Let's work together

My post counter tells me this is my 100th post, so I thought I'd do something really powerful, exceptional, important. But I can't think of anything so I'll have to settle for something at least serious.

Every week almost I read about the "science-religion conflict". Well I can't speak for what some "scientists" and some "religious types" do, but I insist there is no conflict between science and theology. And since I do both in my limited way, I am passionate about this.

Are not both "science" and "theology" attempts to find the truth? Truth is truth and none of your post-modernist metanarrative rubbish, please. Any perceived conflict must therefore be due to doing bad science or bad theology, or I guess both. They may work in apparently different styles - the experiments are not quite like each other all the time - and in different areas. But both are rational. Both observe and construct theories. Which are subject to analysis. To see if they contradict observed facts (experience of God is a fact, although of a different sort and subject to careful scrutiny).

In fact I assert that by any normal meaning of the word "science" (like knowledge) then theology is a science. So are philosophy, metaphysics, history (all about causation), psychology and you can go on. Some of them we call inexact, forgetting how inexact the cutting edge of theoretical physics can be. Inexactness is not a problem - declaring something exact when it is inexact is the root of trouble, because it's bad science.

Finding the truth is bad enough without your fellow-seekers slagging you off.

What's the time?

There is a season.

A time to be born, a time to die.
A time to plant, a time to reap.
A time to kill, a time to heal.
A time to laugh, a time to weep.

A time to build up, a time to break down.
A time to dance, a time to mourn.
A time to cast away stones.
A time to gather stones together.

A time of love, a time of hate.
A time of war, a time of peace.
A time you may embrace.
A time to refrain from embracing.
A time to gain, a time to lose.
A time to rend, a time to sow.
A time for love, a time for hate.
A time for peace.

Words as adapted by Pete Seeger in Turn, Turn, Turn! from Ecclesiastes.

Is that the time?

Odd one out

This is called having too much of a good thing. It's fun to be different. It's not so much fun when it's all the time. Sometimes you need a bit of support in it.

It's not really about the World Cup, honest

Catching up on Telegraph articles about England's "failure" (hey they got into the last 8 in the world!) there are contained therein numerous references to "the golden generation" and at least one to "the golden child" (who I think is Rooney although that was in an article about Beckham) leading them.
It's the first time I'd seen it so explicitly stated but only I think because I don't read the football pages very often really - and I'm sure I've heard it on the telly. Before the contest - long before.

You can't do that. Mustn't.

You cannot give that sort of tag to anyone in preview. You might do it in retrospect when you can dispassionately analyse and reflect. (If that's possible in football writing.) Be sure even then.

It asks too much. Whatever potential you think you may have spotted, whatever skills you think may have been displayed in lesser situations, you cannot put that pressure on anyone. Because then they can only "fail". They cannot succeed. Nothing will satisfy. Win the Cup once and you'll be asked to do it again (or better) - until it is impossible.

Talent, where it exists, still has to be nurtured. Yes it has to be challenged, or the step to the big league cannot be made - and it is the WORLD Cup - but you have to help it develop on the way. It might develop in ways you did not expect, or want. It may be that the midfield runner can play alone up front - but it has to be trained. And if it can't go in one direction then you help it to work out its destiny in whatever way is best for the subject, not you, and not force it into prior and premature patterns. But if you expect automatic success, if you think you can force a mould, you are guaranteed disappointment all round. No-one can predict the future. To even conceive of a phrase like "golden generation" is dangerous. To mention it - to anyone - is fatal. To let the subject hear it is catastrophic.

Gold is precious. Don't drop it.

One year on

This is a difficult one but you get nowhere by not tackling the difficult ones.

Rageh Omaar has a good piece in today's New Statesman about how the media doesn't engage with Muslims except on a certain tack, and then I saw the headlines in some of the redtops (which I don't read): "Unbeaten", "No Surrender".

Well, understandable, and true I suppose but just a bit forceful/antagonistic? How do British Muslims feel when they see that? If "Let's sit down and talk" is perhaps a bit far then maybe we could have managed "We Will remember"?

In the spotlight?

A propos of the previous post, it suddenly occurs to me: to date all those reading this blog have known me (at least as far as I'm aware) and can make allowances. Now I've opened myself up to a wider audience.

I shall have to be more careful what I say.

Methodists communication shocker

Well I finally got to look at TheConnexion.Net that Angela pointed out to me, and since they've put a link to my blog (with a very kind post on Richard's personal blog), I've started a new links section on the right called Methodists on the Net and given them pride of place. Check them out - and you can ask to join too!

Essay writing

Here are some useful phrases and their translations.

Quote: "There are many references in the literature .."
Translation: "I can't find them"

Q: "More research could be done ..."
T: "I couldn't be bothered"

Q: "There is a more modern view..."
T: "I haven't read anything published since 1965"

Q: "Some hold the view that .."
T: "My mate down the pub says ..."

Q: "This is a very complex question"
T: "I don't understand it"

Q: "A complete theory has yet to be formulated"
T: "Nor does anyone else"

Q: "This question is beyond the scope of the brief."
T: "Phew."

Q: "It follows that..."
T: "It doesn't follow, I'm busking it."

and some scentific/mathematical ones:

Q: "Exercise for the student"
T: "You're on your own"

Q: "Clearly"
T: "A few lines of algebra and you should be convinced"

Q: "It turns out that ..."
T: "Several pages of very messy algebra have been omitted. Best of luck in reconstructing them."

World Cup Reflections - hey it's popular culture, all right?

Two contrasting thoughts.

Before them though I have to admit that I thought from watching the group games that the final was likely to be Brazil v Argentina. Shows what I know. (Not that I was alone in such a belief - come in, The Telegraph.)

Someone at church today said that after the Portugal game she saw the newsreader on TV throw his England flag in the bin. She thought that was wrong, and I agree with her. If we have allegiance to someone or some group or some concept or whatever then we do not abandon him/her/it/them just because they are not a "winner". For that is not the Gospel and it is not even pragmatic secular. It encourages the wrong attitude ("win at all costs") and it fails to give support where needed. The great thing about the English support this World Cup is that even though the team has not played well, the fans continued to turn up and sing their hearts out in support. They were loyal. Loyalty should not be blind but is also not easily disposable.

On the other hand:

England have in truth not looked like they were capable of or deserving of winning the World Cup in any of their five games. Talk about unfulfilled promise. So a 1-0 win is a win and you are allowed some - but sooner or later you have to play well. So maybe with all the (metaphorical and literal) flag-waving in the press and the substantial hype about their chances, they felt under too great a pressure to achieve that they could not perform - they looked like frozen rabbits at times - and that stopped them. Or maybe the pressure to justify their salaries (I wouldn't mind that sort of pressure for a bit) , or ... Sometimes they look like they are just waiting for an excuse to lose. Player sent off, jinx coach opposite, can't win penalty shootouts ... (and we must counter here the argument that "the law of averages says they must win one" - it says no such thing). How many excuses are sufficient?

So you ask: why did they not perform? Portugal were beatable. If England had been two up, and probably if one up, when Rooney was sent off they would still have won - but for those 62 minutes he was on the field they barely looked like scoring. An organisation with such stage-fright has to be questioned as to its belief, effort and tactics. And whether the ability is as great as stated. Do any other organisations seem to achieve less success than they might be expected to? Do they look like they are using convenient excuses for lack of success?

Master and Servant

There liveth at that time a man who though his dwelling and attire be passing well appointed, yet his heart was empty, though he knoweth it not. And there cometh to his door a visitor who desireth to serve and he knocketh on the door, which when it openeth unto him, he saith to the owner "I have come because I desire to minister to you for I can see that your heart is sore. I shall be your servant and you shall be my master and this is my wish." And the owner, touched by the generosity of the offer, inviteth the stranger in and saith "I shall beyour master and you shall be my servant. Welcome."

So the servant taketh his position and looketh after the master and prepareth meals and keepeth the dwelling tidy and in this wise careth for the master. And the master's heart was eased and even strangely warmed for the relationship it was a good one and benefitteth both parties. And it came that the master saith to himself "I have received so much from my servant and it is not right that I give nothing in return." So he calleth the servant and he saith "Look here is a space which shall be yours for you have been faithful and true to your word and the servant is worthy of his hire." And he gaveth the servant to have his own bedroom and study for his comfort. And their relationship grew further harmonious and both prospered.

And the master saith again "I shall pay you, my servant, that you feel worthy and that your apparel may be a sign that you are hardworking and I shall no longer call you servant but butler." And it pleaseth the servant to be so honoured and valued and he was continual diligent. And some looketh on and marvelled.

But the honour given to the butler he felt not to be as great as that which the master possesseth and the butler, though he continue to serve at table, feeleth that he too was needy and he sneaketh sips of wine from the master's cellar when unobserved. And the master realiseth not and yet he wondereth that he had partaken so much. And the butler cometh to the master and saith "I could serve you better yet if you would allow me to do so, but it requires some investment. For in order to study correctly how best I may serve you I need some space and support and several more rooms, even unto the size of four." And the master seeth the logic and constructeth an extension being a whole new wing and an en-suite for the private use of the butler only, even though the cost was considerable and his resources were diminished thereby.

And the butler cometh again and addresseth the master thus "It seems to me that I am now more than a butler to you for I have all your interests at heart, and should I be given a new title?" And the master respondeth "You shall be called estate manager and I shall pay you accordingly for you have all my best interests at heart and whatever costs you have I shall cover them." And yet he goeth away and gaveth off a great sigh. For it seemeth to him that events overtaketh him and the financial burden it groweth larger and larger but his heart now vex him sore from time to time. For the master seeth how the estate manager now finely dresseth himself in comparison; and yet he remembereth all that had been given and he was still grateful
for all the past times. But the relationship between the twain now straineth a tiny bit. And indeed the expenses groweth further and more than the master had projected.

And then the day cometh when the estates manager cometh to the master (for he had become bold in manner) and saith "The costs continue to mount and I need an 8% increase to continue to manage my affairs." And the master taketh down the 12-bore shotgun from above the mantel-piece and he loadeth it and he giveth the estates manager both barrels full in the chest so that he lieth at his feet. And the master saith "There's an end of that", and he throweth the body into the street as a warning for all. And he putteth a sign on the outside of his house which saith

NO SERVANTS WANTED. KEEP AWAY.

And he liveth many long years more and though he yearneth inwardly yet he never forgetteth the servant who became a butler and finally a manager.

The Man in the Grey Suit - a cautionary tale

There was a man who used to wear an old grey suit. One of his friends suggested he could try something different, so he went out and bought a nice blue jacket. But on the first day that he wore it, somebody said they thought it was a bit too bright, and in order not to offend, he put it away for another day.

But that night he died, and some of his friends said it was a pity. Others though said that although it was a loss, they felt it should have happened earlier anyway because he was too conscious of standing out. And they went out and painted a rainbow.

The Last Supper

I wonder how it was set out?

LOL

A few programmes have made me laugh out loud when on my own:

Bottom
Men Behaving Badly
Grumpy Old Men
Green Wing

and the daddy of them all:

I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue.

Lots of fun in "One song to the Tune of Another".

This week:
Rob Brydon singing "Killing Me Softly With His Song" to the tune "The Bare Necessities".
Graeme Garden singing "Blowin' in the Wind" to the tune "Daytrip to Bangor"

Sadly no Jeremy Hardy. If you've heard me sing, you'll understand why I appreciate Jeremy so much.

Wish You Were Here

Now there's an ambiguous phrase if you like. Like the Spanish inquisition, every time I think I've counted the number of meanings I get another one. So these are not numbered.

It can be what postcards purport to be - I'm having a really good time and I think you'd like it too - a gift.
One step down: is I'm having a pretty good time, but something is missing, and it's you. Then it would be perfect. Yearning.
Further down is: I'm having a poor time but you would perhaps make it bearable. Alienation and loneliness but could be tinged with (faint) hope.
A bit more sardonic is: I'm having a poor time and you might as well be as miserable as me.
And of course: wish you were here and wish I wasn't. Which can have two versions, depending whether you think the addressee would like it.

Roger Waters seems to start in the third one, addressing Syd, but by side two (sorry, habit) is somewhere in the last phase, addressing - who knows. Hopelessness and possible paranoia.

What did you mean last time you used it? And who did you talk to? God?

Working for God

The Methodist Church - and maybe others - majors heavily on the idea of "call". All of us who are preachers have spoken of our call, in private, in public, on various occasions, and maybe on how the call has changed over time. And we love to hear of others' call. Not only preachers, of course.

I think we have missed a trick. Sometimes the appropriate term is not "called" but "sent". This sounds more dangerous than it is, for although it implies distance and separation from God, you find when you get there (and we all feel like Jonah sometimes) that God is waiting for you at the other end. All you have to do is find him/her.

The Man in Black

He is an iconic figure. His presence, his silhouette, his shadow, even the threat of his presence, can dominate a landscape or scene. He is symbolic. He sends a chill down your spine.

He can be a villain but that is mostly too obvious. He is an enigmatic figure for he is an outsider. He is a brooding, mysterious character. Even if he laughs, beware, for it is not always what it may seem. What does he want? Why is he there? Will he disrupt or enhance? Will he stay or go? For he can suddenly disappear, leaving only the ghost, the whisper of his otherness.

But it may be otherwise. Jerome K Jerome eloquently explained how we are what we eat and so we can also be what we wear. Maybe the man in black is driven by his appearance rather than the driver of it. He acts the way he does because of his look and feels a slave to it. Why he did choose to wear black? This is the question that must be answered, for it is key. Understand that to understand all.

The man who took off his hat

A man went and bought a new hat to see what it would look like. It was an odd feeling at first and he wasn't sure whether it really fit, and whether he actually liked it, but he persevered and grew to feel comfortable in it. And people began to recognise his new look and eventually to know him by his hat. He felt meanwhile that his hat was part of him and reflected who he was. He certainly noticed that people treated him differently from how they had before he started wearing it - a few didn't like it and wanted him to stop, and a few treated him worse, but on the whole he got on better with those he met.

But he wondered after a while whether folk only saw the hat, although he still felt comfortable in it. And he wondered what would happen if he took his hat off - how would he feel? So one day he took his hat off. It felt distinctly odd, and some folk didn't seem to recognise him any more, but despite all that he felt oddly liberated. He felt excited and confused together and those who knew him sensed it too. Some worried about him, and some encouraged him, and some wanted him to put that hat straight back on, and some didn't know how to advise him (but some did anyway). So he had to have a serious think.

Should he go back to wearing the familiar hat? Would it be the same?
Should he wear it only sometimes? What would people think? Would they recognise him?
Was the hat too old to wear, and should he buy a new one, or simply go without for a bit?

Ichthus

I don't normally race to read it, but for some reason did today. Wow. Bit curious though.

First article starts "If you ask most students about theological College ..." ! - but that's only the hook. And though it purports to be about prayer it seems to be more about sermons. So that one threw me for a loop.

And page 19 (by P. Johnson!) starts about hymn-sandwiches, but finishes about liturgy and read prayers! (a little harshly here and there on the latter). I do agree with him on meditation, though.

OK I know when I'm being got at.

Reflections on alternative worship

I've had a bit of time to think, but these thoughts are still to some extent "work in progress".

I enjoyed the service. That's the only bit here that's meant to be evaluative, but it's worth saying first.

I wonder if I need a bit of practice at getting as much as I can out of this sort of service. Specifically I wonder if I tried to do too much - in that in the time available I tried to go round every station, not necessarily to spend equal time at each but to value each, and I don't think I had enough time at every place. I probably could have spent twice as long at most of them.

In the order I visited:

The hotel room I take to be about loneliness and alienation, but there's something else which I haven't quite verbalised.
I placed myself on the physical map and looked at the old map, wondering at its value. I did write something about this station at the signpost.
At the tent I remembered a gift from God and a place at which it "was received".
The camper van told me about how we treat those who travel, but I think there's more.
At the signpost I read others' messages but can't now remember any - and I think some were helpful. I hope mine was. The signpost is perhaps a bit obvious as a symbol and too familiar (or current) for new reflection.
The cairn was a puzzle. I don't recall clearly what it said. And I had definitely run out of time at the end.

The blues song was good to finish, but I didn't get much from the readings - again perhaps too familiar? Couldn't manage the fresh eyes needed. I was challenged by writing on the tape. I may have taken this one too literally.

I'm still in a place where I'm more comfortable with more input, or maybe a particular form of same. We'll see. Like eating rich food when you're used to simple fare? Or nouvelle cuisine compared with a trencherman's usual?

Introduction Needed

I need to meet someone. No not that sort of someone. It occurs to me that I know a Hope and a Charity, but I need to get to know a Faith to complete the set.

I also know a Grace and a Verity, and a Joy. Perhaps a Makepeace?

I know an Angel and at least one Michael, so a Gabriel would be good. Or a Raphael.

At College I know David and Jonathan.

I could probably do with a Patience and a Prudence, too.