The preaching plan at my church is probably a classic example of what my boss in industry called the difference between ‘plan’ and ‘planning.’ Whilst I was never entirely convinced, there was certainly something in what he said. Plans, he argued, were rigid, difficult to alter, inflexible – and often doomed to failure. Planning on the other hand embraced the strengths of organisation and systematic forethought but was flexible enough to cope with the unexpected.
The original plan would have seen the Ephesians series finish before Remembrance Sunday, leaving us space for two ‘specials’ before advent. After the congregation elected to cancel one service (then most failing to attend the one they’d opted for instead, which is another story!) I decided to reshuffle the series so that it would go right up to the end of the liturgical year (not that anyone but me would notice).
This is all by way of introducing the fact that I ended up with Remembrance Sunday to be followed by an exploration of Ephesians 6:10-20 – the so-called gospel armour with all its language of battle. It has been interesting – and challenging – trying to prepare something ‘different’ for Remembrance (our service at 3p.m. means more freedom over if/when we do the silence) and wondering how on earth (or in the spiritual realms!) to deal with the Ephesians passage next week.
My remembrance service is aimed simply at prompting thought: it uses lots of counterpoint (I think!) to try to highlight some of the tensions the issues of war and conflict, to ponder why we recall military war-dead and not either civilians or those who simply die of old age (civilian or military). As a result it probably has so many ideas my college tutors would go spare. It includes the ‘act of remembrance’ and then a reading of ‘In Flanders’ Fields’ followed by singing ‘where have all the flowers gone?’ Some war photographs precede a summary of the ‘just war’ criteria’ and questions to ponder – Christ or country? Arms or aid? Etc. etc, - nothing new but, I suspect, unfamiliar territory for my congregation. We end up with an opportunity to remember those who are important to us – relatives, friends, non-military heroes and so on. It is slightly risky with my folk, some may detest what I am doing but it feels right, especially in the light of recent events, to challenge the unthinking practice of romanticised remembrance.
So what, then do I do with the Ephesians passage next week? This is the real challenge! So far I have found one commentator who compares the ‘armour’ with the robes of the Levitical priesthood, suggesting that the author might have seen the similarities and another who suggests that in Roman occupied lands it was simply a familiar sight, so easy to understand. I have also found some very scary websites on spiritual warfare: woe betide anyone who uses the NIV (rather than KJV) and as for anything later or a paraphrase, well, I suspect hell awaits.
At the moment I am working with the broad title of ‘ready, willing and able’ since these seem to be the attributes of priest, soldier, athlete, farmer or any other image used in the Epistles to describe disciples. Somewhere I need to try to get across the idea that the ‘evil’ is not ‘people’ and try to get people to think about just what it is they are opposed to. But I still come back to the same question – how does the military and battle imagery, which clearly has its place, square with the realities of contemporary warfare and fear of terrorism? When modern warfare kills three civilians for every military person, the image of Christian as soldier is less tenable than a century ago when almost all war deaths were soldiers. Answers on a post card before next weekend would be appreciated!