A Music Biography Spotters Guide

During a recent stroll through my local bookstore (not that I've had much time for recreational reading lately) I noticed the new Metallica biography was instore and made a mental note to purchase. This had me thinking that this type of tome was just the sort of thing that could easily end up in Christmas stockings within the coming month. It also occurred to me that as so many different types of music biographies exist in the world these days the novice might have difficulty in distinguishing the Good from the Bad or Ugly. As a conni-sewer of the genre, I hereby offer a quick guide to the types of music books likely to be found at your local vendor and some of the pros and cons associated with each.

The Authorised Biography
Sometimes labelled 'The Official Story of...' type. In this model an authorised voice (either a journalist or an employee of the artist) presents a history from the artist's point of view. Such a biography can be a useful source of information, particularly on early history and fun anecdotes from the road/studio. However, the downside is that controversies and conflicts can be downplayed or glossed over to the point of driving true fans to the point of insanity. If anyone presents you with The Official Authorized Biography of KISS it should be filed with the matches beside the fireplace.

The Unauthorised Biography
Composed with little (or no) cooperation from the artist or their management/record company. Well established facts are rehashed and vast amounts of speculation are entered into based on gutter journalism of the worst kind and witnesses that rarely stand close scrutiny. At best a few salient observations are made. Approach with caution.

The Tour Diary
Probably my favourite type. A particular album-tour period is taken in great detail. Lots of observations of the artists in situ. Casual conversations recounted verbatim. Side characters become personalities of their own. The artist becomes an actor in a production bigger than themselves that remains hidden from the audience. Cracks appear and myths are challenged. Robert Greenfield's A Journey Through America with the Rolling Stones and Ratso Sloane's On The Road with Bob Dylan are classics and should be in every serious music fan's library. Be aware, however, that the author is usually a willing participant in backstage antics including the consumption of (shock horror!) illicit substances that may or may not cloud their recollections.

The Group Effort
This is a format that has come into play since the late 90s and there should be more of them. Usually works for a band with strong personalities. Each member gives an independent account of the history to a coordinating writer who then takes portions from each to weave together a narrative. This can have interesting results when the recollections don't quite match up and the reader must make up their own mind. The Dirt by Motley Crue is a must-have in this category.

The Insider Out
A band member takes it upon themselves to 'tell their side of the story'. If the band member is a reputable character this can give a perpective on band dimensions that would never see the light of day. Stone Alone by Bill Wymann is particularly good despite now being 20 years old owing to Bill's obsessive-compulsive nature on keeping a copy of every bit of paper to do with the band. I see that Steve Adler from Guns 'n Roses has his book out now. I am less optimistic about his recollections.

The Outsider In
Not the artist themselves but a 'trusted insider' tells their story of life in the rock 'n roll world. The characters of the artists are observed over a long period and events are reported from an 'objective' veiwpoint. Some of these accounts can be tawdry, vindictive, or wildly inaccurate. Tony Sanchez's account of life with Keith Richards is all of the above. On the other hand stories can be told with a lot of both love and honesty. Richard Cole's Stairway To Heaven should be taken very seriously, as should Steve Parish's Home Before Daylight.

These represent the major categories. There will always be variations on the themes and additional works, particularly with the more 'cerebral' artists who tend to attract a fair amount of socio-rhetorical criticism (if you're into that sort of thing). Remember also that music biographies always operate under the 'when the legend becomes fact, print the legend' mentality. Happy reading!

Of History and Financial Crises

Just recently I finished reading Marcus Loane's Centenary History of Moore College. As a piece of local history published over 50 years ago it makes a challenging read for modern eyes. To call it a 'gripping read' would be an overstatement. To be fair, as a history of the College rather than the personalities involved, there is only much juicy gossip that can be crowbarred in. That said, Loane's dry humour pops up occasionally if you are willing to persevere The focus of the work is really on how the College managed to persevere with the task of preaching the Gospel in the midst of the shaping of a nation. As a result finances play a large part in the book. It gives the feeling occasionally that you are reading a collection of someone else's payslips.

This year Moore College has been hit by the full force of the GFC. While there may be legitimate grumblings about loss of bookshop discounts and no more seconds at lunch, the real impact is at the human level as several beloved staff have been unable to be maintained. So, I thought I would share what Marcus Loane has taught me about the Financial Crisis:

1) God is bigger than Money. For those who imagine that the College has always been a place of financial security and diocesan stability, think again. For most of its history MTC has been a brass farthing away from being skint. There were many times when it seemed as if the great work of the College was about to be swept away because of financial pressures only to be graciously given a lifeline. While this tells me a lot about the providence of God it also tells me that building the Kingdom can weather the seas of Fiscal Uncertainty.

2) Institutions are smaller than People. Sounds counterintuitive given that we are talking about a moderately large College with a distinguished history. However, it appeared to me on reading Loane's account that those who led the College in the past (whatever their theological leanings) put the welfare and education of the students rather than the reputation of the institution as their paramount goal. Similarly, those students who attended did so not because of prestige but because a commitment to a high quality of theological education in order to serve God through ministry to His people. Buildings and Councils and Mottoes have value not in and of themselves but because of the people to which they testify. Christ did not die for a College but for those who fill it and the ones they serve.

3) The Kingdom is bigger than a College. Moore College was not the first nor last Church of England theological education institution set up in Australia. Many others were born, prospered for a time, and died under God's hand. We must never forget that this College stands in exactly the same situation. Because we thrive today does not mean we will so tomorrow. In a generation Moore Theological College could be no more. I definitely do not want that to happen, but I think that if I have trust in the Lord rather than Man I have to be OK with that. Sometimes I hear the view that the end of the College would mean the end of Evangelical faith in Sydney. It would be a hard blow, that much is certain, and one I think we must all work hard to prevent. Yet the Word will endure until Christ returns. If it is not preached and taught in this place it will be somewhere else. With everything that has happened in the last 2000 years the fate of one local College is small in the plans of God. Still, I believe that His Love rests upon this place and all who study and teach here and I thank God for the blessings which I have personally received here.

OK, now I must show my commitment to the dying embers of my theological education by going to class! In the words of Bill & Ted: Be Excellent to each other!

On Baptism and Thanksgiving

As I approach the end of my College career and look to embark upon the strange world of Parish Ministry certain pastoral issues are beginning to creep into my peripheral vision. Very soon it won't be a question of just What The Boss Has Decided. How I respond to certain difficult situations with integrity becomes even more relevant and I feel that if I start poorly it will be harder to get back on track later.

Recently the question of Baptism has raised its head. To clarify my own view, I am Calvinistic regarding the Sacraments. As for how they should be administered I like what Donald Robinson has to say (though, being honest, I am perhaps a little less congregationalist than he is). In short, when I take my Anglican ordination vows next February I don't believe that I'll have to cross my fingers under the cassock.

I also recognise that some in our congregation feel differently about the Sacraments. With respect to Communion it is reasonably easy to keep your views to yourself as you participate. But Baptism (especially of the infant variety) requires a clear and public judgment call - you either Will or Won't. For those who have had reservations I have noticed a certain compromise making its appearance (it may have been around for a while, I'm not really sure). This is the Thanksgiving Service. The idea being that for those parents who are not comfortable making promises of faith on behalf of their child but still wish a public religious service they ask for the congregation to join in a special time of giving thanks for the birth of the child and praying for wisdom and faith as that child grows.

I firmly believe that all people should follow their conscience in this matter. Because of my own convictions I believe that baptism is as it is scripturally described neither a mandatory rite that all must participate in or a 'work' to earn God's favour. Since it is the grace and work of God which is on view (and this cannot be shaped or bestowed by our ceremonies) I am prepared to be gracious towards those who differ from me.

The question: If in the future I am asked to officiate at such a Thanksgiving service should I agree?

On the one hand there is nothing wrong with giving thanks to God. We should all do it a bit more. And since the grace of God belongs to Him and not to me, who am I to sit in judgment on someone else's conscience. Also (for more pragmatic reasons), simply agreeing may avoid a possibly hurtful pastoral situation.

And yet...

And yet, the more I think about it, I am not convinced that I could in good conscience preside over such a service. Three immediate problems spring to mind:

1) It would be contrary to my ordination vows. Part of what I will be agreeing to is to support the theology of the Anglican Church as expressed in the Prayer Book and 39 Articles. Part of that theology is sacramental and so has been set down in particular ways and not in others. Well, so what? Aren't Anglicans famous for shafting the rules when it suits them? Yes, and that is often part of the problem. Despite my Counterculture affinities I'm not the sort of person who goes out to deliberately subvert the system. Let there be a fair fight or no fight at all. Even more so if I actually agree with the rules as they stand.

2) It shifts our theology of grace from Calvinism to Arminianism. In the service of baptism it is God's grace and faithfulness that is most on show rather than the faith of either the baptized or their sponsors. Our faith is important but only as it testifies to the work of God. When my son was baptized I had faith that God was able to nurture faith even in one so young because of His sovereign call. It seems to me that is is this focus on God's election and grace which are most denied by the Thanksgiving practice. The emphasis is on the hope that one day the child will be 'capable of making a decision on his/her own'. Grace becomes something for the future rather than the present. God is placed as inactive now but active later 'when they are ready'. Such a view of God's grace I could not support.

3) Individual conscience trumps community expressions of faith. If you were to go out to dinner at a good steak restaurant you would probably be a little irritated if the manager declared that because there was a vegetarian sitting at Table 24 the whole restaurant would have to be vegetarian for the evening. You get a similar problem with the Thanksgiving service. Everyone knows that Anglicans are part of the Baby Dunking mob. If you attend our services regularly you can expect a certain number of soggy screaming children per annum. You can even expect to be invited to join in prayers for the faith of these infants in that context. However, when a particular couple decides that such an expression of faith is Not Good and proposes an alternative they in effect ask the community their theological convictions by participating. It is never expressed as such, but the effect over time is confusion over exactly what we do believe about sacraments and a belief that church community is a Choose Your Own Adventure to suit individual needs.

These are some of my gut feelings regarding this situation which I am fairly confident of being placed in at some time. Although, if I'm honest, there are probably arguments for the other side that I haven't considered. To clarify again, I think that it is absolutely right and appropriate both that Christian communities should give thanks for the birth and faith of all children born into them. How this should be expressed with respect to established church practice appears to be a more sticky question than I initially considered.

Carry On Jerusalem

The other night my Dearly Beloved dug up a treasure from the past...

As part of 2nd Year lectures on the Deuteronomistic History the sainted George Athas asked the assembled class whether they thought the book of 2 Samuel was a Comedy or a Tragedy and, if such a book was to be made into a movie, to write the blurb for the DVD cover. I, clearly getting it wrong, opined that it was a Comedy. Not only that, but a comedy worthy of that great British institution, the Carry On team!

For those out there of a high cultural standard, the Carry On films were a key part of English comedy in the late 1960s, the purpose of which was to have as many sexist jokes in 90 minutes for as little money as possible while still retaining something resembling a plot-line. The Dearly Beloved and I are devotees. For me, I consider them to be an medium conveying considerable existential angst at the impending nuclear disintegration of existence through farcical whimsy. And Barbara Windsor was the sexiest woman ever (apart from the Dearly Beloved of course).

For the benefit (or otherwise) of My Public, I here reprint my DVD blurb for...

Carry On Jerusalem

Reprising his role of the manly shepherd boy from Carry On Goliath, this hilarious masterpiece of British cinema finds Kenneth Williams as King David as he begins his reign over the nation of Israel. Having dispensed of old king Saul, David was hoping for a quiet life but is thwarted at every turn. His eye is caught by voluptuous neighbour Bathsheba (Barbara Windsor – BAFTA nominated: ‘Best Nude Bath Scene’), wife of the nice-but-dim Uriah (Bernard Breslaw). However, David’s romantic adventures do not escape the notice of his beloved wife Abigail (Hattie Jacques), who is determined to catch him in the act. David also has to face the remonstrations of the holy prophet Nathan (Sid James), who wants all the pleasures of the palace for himself, as well as the stress of his son Absolom (Charles Hawtrey) suffering from an inferiority complex. How did it all go so wrong?

There Must Be Some Kinda Way Outta Here...

OK, this post may only be of interest to my Australian readers (if any such exist). My international readers (if any such exist) may get a slight insight into the workings of Australian Government, a wild and unpredictable beast now entering strange new territory.

It's been a week and the sky has not fallen in. Granted, Parliament has not sat yet, and not being in ancient Gaul the sky falling in is not a principle national concern. But it looks as if the Labor minority government is set to at least have a go at governing our country. We must, however, remember that the whole house of cards could tumble at any time. We are only one by-election away from meltdown. Even without this, if legislation fails to get through because of cracks in the hastily constructed alliance with regional independents who share only marginal ideological ground, we could be going back to the polls in less time than we all would have liked. Certain former political leaders have given the current state of affairs a maximum of 18 months. Nothing like stable government can be said to exist at all for the next 3 years.

But my next question is more interesting: how will the electorate solve the problem? At some point we will have to line up again and fill in another slip of paper, so which way will we jump? There are two possibilities.

First, the electorate will become more 'conservative'. I don't mean that we will all start voting for the Shooters and Fishers (though I note the remarkably high vote they appeared to get this time round). What I mean is that the garden variety Aussie voter has a general preference (no pun intended) for how they will vote unless they have a good reason to vote otherwise. This election much was made of the 'protest vote', an unavoidable byproduct of both major parties having divisive leaders and a lack of positive vision. When the next election comes around will the electorate swallow its pride and go back to their old voting patterns in order to produce a more 'representative' parliament? This would be seen in a drop in primary vote for the Greens or corresponding conservative parties in order to make sure that at least one of the major parties gets to govern in its own right.

Second, the electorate will become more 'radical'. The alternative option is that, if the current government falls into utter farce, the voters will vote for someone who will Get Something Done, even if it means opening themselves up to other political action that they might wish to avoid. This would see minor parties and independent candidates boosting their primary vote. Such an outcome is likely, especially if the independents who hold the balance of power are seen to be driving policy. The electorate might then prefer to go for strong local independents who might be able to gain local development advantage (i.e. pork barreling in exchange for support).

Whadda youse all reckon? What's a voter to do in these circumstances?

Crash Through - Beautiful Ragged Mayhem

I have been distracted (again!!!) by the great maelstrom of study/work/family/etc. Yet, given that my great friends Crash Through will be launching their debut album next week (and I can't make the launch because of work) I thought the least I could do was to post a review of the bloody thing. Enjoy...

Out of the ashes of The Nood and The Pennydreadfuls comes the new project from guitarist/songwriter Phil Morgan. Crash Through straddles the proto-punk of The Stooges and The Dictators and the alternative/noise of The Pixies and Mudhoney with socially aware lyrics to boot. Sonically similar his earlier work, the intervening years along with the help of fellow Pennydreadfuls refugees Richard Schweizer (bass) and Tim McAlpin (drums) have helped to sharpen Morgan’s songwriting while still remaining on the edge. Now they have a debut album to show for their efforts.

Beautiful Ragged Mayhem is a worthy first effort from the band without being a world contender, even if that had been on their radar. Morgan has always a purist approach, eschewing anything that might be deemed ‘commercial’ or even ‘normal’ in favour of challenging both the senses and the minds of his audience. This is Shock ‘n Awe rock, no question.

The basic tracks were cut at TLS Studios with the overdubs and vocals put down at Morgan’s home studio. While a popular method these days the results can be mixed, and that is what seems to have happened here. The drums have a highly compressed timbre that jars with the ragged guitars. The kick drum pounds out of the speakers, the snare lies buried somewhere in the mix and the cowbell sounds more like an empty milk bottle. The lead vocals often sound dry, crying out for another drop of reverb, and also are occasionally placed too high in the mix. The bass sound is a tad muddy but otherwise acceptable. That being said, there are a good mix of guitar tones on the tracks, the acoustic guitars being done particularly well. However, Morgan’s love of experimentation often leads him to make unorthodox choices that result in some otherwise radio-worthy songs being kept in the ‘Too Raw’ pile. Maybe that was the intention. While far from being a tough listen, Beautiful Ragged Mayhem feels more like a sonic patchwork than the unified sound Morgan was hoping for. Doing more cuts live may preserved the punk ethos better.

So what of the songs themselves? There are some real gems on this record. ‘It’s All Backwards’, ‘I Know It’s Not Right’, and the title track get stuck in the mind easily and would be at home on a major label release (tidied up for the teenyboppers, of course). Faster tracks like ‘Nothing Can Slow Us Down’ and ‘Acronym Blues’ give a nod to their old school punk heroes. Surprisingly, the listener is treated to not only acoustic guitar but also organ on this record, both tones that Crash Through are not known for in their live shows. This ultimately goes to the heart of the Crash Through philosophy: Conformity is Treachery. If the listener is led to question their assumptions about what is Good, Acceptable or Safe in art then the song is a success even if the riff was fluffed a bit coming into the second chorus.

But herein lies the rub: when you produce art which is disconcerting and raw you leave yourself open to criticism. How raw is too raw? What would have happened if things had been polished up just that little bit more? Does it really matter if no-one likes it? A confronting performance will always alienate at least as many people as it attracts, most likely more. And it is questions like the above that ran through my head as I considered the musical performances on this record.

Morgan has always been a guitarist who has been driven by sonics and soul rather than technique. It doesn’t hurt that he has more than passable technique anyway and that he has continued to improve over the years. It comes as no surprise that his is the most confident performance on the record, with tight rhythm riffs and punchy solos in the old-skool punk tradition. His tones range from funkily clean to a heavy fuzz with plenty of buzzes, squeaks, and feedbacking yowls. Unfortunately, the rhythm section does not appear to be firing on all cylinders. Schweizer holds down a solid low end, but his habit of merely following the changes rather than trying to find a melodic counterpoint to the madly riffing Morgan means that there feels like something is lacking downstairs in the bass-ment. Listening to some old Greed Day albums wouldn’t hurt. McAlpin is a straight down the line, four-on-the-floor rocker with a personality not dissimilar from Animal on The Muppet Show. As such he sometimes seems to struggle with Morgan’s off-beat driven riffs and non-bluesy changes. All together, it sometimes feels as if Schweizer and McAlpin are trying to chase down Morgan rather than them all moving as a group. Sometimes the phrenetic nature of the music means that this is not a problem, but at places it comes drastically unstuck. Though it pains me to say it, a low point of the record is the long-standing live favourite ‘Milk Crate’. A psychedelic funk rocker with an obscene sing-along refrain, both the beat and the tempo appear to have been lost somewhere in the studio process. The song appears rushed, the guitar and drums out of step (a mortal sin in the Church of Funk) and the bass fails to fill sonic gaps in the verses.

Is Beautiful Ragged Mayhem then the magnum opus of Mr Phil Morgan? The short answer is No, but this sells the album drastically short. Crash Through have put together a fine work on their own terms rather than chasing commercial or critical validity. As with any project of this nature, this will inevitably lead to aspects that will be filed in the Could Have Been Done Better folder. Yet the high points, when they do come, show remarkable accomplishment and a true artistic vision. Crash Through are a band of great potential both onstage and in the studio. To have put out this type of record in the current climate where all artists are airbrushed and fashion styles to within an inch on their life takes guts. Whatever the sales figures, Crash Through should look upon their debut album as a success and press on to greater glories. The General Public, however, would be wise to take my advice and jump on the Crash Through train now, if only for the satisfaction of saying you were into them before they turned slick and commercial.

Crash Through launch their debut album at the Annandale Hotel on Friday September 17.

www.crashthrough.com.au

Where to find a Postmodern Theologian?

We all have our theological heroes. Coming into Moore College I was faced with what I thought was a terrible prospect - reading the entirety of Calvin's Institutes! However, once I got started, I found it a most inspiring read, not nearly as incomprehensible as I had feared. So Calvin reigns pretty high on my Heroes list. You will probably have your own list, probably containing one or two people who have not yet 'fallen asleep'.

If I were to ask you to imagine a leading theologian what sort of image would come to mind? Probably, if I haven't misjudged you, some ageing male (preferably German), short stubbly beard, tweed jacket, degrees from all the top universities, working in a top university, thinking great thoughts about God and publishing lengthy books with lots of small print at regular intervals. Up until recently you would have been right...

But all this presupposes a Modern epistemology - 'the truth is out there', etc. But, as we are being reminded, we have moved into the Postmodern age. The search for the truth is so, like, five minutes ago. What can some old white guy meaningfully tell me about God? What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem? What does the Acadamy have to do with the Church? It's on the street, Man. That's where it's all happening. It's time to throw off the old paradigms and pick up a Postmodern voice to take us into the new century.

Problem: the first great Postmodern theologian hasn't shown up yet.

So far we have had a lot of yakking about it. Kevin Vanhoozer's edited Cambridge Companion is worth looking at and contains some basic principles but doesn't really 'do' it. John Millbank and others associated with the Radical Orthodoxy talk the talk but it's still a Modernist framework. We're all waiting around for the new Schleiermacher, the new Barth, the new Jimi Hendrix to step up and knock those old Oxbridge-trained nuts out of their trees!

But where do we find such a beast? This is the problem - you can't tell. They'll just spring up one morning, like a psilocybe cubensis on your front lawn, and all your perceptions will be altered (joke!). Will it be through blogs, podcasts, sacramental liturgy? We could probably learn a lot from the popularity of The Shack in the last few years, a work that made some bold theological statements communicated through narrative. Is this the form our Postmodern leaders will take? Only time will tell...

Can't You Read The Sign?

Before we get started, I'd just like to know why it is that whenever I go to make a fresh post on this infernal blog I always forget my password?!? I've had to reset the password about three times in a row because it won't stick in the brain. At least I don't have to worry about hackers...

In a recent article about the 'Jesus: All About Life' campain it makes the astounding claim that 3 out of 10 churches who participated had their Jesus banners stolen. I find this both amusing and worrying. It's funny to think that there is a certain section of the public who believe that simply stealing a lot of plastic banners with Jesus' name on them will make Christianity disappear. On the other hand, it is worrying that so many people acting independently (note: I'm assuming independent action as I haven't been made aware of any coordinated anti-Christian campaign on our banners) are willing to commit a felony (theft or willful damage) against those churches participating in a multi-denominational evangelism campaign. Most people will no doubt say that stealing a few signs is not serious. But I think it is very serious. At the very least in Australian society church property used to be sacrosanct. I know that these days we cannot expect any special treatment in a post-modern age, but does it strike anyone else as worrying that crimes are being committed against Christians on a grand scale because of their beliefs? Will we soon have to watch for arsonists at evangelistic services? Will ministers have their throats cut? What will tomorrow bring...

Church Websites

Lately I've been delving into the dark underworld of church websites. All part of the arduous process of searching for a job after graduation. Good to know the lay of the land, see who might be moving on or who might have opportunities for growth in the future.

As I've been looking around I've been struck by how few websites are interactive for users/visitors. Church websites are mainly set up like bulletin boards, places where you can get information (hopefully) about service times, staff, community projects, and so on. These things are essential, but I'm wondering if it is sufficient for modern communities. Think about the popularity of Facebook/Twitter/etc. These are not sites where you go to get information, but places where you join in discussion and find communities of like-minded people and get to know them. They are fast-moving, vibrant, and unpredictable. By comparison, the Rosetta Stone was probably updated more recently than some of the websites out there (and contains more useful information).

Here's a wacky idea - why don't we have members of our congregations contributing regularly to the content of their church website? Wouldn't it be encouraging to read about a particular Home Group and how they've been reaching out to people with the Gospel? How about using our church websites to let people know about touch footy games/surf trips/shopping excursions/movie dates? Is a youth group discussion forum a possibility? At the moment everything is looking very Top-Down and that is rarely a good thing. Let's give Power to the People!

Back Home Again

He has returned! Yes, after months of procrastination I have chosen to resurrect The Starry Crown for further reflections, both logical and illogical. To tell the truth, I never intended for this blog to lapse into obscurity but pressures of life really overwhelmed me in the last few months and suddenly it seemed that posting random stuff in the public domain was not a life priority. Well, the prodigal son has returned. I hope that over this year I'll be able to bounce around ideas that have occurred to me while enduring the trials of 4th Year at Moore College as well as musical/political/social rants. It is also a good time for a new beginning as I have just returned from Moore Mission at St Philip's York St.

This was a great mission in so many ways. Massive respeckt to Justin, MPJ, and all those at CBF for organizing the program. Many thanks also to Ian Powell for coming in and giving our Sydney Anglican complacency a boot up the backside with refreshing honesty! The time spent on walk-up was productive and I got to speak to many people about Jesus. But the long journeys in from the West to the CBD every day was draining. A less-than-full program also made it hard to feel like we really got off the ground.

But the hardest thing for me was the concept of ministering to the City Worker Tribe. It's no secret that the corporate culture is one where I don't feel at home. More than that, though. I think I'd rather do five years at Long Bay than be chained to a workspace in a glass-framed skyscraper. After a week I could feel the life draining out of me.

I discussed this with a compadre on the way home last night. He quite rightly pointed out that all of us are called to cross-cultural ministry. That is very true. But is it possible to minister to a culture about which there is nothing to admire? When people go on long-term mission my gut feeling is that there has to be something about the place they go that they really like. It might be the history, the language, the culture, or even the food. But what it there was nada, nothing, zero, zip? Can we really 'become like' something we hate? Is it even wise to try? While the apostle Paul was deeply troubled at the idolatry he found in Athens he could still find a way of placing his message in the context of a culture that was on the search for religious truth but hadn't found it.

On the other hand, where do we stop? Exactly how much do we have to see in a culture that is redeemable before we decide that we're the right minister for the job? Will a culture that seems very close to our own social ideals end up subtly corrupting the message we bring? Am I putting culture over Gospel? Where is the wise man in this situation?

On a different note, I went to see the Archibald Prize yesterday afternoon. First time I have ever done that. Some good pictures there, plus a lot of Very Ordinary. I voted for the picture of Archbishop Elliot and his cat for the People's Choice. Go see it!