Spring Harvest is coming of age. In terms of James Fowler’s Stages of Faith it stands between stages four and five, where what was once unquestioned is now subjected to critical scrutiny and a "bigger picture" is glimpsed which makes room both for mystery and a new sense of justice.
Over the past three years Spring Harvest has been redefining itself through its ongoing theme of One God, One Church and this year, One Hope. As illustration of this ongoing redefinition, here is a selection of things said and done around the Skegness site in Week 3:
- Recognition of hypocrisy within Evangelicalism - “There has been something of the Pharisee about us; we have been protective of our theology and selective in our targets.”
- Revised understandings of scripture i.e. “Scripture is reticent on the mechanics of the atonement but profoundly insistent on its reality”; “Taking the Bible seriously does not mean taking the Bible literally”; and revised understandings of hell ruling out eternal conscious torment.
- Importance of facing issues of inclusivity in the Church i.e. an apology to those people with disabilities who have been told by their church that they don’t have the faith to be healed or that they must have unconfessed sin in their lives because they have not been healed; and stories of being on reality TV alongside a representative of a gay and lesbian group to oppose a fundamentalist group claiming that “God hates fags”.
- Need to be real about faith - “raw and real in prayer”; dangers of self-congratulatory or romantic worship.
- Respect for the great world religions. No ‘no-go’ areas in interfaith, relationships can be built with side by side conversations on issues of the common good and intra-faith conversations on issues of belief.
- The Kingdom of God is about rehumanising the dehumanized and involves God in renewal of the whole world therefore salvation is not just about me and my sins but also about the overthrow of oppression.
Some things, of course, have not changed. Worship remains upbeat, uptempo and uplifting. There are moments of reflection, often when some sort of response is called for, but emotions are quickly lifted or whipped up once again. Dance, drama and painting are also fully utilised in worship with the drama during this week being particularly apposite.
Spring Harvesters continue to love an emotional appeal and, as a result, took to first-time Big Top speaker Andy Caldwell who became so caught up in the passion of the moment that he forgot the third point of his sermon which, as a good Baptist, he had earlier promised to us. No one else seemed to notice or mind, least of all the hundreds who knelt on the creaking boards of the Big Top to renew their sense of astonishment at the Son of God.
Caldwell was clearly being groomed in the standard style for Spring Harvest sermons; the after-dinner sermon which aims to combine humorous anecdotes with punchy bible-based points. Jeff Lucas is the star performer when it comes to the after-dinner sermon and he did not disappoint on the final evening with stories and delivery equivalent to a stand-up comic combined with direct and poignant teaching drawn directly from the passage. In this case, the story of Jesus turning water into wine which afforded great scope for reflecting on humour as a symbol of joy, including a quote from the Pope on the subject.
The Anglican input was particularly marked this year with the Bishop of Willesden, Pete Broadbent, delivering the daily Bible expositions and the Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright, lecturing, preaching and in late night discussion. Pete Broadbent moved rather ploddingly through the Isianic Servant songs and, although he outlined the exilic background of these passages, seemed to miss a trick by choosing not to make the link to the situation of the post-Christendom church. Instead, we were asked to think mainly in terms of other generic experiences of exile like migration or a house move.
Tom Wright, however, was a whirlwind of Biblical connections as he explored the centrality of Christ to creation and the impact of his crucifixion and resurrection on the coming of the Kingdom of God. In his lecture and sermon he gave a vision of a Kingdom that overthrows the oppressors to bring forgiveness and wholeness to all. This vision was received with spontaneous applause but to what extent it was fully grasped was unclear from the late night q&a where the questions asked – Christian political parties, belief in a fiery hell, cremation versus burial - were mainly peripheral to the content of his talks. My question about his use of the five act play as a way of imaging salvation history drew from him an image for the work of the Kingdom which still lies ahead; that of the jazz musician listening deeply to the structure of the music in order to improvise his or her individual contribution.Wright’s image could stand as an appropriate metaphor for Spring Harvest itself as it seeks to equip the Church in a way that is open, compassionate, humorous, self-deprecating, passionate, transforming, uplifting and evangelical.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Albert Ayler.
5 comments:
Glad you got the 5-Act play and the jazz improv metaphors fired up with Bishop Tom!
Right, I'm off to reread King Lear with some Miles Davis on the headphones!...
(...or should I be preparing for tomorrow morning's worship!?!)
Go well (and welcome back!)
(BTW seen Diana Thursday and Lyn today...see you Tuesday for a full house!..)
everyone else seemed to like andy a part from a very small few (like your self) haha
Good summary Jonathon.
I do wonder whether Tom Wright was the right person to have on Monday evening. He gave a very detailed, wide ranging and at times breathless lecture which was magisterial in its scope. However, I am not sure it was suited to that particular session and the balance between theology and praxis was definitely weighted to the former. I think you are right in questioning how much was grasped.
Interesting comments about the 'after dinner sermon' and I agree that Jeff Lucas is the master. I do feel that some of the others don't quite get the balance right between anecdote and teaching with more style than substance. Conversely, I felt that Pete Broadbent could have done with more anecdote, illustration and application in his Bible readings to earth his exposition on the suffering servant in Isaiah. He did more of this in his last session so I guess one could argue that he provided a good eschatological model!
I also agree that the tone of Spring Harvest has changed, however, I detected this shift beginning some five or six years ago both in the substance of the teaching and also in the make up of the leadership team.
I think it is a positive development that senior Anglicans able to do significant theology like Rowan and Tom are being invited to speak at Spring Harvest. I think that is good in terms of the diversity of the event and broadening people's exposure to other styles and forms of doing theology.
The fact that such people are there helps keep someone like me engaged with Spring Harvest (and, while I know I'm often in a minority there on these kinds of issues, don't suppose that I'm totally alone). I could do with more of that sort of thing. The first year I went, for example, there were some excellent Arts-based seminars (the sort of thing we do on 'The Big Picture') in the student programme, which have never reappeared in subsequent years. Perhaps we could offer to do some 'Big Picture' type sessions there?
So, I don't think people like Tom and Rowan should adapt their style too much and that they should be given the chance to speak to the main gathering of Spring Harvesters. I agree that Tom Wright's sermon was breathless, wide ranging and felt as though he had one opportunity to say these things to these people so he was determined to say all that he could. However, if it all felt too much on the night people could get the dvd and digest it in smaller chunks later. Although, I took notes, in a sense I think the detail wasn't as important as the overall vision of the Kingdom which he created and which I found inspiring.
I agree that it is very important that people like Rowan and Tom come to SH. However, I don't agree that they shouldn't adapt their style to the occasion/audience, that is a basic skill for a communicator.
When Rowan came to SH and spoke on Creation and Christianity he clearly adapted his style to the audience. He didn't give the same talk as he would have done to a group of graduates in a seminar but it was still very profound. A look at Tom's sermons on his website shows that he is very capable of making deep theological points in an accessible manner. His writings show that he is very skilled with anecdotess that illustrate his points. It could be argued that the criticism he received over his Easter sermon was precisley because he was so clear and accessible in what he was saying and there was plenty of application.
I felt that some of the key things Tom had to say may have got lost in what was a very dense talk and with more illustration and application he would have given his audience time to catch breath and reflect on what he was saying. Some of those I talked to afterwards found him difficult to follow and one or two felt slightly intimidated, which was a great pity as it may have turned them off from reading his more accessible books and commentaries. There were other forums for him to go into more depth and stretch people.
Stephen Cottrell (Bishop of Reading) said recently 'If they ain't heard it, you ain't said it!' and I think that is a good maxim for those of us who are involved in a preaching and teaching ministry. We need to reflect on how we communicate as well as what we communicate and I just wonder whether Tom missed a trick there.
I agree with your point about the need for more Arts-based seminars and one thing I really valued last year was Gerard Kelly's Bible readings which he illustrated with art, poetry and music in a very effective manner.
Post a Comment