men who returned from the Great War and have no memorials.

 

What did they bring back from the war?

Some came back with heroic stories, of bold actions which won battles and rewarded medals.

Some returned with stories of the camaraderie and comradeship they had found in battle – a new community which for many stretched across enemy lines, with a sense of solidarity with the troops from the other too.

Some brought back from the war a heightened sense of right and wrong, a politicised view of life, as never before critical of God and of State.

Some brought back forms of madness, shell-shock, despair, anger which would never heal.

And yet others brought back silence; as if all they had experienced had numbed them. And the families of these combatants developed the skill of listening to the gaps, learning from what went unspoken.

My great-grandfather was one of these. The man for whom I was named, John Cyril Davies, was a First World War Survivor. A ship’s carpenter on the Cunard passenger liner Lusitania which was torpedoed by a German U-boat off the coast of Ireland in May 1915.

1,198 passengers and crew lost their lives that day, but my great-grandfather was one of the 764 who survived. I’m told that he never spoke of the events; but he did have a totem, an item which he brought home with him – a lock of a young woman’s hair, which he kept in a box in the attic but, again, never told the story of whose it was or how he came to have it. 

If I had not been a preacher but a novelist I might have seized on this detail and constructed a story on it – maybe of heroism, his rescue of a young girl floundering in the drowning seas, or maybe of unrequited love, she lost to the sinking ship never to be seen again, leaving him with just the lock of hair to contemplate what might have been.

But I am a preacher and so my task is to give voice to one of the unspoken questions raised in my great-grandfather’s silences: where was God in all this?

Well, let’s just turn that question around a moment. Where is the Devil in all this? Some say that the devil is in the detail. I suggest that in the majority of the great wars of modern times the devil has been in our unquestioning devotion to the Nation State, an invention of modernity which has replaced God with nationalism as the focus for people’s faithfulness, and the driving force behind most of the major conflicts of the past two hundred years. In the words of the historian Karen Armstrong,

The secular war for the nation had given some of the participants experiences associated with the religious traditions: an ekstasis, a sense of liberation, freedom, equanimity, community and a profound relationship with other human beings, even the enemy. Yet the First World War heralded a century of unprecedented slaughter and genocide that was not inspired by religion as people had come to know it, but by an equally commanding notion of the sacred: men fought for power, glory, scarce resources and, above all, for their nation. [1]

And so, if the world’s peoples are to work out how to live in peace in the future we need to address this sobering proposition, that the nation is now our idol.

So where is God in all this? I propose that it is not the devil, but God who is in the detail.

A God of small things, who stood alongside people in their suffering in the trenches and other arenas of war, who then accompanied them home. Who stood with those at home, waiting anxiously for their loved ones’ return.

A God of modest things, whose great skill is to help humans to learn to be humane in the everyday exchanges of ordinary life.

A God whose kingdom is very much of this earth, as taught by Jesus to ordinary people through parables set in everyday situations – the workplace, the mountainside, the sea shore.

What did they bring back from the war? 

A desire to move on, to learn how to live now in peace. To find love, to make a home, to build families, to apply themselves to neighbourliness and community.

I believe that God was with them in those details, as they went about the humble, but noble, task of making the peace.

I believe that god was with my great-grandfather as he overcame the trauma of the Lusitania and set about building a life for himself – building a home and family which eventually included me.

And so I invite you now, to take a few moments to consider the lives we are commemorating today, and other lives whose memories have been rekindled for you in this hour.

Consider what they brought back from the war; consider their stories and their silences, and what you learned from them.

Two minutes silence.

God, we give you thanks that you are with us in the details of our lives in peacetime; help us to hold ourselves close to you, keep us fixed on the humble, but noble, task of making and keeping the peace. Amen.

The Lord’s Prayer.

 

Notes

[1] Karen Armstrong, Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence p.274

Exploring worship – Introductory talk

Perhaps my first memory of Christian worship is of the day when, at the age of three or four, in a Baptist Church in suburban Liverpool, I spent the whole of one particular service in the pew alongside my grandmother, rather than out in the creche as I usually did.

When it came to the congregation starting to recite together the Lord’s Prayer, my eyes opened, lit up, and I turned to my grandma and said excitably, 'I know this prayer! We say it every day at nursery school!' 

Now besides my grandmother who was mortified by my loud interjection, and shusshed me up quickly, this must have amused the rest of the adults around me, as it amuses me (and a little bit embarrasses me) now, but it was a revelation at the time.

In that moment of recognition I learned something significant about Christian worship – that in different places at different times there was a common prayer which connected people as they said it; a prayer that had been passed on to us by others before us. 

I was later to learn, of course, that the Lord’s Prayer went all the way back to first-century Palestine and formed part of the teaching of Jesus to his followers in what we now call The Sermon on the Mount. …

 

We're starting a series taking a close look at Christian Worship, in all its forms, today. This is the start of my introductory talk.

Exploring Worship – Introductory talk

Second Sunday Before Advent, 16 November 2014

Queen Camel, Corton Denham, Weston Bampfylde

 

Perhaps my first memory of Christian worship is of the day when, at the age of three or four, in a Baptist Church in suburban Liverpool, I spent the whole of one particular service in the pew alongside my grandmother, rather than out in the creche as I usually did.

When it came to the congregation starting to recite together the Lord’s Prayer, my eyes opened, lit up, and I turned to my grandma and said excitably, ‘I know this prayer! We say it every day at nursery school!’ 

Now besides my grandmother who was mortified by my loud interjection, and shusshed me up quickly, this must have amused the rest of the adults around me, as it amuses me (and a little bit embarrasses me) now, but it was a revelation at the time.

In that moment of recognition I learned something significant about Christian worship – that in different places at different times there was a common prayer which connected people as they said it; a prayer that had been passed on to us by others before us. 

I was later to learn, of course, that the Lord’s Prayer went all the way back to first-century Palestine and formed part of the teaching of Jesus to his followers in what we now call The Sermon on the Mount. [1]

I was later to learn that in some churches it was said differently than in ours: some churches used contemporary language instead of thines and thys, and some churches cut the prayer short, missing out the ending ‘for thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever’, which I also later learned was called the doxology. I came to learn that what we in our nonconformist church called The Lord’s Prayer others called the Our Father or the Pater Noster. 

In time I came to learn that The Lord’s Prayer prayer appeared twice in scripture and that Luke’s gospel misses out the lines, ‘your will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven’, and later also omits to say ‘deliver us from evil’. I came to learn that where I was used to praying, ‘lead us not into temptation’, others said, ‘save us from the time of trial’, and that where I usually said, ‘forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us’, others said ‘forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors’.

Each of these little lessons learned was another revelation about God and how we Christians speak of him, about Jesus and how we Christians relate to him. About how Christian churches differ in the way they go about following Jesus, and can learn from each other’s ways. About how our worship has been formed by our various histories and cultures, and how it continues to evolve.

We are going to spend the next few weeks in our churches thinking about our worship and what it means to us. It’s an opportunity for us to look more closely at the liturgies which we take part in week by week, to renew our understanding of them, to refresh our interest in them, to deepen our involvement in them. 

Now, the word liturgy comes from a Greek term meaning ‘public service’ and is formed by two words: ‘laos’ (people) and ‘ergon’ (work), so liturgy literally means ‘the work of the people’. That’s an interesting revelation: suggesting that as we join together in our individual churches in our prayers and our songs and our responses to the word, in our communions and confessions and intercessions, we are at work – paying due honour and homage to God. [2]

Another ancient expression which has always held great importance when it comes to Christian worship is the Latin phrase lex orandi, lex credendi – ‘the rule of prayer is the rule of belief’. That is, the way your community worships – expresses, teaches, and governs what your community believes. Worship comes before belief. Your worship forms your belief.

So if in worship we are at work giving honour and homage to God, we are at the same time being shaped and formed into the kinds of Christians our worship invites us to be. Consider what is happening to us when we join in these responses:

Lift up your hearts: We lift them to the Lord. 

Let us give thanks to the Lord our God: It is right to give thanks and praise. 

– we are being shaped and formed into people whose hearts are directed towards God, whose authority is our Lord, to whom we are thankful.

And when the minister goes on to say, 

It is indeed right, it is our duty and our joy, at all times and in all places 

to give you thanks and praise, holy Father, heavenly King, almighty and eternal God

– then the church affirms this, our heartfelt belief. 

Now God’s people have been working together at worship, and being formed and shaped by it, for many many centuries. Christian worship has pre-Christian origins, of course, in the Temple worship of ancient Israel, with its blood and grain sacrifices, its formal offerings at festival times; in the household prayers of most of the people most of the rest of the time; in the reading of the law and the corporate worship of the local synagogues, whose importance rose as the Temple fell. 

The first Christians were rooted in these ways of worshipping and so it was natural that they would deeply influence the developing forms of what eventually became known as Christian worship. The reading and exposition of scripture, the singing of the psalms and other hymns, developed early too. Jesus’ institution of a meal in his memory ensured that communion played a key part from the start, in gatherings of Christian believers. [4]

And whilst the church over centuries divided between East and West, and later again between Reformed and Roman traditions, virtually all Christian churches everywhere, today,

  • meet on a Sunday;
  • listen to Bible readings;
  • share in Communion or the Eucharist;
  • listen to music, and join in with hymns and songs;
  • join in prayer;
  • receive teaching in the form of a sermon or homily; and
  • take a collection or an offering. [5]

– and in these ways we continue our work of praising God, and being formed and shaped by our worship.

That’s not to say that our work is always easy. Some people stop coming to church when they’ve been hit by a crisis or involved in a disaster, because the liturgies don’t say what’s in their hearts:  the confusion, the lamenting, the anger aren’t allowed a voice.

Others fall out with worship when its language seems to reduce them to something less than they feel they are: many struggle over this line, for instance: ’But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders’. Others struggle with the relatively recent innovation, the Sharing of the Peace, whilst others embrace it as a positive expression of brother- and sister-hood.

Believing that worship forms us, some people fall out with forms of worship which they feel are shaping them in unGodly ways. For instance, some gratefully fall into the silence of Quakerism, escaping the bombardment of words, words, words, on which so much Western Christian worship is based.

But others, well aware of the in-fighting and the exclusiveness which sadly marks church life, note the contradiction in the creed, of everyone saying together, ‘I believe in the holy catholic church’, but keep saying it, in the firm hope that this will sink in and the ecumenical spirit will rise.

Returning, in conclusion, to The Lord’s Prayer. You recall how it came about when his disciples asked Jesus ‘Teach us how to pray’. 

You might think, but surely they already had all the prayers of their tradition, they were well versed in the psalms and the household prayers and the synagogue liturgies. So why did they need Jesus to teach them how to pray?

Perhaps because they clearly saw that Jesus was doing a new thing with them. Jesus was introducing to them a whole new way of relating to God, which challenged the old ways of relating. No longer the Temple and the need for blood or grain sacrifices. No longer the formalities of the law alone. But now a relationship – now the people’s prayers were to be directed to God as a father. 

Our worship is in constant development. Look at the history of the church and you see that all our services – even the beloved old BCP – have hardly stood still, they’ve constantly evolved as the people of God have evolved in their understanding of his ways in the world, requiring fresh expressions of prayer and praise.

And so new forms have worship emerge, like new growth each springtime. Most of them still consisting of Bible reading, music, and prayer, many of them around the sharing of a common meal.

So in our benefice CafeXtra, for instance, or Sacred Space, a service of prayers for healing, have come about in recent years and are meeting needs. As time goes on, other forms will come too, to complement and at times enrich the more established styles of worship. It has ever been so.

So over the next few weeks in our services we will be taking a closer look at the way we worship, and your questions, your comments, will be very welcome. This week you may like to give some thought to your own personal worship journey:

The traditions which you have been brought up in;

Moments of illumination in which certain aspects of worship have come alive for new in a new way;

The best things about the traditional forms of worship, which you most value;

And the good things about new or informal ways of worshipping which you have experienced or seen.

Our aim in this series is to enrich our life of worship together. We have been given much; we have an abundance of wonderful worship at our disposal. Let us take what God has given us and make even more of it, for our sake and for the sake of drawing others in. 

 

Notes

[1] Matthew 6.5–13

[2] Wikipedia: Christian worship.

[3] Wikipedia: lex orandi, lex credendi.

[4] Paul F. Bradshaw, A Companion to Common Worship: v. 1 (Alcuin Club Collections 78), p.1-9

[5] Wikipedia: Christian worship.

 

The Beatitudes – Christianity with its eyes wide open

… The preeminent contemporary historian of religion Karen Armstrong has recently written of her belief that ‘modern society has made a scapegoat of faith.’ ‘In the West the idea that religion is inherently violent is now taken for granted and seems self-evident,’ she writes. She speaks of the mantra recited to her constantly, by American commentators and psychiatrists, London taxi drivers and Oxford academics – the view that ‘Religion has been the cause of all the major wars in history’. 

It is an odd remark [she says]. Obviously the two world Wars were not fought on account of religion. When they discuss the reasons people go to war, military historians acknowledge that many interrelated social, material and ideological factors are involved, among the chief of them competition for scarce resources. Experts in political violence or terrorism also insist that people commit atrocities for a complex range of reasons. Yet …  we routinely load the violent sins of the twentieth century on to the back of ‘religion’ and drive it out into the political wilderness.

This makes it difficult for an authentic Christian voice to contribute to discussions about conflict in our times. But perhaps no more difficult than Jesus found it in the conflicted society of his day.

Karen Armstrong: Fields of Blood. Religion and the History of ViolenceAnd the joy is that The Beatitudes do not offer a mere sticking-plaster to the suffering scapegoats of the world. The beauty in the Sermon on the Mount is that it proposes a new way of human behaving towards others which, if followed, will introduce a new realm of human well-being, in the here-and-now, which Jesus calls The Kingdom of God. …

 
– from my Remembrance Sunday talk, The Beatitudes – Christianity with its eyes wide open, today. Karen Armstrong's Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence is my latest page-turner, highly recommended.

The Beatitudes – Christianity with its eyes wide open

Matthew 5.1-12

Remembrance Sunday, 9 November 2014

Corton Denham, Weston Bampfylde

 

Lest we forget – the teachings of Jesus which we call the Sermon on the Mount were words spoken to an audience in wartime.

Lest we forget – the extract from that sermon which we now know as The Beatitudes, Jesus gave to the crowds in Occupied Palestine, circa AD.30.

So when he spoke of the poor on that day, he did so with his eyes open to those most damaged by the Roman occupying forces and their client rulers of the Jewish hierarchy, those who had lost their homes, their land, their freedom in being coerced into supplying the means by which the regime could survive and flourish.

And when he spoke of those who mourn, at that time, he was awake to the grieving mothers and sisters and friends of those who the state had executed for plotting treason, or for petty theft, or for all crimes in-between which upset the balance of empire.

When he spoke of the meek he would have had in mind the conscripts to the empire’s armed cause; the lepers cast out to the gates of the cities lest they contaminated the people.

When he spoke of those who hungered and thirsted for righteousness he would see in his audience those who followed the rule of the governing powers to the letter, in faith that this was the just way, and those who, by contrast, were members of protest groups, some plotting insurrection, seeking to re-establish the higher laws of God in the land.

Jesus had his eyes open to those who in this occupied territory nevertheless performed acts of mercy, even on those their community opposed; he watched and saw peacemakers at work, those who raised eyebrows by reconciling differences between people in the Temple courts, in the marketplaces and in homes. 

The Sermon on the Mount was not a spiritual meditation about a pie-in-the sky future world. The Beatitudes were formed and articulated in an occupied territory at a time of great conflict. And because of this they remain persuasive today. 

One hundred years after the First World War what is the authentic Christian voice to say about conflict in our times? What words do we have to contribute to the well-being of our world? To begin to answer this we have to go back to the roots of our religion, to the ancient ways whose genesis we share with our Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters.

Every year in ancient Israel the high priest brought two goats into the Jerusalem temple on the Day of Atonement. He sacrificed one to expiate the sins of the community and then laid his hands on the other, transferring all the people’s misdeeds on to its head, and sent the sin-laden animal out of the city, literally placing the blame elsewhere. In this way, Moses explained, ‘the goat will bear all their faults away with it into a desert place’.’ In his classic study of religion and violence, René Girard argued that the scapegoat ritual defused rivalries among groups within the community. [1]

If we look again at the people Jesus spoke about in the Beatitudes, we see that they were the  scapegoats of that world, just as they are in ours: 

The poor, forever exploited for their land and livelihood by society’s elites; the mourners and the meek, who had lost out in the conflicts of the time and from whom society withheld welfare; those who protested and those who tried to establish peace, whose voices were silenced by the ruling elite, by any means possible. 

Each of them victim to the ways of the scapegoat mechanism: having the blame for society’s ills placed on their heads, being cast out of the community for the greater good of all.

It is not difficult for us to identify the scapegoats we create today – in this time of massive economic inequalities our society demonises our poorest by our cruel and unjust insistence that those on welfare are feckless scroungers, and reviles those who travel across borders in search of an income to support their families. [2]

Is it too provocative to propose that there is a line which firmly connects our scapegoating of economic migrants with the regular scapegoating of the Jews in European history which culminated in the Nazi death camps of World War Two? 

And is it too fanciful to suggest that those sent to the trenches in the First World War were scapegoats of the end of empire? Allied and German soldiers alike cast out to the wilderness of the Western Front to bear away all the faults of the crumbling world to which the ruling elites still clung?

We might consider these questions credible if we recognise the reality of the scapegoat system at work in our world, creating the conflicts into which we are constantly drawn.

Perhaps the greatest contribution of Christianity to humanity’s understanding of itself, is this profound insight of the scapegoat. From ancient times societies have kept order by identifying the vulnerable ones among them, and eliminating them. This is the root of our rituals of sacrifice, at first human sacrifice, then animal sacrifice, and in modern wartime the language of sacrifice through which we send others to their deaths.  

Though deeply ingrained in its ways, the scapegoat mechanism was hidden from the world until revealed by the scapegoating of God himself – the show trial and execution of Jesus, whose death revealed him as the sacrificial victim of the empire whose ways he challenged. The words and actions of the resurrected Christ bear what we might call ‘the intelligence of the victim’ which makes the insights of Calvary the pivotal point on which human culture turns. [3]

Since Calvary, our eyes have been opened to the scapegoat mechanism. We have seen it at work in our own lives and societies. We have realised how deeply ingrained it is in us. Since Calvary, some have turned their backs on all restraint and escalated violence through the industrial-scale slaughter of troops in World War One, the fire bombings and nuclear annihilations of World War Two, and the genocides and terror acts of more recent times in which civilians are the primary victims. But the knowledge of the scapegoat mechanism has prompted others to place limits on our behaviour by means, for instance, of the application of the Just War Theory. We hear the intelligence of the victim in the insights of the last survivor of the First World War Harry Patch, who with his eyes wide open once claimed, ‘War is organised murder’. 

The preeminent contemporary historian of religion Karen Armstrong has recently written of her belief that ‘modern society has made a scapegoat of faith.’ ‘In the West the idea that religion is inherently violent is now taken for granted and seems self-evident,’ she writes. She speaks of the mantra recited to her constantly, by American commentators and psychiatrists, London taxi drivers and Oxford academics – the view that ‘Religion has been the cause of all the major wars in history’. 

It is an odd remark [she says]. Obviously the two world Wars were not fought on account of religion. When they discuss the reasons people go to war, military historians acknowledge that many interrelated social, material and ideological factors are involved, among the chief of them competition for scarce resources. Experts in political violence or terrorism also insist that people commit atrocities for a complex range of reasons. Yet …  we routinely load the violent sins of the twentieth century on to the back of ‘religion’ and drive it out into the political wilderness. [4]

This makes it difficult for an authentic Christian voice to contribute to discussions about conflict in our times. But perhaps no more difficult than Jesus found it in the conflicted society of his day.

And the joy is that The Beatitudes do not offer a mere sticking-plaster to the suffering scapegoats of the world. The beauty in the Sermon on the Mount is that it proposes a new way of human behaving towards others which, if followed, will introduce a new realm of human well-being, in the here-and-now, which Jesus calls The Kingdom of God.

For the poor are blessed when the privileged turn to them as equals and stand with them in their struggles for economic justice; the meek are blessed when the powerful share their power with them and bring them in from the cold; the mourning of those whose loved ones have been lost to the wars of empire will be relieved by those who recover the means to build peace between peoples and deal with conflicts without violence.

The Beatitudes encourage us that it is possible to build peace and understanding with those we would otherwise distance ourselves from, and cast out into the wilderness: among them not least our Muslim brothers and sisters, of whom the vast majority are peaceable citizens, of whom far more have been killed by ISIS than any other group of casualties.

If Karen Armstrong is right and religion is being made a scapegoat in the modern world, then this should be questioned, she says.

“Having a scapegoat means you displace your sins and put the blame elsewhere. They’re not your sins any more. We are not looking sufficiently at nationalism, aggressive colonialism, and our inability to accept minorities, which resulted in the explosion of the Holocaust, and the creation of a world with a new aristocracy, the West versus the rest. [5]

The ethic expressed in The Beatitudes is not pie-in-the-sky spirituality. This is Christianity with its eyes wide open. The Beatitudes invite the world to cease displacing our sins and putting the blame elsewhere, and to embrace a new and better way of being human. 

 

Notes

[1] Karen Armstrong, Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence, p.1

[2] For a detailed critique of this contemporary attitude see Owen Jones, Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class.

[3] ‘A phrase that James Alison uses a great deal in his work is “the intelligence of the victim.” It describes the revelation that begins to issue forth, through the power of the Spirit (the “Paraclete” in John’s Gospel), as Jesus the Risen Victim appears to witnesses on Easter morning. According to mimetic theory, all human mythology is from the persepective of the victimizers, namely, the story of human culture generated at the expense of victims – though the collective violence of culture is veiled behind the violence of the gods. The Gospel is the inbreaking into human mythology of God’s story of salvation as told from the perspective of the Lamb of God, God’s Son offered to our cultural mechanisms of victimage. “The intelligence of the victim” is an epistemology that proceeds from the perspective of the victim.’ – Paul Neuchterlein, James Alison on “The Intelligence of the Victim”, Girardian Lectionary. See also An Excerpt for James Alison’s The Joy of Being Wrong: Original Sin Through Easter Eyes, from the same website, and all James Alison’s work.

[4] Karen Armstrong, Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence, p.1

[5] Cole Moreton, It’s not all religion’s fault (Karen Armstrong interview), Church Times, 31 Oct 2014

 

To End All Wars: How the First World War Divided Britain

Adam Hochschild: To End All Wars Seldom do I read books which feel like real page-turners, but I've just finished a great exception to that: Adam Hochschild's To End All Wars: How the First World War Divided Britain. It's a thoroughly engaging journey from pre-1914 to post-1918 through the lives of some of the most influential figures involved in the conflict, mostly on the British / Allied side but including Russians, Germans, Austrians too. The beauty of the book is in the way it combines the struggles of those in the trenches with those imprisoned facing firing squads for their conscientious objection; the way it demonstrates the remarkable strength of the anti-war movement in Britain and (towards the end of the conflict especially) in Russia and Germany; and the way that it shows how the war radically divided families. Among these were the Pankhursts, who broke off their suffragette campaigns, two to become leading advocates of the war, two to publicly oppose it, and Field Marshal John French, 1st Earl of Ypres, and his campaigning pacifist sister suffragist, Sinn Féin activist sister Charlotte Despard. A great book to read for right now.

The saints were not perfect

Some of us struggle with the idea of the saints as being outstandingly godly human beings. A friend of mine, reflecting on a time of deep soul-searching about his own life and faith, once wrote: "I needed to recover words like 'saint', the 'righteous' and 'prophet' from the religious ghetto where they mean long dead people who weren't ordinary like me. They did magic things, and God spoke to them in magic ways and theologians had buried them under mountains of words. I decided that the real, breathing men had to be like us if they were to be of any use to us." 

When we talk about saints we assume we're talking about the great people of faith. Those who put their lives on the line for their faith, those who made amazing sacrifices to witness for God. But we must remember that the saints were not perfect. That is something which our modern-day secular Halloween reminds us of: that all of us have a darker side.

– from my talk for All Saints Day, Matthew 5 – The saints as signs of contradiction.

Matthew 5 – The Saints as signs of contradiction

1 John 3.1-3, Matthew 5.1-12

All Saints Day, 2 November 2014, Sutton Montis

 

We don’t celebrate All Saint’s Day like we used to. But the trickery, the darkness, the setting-of-fires, the remembrance of the dead: it’s still deeply ingrained in us. In his epic book about the ritual year, Stations of the Sun, Ronald Hutton writes,

By the end of the Middle Ages, the Christian feast of the dead, known as Hallowtide, Hollontide, or Allantide, had developed into a spectacular affair.… The book of ceremonial for the court of Henry VII specified that upon All Saints’ Day the monarch would dress in purple and his attendants in black, the colour of mourning. For that evening … many churches laid in extra supplies of candles and torches, to be carried in procession and to illuminate the building. … St Mary Woolnoth in 1539 paid five maidens wearing garlands to play harps by lamplight. Each mayor of Bristol in the 1470s was expected to entertain the whole council and other prominent citizens and gentry, to ‘fires and their drinkings with spiced cakebread and sundry wines’, before they dispersed to their respective parish churches for evensong. There they presumably prepared for the most famous ritual of the night, the ringing of church bells to comfort the souls in purgatory after the congregation had offered prayers for them….In [these ways] the opening of the season of darkness and cold had been made into an opportunity to confront the greatest fear known to humans, that of death, and the greatest known to Christians, that of damnation. [1]

Now as Hutton points out, the Protestant Reformation outlawed many of these activities, doing away with the notion of purgatory and the need to ask the saints to intercede for us. The new laws, of course, didn’t stop these things happening. In the new liturgy of 1559 All Saints was retained, ‘but as a day on which to commemorate saints as outstandingly godly human beings, not as semi-divine intercessors; the prayers for the dead were, of course, abolished once more.’ Opposition to this was strong. Especially (writes Hutton) in the particularly-Catholic north of Lancashire. There, bonfires blazed on the hills along the Ribble Valley; in Whalley families would gather on the hills at midnight on the eve of All Saints’, one holding a large bunch of burning straw at the end of a fork while the others, in a circle, prayed for their dead. 

In our more tolerant ecumenical times we can comfortably gather here today as a company of people who have embraced the values of the Protestant Reformation, but I suspect who also still have a feel and a respect for the value and the viability of some of the older rituals. Our history – and our own changing life experiences – help us to understand that rituals can and should alter as society constantly shifts. We can live with the contradictions, even embrace them and learn from them. 

Today most of us – in this church – would probably say that we don’t regard the saints as semi-divine intercessors. Though we may respect those who do. A question for us might be this: whether we still regard saints as outstandingly godly human beings. 

Some of us struggle with this idea. A friend of mine, reflecting on a time of deep soul-searching about his own life and faith, once wrote: “I needed to recover words like ‘saint’, the ‘righteous’ and ‘prophet’ from the religious ghetto where they mean long dead people who weren’t ordinary like me. They did magic things, and God spoke to them in magic ways and theologians had buried them under mountains of words. I decided that the real, breathing men had to be like us if they were to be of any use to us.” [2] 

When we talk about saints we assume we’re talking about the great people of faith. Those who put their lives on the line for their faith, those who made amazing sacrifices to witness for God. 

We must remember, though, that the saints were not perfect. That is something which our modern-day secular Halloween reminds us of: that all of us have a darker side. We are riddled with contradictions. The church at its best also recognises this. We mustn’t forget that even the greatest saints were also sinners. 

I will resist the temptation here to reel off a list of the great saints and what was wrong with them as human beings. Sufficient to say that even Mother Teresa of Calcutta – who was fast-tracked to sainthood after her death in 1997 – has since had questions asked of some aspects of her life. About her motivations for her work and the way she conducted her charity. These questions have caused some Catholic writers to call Mother Teresa ‘a sign of contradiction’, which means a holy person whose holiness is nevertheless under dispute. 

Some of us, my friend included, might welcome this, because it affirms the notion that even the saints are human. And the reverse of that which can be beautifully true: that even us flawed contradictory humans – you and me – can be saints. 

Jesus himself was portrayed as ‘a sign of contradiction’, by Simeon in the temple. The old man held the child Jesus in his arms and praised God, calling Jesus ‘a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel.’ But he also said that Jesus would be ‘a sign that will be spoken against’, a sign of contradiction. 

The early Christians were also regarded as signs of contradiction, questioned by many who stood outside them, a sect of people who others were wary of. In the current culture of questioning religion in our society we know how that feels. 

And the teachings of Jesus often embraced contradiction too, not least the sermon which opened with the words ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven’ – a statement which suggests that the least likely people are the sainted ones.

Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. 

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth….

The power of Jesus’ words here is that the unlikeliest people become the saints – the little ones, the struggling ones, the wounded ones, those who feel the injustices of the world so keenly that it upsets them deeply. 

The blessed ones contradict all expectations. 

How then, do we come to this question of what makes a saint? 

We might come feeling poor in spirit, but if we come that way, then the kingdom of heaven is ours. 

We might come mourning, but if we do then God promises that we will be comforted. 

We might come meekly, nervously, with just a tiny bit of faith, but if we come in this condition Jesus tells us to expect to inherit the earth. 

We might come hungry and thirsty for righteousness, full of concerns about the world’s suffering ones, aching to see wrongs righted. And if we do then God promises to satisfy these, our longings. 

The blessed ones contradict all expectations. 

So how do you come to this question of what makes a saint? 

If you come as you are – that is, if you come to Jesus just as you are, whatever the seeming weakness of your position – then, astonishingly, you find yourself among the company of the saints. That is all there is to the kingdom of heaven. 

The saints are those who accept their membership of the kingdom, and despite being mocked, perhaps, or opposed, despite being called ‘signs of contradiction’, the saints are those who hold on to their membership of the kingdom and let it deeply affect the way that they live. 

‘Because of the love of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold’, Jesus told his disciples. ‘But anyone who endures to the end will be saved.’ [4]

Now that is something worth lighting fires for; that is something worth ringing bells to celebrate. That is something to dispel our fears of death, and of damnation; that is something to enlighten us at this dark time of year. 

 

Notes 

First preached in Liverpool on All Saint’s Day, 2/11/2008 

[1] Ronald Hutton, Stations of the Sun; A History of the Ritual Year in Britain, p.371 

[2] The late Jim Hart, quoted in my blog of July 28, 2004 

[3] The beatitudes section of this talk owes rather a lot to my earlier sermon Kingdom healing and the beautiful game, 30 Jan 2005

[4] Matthew 24.12-13