Tag Archives: Church

Blogs, Book Review

Charles Ringma writes on well-being in the Church

Leave a comment

Formation in Well-Being: A Challenge for Today’s Church

by Charles Ringma tssf

Introduction

Most of us at this conference today, know something of the reality of the pressures we experience at work. And these pressures are no different when ministering in the church, or working in church-related institutions. And they are no different when one is working in a business run by Christians, or in secular employment.

There is always more than needs to be done. There is the pressure of time- constraints, outcomes, and success. And often there are unrealistic expectations.

This is particularly true in church-related ministry. So many needs. So much more that needs to happen. And so many expectations that we place on ourselves, or that others place on us. As a consequence, Christian workers often feel burdened and not well-cared for. Burnout is a real problem. So is discouragement. And doing Christian ministry with an underlying vein of resentment can hardly be fruitful!

So, I am sure that many of you have come to this Ministerial Conference on well-being with hopes and expectations. In particular, you may feel that this topic is all the more relevant since the Covid crisis. Doing work well and being well-cared-for is a pressing challenge. And so, you have come believing that this is a most timely and relevant topic for those in Christian ministry.

But you may also have come with some concerns. You hope to gain some good ideas or strategies from this conference, but you are worried whether they can be implemented in your church.

You may also some deeper concerns. Is the concept of “well-being,” and its close cousin “wellness,” too trendy, psychological, aspirational, and vague. Does it promise too much? Will it only lead to frustration?

And if that is not enough some of you may be wondering what about the more traditional language of spiritual growth, Christian maturity, discipleship, Christ-likeness, and wholeness, among other terms that we are much more familiar with?

So welcome. And it’s ok if you are hopeful and expectant. And if you are concerned and a little troubled, that is ok too.

My happy task is not to push a particular line. I am not paid by a major pharmaceutical company to push well-being pills, although happiness pills are on the market. And ATS has not placed limitations on what I can say regarding this topic. They have only asked me to deal with church structures and practices that promote well-being. A big topic, no doubt. Enough to make me anxious which impacts my sense of well-being! Biro lang!

So come along for the ride. Let’s see what we can learn. I wish to make some basic moves. 1. I want to note the current interest in well-being in society. 2. I want to suggest that a Christian understanding of well-being has a different source and dynamic. 3. I want to make some suggestions as to what churches and church-related institutions can do to facilitate well-being. But I do so from the perspective of calling for significant change in the way we do church.

A Personal Vignette

But first a personal note. I am not giving this talk as an arm-chair theologian calmly sitting in a library. I do so as a practitioner having worked for decades in urban and cross-cultural mission and as one involved in pastoral ministry.

And I do so, having experienced a major health breakdown after several years of ministry to those in the drug scene.

I know something about failure in self-care, work-life balance, and in sabbath and other spiritual practices. I know something about the evangelical mantra of much-doing. And have struggled all my life in seeking to live and serve in more sustainable ways. My recent book In the Midst of Much-Doing: Cultivating a Missional Spirituality explores that journey.

Let me just say that failure can be a great blessing. It can immobilise us. It can also move us forward.

Well-Being in the Contemporary Cultural Landscape

A few weeks ago, the commanding general of the Australian army, gave a tearful public apology that the army had failed its soldiers and families in providing adequate support for its personnel in relation to high suicide rates. He said: “we have failed in the well-being of our soldiers.”

A little earlier we had a Royal Commission looking into problems in the Aged Care sector. The report highlighted a failure in providing adequate resources for the well-being of the elderly in aged care.

And more generally, in the current workplace, one of the challenges is that companies need to give greater attention to the overall well-being of their employees and to the conditions in the workplace in general.

Schools now have policies that are meant to guide and facilitate the well-being of teachers, support staff, and students. Mental health services provide well-being programs and strategies that facilitate a positive outlook, satisfaction with life, and life-giving ways of being and relating. And everywhere there are programs – physical, psychological, meditational, spiritual – that seek to promote well-being.

This theme has become so all pervasive that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has made well-being a key element in its public policy framework. The organisation recognises that well-being as a positive state is a key resource for daily living, and contributes not only to sustainability, but also to human thriving and productivity.

A Little Definitional Clarity

At the most basic level, well-being has to do with living a good quality of life in all its dimensions. Well-being has to do with being healthy, happy, positive, and growing in one’s full potential in the personal and social dimensions of life.

Well-being is, therefore, a relational concept. And Aristotle in the dim and distant past had already formulated the idea that my personal well-being is directly linked to your well-being. Thus, he thought of it in communal terms.

But since we are complex creatures, well-being is a complex. Therefore, it does not have a single source. It is the combination of a person’s physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, and social-health factors.

It’s Not That Simple

The above is all well and good, but it’s not that simple.

First of all, one’s sense of well-being differs in terms of one’s life cycle and aging. Contemporary Western young people see well-being as involving happiness, kindness, fun, and safety. The not-so-young see it in terms of inner harmony, mental health, and work-life balance. Others have other perspectives.

Second, the sense of well-being differs in different cultures. In contemporary Chinese culture, well-being has to do with contentment but also with optimism. And you will need to identify how well-being is understood in Philippine culture, but also in its different cultural groupings and social classes.

Third, and most fundamentally within a Christian world-view, how is well-being understood in a world of beauty and abundance and a world of brokenness, injustice, and the misuse of power? How is well-being understood when we are, and continue to be, sinner/saints, according to Martin Luther? How is well-being understood when we are called to be in Christ and to live in the way of Christ sustained by a cruciform spirituality – a spirituality that calls us to suffer on behalf of others? How is well-being understood when we are called to bear the cross? And how is it understood when we live the yet and not-yet nature of the kingdom of God in our world?

And finally, and most problematically, what does well-being look like when you live with a disability, live in poverty, have been displaced due to natural disasters or war, have lost your health, marriage, or your job, or you are marginalised, or discriminated against.

In the light of all of this, is well-being simply something we wish for and can work for, but remains a dream on the far horizon?

Well-Being in a Christian Frame

If you think that I am simply negative and dismissive of the current emphasis in society on well-being, you are mistaken.

Attention to the concern for well-being has important dimensions. The one, is that health and well-being cannot be attained simply by medication. The other, is that institutions can discriminate against certain people, can misuse its power, can be oppressive. And further, in all the configurations of social life, we need to promote and facilitate the dynamics of respect, care, equality, and the possibilities for growth and well-being.

So, the concept of well-being is helpful. Therefore, I wish to show that well-being is consistent with the Christian pastoral vision. But at the same time, I seek to show that this pastoral vision surpasses contemporary notions of well-being. And finally, I wish to make practical suggestions what this Christian-enhanced-notion of well-being may look like in our churches and church-related institutions, and other dimensions of life.

The heartbeat of the Christian vision is that the God of the biblical narratives is a God who is compassionate, restorative, and empowering. God heals and seeks to make us well and whole. God’s redemptive purpose in Christ, through the Spirit, is to bless humanity so that we can live in the joy and fulness of God’s purposes. Key terms that reflect goodness is the OT concept of shalom, and the NT concept of soteria.

As a consequence, of this restorative work of God, we are all called to love and care for others both within the faith-community and in society. And this includes the dynamics of respect, care, equality, and the possibilities for growth and well-being.

But well-being within a Christian frame is different. And it is different in a number of key ways. First, its source is Christological. It is living in Christ, in the way of Christ, and for Christ. Second, its inspirational centre is pneumatological. It is living and acting empowered and guided by the Spirit. Third, it is sacrificial. It is loving and serving the other – even the enemy – for that person’s blessing. Fourth, it is prophetic. It is willing to hear God’s corrective voice, to be converted and transformed, and to carry that vision into the world to call it to God’s light. And finally, it is eschatological. It is willing to live in the now what God’s final vision of restoration will look like.

In contemporary society well-being is a human project of care, justice, and empowerment. In the Christian faith well-being is rooted in the nature of God’s redemptive work in Christ and is expressed in an imitatio Christi that seeks to live God’s shalom and soteria in relation to all, including the neighbour in need and the enemy in anger. In Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Ethics, well-being in contemporary society is living the penultimate (that which precedes the ultimate). But Christians are called to live the ultimate in the light of God’s final purposes.

What this means practically is that well-being within the life of faith is not merely a human project, is not a group’s self-enhancement, and it is not primarily a strategy. Rather, well-being is love of God and love of neighbour for the Christification of all of life to the glory of God.

Christological Well-Being and Structures and Strategies in Pastoral Care

It is at this point that I seek to be most specific. The global church is facing many external challenges. But there are also many internal challenges, which I primarily seek to address.

In dealing with current issues, we must not forget the broad sweep of church history, including what the church has not done well. In the past the church has brought people to faith with the power of sword. It has burned at the stake people who did not agree with its doctrines. It has sought to rule societies. And in recent centuries it has been coopted by colonialism, the pragmatism and scientism of our age, and has in many ways been culturally captive.

Much more recently, the Lausanne Movement has identified that global Christianity is weak in the formation of its adherents, in discipleship, and in ethical and sacrificial living. And we may add, that it has not been strong in its prophetic witness in the world.

This means that the issue of well-being – a big theme in contemporary services and institutions – poses a challenge to the church in terms of church’s conversion and growth. And we take up this challenge in the light of the Christological well-being we have already sketched out.

Make Your Own Move

I am about to make a number of suggestions. But you can tune-out if you like and have a mini siesta. What really needs to happen is that you need to make some practical moves when you leave here. You need to think about how well am I caring for staff? How well am I caring for myself? How well am I serving the congregation? How much are we all working together? How well do we share what we have? How well do we build each other up? How well do we celebrate? How well are serving the wider community? And other similar questions need to asked and explored, and answers implemented.

This is up to you. Be wise. Don’t be afraid. But if nothing changes – nothing changes!

Issues I Would Also Like You to Think About

• Churches need to be challenged to move from an easy believism to proclaiming and teaching a full-orbed gospel.

• Members need to be formed in the faith: biblically, spiritually, and missionally.

• The prosperity gospel needs to be replaced with a gospel of redemption, joy, discipleship, witness, and service.

• Church as institution needs to be reconfigured as church as community in Christ, as the body of Christ, and as a common life-together.

• Church leadership as mono-leadership needs to be reconfigured as reflecting the Trinitarian nature of God.

• Members of the church – the laity – must not be kept in infancy. Their voices need to be heard. Their gifts acknowledged. Their service in family, work, and the general marketplace celebrated.

• Reflecting the Trinitarian life of God, both the Christian family, the parish church, and all forms of Christian community and church related institutions need to function in inter-related and complimentary ways.

• The pastoral life of the church needs to be rediscovered. The church is so much more than a Sunday event. It is a life-together, and many forms of small group nurture, care, fellowship, and service need to be created and maintained.

• The dynamics of life-together is more than respect, care, and mutuality. It involves prayer, forgiveness, reconciliation, servanthood, and being willing to suffer for the sake of the other.

• Christological well-being involves love of God and love of neighbour. Service, relinquishment, generosity, sacrifice, are all part of a Christological formation in a full-orbed well-being.

• In order for such a well-being to flourish in the grace of God and the power of the Spirit, we need to face our own selfishness, the dynamics of exclusion and racism, our cultural captivity, and our misuse of power. As a consequence, our hearts need to be attuned to the weak and vulnerable in our midst.
•

So much more could and should be said. Clearly the life of the church must be transparent in relation to the laws of the land. And there are good reasons for us to learn from others – including those in secular fields of human well-being and flourishing. But the gospel challenge is that the new life of Christ takes us into a fuller way of being. It takes us beyond what we think is possible. The Gospel makes this specific. Matthew records the words of Jesus: “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (5: 20 ESV, my emphasis). The Greek term, perisseuo, and its derivates means: more than enough, abundant, remarkable, extraordinary.

Yes, we are called to promote well-being in terms of respect, care, and equality. But we are also called to bring forgiveness, reconciliation, love of the other including stranger and enemy, and a suffering servanthood for the sake of the other. Simply put, we are called to give our life, just as Jesus did.

Questions for Discussion

• What are the difficulties and blockages in engaging in discussion, evaluating, and improving things in your church or church-related institution?
• How much is your church task-oriented at the cost of also being nurture- oriented?
• What needs to happen if a Christ-shaped vision of well-being is to flourish in your church?

Charles Ringma, tssf.
Research Prof., Asian Theological Seminary, Metro Manila / Emeritus Prof., Regent College, Vancouver / Honorary Research Fellow, Trinity College Queensland, Brisbane / Distinguished Senior Fellow, Catechesis Institute, Waco, USA.

Blogs

More to Church

More than Church
A Reflection by Charles Ringma tssf

Whenever we talk about church, we primarily have the parish church in view where we meet on Sundays for worship, word, sacrament, and fellowship.

At a secondary level, we may also have a small mid-week prayer, Bible study, or fellowship meeting in view. And at tertiary level, we may be thinking of the denomination of which the church is a part, or the universal church as it exists globally.

This way of thinking about the church is primarily marked by its being gathered- together and its institutional nature.

All well and good! But there is more to the story.

The first, is the recognition of the church militant and the church triumphant – that is the present-day historical church in its journey of witness, service and suffering, and the church of the saints who have gone to their heavenly reward, but, who are in a spiritual sense, “still with us.”

Secondly, for much of the church’s history there has existed the parish church and various forms of Christian community of which Monasticism has been the most enduring reality. In our contemporary context while Monastic communities have diminished, there are parish churches that have formed small intentional communities as part of their over-all life together.

Thirdly, there are many church-related institutions and ministries. These are mainly in educational and community welfare domains.

But there is even more to the story when we think about church. Unfortunately, the three further areas I wish to draw attention to tend to be the neglected or over-looked domains. And primarily these have to do with the recognition that the church is both a gathered and a scattered reality – the people of faith in their families, neighbourhoods, and places of work.

1. There are many so-called para-church organisations and ministries, initiated by Christian individuals and supported by Christians across denominations, that are committed to the work of witness, service, care, and justice. It is unfortunate that the parish church often does little to acknowledge, encourage, or support these ministries.

2. There are the many “informal” ministries and services that the “laity” of a particular parish church engage in that are seldom recognised. These are neither prayed for or supported. The problem here is the over-focus on the institutional nature of the church and its ministries, and an underplay of church as people in the world serving in their neighbourhoods, places of work, or their involvement in other networks.

3. There is the reality of the Christian family as an embryonic form of “church.” One hears little about its importance in the nurture, care, and formation of the next generation.

In the light of the above, I which to make several suggestions –

First, there is no theological justification for the present hierarchy of parish church, then intentional Christian community, then Christian family, then para-church organisations, and then what Christians are doing informally as the scattered people of God. All seek to be the servants of Christ. All are committed to worship, word, and service.

Second, this means that the parish church must see itself as linked-to and involved-in all the other spheres of Christian expression and engagement and therefore needs to become a more open, engaging, and reciprocal institution.

And thirdly, this is particularly relevant in the Western world where involvement with the parish church is diminishing. This means that the more diverse but cooperative the witness and service of the people of God can be, the greater the possibility of its impact.

Charles Ringma, tssf.

Reflection

Being priestly, prophetical and kingly

Christ: Prophet, Priest, King: Where Does That Leave the Church?
By Charles Ringma tssf

I believe that it is pretty much a given that Christ has everything to do with the church. In theological jargon, this is expressed as follows: Christology forms and shapes ecclesiology.

This simple phrase has several important dimensions. First, the person and work of Christ is the source and foundation of the faith community. People come to faith in Christ and form a community reflecting Christ. Second, the way of Christ in the world is the way the church is to be as disciples of Christ. If Christ is indeed the Prince of Peace, then the church should be a peace-making community. Third, what the church is, reflects back on Christ. The church as the “body of Christ” is a second “incarnation” of Christ. Thus, the church is to be an embodiment of and witness to Christ. Here the church is called to great fidelity.

In Christology, we speak of Christ as being Prophet, Priest, and King. And we usually spell this out as follows: 1] As prophet, Christ is the voice and reflection of God to humanity. He brings the new word, the new vision, the new way. And as prophet, Christ critiques the old way and its pretentious powers and shows the new way of redemptive suffering and the bliss that is to come in God’s final future. As prophet, Christ is the great disturber, the one who disrupts the status quo. 2] As priest, Christ is the bridge between God and humanity in his healing and restoring activity, and in his intercession for the church and world. As the Great Priest, Christ, agonises into birth the kingdom of God in people’s lives and in the world. 3] As King, Christ is Lord not only of the individual believer, and of the church, but also of the world and the world to come. Here there is the call for a faithful following of the one whose rulership is so different to that of the nations. He is the Servant-King and as the Lamb that was slain, he demonstrates a generative rulership which seeks to bring into being a whole new world.

So, what about all of this in relation to the faith community? What does Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King have to do with the church? Simply put, everything! If its true, as we have said, that Christology impacts ecclesiology then ecclesiology should not impact Christology. In other words, we can’t be reductionistic in making Christ fit our church paradigms. And we can’t favour the one ministry of Christ to the neglect of the other ministries.

Yet, this, seems so often to be the case. Let me illustrate this at a very broad level.

Roman Catholic and the mainline Protestant churches have tended, in their long commitment to the Christendom project, to emphasize the kingly work of the church in forming churches and institutions that seek to have social clout. This approach operates on the notion that the more powerful the church can be in society, the more good it can do. In this model, the church is always seeking political and social “capital” and influence. We have seen this with Evangelicals during the Trump presidency and with the Roman Catholic church in Poland.

Pentecostal and Charismatic churches while increasingly seeming to move in the same direction as described above, have traditionally emphasized the priestly ministry. They have sought to be a healing and restorative presence for people and have outworked in the broader community. In this, they have tended to be more a-political.

The prophetic ministry has tended to be more the domain of fringe groups such as the Anabaptists, Quakers, and para-church groups such as Sojourners, along with many other similar groups. Their orientation has been to question the major dominant paradigms in both the churches and the world, and to call for a new way of being in the world. Rather following the “triumphant” Christ into the world, they have tended to follow the “suffering” or “bitter” Christ into the world.

So, you may want to think about where you fit? Where does your church or organisation fit? And more importantly, where should you and I fit?

In wrestling with this, here are a few thoughts –
1] If Christ is indeed Prophet, Priest, and King, then the faith community should reflect these three “ministries” of Christ.
2] Can these three be held in creative tension?
3] Karl Barth, in formulating a theology that had to do with calling the church to resist the church’s Nazification, made the claim – not surprisingly given his context – that the prophetic work of Christ was primary for the church and the other “ministries” had to be understood in the light of that prophetic work. What do we think of this?
4] Does this mean that in differing settings, a differing ministry need to be the major focus?
5] And finally, how are we to discern in our world what is most pressing regarding the way the church is to be in the world?

Charles Ringma tssf,
Emeritus Prof. Regent College, Vancouver; Research Fellow Trinity College, Queensland; Hon. Assoc. Prof. The University of Queensland; Adjunct Faculty Asian Theological Seminary, Manila.

News, Reflection

Christians: The third Race?

A Divided Christendom. Can the Idea of a “Third Race” Help Us?

by Charles Ringma tssf

We seem to be living in a very different time to the 20th century when churches were concerned about the lack of unity of the church and its implications for the witness of the church in society. This concern seems to have disappeared.

Today, the splinterization of Christianity continues with many solo churches coming into being and Christian para-church groups continuing to proliferate. Also, many Christians now prefer to be part of informal “groups” or as alienated from the church while continuing to maintain their Christian faith.

All of this is overlaid with the reality that churches are not only divided along doctrinal, but also along ethnic and economic lines. We have Chinese and Vietnamese churches and churches predominately of the well-to-do.
What all of this indicates is that the concept of church, as the Body of Christ, has become a pragmatic and functional reality with little biblical/theological depth. That being the case, we have freed ourselves to “play church” at will, and our little sense of cooperation has not only led to duplication, but also competition. And with the lack of growth of the church in the West, “branding” has become a dominant operational motif. We have to show how we are different, and move you to join our more desirable form of church.

All of this should be of great concern. While this brief reflection does not provide the space to develop a theology of the faith community, some basic comments can be made.

Being linked to Christ involves the double movement of being “baptized into Christ Jesus” (Romans 6: 3) and being baptized into the faith community: “in the one Spirit we were all baptized into the one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free” (1 Corinthians 12: 13). This means that God’s reconciliation in Christ is both vertical and horizontal – we are joined to Christ and linked to one another. Solo Christianity is a postmodern fiction. The heartbeat of our faith is relationality – joined to God, the faith community, and our world.

This Christological community in the Spirit is a community where traditional social categories are overcome through a spiritual unity expressed in a concrete life together: “there is no longer Jew or Greek…slave or free…male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3: 28).

This does not mean that these ethnic and social distinctives disappear in the faith community, but that they are no longer determinative. Christ is the new centre. And as such Christians are a corporate identity and are called “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people” (1 Peter 2: 9).

It is therefore appropriate to ask the question whether in Christ a new “race” has come into being. Are Christians, as distinct from Jews and Gentiles, to be regarded as a Third Race?

The writer of the Epistle to Diognetus seems to think so. The writer speaks of Christians as “this new race or way of life” that has come into the world. The author continues: while they “follow the local customs in dress and food and other aspects of life, at the same time, they demonstrate the remarkable and admittedly unusual character of their own citizenship.” They live in countries as “non-residents,” and “every foreign country is their fatherland and every fatherland is foreign.”

What we may draw from the above biblical passages and from this epistle is the following –
1. Christians are a distinct spiritual and social entity in society.
2. Their identity in Christ is not limited to their particular church.
3. Their identity is also national and global.

Let me draw some possible implications from these most basic points. First of all, Christians need to think about commonalities and sharing across denominations in their particular localities. Secondly, churches should exercise common concerns for the nation as a whole in which they find themselves. And thirdly, and most fundamentally and controversially, Christians need to find commonality with other Christians across the world.

Majoring on this last point, I believe that we need to rethink our order of priorities. If Christians are indeed a Third Race as a spiritual/social entity in Christ, then my priorities cannot be Australia first, the USA first, or China first, and then my commitment to Christ. Instead, the priority is Christ first, and then my commitment to local, national, and global Christian communities.

This means that I need to question what my country is doing in its policies towards other countries which will also affect my Christian brothers and sisters in that country. Put in the starkest terms I may need to become an “enemy” of my country if my country’s actions hurt another country and its faith community.

While this may all sound far too grandiose or abstract, let me make a simple point. If a church community in Australia forms a link with a church, in say Timor Leste, then the Australian church would have to take an interest in Australian Government policy towards that country and the church may well need to raise its voice in prophetic protest and work hard in expressing caring and practical solidarity.

And moving in the other direction, our solidarity with a faith community in Myanmar or Nigeria or Bolivia could open our eyes to things we are not properly seeing because of our cultural blinkers and arrogance.

All of this does not in any way suggest that we neglect responding to our neighbours and institutions in the general community. Love of God involves love of neighbour. But love of neighbour does not cancel out love of brothers and sisters in the faith in other parts of the world for with them we have a Christo-centric common identity. Paul’s words ring loud and clear: “So then, whenever we have opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for those of the family faith” (Galatians 6: 10).

What could it look like if the local cooperation of faith communities could propel us out of our myopic perspectives and liberate us to embrace a global concern of Christians as a Third Race?

Charles Ringma, tssf,
Emeritus Professor Regent College, Vancouver; Honorary Research Fellow Trinity College Queensland; and Professor in the PhD program in contextual theology at Asian Theological Seminary, Metro Manila.

Book Review

Blessed are Christians through the Pandemic

Irene Alexander and Christopher Brown (editors),
To Whom Shall We Go? Faith responses in a time of crisis,
Cascade 2021
Paperback ISBN 9781725289550
Hardback ISBN 9781725289567
eBook ISBN 9781725289574
Available from the publishers, Koorong, or from the authors at holyscribblers.blogspot.com
Hardback $40, eBook and Paperback $25

Reviewed by Ted Witham

Part of us wants to pretend the Coronavirus pandemic has not happened, and that the Church can go back to its old ways after the worst of this is over. I have no doubt, however, that there will be enduring changes, not least in the way Church organisations use technology.

The collective of Christian writers behind To Whom Shall We Go, who call themselves the “Holy Scribblers”, are also convinced of permanent change. Their interest, as shown in this series of eleven essays, is in changes to our spiritual lives more than technology.

The book is loosely structured around the Beatitudes and this structure gives the book an optimistic feel: we Christians will be stronger and our faith will be deeper – we will be more blessed – because of living through this moment. Their grounds for optimism are historical. We have before lived through past pandemics and challenges and emerged changed and stronger.

The authors are an eclectic mix of academics and thinkers who are looking for thoughtful Christian readers, clergy and lay. Two Franciscan Tertiaries, Terry Gatfield and Charles Ringma, are among the contributors. As is always the case with essays from diverse authors, individual readers will find some essays stronger than others. For example, Chris Mercer’s explorations of Desert Father Evagrius’ “eight deadly thoughts” (gluttony and lack of thankfulness for food, sexual lust, sadness, boredom and apathy, vainglory and pride) resonate for me.

I have some quibbles with the structure of the book. Each section gave rise to prayers and questions for reflection. The reflection questions were at the very end of the book. In the eBook format, especially without hyperlinks, this rendered the questions almost useless.

The prayers were crafted along quite traditional lines, so some could be used or adapted, for example, for intercessions at the Eucharist. I found them a bit too stolid, with none of the creativity of the stunningly beautiful prayers of another Australian, Craig Mitchell, in his recent Deeper Water (Mediacom).

To Whom Shall We Go is a timely book and will stimulate lively thinking about where God is now leading God’s Church.