So, as I said in my previous post, I'm moving blogs. Come and visit me at my new home, find out about why I've chosen a new name, and join in the conversation.
Cheers.
So, as I said in my previous post, I'm moving blogs. Come and visit me at my new home, find out about why I've chosen a new name, and join in the conversation.
Cheers.
I have been coming to the conclusion that I made a bad mistake in leaving WordPress, and losing my previous virtually real estate on the Interwebby thing. I can't do anything about the latter, but I can change the former.
Looking back (and readers will know I've been going through a patch of depression, I think the termination of metacatholic was triggered by the whole "Let's just give it up" syndrome starting.
In one sense, water under the bridge. What's next is what counts. And I want to get back to the range of bible reading, interpretation and translation issues I was covering before with some media, politics and church life and theology thrown in.
I spent some time wondering whether to stick with this one note blogito pun, or to take the opportunity to go for a new name with the new blog.
I've decided to go for the big step and change everything at once. Hopefully you'll put up with this indulgence, and hopefully I'll reward you with posts of quality and style, accompanied by easier commenting for you.
So keep tuned, and the new blog will appear as soon as I've got it into the shape and design I want.
What exactly are the key themes of Luke's Pentecost narrative? The older – perhaps more homiletic view – that a reversal of Babel was in Luke's mind gets no real place in serious study that I can see. And, indeed, against it must count Luke specifying that those present are Jews from every nation. The idea of one church speaking all the languages of the world, however, may profitably be developed and interpreted in part with reference to the Babel story.
A great many commentators take the idea that Pentecost had become associated with the giving of the Law. Against that it must be asked a) whether the signs of Luke's theophany are Sinai specific or rather more general b) whether Luke has such a Pauline Law / Spirit antithesis and c) whether we can have any degree of certainty about when the connection between Pentecost and Sinai was firmly and commonly made. Nonetheless, it again offers reasonable themes for development, and integrating the witness of the NT.
One thing we can know is that whatever other connotations we may read around Pentecost, it is a Harvest feast. I am thrown back to Luke 10 and the sending out of the seventy, that the Lord of the harvest might send out workers into his harvest. The harvest metaphor for God's ingathering of the peoples is a common one. Luke (following Matthew but in his own way) associates this with the mission of Jesus' disciples. Now on the harvest feast the disciples are sent out to the ends of the earth, speaking all the languages of the world, with Peter preaching a fairly thoroughgoing "last days" sermon.
As I say, I don't want to lose the theological or canonical force of either the Babel or Law oriented interpretations. But in terms of the central thrust, I wonder whether we need to look much further than the obvious harvest associations of the feast of Pentecost.
Jesus, now officially my mate, marmite. Honestly, is there no end to the number of people prepared to squint at food until they convince themselves they see a fuzzy replica of something bearing a vaguely suggestive resemblance to the Turin Shroud. And why is there always a media outlet ready to let them look more like semi-spiritual idiots than fools for Christ?
"Behold, the kingdom of heaven is like yeast extract. A small amount spread on toast flavours the whole slice." Or something.
… can someone explain to me how a political party campaigning for the UK to be independent of Europe, can select a candidate for the South-East of Engalnd constituency who is an Argentinian-born Spaniard living in Barcelona
That's a question I've been asking myself quite a lot lately, though rarely quite so politely, and with more expansive adjectives of the sort that might displease some of you.
It's one of the things that happens when you suffer sporadically from depression, although I hope I'm emerging from it now. I might blog about this some more sometime, but I think it was kicking in well before I gave up my previous metacatholic blog, and giving that up was a symptom of already feeling "what's the bloody point?" I have also nearly deleted this blog several times in the last few months.
I may come to regret this post, since there still seem to be plenty of folk out there who believe that suffering from depression proves you're not a Christian / disqualifies you from ordained ministry / is a symptom of demonic oppression. It would certainly make life easier sometimes to have an anonymous blog – I'm sure it was only anonymity that encouraged NT Wrong to pepper his now defunct blog with the odd "fuck" – but more the sake of being honest rather than to upset the tender ears of those unused to the language.
(Incidentally, carrying on ministry with a plastic smiley face stitched on says oodles about the objectivity of the sacraments)
Anyway, I hope that as I emerge from the pit I might get back to more regular blogging on the topics that genuinely engage me, and the sorts of things that a) qualify my blog as a biblioblog and b) were what people used to read metacatholic for. I suspect, however, that I will be going back to wordpress on my own host, since I have found blogger annoying in all sorts of ways I never used to notice before the WP experience.
So watch this space: I'm getting to the point where blogging seems more attractive than tears and thoughts of termination when alone, and getting up seems worth doing again. Let's hope the road continues upward.
