Today is the day when women traditionally take the opportunity to propose marriage. This leap year there has been a lot of talk about marriage, both in Christian circles and in society as a whole.
The government in the UK last week announced the beginning of a process to consult on changing the definition of marriage to include same sex marriage. Even before the official announcement a group of churches and others had organised to fight the proposed change. The Coalition for Marriage (C4M) had 15000 signatures on their website within 24 hours of going live last week and that number has steadily grown. The online debates have begun on Facebook and other places and I have been involved in some of them.
Predictably enough the defenders of traditional marriage have been accused of being homophobic, reactionary, bigoted, out of touch and lacking in compassion for gay people. Also predictable has been the response of the defenders to these allegations, sometimes making assertions for which they have no evidence, sometimes chucking verses of Scripture about like ammunition, not caring where it lands. ( The words of Jesus about pearls before swine have sprung to mind here at times.)
Meanwhile,in America two well known pastors have published books on marriage in the last few months. Tim Keller has published The Meaning of Marriage and Mark Driscoll has produced Real Marriage to considerably more controversy. I have only read Keller's book which is a typically thorough and thought provoking exposition of Ephesians 5:18-33. At the beginning of the book Keller, who writes along with his wife, Kathy, defines marriage as 'a lifelong monogamous relationship between a man and a woman', a definition which previously would not have been required but which, increasingly Christian leaders are going to be required to give.
Keller's book also explains why, for Christians, the redefinition of marriage is more than just an extension of civil rights. Marriage is not simply for the stability of society or companionship or even procreation. Marriage, in Paul's terms is an illustration of the gospel and a demonstration of God's love for the church. Typically, therefore Keller's book is not simply a manual on how to have a happy marriage but a discussion of how our marriages can present the gospel of Christ to the world and how couples can help each other to draw closer to God (and to each other)through their determination to love one another and give of oneself to each other. (Although there are plenty of examples of both success and failure from the Kellers' own marriage.)
In the chapter written by Kathy Keller there is a discussion of the controversial area of headship and submission which concludes by asking each partner in a marriage to take on 'the Jesus role' in the marriage. The husband is to take on the role by exercising headship as a servant, always putting his wife's needs before his own. The wife is to take in the role by willingly submitting to her husband's servant leadership just as Christ willingly submitted to his Father even when he was co- equal in the Godhead.
At a time when traditional views of marriage are under attack and when attitudes to marriage are increasingly superficial, The Meaning of Marriage is a vital corrective. Married Christians are encouraged to recognise that their marriages are intended to present the gospel to the world. Unmarried Christians are reminded that marriage is not the be all and end all but rather only serves as an illustration of the ultimate relationship between Christ and his church; the only relationship through which every Christian (married or single)finds fulfilment.
If you are engaged to be married, read this book now. If you are married, read this book to remind yourself of the importance of your relationship and your covenant decision to love one another. If you are unmarried read this book to remind yourself of the proper Biblical perspective on marriage and singleness. All Christians should read this book to be reminded of the astonishing depths of the gospel of grace.
Wednesday 29 February 2012
Monday 6 February 2012
On the eve of a 200th anniversary
Studying English Literature in school can go one of two ways. It can lead some people to never want to pick up another book again in their lives or it can nourish a love of literature that lasts a lifetime. Often it depends on the material studied and on the teaching of it. Or it can depend on whether the immature teenage brain is capable of understanding the mind blowing nature of what it is taking in, rather than just reading Brodie's notes (remember them?)and desperately trying to remember key quotations for the exam.
I was very nearly put off reading the work of Charles Dickens when I studied Oliver Twist for GCSE. On reflection I don't think it was anything to do with the teaching which was very enthusiastic (to the point of reading dramatic episodes aloud and hamming it up ridiculously as Fagin). Rather it was due to the fact that I could not appreciate the revolutionary nature of what I was reading.
Thankfully I overcame my initial reaction to start reading some of Dickens' other work. His use of language to provoke a smile or a tear in his reader was second to none. He could lose his reader (and sometimes himself) in overlong passages of vivid description or wild tangents of social comment which did nothing to serve the plot but did everything to let you know what the author thought of the corrupt institutions of his day.
His personal life was a troubled one. Nobody could mistake Charles Dickens for a model husband and father and his attitude to women (both in real life and in his novels) was weird. But his novels shaped life in this country like no other works of literature could. Some of his characters were bland (Oliver Twist, Little Nell) but that only served to demonstrate the colourful character of many of the others (Fagin, Miss Havisham, Uriah Heep).
But why am I writing about Dickens in this blog? Not just because he is one of my favourite authors and Great Expectations is almost certainly my favourite novel of all time but because his (almost prophetic) voice is just as relevant to society today as it was when he wrote. We have plenty of satire today but none of it comes with the moral outrage so often contained in Dickens' writing. We have plenty of campaigners for justice but movements like the Occupy protests lack the imagination, punch and vicious sense of humour that made Dickens incapable of being ignored by the powerful and corrupt.
Maybe it is going too far and maybe Dickens himself would reject the idea but I think it is entirely possible to see him standing in the heritage of the Old Testament prophets who were stark in their criticism of power and who often delivered their message with biting satirical humour. (NB Hosea also had a pretty strange personal life!)Our society with all it's dissatisfaction at the perceived corruption of financial, governmental and ecclesiastical institutions is surely ripe for a new Dickens. There are many blurbs on the back covers of paperbacks that use that tag about an author. None of them live up to the hype. Perhaps we need to recover the old Dickens and ask ourselves what he would write about 21st century society. Would it be any less scathing than his opinion of 19th century Britain? I think not.
Perhaps it would be even better if we re-read some of those Old Testament prophets and began to apply their voice to our culture today and echo their cries for justice and mercy. In May the Presbyterian Church in Ireland will launch its theme for the year 2012-13 which calls the church to be a prophetic voice in our society. I suspect Mr Dickens would approve. He might even ask what has been keeping us?
I was very nearly put off reading the work of Charles Dickens when I studied Oliver Twist for GCSE. On reflection I don't think it was anything to do with the teaching which was very enthusiastic (to the point of reading dramatic episodes aloud and hamming it up ridiculously as Fagin). Rather it was due to the fact that I could not appreciate the revolutionary nature of what I was reading.
Thankfully I overcame my initial reaction to start reading some of Dickens' other work. His use of language to provoke a smile or a tear in his reader was second to none. He could lose his reader (and sometimes himself) in overlong passages of vivid description or wild tangents of social comment which did nothing to serve the plot but did everything to let you know what the author thought of the corrupt institutions of his day.
His personal life was a troubled one. Nobody could mistake Charles Dickens for a model husband and father and his attitude to women (both in real life and in his novels) was weird. But his novels shaped life in this country like no other works of literature could. Some of his characters were bland (Oliver Twist, Little Nell) but that only served to demonstrate the colourful character of many of the others (Fagin, Miss Havisham, Uriah Heep).
But why am I writing about Dickens in this blog? Not just because he is one of my favourite authors and Great Expectations is almost certainly my favourite novel of all time but because his (almost prophetic) voice is just as relevant to society today as it was when he wrote. We have plenty of satire today but none of it comes with the moral outrage so often contained in Dickens' writing. We have plenty of campaigners for justice but movements like the Occupy protests lack the imagination, punch and vicious sense of humour that made Dickens incapable of being ignored by the powerful and corrupt.
Maybe it is going too far and maybe Dickens himself would reject the idea but I think it is entirely possible to see him standing in the heritage of the Old Testament prophets who were stark in their criticism of power and who often delivered their message with biting satirical humour. (NB Hosea also had a pretty strange personal life!)Our society with all it's dissatisfaction at the perceived corruption of financial, governmental and ecclesiastical institutions is surely ripe for a new Dickens. There are many blurbs on the back covers of paperbacks that use that tag about an author. None of them live up to the hype. Perhaps we need to recover the old Dickens and ask ourselves what he would write about 21st century society. Would it be any less scathing than his opinion of 19th century Britain? I think not.
Perhaps it would be even better if we re-read some of those Old Testament prophets and began to apply their voice to our culture today and echo their cries for justice and mercy. In May the Presbyterian Church in Ireland will launch its theme for the year 2012-13 which calls the church to be a prophetic voice in our society. I suspect Mr Dickens would approve. He might even ask what has been keeping us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)