theConnexion.net home | board | compass | prayer | eCard   

Weblog Archives: April 2003

Wednesday, April 30, 2003

Despite all the effort that's been put into food education over the last few years, the British diet continues to get worse. (Source: The Independent)

Government figures released recently show that consumption of meat products and processed potatoes has increased, whereas fresh fruit, vegetables and fish continue to decline. The amount of calories in the British diet coming from fat has also continued to increase. How does this make any sense? In part, the explanation must be the confusing messages which food manufacturers continue to send out. One example is the recent promotional campaign by Cadbury UK which has tokens printed on chocolate wrappers that schools can collect and swap for sports equipment. Get your children fit by persuading them to eat as much chocolate as possible. Nice one.

One newspaper calculated that under the scheme, one set of posts and nets for volleyball would require tokens from 5,440 bars.
The Food Commission pointed out this would entail children spending more than £2,000 on chocolate and wolfing their way through 1.25 million calories. Source: BBC
Meanwhile, arguments continue about the resourcing of the NHS, and everyone's expectations of it continue to rise. What does it take to persuade people that health is not something you buy, but it is at least in large measure something for which you have to take responsibility? The food industry must bear some of the blame for British eating habits, but there is no escaping the fact that every adult is responsible for what they munch. Equally, parents have a responsibility to see that their children eat sensibly. It might not be what they want -- but they don't know what's best.

Bah!

Posted by Richard @ 09:47 PM BST [Link]

Tuesday, April 29, 2003

I've been spending the last ten days as News Guy™ and Contestant Support for the online game show The Ark.

It's a great job, but man am I tired. It's twenty to one, and I've only just finished work for tonight. I've even been dreaming about it...

Posted by Wood @ 11:53 PM BST [Link]

Yesterday, the Gutless Pacificist raised the subject of the death penalty, and the discussion continues here. I don't think I've ever mentioned the subject at connexions before, but regular readers (both of them!) won't be surprised that I'm not in favour of it. Let me briefly say why.

For the record, I don't base my opinion on "the sanctity of life". I'm convinced that there are worse things than dying, and it would be a strange Christian minister who thought otherwise. I'm against the death penalty first because I see no evidence that it is effective in reducing violent crime. It doesn't have a deterrent effect, and I'm sure I have seen evidence somewhere which suggests that murder actually rises appreciably after a well-publicised execution. It's only purpose is revenge, and revenge has no place in a Christian value-system.
It might be more acceptable if the penalty were administered swiftly, but the practice of keeping people on death row for many years must surely constitute "cruel and unusual punishment".
Yes, I know that the death penalty is laid down in the Old Testament for certain offences, and neither Jesus nor Paul addressed the issue directly. (Though there is, of course, the one incident when Jesus did intervene in what would have been a lawful stoning and the guilty party walked away free) But the society of ancient Israel is not 21st century Britain or America. If you want to claim OT sanction for the execution of murderers and rapists, you have to explain why it is that the penalty does not extend to, for example, those who curse their father or mother, adulterers and blasphemers, or why it is only the rape of virgins engaged to be married which carries a capital sentence (Deuteronomy 22).
Finally (for now) I don't believe that any system of justice is so perfect it can never make a mistake. In our media-driven age, it is too much to expect that jurors will judge guilt or innocence on the basis of the evidence presented to the court. That alone is reason enough for me.

Posted by Richard @ 04:28 PM BST [Link]

Monday, April 28, 2003

Josh Claybourn put me on to this article, It had to be said. Religion is a dangerous thing. And I have to say, "I agree!" Sort of, anyway.

Zuly made a very commendable reply, but what caught my eye in the article was this extraordinary claim:

Mother Teresa would have been saintly without the New Testament. Martin Luther King would have been a paragon of eloquent courage without having been baptized. Gandhi would have overturned an empire leaning only on his walking stick.
It's a bold claim, but I beg to differ. To assume that you can seperate people's beliefs from their behaviour is, I think, obvious nonsense. Without the faith which motivated them, these would have been completely different people. Maybe better, maybe worse -- but certainly different. Faith is more than an intellectual assent to a series of propositions, though it does include that. But at it's heart faith is a commitment which will drive and motivate every part of the believer's life. It's just dishonest to claim otherwise. You might as well say that Hitler would have been a lovely bloke if he hadn't happened to be a fascist.

But still, I agree with opening proposition. "Religion" - which for me means a commitment to follow Jesus - is a dangerous thing. Dangerous to self-interest and greed. Dangerous to alternative demands of allegiance, be they social or political. Dangerous to ideologies which claim racial or cultural superiority over others. Dangerous to the smug and self-satisfied. And, above all, dangerous to those so blinded by their certainties that the opinions and sensitivities of others are treated as being of no account.

It had to be said.

Posted by Richard @ 04:09 PM BST [Link]

I'm pleased to report that I've suffered no ill effects from my evening in the saddle yesterday, but I'm starting to think I should make the ride in August a bit more challenging. Perhaps I'll make it some species of a "figure of 8" rather than a straight line affair. At least then I'd be able to start and finish from home. But "finish" might well be the operative word...

If anyone has any experience of preparing for this sort of event I'd be glad of any handy hints you might have.

Posted by Richard @ 02:56 PM BST [Link]

From the BBC, 10 things we didn't know this time last week

Curly-haired Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein's chief negotiator, is a familiar sight to news consumers in the UK and Republic of Ireland. But how far can his fame actually spread? A clue from Esquire magazine, to whom he told the tale of "the time a few years back when a Chinese woman spotted me at the airport in New York. 'Look, look,' she announced, 'it's Art Garfunkel'."

:o)

Posted by Richard @ 12:02 PM BST [Link]

Sunday, April 27, 2003

the Big Ride now looks very feasible. I went to my evening preaching appointment by bicycle, a round trip of 32 miles. So I'm feeling pleased with myself.
Tired, but pleased with myself.

I only hope I can walk in the morning...

Posted by Richard @ 10:55 PM BST [Link]

Saturday, April 26, 2003

Even more unbelievable than the story below is the news that there are three children being held at Guantanamo Bay. The boys, aged between 13 and 15 are being held as enemy combatants after being captured in Afghanistan. On the radio today the General in charge of Camp Delta was quoted as saying that they had been coerced into fighting. It is hardly surprising that there has been a certain amount of disapproval at the imprisonment.
Can it really be right to hold children this way?

Posted by Richard @ 11:00 PM BST [Link]

If this is true, and I've so far not seen it reported anywhere else, it would be extraordinary. Not that "The White House may have had a reason to go to war with Iraq that had nothing to do with whether or not Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction" or the hold-the-front-page news that "the Sept. 11 Attacks Changed Everything", but that the Bush Administration is prepared, even stealthily, to admit it so soon.

Link via Josh Claybourn and the Agitator.

To be honest, I do find it a bit hard to believe -- I wonder if the BBC will pick it up?

Posted by Richard @ 11:23 AM BST [Link]

Thursday, April 24, 2003

You'll never guess! My blog's won an award! I'm speechless with emotion.

It's the prestigious "The best sermon-in-comment-form from a Methodist who is also a Buzzcocks fan" award from Bloggedy blog, so hotly contested it has never been awarded before. And, maybe, never will be again.

Isn't that something?

Posted by Richard @ 08:39 PM BST [Link]

Rachel has a fine piece headed Our God reigns but not in Economics, including this great little story:

In the Middle Ages a monk from Germany made a pilgrimage to Rome. There he bought a silver chalice to take back to his village church. On the way home he fell in with a trade caravan, and one night got talking to a couple of the merchants. In the course of the conversation he showed the two merchants his chalice, and told them how much he had paid for it.

The merchants congratulated him on his purchase. He had, they said, been very fortunate. The chalice was worth much more than the amount he had paid. They were tickled by the fact that an inexperienced monk had been cleverer than they had. Although they were merchants they had not had such a good stroke of luck on their trip.

The monk listened carefully to what they had to say. The following day he got up and started out, but not for his home town. He went back to Rome. There he searched for the seller of the chalice in order to pay him a just price.

Thought provoking stuff. Head over to Rachel's place and read the whole piece.

Posted by Richard @ 03:11 PM BST [Link]

Wednesday, April 23, 2003

It has been too long since we heard from Charles Wesley:

Come, sinners, to the Gospel feast;
Let every soul be Jesus’ guest.
Ye need not one be left behind,
For God hath bid all humankind.

Sent by my Lord, on you I call;
The invitation is to all.
Come, all the world! Come, sinner, thou!
All things in Christ are ready now.

Come, all ye souls by sin oppressed,
Ye restless wanderers after rest;
Ye poor, and maimed, and sick, and blind,
In Christ a hearty welcome find.

Come, and partake the Gospel feast;
Be saved from sin; in Jesus rest;
O taste the goodness of your God,
And eat His flesh, and drink His blood!

You vagrant souls, on you I call;
(O that my voice could reach you all!)
You all may now be justified,
You all may live, for Christ hath died.

My message as from God receive;
Ye all may come to Christ and live.
O let His love your hearts constrain,
Nor permit Him to die in vain.

His love is mighty to compel;
His conquering love consent to feel,
Yield to His love’s resistless power,
And fight against your God no more.

See Him set forth before your eyes,
That precious, bleeding Sacrifice!
His offered benefits embrace,
And freely now be saved by grace.

This is the time, no more delay!
This is the Lord’s accepted day.
Come thou, this moment, at His call,
And live for Him Who died for all.

Posted by Richard @ 10:53 PM BST [Link]

Shame on me.
I almost forgot it was St George's Day today.

Posted by Richard @ 10:50 PM BST [Link]

Tuesday, April 22, 2003

Joel Fuhrmann isn't someone that I agree with alot of the time, so it should be no surprise that even our opinion about the definitive Doctor Who is different. Writing in a comment on another post, he said

...the Sylvester McCoy series was getting pretty weird. I liked him a lot better than the previous Doctor, Collin Davis, I think, but no one was as good as Tom Baker. And no companion was ever as good as Leela
I humbly beg to differ. Jon Pertwee is The Doctor, no question about it. Isn't that obvious to everyone??

There again, I'm old enough (just!) to remember when JP took on the role from Patrick Troughton and being very uncertain that the programme would ever be any good again. Joel's favourite Tom Baker is favoured by lots of others too, and there are good reasons why. I've even met someone who thought that Peter Davison was the best of the bunch, and I had to hold him down while I washed out his mouth with soap. Sylvester McCoy (and companion Ace) should have been the best, but imho weren't given sufficient chance. ("Remembrance of the Daleks" is an absolute cracker).

So why do people hold such firm opinions about this vital matter? Is there some objective test that can applied, some measure of acting, storylines and scripts that can provide a true test? Of course not - aside from the certainty that the execrable 1990's TV movie was far and away the worst Doctor Who experience ever, everything else must be a matter of taste and opinion.

This is a long way from the usual subjects of connexions and, like the Monty Python post the other day, you may wonder where this is going. After all, in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter which view you take. It isn't something you are very likely to end up in a pub brawl about, at least as long as the pub you're in isn't anywhere near a Doctor Who convention. Most people would be happy to tolerate a disagreement.

My theory is that for at least 90% of people, the Doctor they think is the best is the one they grew up on (which is why Paul McGann hasn't got a prayer). The Doctor that saved the day when you were a kid, who took on the Daleks, the Cybermen and all the rest while you were doing your growing up is going to be the one you appreciate most. What I think I'm saying is that for most people their reaction to the Doctor is culturally conditioned.

There are many disagreements which Christians find it much harder to tolerate. Baptism, eucharist and ministry. The place of the scriptures. All sorts of stuff. We find ourselves getting "hot under the collar", questioning the other's faith, resorting to sarcasm and stereotype to belittle someone we perceive as an enemy who we ought to be embracing as a brother (or sister). We are often too ready to be blinded by our certainties and so miss the good gifts that God offers to us through the various branches of the Church.

None of this means that the there are no "wrong answers". Don't start portraying me as some sort of "who cares" relativist.

But I'm convinced that the way we tolerate disagreement and learn to work together anyway is a major test of the reality of our discipleship.
You, of course, may disagree.

Posted by Richard @ 10:53 PM BST [Link]

Sunday, April 20, 2003

The Lord is risen!
He is risen indeed! Alleluia!

It has been a busy 24 hours -- which I suppose is hardly surprising for a Methodist minister at Easter. I led an overnight vigil with a small group of folk at church, beginning at 10.00pm last night. There were acts of worship at 10, 12, 2 and 4 in the church, then we met with a rather larger group on the beach in Swansea Bay for a sunrise service at 6am. Between the formal worship time was space for silent reflection in the sactuary, and not very silent fellowship in the kitchen. After the service on the beach we gathered again for breakfast at church. Then there were 2 more services, a "quiet" communion at 8.30 and a family celebration of communion at 10.30.

Spiritually, it has been everything I hope an Easter Sunday celebration will be. Physically, I'm ...
Well, let's just say I'm a teeny bit tired.

Posted by Richard @ 06:32 PM BST [Link]

Saturday, April 19, 2003

From the sacred texts of the cult of Monty Python, viii, "Full frontal nudity" (first broadcast December 14, 1969):

Customer: Hello, I wish to register a complaint... Hello? Miss?

Shopkeeper: What do you mean, miss?

Customer: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint.

Shopkeeper: Sorry, we're closing for lunch.

Customer: Never mind that my lad. I wish to complain about this parrot what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.

Shopkeeper: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

C: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it!

S: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.

C: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

S: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage!

C: The plumage don't enter into it. It's stone dead.

S: No, no! It's just resting!

You're entitled to wonder what this has to do with today. I've just done a Google search on "Holy Week events" to see what's beeing said about today. I've discovered that there is a stock phrase in use: Jesus rested in the tomb while his disciples observed the Sabbath

I hate to be blunt, but that's pious nonsense. It makes it sound as if Jesus has just gone for a little lie down. But he's not resting. He's dead.

I mean, like, really dead. Isn't that the whole point?

Posted by Richard @ 11:45 AM BST [Link]

Friday, April 18, 2003

I've posted a Good Friday reflection over at blogs4God. Those who were with me this morning will notice it bears more than a passing resemblance to my sermon.

Posted by Richard @ 02:01 PM BST [Link]

Good Friday

Mark 15: 25-42

It was the third hour when they crucified him.
The written notice of the charge against him read: the king of the jews.
They crucified two robbers with him, one on his right and one on his left.
Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads and saying, So! You who are going to destroy the temple and build it in three days, come down from the cross and save yourself!
In the same way the chief priests and the teachers of the law mocked him among themselves. He saved others, they said, but he can't save himself! Let this Christ, this King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.
Those crucified with him also heaped insults on him.

At the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour.
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voiceEloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?--which means, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
When some of those standing near heard this, they said, Listen, he's calling Elijah.
One man ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to take him down, he said.
With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last.

The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.

And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and saw how he died, he said, Surely this man was the Son of God!
Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome.
In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there.

It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath).

Posted by Richard @ 10:10 AM BST [Link]

Thursday, April 17, 2003

I've received a fairly curt email from the folk at the Crown Flag Commission, who I mentioned the other day. It reads

RESOURCING THOSE WHO EXTEND THE KINGDOM

We are a resourcing ministry.

Net income received by the Crown Flag Commission,
after covering our operating costs,
goes to resource front line ministries
which extend and strengthen the Lord's kingdom

So now you know.

Posted by Richard @ 11:01 PM BST [Link]

My friend Pat works for a bank, and like me you might have thought that banks were fairly, well, staid places to earn a crust. But apparently not. The bank Pat works for has tried to liven things up a bit by importing a scheme from America. It's called "fish", because it was first used on Seattle Fish Market where, says Pat, "the employees felt they had such a mundane rotten job, that they needed to introduce an element of fun into their day." Here's what Pat says now happens in the bank:

...each member of our staff (about 250 in all) has been given a multi-coloured soft toy fish which we are encouraged to throw, to be caught by work colleagues, at least five times a day. (in Seattle they throw real fish!) We've been subjected to two lengthy videos made by the fishmongers and several presentations. Under the fish philosophy you Play, Choose your attitude, Be there, Commit (yourself to the philosophy) Be it etc. All our departments have to have fish related names,(prawn stars, loan sharks etc) fish jokes abound, and whilst joining in is not compulsory, if you don't it's bound to go against you.
There's the rub, isn't it? "You'll have fun, or else!" I understand where all this is coming from. A happy office has a good chance of being an efficient office. A place where people actually want to work will get stuff done. But management techniques imported from outside with even a hint of compulsion are bound to breed resentment and, ultimately, prove counterproductive. It would surely be much better to allow members of a particular office to "customise" their own workspace and, to an extent, working practices.
But even then, as long as the company reserves the right to make large scale redundancies in favour of cheaper employees elsewhere, it is nonsense to expect a workforce to be completely committed. In these days of "competitive tendering" and "contracting out", it is easy to forget that loyalty cuts both ways.

Posted by Richard @ 10:15 PM BST [Link]

I've made a really important discovery that I need to share.

I'd thought that the perfect sandwich was peanut butter, banana and cheese.
But I was wrong.

The perfect sandwich is honey, peanut butter, banana and cheese.

Only don't tell Jayne. She just doesn't understand haute cuisine.

Posted by Richard @ 02:58 PM BST [Link]

Through Holy Week with Mark's Gospel

Mark 14: 22-42

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, Take it; this is my body. Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many," he said to them. "I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God."
When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.

"You will all fall away," Jesus told them, "for it is written:
'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.'
But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee."
Peter declared, "Even if all fall away, I will not."
"I tell you the truth, Jesus answered, "today--yes, tonight--before the cock crows twice you yourself will disown me three times."
But Peter insisted emphatically, "Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you." And all the others said the same.

They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples, "Sit here while I pray."
He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled.
"My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death, he said to them. Stay here and keep watch."
Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him.
"Abba, Father," he said, "everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will."
Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."
Once more he went away and prayed the same thing.
When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him.
Returning the third time, he said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Enough! The hour has come. Look, the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners."
Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!"

Posted by Richard @ 12:00 PM BST [Link]

BBC News this morning did a bit on the Stevens Report, the current inquiry into the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane in 1989.

Seems that the Police colluded with the Loyalist paramilitaries who murdered him. Defending alleged terrorists in court is not punishable by death in any democracy I'm aware of. That police officers could think so - people whose job it is to uphold the due process of the law - and that they would even go so far as to allow (and maybe even encourage) another bunch of terrorists to "whack him" (in the words of one of the UFF members who claimed responsibility) depresses me more than words could say.

Posted by Wood @ 09:18 AM BST [Link]

Wednesday, April 16, 2003

Through Holy Week with Mark's Gospel

Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny.
Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on."

Posted by Richard @ 09:16 AM BST [Link]

You might have noticed that there was a small skirmish between our Wood and Mark Byron over a piece that Wood wrote last week.

Mark has now written two further replies, "Will reconstruction work?" and "How moral is our foreign policy?" which, though I don't agree with him, I have to say are models of how it is possible to put a contrary point of view without blowing raspberries at the other fellow. And it is Good Stuff.

(I'm sorry I couldn't link directly to the individual items. The blogspot permalinks weren't working this morning)

On a different subject -- a big "Welcome Back" to Ivan the Crank!

Posted by Richard @ 09:02 AM BST [Link]

Sorry about the double -entry. I hit enter twice and can't take it back. It's a lot like things we say that we wish we hadn't.

Ivan

Posted by Ivanthecrank @ 02:07 AM BST [Link]

I accidentally double-clicked my previous entry and gave readers a chance to see double. Sorry about that. Ivan

Posted by Ivanthecrank @ 02:02 AM BST [Link]

A few weeks ago we had to have our hard drive reformatted and I lost a lot of my "favorites" as well as my ability to get to this blog site. It's good to be back. I've got some rambling musings to share, so here goes:

1. Our church as a men's softball team playing in a local church softball league. Our team is made up of players from their mid-thirties to age 79. Our older players are our healthier players since they play in their retirement communities, so for the first few games the younger players were getting the injuries. All the other teams have mostly younger players who also play in industrial leagues. Needless to say, we are not very competitive. We usually lose by 20 runs and some get quite discouraged. Tonight, we had to borrow players from the other team and ended up losing 9-3 and had a great time doing so. Instead of our usual negative attitudes, we actually had a great time. SO maybe, it really is true that it's not a matter of whether you win or lose, but how you play the game!

2. We just finished our annual Easter pageant on Saturday and Sunday nights. When I first came to our church, I was young enough and skinny enough to get recruited to play Jesus (despite the red hair). Last year I was Nicodemus and this year I was promoted to the lofty position of Pontius Pilate. I suspect Judas Iscariot is right around the corner! During the weeks of rehearsals I kind of took the whole thing as one more thing on my plate, but during the dress rehearsal and the performances, it finally got ahold of me and made me think about the difficult position Pilate was in and many people are in when they have to choose between a Jesus who doesn't meet our expectations of a messiah or king and a Baarabas who, because he takes a popular stand, is seen as a hero. That's how sin clouds a lot of our decisions.

3. I hope that now that the war is "over" that it was not just part one of a three or four country tour of the Middle East and a certain part of an Asian penninsula. Instead, I hope we put our energies into helping the Iraqi people build a new, free nation for themselves.

4. As we head into Maunday or Holy Thursday, Good Friday and then Easter, may we all spend time in the Upper Room with Jesus and His disciples, waiting in the courtyards with Peter during the trial and at the foot of the cross during the crucifixion. I hope we don't move to quickly from the triumph of Palm Sunday to the ultimate triumph of Easter. We can't truly get there without going to the cross. Without that, there would be no Easter. May God bless you all as we all go through this Holy Week as pilgrims to the cross and then the empty tomb so that Sunday we can proclaim: "Christ is Risen! He is risen indeed!" Peace: Ivan The Crank

Posted by Ivanthecrank @ 02:02 AM BST [Link]

Tuesday, April 15, 2003

Like every other user of the internet who hasn't been over careful with his email address, every day I get quantities of spam. Often it comes from kind people in Africa who wan to share their millions with me. Sometimes it offers the opportunity to augment my anatomy or fulfill some fantasy I didn't know I had. Most days there is some wonderful new way to get millions of visitors to my website. Spam has become a fact of internet life, and I don't suppose it'll be going away anytime soon.

But there are times when I don't know whether to laugh out loud, or put my fist through the monitor. Today I had a little note from The Crown Flag Commission which offers to provide me with THE MAJESTIC NEW EMBLEM FOR THE CHURCH OF THE 21st CENTURY, a smart gold crown on a red background -- much more noble than the stupid fish that Christians have been using for the last little while. Apparently It was imparted to some ministers during an awesome time of prayer so I'd better hurry along and get one. Sadly, I haven't been able to find out where the proceeds from sales will go, but I'm sure it's a worthy cause. Especially as

Every flag that is issued by The Crown Flag Commission is prayed on, and a blessing conferred upon it, so that even if it is not flown, it may be used by the individual during their prayer time, or draped upon their bed as they sleep, or knelt upon as they intercede


Lord, give me strength...

Posted by Richard @ 04:03 PM BST [Link]

Through Holy Week with Mark's Gospel

Mark 12: 13-17

Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. They came to him and said, "Teacher, we know you are a man of integrity. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not? Should we pay or shouldn't we?"
But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. "Why are you trying to trap me?" he asked. "Bring me a denarius and let me look at it." They brought the coin, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
"Caesar's," they replied.
Then Jesus said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."
And they were amazed at him.

Posted by Richard @ 09:55 AM BST [Link]

Me again.

Back to my recent exchange with Mark Byron.

After what looked like an apology (I'm certainly taking it as one, anyway), he wrote about "idiotarians", these people being, as far as I can make out, people who write stuff Conservative Americans disagree with (psh. And they wonder why they get so little love).

Dr Byron wrote this:

"I have a standard line when I start my classes-there's no such thing as a dumb question. There are ignorant questions. Dumb means you can't learn; ignorant means you haven't yet learned. Ignorance is curable. Our "idiotarians" aren't dumb, just either ignorant and/or misguided."

This is what I posted in reply to him on this site; If I may be so bold, I think it bears repeating, so... I'm repeating it here, edited slightly for grammar.

It's the "ignorant and misguided" part that intrigues me. You see, I think the biggest mistake both Liberals and Conservatives (using the American definitions of the words) make again and again is to assume that

"If Liberals/Conservatives (delete as applicable) really knew all the facts and had a grasp of the meanings behind it, they wouldn't be Liberals/Conservatives (delete as applicable)."

But the thing is, there are both Liberals and Conservatives who aren't ignorant. And in fact they have exactly the same information and grasp of things... they just come to a different conclusion.

This, I've found, is exacerbated by people from different countries. We have assumptions and ideals which are very, very different to each other. People don't realise just how utterly different in outlook people are on opposite sides of the Atlantic.

Having an accurate grasp of the facts does not guarantee the holding of any one particular opinion. Upbringing and cultural background play a huge part, too.

Now I'm sure you, as someone who knows about this sort of thing for a living, do know a whole lot more about this than I, a humble journo, do.. But it's arrogance to assume that knowing and understanding the facts is going to mean that only one opinion can be held.

Posted by Wood @ 08:51 AM BST [Link]

Monday, April 14, 2003

Through Holy Week with Mark's Gospel

Mark 11: 15-19

After Jesus and his disciples reached Jerusalem, he went into the temple and began chasing out everyone who was selling and buying. He turned over the tables of the moneychangers and the benches of those who were selling doves. Jesus would not let anyone carry things through the temple. Then he taught the people and said, "The Scriptures say, `My house should be called a place of worship for all nations.' But you have made it a place where robbers hide!"
The chief priests and the teachers of the Law of Moses heard what Jesus said, and they started looking for a way to kill him. They were afraid of him, because the crowds were completely amazed at his teaching.
That evening, Jesus and the disciples went outside the city.
Here's a reminder, if we needed one, that the "Gentle Jesus, meek and mild" of the old children's hymn doesn't bear much resemblance to the Jesus of the gospels. Why was Jesus so angry? After all, both the money-changers and those selling doves were necessary to the functioning of the temple. It's possible that concern for the purity of Jewish worship on the approach to Passover was preventing gentiles from using the Temple as a place of prayer. At the same time, the temple is apparently being used as a short-cut, expressly forbidden by the Mishnah. So when Jesus would not let anyone carry things through the temple it might be that he is demanding scrupulous fulfilment of a law about which the temple authorities had become lax. What angers Jesus is whatever indicates that the people are insincere in their worship of God, whether it be over-scrupulousness or laxity, Both are to be found in the church today. And both, I believe, still move Jesus to anger.

Posted by Richard @ 10:08 PM BST [Link]

If you think you can do better than most world leaders, you could do worse than to try The Nation States Game.

You set up a country, you try and turn it into the utopia of your dreams. Every day, you get a proposal for a new law or action, and how you vote changes how your country does.

It's fairly well-balanced (both left- and right-wing states have a pretty equal chance of doing well - or badly) and quite fun, in a vaguely diverting and not-really-that-realistic-at-all sort of way. My own Pet State has exemplary civil rights and political freedoms... but early mistakes meant that my economy went down the tubes. No surprises there, then. :-)

Posted by Wood @ 04:11 PM BST [Link]

Richard alerted me to the fact that Mark Byron apparently "fisked" me for my one post on the war a couple days ago.

What annoys me about it is not that he disagrees, but that the guy appears not to have read what I was saying (one question: which part of the word "ambivalent" do you not understand?). I get called an idiot by a complete stranger for an opinion that I don't hold. What gives?

This is my fault. Hardly anyone bothers to read long posts. They get halfway down and then decide they've got your measure.

I've been on the net for about six years now, and I thought I'd realised that. Clearly not.

Posted by Wood @ 08:58 AM BST [Link]

More good stuff from Bene Diction.

Posted by Richard @ 12:06 AM BST [Link]

Sunday, April 13, 2003

I need your help.

The Methodist Church in Swansea & Gower has 11 churches with about 30 miles seperating them as the crow flies. I have the privilege (!!) of being the Superintendent Minister.
This year, along with the rest of Methodism, we'll be celebrating John Wesley's 300th birthday with a number of events, and if you're in Swansea do feel free to join us for any of them. I was thinking about Wesley, wandering about the place on his horse, and feeling very gratified that I live in age that doesn't require me to spend any time on horseback. Dangerous animals, horses. I do, however, think of my bicycle as the trusty steed, and it has the great advantage over a horse of being possesed of neither teeth nor hooves. And it isn't so far to fall. So I'm glad Wesley had his horse, but he's welcome to it. I'll stick to my bike.
Get to the point Richard!
I've been challenged to ride my bike across the Circuit in a day, visiting every chapel and preaching a sermon in each. It started as a joke, but the idea grew and now it looks like it'll be happening this August. Although it is obviously a bit of a stunt, I hope it will be more than that. I've started serious training and a strict dietary regimine (I run to the car instead of walking, and have swapped one of my 20 daily cups of coffee for a glass of water), but it isn't the ride that concerns me, despite the hills in these parts. I'm much more anxious about the preaching, which I'll be taking every bit as seriously as my normal Sunday duties. I shan't be doing 11 different sermons (there are limits!), but I couldn't stand to listen to myself say the same thing 11 times either. So I've got some praying to do.

That's where you can help me. Suggestions for sermon ideas would be gratefully received of course, but it's your prayers I'm really after. For the ride, my ideal weather would be overcast (but not raining), cool and still. Everyone else will want it to be hot and sunny. So let's get a head start on those prayers -- it might make all the difference! And seriously, I would value your prayers that I'll have the strength I need and that the event will be a good witness to the gospel.

Posted by Richard @ 06:12 PM BST [Link]

There is a scandal lurking in the Christian blogosphere.

I've noticed that at the weekends, the traffic at connexions drops considerably. Sundays I can understand. Most of my readers are Chistians. They do church and stuff on Sundays. But what about Saturdays? Can it really be that my respectable readership does most of its surfing in the office during working hours? The three of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

And it isn't just connexions. My impression is that traffic at blogs4God, another site where I have a bit of input, drops more than a little at the weekend too.

Remember kids. It's only a short step from surfing the net on company time to 'borrowing" paper clips and ball points.
Before you know it you've embezzled millions and you, your wife, children and most of your living relatives have been taken to jail.

Be careful.

Posted by Richard @ 12:00 AM BST [Link]

Friday, April 11, 2003

OK. I've been reading with interest recent entries about the war. I've refrained from commenting, mainly because everyone's got an opinion, right? What does it matter that there's one more. You want a (pretty acerbic) anti-war view from an American, you go see Miss Monica. You want a (just as acerbic) pro-war view from a Brit, go read ReAndymator's blog. I refrained from talking about it, and said why a ways back on my own site. This is going to be my only post on the war.

In private I made two predictions:
*That The Americans and British would be in and out in days;
*That no WMDs would be found.

The first was actually inaccurate - it took a little longer to stomp the Iraqis. I honestly couldn't understand how anyone could think that the world's greatest war machine (and it's allies, otherwise known as "target practice") could possibly fail to crush Iraq in the shortest possible time. The second... well, we're going to have to wait and see with that one.

But then, it's easy to say, "I told you so", innit? Especially if I didn't tell you so in the first place. :-)

One reason I kept schtum is because I've been really ambivalent about the war. Saddam is a murdering sicko, right? It's madness to even suggest for a minute that the Americans are anywhere nearly as bad as he is (even though - and mark this well - the vast majority of the people in the Middle East, who hate Saddam, consider them to be far, far worse).

I believe that it was right to topple Saddam, and I rejoice that it didn't take very long (although I do predict that the mopping up operations may take a whole lot longer - think Khmer Rouge longer).

These are the reasons why I'm ambivalent.

1. Moral HighGrounding

What upsets me is the attribution of a moral dimension to the motives of the US and UK governments. No one is toppling Saddam Hussein for altruistic reasons. Before you go, "Oh, here we go again, he's talking about oil," hear me out. It's not about oil.

Fact: the UK and US supported and subsidised Saddam Hussein's government in the 80s.

Fact: Saddam has always been an evil mass-murdering dictator. Back in the 80s, he had torture chambers, right. He was killing Kurds right left and centre. He's not changed his ways.

The UK and US governments seemed to do the getting-in-bed-with-evil-dictators thing a lot back in the day - Pinochet springs to mind, for example. The principle at play was "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". This principle is the primary reason for most of the messes the West is in, and the reason why other nations so cordially hate us. We're at war with Argentina, we join up with Chile's mad evil dictator. We're in a bad way with Iran, we join up with Iraq. We're not so keen on the USSR, we train the Taleban guerillas fighting them.

We are the two most hated nations on Earth. We are, respectively, seen by 95% of the people on Earth as The Evil Empire, and The Evil Empire's Prison Bitch.

Sad but true. Part of the reason for this is that we are rightly perceived by (for example) Islamic nations as unprincipled in our choice of allies. We back a country up, then when it suits us, we stomp them. Sure, the Islamic states hate Saddam's guts... but they hate us more. Meanwhile, whatever you might think of states run by Sharia Law (and I wouldn't want to live in one), one thing is true: their alliances are made on principles... and they are kept.

If we were really doing this because Saddam is a Bad Guy, we'd have sorted him out back in the 80s. Along with Pinochet and the nuts who run Indonesia, and all the other countries the unprincipled right-wing nuts who ran our respective countries in the 80s enlisted to be on our side.

There is no moral reason why we did what we did. No government ever goes to war if they do not consider it in their interests to do so (and yes, that even includes WWII - go read up on it if you don't believe me). We did not "suddenly see the error of our ways".

Look at it through the eyes of the people of the Middle East. The Brits come and comprehensively stomp everyone throughout the nineteenth century. They bleed the Middle East dry, steal all the best ancient monuments (ever been to the British Museum?), crush dissent, murder, torture, and grab any piece of land that comes their way. WWII happens, and Britain finally goes, but only after installing Israel on top of Palestine. The US are accomplices in this. The US then back up this state which (in the opinions of the Middle Eastern people) has no business being there in a couple of wars, and then supports the Second Most Evil State in the region in a war against a principled Islamic state. We may not think like this, but I from what I've read and seen, I am pretty positive that the people in the Islamic states do.

We have crushed Saddam like a bug (again, it boggles that anyone could think that any other outcome would be possible) because it is expedient. No more, no less. We have a power base in the Gulf outside of Israel. We are trying to say to the other nations in the region, "Hey, look - we can crush the bad guys too!" which I don't think is going to wash, frankly. And we are attacking Iraq because after 9/11, we're flippin' well going to have to attack someone. Oh, and there's some oil there, too. But to be honest, the oil's a red herring.

So, while I welcome Saddam's fall, I just wish that the US and UK goverments would actually be honest about their reasons rather than to adopt a moral high ground that just isn't there.

2. The Quick Fix
Yes, the Iraqis are now celebrating.

Last week, Saddam (or someone very like him) went out on the streets of Baghdad, and he got an ecstatic reception too. How come the same people cheered Saddam one day, and then US the other?

Simple. The people are cheering for the men with the biggest guns.

We often making the mistake of assuming that everyone in the world basically has a little Libertarian Westerner just dying to break out. But these people have never lived in a democracy. They have no reason to think that a democracy's any better, and probably if you asked some of the better informed ones, they'd tell you that democracy was a decadent Western invention. They cheer for the people in charge. They cheer for the people with the tanks. They just do.

And isn't even that they don't mean it - in their culture, you honestly and wholly give your alliegiance to the people in charge, because that's the Right Thing To Do.

I'm absolutely positive that things will be better for them now that the US and their Moving Targets (sorry, I mean the UK) are in charge. The question is: are the Iraqis going to think that?

You can go, "Duh! It's obvious! Of course they'll realise!" But I honestly don't know if they will. There will be a honeymoon period, and then the difficulty of running a state like Iraq will just rear its bushy-moustached head.

You simply can't assume that it's going to work if you just slot in your mode of government. (tangent: my recent exchange here with Mr "Religious Left Watch" got me thinking: the reason socialism only works in some countries - and it does, Sweden being the most obvious example - is because the people have to buy into it. if the people of a nation aren't prepared to take it, it might not work. A socialist government in the US would be an unmitigated disaster, for example. The same goes for democracy. Don't think that because a Western democracy works for us it's going to work for Iraq).

Take Afghanistan. I was depressed to read a couple weeks ago that even under the new Afghan government, resentment against the US (and Britain even more so - after all, it was our mess first, history fans) is at a peak. Are they ungrateful? No, because they don't consider us to have saved them.

In his comment on The Living Room, Joshua Claybourn wrote that success was toppling Saddam. No. I must disagree. Success is sorting out the mess that Iraq is in, a mess that both the UK and the US had a great hand in causing in the first place.

So. Were we right to go to war? Dunno. I honestly still don't know. We were right to stomp Saddam, but that's not the same thing. We will only be the heroes we think we are if we clear up the mess for which we were partly responsible in the first place.

There. My Take On The War, first, last and always. I hope that Richard will forgive me for putting this epic on his blog and I certainly won't take it at all personally if he reaches for the delete button :-).

Posted by Wood @ 09:45 AM BST [Link]

Thursday, April 10, 2003

In a comment on theLivingRoom Josh Claybourn writes

In sum, I feel as though I'm making an effort to address both the negatives and positives of this war. Unfortunately I do not get the impression that some bloggers (namely, the ones I emailed) address those positives. I was curious, and still am, as to how they interpret those positives.
I did make a response on his site yesterday, but perhaps something a little more eirenic is called for.

How do the images of joyful Iraqis make me feel?

Well, I'm glad Saddam's gone. But I think it is too soon to say what the images that have been sent back really mean. The BBC reported this morning that the cheering crowds came only from the poorer Shi'ite community in Bagdhad. There have been similar scenes of joy in Kirkuk, but I can't be the only one who's just a little anxious about the tension between the Kurds and Turkey. One of the problems with the reporting of this war has been its speed - sometimes things have been reported as facts which turned out to be speculation, and the instant analysis offered by journalists has served its purpose of filling up airtime, but hasn't really furthered our understanding. The rush to get out a story has often generated more heat than light. I really am glad that the Ba'ath Party regime is no more, but we'll have to wait and see whether the joy at being able to destroy some statues is justified in the long run.

And though (say it again!) I'm glad Saddam's not there anymore, that the torturing's finished and the children have been released from jail, I can't engage in the sort of moral calculus that says the price was worth it. I honour the valour of those who wear their nations uniform and risk death in combat. But how do you weigh the freedom of some children by the maiming or death of others? How much freedom do the arms of Ali Ismail Abbas buy? I know, that's emotive language, but emotion has its place in my moral vocabulary - the world is not reducible to the merely rational.

I don't know whether that comes anywhere close to answering Josh's curiosity, but it's as much as I'm capable of tonight. I've been up since 4:15 and I should have been in bed hours ago. Goodnight.

Posted by Richard @ 11:43 PM BST [Link]

This is not another cheap trick to try to build my blog traffic. Mizwacky has a well-written and thoughtful post about sex. I agree most strongly with her conclusion:

And it's not just everyone else who has fallen into the trap of seeing sex as an object; we, the church, have done it too. We debate pre-marital sex and homosexuality and say almost nothing about materialism, lying, gossip and slander, which are very real problems in many churches. So many people - both Christians and non-Christians - have commented on the imbalance.
Do you see how we have made sex and sexual issues so important, far more important than they really are? In our own way, we are almost as obsessed with sex as the world is.
But you should go and red the whole piece. Don't forget to tell her what you think.

Posted by Richard @ 04:46 PM BST [Link]

Thought for the Day was very good again this morning. Here's an extract

I want to see what kind of Iraq our political leaders will build without Saddam Hussein. But I also want to know what kind of Iraq Ali Ismail Abbas would build. Maybe when the time is right someone should take the trouble to plunge into his painful darkness and ask the question. It’s possible, that scattered amongst his bewilderment are the basic answers for a lasting peace peace as credible as anything any politician or military leader with an angst is likely to come with.

Posted by Richard @ 03:53 PM BST [Link]

The blogging experience has felt, like, really heavy in the last day or two. In the light of that, here's a (ahem) "funny" story from my friend Alice. Don't hold it against her.

Two guys from Wales die and wake up in hell. The next day the devil stops in to check on them and sees them dressed in coats, mittens and balaclavas warming themselves around the fire. The devil asks them, "What are you doing? Isn't it hot enough for you?"The two guys reply, "Well, you know, we're from Wales, the land of wind and ice and cold. We're just happy for a chance to warm upa little bit, eh."
The devil decides that these two aren't miserable enough and turns up the heat. The next morning he stops in again and there they are, still dressed in coats, mittens and balaclavas. The devil asks them again,"It's awfully hot down here, can't you guys feel it?" Again the two guys reply, "Well, like we told you yesterday, we're from Wales, the land of wind and ice and cold. We're just happy for a chance to warm up a little bit, eh."
This gets the devil a little steamed up and he decides to fix these two guys. He cranks the heat up as high as it will go. People are wailing and screaming everywhere. He stops by the room with the two guys from Wales and finds them in t-shirts, shorts and sandals, drinking a beer and cooking a "barbie".
The devil is astonished: "Everyone down here is in abject misery, and you two seem to be enjoying yourselves." The two Welshmen reply, "Well, you know, we don't get too much warm weather in Wales so we've just got to have a cook-up when the weather's THIS nice."
The devil is absolutely furious, he can hardly see straight. Finally he comes up with the answer. The two guys love the heat because they have been cold all their lives. The devil decides to turn all the heat off in hell. The next morning, the temperature is below zero,icicles are hanging everywhere; people are shivering so bad that they are unable to do anything but wail, moan and gnash their teeth.The devil smiles and heads for the room with the two Welshmen. He gets there and finds them back in their coats, mittens andbalaclavas. NOW they are jumping up and down, cheering, yelling and screaming like mad men!!!
The devil is dumbfounded,"I don't understand, when I turn up the heat you're happy. Now it's freezing cold and you're still happy. What is wrong with you two???"
The Welshmen look at the devil in surprise,"Well, don't you know boyo? If hell has freezen over, it must mean that Wales has won a match in the 6 nations"

Posted by Richard @ 10:39 AM BST [Link]

Wednesday, April 9, 2003

I haven't blogged about the war since it began, though regular readers will know that I didn't want it to happen. Over recent days I've been enjoying some robust conversations on Joshua Claybourn's blog about a variety of things, and I think this has prompted the following "request" by email

I’m looking forward to your commentary on Iraqis celebrating the fall of Saddam Hussein and his evil regime.
Well Josh, since you ask so politely...

Slightly bad-tempered response

Posted by Richard @ 11:07 PM BST [Link]

Tuesday, April 8, 2003

From John Wesley's "UPON OUR LORD'S SERMON ON THE MOUNT: Discourse IX":

"Does not every reasonable, every thinking man see that he cannot possibly serve God and mammon? Because there is the most absolute contrariety, the most irreconcilable enmity between them. The contrariety between the most opposite things on earth, between fire and water, darkness and light, vanishes into nothing when compared to the contrariety between God and mammon. So that, in whatever respect you serve the one, you necessarily renounce the other. Do you believe in God through Christ? Do you trust in him as your strength, your help, your shield, and your exceeding great reward? as your happiness? your end in all, above all things? Then you cannot trust in riches. It is absolutely impossible you should, so long as you have this faith in God. Do you thus trust in riches? Then you have denied the faith. You do not trust in the living God. Do you love God? Do you seek and find happiness in him? Then you cannot love the world, neither the things of the world. You are crucified to the world, and the world crucified to you. Do you love the world? Are your affections set on things beneath? Do you seek happiness in earthly things? Then it is impossible you should love God. Then the love of the Father is not in you. Do you resemble God? Are you merciful, as your Father is merciful? Are you transformed, by the renewal of your mind, into the image of him that created you? Then you cannot be conformed to the present world. You have renounced all its affections and lusts. Are you conformed to the world? Does your soul still bear the image of the earthly? Then you are not renewed in the spirit of your mind. You do not bear the image of the heavenly. Do you obey God? Are you zealous to do his will on earth as the angels do in heaven? Then it is impossible you should obey mammon. Then you set the world at open defiance. You trample its customs and maxims under foot, and will neither follow nor be led by them. Do you follow the world? Do you live like other men? Do you please men? Do you please yourself? Then you cannot be a servant of God. You are of your master and father, the devil."

Posted by Richard @ 11:38 PM BST [Link]

There's a provocative but useful post about conservatives and the environment over at Josh Claybourn's place. Pitch in!

Posted by Richard @ 05:46 PM BST [Link]

Monday, April 7, 2003

Bene Diction links to two articles about journalism in wartime. The Asia Times offers some hints on spotting disinformation, whilst Robert Jensen in the Boston Globe makes a plea for objective standards of journalism:

None of these observations is meant to disparage the excellent work of many war correspondents. But journalists are constrained by the demands of the institutions in which they work (more concerned with ratings and profits than critical reporting) and the ideology of the society (which in wartime tends to demand conformity to reflexive patriotism and nationalism). In such a world, the routines of ''objective'' journalism -- which overwhelmingly rely on official sources, mainly from government, military and corporations, and the intellectuals who serve them -- not surprisingly produces a view of the world skewed toward the powerful.
Quite.

Call me cynical if you must, but the last thing I expect to see in wartime is objective journalism. Information is a weapon as potent as any in the military arsenal: it would be surprising indeed if words and pictures were not used to serve the purposes of those releasing them. I don't want to impugn the integrity of journalists. But in a battle situation they can only know what they are allowed to see or are told. "The Truth" is less important than victory.

Posted by Richard @ 10:37 PM BST [Link]

I wish I'd written this.

Update:You need Real Player to hear the audio version: the script is here

Posted by Richard @ 04:39 PM BST [Link]

Darren has been browsing Moslem blogs and found many similarities with the Christian blogs he reads regularly. He makes some intersting observations, but disturbs me with:

I was very disappointed to observe on a number of blogs comments from readers that were inflammatory, racist and aimed at provoking some of the bloggers as they grappled with tough issues. My visit was fleeting so I cannot really comment on who was at fault - however in most situations the Muslim bloggers responded to these hurtful comments with real grace and the majority of the 'heat' seemed to come from those leaving the comments - often quoting the bible to make their points.
I'm disturbed, but not surprised.

Darren offers a starting place here if you'd like to join him on a tour of Moslem blogs. I join him in urging "grace, respect and love – just as you would expect from those visiting your home (cyber or real!)" - but I didn't need to say that to my readers here, did I?

Posted by Richard @ 12:16 PM BST [Link]

Sunday, April 6, 2003

For purely environmental reasons (recycling is good, right?!) I'm posting today my letter from this month's church newsletter:

In one of the sessions at our Church Family weekend there was a discussion about the parables of Jesus. If you had to pick just one parable that represented the ‘kernel’ of your faith, what would it be? Many – perhaps most – people reacted swiftly to the question. It’s impossible to pick just one they said. But after the discussion it was clear that there were two "front runners", "the Prodigal Son" and "the Good Samaritan".
Good answers, I reckon. The one pictures God as a father yearning for the return of a son who has abused his love and squandered his inheritance. The welcome the son receives is unhesitating; the party the father throws in celebration is noisy and lavish. That, says Jesus, is how God loves us. In the second parable Jesus is answering the question, "Who is my neighbour?" with a story of a man helping an enemy in need. The first parable is about God and how he loves us. The second is about how we live in response to that love.
During April we’ll remember the events of the Passion of Jesus, his betrayal, suffering and death. We’ll celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and give thanks for his victory over death. As we share in this way we’ll be reminding ourselves of just how far God was prepared to go to save us from ourselves, as Charles Wesley put it,

       "Emptied himself of all but love
       And bled for Adam’s helpless race"

What a wonderful truth – that God gave himself up for you and me! My prayer is that in all our remembering and celebration, we will once again be apprehended, seized even, by that amazing love.
But let’s not forget that this is not merely a "feel good" message given for our personal benefit. The love of God, freely given, is also a call to service – "Go and do likewise"


Posted by Richard @ 02:50 PM BST [Link]

Saturday, April 5, 2003

ianwhite2 (11k image)I've spent most of the day with other Superintendent ministers and Circuit Stewards (lay leaders), meeting with our President of Conference Revd Ian White. (He's the one on the left in the picture. With him is Revd Wil Morrey, our District Chair) I've got to admit I was more than a little reluctant to go - the sun has been shining again and it seemed a pity to be indoors. But I'm glad I went.

One of the vital questions Ian raised for us was the issue of communication. He noted that we are becoming skilled at electronic communication and this has great benefits, but reminded us that our reliance on e-stuff (that's my word, not his!) has a downside. Quite apart from the added pressure that comes from the expectation of an instant response, there is a more serious consequence that we only contact those we wish to contact, and erase from our minds those we do not wish to deal with. Where we used to "broadcast" our message, now we "narrow-cast". Noting how much smaller the world has become he asked, "Has our thinking become smaller to match?"

I'm sure that this is a legitimate concern, but it is a society-wide rather than a church issue. And I'm not at all sure I know how to address it.

Posted by Richard @ 11:29 PM BST [Link]

Friday, April 4, 2003

Not much time for blogging today - busy adding to the children's climbing frame in the garden. And, of course, enjoying the spring sunshine. I did get my piece for blogs4God done though. Now I'm switching off this blessed thing and going back to enjoying my day off. Before I go let me leave you with another of of Charles Wesley's hymns:

EARTH, rejoice, our Lord is King!
Sons of men, his praises sing;
Sing ye in triumphant strains,
Jesus the Messiah reigns!

Power is all to Jesus given,
Lord of hell, and earth, and heaven,
Every knee to him shall bow;
Satan, hear, and tremble now!

Angels and archangels join,
All triumphantly combine,
All in Jesu's praise agree,
Carrying on his victory.

Though the sons of night blaspheme,
More there are with us than them;
God with us, we cannot fear;
Fear, ye fiends, for Christ is here!

Lo! to faith's enlightened sight,
All the mountain flames with light,
Hell is nigh, but God is nigher,
Circling us with hosts of fire.

Christ the Saviour is come down,
Points us to the victor's crown,
Bids us take our seats above,
More than conquerors in his love.

Posted by Richard @ 09:30 PM BST [Link]

Riding along the sea front cyclepath this morning: a beautiful golden dawn, the tide high and lapping up against the path not ten feet away, water as blue as the sky. The sun, still low reflects across the water, a path of dazzling light which follows me all the way along to West Cross and back again.

But it isn't the light that's moving - what appears to be a path is actually the fraction of the light that directly enters my field of vision. I'm only seeing a bit at a time. If my field of vision was wide enough, the whole sea would be ablaze with light.

Posted by Wood @ 09:20 AM BST [Link]

I received a nice little parcel from Amazon today - the contents may or may not say something about my state of mind


Just thought you should know.

Posted by Richard @ 12:01 AM BST [Link]

Thursday, April 3, 2003

Darren has done it again - posted a smashing piece about a conversation with a Buddhist nun, and upset a conservative by so doing.

In my Lent group this week we talked of inter-faith conversations and the possibility of inter-faith worship, a big subject I might come back to at some point. But one thing we should be clear about is that mutual understanding between the faiths can only do good. If you truly want to understand a different faith, then you have to meet and talk with those who practice it. It really is as simple as that. No amount of reading books, however worthy, or listening to experts, however learned, will substitute for genuine conversation with a real Moslem, Sikh, Buddhist or whatever.

In the course of conversation we learn that these are real people, not very different from us. Instead of thinking of them en masse, we're enabled to make friends with individuals. I'm as sure as I can be that that's what Jesus would do.

Posted by Richard @ 11:09 PM BST [Link]

Edwin Starr
Wood drew my attention to this in the comments of my last post:

We are extremely sad to announce that, following a suspected heart attack, Edwin passed away at his home in Nottingham, England.
Edwin was 61.
[MORE]

Posted by Richard @ 10:42 PM BST [Link]

Wednesday, April 2, 2003

The Gutless Pacificist asks, Where have all the war songs gone? and offers his top 3, plus a runner up.
I beg to differ, so here are my (current - probably different tomorrow) top 5:

Andrew Careaga did a similar list fairly recently, and he's always worth reading.

Posted by Richard @ 10:02 PM BST [Link]

Tuesday, April 1, 2003

From the United Methodist News Service:

Capital punishment, legalized killing by the state, has always been a deeply troublesome issue for religious and non-religious people alike.

Debate on the issue has intensified in recent years, particularly in the United States, where an unprecedented number of people have been executed. Most church groups officially oppose capital punishment, but individual support has increased following such horrendous events as the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, high-profile child abduction cases, the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and last fall's chain of sniper killings in the Washington, Maryland and Virginia area. [more]

Posted by Richard @ 11:52 PM BST [Link]

As a kid I used to love comics - Beano, Sparky, Topper, Wizard, Hotspur, and finally 2000AD. (OK I admit it. Marvel comics did have a place too, but that complicates things)

I remember reading a story in one of them in which the main character tries to help an old lady across a street. She's very awkward about it and it takes him a whole page. In the end he achieves his goal and delivers her safely to the other side.
The punchline is that she never wanted to go and he ends up being beaten with her brolly.

Even as a child I understood the point. No matter how deep your sincerity in trying to help someone, if they don't want your help you can't expect them to be grateful.

Just a thought.

Posted by Richard @ 11:32 PM BST [Link]

Here's a relatively new blog for "librarians and people interested in search engines, searching the net, design issues and general whitterings" by Phil Bradley. I don't know him, but my wife has been to some of his training sessions and reckons he's a good bloke. I'm not going to argue. You shouldn't either.

She's always right.

Posted by Richard @ 11:21 PM BST [Link]

Alas, poor floppy is now a stiff.

Posted by Richard @ 04:35 PM BST [Link]

[Archive Index] [Main Index]

Powered By Greymatter

Listed on BlogShares