priests

Those of us who are in the 'Congregational' way of being the Christian church are keen to promote the 'priesthood of all believers', and are encouraged by signs that the Roman Catholic Church is challenged by this concept. It is interesting to note that a Basque priest, Jose Antonio Pegola is being accused of heresy becasue some views he has expressed in a new book are contrary to the Vatican view. We read that the book 'Jesus; an historical approximation' has sold almost 100,000 copies, and Spanish bishops have apparently requested that a further 6000 copies should be destroyed.  Why? He writes of God being compassion, rather than power, and works out his radical view of the mission of Jesus. But I am intrigued by  this: 'In Jesus' movement all patriarchal authority disappears... no-one is above the others. There is no rank or class. There are no priests, Levites and lay people. There is no place for intermediaries. Everyone has direct, immediate access to God, the Father of all'  (The Tablot March 26 p5) That is the heart of Congregationalism. Makeof it what you can.  Henry King. AKA Ian Gregory end.

Congregational

I am sorry to hear that pressure to create a 'new image' for the Congregational Federation is increasing. More and more people in Congregational churches are telling me that they see no point in 'rebranding' the Federation at the cost of £51,000 from the Council for World Mission. The Times has recently published details of commercial 'rebradning' schemes that failed, including the Post Officer ('Consignia') and British Airways. If I thought that rebrading would encourage more people to take an interest in the Gospel via our churches then it would be fine, but it will not. TYhe aim seems to be promotion of the Federation, which is not a church, but a religious organisation with paid official;s anxious for it to grow. That is all right, but the promotion of the local church is the task of the local church, not the Federation. I hope more and more people will realise how futile and wasteful of resources this proposal is, and speak out against it. The idea  comes from the Castle Gate 'establshment', not from any of our churches. In my view it is the thin end of a sinister wedge, in which 'say-so' is being seized by Castle Gate and a few 'in' people I wonder what the late Graham Adams, our former Gen Sec, would say? He warned us about this very tendency.I am reminded of  a book by Albert Peel, 80 years ago. In 'A brief History of English Congregationalism' he noted (p78) that in its early years the Congregational Union attempted too much for its strength and found the burden too heavy to be carried. 'In recent years the current towards the centre has been running strongly.....with every increase in central funds and in the power of organised Congregationalism there must be a corresponding increase in the vigoiur of the independent  churches, a renewed sense of the presence of Christ in the midst of his people if true Congregatiomnalism is to survive...If churches come to rely on unions for support rather than on their own efforts allied to the leading of the divine spirit, the time of decay is at hand.' Peel strongly urged the freedom of the local church, and especially for the editor of its magazine. 'If a journal is merely the mouthpiece of of the officials of the union it is likely to be thought insipid and uncritical, with its editor more or less muzzled and obliged to take the official view.'  I have ben allowed that freedom in the last ten years, and we must keep watching to make sure it continues. Ian Gregory.

who needs priests?

The idea may be gaining currency that in order for there to be a proper Christian church there has to be a priest, ordained by a bishop. That is why a small number of people are now leaving the Church of England for the Roman Catholic Church. They are profoundly wrong, but we are all entitled to be wrong about our choice of beliefs. Publicity given to the 'ordinariate' (more religious jargon) gives the impression that Christianity depends on a separated, ordained priesthood, which Catholics say is the province of males ordained in the succession of Peter. It does not. There is a well-defined 'priesthood of all believers which generally applies in nonconformist churches. This says that all who have committed their lives to Jesus Christ as Lord are entitled to peform all the functions of church leadership. There is no need for a special kind of human being  to preside at the sacraments of the Church; all that is necessary is that such a person, male or female, is a Christian, normally invited to undertake these duties by a Christian fellowship. These include presiding at communion serviecs and baptising infants. The idea that the church exists only when there is a priest in charge is a fallacy, and might lead people to think that what they receive from the church without a priest is invalid. Not so. It would release the Catholic Church from its paralysis if it allowed lay leadership, as happens anyway in parts of the world where there is a perceived shortage of priests. In parts of S America Cheristians organise their worship and sacraments where there are no ordained priests. This makes them, virtually 'congregational' churches like the one to which I belong. We need to abandon the idea that there is a special category of 'holy'orders which validates God's blessing, which is freely available to all. .

funerals

It's time to play down the religious content of funeral services at crematoria. I am invited to conduct an increasing number of such events for people who have had no connection with religion during their lives, and ought not to be troubled with it in their death.  It is pointless to recite sentences from the Bible, and use traditional churchy jargon, when mourners have little idea what we are talking about. Religion, and its ideas and language are things we inflict on mourners, who sit with a glazed expression, getting no comfort from what is said. It would be better to use words and images that are familiar to them, because death is a natural event in the rourse of life, and it should not be veiled in medieval religion. People may have been with their loved ones at the end of their lives and hopefully how peaceful and 'ordinary' the end can be. We can surely fashion a funeral service which takes account of its mystery and sadness, but which also points to the natural passing from this stage of life to the next, without confusing it with strange stuff from St Paul and  the psalms. The aim should be to focus on the life and achievements of the deceased, and bring out his/her humanity, sense of humour, and general interests. Human beings are endlessly interesting, and even the most modest life can carry a good story to be told at the funeral. There are, of couse, selfish rogues in whose lives there has been little virtue. It is no part of our task to pass judgment, but there is always room for honest assessment. The hope dscribed in the life and teaching of Jesus is simple enough to make the service memorable, without baffling people with clerical robes, obscure rituals and what is virtually a foreign language. Funeral directors tell me that people are icreasingly asking for humanist services, which can be chillingly bleak and hopeless. The bereaved may have an instinct that life continues in some form after death, but they think traditional religion as being virtually meaningless. Their emotions are already in shreds. Their minds may be similarly shredded, by faux religion.  Rev Ian Gregory, retired Congregational minister