 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Previous
article
| Contents Page
Issue 31 of Christis carried an interesting article on the ‘Toronto blessing’ (strange, but I thought the phenomenon was originally known as Pentecost and occurred in Jerusalem, but then we westerners are always updating and improving on these things). I write as one who has “spoke with the tongue of angels”, but as the song continues “I still haven’t found what I’m looking for”.
What is all this charismatic stuff about? What’s it for? The original Pentecost (Acts 2) was all about God giving his own Spirit (his nature, his essence) to human beings so that they might “be witnesses … to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). In other words God giving human-kind his own life-force, his strength, so that we may become like Christ (“conformed to be the likeness of his Son” (Romans 8:29)). Indeed the early Church was so good at the imitation of their Master that it earned them the derisive nick-name ‘Christians’ — ‘little Christs’. (Acts 11:26).
To sum up, then. The Spirit is given to us to make us into God’s children, sharing the nature of God, sisters and brothers of Christ. (Hebrews 2:11).
I rest with St. Paul, who having surveyed the charismatic fervour of Corinth, comments: very nice but, “now I show you the most excellent way” (1 Corinthians 12:31b ff). He then goes on to write that remarkably beautiful hymn to show that love is more enduring than tongues or prophecy (or even faith). St. John continues, writing “God is love” and that, therefore, we should love (1 John 4:16,21). We are told, once again, that we should take on the nature of Christ.
So what’s so important about being tiny replicas of Christ? Well, unless I’m reading my New Testament wrongly, God is not planning to show his face ever again in quite the same way as he did through Christ. Instead he’s left his essence (Spirit) on earth in us (John 16:7). The gist is this: God has given us his job. He’s given us a role model (the Son) and the capability to fulfil that (the Holy Spirit).
Now my last question is simply, what did Christ do that we have to do? Well, it goes a lot further than handing out Luke’s Gospels (a good effort, but a bit like expecting a sticking plaster to cure a broken leg). If we’re serious about this world’s need to discover the existence of a loving God, one has to go further than handing out propaganda and then sitting back — that’s too easy. We’ve actually got to reenact Christ’s life, all of it, all the time. From the bits about mourning with the bereaved, celebrating with the joyful, to spending time with the ‘scum’ of the society. From standing up against injustice and political and religious hypocrisy, to suffering ourselves, even to the point of crucifixion and resurrection. (When was the last time we became martyrs by relinquishing our own interests and rights for the good of others, even though it was painful and costly to do so?).
What is the ‘Toronto blessing’ and the whole charismatic scene about? If it’s what it claims, and ought, to be about then it will result in the creation of thousands upon thousands of individuals each reflecting the love of God. Otherwise it will merely be the attention-seeking of a “resounding gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Corinthians 13:1). We shall have to wait and see.
Meanwhile, I’d like to remind us all of some of the not-so-supernatural gifts which tend to be overlooked. If you seek charismatic experiences, here are some of mine:
Peace,
Anyone interested in setting up a Christian Arts project/society? I’m particularly interested in the dramatic Arts (being a frustrated actor and mime artist) and I would be pleased to hear from writers, actors, directors etc from all denominations and traditions who are interested in promoting the Good News, Social Justice and Christian unity through their chosen art form.
Please write to Dean Akrill at James College or Email: da105@tower.york.ac.uk. It’s only a dream at the moment, but together we could make it a reality!
Love, Peace and Flowers,
I read with interest Joanna Chamberlayne’s article on vivisection and animal experimentation and although I find myself in agreement with much of what she says, I feel I must express an alternative view on the use of animals in medical and scientific testing. I am not sure how much the value of medical testing is in serious doubt, certainly it is not often possible to test completed drug therapies on animals with any degree of usefulness but there are large similarities between humans and animals which can be exploited.
It is the case that nearly all progress in medicine or biological psychology is traceable in part to pioneering studies conducted on animals. While it is undeniable that much research on animals leads to little of practical value — and the same is true of research in any field — animal research has lead to the development of anti-anxiety drugs, new methods of treating pain and depression, an awareness of how certain drugs can impair foetal development, an understanding of the effects of old age on memory, methods to help overcome neuromuscular disorders and numerous other advances.
(N.E. Miller, 1985)
I do not wish to make any claims regarding the morality of animal experimentation, but I feel that its utilitarian value is worth noting.
There is a cost associated with the equal rights for animals position. For example, at present the best treatment for people with a defective heart valve is to transplant a valve from a pigs heart. We must, if we take a hardline no exploitation of animals position, tell people with defective hearts that this is not acceptable. We must also tell people suffering from AIDS, spinal cord damage and other incurable diseases and handicaps “Sorry, we must greatly slow down progress towards a treatment for your condition.” This may turn out to be what we must morally do, but the cost should be recognised.
Previous
article
| Contents Page
|
|
|
|
|
Last modified: 25th November 2005