We have an online Communitas “Thinklings” event coming up this week, spread over a few days, to consider the question of church and mission after the pandemic. Brian McLaren helped us launch this informal theological forum nearly 20 years ago, and we’ve kept it going fitfully. Never before online though.

I picked up Is Europe Christian? by the French political scientist Olivier Roy to help set the scene. It was published last year, so it doesn’t take coronavirus or Black Lives Matter into account. But I think it may be helpful, as we consider the impact of these more recent developments, to remind ourselves of the larger historical context.

In answer to Drew’s question, Daniel is in Babylon, Jerusalem is in ruins, the Jews have become an object of scorn and ridicule among the nations. He confesses the sins of his people and prays that God will be merciful, that he will bring his anger and wrath against the city to a swift end, and make his face to shine again upon his sanctuary (Dan. 9:3-19).

In response “the man Gabriel” comes to him “in swift flight” to reveal what will happen to Jerusalem. It’s not good news.

I made the point in my previous post that Paul’s teaching on marriage in 1 Corinthians is not stand-alone, timeless ethical exposition but a somewhat makeshift set of instructions to help the church navigate a difficult eschatological transition. I mentioned as part of my catalogue of eschatological markers in the letter that speaking in tongues was a “warning to unbelieving Jews that Jerusalem faces catastrophic judgment.” I thought it might be worth saying a bit more about that.

Modern discussion of speaking in tongues or glossolalia has tended to focus on such questions as whether the phenomenon is to be explained psychologically or supernaturally, whether the “tongues” are of earth of or heaven, or whether it must be regarded as definitive for Christian experience.

I thought that this was a rather good piece on marriage by the sociologist Mark Regnerus in Christianity Today. You have to be a subscriber to read it, unfortunately, or you could look out for his forthcoming book, The Future of Christian Marriage.

I saw this comment in a Facebook thread about Black Lives Matter. The relation to its context was a bit obscure, but I think that the point being made is clear enough: “even though God’s kingdom is for everyone, Jesus’s ministry was principally devoted to the oppressed. A group of which He was one.”

It’s a powerful statement to make in the current climate. If Jesus was firmly on the side of the oppressed, the church has little choice but to throw its weight behind progressive movements for social and political reform. Is that right? Is it a fair representation of the agenda of the historical Jesus, who is the only Jesus who ever actually existed?

This is proving to be a tumultuous year for the world, and for the post-colonial western world in particular. Many people are hoping that the coronavirus pandemic has woken us up to the damage that we are doing to our planet, and that the death of George Floyd has finally ignited a racial justice revolution. We shall see.

The only good news that evangelical churches in the UK seem to have found in events, however, is that under lockdown people are showing a new interest in Christian faith and attending online services. I also read somewhere that at least as many have taken the opportunity to stop attending church. We shall see.