←

Diary of a (Maybe) Retired Pastor

Category: Uncategorized

  • Smile

    mayberetiredpastor

    Smile

    God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

    Genesis 1:31, Old Testament, The Bible

    Shortly after the New Year, we went to a concert featuring a guitar and cello duo (1). An unusual pairing and an unusual choice for us (we usually choose orchestral concerts). We did not really know what to expect but what we experienced was a scintillating evening in which the two musicians demonstrated genuinely virtuosic levels of musicianship. The guitarist managed to make his guitar sound like a whole orchestra filling the room with depth and power and colour of every shade while the cellist made her cello sing and weep and dance and clap with extraordinary feats of bowmanship. As the two musicians got into their stride, I could not help but smile throughout the programme. The concert ended to deserved rapturous applause.

    Like hot baths, concert going is a luxury – not the most outrageous of luxuries, but in the context of the hardship and poverty millions experience it is very much the experience of privilege. Some may wish to argue that such things should not be indulged out of sympathy and solidarity with those whose circumstances do not permit such things, or, that it is shameful to enjoy such things with the world in its current state. Such positions do not find a great deal of favour with most and a cynical person might see this as evidence of the irredeemable self-centredness of people in general.

    The Westminster Catechism states that Man’s chief and highest end is to glorify God, and fully to enjoy him for ever. (2). Countless sermons have been preached across the world on how this should be practised in everyday life, but one that I do not recall having ever heard preached (and one that I myself have not preached (yet!)) is one where the enjoyment of what God has created is, perhaps, the greatest way to glorify God of which we are capable. The Creation account repeatedly reminds us that God looked at what He had done and was pleased. He liked what He had done – including, and especially after, His creation of humankind.  There are indeed, despite the many horrendous instances of ugliness we have imposed upon the world, countless instances in which the sheer beauty and grandeur and wonder of the material universe just causes our hearts to stop in awe, or our eyes to open wide or, indeed, our faces to smile. When we do that are we not, in fact, smiling in unison with God as He surveys His handiwork and smiles? Is this not the true essence of giving Him glory and enjoying Him? And, amongst those instances of wonder and beauty, are the artistic creations of human beings, the most amazing work of all the works of God.

    There is much in our world over which we should mourn and grieve; much that we should feel guilt and shame about, but let us not ignore all that which bears the true stamp of the Creator and smile with Him as we behold His handiwork.

    1. https://events.humanitix.com/mediterranean-strings-manchester acc. 11/2/26 17:34
    2. https://thewestminsterstandard.org/westminster-larger-catechism/ acc. 11/2/26 17:37

  • The Night Is Far Gone

    mayberetiredpastor

    The Night Is Far Gone

    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called “Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore.

    Isaiah 9:6-7, Old Testament, The Bible

    One morning in Advent, my devotional reading for the day coincided with a broadcast on the radio of Handel’s aria of the same passage from the Messiah – For unto us a child is born, a son is given …  seeing the text on the page and hearing it sung at the same time to the music of Handel of course made a great impression on me that day.

    2025 has been a year in which a great upheaval of the pre-existing world order has taken place. In a matter of months, conventions and understandings which had underpinned our world since the second World War were unceremoniously overturned. Might has been given a freedom and authority which we thought we had done away with, and truth has become merely a matter of who can shout loudest and longest with the result the poor and the weak are simply inconveniences to be swept away by the rich and the powerful. Most troubling has been the emergence of a form of Christianity which seems to preach a gospel that dresses itself in ideologies not seen since 1930’s Europe. It is unrecognisable from that preached by Jesus yet loudly proclaimed as the true gospel by, again, the rich and the powerful. 2025 is leaving behind, for me at any rate, a bitter sense of foreboding.

    That day, when text coincided with song, a candle was, for me, lit in the dark. Christmas is, of course, the celebration of the birth of a king – a king like no other, a king who brings the dawning of an age of justice, righteousness, peace – the dawning of hope. Text and song reminded me of that. The Son of God had been born amongst us, and His life, death and resurrection are a matter of record. It is the promise that the lion will lie down with the lamb, that every tear will be truly wiped away. The birth of the Son ushered in the dawn of a new age, an age which will never end. It was the herald of a new kingdom that will not be denied. The shedding of His blood was the payment of all debt, the cleansing of all corruption. His resurrection was and is the triumphant defeat of all enemies. His return is certain.

    This present darkness is temporary. It may seem long, it may be bitter, but it will not last. The King will return. So, despite this year, and even if there are similar years to come, with text and song aligning together that day, Christmas was once again a celebration of joy. The King has come and we cry with all the saints, “Maranatha, come Lord Jesus” (1).

    1. 1 Corinthians 16:22 & Revelation 22:20, New Testament, The Bible.

  • Adolescence – A Warning To The Church

    mayberetiredpastor

    Adolescence – A Warning To The Church

    So God created humankindin his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

    Genesis 1:27, Old Testament, The Bible

    Last week, the youngest male actor to ever win an Emmy was named. He was awarded the accolade for his part in the Netflix drama Adolescence, a drama about a young teenage boy who murders a  female classmate. It was of particular interest because it sought to portray the reactions of the boy’s family from the moment of the police bursting into their house to the realisation that what was alleged about their son was not some ghastly error but the horrifying truth.  As the story unfolded through its various episodes we learned that the family was a perfectly ordinary, decent family, nothing anyone would say could lead to the misogynistic rage exhibited by the boy. It was his exposure to misogynistic incel culture on social media that led to his violent attitudes towards women that we saw disturbingly exposed in the harrowing third episode.

    The warning for the church is not that we need to be careful about what our young people might be exposed to on social media, although that might indeed be a concern, but the holding on to teaching that, however tangentially, provides justification for the misogynistic narrative propagated by various online influencers. That teaching is complementarianism.

    Complementarianism is held by some (not all) conservative evangelical churches across the world. It holds that men and women are not interchangeable but complement each other. By itself, this notion seems unexceptionable and, indeed, a positive way of thinking about relationships between men and women. But complementarianism goes further to teach that headship and authority belong to men and not to women. There are various flavours of this but the most common, at least in UK churches, is that this applies to marriage and order in the church.  Regardless, complementarianism has at its core the belief that women are by nature subordinate to men. This is openly taught in complementarian churches and while modern complementarians go to great lengths to extol the value and competence of women (in their proper roles) it is not hard to see how young minds could easily take hold of the core idea that women are subordinate and lesser than men, and how that could be exported into the wider culture thus affirming and justifying extreme misogyny.

    The biblical basis of this teaching rests principally on three passages (1) found in the letters of the New Testament. Each of these passages carry significant interpretive problems that, ordinarily, would mean they would not be used to formulate teaching. However, these three passages are an exception. They are used as the interpretive prism that shapes and controls the interpretation of the rest of scripture in the matter of the relationship between men and women.  Leaving out these passages when developing teaching about men and women results in the exact opposite of complementarianism: women in the Bible exercise leadership and authority in society and church in  the same way that men do and it is never questioned or qualified. It is this overwhelming weight of scriptural witness that ought to control the interpretation of the three passages (1) and not the other way around.

    The weakness of the complementarian case is amply demonstrated by the desperate theological attempts to buttress the teaching by reaching for the central doctrine of the Trinity (the being of God) only to end-up perverting the doctrine of the Trinity by resurrecting a teaching that was condemned as heretical in the 4th and 5th centuries AD (2). That attempt has been roundly repudiated and complementarians have retreated from that position (3).

    Complementarianism is a pernicious teaching that distorts our understanding of the relationship between men and women. It gives affirmation and justification for the widespread abuse and exploitation of women that still pervades our societies. Complementarian churches may strive to gloss and mitigate the notion that women are innately subordinate but it does not eliminate it. The subordination of women is the foundation of all exploitation and abuse of women. There ought not to be any room in any church for this unscriptural doctrine.

    1. 1 Corinthians 11:2-16; 1 Corinthians 14:33b-36; 1 Timothy 2:8-15
    2. https://diaryofamayberetiredpastor.blog/2024/09/03/i-didnt-know-this/
    3. Kevin Giles, The Rise and Fall of the Complementarian Doctrine of the Trintiy, 2017 Cascade Books.

  • A New Age Has Dawned

    mayberetiredpastor

    A New Age Has Dawned

    7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore.

    Revelation 20:7-8 New Testament, The Bible.

    The Millennium  is the period of the 1000 year reign of Jesus Christ on earth in the book of Revelation of the Bible. It comes prior to a final explosion of Satan’s rule before the New Creation is inaugurated. Exactly how this is to be understood in actual historical time is much debated. In the New Testament, time has two forms: chronos time which corresponds to measured, chronological time, and kairos time which measures teleological significance. The Millennium seems to be this second kind of time (although the church holds a variety of understandings of it) in which there is a period of time (not necessarily 1000 chronological years)  in which the rule of Christ can be seen to be hold sway which then gives way to a period when Satan is allowed to exercise power. We seem to have entered just such a transition from the Millennial rule of Christ to the rule of Satan.

    The invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the savage war against the Palestinians by Israel are remarkable not only because of the suffering they inflict on ordinary people but because of the unashamed lying by the Russian and Israeli authorities. Even as the world can see with its own eyes through nightly news reports the unjust suffering inflicted by the Israelis and Russians so they categorically deny and lie without shame as they propagate their “truth” to the world. This leaves many open-mouthed and astonished at their sheer brazenness. The world wonders how they can get away with it.  

    The two world wars of the 20th century led to the establishment of an international framework of conventions and laws whose aim was to prevent not only war but the kinds of atrocities that were perpetrated by evil men in the name of national interest.   Institutions such as the United Nations, the International Court of Justice were established so that law in the widest sense (such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions) would govern the affairs of the world and not the whims of megalomaniacs. National leaders were no longer immune from accountability but were subject to international law. But, as with all law and convention, these are only as effective as the enforcement that is applied and in the present time those with the power to enforce have no interest in doing so and, in fact, seek to undermine that international order at every turn.

    The United States is the one power in the world capable of enforcing the international order of the 20th. century but, with the election of President Trump in 2016 and then his re-election in 2024 the United States chose to turn away from that international order and usher in a new age. President Trump governs through lies and falsehood and has no interest in the international order of the preceding century. His rise to power has ushered in a new age where the truth is irrelevant and falsehood is unashamedly lauded and enables Putin and Netanyahu. It is the age when the Father of Lies – Satan himself – rules (1).

    A significant part of President Trump’s support has come from conservative Christians in the American church. It is this very part of the church that would most avidly affirm that they seek the rule of Christ and the Millennium in history, and yet it is their actions that have brought an end to the, arguably, Millennial rule of Christ of the 20th century and the freeing of Satan from his chains in the 21st. century.  The Bible is, of course, a book of hope and promise, and while Revelation predicts the resurgence of Satan it also promises the end of his power. It also promises judgment when all will be judged according to their deeds and justice will be enacted. The irony that it is conservative Christians that have enabled the unleashing of Satan’s rule is not lost in the Bible. All will be judged (2).

    1. John 8:44, New Testament, The Bible
    2. Revelation 20:7-15, New Testament, The Bible

  • Is The UK State Biased Against Palestine?

    mayberetiredpastor

    Is The UK State Biased Against Palestine?

    You shall not render an unjust judgement; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbour.

    Leviticus 19:15. Old Testament, The Bible

    The reactions of the Home Secretary (Yvette Cooper), the Prime Minister and the BBC Governors to the Gaza-related protests by Palestine Action and Bob Vylan give cause for concern. Palestine Action made the headlines by successfully breaking into an RAF Airbase and spray-painting  an Hercules aircraft engine. Yvette Cooper’s reaction was to immediately proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation (1). Shortly after, Bob Vylan, during his set at Glastonbury Festival, led the audience in chants denouncing the Israel Defence Force, an act that the Prime Minister then denounced publicly as “appalling hate speech” (2) and which led to furore in the BBC with the result that the video was removed from the BBC iPlayer and a number of senior staff suspended (3).

    As a protest group, Palestine Action appears to have conducted several high profile acts of vandalism against a number of companies and establishments whose activities they feel support the Israeli war in Gaza. Their purpose appears to be to push the UK government into reducing support of Israel’s military. They have apparently cost some companies large amounts of money to repair the damage done.   On this last occasion they have succeeded in seriously embarrassing the government and the RAF. But does this warrant their proscription as a terrorist organisation? Surely the criminal law is sufficient to address serious damage without proscribing it as terrorist activity? It does seem that their activities as a protest group have been just too effective for the government (and perhaps the targets) to stomach and so the Home Secretary has chosen to define them as a terrorist group to silence them.

    As many have pointed out (see e.g. 4), Bob Vylan’s words must be set alongside the actual deeds of the IDF  in Gaza where appalling acts, if not actual war crimes, have clearly been committed and continue to be committed on a daily basis and yet the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary remain questionably muted about the latter while full of righteous indignation concerning the former and Palestine Action. Where is the impartiality and balance?

    It is difficult to escape the suspicion that our government institutions are infected by an entrenched bias towards Israel and against Gaza and Palestine. One wishes, as many do I’m sure, for a more genuinely even-handed, and courageous government, unafraid of the power of others – whether great or small. The Prime Minister, self-confessedly is not a person of religious faith, but I assure him that he does and will stand before a Judge who will hold great and small to account.    

    1. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-06-23/debates/25062337000014/PalestineActionProscription   acc. 13.7.25 14:18
    2. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c33514nryy1o   acc. 13.7.25 14:35
    3. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czjkmlj1348o   acc. 13.7.25 14:53
    4. https://www.facebook.com/share/r/1BA75C8hAu/ 

  • When Pastors Sue Their Churches

    mayberetiredpastor

    When Pastors Sue Their Churches

    When any of you has a grievance against another, do you dare to take it to court before the unrighteous, instead of taking it before the saints? … 5 I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to decide between one believerand another, 6 but a believer goes to court against a believer—and before unbelievers at that? 7 In fact, to have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?

    1 Corinthians 6:1-7, New Testament, The Bible

    I recently learned of two churches where the ministers turned to the law against their churches. The apostle Paul clearly feels this is not what one Christian should do against another Christian (see quote above). Are these ministers therefore wrong? Almost certainly their churches would think so. However, in one case, the subsequent Employment Tribunal ruled in favour of the minister and fined the church £400,000! The other case is ongoing, but the minister’s lawyers feel confident enough to take the case to tribunal. Clearly, the way the churches behaved as employers, at least in the first case, failed to meet even secular standards let alone what might be expected of a church.

    The apostle clearly expects churches to behave to a standard far greater than that of everyday society. This applies not only to grievances between individuals but also to grievances between a church and their employees (in these two instances, the ministers). When it comes to differences between churches (their trustees, who would be the formal employers) and their ministers it is sadly too often the case that the church trustees display the same behaviours as secular employers: they respond to challenge with confrontation; they use the power of the employer to coerce and intimidate; the law is interpreted narrowly and legalistically, ignoring the underlying principles the law seeks to embody. Most importantly, they develop “groupthink” unable to see beyond the tensions of the conflict, they become defensive – circling the wagons. In spiritual terms, they lose prophetic vision and spiritual wisdom as they deal with the situation. The minister becomes demonised and characterised as “difficult”, “uncooperative”, “divisive”, and is isolated and ostracised.

    Ministers are especially aware of the apostle’s words so they reach for the legal button only when they feel they have no other recourse (there are, sadly, ministers who are bad actors – but that does not seem to be the case in these two instances). In a way, it is a cry for help, it is a way of saying “Things have gotten out of hand! Please, can we stop, pause, take a step or two back and approach this differently?”.    But, by this time, church trustees are often too unseeing to recognise the cry and see only an hostile act. It is the proof that the minister is now an enemy who has abandoned the spirituality of their office. This is what the apostle means by “shame” and “defeat” when secular law is invoked to settle Christian disputes. The two sides have fallen far outside the standards of Christian fellowship.

    Between an employee and an employer the power is held by the employer which is why there are employment laws and tribunals – so that employees have some protection. When the apostle commends accepting loss rather than going to court he does not have in view the unequal power relationship of an employee and employer. Here, different biblical injunctions apply concerning the powerful and the powerless where the powerful should give way.  Church trustees should be willing to seek reconciliation even if it comes at some loss  (the loss would be much smaller than the losses imposed by an Employment Tribunal; regardless, the spiritual gain is actually far greater). Often, the most important loss is loss-of-face if the trustees back away and tacitly agree that they are, at least in part, at fault. It is this that is probably the most difficult for the trustees to accept, but if court is to be avoided and some form of reconciliation achieved – even if there is a separation of ways – then this must be accepted. Choosing this path is what elevates a difficult and sad situation above the secular standard.                                                    

  • The Promised Land Forever?

    mayberetiredpastor

    The Promised Land Forever?

    The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 ‘Come, go down to the potter’s house, and there I will let you hear my words.’ 3 So I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was working at his wheel. 4 The vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter’s hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as seemed good to him. 5 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 6 Can I not do with you, O house of Israel, just as this potter has done? says the Lord. Just like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. 7 At one moment I may declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, 8 but if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will change my mind about the disaster that I intended to bring on it.

    Jeremiah 18:1-8, Old Testament, The Bible

    According to a recent poll, 82% of Israelis are in favour of expelling the Palestinians from Gaza (1). The validity of the poll is disputed but there can be no doubt that a significant fraction of Israeli opinion is in favour of not only the expulsion of the Palestinians from Gaza but also from the West Bank. The reasons for this may be mixed but it is clear that for many in Israel, and especially the Israeli government, it is a theological conviction – as one Israeli woman put it in a recent BBC interview, “God gave us this land” (see e.g. 2). But they are not alone in  holding this belief, it is a view held by some Christians outside of Israel whose attitude is that Israel is justified in anything it does to “recover” the lands given to it by God.

    Such a belief is based on a profoundly faulty understanding of the Bible. The promises of God are considered, in this belief, as unilateral and unchangeable, but the relationship between God and His people is actually defined by covenant. God’s promises to His people are covenant promises. There are two sides to a covenant, on one side, God promises to uphold His obligations provided that the other side – His people – uphold theirs. Since God is faithful and does not change, the question  is will the people be faithful and uphold theirs? The whole history of the people of Israel in the Bible is that they consistently fail to do so, and as a result, they lose their privileges under the covenant. God’s graciousness is evidenced by the fact that He repeatedly offers the people a way back.

    The prophets in the Bible constantly rail against the people of God warning of their many failures and the consequences if they fail to repent and keep the covenant. The quotation above from the prophet Jeremiah is one such warning. Here, the famous example of a potter and how the potter shapes and decides the fate of a piece of pottery is used to drive home the point that God can and will punish the people if they fail to keep the provisions of the covenant. Jeremiah’s prophecy is particularly relevant to the question of the “Promised Land” because he explicitly warns that the land will be taken away from the people which is exactly what happens with the Babylonian conquest.

    For those holding a theological view of the ownership of Gaza and the West Bank, the unbridled vengeance carried out by the Israeli government since the Hamas attack and the deliberate programme of ethnic cleansing places them far outside the covenant and thus beyond the privileges of the covenant. The covenant demands better of the people of God.

    Since Jesus Christ, the only way back to the covenant is to recognise that He is the Son of God and own Him as Lord and Saviour (3).  And, in the renewed covenant, the Promised Land can now be seen as merely a pre-figuring of the true Kingdom which comes only with the new creation. There is nothing special about the patch of land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean, no special rules apply, and certainly no difference in the ethical and moral treatment of the land and its people.

    1. “Yes to Transfer”, Haaretz, 28th. May, 2025
    2. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8d1j3v2y3mo
    3. Gospel of John, 3:18, New Testament, The Bible

  • This Labour Government Disappoints

    mayberetiredpastor

    This Labour Government Disappoints

    Where there is no prophecy, the people cast off restraint …

    Proverbs 29:18a Old Testament, The Bible.

    The timing of the government’s publication of its immigration whitepaper (proposed legislation) was clearly a response to the astonishing success of the anti-immigration Reform party in the recent English local elections. The whitepaper’s emphasis on dramatically reducing immigration and the timing of its publication clearly demonstrates a government that is reacting to populist feeling rather than seeking to shape national debate.

    Reducing the number of legal migrants can be a legitimate government policy but what is missing is any sign that the consequences are being clearly addressed. The aim is simply to reduce the numbers as rapidly as possible to some arbitrarily small number. The care sector has already loudly warned that reducing their ability to hire staff from overseas will mean closures in a sector that is already woefully inadequate for what we need as a nation. All year, the universities have been cutting courses and reducing staff as they try to plan around the major reduction in income as overseas student numbers plummet. Then, there is the growing financial burden of paying for the nation’s pensions. This currently represents around a half of the total welfare budget (1) and is only going to grow bigger as more and more people reach retirement age. And there is the NHS. Despite the increase in funding in the autumn statement, the NHS this year is planning to cut thousands of clinical staff in order to balance the books (2). Decimating the immigrant workforce means decimating the income tax paid by that workforce. How, then, are the nation’s pensions to be paid for? How, then, are we to pay for enough doctors and nurses in the NHS to stop playing catch-up? How do we replace the lost income of universities? How do we prevent closures of care homes?

    It comes down to money. After reducing the immigrant workforce is the government going to invest enough money into these sectors to induce the UK home workforce to take up these jobs or to cover the loss of income? But for the government to invest more money into these sectors taxes will have to rise. It is this conversation that the government refuses to have with the electorate. How much are we willing to pay in taxes so that we can have effective public services, good pensions, and reduce the need for immigrant workers?

    The Bible pithily points out that in the absence of prophecy a nation ends up in disarray. In the Bible, of course, prophecy is tied particularly to the wisdom and truth of God. But we do not need to specify divine inspiration to see that this applies in our time and place. Truth and wisdom, divinely inspired or not, is an important aspect of good government. Where a government will not offer truth and wisdom to a nation, particularly in debating public policy, there will be disarray. In the specific case of the UK, the choice between good public services and long term benefits for seniors and how much we are willing to pay, either directly through taxes or indirectly through immigration,  needs to be made clear and be part of the national debate. Instead, this government (as, indeed, the previous government) seems content to react to populist sentiment rather than lead national debate. The resulting national disarray as public services and benefits shrivel in the vacuum simply nurtures extreme and false sentiment. Many of us had hoped for something more worthy from a Labour government.

    1. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-information-and-guidance/benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-information-and-guidance#social-security-spending-in-the-united-kingdom-and-the-welfare-cap acc. 30.5.25
    2. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/may/09/nhs-hospitals-england-cuts-financial-reset

  • I Don’t Know How To Love Him

    mayberetiredpastor

    I Don’t Know How to Love Him

    “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

    Gospel of John 13:34-35, New Testament, The Bible.

    Our minister made a bold song choice this Easter. He closed the Maundy Thursday service with the song Gethsemane (I Only Want To Say) from Jesus Christ Superstar. Bold because it is musically demanding, but the church is gifted with some superb musicians; bold because it was not what the congregation expected; bold because at the time of its release over fifty years ago it was highly controversial drawing outrage from many Christians (I was there!). The vocalist and keyboardist gave a powerful rendition of the song but all I could hear were the screaming rock vocals of Ian Gillan of the original studio cast. Despite its unsavoury reputation in the church at the time, Jesus Christ Superstar taught me more about the gospel than all the years I had spent in Sunday School put together! For the first time, I understood that Jesus Christ was truly a man, a real person. That, for Him, the anticipation of dying on a cross was something that horrified Him, He did not, then, know the reality of the resurrection because He had not lived it – it hadn’t happened yet. He was in the same position as we, having to trust God.

    Two songs from Jesus Christ Superstar have stayed with me through the years. The boozy disciples’ song  that so deftly paints what the Last Supper might have been like (Look at all my trials and tribulations, sinking in a gentle pool of wine …) and the song, I Don’t Know How to Love Him sung once by Mary Magdalene and once by Judas.

    Look at all my trials and tribulations might (and did) strike some as irreverent but, for me, it was, and is, a warning not to take the sacrament of the Last Supper (or Holy Communion depending on what tradition you hail from) lightly. It reminds me to take time as I eat the bread and drink the wine (alcoholic or not) lest I share in the drunken oblivion of the disciples. It is the reason I find the fashion for supermarket communion (1) amongst some churches objectionable – theirs is the very essence of the disciples’ boozy song in Superstar, completely oblivious to what is going on.

    But it is Mary’s and Judas’ song that haunts me most. In Mary’s voice it is a song of tender love and devotion, but, also of confusion and bewilderment as she wrestles to understand exactly what she is feeling for Jesus – it is almost mediaeval in its sensibility towards Jesus Christ.  In Judas’ voice, it is a song of angry despair. He sees the good in the man whom he has followed for three years and wants so much to see Him succeed  and yet believes that the path He has set is so wrong. Judas wants to love Jesus but he is only able to betray Him.  And so, for me, the song expresses the inadequacy of my response to Jesus. Having followed Him for over half-a-century, I still find myself painfully aware how far short of truly loving Him I am, and yet still He fills my life with grace.

    I am grateful to our minister for his bold and inspired choice of song for Maundy Thursday. It has helped me reflect more deeply on the grace that has been poured out for me.  

    1. https://diaryofamayberetiredpastor.blog/2024/07/15/supermarket-communion/