top of page

Progressive Christianity St Matthew’s Style: A Case for Being Tactical, Tacky and Troublesome

April 18, 2010

Clay Nelson

[Presented on 18 April 2010 at Common Dreams 2 Progressive Religion Conference in Melbourne]

 

I am here this morning to tell you about a billboard. How ridiculous is that? It was just a billboard. However, it is a parable about the importance of progressives doing public theology. As Sherene [a progressive Muslim speaker at the conference] pointed out in her talk about contextual Muslims getting their message out, it isn’t an easy thing to do.

 

But it wasn’t me who was supposed to tell you about it. My colleague Glynn Cardy was invited to tell you about how we do public theology with billboards. I assure you he would much rather be here than in a hospital bed, so I thought at least his image could be. This is Glynn. 

 

This is a bad news, good news, bad news situation. My best friend became seriously ill quite unexpectedly during Holy Week and will be convalescing for at least nine months. The Good News is I get to be at this conference with four hundred wonderful progressives to tell you about our billboard experience. The bad new is when Glynn got ill on Maundy Thursday he had not yet prepared his talk. So while I am delighted to have gotten a free trip to Melbourne out of the deal and to be part of this conference, I wish he had written this talk before he became ill. As a result you will notice that my title for the talk is a little different than his.

 

Glynn was invited here because he had the courage to approve a controversial billboard. I am here because I’m the only other option available. It is my responsibility to develop with our advertising agency, M & C Saatchi, our billboards. My claim to fame is that the billboard he agreed to go with offended about half of the known world. 

 

It displayed a dejected Joseph and a wistful Mary in bed with the caption Poor Joseph, God was a hard act to follow. While St Matthew’s has been putting up billboards for over six years this is the first to go viral in our Internet age. 

 

In the month following putting up the billboard our website had 35,500 visits from 177 countries. I know that we aren’t in the same league as Francis McNab trashing the 10 Commandments, but we were pleasantly surprised when we had visitors from nearly every country on the planet from Argentina to Zambia. I really want to meet the one person in Mongolia who checked it out. 

 

On Google gave the billboard over 77,000 hits. Blogs both pro and con had a field day. Every major newspaper in the world and lots of smaller ones published articles on it. Letters to the editor were abundant. A poster art museum in Switzerland asked to include it in their permanent collection. Numerous magazines and journals covered it as well. The New Zealand Herald had stories on it for nine straight days.

 

We were swamped with comments both pro and con on the website, in emails, phone calls and letters. I’ve been asked by the conference organizers to share a taste of the reactions. Here are some emails expressing disapproval.

 

Some were concerned about our soul:

 

Your billboard is disgusting, perverted and does not reflect any of the great values of Christianity that you are meant to be preaching. Who ever came up with this absurd idea should be extremely ashamed and who ever approved it should be even more so. I hope who ever is involved in this will go to confession and purge their sin. This is a mortal sin and the penance should be great.

 

This correspondent might be surprised to know that the team leader at M & C Saatchi is a highly committed Anglican Evangelical. The illustrator is an active Roman Catholic who is hoping the Pope doesn’t find out. And the team member who came up with the idea in a brainstorming session, was afraid to tell her mother that she had done so.

 

Some were concerned with the souls of others:

 

Please do not put up your billboard again with Our Lady and St Joseph in bed! It is disrespectful to the Mother and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It makes every one who sees it have impure thoughts and maybe actions! 

 

Some thought we were being disrespectful of the faithful like this one:

 

I was overseas and thus unable to take part in the Rosary of reparation against the vile and cruel blasphemy that you and your parish committed against the Most Holy Trinity, the Blessed Virgin Mary and St Joseph. It was a disrespectful and callous attack on the faith, love and devotion of all Christians, especially Catholics.

 

Not only Christians were upset. This is one from a number from Muslims:

 

I was especially shocked and disappointed that a Christian organization could commission such a distasteful poster. How would you feel if a cartoon depicting your own mother in bed with her husband post coitus was placed on a billboard in public? Then imagine how painful it is to see the blessed mother of Jesus – regarded by both Christians and Muslims as the best of women – portrayed in such a crude and undignified manner?

 

Some were concerned about the ecumenical movement:

 

How can we reconcile Anglican and Catholics if you allow Billboards like the one with Our Blessed Mother and Our Blessed Lord?

 

Many worried about those we offended:

 

I am a person in my early 30's and have a fairly liberal view on things. I come from a Christian background, but by no means consider myself overly religious. However, I found your billboard rather offensive to my sensibilities. I know your intent was to start a debate, and I concede that you have achieved this, however at the expense of Christians out there who are very hurt and upset by this billboard. You have to ponder if the debate you have created by putting up this billboard, justifies the offence and hurt caused to many.

 

This one seems to believe religion should not be offensive:

 

I realize there is a range of doctrines within the body of Christ. However I think we need not go out of our way to offend others – especially those within the body. 

 

Some tried to argue theologically while questioning whether or not we were Christian:

 

You seem to have the idea that even if there was a virgin birth then God would have had to send sperm down from above. I can't believe that a Vicar of a supposed Christian church is so stuck in worldly thinking that you cannot grasp the idea of the power and vastness of God and that he is not constrained by time, space & matter. It seems that you can only think within the confines of this world and in this respect you are no different from an atheist. So what are you doing as a vicar for a Christian Church when you do not believe the basic theology of the church or has the Anglican Church lost the plotaltogether. Surely you would be better off spending your time working for some Humanistic New Age church or charity that does not claim to be Christian when you are obviously not a Christian. In fact I would say that not only are you not a Christian, but are in fact anti-Christian as you are using your position in a church to attack it from within. 

 

One worried about our stewardship in a rather bigoted manner:

 

Lucky you are not a Muslim... you would be a target for zealots who would aspire to earn themselves 21 virgins in the hereafter if they could score you, but what amuses me more than anything else is that you employ funds donated by people who expect you to utilise their monies to promote good Christian works so you immediately open your purse and give a commission to the world's largest Jewish advertising agency... com'on Rev... tell the world how much Christian-donated funds given to you in trust and good faith have you spent with Saatchi from initial briefings, concepts, and final production costs). Just tell NZ honestly how much of your parishioners' funds went into this obscenity?

 

He would be surprised to know that we are not charged for M & C’s creativity, which is donated. We pay for producing the art and about $250 to have the skin printed and installed.

 

Many just didn’t like us like this one signed by someone with the sweet name of Chelsea:

 

SON OF A BITCH! YOU WILL BURN IN HELL!!!!

 

In the face of such acrimony it was a relief to get many letters of support as well. 

 

Many clergy responded appreciatively:

 

Thanks for your humour and courage to post the image of Joseph and Mary. I am an ordained minister in the United Church of Canada. Our closest link your way is the Uniting Church of Australia. 

It takes tremendous courage to let the truth be known. Living next door to the Christian fundamentalist types in the USA, I do appreciate the havoc your campaign created and the liberation in it as well.

 

Whoever thought that up was very smart to put it mildly. As a church minister who believes it is my job to do my best to reshape Christianity to become closer to what we know of the person of the real Jesus, I wish I had thought of it.

 

I'm an English Methodist Local Preacher, and want to say I think your controversial billboard is a scream. If I can imagine God as having human attributes, then I think he’ll be having a good chuckle. The serious side of the message is well made and it is absolutely right that Christians should always be questioning and exploring. I wish you and your church every blessing in all your endeavours.

 

One that I personally appreciated was from the person responsible for Latter Day Saints’ publicity in NZ:

 

You and your team have done some awesome work in the last 4 to 5 years. Even if I felt uncomfortable at first with the latest billboard, how could it not be a success with all the talk it has generated? 
I would not be allowed to approach it in this way, but I hope you don’t get discouraged by what some people might be saying. I really value yourapproach and judgment. I think religion needs more people like you and your team.

 

We heard from many of different faiths and those who claimed no faith at all:

 

I don't live in New Zealand, and I long ago stopped considering myself "Christian" precisely because, in my experience, most so-called "Christians" are so enmeshed with the narrative of Jesus that they fail to get the point of his ethical and spiritual teachings. 

It often seems that it is the people who are most emphatic in their self-identification as "Christians" who behave in a fear-based, destructive way to those whom they perceive as "other" – in total violation of the values and ethics taught by their "Christ.” But, if I did live in New Zealand, and saw a church with a billboard such as you recently put up, I would probably feel like I had to check it out, and maybe even re-think identifying as a "Christian" once again! Kudos to you! Keep up the good work! 

 

While Catholics were more often critical, we heard from many who were appreciative. Here are two:

 

I'm a Catholic who believes in the virgin birth, and I thought your billboard was really funny. Christianity is too often sidelined by popular culture as being boring, irrelevant and old fashioned, whereas in fact it's the most interesting, topical and fun thing in the entire world.

 

And this one:

 

Thank you for your courage. 

I am an older, gay catholic (former religious monk) with a life partner living near LA. Because of your billboard I have read and explored your website and wish you were near our shores not an ocean apart.

 

Humanists and rationalists were quick to express their appreciation, which wouldn’t surprise our detractors:

 

Thank you for starting a debate and for educating me about Progressive Christianity. I am heartened to see that not all Christians believe the bible stories are factual. I'm an atheist & humanist myself yet whole-heartedly believe in following Jesus' #1 message – Treat others as you would like to be treated.

 

My personal favourite from the atheists was this one:

 

I’m a rabid atheist – but what has happened to you guys with your nifty poster stinks! This is a blow for freedom of speech. Send me your bank details and I will direct credit you $50 to get this poster back up.

 

Here are a few who were just pleased that we were generating a conversation:

 

Love the poster. Love that you're stirring the thought processes of the reluctant. My theory is that sometimes you can't tell if something is dead until you poke it. Keep poking.

 

Clay, I wanted to contact you because I was so impressed with your comments to the New Zealand Herald on the St Mathews billboard. Too often actions are carried out in the name of religion that are not loving or rational acts. Good on St Matthew’s for attempting to get New Zealanders to consider their faith and get people talking about religion. And good on you for pointing out that abuse and threats are not consistent with Jesus' message. I am not religious myself but I respect the work St Matthew’s does and I respect religion that aims to better the lives of others, especially the weaker members in society. Thank you for your stance. 

 

It is a shame that the faith of so many is still rooted in literal interpretations, but it is encouraging that there are those such as yourself who will not compromise a far deeper understanding. Never dumb down the teaching to please the masses.

 

Please keep the billboard; it generated much healthy debate here at my university. I wish you strength to brace the storm. A friend in Texas.

 

Just wanted to write in support of your billboard. I am immensely cheered by it. It's about time some real Christians stood up against those who would use Jesus’ name to preach intolerance and discrimination. 

It is certainly creating discussion. As someone who has just been diagnosed as a Unitarian Universalist, it not only drew me to your site but has me reading half of the articles.

 

Some appreciated our making Christianity more accessible:

 

I am sure there are many people in societies around the world who share Christian values (but may or may not consider themselves Christian) who will have found Christianity a little bit more accessible and relevant as a result of your billboard.

 

Hurray for people like you. Where is it written that God does not have a sense of humour.

 

Blessings be on you all for your thought-provoking and playful billboard. And to think in the West we like to say that it is Muslims who have no sense of humour about their religion!

 

I have great admiration for what you are doing. If you want to make a difference and want your message to be heard you have to be prepared to do the unexpected and push the boundaries.

 

I admire you for choosing to make a difference!

 

Many thanks for having the guts to put up the billboard. It made Christmas real and relevant.

 

In the week after the billboard went up Glynn and I were swamped by media interview requests. At the hour the billboard went up I was officiating at my mother-in-law’s funeral. Throughout the service I could feel my phone vibrating. Checking voicemail afterwards there were 18 requests for interviews from radio, TV and print media from around the world and it didn’t stop for days. Glynn was especially brilliant as our primary spokesperson.

 

While many traditional Christians felt we were misguided or insensitive or going to burn in hell, they never thanked us for opening a media window for them. For instance, BBC radio featured a lengthy debate between Glynn and Lindsay Freer, spokesperson for the Catholic Church in New Zealand, where she had ample opportunity to put forth the Catholic position on the virgin birth and Mary’s perpetual virginity. We sincerely doubt she would have gotten that coverage without us. Did we get a thank you note? No!

 

What has been the most surprising aspect of this experience is discovering the billboard is immortal. Yes, even though it and its replacement were up a total of only twelve hours before being defaced and then stolen twice, it won’t die. In March when the Advertising Standards Authority ruled against those who had made complaints about it by declaring it not obscene, it once again got international coverage in print and on the Internet. When our Easter billboard went up on April Fools Day, the whole world was waiting. Every story about it referred to the Christmas billboard. When the Easter billboard was defaced the media covered it again referring to the vandalising of the Christmas billboard.

 

I am certain that the day you read Glynn’s or my obituary in the paper it will be under the heading, Will Billboard Priest Go to Heaven or Hell?

 

Viral billboards don’t just happen

 

To understand how “just a billboard” garnered so much attention, one must look at the context – the church that put it up.

 

St Matthew-in-the-City is a downtown church in Auckland, New Zealand right next to the Sky City casino and their iconic Sky Tower.

 

It is a beautiful neo-Gothic structure that is 105 years old located on the busiest surface street in New Zealand.

 

Within a few blocks are the offices of every major media outlet in New Zealand. The congregation has been part of Auckland since its earliest days. As the city grew St Matthew’s was on the wrong side of the tracks. It was the neighbourhood of the poor, working class and shopkeepers. The wealthy and powerful lived on the other side of Queen Street and attended their own churches. Because of these circumstances St Matthew’s has long had a bias for those who got the short end of the stick. Early examples include founding the Seafarer’s mission down at the docks and a school for the children of working class families on the site before there was a church. This perhaps accounts for St Matthew’s being on the edge of polite society and their respectable churches still today.

 

Over the years vicars with an affinity for being on the edge and somewhat edgy themselves were drawn to St Matthew’s. Canon Blackwood Moore for example, was the first to use modern media to challenge the establishment. Radio New Zealand at the time broadcast live services at St Matthew’s. However, the Government was not pleased with his comments on topical issues in his sermons so he and St Matthew’s services were banned from the airwaves. (After Glynn, he is my hero.)

 

In the 1960’s when protests in America were most strident, St Matthew’s most radical act was allowing sherry and dancing in the church. But in the 70’s and in particular the 80’s things began heating up.

 

St Matthew’s became a hotbed of controversy in respect to social justice issues. My present day office was where those plotting to disrupt South Africa’s Springbok Rugby Tour met. After apartheid fell in South Africa it was from St Matthew’s pulpit that Nelson Mandela came to thank New Zealanders for their support.

 

Anti-war singer, Pete Seeger played a concert from that same pulpit during the Vietnam conflict.

 

When the US sought to bring ships that might have nuclear weapons aboard into the Waitemata Harbour, the Revd Dr George Armstrong, a non-stipendiary priest at St Matthew’s and a professor at St John’s Seminary led a flotilla of small boats to block the harbour entrance.

 

When it was still illegal to be homosexual in New Zealand, the congregation founded the first congregation to serve the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer community in New Zealand.

 

We are to this day the venue of choice for the AIDS Foundation’s Annual Candlelight Service and the Transsexual community’s memorial service. It is no longer surprising to me to witness a funeral led by drag queens.

 

St Matthew’s is where many who die from HIV/AIDS choose to hold their farewell.

 

Today St Matthew’s is the only Anglican Church in New Zealand that publicly permits Civil Unions for gays and lesbians in the sanctuary and to my knowledge I am the only parochial priest who is also licensed to perform civil unions.

 

St Matthew’s was an outspoken supporter of women’s ordination and has had a long line of women priests on its staff. They have made sure inclusive language has had a high priority.

 

Being next door to the Auckland City Mission, an Anglican diocesan institution, the city’s rough sleepers use our pews for naps on rainy days and doorways as their bedrooms. We are on a first name basis with many. One homeless woman listed us as her permanent residence on official forms. We become intimately involved in their lives. They attend services, potlucks and even church picnics. We have done their weddings and baptisms and helped them find better lodging and get needed services. We are in the midst of a $100 million joint project with the City Mission to build a state of the art center for rough sleepers and homeless women with children.

 

So from our founding we have been a church on the edge. However, there are two sides to this edge. Polite society might prefer not to, but does know who we are. 

 

Under Peter Beck, one of our more respectable vicars, now Dean of Christchurch Cathedral, St Matthew’s began connecting with the business community of Auckland. In establishing relationships with downtown business leaders, he was able to raise millions to refurbish the badly deteriorated structure that the diocese was considering demolishing. Those relationships also established us as the pro-bono client of M&C Saatchi, our billboard co-conspirators, and Network PR, a public relations firm. However, his greatest gift to the church was tearing down the original wooden church to build a hideous looking but highly profitable car park. Thanks to the car park and other assets the church is financially secure. We recognize that having that security is a gift most churches do not have. It gives us the freedom to say and do things others might wish to say or do but can’t because of a lack of resources or they don’t dare because it would risk their financial viability. Having the freedom, we feel an obligation to be their voice as well.

 

When Peter left for Christchurch to become dean, the church called Ian Lawton, a young, outspoken Aussie with an earring, gifted pen and brilliant theological mind to be the next vicar. Ian’s contribution was huge to St Matthew’s present ministry. The billboards began under his tenure, the first somewhat primitive website compared to today’s was launched and a virtual online magazine was published to theologically reflect on church and culture. Ian resumed St Matthew’s reaching out to those on the wrong side of the tracks, but in this case it was those who were seeking spirituality, not necessarily religion.

 

But his other contributions included opening the church to the community for uses beyond services and classical concerts. The pews were made movable so they could be removed for fashion shows, cocktail functions, dances, media events and on one occasion a Rave.

 

These “scandalous” uses of the church and tentative attempts at liturgical renewal annoyed many in the congregation, culminating in the music director’s departure and along with him most of the choir. Their departure would prove to be a godsend.

 

He was not with St Matthew’s long because Bishop Jack Spong, who coincidentally was my bishop as a young vicar, recruited him for a nondenominational church in the US where he is continuing to make wonderful progressive waves.

 

The congregation he had walked into and later left behind was not a highly functional one. Like many liberal churches, St Matthew’s had a long history of being inclusive to a fault. She tried to hold within her embrace:

 

• Anglo-Catholics who were “liberal-ish” in their support of women’s ordination but were still in love with Thomas Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer. Until two years ago the 8 am service stilled used the 1663 service.

 

• Evangelicals who were liberal about social justice issues but conservative scripturally and liturgically.

 

• Dysfunctional poly-Conservatives, who were never sure where they were on any issue, except protecting and maintaining the historic building.

 

• Liberals who were broad in theology and inclusive socially, yet avoided being critical of theological differences within the church.

 

• Radicals who resisted a male-dominated church hierarchy and wanted inclusive language in the liturgy with new metaphors for God.

 

This eclectic mess is probably what made America attractive to Ian and what killed off at least one vicar and made life exceedingly difficult for the rest. Building community out of such theological, liturgical, and socio-economic differences was made all the more difficult by the fact that most of the congregation did not live within the parish boundaries, but came from a wide geographical area.

 

It was into this parish mix Glynn was called in 2004. Perhaps they called him after Ian because he came from a respectable suburban parish, was older, and not having an earring looked safe. I’m not sure if they noticed his criminal record. As a young seminarian he was arrested protesting for Maori land rights and was convicted of disturbing the peace.

 

He spent his first year getting the lay of the land and figuring out how to make St Matthew’s a staff-driven church. As he began to build his team I was immigrating to New Zealand. The day after George Bush was re-elected I felt a need to make a statement in opposition to the Iraq War and his dismantling of the Constitution. Moving to New Zealand was that statement. At the time I had been away from the Episcopal priesthood for eight years, working for the Unitarian Universalists as an administrator and was a member of their ministerial fellowship preparing to be received as a UU minister – a goal I gave up to immigrate. My first Sunday in New Zealand I attended St Matthew’s because they had a large banner flying from their bell tower that resonated for me, “Make Poverty History.”

 

Inside I listened to an excellent progressive sermon from Glynn while holding my breath because of the overwhelming body odor coming from an obese homeless woman asleep in the same pew. 

 

In the pew sheet was a notice that they were looking for someone who had communication and marketing skills, as well as proficiency in website development. Having some knowledge of Anglicanism was considered a plus. Having acquired qualifications in web development after leaving the priesthood, I went back to my hotel and applied. While I wasn’t sure I wanted to work for the church again, I decided that it was better than driving a taxi. I got a call the same day from Glynn coaching me on how to prepare for the interview so I would get the job. His counsel was probably good but since I couldn’t yet understand his accent, I missed most of his good advice. At the interview I shared my vision of creating a virtual progressive church online. Two weeks later I was employed to start building it. A month later Glynn broached the subject of me getting back in collar. With some reluctance and great reservations I agreed to give it a go. But in doing so I promised myself not to hold back what I really believed even if it meant being tried for heresy. After all, it worked out pretty well for Sir Lloyd. So far, the best Glynn and I have been able to do is to be accused of heresy with demands made to the bishop that we be disciplined. Not liking publicity, the bishop chose not to act. We were sorely disappointed.

 

Glynn and I are in many ways quite different from each other, but we discovered we have the kind of rare synergy forged in close friendship, common purpose and a willingness to break the rules. Unlike Peter Kennedy [of St Mary's-in-Exile, Brisbane] we have never been mistaken for the Messiah, but like him we can be naughty boys. Through our writing and preaching we began climbing further and further out on our progressive theological limb. Putting it on the web for all to read committed us further to continuing our progressive journey. Eventually the congregation began to notice that what we were preaching was often being refuted by language in our Book of Common Prayer liturgy and the hymns. But putting aside the prayer book in the Anglican tradition is not something done lightly. For many Anglicans the prayer book is more sacred than Scripture.

 

The opportunity to begin making the liturgy congruent with our theology came in 2006 in planning a U2charist, a Eucharist using U2 music instead of hymns. At the time U2charists were sweeping across the US, but they were just putting Bono’s music into traditional liturgies. As the one initiating and planning the event, I asked Glynn, the poet on the team, to write a liturgy that reflected progressive theology for our U2charist. That was the beginning of our liturgical renewal. We now have several liturgies we use during different seasons of the church year. While Glynn offers the first draft, the congregation is actively involved in developing and evaluating each one. We consider each a work in progress. They are all available on our website. Feel free to use all or parts of any that move you.

 

In retrospect, I believe that how we approached liturgical renewal and the content of the liturgies themselves accomplished what none of Glynn’s predecessors had been able to achieve – they formed St Matthew’s into a cogent community. A few, of course, are not happy about not using the prayer book but they can still do so at the 8:00 am service if they choose – most don’t. To their credit they accept that the new liturgies represent the community. A few have left, but many more have come. In the last three years worship numbers have grown by a third. Even better the congregation is considerably younger and more diverse than before. They are proud to be part of a church on the edge. This was never more evident than when the furor hit over the billboard. A few were uncomfortable with it, but only one member of the congregation left because of it. The vast majority was totally supportive and happy to defend St Matthew’s billboard to their families, friends, co-workers and neighbours.

 

Liturgical renewal not only helped us to form a community, it under girded the development of the Christmas billboard and the decision to go forward with it.

 

Our earliest billboards were sometimes clever but exceedingly safe.

 

But about a year and half ago I changed the brief we had with M & C Saatchi. I told them that one measure of a successful billboard for St Matthew’s was that it wouldn’t be comfortable in front of any other church in Auckland. I wanted our billboards to make it clear that not all Christian churches were the same flavour. In particular I wanted our billboards outside the church to reflect the progressive Christianity being exercised within.

 

Lastly, whenever possible I want them to reflect our whacky Kiwi (or in my case, American) sense of humour. It was this brief rooted in our liturgy that produced “The Billboard.”

 

What lessons have we drawn from this experience?

 

There are three. The most important lesson, I believe, is the realization that being an inclusive church has its limits. Yes, all are welcome, baptized or not, Christian or not, to receive communion. But we should not be concerned if some choose not to be included. Progressive Christianity should not be afraid of offending. Our view is that Jesus wasn’t.

 

The second lesson is related – unity is highly over-rated. Many of our colleagues in the diocese were not pleased with us because they believe the church should speak with one voice. This is an idea that we find laughable. The church has never spoken with one voice. They were upset with us because some of their parishioners were upset at them because of what we’d done. They felt put on the spot and they didn’t like it. Some even advised that we should get prior approval from the bishop before we put up future billboards. Yeah. Right.

 

Their lack of support was disappointing, but not as much as the silence from some of our mentors, near and far. But nevertheless, we continue to believe that some things should not be sacrificed on the altar of unity, no matter how lonely being troublesome can be. Change in the church or any other institution has never been accomplished without someone being troublesome. If unity is to be found it is on the other side of being troublesome. 

 

Another lesson is that in a secular society that rarely looks at the church, one cannot be too bold in doing public theology. Our critics would say we resort to being tacky, not bold, to get headlines. I subscribe to the idea that there is no such thing as bad publicity, with the possible exception of one’s own obituary. We make headlines sometimes by making fun of ourselves or by seeming to ignore the religious sensibilities of others, standing up for the GLBTQ community or working for peace.

 

We also gain media from having services for non-members like our annual animal blessing for the SPCA, children’s Christmas service with Santa and a Christmas fairy and on occasion events like a teddy bear blessing.

 

We also make headline by sending out media releases on topical issues – the most recent being a statement condemning NZ Bus for refusing an ad from the Rationalist Society saying,

 

“There’s probably no God, so stop worrying and enjoy life.” Lastly, Glynn frequently and I occasionally send letters and opinion pieces considered controversial for publication in the NZ Herald. We are published more often than not.

 

The third lesson concerns issues around freedom of speech. Our experience is that the biggest threat to our freedom of speech is our selves. Self-censure is a much bigger threat to getting our message out than anything our detractors or the diocese can do to silence us. Fear is at the heart of silence or failure to act. Glynn and I have done a lot to build up goodwill in the congregation and the greater community, if not always the institutional church. That goodwill is like chips painstakingly won in a poker game. They do us no good if we don’t put them all in once in awhile. 

 

When to do that is always the question. Whether you do or you don’t always has consequences. For instance, Glynn and I both loved the first billboard we were presented by M & C Saatchi for Christmas but we differed on whether it was worth cashing in our chips. They proposed a billboard showing a giant flouro sperm coming down presumably from heaven. The tagline was from a Christmas carol – “Joy to the World…” The implied second line of the carol was the joke. In retrospect I am delighted Glynn’s didn’t go with the first one. If he had we would not have gotten the one we put up.

 

We also discovered that one has to consider the consequences of exercising freedom of speech. After the billboard was vandalized twice and stolen twice the question was how to respond visually. We developed two possibilities and were ready to go with this one, but it was never used. It had become clear that the team was exhausted dealing with both the controversy and getting ready for Christmas. We decided reluctantly to hold our fire at least until Easter.

 

So in conclusion when doing public theology there is a time for tact as in tactical, but ultimately being tacky and troublesome are important tools for reshaping society’s understanding of Christianity, which is defined all too often only by Evangelicals and the institutional church. We can’t make a difference if we can’t get anyone’s attention.

Please reload

bottom of page