A survey shows that women who go to Church live on average 5 months longer.
Of course, what this survey misses out on is that the average churchgoing woman will attend a total of about 3 months of Church Committees of various kinds over her lifetime.
So, at most, a mixed blessing, I'd say.
Monday, 16 May 2016
Breaking the Cycle of Fear
In superstition news. Drayton Parslow has agreed to apologise for his claim that Burton Dasset was using "witchcraft" to ride his cycle without actually pedalling.
After close investigation of the accusation, Young Keith's Uncle the Police Officer has established that in fact Burton was merely coasting downhill.
Witchcraft isn't actually illegal in Britain any more. The last prosecution under the Witchcraft Act was in 1944. Meanwhile in Husborne Crawley it must be thirty years since they last ducked a suspected witch. Shocking case. He was accused of possessing "a magic scrying and talking box." Radio Rentals avoided the village for years after that.
Sunday, 15 May 2016
The Dangers of Driverless Cars
Impressive scare-mongering from the Guardian on the subject of driverless cars, and their ability to be safer than driven cars:
Where does all this needless fear come from? I reckon it's about autonomy. The human reaction to being not fully in control of a situation. The belief that as long as we are behind the steering wheel, and nobody else, everything will be fine. Which leads people to speeding, reckless behaviour, close passes on cyclists, and all the other fun that passes for a day on the roads. It's a delusion, of course. Our autonomy lasts right up to the moment that there's a car crash, or we hit traffic in town, or we blindly follow our SatNavs into a lake.
I'm looking forward to the driverless car world. If we rewrite the laws right, we should be able to be driven home from a night out after a few drinks, safe in the knowledge that we won't crash into bicycles. Our insurance policies will be lower, and everybody will be able to have sex on motorways. (Obviously, with a driverless car, you'd be able to have blinds on the windows. Let's not outrage convention). I wonder why the newspapers are so against it?
"The vehicles are expected to dramatically reduce accidents and premiums, with some warning they could put the future of the motor insurance industry at risk."
Just ignore the split infinitive. It's not a hanging offence. Really. But I'm impressed that the Guardian, that noble defender of lost causes, does not go so far as to suggest the Government should legislate to ensure a constant stream of injuries and deaths, so as to protect insurance industry jobs. But we've not heard from Jeremy Corbyn yet. He has previously suggested reopening coalmines - or maybe not - and driving Trident submarines around without warheads, so who knows what he might think.
This is grade A "experts warning" territory. The Express outdid itself with the warning that driverless cars could lead to more people having sex while motoring. Though I reckon their picture should logically feature a steering wheel and some feet, not a pair of hands.
And then the Telegraph. Who memorably warned us of the danger that cyclists could slow down traffic if driverless cars became common:
"Under the current Highway Code, drivers are expected to leave as much room as they would leave for a car when overtaking cyclists.Yes, according to the Telegraph the Highway Code might need to be rewritten to allow driverless cars to be as dangerous as driven ones. Keeps me awake at night, that does.
There are fears driverless cars could be left crawling behind cyclists for miles as they wait for enough space to overtake if the rules are not changed."
Where does all this needless fear come from? I reckon it's about autonomy. The human reaction to being not fully in control of a situation. The belief that as long as we are behind the steering wheel, and nobody else, everything will be fine. Which leads people to speeding, reckless behaviour, close passes on cyclists, and all the other fun that passes for a day on the roads. It's a delusion, of course. Our autonomy lasts right up to the moment that there's a car crash, or we hit traffic in town, or we blindly follow our SatNavs into a lake.
I'm looking forward to the driverless car world. If we rewrite the laws right, we should be able to be driven home from a night out after a few drinks, safe in the knowledge that we won't crash into bicycles. Our insurance policies will be lower, and everybody will be able to have sex on motorways. (Obviously, with a driverless car, you'd be able to have blinds on the windows. Let's not outrage convention). I wonder why the newspapers are so against it?
Secularism in the City
Interesting if not exactly coherent from Salvatore Murtas at Conservative Home as he argues that the election of Sadiq Khan as Mayor of London is a "challenge to secularism."
This "challenge" is based on Khan's identification of himself as the Muslim son of a Pakistani bus driver. Thus introducing religion into the mayoral election.
Well hang on. Sadiq Khan is who he is. We elect people as a whole package. So the previous Mayor was a blond. posh, philandering part-Turkish, part-American, part-Swiss, part-French, part-royal, Latin-speaking buffoon. You get the whole package when you elect a London mayor.
Two things stand against Khan's identification of himself as a "Muslim" challenging secularism. One is that Khan's voting record in parliament would cause some of the more extreme Islamists to consider him not a true Muslim. And an apostate, to people like that, is worse than people who aren't Muslims at all. The other is that the Muslim population of London is about 12% of the overall population. You can't win London by simply appealing to the "Muslim" vote, any more than the "Jewish" one or the "Catholic" one. You can by getting out the Labour vote.
London is a Labour city. All things being equal, it will elect a Labour Mayor. Boris Johnson has the sort of personality that stopped all things being equal - a kind of one-man melting pot, incoherent politically, often utterly amusing but then frequently just as frustrating - he is the sort of person who can represent London.
All Sadiq Khan had to do, to be elected, was to be dignified and have as much personality as his opponent. That his opponent was a kind of Boris-lite, a posh bloke without the Boris charm who indulged in some nasty sneers, meant Khan's job was simpler.
Sadiq Khan has seized the opportunity that London at its best offers - to climb from a working class background, from an immigrant family, and become a lawyer, an MP, and now the mayor of the City that gave his family a home. He is a true Londoner.
This is no challenge to secularism. Women aren't being made to cover up in Hyde Park. The pubs are not being forcibly closed in Kentish Town. London went to the polls and elected the best candidate. That's all.
This "challenge" is based on Khan's identification of himself as the Muslim son of a Pakistani bus driver. Thus introducing religion into the mayoral election.
Well hang on. Sadiq Khan is who he is. We elect people as a whole package. So the previous Mayor was a blond. posh, philandering part-Turkish, part-American, part-Swiss, part-French, part-royal, Latin-speaking buffoon. You get the whole package when you elect a London mayor.
Two things stand against Khan's identification of himself as a "Muslim" challenging secularism. One is that Khan's voting record in parliament would cause some of the more extreme Islamists to consider him not a true Muslim. And an apostate, to people like that, is worse than people who aren't Muslims at all. The other is that the Muslim population of London is about 12% of the overall population. You can't win London by simply appealing to the "Muslim" vote, any more than the "Jewish" one or the "Catholic" one. You can by getting out the Labour vote.
London is a Labour city. All things being equal, it will elect a Labour Mayor. Boris Johnson has the sort of personality that stopped all things being equal - a kind of one-man melting pot, incoherent politically, often utterly amusing but then frequently just as frustrating - he is the sort of person who can represent London.
All Sadiq Khan had to do, to be elected, was to be dignified and have as much personality as his opponent. That his opponent was a kind of Boris-lite, a posh bloke without the Boris charm who indulged in some nasty sneers, meant Khan's job was simpler.
Sadiq Khan has seized the opportunity that London at its best offers - to climb from a working class background, from an immigrant family, and become a lawyer, an MP, and now the mayor of the City that gave his family a home. He is a true Londoner.
This is no challenge to secularism. Women aren't being made to cover up in Hyde Park. The pubs are not being forcibly closed in Kentish Town. London went to the polls and elected the best candidate. That's all.
Saturday, 14 May 2016
A Generic Pentecost / Eurovision Sermon
When the disciples spoke, they were understood in many different languages.
Now, at this point some Pentecosticals would say that this was down to a miracle. But let's be honest, that's a bit unlikely isn't it? And I'm going to say that the more likely explanation - one that's been ignored by nearly everybody except a load of liberal scholars down the ages - is that in fact they were all praising God in Koine Greek. And the reason why the people from all over the known world understood them is because they all spoke Greek as well. But, in the excitement of having these men (and possibly women) running around praising God in a language they understood - instead of Hebrew, which they probably wouldn't - they fell into the confusion of believing the disciples were all praising in their own language.
I mean, clearly they apostle couldn't speak in all the languages of the people there - 12 disciples but 16 different mentioned races. So you know it makes sense.
Now, at this point some Pentecosticals would say that this was down to a miracle. But let's be honest, that's a bit unlikely isn't it? And I'm going to say that the more likely explanation - one that's been ignored by nearly everybody except a load of liberal scholars down the ages - is that in fact they were all praising God in Koine Greek. And the reason why the people from all over the known world understood them is because they all spoke Greek as well. But, in the excitement of having these men (and possibly women) running around praising God in a language they understood - instead of Hebrew, which they probably wouldn't - they fell into the confusion of believing the disciples were all praising in their own language.
 |
| The Common European Lovely Horse |
Which is, in many ways, like the Eurovision Song Contest, isn't it? Just like the Jews in Jerusalem, people will have come from across the world continent with a common purpose - in the case of Eurovision, to celebrate camp Europop and dreadful string arrangements. They came from many places and many languages, to the centre of the Eurovision religion - Stockholm. And yet they join together as one, reversing the curse of Babel as they praise in the common language. Pop.
And it is this unity - first modelled by those disciples, and latterly by Belgians in sequins - that the people of the "Brexit" campaign are trying to destroy. But we must resist. Don't forget, when you vote in the referendum, that it is not just milk subsidies and straight bananas we are voting over - we are also upholding our right to listen to fat blokes in lederhosen singing in that weird half-American, half-Austrian accent about their love for unspecified goatherds.
So let us follow in the steps of St Peter - uphold our common heritage - and ensure that we reject Farage and all his delusions of freedom. For the Euro-pop we hold in common is greater than the things that divide us. Let's rock!
Prayer Time and Prayer Eternity
Fine, useful and interesting blog post from Kelvin Holdsworth on the intercessions.
Long prayers are a problem for the service leader (I will use a generic term as "worship leader" can be confused with "music group leader" and "priest" with only upset nonconformists and "minister" begs the question if everybody isn't in some sense a minister. But I digress.)
In our own congregation, the main problem is Ozric. He's the one who, in a "spontaneous" contribution to collective prayers, used three points, handouts and an altar call.
But when we put some order into things, as request by the Apostle in 1 Corinthians, we also ran into trouble. We instituted a rota. Ozric got on it. We gave training. Ozric nodded sagely, made some meaningful contributions at the sessions. Then two weeks later he gave us twenty minutes of prayer for his aunt's recovery from an operation. With some toe-curdling detail. We made everybody submit their (written) prayers in advance. He "got inspired" halfway through. And who can argue with the Spirit?
And you know how I was saying the other day, how hard it is to fire a church volunteer? Well, we bit the bullet. Took the bull by the horns. Went for it. And deliberately planned his week on the rota for when we knew he was away.
Swapped with someone, didn't he? Thirty minutes into the prayers for Japan - in which he decided to pray for each town in that country, by name - Hnaef had had enough.
It's not common among the congregations of the saved, I know, that the person leading intercessions has a potato sack shoved over his head and is carried out to the car park. But it was gently done. That evening, as we walked past on the way back from the White Horse, we could hear the muffled word "Yakushima." So at least he'd nearly finished.
Once again we have banned prayers of intercession from Moot House gatherings. We've realised prayer is just too disruptive to the work of the Church. But if anyone wants to join the newly-set-up Prayer Group, it meets in the Rainbow Room every night from 8pm till midnight. Though be warned. If a second person joins Ozric, it might last even longer.
Long prayers are a problem for the service leader (I will use a generic term as "worship leader" can be confused with "music group leader" and "priest" with only upset nonconformists and "minister" begs the question if everybody isn't in some sense a minister. But I digress.)
In our own congregation, the main problem is Ozric. He's the one who, in a "spontaneous" contribution to collective prayers, used three points, handouts and an altar call.
But when we put some order into things, as request by the Apostle in 1 Corinthians, we also ran into trouble. We instituted a rota. Ozric got on it. We gave training. Ozric nodded sagely, made some meaningful contributions at the sessions. Then two weeks later he gave us twenty minutes of prayer for his aunt's recovery from an operation. With some toe-curdling detail. We made everybody submit their (written) prayers in advance. He "got inspired" halfway through. And who can argue with the Spirit?
And you know how I was saying the other day, how hard it is to fire a church volunteer? Well, we bit the bullet. Took the bull by the horns. Went for it. And deliberately planned his week on the rota for when we knew he was away.
Swapped with someone, didn't he? Thirty minutes into the prayers for Japan - in which he decided to pray for each town in that country, by name - Hnaef had had enough.
It's not common among the congregations of the saved, I know, that the person leading intercessions has a potato sack shoved over his head and is carried out to the car park. But it was gently done. That evening, as we walked past on the way back from the White Horse, we could hear the muffled word "Yakushima." So at least he'd nearly finished.
Once again we have banned prayers of intercession from Moot House gatherings. We've realised prayer is just too disruptive to the work of the Church. But if anyone wants to join the newly-set-up Prayer Group, it meets in the Rainbow Room every night from 8pm till midnight. Though be warned. If a second person joins Ozric, it might last even longer.
Thursday, 12 May 2016
Did you Have PPI?
That's right. The world is full of people who can't remember whether they had PPI. Some people picked it up in an unfortunate sexual encounter in Sutton Coldfield. Others were simply taken in by somebody they met on holiday in Worthing. And until now, there was no diagnostic test for PPI.
But now it's easy. Simply tap yourself on the head with a credit card.
If your cat's eyes glow, you've had PPI.
But now it's easy. Simply tap yourself on the head with a credit card.
If your cat's eyes glow, you've had PPI.
Teeth Will Be Provided
When I was very young, somebody bought me a collection of "Irish Joke Books."
They wouldn't be sold these days. And they have not, as far as I am aware, left me thinking the Irish are any funnier or less intelligent than the English.
But I'm pretty sure that they contained the joke at the end of this recording of the irreplaceable Dave Allen.
Which gives me pause for thought. If I don't even think the joke was new when Dave Allen did it - then how come Giles Fraser thinks it was Ian Paisley that said it?
This worries me. Giles Fraser uses the story in support of a rather odd survey saying that clergy should not tell jokes in the pulpit. He is saying that only someone of genuinely quick sense of humour, as the Late Dr Paisley was, should use humour.
See, I don't get it. I'm not aware that Ian Paisley ever had a reputation as an after dinner speaker. I didn't know he had a sense of humour.
And I really really don't think that Ian Paisley would think the damnation of other human beings would be the source of entertainment and light-hearted quippery.
In other words I'm not convinced Ian Paisley said this.
I've over-thought this a bit, haven't I?
But I'm pretty sure that they contained the joke at the end of this recording of the irreplaceable Dave Allen.
Which gives me pause for thought. If I don't even think the joke was new when Dave Allen did it - then how come Giles Fraser thinks it was Ian Paisley that said it?
This worries me. Giles Fraser uses the story in support of a rather odd survey saying that clergy should not tell jokes in the pulpit. He is saying that only someone of genuinely quick sense of humour, as the Late Dr Paisley was, should use humour.
See, I don't get it. I'm not aware that Ian Paisley ever had a reputation as an after dinner speaker. I didn't know he had a sense of humour.
And I really really don't think that Ian Paisley would think the damnation of other human beings would be the source of entertainment and light-hearted quippery.
In other words I'm not convinced Ian Paisley said this.
I've over-thought this a bit, haven't I?
Wednesday, 11 May 2016
Situations Vacant: Bishop of Berwick
Applications are invited for the vacant post of Suffragan bishop of Berwick.
An excellent benefits package including 25 days paid holiday per year (Plus Bank Holidays and 3 NCI Holidays), Interest free season ticket loan, pensions package and childcare vouchers.
Contract Type: Permanent, 35 hours per week
Could you help the Church of England "reach out" to a Millennial generation in the North East of England? We haven't the faintest idea what "Millennial" means, but we keep reading the word in the Guardian so it must be pretty trendy. We're hoping it hasn't got anything to do with the end of the world, as if it has then frankly we're wasting our time posting this ad.
We are looking for someone who can create change by inspiring and supporting others in a wide network with a strong track record of delivery. That previous sentence doesn't actually mean anything, but we'd really like it if you can act like it does. Professional knowledge of Millennial Christianity and/or working as a barrista would be an advantage.
This role does not have an occupational requirement to be a Christian. We particularly encourage applications from BAME individuals, as they are currently underrepresented in this organisation. Sure, that's because a lot of BAME people are Hindus or Muslims. But don't let that put you off. Members of the non-Christian religions seem to be a lot keener than the Church of England on that whole "religion" concept so we're very excited about the whole thing.
We welcome applications from candidates of all Religions and Beliefs, Race, Age, Sexual Orientation and all factors irrelevant to a person's working ability. Thought, obviously, keep quiet about that whole Sexual Orientation business. Especially if you're married.
The Church of England. Diverse, vibrant and wondering what on earth we're here for.
No relation at all to this. I definitely didn't read the original advert, comment on it and then discover it had been taken down.
And inspired by this:
An excellent benefits package including 25 days paid holiday per year (Plus Bank Holidays and 3 NCI Holidays), Interest free season ticket loan, pensions package and childcare vouchers.
Contract Type: Permanent, 35 hours per week
Could you help the Church of England "reach out" to a Millennial generation in the North East of England? We haven't the faintest idea what "Millennial" means, but we keep reading the word in the Guardian so it must be pretty trendy. We're hoping it hasn't got anything to do with the end of the world, as if it has then frankly we're wasting our time posting this ad.
We are looking for someone who can create change by inspiring and supporting others in a wide network with a strong track record of delivery. That previous sentence doesn't actually mean anything, but we'd really like it if you can act like it does. Professional knowledge of Millennial Christianity and/or working as a barrista would be an advantage.
This role does not have an occupational requirement to be a Christian. We particularly encourage applications from BAME individuals, as they are currently underrepresented in this organisation. Sure, that's because a lot of BAME people are Hindus or Muslims. But don't let that put you off. Members of the non-Christian religions seem to be a lot keener than the Church of England on that whole "religion" concept so we're very excited about the whole thing.
We welcome applications from candidates of all Religions and Beliefs, Race, Age, Sexual Orientation and all factors irrelevant to a person's working ability. Thought, obviously, keep quiet about that whole Sexual Orientation business. Especially if you're married.
The Church of England. Diverse, vibrant and wondering what on earth we're here for.
No relation at all to this. I definitely didn't read the original advert, comment on it and then discover it had been taken down.
And inspired by this:
@pmphillips @vahva anyone fancy trying to define millenial christianity? is that 'the Guardian' 'millenial' or eschatology millenial?— James Ballantyne (@JamesOSM) May 11, 2016
With Alice Aforethought
I was reminded tonight of the old Smokie song, "Living Next Door to Alice."
And I wonder. 24 years he's been living next door to Alice, and yet he doesn't know why she's leaving or where she's gonna go. She's clearly got her reasons, yet he doesn't want to know.
That's not what I'd call emotional investment. I don't reckon he actually cared that much about Alice at all. He just needed an excuse to write a song.
And I wonder. 24 years he's been living next door to Alice, and yet he doesn't know why she's leaving or where she's gonna go. She's clearly got her reasons, yet he doesn't want to know.
That's not what I'd call emotional investment. I don't reckon he actually cared that much about Alice at all. He just needed an excuse to write a song.
Unintentional Community
The rise of Intentional Communities is well-documented. Indeed, given the membership regulations of the Beaker Folk, one could argue we are just such a community
I interview any aspiring member of the Beaker Folk. At the interview I ask the following questions:
1. Are you a seeker after truth?
2. Are you intentional?
3. Can I see your last three payslips?
We find that #3 tends to weed out the people who are less intentional.
But you know, we are a fellowship that welcomes all faiths and nuns. That's why we built the Beaker Annex. Based loosely around the concept of an Oxford "quad" - ie there's no heating and it's half a mile to the loos. And we send Hnaef round every day to make it clear that public schoolboys are inclusive, tolerant and better than anyone else.
The Annex is for anyone who yearns for authentic religious experience, but without the extortionate rates of the Great House. You can come along to the events at the Moot House, watch the moon rise in the Lower Meadow, hunt for mistletoe in the orchard. But all without the need to spend an arm and a leg.
Basically, it's full of people who know they want to know God better, but are thrown randomly together to get by and try to get on with each other. We're calling it the "Unintentional Community".
They're a lot close to God than the people in the Moot House sometimes. I reckon that's just a statistical freak. I mean, how could a church of all ages and backgrounds form a better community than a carefully planned bunch who want to live together? Ridiculous.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)