One Year

Paper anniversaries are not really that impressive. The least among a grand list of traditional wedding anniversaries, the first stands out mainly for its simplicity. This makes sense, since the first year of a marriage is filled with many things, including the expenses of settling into a new home. This has certainly been the case for us. But the first anniversary is still special, for that simple case that it’s the first. And firsts are always special. Today we celebrate the passing of the first year of our first marriage, being hopefully our only marriage, but the first of many anniversaries.

And it has been a good year. We have grown together, enjoyed our life, and seen ups and downs. Is ours a perfect marriage? Hardly. But whose is? The point is, we’re in this for the long haul, and first year has been pretty good. We still love each other. And on this day, I’m still saying yes, as I did one year ago.

Although many things have happened since, we still cherish the memories of our wedding day last year. And these last days I have begun uploading – finally – a selection of pictures from the wedding. The last ones will follow shortly.

Why the delay, you may ask? Well first of all, it took time to get the pictures. Our hired photographer for the day, while very skilful in taking pictures, didn’t actually deliver them until four months later. By that time, we had lost momentum – we were caught up in buying furniture, working, and studying, and wedding stuff was not high on the agenda. Eventually I got around to collecting pictures from many different sources, and sorting, tagging and rating them. This took time, and only now a selection was ready for upload. And I guess the anniversary is a suitable occasion for actually putting them online.

You, my readers, may not be that interested anymore. The season is about to begin, and new weddings will fill the radar shortly. But I hope you will take a look at the pictures, thereby reliving the day and celebrating our anniversary with us.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kennethbirch/collections/72157624108299833/

DUCH Session – Once Again

Exactly three years have now passed. Once more it’s time for the Seventh-day Adventist Church to meet in session. This means electing (or re-electing) officials, hearing reports, voting on various business items, and of course gauging and debating the state of the church.

As many readers may remember, the session three years was somewhat turbulent, but ended on a positive note. I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that the new administration has set a new tone. There have been unforeseen challenges, especially financially, and unfortunately my own position has been cut away, and I now find myself in search of new job by the end of summer.

But the current leadership has, in fact, managed to draw us closer together and refocus many churches on doing what churches should be doing: good for other people. Like many others, I am hoping for a reelection of the current leadership.

Previously mentioned on this blog, the great controversy this year will be the inclusion of new churches as full members of the union fellowship. Café Church in Copenhagen is the most well-known of these. My prediction is that the vote will pass, but not without some painful outbursts from concerned brethren and others. While the conservative wing is still active, there is now a much broader consensus that new initiatives and expressions are not evil, but should be accepted and even encouraged. Or so I hope.

Currently I’m still employed by the church. And my job at the session is keeping the world updated. I’m in charge of writing press releases, news item, tweets, and more, hopefully satisfying those at home wanting to follow the news, and others who might gain knowledge of the church from my work. You can follow all this in Danish at www.adventist.dk/gf (here, you’ll with links to Flickr, Twitter, Facebook, and live streaming of the meetings).

Thus, my blog will remain dormant during the session. But I’ll probably post some thoughts afterwords, so stay tuned. Good night, and good luck.

The Fragility of Peace

I photographed this local Thai, relaxing in the heat in Lumphini park when I was there a year ago. These days the park is deserted, and part of the protest zone. It’s hard to imagine the change in mood.

I have usually been optimistic about peace. I have argued that, as living standards increase globally, so does world peace. This has been the reality of the last half century. Poverty is still a problem, but as a proportion there are many fewer really poor people than ever before. And while the 20^th century is often portrayed as especially brutal, this is not the case for the latter half of that century. Despite highly publicised wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Bosnia, Afghanistan, etc., the world is actually a safer place now than ever before. Thus would have been my argument 5-10 years ago. But perhaps peace is more fragile than hoped.

Recent events in Bangkok have saddened me in particular, after spending quite an amount of time there myself just one year ago. Now you have people fighting in the streets, and 17 killed yesterday in anti-government protests, in this usually, if not quite, then at least peaceful city. After spending a month in Thailand, I even began toying with the advantages of Buddhism, since these people seem so content, and happy, and peaceful. Well, not any more. Perhaps Thailand is unique. But perhaps not.

I watch these events unfold on CNN in a hotel room in Slovenia, a former Yugoslav republic. This is my first visit to the Balkans, and what struck me the most by flying to Zagreb, Croatia, and the short drive across the border to Slovenia, was the complete lack of signs that 15-20 years ago, this was a civil war zone. Granted, Slovenia probably fared the best of these countries. But it still amazes me that after less than two decades, this place looks and feels just as safe and wealthy as Northern Europe. How could such things have happened here?

But dire circumstances lead to desperate measures. Take Greece, long-time EU member, where the financial situation is driving people to violent protests on the streets. One can always argue who is to blame. But the point is, such extremities are unfortunately not quite as extreme as we’d like them to be.

So what about the financial crisis? In a bleak article in the latest edition of Newsweek, titled “Depression 2010?”, Robert J. Samuelson suggests that we haven’t seen the worst yet: “Greece’s plight challenges [the] optimistic interpretation.” Many other western countries are seriously indebted, and there is a crucial need to, e.g., save more and spend less, rein in expensive welfare systems, and adjust global trade so things don’t run out of hand. The problem, partly, is one of leadership, says Samuelson. “The United States’ leadership since World War II is eroding before China’s ascent. There’s a danger now, as then, of a power vacuum. […] As for Britain’s place as global leader, the United States assumed that role only in World War II.”

How does the future look? “Will the recovery encourage conscious changes? Or is recovery providing a false sense of security?” asks Samuelson, and adds: “The stakes are, of course, enormous, because – as everyone knows – the economic suffering of the Great Depression transformed many countries’ politics for the worse and led to World War II.”

Could this happen again? Yes. Could it happen in Denmark? Yes, why not. We have grown accustomed to decades of economic growth and prosperity, and we’ve been too comfortable to have the need for stigmatising and declaring enemies. That can change. For people in Thailand, Greece (or Iceland, for that matter), it’s a matter of life and death, of the ability to support yourself. That makes you desperate. And others could follow.

Come As You Are

During lunch today I had a look at a random article in Politiken, and something resounded in me when I read the following quote:

“When you enter, you can let go of everything. Lose all your inhibitions. You can be yourself, even come in your nightgown and morning hair and jump around, and maybe walk on stilts. No one will look at you stupidly. It’s just: ‘Welcome’.”

What she’s talking about is the youth subculture of “Hardstyle” – a growing lifestyle movement focusing on heavy dance music.

But what if people could say the same about church?

Why the Café Church Matters

At the upcoming business session of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Denmark in May, delegates will vote on whether to grant the Café Church in Copenhagen full church status, thus upgrading it from its current “company” status.

The move will doubtless be controversial to some people, since this congregation has had more than its fair share of criticism and gossip since its inception 10-15 years ago. On the other hand, it will be crucial to the future of Adventism in Denmark, not because of this individual church, but because of the vision it represents.

The Café Church is a new way of doing church which downplays certain typical traits (or oddities) and focuses on bringing the gospel to people with as few restrains as possible. Just as Paul became Greek for the Greeks, etc., it strives to become postmodern Copenhagen-ish for postmodern Copenhageners.

And of course there have been hiccups along the way. One of most talked about is the struggle with Adventist identity. But this is hardly unique to the Café Church. We all struggle somewhat with the issue of identity, and that’s not going to go away anytime soon. Here, at least, some people are honest in expressing their concerns about how the connection should be to the wider church body, or whether it should exist at all. But now the Café Church actually wants to be a part of the Danish Union. It is not necessarily an enthusiastic move (which is understandable, given the bumpy history), but it is sincere in wanting to embrace a wider fellowship, while maintaining its unique position.

The CC has been a pioneer, not only in Denmark (inspiring, among others, Aarhus Café Church, a big part of my life for many years), but also internationally, showing the world church community that fresh expressions of church are in fact possible, and essential to kingdom growth.

The decision on whether to include the Café Church into the Danish Union will be a final litmus test of the church’s willingness to embrace change and diversity. A rejection would signal, and result in, segmentation and streamlining. While this might enhance efficiency, since there would be only one right way of doing things, in the end the church would suffer immensely. The remaining church would be narrow in thought and expression, and its relevance to society would have to be reconsidered.

On the other hand, an affirmation would send a clear signal that there is hope for the future. It would express a belief that there are, in fact, ways to make the gospel relevant to a new era. This is not the only way – but it underlines the idea that there is not one way of doing things, but many.

I believe that the majority of church members in Denmark are actually in favour of fresh expressions and new ways of doing church. They may not all cherish a certain style, but they will embrace diversity and acknowledge that we are working in different ways toward the same goal.

Recently, I moved my own membership to the Café Church. And so the fate of my own new church body is at stake. But more than that, this is an opportunity to move forward, putting old grievances behind us and uniting in diversity for the sake of the gospel.