I have to be honest and say I was not even remotely enthused when our last Church Meeting opted to join with St 'Smells and Bells' for a strawberry tea and 'songs of praise.'  Not because I dislike that church nor yet because I object to 'favourite hymn' services, goodness knows I've led enough, but some kind of mixture of yet more disruption to the preaching plan and, well, the dread of hymns ancient and prehistoric combined to make it all seem very unattractive, and being the minister I had no choice but to go...  A couple of hours after the event, I feel some repentance is needed as it was a good afternoon and a real opportunity for us to minister with/to our Anglican friends who face a very tough meeting this week.

The afternoon began with bowls of locally grown strawberries and cups of that delightful brew, 'ecclesiastical tea,' served in the vicarage garden on a glorious summer afternoon.  Apart from minimal mixing between the two congregations, it was a lovely way to pass an hour - and I got some favourable comments for collecting up empty tea cups and helping wash up: a great opportunity to explain I have a diaconal ministry and deacons were originally table waiters!

The hymns choices were actually, on the whole, good.  We had some classic 'belters' by Wesley and the like, a bit of Kendrick and some contemporary worship songs, and one of my own favourite Timothy Dudley-Smith offerings, 'Lord for the years'.  We also had a reading from Romans 8 and intercessions led by the vicar which alluded (among other things) to 1 Cor 12:26, if one part suffers, the whole body suffers.  I then used these as jumping off points to offer prayer on behalf of my people for the Anglicans - who this week face a decision not to close a building but to terminate their congregation.  In all things God works for good for those who love Him.  I gather the Greek is ambiguous as to whether it is God or the things that do the work for good; for me it has to be God who works good, as not all things are: we prayed for an awareness of God's love, peace and guidance in the decisions that are made.  If one part suffers the whole suffers: we recongised that we are one tiny cell in the whole, so are our siblings in Christ of this little Anglican church; we prayed that we would be able to support them.

In all things God works for good: given free choice, I would not have chosen to be at this service but I was truly blessed by it.  It was an opportunity for two small churches to show solidarity in a time of uncertainty; a time for mutual support and encouragement.  It was good.  It was of God.

I enjoyed the strawberries and sunshine, I was uplifted by the singing, but the solidarity, ministry and mystery of a God-given blessing, these are far more wonderful indeed.  As the apostle wrote, and we sang today 'one church, one faith, one Lord!'  We may never see the earthly outworking of this fulfilled, but so long as little 'smells & bells' and little (what they perceive as) 'happy clappies' can love and support each other as one in the body, then we're doing something right.

It was a very hot July afternoon and as a football loather (possibly a heresy worthy of the stake) I was happy to be in church for an ordination service.  The one or two spare seats, and the ability to get an aisle place anyway, meant it did not become unbearably hot, though I was very glad not to be one of the suited folk 'up front' on this occasion.

I enjoy these events, so unashamedly Baptist in their diversity, yet united by the common elements of worship, preaching, story telling and promise making.  I am always fascinated by the choice of hymns and songs, the readings selected (and why) and, being nosy, the testimony bits never fail to appeal.  Today's service was no exception, and I came away proud to be Baptist and encouraged in my own ministry.  It was a crackin' do.

The text, John 2:1 - 11, is one I more naturally associate with marriage services, though perhaps there is a natural similarity between marriage and ordination promises/vows, and the sermon combined humour and colour with some profound reflections on ministry.  I even had a little smile to myself as a reference was made to a Bible story - Jesus walking on water - that I had used when I led devotions during this person's college interview over 3 years ago.  God's Spirit and God's humour!  So, just in case the preacher happens this way and wants to be sure I listened, the five points, as I heard them, were...

Ministry as celebration - joyful, fun and abundant

Ministry in the midst of life - not chaplain to the saints locked in a church building

Ministry as priesthood - pontifical - where each acts a bridge taking the needs of others to Christ

Ministry as authority - under God/Christ and relational

Ministry as the reflection of the glory of God in the world - embodied/incarnational

It was good stuff, I guess easy to hear because I'd endorse what I heard/understood it to say, but no less challenging.

This was the first time for a long time that I went to an ordination service without a 'job' to do, and it was a real privilege simply to receive as a member of the congregation.  It was good silently to re-affirm my own ordination promises and to renew my own commitment to walk in ways 'known and to be made known' to use that lovely old Baptist covenant expression.  It was good to sing songs that reflected the reality of life - joys and sorrows, a conscious choice to bless God's name no matter what, and of a God who is faithful.  Ministry for me certainly combines all sorts of experiences and emotions, and these were songs I could 'own.'

Hopefully the newly ordained minister will be able to turn the gift I gave him into wine - and when he next passes this way to be assured that this, not wierd testing kits with dip sticks that turn blue in certain liquids, is a far better demonstration that the process 'worked', or has begun to work.  More importantly, I pray that he will find his ministry enjoyable and rewarding.

In the words of St Wallace the Hairbrained, 'crackin'.

Would Judas ask that question?  Who knows!  As I have visited my usual round of blogs this week I have been struck by the number of apologies for not posting anything for a while, as if we are somehow accountable to our loyal readers for the quantity of stuff we share.  Maybe this is because most of the Blogs I visit are written by ministers who are used to having to churn out a sermon or two every week?  But surely this is not the purpose of blogging; is it not instead some kind of strange mix of a journal and a desire to talk to other people coupled with the need to be a little cautious about what is out there in the public domain?

Frankie Ward in a comment on Sean's blog (here) asks about blogging as a form of theological reflection, and poses some interesting questions.

Do I have an 'ideal' or 'imagined' reader?  Well, to an extent yes, though the nature tends to evolve as I become aware of who some of my 'real' readers are.  I tend to assume some level of basic Christian knowledge, a slightly odd sense of humour and then it's a sort of mish-mash of around half a dozen colleagues/friends.

Beyond that, there is the potential for the good people of Dibley, or those who know them, to drop by.  This inevitably colours what I say as getting sued is not a good idea, nor is upsetting or wounding the people among whom I live and work.  Inevitably some of what is posted is filtered for this reason and pseudonymns used (surely you did not believe I REALLY live in Dibley?! ;-))

When I read other people's stuff if often seems much more refined, as in having been through a more careful cycle of drafting and reivsion, than mine, which is usually just the product of manic typing - so more authentically my kind of journalling.  I don't think either is more or less valid but they are different.  I enjoy reading the carefully thought through stuff and learn from it, I also enjoy reading the trivia which helps me to remember that these clever folk are also quite normal too.

So, in answer to the title question, I guess the answer is 'it depends on the blogger.'  Whether we share stories, learn from each other's studies, have a laugh, reflect deeply or just engage in some kind of virtual catharthis what seems to matter is that we enjoy it, not how often we do it or how much we write in the process.  So I'll stick to 'twaddle weekly' and you can write 'quality monthly' and between us we'll fill blogland with a good mix of 'stuff'

Today I am writing up an essay on the 17th/18th Century General Baptists' debate on 'mixt marriages.'  This is probably of no interest to 99.999% of the world but I've found aspects of it fascinating and highly entertaining (OK so that's a bit odd, but hey...).  Anyway, as I've been typing away all day, I came across a lovely quote on proof texts from 1706: -

‘…as… the wringing of the Nose bringeth forth Blood, Prov 30.33, so the forcing of a Text bringeth forth a sense never intended by the author…’

Now you have to admit that's pretty good!  Well done 'Philalethes' whoever you really were.  He/she also has some interesting comments to make on the authority of the Assembly Book and that of Scripture - dare any of us look at our church rules and the like in the 'mirror' of the Bible?

Now, only another umpteen thousand words to write...

A very helpful comment on my reflection on the recent service at D+1 BC reminded me of one of the things that has always fascinated me about communication in general and preaching in particular, namely the 'what I said, what you heard' effect.  I have been taught more times than enough, thank you, theories on communication and the small proportion that is actually accurately transmitted.  I know the theories of 'ideal,' 'implied' and 'real' reader and authors, which are not altogether dissimilar.  For all that, I still find it intriguing how diverse can be the 'hearings' or 'readings' of the same sermon by different people: I vaguely recall many years back being asked by someone what a sermon I'd heard had been about, and being told my recollection was utterly different from that of someone else they'd asked. 

So why is this, does it matter, and if so, how?

There are some obvious practical reasons, like audibility, accessibility and maybe intellectual ability.  There's the nice spiritualised answer of 'the Holy Spirit' - I believe that's true, but not the whole picture.  There're also factors such as the way something that's said sparks off a train of thought, if this passage has past associations (and what they are) or what is going on in our lives.

I have long since learned not to worry if people seem to drift off, so long as they are not counting the occurences of the letter 'e' in the notice sheet or playing the Powerpoint equivalent of 'hymn number bingo' (have you read 101 Things to do in a Dull Sermon?) but it is very difficult to get any useful feedback.  Sometimes I feel a sermon has been quite intense, a bit 'telling off' and someone will say 'that was really encouraging.'  Sometimes I feel a sermon was muddled or never quite got where it was going and someone says 'that made me think.'  Just occasionally I think a sermon was quite good - and someone says 'didn't like your hymns'!

I have also learned not to worry too much if people think the sermon was about something other than what I intended - at least it shows they have engaged with something I said.  I do worry when they expand on my (rare!) anecdotes as if they were the main point of what I said.  And I really don't like 'nice service' as a comment... as the song says 'I'm not ready to do nice.'

When I was a relatively inexperienced engineer, writing my first technical report, my supervisor gave me some good advice which has remained with me and to some extent applies to sermons too.  He said, 'our job is to put up game birds for others to shoot down.'  I'm not advocating bloodsports (though let's face it preaching sometimes feels like one!) but there is a sense in which he was right.  My task is to prepare carefully and prayerfully what I want to share with my people.  Once the words are released I relinquish control (though not ownership or responsibility) and allow the combination of human reception and Holy Spirit indwelling to determine what happens next.  This allows me to be less defensive of what I deliver and to worry less about what others hear - so long as they do listen and do hear!

The theories on communication and the like are useful, and help me think about how I deliver what I deliver, but as a preacher rather than a teacher I am less concerned with accurate tranmission of my views than insightful reception of what God is saying through/inspite of/despite that.