I have managed to get myself into a bit of hot water in some circles by posting my dislike of a certain worship song, but hey, I make no secret of my opinion of this song and people are free to disagree.

I have always believed that all songs and hymns are created out of a genuine desire to offer praise, worship etc to God, and that quite a lot of the time our likes and dislikes are more about taste than theology.  At the same time there is a theory - which I don't entirely subscribe to - that says, essentially, what we sing shapes what we believe.  One way and another, what we sing is important.

A few years ago I did some work looking at Christian and Hindu iconography for an essay I was writing, an exercise that made me realise how lax western protestantism, and particularly evangelical protestantism, is about training its artists and song writers.  In Orthodox traditions, in order to be a Christian icon painter, a person must first be trained in theology - they are not just painting nice pictures.  Similarly, although the statues used by Hindus can be made by skilled artisans, only a suitably trained and 'ordained' person can dot the eyes, invoking the deity.  How different from our banner groups who are generally composed of people who like sewing and have not a clue about liturgy or theology.  I wonder if the same is true of many of those who write hymns and songs?

'Good theology' does not automatically mean theology I agree with, rather it is grounded in careful study and prayerful reflection.   In my view, the hymns and songs with the best theology - whether or not I like or endorse them - are written by people with some theological background.  Hence, if asked for 'good theology' I would probably point to people such as Timothy Dudley Smith, Brian Wren and John Bell - to choose without much thought three rather different 'schools' - and away from some of the things that are popular in big gatherings, even when it draws very heavily on verses of scripture.  Let's face it, if I could write songs (which thankfully I can't) I could have "fun" with things like the end of Psalm 137 (dashing babies' heads on rocks) or Proverbs 26:11 (dogs and vomit).

So, prompted by one or two others, this is your chance to share your views and/or the best and worst hymns/songs you have encountered.  I recognise that it is easy to criticise, and I am sure the writers do indeed intend to offer worship, but maybe sometimes we need to be a little more critically aware of what we sing?  Offers please!

It's a word I've been hearing a lot this last week - a week in which physical and mental exhaustion has loomed ever larger and my ratty levels have been getting higher and higher.

So here it is.  On the one hand I really enjoy, and feed on, the banter, disagreement, playfulness, profundity and even banality of the stuff that floats around cyberspace.  On the other hand I am constantly challenged by questions of justice, of poverty, of what it really means to be a disicple of Jesus.  But on the other hand... (its OK my Jewish ancestry allows me more than two hands with which to weigh things up!).

On the one hand, by UK standards I have a modest income, work long hours, and live a fairly basic lifestyle.  On the other hand by world standards I have an enormous income, enviable freedom and live in luxury.

On the one hand I am enjoying researching academic theology and believe that one day it will have a practical outworking.  On the other hand there are the day to day practicalities of attempting to lead a small congregation through humungous (spelling?) transition at a time when daily more people hit major personal crises.

On the one hand is a call to lead a church, on the other to care for them, and on the third (!) to be their servant.  How do I reconcile being paid by people with needing to challenge them about disicpleship?  How much does one who pays the piper have the right to call the tune?

Finding balance is incredibly tricky, and I am really bad at it!  I think that life is so incredibly complicated that I could send myself insane trying to work out just what I ought to worry about.  So instead I plod on doing the best I can and every now and then needing a little splenic venting!

I suspect I will spend the rest of my life trying to find this balance, and never finally succeed.  Maybe being aware of the questions is a step in the right direction?  Any thoughts from those who manage it better than I?

Cambridge was interesting!  Made me glad I'm working with Manchester as the thought of having to express my literature review in 7k words is too horendous for words.  It was interesting to hear about people's work and in some ways it gave me a little more confidence in mine.  Tiring but helpful, I think, even if the room (in Wesley House) was like an icebox, but that's another story.

I stayed over with a friend (in a place called Over) and it was good to catch upon their church news (even if their church did not want me four years ago...) and to relax for a bit in what is proving an ever-increasingly stressful phase of life.

On the way home the exhaust on the Saxo blew - big time, deafeningly - so I was glad I only had about 20 miles to go and that the traffic police had other fish to fry.  Now it is in the garage having a new catalytic converter and a new backbox.  This will make a large hole in £400.  Ouch.

I ought to be tapping away at my essay but I am so utterly exhausted that catching upon emails, reading blogs (and trying to support people in ever more convoluted muddles who keep phoning) is about all I'm fit for.  This evening I am leading the Ascension service and I am hoping that somewhere in that I will find a point of divine contact and rest.

This is my designated annual study week.  That is of itself something of a joke since I already have a service to lead on Thursday (Ascension for anyone who is ignorant of these things, like most of my Deacons, despite it being in the church notices countless times) have yet another mega-pastoral crisis emerging and yesterday had to attend two urgent meetings at very short notice - one with our architect and another with school governors.  In a moment of total insanity I agreed to attend the Cambridge DPT presentation of literature reviews -partly because I thought it would be interesting and partly because I thought I might learn something - I now have three 8k papers to read before tomorrow!  The only consolation is that having glanced through them, the standard of writing seems no better than mine!

I am meant to be writing a 12k essay (Manchester requirements are different) on my literature review.  Yesterday I wrote about 4k words and then, reading over them and marking up changes, virutally rewrote the whole lot.  It reminded me of my early and late days in industry.  In the early days I'd write a report and my supervisor would virtually rewrite it, towards the end other people would write reports and I'd do the same for them.  Now I find I am in both places at once - the novice writing the essays and the experienced reoprt writer editing the clumsy prose.

Today I need to get an advert to the local press for our Pentecost events, deliver batches leaflets to be delivered house to house, write another 8k words (no chance) and all before I leave for GB at 5:30.  Hmm.  Working for a living was so much easier.  Blogging as a displacement technique perhaps...

UPDATED!

Then my computer ate my essay, I mean really ate it, gone, phut, one moment I was saving it (something I tend to do every couple of paragraphs!), next it did not exist.  So much for perseverence of the saints, or some such computer equivalent.  After messing about I managed to descend into the hell of files with weird names and find a temporary fastsave version (phew) only five minutes older than the work I'd done, and now I have about three versions on different storage media - and a new hard copy.  Oh yes, and for half a day's work I now have a tidied up 4k words and nothing new added.  Grr!  Moral of the story - bring back pens and paper.

Being a good, reasonably well behaved kind of minister person, I try to allow my Deacons to have a say in the themes I use for preaching, though most of the time no one says anything.  My request to respond to the recent local elections has elicited thrice the usual response rate (three!) of which one in particular elevated my blood pressure with its claim that church services should never be used as 'political platforms.'  No?  It's a funny old gospel we preach then!

I was miffed, more than a little, by the inference that I might take a party political stance or that I might say something that would contravene the incitement laws (not quite sure what they are called, but I'm sure any Imam could tell you).  But more, I was troubled by the implication that church should be a nicey nicey place where we talk about nice gentle Jesus who is preparing a lovely buffet in heaven for nice people like us.  Sorry, I'm being stroppy, not fair when the person cannot defend themself.

The key 'text' of my sermon next Sunday is "all that is needed for evil to triumph is for decent people to do nothing" and I will use as examples the Confessing Church in Germany, good old overworked William Wilberforce and the Mandela/Tutu work in South Africa as examples of Christians who did see the Gospel as powerful and church as a very political platform.

The famous misquote of Martin Neimoller's poem (the version that includes Jews) seems to epitomise the consequences of doing nothing, of being apolitical. 

Next Sunday I will ask people to do something political - on 'Not for Sale Sunday' I will ask them to fill in a BMS postcard lobbying the Albanian Embassy on the issue of human trafficking.  I hope that people will see how gospel and action - political action - can go hand in hand, and that church is anything but a nice place to escape the realities of a broken world.  I will also invite them to heed the words of Jesus and Paul to pray for (not about or against) those in authority.

And maybe I won't feel quite so much like ranting afterwards!