I heard two lectures in churches last weekend, both by men eminent in their fields and their denominations.
To be fair, I shall name neither speaker.
The first was a modest affable thesis that God and us are infinitely capable of loving, infinitely lovable, and that we are infinitely beloved. He said truly grasping this would revolutionise the relationship with ourselves, God and change society.
And he tied in Julian of Norwich with Casualty! [hospital TV drama]
The second was an arrogant sounding but poorly delivered and argued piece diluting a Gospel to crude psychological archetypes that made his offering of Christianity seem pale in comparison. More annoying archetypes were in his assessment of denominations and the attributes of star birth signs. He was hypocritical, making assumptions about beliefs and showing the same generalisations that he criticised others for.
A follow up talk was on how we should be more “rock and roll” in religion, which for him meant the antisocial behaviours of pop stars of his youth. He said he preferred Ireland to New Zealand because it felt alive with drunkenness and beggars in the street! He confuses radical, full living with immaturity and lack of consideration. Smashing up hotel rooms and angry swearing and drug abuse are not signs of coolness and cultural significance. He forgot too that for many, real faith is about a radical life view, not cosiness and prohibition.
There were things I did not enjoy in the first lecture – its slow and deliberate delivery was sometimes difficult and I yearned for some passion – which the second did (if you call thumping a lectern and a bit of a shout “passion”). But it was the former who had enthusiastic applause, and I saw one audience member rush up and hug someone and say it was the best speech he’d heard – ever.
And I knew instantly which of the two made me feel so warm and I moved that I wanted to rush home and be with those thoughts. I know which speaker’s hand I’d rather shake, and to whom I shall write to thank.