Overheard in the station cafe the other day:
Little girl and accompanying adult - probably her mother, are seated opposite the fruit machines.
LG Do you know something? Rabbits can't be superheroes.
M Really? Well, that is interesting. Why not? Why can't they be superheroes?
LG Because...because...(puzzled pause, then...triumphantly) They don't have muscles!
Poor Mum tries to smooth things over by pointing out that Mighty Mouse and Superted are superheroes all right and they're not brilliantly well-endowed in the biceps department either, but no, LG isn't convinced. By now I realise that what sparked this piece of philosophical musing was a picture of a concrete-jawed, muscle-bound specimen of the rabbit family on the front of a fruit machine. I wonder if LG has ever met Peter Rabbit and cousin Benjamin Bunny. Maybe if they'd worn their underpants on top of their trousers instead of pinching cabbages and lettuce in Mr McGregor's garden they, too, would be playing a starring role in amusement arcades and pubs instead of adorning china mugs and chintzy tea cosies the length and breadth of the land.
And stretching the analogy somewhat, I'm wondering how many people dismiss people like St Francis; not being able to get past the popular image of him and the birdbath, surrounded by assorted wildlife that could have come out of a Disney cartoon. Yet look at what he founded.
Fluffy bunnies unite. You don't have to lose your Y-fronts to be a superhero.
Camomile tea, anybody?
"If I believe in you out the desire for Heaven or the fear of Hell, reject me. Only if I believe in you out of pure love should you take me in."Kazantzaki's 'Saint Francis'
Welcome to today's entry, brought to you by the Letter 'E.' Yes, it's the dreaded word, 'Evangelism,' the mere mention of which often gives me that uncontrollable urge to bury myself in my (ever-growing) ironing mountain until all danger has passed. As applied to myself, those words, 'bull' and 'china-shop' come to mind. That I'm tackling such a 'heavy' topic on a Friday afternoon is only really because I've just come up for air after breaking the back of a long-awaited essay and need some light diversion. (The alternative being to dive back down into the never- ending ironing pile.) (Whoever said that faith can move mountains?!) Given that enticing prospect, I'd far prefer to ponder over some threads that have been whirling round in the deepest recesses of my brain this last week or so, and try to make sense of them.
So, to Francis. I read the above quotes in some current online discussions: Worship a mad God or Go to Hell? and Evangelism is Still a Dirty Word...but Should it Be?. What's the basis on which we seek salvation;and why should we encourage others to do likewise, given that from some quarters at least, the God presented comes over as a tyrannical and jealous despot. The 'Good Old Uncle George' (scroll down to section 4, para 4) caricature so beautifully described by Gerard Hughes, preaching a gospel of 'Conditional Love.' (Jeremy Young has some particularly good insights into this last; though I can't pretend to agree with all of his theories). After years of struggling with similarly inappropriate images of the Almighty (and, I suspect, boring a good number of people to tears with my inane ramblings along the way) my own, personal 'wicked uncle,' mostly remains safely in his basement, with only the very occasional outing - when he mostly appears more 'bossy,' than despotic. Has he been replaced by something more acceptable? That's difficult to say, given that nowadays I try not to anthropomorphize God. 'A' for Apophatic is my new Letter of the Day and I recently discovered 'The Cloud of Unknowing' with more than a nod of recognition. I've not read the Kazanttsaki book myself, but the quotation from it sits comfortably with this, I think. It's the kind of saying that I tend to file away, if not in an actual, but a spiritual 'treasure box,' to take out, turn over, and ponder over every so often.
Then the gospel mandate to evangelise accepted, what's the best way to go about it? The leader of the second discussion quotes the well-known saying of St Francis in advocating the softly-softly approach, which about ties in to where I find my self to be these days. Not that I'd knock the big rally approach mentioned in the discussion.It's not the way I personally came to faith, although since then I have responded in some ways to if not huge, but smaller-scale events - and sometimes gained surprisingly from the (to me) most unlikely settings. I'm a great one for tolerance of difference (on a good day!) just as long as something's not pushed as being The Way, The Only Way, and It's My Way or the Highway. After all if I did it My (personal) Way, no doubt I'd be forcing unwillling persons into contemplating their respective navels all the time, with disastrous results!
Nevertheless, and especially given that first principle of TSSF is To make our Lord known and loved everywhere I do hold to some notion of something or other, be it with a lower-case 'e,' and, starting where I am. Charity begins at home, after all. (though I'm not sure my family would vouch as to its efficacy!). But low key; at times maybe even lose the key - 'move out of the box' maybe. In the Evangelism discussion I found the post where the writer was beginning to move into working with people in the areas of alternative spiritualities and New Age thinking interesting. Especially that they felt listening to be a key part of the process. In a Busy, Busy World (sorry, R Scarry), where information (and corresponding expectation to 'do' ) streams from every pore, the space either to listen, or to be listened to is at a premium.
Coincidentally, the other day I borrowed Geoffrey Wills work on evangelism Won by One. I first read this many years ago, not long after becoming a Christian (or renewing my faith - according to one's viewpoint). On a visit back to the UK, I used to visit my 'home' church each autumn round about the time the homegroups were gearing up for a new term,and that year, Won by One was the set book. I've not had a chance to re-read it yet and it'll be interesting to see if the impression I get of it differs from that of 14-15 years ago. What I do remember was his emphasis (new then, maybe?) on the one to one, friendship approach to making Christ known and his allowance that a one-size -fits-all gospel message doesn't suit everybody. If I remember rightly, he discovered the hard way with his own mother, that the Good Old Uncle George - repent or burn (ok, a modified version of) doesn't work. In that instance, it was the picture of Christ as friend that at last broke down the barriers. Would Francis have approved, I wonder? I suspect he would.
So, to round off that attack of verbal meanderings, what better to finish with than some more verbal meanderings on the subject by Cartoon Church's Dave Walker. I don't think I'll be getting that prize for the best evangelistic award, either, Dave.
'Preach the Gospel at at all times. If necessary, use words.' St Francis
