Which are the authentic believers: radicals or moderates?

In these troubled times, a debate has opened up about the role of religious fundamentalism. Which are the authentic representatives of their faith: the radicals who have been causing so much trouble, or the moderates who blend unnoticed into society?

A radical meets a moderate, or vice-versa.

It's a shocking thing for a blogger to say, but it is not the moderate Christians who reflect the teachings of their founder. As Mayor Sadiq Khan has said "Living in a big city, we must accept radical Christians, loving their neighbours, giving alms to the poor, visiting the sick, sheltering the homeless, protecting the weak, and so on. But there is no need to panic."

Of course most Christians are anxious to deny that they do "good deeds". They just want to fit in with society, for example by approving of abortion, or homosexual relationships.

Nancy Pelosi explains: we can be Christian without taking Christ seriously!

But the police are aware that some Christian preachers - a minority, certainly - are radicalising their flock with aggressive slogans such as "Love thy neighbour", "Obey my commandments", and "Peace be with you". There are destinations such as Jerusalem, Rome, Lourdes - even Walsingham - where people are deliberately encouraged to take Christ's teaching seriously.

Lourdes - should we allow people who have been there to re-enter the country?

There are those who claim that "true" Christianity is the moderate sort practised by ordinary non-religious Christians - the ones who attend church once a year, get drunk, watch porn, fiddle their taxes, and tell lies when they feel like it; but they have a weak case. For, look at the Founder of the religion, and He was nothing at all like that. No, those irritating do-gooders who cause such a nuisance may actually be nearer to the true faith. And - harsh though it may be - we should judge a religion by its founder. Unless it is Islam.

A charismatic Christian - probably the most irritating sort.

How would God vote?

In this post about British politics we shall (as usual) take the mainstream Christian view of God, namely as the Holy Trinity of Father, Son, and Spirit. So those with imperfect viewpoints who see God as Allah, Vishnu, the Tiger God, or a bowl of porridge (the Quakers) will be disappointed.

GOD the Father

This one is easy. The Father is an authoritarian figure; indeed He produced the Ten Commandments as a definite policy. He must be a Conservative, probably even a Thatcherite. He would certainly be described as "Strong and Stable".

Allowing the vast majority of his people, except for a wealthy yacht-owner (Noah) and his family, to be drowned in a flood, is the sort of policy that conservatives can only look on with envy.

All right, there's some stuff in the psalms about the Lord being a shepherd, and people lying down in green pastures (definitely appealing to the Greens), but generally the Old Testament has little to say about carbon footprints and recycling plastic bags. So a Tory He must be.

"Vote Conservative! Mind you, I'm not all that keen on Theresa May."

GOD the Son

Jesus is easier to pin down, as He is the only one of the Trinity who is actually human. He was very keen on helping the poor, so it is not surprising that the Labour party would like to claim Him. After all, their main appeal is to poor people such as celebrities (footballers, actors, BBC comedians, etc.), doctors, professors, etc. Oh and a few ex-miners and ex-steelworkers aged about 95.

The other reason why we assign Jesus to the Labour party is that He bears a distinct resemblance to the young Jeremy Corbyn, although without his fondness for Marxism, terrorism, etc. Indeed, as a Jew, Our Lord might feel unwelcome in the modern Labour party.

The IRA theatre players with their re-enactment of the Last Supper.

Still, the "what would Jesus do" people tend to focus on His "Labour" credentials as a touchy-feely softie, rather than His habit of chastising people with ropes of knotted cord (surely a UKIP habit?) - not to mention the threats of Hellfire - so let's provisionally assign Him to Labour.

GOD the Holy Spirit

The problem with the Holy Spirit is that He (or She if you believe James Martin SJ) has never been known to make a precise statement. A lot of hot air rushing around with good intentions... well, that suggests the Liberal Democrats.

"Kumbayah, Lord," say the Lib Dems.

You'll find that the people who mention the Holy Spirit a lot (especially when implying that Christ's teaching could do with a little updating) would fit in well with the Lib Dems: think of their leader Tim Farron and his "these are my principles, but if you don't like them I've got others" attitude to abortion and same-sex weddings.

---

So, according to the Trinity, we must expect a hung parliament. Of course, by looking at the early church, we can find representatives of other parties: St Andrew, the Scottish disciple, would be SNP; St Peter, with his suspicion of foreigners, would be UKIP, and so on.

Maybe we can get more guidance by asking a bowl of porridge.

The Boat of Fools visits the Charismatics

After a recommendation from Sister Hilary White, we sent our "Mystery Worshipper" to the local charismatic church, for a bit of speaking in tongues.

Get thee behind me, Stan!

"Stan" here is presumably Professor Stanley Unwin, known for translooping the sacred liturgicobble into the vernaculums, which sounds a bit like peebles sparking in tongles, doesn't it? Deep joy.

What was the name of the service?

Missa Polylingua.

Achtung! Allegro con brio! My hovercraft is full of eels. Och aye the noo! Geen toegang!

What were the exact opening words of the service?

The priest's opening greeting was La plume de ma tante est dans le jardin, to which the congregation responded in a variety of languages, known and unknown, all the while jiggling around excitedly and waving their hands in the air so that their neighbours would realise that the Holy Spirit hadn't overlooked them. According to the service book, some acceptable responses would have been:

Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
Hasta la vista, baby!
Caesar adsum jam forte. Brutus aderat. Caesar sic in omnibus. Brutus sic in at.
Nid wyf yn y swyddfa ar hyn o bryd. Anfonwch unrhyw waith i'w gyfieithu.

However, we were encouraged to use our own imagination, and I said simply Bunga bunga!

"I am not in the office at the moment. Send any work to be translated."

On a scale of 1-10, how good was the preacher?

Approximately -10. He was clearly trying to explain to us that speaking gibberish was the best way to bring the Holy Spirit into our lives. I don't think he succeeded.

In a nutshell, what was the sermon about?

The most profound insights I got from him were Cave canem and Twój kocioł jest zapakowany w górę, giermka, the latter being Polish for "Your central heating boiler has packed up, squire."

Combien ça coûte, ce toutou dans la fenêtre?

How would you describe the after-service coffee?

It was specially-manufactured Mystic Maniac coffee, as drunk by lunatics.

Did the service make you feel glad to be a Christian?

Yes, I only dropped into this service as a service to readers of this blog. I won't be coming back.