Answering Questions

I was asked some clarification questions regarding what I believe that arose from my last blog (click here). So I have decided to try and answer them here.

Where does Jesus’ resurrection come into it? And does the evidence change anything?

The metaphor of Jesus’ resurrection has considerable value, as a metaphor for new life. The resurrected body of Christ tends to be understood as the Church, who in the face of death rediscovers hope and purpose. I have certainly read the ‘evidence’ or lack thereof for Jesus and the resurrection, and as a result I tend to oscillate between a) all that we can say with any certainty is that he was a wandering sage of sorts, or b) perhaps not even an historical figure at all – “We have no idea what the historical Jesus was like, and at this distance we have no means of finding out either” - Rudolf Bultmann. Also an interesting recent book on the question is Richard Carrier’s ‘On the Historicity of Jesus’. Ultimately, whether Jesus is or is not an historical figure does not change my faith in the Christian narrative.

What does preaching from biblical texts look like for someone of this philosophical position?

It does not look that different to what you might expect from someone rather more orthodox. Taking the New Testament as ‘parabolic’ as opposed to literal does not change how or what one might preach upon that much. Also keep in mind that in the Liberal Anglo-Catholic tradition - were my journey into ministry began, homilies are 5 to 10 mins – not therefore exegetical preaching.

How does 'mission' (or an equivalent term) work for a Christian non-realist?

As a Christian my impulse is towards living out the ‘Kingdom of God’, and having that Kingdom be realised on earth here and now in people’s lives. And that necessarily involves inviting others in to participate. Anglican mission is best expressed by the Five Marks of Mission to which I have no real reservations; I guess the latter marks of mission which focus on more practical engagement I may be more inclined to emphasise over and above the former ones, which could be categorised (I think unfairly) as more like proselytization.

Further Reading: Don Cupitt, Lloyd Geering, Thomas J. J. Altizer, Thomas L. Brodi, John Dominic Crossan, Marcus Borg.

What Christian Non-Realism means to me

Mark Rothko, Black on Maroon (1958). 

Christian non-realism is essentially an approach to one’s Christian faith which interprets the ‘magical’ aspects of Christianity as metaphor. Christian non-realists reject all the supernatural elements of the faith, and do not believe in an objective being or thing called God. The word ‘God’ is used in a plethora of different ways, but never to describe a force which is beyond the laws of nature. God is not a thing or a being, but rather an experience, an experience of the subjectively impossible being actualized into our lives, an experience of finding hope in hopelessness, a word which articulates something of the quality of sacred space, and a word which somehow describes something beyond words.

Christianity then, is not uniquely privileged, but rather is a language through which the ordinary everyday experiences of us all can be understood and interpreted; a language which we inherit from our ancestors, which orientates us within a narrative through which we can draw out meaning and purpose for our lives.

This narrative in which we situate ourselves is not static, but ever evolving as we grow in our understanding of who we are in relation to God. The Bible then can be taken as an extract from this meta-story of humanity seeking to comprehend itself and how it relates to God.

Of course for non-realists the figure of Jesus himself, as is the case with all Christians, is of central import. In Jesus we have the principal metaphor of God being incarnated upon earth and dying, God choosing to self-annihilate. Click Here – for another article I wrote on Death of God Theology.

Being a Christian non-realist is a challenging perspective to hold, for it confounds orthodox Christians and irritates Atheists, because it challenges common assumptions in both camps. It is a perspective which seems to have had its day in the established church, and in part this led to my decision to leave Anglican ministry and pursue Unitarian ministry. I feel that Christian Non-Realism fits better into a Unitarian context, for the culture within Unitarianism is more egalitarian in nature.

 

Jumping Ship

After much prayer and consideration I have decided to leave Anglican ministry, and pursue ministry within the denomination I have for many years felt a natural affinity towards - the Unitarian Church. I did my degree at the London School of Theology, graduating in 2010; towards the end of my degree I happened upon the work of Don Cupitt. I found his non-realist Christian standpoint immensely captivating; his work drew me into considering Anglican ordained ministry.  Upon reflection I decided to train at the most ‘liberal’ Anglican seminary, where Cupitt himself was even vice-principal: Westcott House.

At Westcott House I made some good friends, and enjoyed the insights of a few lecturers but for the most part I found the experience deeply dissatisfying. I was surprised and disappointed to find that the insights of Cupitt had come to be regarded with distain, and so I slowly arrived at the conclusion that there would need to be a stark disconnect between what I thought and the beliefs I promulgated. During this trying period I did however discover an oasis, a place where I did not need to obfuscate my words, a place where I could be open and honest. This was the Cambridge Unitarian Church.

I was in two minds, on the one hand I felt that I should pack the whole thing in and move in an entirely new direction, but on the other, I knew I did not really know to what extent the microcosm of Westcott House reflected Liberal Anglo- Catholicism more generally. There was always the chance that in overcoming the obstacles before me, I would discover my place, where I fit into the Church.

So, I took up my Assistant Curacy role in the Diocese of Portsmouth, in 2013 being ordained to the deaconate, and in 2014 to the priesthood, and then finally I resigned my post in the summer of 2015. My assistant curacy post was not deeply dissatisfying, but nor did I ever feel at home. My colleagues were always very supportive, and the congregation to which I served was very welcoming and friendly, but regardless my theological scruples continued to gnaw at me. I invariably occupied theological space outside Anglican comfort zones. My Christian ‘anarchic’ leanings always left me feeling uneasy, especially when ecclesiastical authority was exercised. So I gradually and probably inevitably arrived at the conclusion that I must leave, I must pursue Unitarian ministry.