In my community we always sing the Latin Te Deum. I have nothing against singing it in Latin, but it does drag on. The brethren often refer to it as the Tedium.

For the rest of this lovely interview of the cleverest Catholic writer in English today, head to here (H/T to catholicity and covenant).

Who is our Anglican pundit who can find the middle between the extremes and paint hope into the picture of Anglican futures?

Inexorable law of congregational life (extended)

Visiting several parishes recently has been an excellent re-acquaintance with the style and substance of parish life in our diocese. Fourteen months as priest in charge of one parish was a wonderful experience but left me out of touch with the rest of the parishes.

Not for the first time, I have been struck by the importance of music for the character of Sunday worship. One difference between parishes faithfully following the prayer book as the substance of the regular liturgy is in the music used in the service. Here is 'choral eucharist', there is 'eucharist with hymns', over the way is 'Hillsong eucharist' and down the road is the eucharist with 'Belfast mod hymns'. Of course within some parishes such differences may apply to multiple services.

Each form of service has arguments in its favour, not least that each service actually takes place since that means that a body of people are willing to gather, and some instrumentalist or a group or choir are committed to making the music. There are arguments against each service, not least that some parishioners make it very clear that "8 am" or "9.15 am" or "5 pm" are "not my cup of tea."

But what interests me, reflecting on the big picture of Christian life in our country, statistical trends re belief and commitment is which services are populated by younger generations: children, youth, young adults, parents with young families. The under fifties, in other words. By 'populated' I mean that the dominant presence in a service is the presence of younger generations.

On that score there is simply no doubt, not a scintilla of evidence otherwise, that the younger generations are in services where the music style reflects the general music style of the younger generations. Whether we love it or loathe it, Hillsong/Belfast mod hymns/Matt Redman and the like supply the music for the services where the present younger generations gather and chart the direction of the future services for the elderly (those who are 53 years old and rising). There will be no choral eucharists on Sunday mornings when I am in a rest home.

In the services I have visited, from a church growth perspective many aspects have been done well and are uniform in standard across the parishes: warmth of welcome, hospitality offered after the service, relevant preaching, quality of service leadership, provision of programme for children.

The measurable difference in respect of services with many rather than few younger generations has been the style of music. Already stated here in the past and worth stating again: the age profile of a congregation reflects the music style of the service. It is the inexorable law of congregational life today.

Extension (Wednesday): I am delighted to have what I said above subject to critique in comments below. I also enjoyed a reflective conversation yesterday on my main idea. All of which leads me to add a few words, hopefully clarifying what I am trying to say.

(1) First and foremost I am proposing a law which is descriptive of congregational life in NZ parishes rather than prescriptive: this is the way things are, where there is a congregation well populated by the under forties, the music is appropriate to younger generations. There are no congregations so populated in which most of the music sung is from the English Church Hymnal or the Book of Common Praise, led by organ or piano.

No comments made thus far have provided counter evidence to this law as a matter of description of our life.

(2) Secondly, I am happy to then make a certain amount of prescriptive recommendation based on this law. Here are a couple of examples, relevant to our local situation in post-quake Christchurch.

- a congregation seeking renewal of the generations gathering for worship should address the question of the music style of its service. Preach your heart out. Add cream buns and cheerios to the morning tea. Train welcomers. Bring every aspect of the service such as readings and intercessions up to an excellent standard. Establish a children and youth programme. A certain advance will occur. But my hypothesis is that if the style of music does not change to the style appropriate to the younger generations, full congregational renewal will not take place.

- when we establish new congregations in new housing areas we should aim from the start to provide services in which the music is in keeping with the younger generations. This means, for instance, that if we are planning on appointing a church pioneer to establish a new congregation with a staff which includes a youth worker and a children's worker, we should also be recruiting a music leader, a guitarist, keyboard player and drummer.

(3) Comments herein focus on services of worship as elements of congregational life. I am making no comment about how to plant a church from scratch. The way forward there might include many steps before a service of worship is formed (e.g. praying, forming a group for prayer and Bible study, surveying the area, visiting people, social events for meeting and greeting people). Nor am I commenting in respect of existing congregations seeking renewal in respect of the first steps to take which could be, say, prayer and developing the preaching; or prayer, developing the preaching, reconfiguring the building. But only so many steps can be taken before the question of music needs to be addressed if we wish to see a change in congregational profile.

(4) Something which came up in conversation yesterday: the importance of music style being advocated here is an importance in its own right for any church seeking to be a church with which younger generations can identify. There is an alternative approach in which Anglican churches seek to imitate the music style of the 'successful' church down the road with the hope that similar 'success' is achieved: I am NOT talking about that. I am not talking about that, not least because in my observation, Anglican churches which set about such imitations are somewhat poor at doing it. No, what I am talking about here has nothing to do with the music which is being played at another church (save that one might gain some great songs by listening in) and everything to do with making the connection between church culture and general culture.

Just a thought about dots (expanded)

Nothing to do with Anglican life but I am wondering if news of the Murdoch divorce today is connected in any way to a strange story a couple of weeks ago about a scandal affecting the heart of the British government (though not involving any cabinet ministers) - a story which involved strong legal threats about publishing any details (other than the ones  noted above).*

On the big story of the global week, one reason for supporting the continuation of the Prism project is that this man wants it stopped!

For a bit of light Saturday entertainment, and in homage to the British and Irish Lions rugby team touring Australia at the moment, here are some improbable tales, or even true ones, about boys being boys.

Sunday: there is nothing 'light entertainment' about the tragic civil war in Syria. So this is a bit of sober Sunday reflection, coming from Andrew Sullivan. He is a prolific commentator and on many issues I disagree with him. But he gets 100% pass mark for this on Syria.

*If you have read around the internet this weekend, or perhaps in today's Sunday papers, you will have seen speculation about a third party - vigorously denied etc - but speculation that doesn't join the dots with the British cabinet being spooked. So my money remains on another explanation for the divorce.

A very witty insight into the matter is here in the New Yorker.  On Friday night I went to a talk where conversation included a familiar topic for Christians reflecting on the state of the world: the alliance between big business interests and the media, combining to suppress the real truth about who controls the global economy and who benefits from it. Everyone there was too civilised to mention Satan and his spawn. But, really, is there any difference between the riff the New Yorker piece plays and the New Testament's disclosure that the dark secret of the world is Satan organising it through the rulers of this world?

ADU has no particular interest in the marriage of one couple among the world's billions. But it is interested if we are about to have a revelation about the nefarious coupling of political power with media power. The connection between the Murdoch story, the NSA story and Obama's decision re arming rebels in Syria, the line through the dots, is the hidden story of who, how, and why decisions are made in this world which determine whether people live or die, but are not engaged with by the people.

Iran has had an election this weekend. To many observers in the West it will appear to be rigged in some way in favour of the real imamic powers controlling that country. But can we in the West be sure that our elections are not rigged by the controlling interests of media, business, military and politicos?

Out back, the real pope is called Walter

In our crazy world it is possible to live a life in which every day is a good day but the world as a whole is sliding into dark chaos. In that darkness, Christians remain obligated by Christ to shine as lights. Our disadvantage compared to recent past is that Christendom has long gone. There is no lighthouse shining powerfully into the darkness. Just us, little candles flickering in the night breeze, sometimes blown out by the gales winds of militant Islamism, strident secularism, or even the gusts of indifference.

But the light we shine is a sign and the crucial challenge of the 21st century for Christians everywhere and of all kinds is how the sign is understood. In terms of language we have a message to speak. But what language will we use so the message is heard? We know what we want to say. We need to find the translation that connects with our hearers. Aramaic was translated to Greek. Nearly two hundred years ago in Aotearoa NZ, English was translated into Maori. Today, especially in a Western world prone to hear the gospel as yesterday's news, we need to find the language that speaks new good news. It is not good enough for us to shine the light of Christ. The world can see something else. We have all heard stories about lights in the sky which are misinterpreted as alien spacecraft. (As it happens, for many, Christians are seen as aliens!)

One particular light shining in the darkness is Walter Kasper. Office wise he is a cardinal of the Catholic church and once was prefect of a congregation, i.e. right at the top of the Roman hierarchy. But for our purposes today his importance is as a theologian. During Benedict XVI's papacy I sensed that Walter was being pushed ever so slightly to the outer. He represented commitment to fostering and furthering the impact of Vatican II while his boss seemed intent on constraining, even undoing that impact. But the wheel has turned again. Francis seems comfortable with Rome re-finding its bearings in the 21st century with Vatican II as its compass. Has Walter Kasper succeeded and Benedict failed? In the back room of Roman politics, the back room where ideas drive policy rather than the back room of wheeling and dealing, is the real pope called Walter?

Thus when the Living Church publishes an article on Walter Kasper, we Anglicans might profit from paying attention. Here is Kasper's single quest(ion) set out (re a recent conference celebrating his theology) by the article's author, Michael Cover:

"In her opening remarks, conference organizer Kristin Colberg (St. John’s, Collegeville) noted that, by his own admission, Kasper’s theological work has proceeded from a single question: How do we translate Christian tradition in the modern context and the modern context through the Christian tradition? In setting these questions at the forefront of his inquiry, Kasper clearly stands in line with the theological concerns of the Second Vatican Council. But Colberg was quick to point out that Kasper’s quest for relevance never led him to reduce the Church to another social-transformative institution. Rather, the Church achieves its relevance solely by insisting on and preserving its distinctive identity. As such, at the heart of Kasper’s translational theology is what Colberg calls the “identity-relevance dilemma.”"

Kasper writes theology but always connects it to the gospel in the world, as this next citation notes:

"Kasper’s theology represents a turn away from the intramural concerns of neo-Thomism to a dialectical theology, rooted in human experience and aimed at “rendering an account of the Christian hope to every human being” (cf. 1 Peter 3:15)."

Therein lies an interesting measure of the work of all would be theologians: have we rendered an account of Christian hope, accessible for all human beings? (!!)

But the quest to communicate the gospel is the quest not of individual disciples but of the body of Christ, the church, so a related question arises whether the church in continuity with its own tradition can develop new forms of ministry for a new world.In essence, this is the significance of Vatican II:

"For Kasper, Vatican II is very much still in its initial stages of reception. As Kasper noted: “If the documents of the Second Vatican Council represent a faithful compass for the Church, the needle of that compass is still wavering wildly.” Hailed as too liberal by some and too conservative by others, Kasper represents a unique middle voice in the translation of the council, calling for “new forms of ministry” that stand in striking continuity with the tradition. For Kasper, Pope Francis serves as an icon of the kinds of changes the council intended."

Now the article goes on to say some other things (about the Anglican Covenant, about the guidance of the Spirit). We may come back to those another day. For this post, let's sit with the question of the task of theology, taking care not to become "intramural" but world facing, developing a 'translational theology', and the shape of the church as bearer of the gospel, developing new forms of ministry (mission?) for a new century.

A light shines in the darkness

I do not know how you view Western civilization but I see it rushing like a certain herd in a gospel story over a cliff into the deep sea. Somehow our political leadership has become a bunch of people with no leadership skills of the kind that lead nations and the world into a better future.

The European Union is a mess with no one having the courage to do the obvious thing and deconstruct the Euro.

Is there any US politician capable of seeing the forest and not the trees? In Australia, Julia Gillard is leading the Labour Party to electoral oblivion but the alternative includes a politician who recently descended to such awful misogynistic depths re Ms Gillard that I refuse to publish a link to the story. (Or did he? In a comment below there is a link to a refutation of the story. But does the refutation stack up? Either way, Oz politics includes some shameless characters. Bit like the Oz cricket team).

Here in NZ we have an opposition Labour Party that includes hypocrisy the depths of which cannot be plumbed: excoriating Sky City (a gambling conglomerate) one moment, nek minit accepting their hospitality at a rugby match. In another saga, over one politician doing what (apparently) nearly all of them do, leaking stuff to the media, the depths of triviality also cannot be plumbed as they turn on one another.

If we head back to Britain we have the absurd spectacle of a nation which gave us the intellectual powerhouses of Oxford and Cambridge proposing that 2014 be a Year of Pretence in which no one will mention that Germany was responsible for the beginning of World War 1. Perhaps this is a practice run for 2033, the centenary of the rise of Hitler to power and thus the beginnings of the Holocaust, and for 2039, the centenary of ... oh, let's see, Poland causing the start of World War 2 because it had insufficiently armed itself as a deterrent against German aggression territorial ambition. Cue John Cleese's famous Fawlty Tower scene about not mentioning the war.

Meanwhile parts of the world are slowly being taken over by a rising tide of extreme Islamism. Not all Islamic societies are a worry, but some are notably troublesome. Here is Hamas intent on strangling the remnant of Arab Christianity which remains in Palestine. Syrian rebels executed a child the other day for alleged blasphemy. Daily the situation grows worse for Christians in Egypt and Iraq. Yet many Western politicians view Palestinian aspirations as uniformly good and beyond critique, while others want to arm the Syrian rebels and refrain from comment on other situations. There is something worrying about the manner in which Islamic loyalties can trump loyalties to countries that provide a new home for people, as in this example from Australia in which the beheading of Lee Rigby is justified because his actions affronted the Islam nation.

We face the prospect of a world in which beheading could be the normative response in many places to affronts to ruling authorities. But don't worry, our politicians have it all sorted ... once they can work out how to tell the truth, stop denigrating at each other, and acquire greater leadership skills than how to leak to the media without getting caught.

Where does light shine in the darkness enveloping us?

Hopefully it shines in and through the churches. In many ways it does, and for that I give thanks to God. If 2014 is the centenary of the lights going out over Europe, it might be the year in which the lights go on for Western Christianity and we really wake up to the fact that we live in a Post-Christendom world. In that world, the gospel is now just another story competing for attention. And little attention is being paid to it. For NZers, 2014 is the bicentenary of the first preaching of the gospel. Samuel Marsden spoke in English at Oihi on Christmas Day 2014. Ruatara translated for him.

English was then the language of Christendom. Maori was the language of those for whom the gospel was new news. In a Post Christendom world we need to translate the gospel for those for whom it is new news. Who is our Ruatara?

The next post will explore one important contributor to the role of translator of the gospel for today's world.

The Most Dangerous Man in England

Whoops. That title should be "The Most Dangerous Man in Tudor England."

Melvyn Bragg has produced a documentary on William Tyndale, with that title. He writes about Tyndale in the Telegraph.

What a genius of the word, that Tyndale was. Never one for using multi-syllables when just one would do, Tyndale's Bible translation could have been re-titled, How to Launch a Homespun Phrase into the English language For Eternity.

What a life Tyndale lived. He was the James Bond of Reformation theologians. Except unlike James Bond, the baddies killed him.

What kept him going? He lost his life that the plough boy might know the Bible in his indigenous language. In short, and still relevant to Christianity today, Tyndale stood up for the Bible as God's revelation and for the importance of readers accessing it according to the greatest possible accuracy in communication.

Apropos of Anglican matters in our day, Tyndale stands for the importance of God's voice being heard through Scripture, with the volume of the voice of tradition turned down as low as possible.

UPDATE: Catholicity and Covenant takes a different line to me above. I think it nonsense and have said so in a comment!

Boundless Informant on Global Anglican Surveillance

UPDATE: Are cracks appearing in the story of the whistleblower? Is the journalist he talked to, Glenn Greenwald, reliable? Check here.

ALSO: Edward Snowden should not have broken his vow to keep a secret. But should the Director of NSA have told the truth rather than a direct lie? Read here.

ORIGINAL: Before anyone outs me, I confess. Barack and me have got this thing going, keeping an eye on global Anglican affairs with the aid of a nifty iPhone app called Boundless Informant.

However there are limitations.

"Current technology simply does not permit us to positively identify all of the bloggers or locations associated with a given communication (for example, it may be possible to say with certainty that a communication traversed a particular path within the internet. It is harder to know the ultimate source or destination, or more particularly the identity of the person represented by the TO:, FROM: or CC: field of an e-mail address or the abstraction of an IP address)"

Also, Barack and I admit that some Anglican gossip permeating the internet has affected the course of blog discussions:

""The continued publication of these allegations about highly classified issues, and other information taken out of context, makes it impossible to conduct a reasonable discussion on the merits of these programs.""

PS You are safe posting comments here. Only 5000 workers in the NSA know where you live and what secrets your computer holds :)

PPS This is the bloke who blew the whistle on the little surveillance op Barack and me had going.