Wednesday, 7 October 2015

Death of Edgar Allan Poe

If anyone has seen Mr Reynolds can they please let me know?

To mark the death of Edgar Allan Poe we will be releasing 166 ravens. In accordance with the Streeb-Greebling liturgy, we are supposed to get them to fly underwater. But after last year's disaster, we decided "never more." We'll let them out in the open air this year.

Tuesday, 6 October 2015

People our hearts bleed for - The CEO in the Embankment Cycle Lane

From the pages of "sympathy for people who don't need it", in the Standard. A very rich person who likes to pollute Central London complains because their personal convenience is being sacrificed for the good of many, as a segregated cycle lane is built by the Thames.
"It’s ridiculous,” says one FTSE-100 chief executive who used to take that road to commute into the City. “I live in Chelsea but Embankment is just a disaster. My driver these days goes south of the river, drops me off in Southwark and I walk across the Wobbly Bridge to our office in the City."
Is your heart bleeding yet?

Let's take it a bit at a time.
"It’s ridiculous,” 
No - it's roadworks. They happen all the time in London, but when it's hundreds of tipper lorries on the latest redevelopment in Town to strip out its character and replace it with over-priced empty boxes for foreign speculators, the captains of industry are quiet.
"says one FTSE-100 chief executive who used to take that road to commute into the City." 
Well, don't. It's a stupid thing to do. There's not much space in London and the Embankment should be an attractive place to wander, not somewhere for your bourgemobile to clog up the path. Get the Tube. Or ride a bike. They're building a bike lane, apparently. That'll be handy. Or earn your money and get in early. You'll miss the traffic. Although, ironically, you'll still be traffic.
 “I live in Chelsea but Embankment is just a disaster." 
No, it's roadworks. London has them all the time. Often to benefit motorists or property speculators, sometimes for water and gas pipes and electricity and stuff, so this is a bit of variety for you.
"My driver these days goes south of the river, drops me off in Southwark and I walk across the Wobbly Bridge to our office in the City."
It's nice to hear you're getting some exercise these days. You'd pay a fortune for that at a City gym. Appreciate that lovely view up the River. Doesn't that take away the executive stress? And just think - if you're fit enough to walk across the Bouncy Bridge and up the hill into the City, you're probably fit enough to cycle from Chelsea. It'll be great once the bikes don't have to tangle with the coaches and City executives, won't it?

Monday, 5 October 2015

A Prayer for those in Carrier Bag Chaos

Archdruid: For those who are now 5p poorer

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For those who want some shopping spontaneously on the way home

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For those who are balancing their shopping down the street

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For those who have mixed fresh meat with a tin of soup and got charged anyway

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For those who are carrying hot chips home from the chippie in their hands after failing to understand the law

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

 Archdruid: For those who bought loose eggs in Manchester, tried to carry them home, and got so angry they started throwing them

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For the 250th employee in a small retailer, wondering whether it's them or the free bags that will be going

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For live goldfish, who are now a preferential option over fish fingers

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For the people who make paper bags, who may have to work ever so hard

All: We light a tea light.

A tea light is lit.

Archdruid: For forgetful people, who will end up getting charged all the time

All: We've run out of tea lights

Archdruid: Chezza, can you nip down the Bazaar and get some tea lights?

Hymn: You'll Never Walk Alone (arr: Rodgers)

Chezza: Sorry Eileen - didn't have enough for the tea lights.

Archdruid: I gave you 2 quid.

Chezza: Yeah, but they say it's 5p for the bag.

Archdruid: Chaos! It's chaos!

Triffids at the Pet Service

Combining the Pet Service with our Celebration of Psalm 8 turned out a bit fraught.

Can I remind Beaker Folk that triffids are not pets? Once again, they're a valuable oil source. But we can't have them receiving blessings in the Moot House. It made the alpacas uneasy. And now we know what alpacas do when they're uneasy. And it's not fun to clean up, Burton tells me.

But Young Keith's creative liturgy for Psalm 8 was impressive. Who would have thought of building a scale of the Moon and putting it into low orbit like that? And although the RAF did shoot it down, what a fantastic display of shooting stars we got! Or so I'm told. With the triffids feasting on alpaca droppings, last night was definitely not the time for watching meteors.

So everyone woke up this morning screaming that they couldn't see anything. I had to explain to them that there's no cause for alarm. It's autumn. The sun just hadn't risen yet.  Same talk I have to give them every year.

I'm expecting them to be out round the ornamental maple later, wondering what illness has made its leaves go red. Every year the same.

Sunday, 4 October 2015

We Reveal the new Liverpool Manager

I was confused. Why have Liverpool sacked Brendan Rodgers, after a perfectly respectable result? A draw away at Everton - nothing wrong with that.

And then I started musing. Why now? Why sack him now? Who is suddenly available?

And then it struck me.

Marty McFly. Of course.

And that means we can bring Mario Balotelli back.

After all, we'll have self-tying shoelaces now.

The Man With the Child in his Eyes

 Some Pharisees came, and to test him they asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”  
Then in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”  
People were bringing little children to him in order that he might touch them; and the disciples spoke sternly to them. But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the little children come to me; do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.” And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.  (Mark 10:2-16)
Whenever someone tells us that Jesus took the weight of the Old Testament Law from our shoulders, in my experience at least, it is unusual for them to mention at the same time his teaching on divorce.

Also, when somebody says that gay marriage undermines the sanctity of their own marriage, they rarely mention - if they are American evangelicals - that the presence of divorced and remarried people in their own congregations -in direct conflict with Jesus's teaching in this passage - may mean exactly the same thing. Because of Jesus is saying that marriage is a lifelong bond between two people, then surely somebody demonstrating its dissolubility is weakening the meaning and therefore everybody else's marriage? I should make an honorable exception for the Catholic Church at this point. They can say that gay marriage undermines other marriage, because they don't allow divorce either. I'm not saying they're right - but they are consistent.

This is a hard teaching. In a way it's a teaching that is more equal than the old teaching. Because the Old Testament laws specified how a man could divorce his wife - but a woman could not divorce her husband. So Jesus is putting both on an even footing.

But even so it's a hard teaching. Before divorce laws were introduced and then liberalised in England, people would be locked into loveless marriages. Women could be trapped with abusive partners - even abandoned but still unable to start their lives again.

It is clearly an ideal that two people stay together for life. It's what we all hope for when we marry, or why would we ever do it!? It forms a basis for a solid home and start for children - for showing lasting commitment. But sometimes, it seems to me, some marriages get so hard, some relationships so broken, that we have to accept that it's the case and do something about it. It seems to me that when that's happened - and people can never be back together - that to divorce is the kindest, and for people to remarry later is a reasonable thing to do. Our Lord gave us some commandments that are not so much hard to live up to as ideals, and I'm not going too cut my own hand off if it offends me. So I hope Jesus is offering the ideal but will still look at us, when we're fail, with mercy.

Which brings us on to the little children. The disciples don't want them near Jesus. Well, you know kids. They disrupt the worship. They're noisy - when they're tiny they scream and when they're a bit bigger they clatter around shouting. They get in the way, between us and Jesus. That's why the disciples don't want people bringing them - there's important people coming to see Jesus. And at the front of the queue, instead of the well-heeled merchants and people with Government contacts, the ones who might fill the money bag for the mission or put a word in to get Jesus a plush preaching gig at some trendy synagogue in Jerusalem - there's a queue of sleep-deprived parents and their snotty-nosed kids.

But Jesus gets angry - he does occasionally, you know - and says no, let them to me. The Kingdom of God belongs to ones like that.

And you know, it would be easy just to treat that saying as if Jesus was just putting up a nice theological saying, so 2,000 years later some middle-class English preacher could say "now what did he mean by that? Did he mean that you've got to have a child-like belief in him? That you've got to be unsophisticated? That you've got to be a whole lot of innocent things - unselfish, generous, simple, loving - that in fact real children actually aren't? I remember Celestine - on a night when Young Keith and Charlii had gone away for a few days' peace a few months back - at 2 am bawling inexplicably, refusing to be pacified by milk, food, songs or videos of " In the Night Garden " - looking at me for one moment with a look of utter victory and contempt.

No. I reckon that the Kingdom belongs to such as children simply because Jesus loves them. He knows kids are snotty and selfish. He knows they've no dignity. He knows they've nothing to offer. No money, no useful contacts, no good behaviour they can trade. He knows this and he loves and welcomes them just the same. Psalm 8 gives us a sense of how high the heavens are, how great our God is, how we're have nothing to offer. And yet "he makes us a little lower than the angels." Nothing we can do on our side. Nothing to offer. Nothing to bargain. No dignity that can stand up before the maker of the universe. Yet he loves us to bits, if we will just come to him as we are.

So you want the Kingdom of Heaven to be yours? This Kingdom you were meant to be a citizen of, yet which - like Monaco - you could never afford to belong to? Go to Jesus as a little child. Not clever, not dignified, not holy. Just as you are, trusting in his love. Because his love transcends all the rules and he loves you to bits.

Saturday, 3 October 2015

Who will Jose Mourinho blame this time?

  1. Arsene Wenger
  2. The referee
  3. The bloke who marks the white lines out
  4. Sepp Blatter
  5. Kevin McCloud
  6. The guy works down the chip shop who swears he's Elvis
  7. Ronaldo
  8. Richard Dawkins
  9. Branislav Ivanović
  10. David Moyes
  11. The FA
  12. The Fourth Official
  13. Dr. Carneiro
  14. Boris Johnson
  15. The media
  16. Jan Vertonghen
  17. Sunshine
  18. Star players
  19. Title rivals
  20. Jeremy Corbyn
  21. Ridiculous mistakes
  22. The pitch
  23. The ghost of Dick Turpin
  24. Luis Garcia
  25. God
  26. The moonlight
  27. The assistant referee
  28. The bloke who puts the goals up
  29. Rafa Benitez
  30. Parents
  31. John Terry
  32. Women everywhere
  33. The good times
  34. John Motson
  35. An impossible save
  36. UEFA
  37. Tiredness
  38. Vicente del Bosque
  39. John of Gaunt
  40. West Ham
  41. All the girls he used to know
  42. The boogie
  43. Agents
  44. The physio
  45. Old Father Thames
  46. George Best
  47. Rats
  48. The defence
  49. The weather
  50. Jose Mourinho? How did that happen?

People with Guns Kill People

It's always tricky when we say things are like other things. It's powerful but it doesn't have to be right or accurate.

An example at the moment being the idea that the argument for Britain keeping a nuclear deterrent, is the same argument given in the United States for having a gun.

Well, I don't get that comparison. The reason we in Britain mostly get away with having very few mass murders is that the laws against just anyone owning just any gun, are backed up by a police force who can do something about enforcing the laws. By criminalising guns, we make it much harder to buy them, sell them, get hold of them. And we assume that the police will remove them from people who get them - with the use of superior force, if required.

On a worldwide nuclear scale, there is no such police force. Wanting nuclear weapons as a deterrent is actually the equivalent of somebody in the Wild West wanting a gun. And when I say the Wild West, I don't mean Bristol. I heard of a Bristolian who used to take a gun hidden in his coat when he went out in the evening because "there's so many nutters about". I apologise for the language, that is what he said. And I can't do the accent, of course. All I can say is that certainly there was one person out in Bristol in the evenings that you would do well to steer clear of.

If we had a worldwide police force, capable of detecting and confiscating nuclear weapons, the comparison would be valid in my opinion. We don't. The UN is ineffectual a lot of the time, and incapable of developing nuclear-weapon-removing technology. Let's face it - they couldn't even find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which is something the old West Midlands Serious Crimes Squad could probably have done in their sleep.

All of which is not to say we should or shouldn't have nuclear weapons. Just to say that the comparison is invalid. Now let's look at America.

You see, the thing is, Americans do have a police force. Quite a well-armed one. Probably too well-armed, but then the problem for the American police is that there are guns all over the place. No wonder they need arming. The could be less well-armed, and less trigger-happy in some cases, if only the general public themselves were less likely to be armed.

But they're not, are they? In parts of the country, the public are armed to the teeth. If you asked them why, they'd say "protection". Not gathering that, if guns in general were seriously restricted, the need for protection would largely go away.

I guess I'm not saying anything that isn't obvious - nor anything that the average American gun lobbyist would completely ignore on the grounds that they have a right under God to arm themselves with shotguns, AK47, missile launchers and anything else they feel they need for protection. They got this right so their militias could protect them from the British, I believe. But honestly, we really don't want them back.

If you want to know why so many Americans die in mass-murders in places of education, there's two components. One seems to be a kind of narcissism that says that somebody who gets their name attached to a massacre is not a useless, pathetic, half-arsed loser, but some kind of celebrity. And the other is that if you give a useless, pathetic, half-arsed narcissistic loser a gun, you give them power and the ability to get what the crave.

A useless, pathetic, half-arsed narcissistic loser armed with anything other than a gun is gonna last about three minutes before some jock puts him in an arm lock. Think your gun laws are protecting you, strange American gun lobbyists? No. They're just putting your children at risk from losers. What an odd view on life you have. People with guns kill people. Even pathetic people with guns can do it. People without guns have a much harder job.

Bloody Heroes

At least three workers for MSF reported to have died in Afghanistan.

Others from the charity are on the Med, rescuing those who are, as the hymn puts it, "in peril on the sea".

Meanwhile they and others put their own lives at risk in places many of us wouldn't dare go, to help others. They're at danger from some of those whom they try to help, some that see anybody as a target and, as today, from those who mean them no harm but cause what is called " collateral damage" - a euphemism for "missed again."

They're bloody heroes. I salute them and pray for their safety.

As a humanitarian agency involved in search and rescue, MSF does not have a mandate or means to assess the immigration status of the people we assist. We provide medical care without judgment and strongly believe that no human being should drown when the means exist to prevent it.

Friday, 2 October 2015

Not in the Whirlwind

Sometimes the world is so frenetic. In this  whirlwind, active England of ours - even out in the sticks, where you'd think we were more civilised - people are constantly shouting - through action, through clothing,  through sheer noise - "look at me!" And you get the suspicion that the increasingly Big-Brother-ish (in the Bazalgette sense), X-factored drawing of attention to oneself is a desperate attempt to attract to the shell of people - for fear that there may - in these days when response times are measured in nanoseconds, and you are the sum of your instant reactions - be just emptiness within.

Social media has plummeted - If it ever climbed in the first place - to similar attractions. People over-sharing for attention - for are page impressions not a form of love? An outbreak of virtue-signalling on Twitter that dwarfs everything since the gentry started putting their names on their almshouses.

I figured that, since value-signalling is a form of structured information, I could use it as a source of energy. So I got Young Keith to build me a Twitter-powered model aircraft. Had to ground it with technical problems, unfortunately. This terrible whining kept coming from its left wing.

And I am grateful to Ian Paul for his article on why pushy men get the top jobs - because they're pushy, it turns out. Though his article is so thorough that I got lost trying to work out his view on how humble men lose out to pushy women. For what it's worth, any of my sympathy for humble men will be put on hold while I await the findings on why there are so few "showy" females. Probably because if you get to be called "gobby" or accused of using sex as a career progression technique or have to be twice as pushy to get as far as less-talented men, you're at risk of deciding that being "humble" is a better career option. Still, pushy wins every time.

So in the midst of a value-signalling, attention-seeking, image-projecting world I made my little oasis of fuzzy thinking here. A place of quiet and reflection, where we could let silence drive out the murmurs of self-will. And what do I find?

An average of twenty meetings a week. Sixteen separate rotas. Acts of worship that become about the planners, the leaders, the person whose folksy ten-minute links between songs just became fifteen minutes. The people who tell you that if you behave like them, smile like them, tilt your head to a 27° angle when you hear any kind of sad news like them - then you can know a true form of self-realisation, and not worry about the emptiness and the fear that, one of these days, the whirlwind outside will break your shell.

Down by the side of the main road, an old bloke sits looking on a pile of newspapers and watches the traffic go past - all day. And someone sits alongside him. In the Med, a boat is hunting for sinking dinghies and struggling to save the people on them. And someone is walking alongside them. In a bombed out street, a girl struggles to cook a meal for her younger brothers. And though they don't know it, someone is at the meal with them. Not in the whirlwind? Maybe.

Thursday, 1 October 2015

One Giant Hole in St Albans, Hertfordshire

To all the Beaker Folk saying there's a "thin place" in St Albans, save yourself the trouble.

That's not a thin place. It's a sinkhole. Stacey Bushes nipped down a put a load of tea lights round it, but the police dragged her off in the end.