Decisions we make and journeys we take when we strive to purely be a Christ inspired Christian. NMD

A Christ inspired Christian! Is there any other kind, I hear you ask? Yes, sadly. We can all call ourselves something - but choose not to live by it.

I think a great deal about the damage caused when the Bible is translated in a literal way. Whether it is by the hands of an abusive priest, a controlling father or any zealous adult. In a nutshell, religious fundementalism and the abuse of its perceived authority can mar the potential of any child and create a scarred adult - a survivor of emotional, physical and, (mercifully out in the open; wickedly at the hands of priests), incidents of sexual abuse. I also look at female equality through the words of Christ and not through gender politics witnessed in parts of the Church. The teachings of Christ are about love and compassion; acceptance and tolerance. I believe the damage is caused when the message is corrupted by extreme fundamentalism. The Word of God through the Gospel of His Son should be full of love and compassion, not bigotry and hatred. 

 Christians are compelled to share their faith with others, but I would be devastated if anyone called me bigotted. I could never tell any soul they were going to burn in hell - I just say there is hope for us all to get to heaven. I would rather be called a maverick, even a heretic; rather than anyone call me a fundamentalist. Christianity is about proclaiming the Gospel of Christ and should be a cry of joy - not misery. It should communicate a message of everlasting hope - not fire and damnation. Christianity is about our love for God and each other.

However - how do we get are heads around this? ...

  Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying. (Proverbs 19:18)

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. (Proverbs 22:15)

Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. (Proverbs 23:13)

I was baptised Roman Catholic but have always felt at odds with the hypocrisy and bigotry of some Churches. Our priest called my father a heathen and said we must pray for him ... my father was an Anglican. I know many off-spring of congregational members from some fundamentalist churches who won't let their kids have friends outside their church community because they view the world as 'evil' and 'dangerous'. If they dare to do anything deemed sinful, (their definition of sin could be a modern hair cut, giving a lass or lad the glad eye or having friends outside church), they can be beaten to a pulp, following the Old Testament instruction; 'if you spare the rod, you spoil the child.' They are then told they have been beaten because they are loved. I know this still happens, because I have been told by the survivors of this form of abuse.

In the Old Testament (written in the Bronze and Iron Age, lest we ever forget) the whole concept of society was being moulded and understood by the expansion and survival of nomadic tribes. Rarely did an individual get a look in, unless it is to trace the tribe's origins. So what we understand as being 'the cradle of western civilization' was, in reality, a bunch of Bronze and Iron Age nomadic tribes from the Middle East. Cultural norms and rules for societal living had to come into play for survival of those tribes. Men fought and their women fed them and gave them babies. Men had multiple wives and procreated as much as they could so as to perpetuate the longevity of their clan. Dowries were used to purchase daughters ... and so it all continued. Tribes/clans got big and the girls were sold off as soon as they reached child bearing age (sometimes at the age of 11 or 12 years) just to make the tribes even bigger - so all in all - life wasn't full of many opportunities, if you were a girl. 

Today, fundamentalist Christian men also treat women according to the rules in the Old Testament. Some women perpetuate this through their own subservient behaviours - and then force these behaviours onto their daughters. When we think about it seriously and rationally in the 21st century, it is madness. This patriarchal social structure, seen throughout the Old Testament, was demeaning for women not just by today's standards but by any standards. Women were seen as the property of men. Abraham was never condemned for impreganting his wife Sarah’s handmaiden Hagar when Sarah could not get pregnant. Once Sarah did get pregnant, Abraham banished Hagar and their son, Ishmael. Can you imagine the strength of feeling against Abraham if that happened today? I won't even mention what Lot did to his daughters. I accept this is all within the archives of history - but how can we justify living like these ancients did in our post-modern world?
 

During the time of the New Testament, the role of women was made insignificant yet again, after the crucifixion of Jesus.

We must remember here, that Jesus loved women and had many follow Him as His disciples. A controversial statement I know, but a fact. After the Apostle Paul told the early church there was neither male nor female in God's eyes, the Pauline Communities needed to do something dramatic following Paul's execution so as to return to their comfort zone of women being kept in their place. As congregations had grown with Paul, so had female discipleship and female priesthood. Well, that would never do. There are some letters attributed to Paul that Theologians have since questioned whether or not he really wrote them. Paul had declared men and women equal and then suddenly - not. Confusing really, unless you come from a Roman Catholic or a fundamentalist church, as both focus on the patriarchal definition of Christianity and endorse the subjagation of women and the punishment of children in today's modern world. They focus on books in the Old Testament like Exodus and Leviticus - and take a look at Deuteronomy if you want to be really scared for young women!

It will be obvious to some that I am not talking about human slavery (as history understands it) here at all. Mercifully, slavery is widely considered reprehensible in our modern world, as I am certain those who translate the Bible literally also consider. But have they conveniently ignored the following?

In terms of wanting to share our faith and a new way of translating it within a structured and civilised society or 'institution' if you will, where is the happy medium? Is it dangerous to cherry-pick from the Bible - to focus on what is good and reject that which is uncomfortable at best and reprehensible at worst? The Old Testament (the Jewish Bible) is widely proclaimed as the Word of God - so is it spiritually damning to question the brutality we read within it? The Jews reject Jesus as Messiah and yet Christians need the their Bible - The Old Testament - to prove that the OT prophets knew we were to have a Messiah. Really, if you think hard about religion, you can understand why so many people completely reject it.

In the same way, can we, the ECC+C, really say we are catholic and yet reformed ... but in reality ... we are really just Christian! The Church of England has always said it is catholic and reformed - but does it still suit everyone, since they controversially voted 'yes' to women bishops? We now hear of hundreds of clergymen placing to one side their reformed natures by returning to their 15th century Roman roots. Some Bishops have left the CofE to join the RC Ordinariate and I suspect 18 years ago when women were ordained they started to twitch and stutter a little - and so consecrating these 'dreadful' women as Bishops has been the final straw for them. The Ordinariate, for those who don't know, is a canonical structure within the Roman Church enabling Anglicans who defect to Rome to maintain some degree of faith 'identity' thus preserving elements of their distinctive Anglican theology and liturgy. (Saves them learning Latin I guess, which is creeping back into Roman worship). The Ordinariate is nothing more than a Old Boys' Club based on a hate campaign against women - that is the unpalatable truth. 

Even the Church of England is confused with what they are or what they are not. Some will only use, and accept the use of, the King James Bible - others prefer modern versions. Some love the bells and smells associated with Rome, and then there are those who enjoy liberal and realistic approaches to a modern world, knowing that Christ wouldn't stand for all this argy-bargy about who is an abomination, a heretic, a trouble-maker, a prophet, a sinful child, a wilful woman ...!

It could be thought that we are rejecting this nonsense in a way atheists do. Ironically, I often agree with atheists when they talk of religion being abusive and brainwashing, but as a devout follower of Christ, I also feel desperate that atheists, who often have a great faith in their atheism, cannot see past fundamentalism and experience the perfection of being Christian, having a promising and hopeful faith. The fact that they call themselves atheist means they have put a great deal of thought into the whole concept of having a belief system within our lives - because atheism is a belief system. 

The Mexican film director, Luis Buneuel (1900-1983), famously quoted; "I'm still an atheist, thank God".

I was potentially one of many thousands of brain-washed Roman Catholic women who was expected to accept, without question, being marginalised because of being female. I was also expected to accept the fictional, man-made and almost cultish mumbo jumbo the Roman Catholic Church belches out to its faithful. I respect anyone and everyone who disagrees with me but defend my right to consider aspects of Roman theology to be idolatrous, showy, blasphemous and often just too weird to give it any time of day. Plus I defend my right to believe some Christians who have experienced some form of 'conversion' in their own adult life go on to damage their children with their zealous ways.

Who has what wrong? Can we really compare Roman Catholic cultish acts of pagan origin with the very people who protested against it? These non-conformists who have ended up so literal in their understanding of the Bible have little or no ability to process common sense and free will - and both are human attributes given to us by God. 

My head tells me I am catholic and reformed - but my heart says I am Christian. People need you to categorise yourself however to make them feel 'safe.' Isn't it sad that we all have to define ourselves like this, purely because it is the only way for some people to understand us and place us into a neat and tidy box? 

 The ECC+C was made a reality some years ago after decades of witnessing both the big and small churches get things more than wrong. Some smaller catholic churces morph into quasi 'Roman' churches without the Vatican's governance - or they become sort-of Anglican churches without Lambeth. The ECC+C is a direct response made by a handful of ecumenically minded clergy, focused on addressing the blurred boundaries of Christianity and Churchianity. Yes, we are defined as reformed catholics, but first and foremost, we are Christian. If that makes us interesting or unusual or even confused, and you can relate yourself to being any of those things, then welcome aboard! We are trying to be different within our method of how we 'do' church. We are evangelical in terms of living and sharing the gospel in our communities. However we shouldn't really call ourselves 'evangelical' or 'method-ists' because of the conotations placed onto both words in the political/denominational world of 'Church' - but here we are and here we are staying, striving to define our faith as quite simply, Christian.

There is so much about human love and emotion in the Gospels that it is astounding that some focus only on the scary bits. Let me end here with the most famous account about love ever written - and move forward together with this.

1 Corinthians 13:4-7 

 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonour others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.