Author Archives: Elizaphanian

About Elizaphanian

Rector of West Mersea

The dream of independence

Posted on by


(checking ‘drafts’ on my blog – and discovering some things that I never published… this was originally written two years ago! Slightly updated)

At least, financial independence. Dave W sent me to this fascinating article. I’ve been mulling for quite some time about how to go about a) getting some of my thoughts put out in book form (mainly this), and b) whether I might be able to generate some income out of my photo-hobby. On the latter score I did use lulu.com to create a calendar some time ago, but only one person bought it, and if her reaction was the same as mine it was of significant disappointment at the quality of the end-product (even if mine is still on the wall right next to me as I type this post).

It seems to me that one of the great benefits of the cultural shift that digital technology has opened up is that the middle-man isn’t needed any more. (Not in every sphere – I’m sure we’ll see the return of middle-men in food distribution as a result of Peak Oil). However, for some work, and especially creative work, the middle-man adds very little of value. See Radiohead’s recent experiment in that regard.

Now, with regard to a book, there are clearly some things which publishers are rather good at doing (Kim Paffenroth makes some good points here). But it’s also possible to pay people directly to do such things, and not go via a publisher. I am now committed to going the self-publishing route, partly because of practicalities and timing, but partly also because of the independence that it allows. I’m going to be using this company. So far as I can tell the single thing that an established publishing house can provide is help with publicity and marketing. Given that I don’t expect vast numbers of people to buy my book, and I think that I am plugged in to sufficient networks to be able to sell enough copies to make it financially viable (around 400 I guess) I see no need to amend what I write in order to sell more copies (I remain open to an editor saying that I need to rewrite something because it’s incoherent of course!)

I’ll let you know how it all goes – I hope to go to press after Easter.

TBTM20100201

Posted on by


This is great: “There’s a big difference between the task of trying to sustain “civilisation” in its current form – supermarkets and all – which is what “sustainability” has largely come to mean, and the task of holding open a space for the things which make life worth living. I’d suggest that it’s this second task, in its many forms, which remains, after we’ve given up on false hopes. (Note that this doesn’t mean organising a campaign against supermarkets, which is the default mode of a lot of what’s called activism.)”
That resonated a very great deal with me!

Faze and phase etc

Posted on by

Pedant corner.

To be fazed is to be surprised, taken aback, knocked off one’s stride.
A phase refers to a period of time, part of a cycle.

I’ve noticed that a lot of people are now confusing the two.

And here’s some more:

To ensure an outcome is to make certain of it.
To insure an outcome is to guard against it, seek compensation if it happens.

To elicit something is to encourage it to emerge (eg a reply).
Something is illicit if it is illegal.

/pedantry

This is why the church is irrelevant to our crisis

Posted on by

“In my experience, there are at least two things essential to any viable community that the vast majority of Americans find completely unacceptable. The first is an accepted principle of authority; the second is a definite boundary between members and nonmembers.”
John Michael Greer on great form.

This is something I’ve been thinking about a very great deal recently – and is likely to form a big part of my talk at the conference next month – and I see it as the legacy of cultural Protestantism, ie the emphasis upon private judgement. There are very great positive aspects to this – nobody should come between the believer and God – but there are also very great downsides. It underlies the ‘ten thousand things’ which is the modern Western church; it is the theology which undergirds world-raping consumerism; it is why the church can teach all it likes about how bad the world has become but will never be able to act as a coherent body and do something about it.

As JMG points out, nothing will change because people don’t want it to change. They don’t want it to change because that is how their value system has been structured – and that value system is one reproduced every week in our western church, reproduced, for example, whenever there are arguments about worship and people ‘getting something’ from it. It is why my teaching about Tesco has been the most controversial (and practically repudiated) thing I’ve ever said in church. It is part of what needs to die – what God will destroy – in order that our hearts of stone might be replaced by flesh.

I keep thinking of Moses in the desert. One aspect of the ten commandments isn’t their specific content, but simply the fact that a community accepted them as their boundary and identity. We have far more equivalents of the 10 commandments than we need – I even came up with my own one here – but what is missing is any sense that a community can be bound over by such a structure. Which is one reason why I’m thinking about getting the church to study the Rule of St Benedict for a while…

/rant

TBTM20100126

Posted on by


“The fact is that if the clergy of the future are to be team leaders, they must also be allowed to be team managers, and this means being allowed independence to exercise local initiative, authority to commission local leadership and financial control to fund what they propose doing.
And that is where the problems will come, because I cannot see the Church of England’s current hierarchy allowing any such thing. What we will have instead, I fear, is centralized control, outside interference and fiscal starvation.”

See also his follow-on post: “The reality is that the erstwhile ‘vicar’ is increasingly exercising an ‘episcopal’ role. But that being the case, the vicar needs episcopal authority. In short, we need to get back to something nearer what is generally acknowledged by scholars (and was recognized by the English Reformers), namely seeing the local presbyter as also the local bishop.
Indeed, if the need is for more ministers and ministry, why shouldn’t there be more bishops? I would guess that a typical rural dean today probably overseas a population as large as that of some medieval bishops. Why not go the whole way and make them into bishops who can ordain local ministers accordingly?”

I haven’t done a TBTM for quite some time. I think I’ll be getting back into the habit over the coming weeks.