I posed some questions regarding scenarios I have encountered during 2011 thus far.
The first considered meeting a woman who, at some stage in her life, had an abortion. Now it is obvious that this is raw and painful She's still raw about it and now, some time after the event we find her wracked with guilt and grieving, feeling the pain of the loss for which she was responsible. .
Do I condemn her because of the abortion?
I don't think so, for Christians are not in the business of issuing condemnation but of correcting and restoring. I wasn't part of the process that led the person to consider and take up the option of an abortion, but I am now part of the process which sees her restored and moving forward with God.
It is so easy to judge when you're outside of the situation and whilst I consider a pro-life stance to be the only approach that is Biblical, I find my Bible telling me to restore those who have been caught up in sin, 'gently'. If asked, we need to say that the decision taken wouldn't be our choice and move on. There is great potential for righteous (which usually means wrong) indignation and for us to find ourselves sinning by our response.
What does it say in matthew Chapter seven? Oh yeah, don't judge because if you do then you're asking to be judged the same way you do it! First rule, what is the Biblical way forward and how would you like to be corrected? (and that's before we consider the loss of a child, regardless of the reason)
Comfort her over the loss of her child?
Well in short, the answer is 'yes'. A life has been lost and there is a mixture of grieving, guilt, regret and loads of fear besides. regardless of how the point has been reached, it has been reached and there is a child who has been lost. In days gone by when I was involved with both LIFE and SPUC I used to encounter a great many women who had never been counselled and and grief-stricken over the lost of their child. Often the situation would be worse as they reached the EDD (or the anniversary of it) and they needed the same counselling and support that a miscarriage or stillbirth woman would need (along with help over the part they'd played in the loss too!).
Tell her 'you're forgiven' and that 'it's done now'?
Remembering the words of 1 John chapter nine:
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
Simple then, isn't it? If the person has acknowledged their sin then forgiveness is part of the transaction. What right do I have to pronounce what God doesn't or deny what His word, and nature, makes real? This is not to deny what has happened and it is not to ignore or diminish - we have to move on, living in the past is what dead people do!
Do I leave, rushing to be free of this sinner?
Some people take this approach, but this is reason so many errors and misjudgments become the norm. We fail to engage and by absenting ourselves give what is often taken to be tacit approval to the act or attitude. Those leaving often tell themselves they are making a moral stand, but rarely is this communicated by them and even less rarely is it understood or lived in by the person who is left there. They see no conflict and thus assume that their position has some merit.
There is much more to the scenario than that given here. As ever, the key is relationship and asking ourselves that perennial question, 'What Would Jesus Do?' and combining this with our Bibles to see, 'What did Jesus Do Then?'. The Micah, 'Mercy, Justice & Humility' is useful too!
I hope this helps move the discussions further with those who are looking at the issue of calling and perhaps makes us a little more responsive as ministers and members of the Church.
Pax
Wednesday, 2 February 2011
Tuesday, 1 February 2011
By their fruit. . .
Shall you know them!
Now I grew up on a home that was most definitely not 'religious' yet oddly my Mother used a great many expressions and phrases that were Boblical. Looking at my recent crop of experiences and goings on, I wondered whether we would be known for the right things or seen simply to deny Christ?
Here's a quick quiz for me, but you join in and play if you wish:
1. You meet a woman who had an abortion. She's still raw about it and now, some time on, wracked with guilt and grieving, feeling the pain of that loss.
Do I condemn her because of the abortion?
Comfort her for the loss of her child?
Tell her 'you're forgiven' and that 'it's done now'?
Do I leave, rushing to be free of this sinner?
2. I am approached by a man who informs me that he and his partner are hopefully moving in and wondered whether they'd find a welcoming place within our building. His partner is another man!
Do I tell him that he and his partner are going to burn in hell and leave in case I catch a dose of homosexuality?
Do I tell him he's welcome but 'no communion for you'?
Do I tell him I don't consider homosexuality to be a compatible Christian lifestyle but also explain that he's a brother and that was the place we needed, honestly and in dialogue, to work from?
Do I, looking to avoid conflict, merely smile and say nothing?
3. I am approached by a man who 'has a calling'. He's a member of another church in the area and lives with a woman. They're not married and have no intention of it. He comes to ask my opinion about his domestic situation in the hope that the CofE wouldn't be bothered about it and would train and ordain him.
Do I explain that the CofE is not an 'anything goes' organisation and tell him to go and sin no more?
Do I tell him that he'd be ok as long as he keeps his domestics to himself?
Do I start to outline how we test calling and explain that his home situation presents a problem which needs to be addressed regardless.
Do I tell him to leave his 'other half', and their kids for the sake of his eternal soul?
Do I te hi
To talk to his pastor and contact him to ask him to talk to this bloke and sort him out?
4. A woman comes to the door wanting baptism for one of her kids. She has a few kids, all different fathers, is pregnant (again! Different father from rest). What do you do?
Tell her she needs to do course and attend for six months.
Tell her I can't baptise the child because baptism requires 'true repentance on the part of the candidate'.
Shrug and give her a date to suit her.
Engage and look at building a relationship to
address the many spitiual, moral and practical issues before me - looking to be a friend?
Just a snapshot of a few of January's challenges.
How would you do? Would you be sheep or goat. Saint or sinner? Pastor or prune?
Pax
Now I grew up on a home that was most definitely not 'religious' yet oddly my Mother used a great many expressions and phrases that were Boblical. Looking at my recent crop of experiences and goings on, I wondered whether we would be known for the right things or seen simply to deny Christ?
Here's a quick quiz for me, but you join in and play if you wish:
1. You meet a woman who had an abortion. She's still raw about it and now, some time on, wracked with guilt and grieving, feeling the pain of that loss.
Do I condemn her because of the abortion?
Comfort her for the loss of her child?
Tell her 'you're forgiven' and that 'it's done now'?
Do I leave, rushing to be free of this sinner?
2. I am approached by a man who informs me that he and his partner are hopefully moving in and wondered whether they'd find a welcoming place within our building. His partner is another man!
Do I tell him that he and his partner are going to burn in hell and leave in case I catch a dose of homosexuality?
Do I tell him he's welcome but 'no communion for you'?
Do I tell him I don't consider homosexuality to be a compatible Christian lifestyle but also explain that he's a brother and that was the place we needed, honestly and in dialogue, to work from?
Do I, looking to avoid conflict, merely smile and say nothing?
3. I am approached by a man who 'has a calling'. He's a member of another church in the area and lives with a woman. They're not married and have no intention of it. He comes to ask my opinion about his domestic situation in the hope that the CofE wouldn't be bothered about it and would train and ordain him.
Do I explain that the CofE is not an 'anything goes' organisation and tell him to go and sin no more?
Do I tell him that he'd be ok as long as he keeps his domestics to himself?
Do I start to outline how we test calling and explain that his home situation presents a problem which needs to be addressed regardless.
Do I tell him to leave his 'other half', and their kids for the sake of his eternal soul?
Do I te hi
To talk to his pastor and contact him to ask him to talk to this bloke and sort him out?
4. A woman comes to the door wanting baptism for one of her kids. She has a few kids, all different fathers, is pregnant (again! Different father from rest). What do you do?
Tell her she needs to do course and attend for six months.
Tell her I can't baptise the child because baptism requires 'true repentance on the part of the candidate'.
Shrug and give her a date to suit her.
Engage and look at building a relationship to
address the many spitiual, moral and practical issues before me - looking to be a friend?
Just a snapshot of a few of January's challenges.
How would you do? Would you be sheep or goat. Saint or sinner? Pastor or prune?
Pax
Monday, 31 January 2011
Where never is heard . . .
The Primate's meeting in Dublin has ended and there wasn't a 'discouraging word'!
No, not one. There were of course two and these are: "CRITICAL SITUATION!"
Rowan did mention that there were a 'significant number of absentees for a number of reasons."
How true and the fact is that it appears that the number of reasons is, predominantly, 'ONE'.
And this ONE reason became flesh and took on the appearance of the lovely KJS, doyen of the liberal and wicked witch to the orthodox! Her invitation, the continuing naughtiness of the American Episcopalians and Rowan's ability to issue warnings and state positions that are never acted upon are causing a lack of confidence in one and bringing the Communion to what is indeed, a 'CRITICAL SITUATION'.
The Primate's own communiqués regarding everything that the Episcopalians have been doing have been ignored and the Episcopalians have broken every commitment and promise it appeared to have made. It was this that stopped the majority of those who stayed at home from coming! Rowan said that their absence was 'felt' and mentions that every day their name plates were placed on empty chairs and candles were lit for them!
If the absences were 'felt' then surely they should also have been acted upon? If I was in a situation whereby someone (or as in this case, 'many') absented themselves from a meeting (social or business) I would seek to remedy this sadness. Surely this is what Rowan should have done, and needs to do?
Rowans words, "They would not be “closing the doors on those who are not with us”.
Surely the reality is that he 'should not have been opening doors to some who were with him!'
He spoke of a “long task” which would see many diplomatic entreaties and positioning and hoped that the Primate's own standing committee might assist in “re-establishing local and regional relationships” and then, when asked about 'disciplinary action against the Episcopalians' said he didn't know. Apparently he doesn't have a crystal ball regarding the actions against the Episcopalians, but I have a sneaky feeling that he doesn't need one - seems to me, other than more primates bugging our and showing their lack of confidence in the man, Rowan doesn't have a clue.
I think the problem is that he's stuck between his own views and doing that the role of ABC demands. On one hand there are the needs of the many and on the other the views of the one!
This rift, for regardless of how one presents it, it is indeed a rift will only serve to fuel division and present opportunities for those who wish to make mischief (from every side). The issues responsible for the rift will only convince those in denominations outside of Rome and the CofE that the Anglicans are becoming a limp-wristed, liberal and sexuality-confused (and sexual-sin approving) bunch.
Warnings are issued; Positions are stated and all that Dublin has demonstrated is that they were merely words, hollow and impotent words. A verbal reflect of the physical manifestation perhaps?
No, not one. There were of course two and these are: "CRITICAL SITUATION!"
Rowan did mention that there were a 'significant number of absentees for a number of reasons."
How true and the fact is that it appears that the number of reasons is, predominantly, 'ONE'.
And this ONE reason became flesh and took on the appearance of the lovely KJS, doyen of the liberal and wicked witch to the orthodox! Her invitation, the continuing naughtiness of the American Episcopalians and Rowan's ability to issue warnings and state positions that are never acted upon are causing a lack of confidence in one and bringing the Communion to what is indeed, a 'CRITICAL SITUATION'.
The Primate's own communiqués regarding everything that the Episcopalians have been doing have been ignored and the Episcopalians have broken every commitment and promise it appeared to have made. It was this that stopped the majority of those who stayed at home from coming! Rowan said that their absence was 'felt' and mentions that every day their name plates were placed on empty chairs and candles were lit for them!
If the absences were 'felt' then surely they should also have been acted upon? If I was in a situation whereby someone (or as in this case, 'many') absented themselves from a meeting (social or business) I would seek to remedy this sadness. Surely this is what Rowan should have done, and needs to do?
Rowans words, "They would not be “closing the doors on those who are not with us”.
Surely the reality is that he 'should not have been opening doors to some who were with him!'
He spoke of a “long task” which would see many diplomatic entreaties and positioning and hoped that the Primate's own standing committee might assist in “re-establishing local and regional relationships” and then, when asked about 'disciplinary action against the Episcopalians' said he didn't know. Apparently he doesn't have a crystal ball regarding the actions against the Episcopalians, but I have a sneaky feeling that he doesn't need one - seems to me, other than more primates bugging our and showing their lack of confidence in the man, Rowan doesn't have a clue.
I think the problem is that he's stuck between his own views and doing that the role of ABC demands. On one hand there are the needs of the many and on the other the views of the one!
This rift, for regardless of how one presents it, it is indeed a rift will only serve to fuel division and present opportunities for those who wish to make mischief (from every side). The issues responsible for the rift will only convince those in denominations outside of Rome and the CofE that the Anglicans are becoming a limp-wristed, liberal and sexuality-confused (and sexual-sin approving) bunch.
Warnings are issued; Positions are stated and all that Dublin has demonstrated is that they were merely words, hollow and impotent words. A verbal reflect of the physical manifestation perhaps?
Sunday, 30 January 2011
Daily Bread
I was once again caught up by the story of the widow of Zaraphath (I Kings 17) and the NT reading which spoke of Jesus' first miracle at the wedding when he turns water into wine. A couple of creation miracles which spurred me into thinking about the Lord's Prayer.
Before I get too engrossed in things, here's a look at the widow's story:
"Then the word of the Lord came to him, “Arise, go to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and dwell there. Behold, I have commanded a widow there to feed you.” So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, behold, a widow was there gathering sticks. And he called to her and said, “Bring me a little water in a vessel, that I may drink.” And as she was going to bring it, he called to her and said, “Bring me a morsel of bread in your hand.” And she said, “As the Lord your God lives, I have nothing baked, only a handful of flour in a jar and a little oil in a jug. And now I am gathering a couple of sticks that I may go in and prepare it for myself and my son, that we may eat it and die.” And Elijah said to her, “Do not fear; go and do as you have said. But first make me a little cake of it and bring it to me, and afterward make something for yourself and your son. For thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘The jar of flour shall not be spent, and the jug of oil shall not be empty, until the day that the Lord sends rain upon the earth.’” And she went and did as Elijah said. And she and he and her household ate for many days. The jar of flour was not spent, neither did the jug of oil become empty, according to the word of the Lord that he spoke by Elijah."
Here we have a woman who has so little that once the final meal is done, all that awaits her and her son is starvation and death. But 'according to the word spoken by Elijah', this did not happen. The oil and flour continued to be there for them and they lived 'until the rains came' (which I have assumed means that stuff grows and fruits ripen and so other food will be available).
People recite the Lord's Prayer without, it seems to me, taking onboard the words relating to the giving of our daily bread. If I had a pound for every person I've met who has told me that they 'live by faith' when what they mean is that they are well-paid and comfortable, I'd have more than a pound!
Every day God provides for us, but we lose that provision in the comfort our our employment and earnings, or perhaps unemployment and our benefits. It is too easy for us to fail to see God's provisions because we provide for ourselves.
It is easy to trust God when we have an income, an assured job, education, a supportive family and the like, but behind all the facades, when the smoke clears - if we stop, think and pray - we will find God's hand on our lives.
Pax
Before I get too engrossed in things, here's a look at the widow's story:
"Then the word of the Lord came to him, “Arise, go to Zarephath, which belongs to Sidon, and dwell there. Behold, I have commanded a widow there to feed you.” So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, behold, a widow was there gathering sticks. And he called to her and said, “Bring me a little water in a vessel, that I may drink.” And as she was going to bring it, he called to her and said, “Bring me a morsel of bread in your hand.” And she said, “As the Lord your God lives, I have nothing baked, only a handful of flour in a jar and a little oil in a jug. And now I am gathering a couple of sticks that I may go in and prepare it for myself and my son, that we may eat it and die.” And Elijah said to her, “Do not fear; go and do as you have said. But first make me a little cake of it and bring it to me, and afterward make something for yourself and your son. For thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘The jar of flour shall not be spent, and the jug of oil shall not be empty, until the day that the Lord sends rain upon the earth.’” And she went and did as Elijah said. And she and he and her household ate for many days. The jar of flour was not spent, neither did the jug of oil become empty, according to the word of the Lord that he spoke by Elijah."
Here we have a woman who has so little that once the final meal is done, all that awaits her and her son is starvation and death. But 'according to the word spoken by Elijah', this did not happen. The oil and flour continued to be there for them and they lived 'until the rains came' (which I have assumed means that stuff grows and fruits ripen and so other food will be available).
People recite the Lord's Prayer without, it seems to me, taking onboard the words relating to the giving of our daily bread. If I had a pound for every person I've met who has told me that they 'live by faith' when what they mean is that they are well-paid and comfortable, I'd have more than a pound!
Every day God provides for us, but we lose that provision in the comfort our our employment and earnings, or perhaps unemployment and our benefits. It is too easy for us to fail to see God's provisions because we provide for ourselves.
It is easy to trust God when we have an income, an assured job, education, a supportive family and the like, but behind all the facades, when the smoke clears - if we stop, think and pray - we will find God's hand on our lives.
Pax
Saturday, 29 January 2011
Utilities, communications and privatisation
I know I'm going to sound like a real dinosaur here but here goes:
I see that moves are, once more, afoot to sell off the british Postal Service (AKA 'The Post Office'. Not only that but Vince Cable (the business secretary) says that the coalition government, "Would not be opposed to foreign investors buying it to help tackle the pensions deficit."
Now I have two distinct areas of difficulty with this. The first relates to the fact that we have an excellent postal system which collects locally and delivers to our doors (in fact, through our doors) and any selling of the business will undoubtedly see this eroded. After all, we already have private mail firms who collect, primary sort and then deliver the mail by using the Post Office (how blinking bonkers is that?). We have the cosy, inner-city stuff handed over to private carries and then complain about the fact that in suburban and rural areas the Post Office goes where others couldn't, especially not at the price that they charge!
Selling the business off is a fool's charter and one which, even with email and the like, will change for the worse our social infrastructure. We will see even more post office branches vanish and the prices will go through the roof.
There is business backing for selling the business off because having sold off some bits and allowed competition (surely competition should use it's own vehicles and postal staff, not piggyback on the Post Office's?) they have undermined and weakened the business so that it look ripe for selling.
But I did say two areas, so let's move onto the other one:
I was taught that it was foolhardy to put utilities and communications in the hands of foreign entities. Now this might sound a bit paranoid (but they might be out to get me) and I might soon appear as if I support conspiracy plans (What! They're out to get me and they're planning it too!), but . .
There is something to be said for a state-owned water, electricity, gas, sewage, telephone and postal service. Ultimately, in time of war, for instance, I am sure that all of the above would be drawn back under the control of any government of the day (O.K., it's obvious that if they're involved we're probably already doomed!). But I hope you see the logic. It's not one that supports a free trade global market I know, but logistically there is logic in what I say (I think).
Of course I am but a mere dog collar (who would also re-open the Post Office Railway which nestles dormant below the streets of central London and take loads of the mail vans off the streets!) and know little about even less, but it still makes sense to my addled brain.
Doubtless someone clever out there can tell me why I'm wrong . .go on then :)
Pax
I see that moves are, once more, afoot to sell off the british Postal Service (AKA 'The Post Office'. Not only that but Vince Cable (the business secretary) says that the coalition government, "Would not be opposed to foreign investors buying it to help tackle the pensions deficit."
Now I have two distinct areas of difficulty with this. The first relates to the fact that we have an excellent postal system which collects locally and delivers to our doors (in fact, through our doors) and any selling of the business will undoubtedly see this eroded. After all, we already have private mail firms who collect, primary sort and then deliver the mail by using the Post Office (how blinking bonkers is that?). We have the cosy, inner-city stuff handed over to private carries and then complain about the fact that in suburban and rural areas the Post Office goes where others couldn't, especially not at the price that they charge!
Selling the business off is a fool's charter and one which, even with email and the like, will change for the worse our social infrastructure. We will see even more post office branches vanish and the prices will go through the roof.
There is business backing for selling the business off because having sold off some bits and allowed competition (surely competition should use it's own vehicles and postal staff, not piggyback on the Post Office's?) they have undermined and weakened the business so that it look ripe for selling.
But I did say two areas, so let's move onto the other one:
I was taught that it was foolhardy to put utilities and communications in the hands of foreign entities. Now this might sound a bit paranoid (but they might be out to get me) and I might soon appear as if I support conspiracy plans (What! They're out to get me and they're planning it too!), but . .
There is something to be said for a state-owned water, electricity, gas, sewage, telephone and postal service. Ultimately, in time of war, for instance, I am sure that all of the above would be drawn back under the control of any government of the day (O.K., it's obvious that if they're involved we're probably already doomed!). But I hope you see the logic. It's not one that supports a free trade global market I know, but logistically there is logic in what I say (I think).
Of course I am but a mere dog collar (who would also re-open the Post Office Railway which nestles dormant below the streets of central London and take loads of the mail vans off the streets!) and know little about even less, but it still makes sense to my addled brain.
Doubtless someone clever out there can tell me why I'm wrong . .go on then :)
Pax
Everything in common?
I get a bit concerned with the fact that so many people quote Acts Two (verse forty-two onwards) that it becomes a little hackneyed and also perhaps a lot of a cliche too, losing the impact through the familiarity.
For me, this passage highlights what ecumenism, and living as a Christian, is all about!
This passage speaks of the believers living on their 'own homes' and managing their own affairs (familial, financial stuff). But it also speaks of the believers selling possessions to ensure that 'none went without'. This has, for me, a resonance with the instruction regarding 'bringing all of our tithe into the storehouse . . .' found in Malachi chapter ten.
As we each live in our spiritual houses, the churches and fellowships, we need to be looking to emulate the Acts 2:42 church within our fellowships and within the wider, local and 'translocal' (as Dunn calls it!).
A call for us to support our own church family (through prayer, tithes for the church and pastoral care and giving within it), the local church family (through prayer, physical and financial support and commitment to each and every member and congregation) and the wider Church (through mission giving, calling out for ministry and projects).
It's so simple, so why don't we do it?
Some only want to live on their 'holy huddles' and live in isolation - not Biblical, not right!
Some only want to support their own
group, franchise or denomination - again, not Biblical, not right, not to be done (this doesn't mean we deny or work against our denomination though), sorry!
Some only want to support local (or British) projects and churches - again, wrong!
Some only want to support like-minded people. Some want to use support as a carrot and withholding of the Eucharist as a stick. Doesn't look that good in print does it (but there is a discussion to be had here!).
As the NT Church was seen to be in unity. As the world saw people living in communion and peace, they flocked to join and get some of it. How many flocking in these days?
Have any idea why not?
Pax
For me, this passage highlights what ecumenism, and living as a Christian, is all about!
This passage speaks of the believers living on their 'own homes' and managing their own affairs (familial, financial stuff). But it also speaks of the believers selling possessions to ensure that 'none went without'. This has, for me, a resonance with the instruction regarding 'bringing all of our tithe into the storehouse . . .' found in Malachi chapter ten.
As we each live in our spiritual houses, the churches and fellowships, we need to be looking to emulate the Acts 2:42 church within our fellowships and within the wider, local and 'translocal' (as Dunn calls it!).
A call for us to support our own church family (through prayer, tithes for the church and pastoral care and giving within it), the local church family (through prayer, physical and financial support and commitment to each and every member and congregation) and the wider Church (through mission giving, calling out for ministry and projects).
It's so simple, so why don't we do it?
Some only want to live on their 'holy huddles' and live in isolation - not Biblical, not right!
Some only want to support their own
group, franchise or denomination - again, not Biblical, not right, not to be done (this doesn't mean we deny or work against our denomination though), sorry!
Some only want to support local (or British) projects and churches - again, wrong!
Some only want to support like-minded people. Some want to use support as a carrot and withholding of the Eucharist as a stick. Doesn't look that good in print does it (but there is a discussion to be had here!).
As the NT Church was seen to be in unity. As the world saw people living in communion and peace, they flocked to join and get some of it. How many flocking in these days?
Have any idea why not?
Pax
Friday, 28 January 2011
Blogging and getting the hits!
What's going on with the blogging business I wonder? Today I've had three emails offering to get me more hits and and another telephone call from another reader (that means I have two now, things are looking up!) who wondered what I thought about a certain blog. I asked what the criterion was for my response and they said that being mentioned on it would certainly mean that they were at least referenced in a place that is authoritative and therefore likely to get them noticed.
This gave me a problem in that perhaps I've been a little foolish in thinking that you posted links to, and quoted, those blogs which challenged, informed or in some way touched you. Perhaps I was wrong and that the basis of posting links and having a blogroll (that is a list of blogs which are recommended) is all part of a quid pro quo sort of arrangement (I remember my Latin teacher telling us us that although it meant 'this for that' it was best remembered as "What's in it for me?").
I have to say that I consider it to be a rather mercenary exchange and one that might lead the poor purveyor of a blog to point to the blog of another as a merely commercial or advertising rich opportunity, which surely indicates a certain cynicism and a potential lack of integrity. Now I am sure that no one links to, or quotes, another source just to look good or attract attention or applause. Then again, remembering marking essays I was also sure that every quote, even though totally out of context was there for a purpose other than to make me think the author of the (sometimes vague and tedious) essay had actually read the set books. Of course, should the opportunity present itself in a tutorial to engage with the topic, it often transpired that perhaps I should have been more cynical.
Still, Augustine was indeed (as one student wrote) a Hippo and Julian was one of Norwich's finest and most spiritual sons! Not only that but Paul had his name changed when he became a Christian as he gave his Saul to his maker (where do students get this stuff, I'm sure I've never taught such things!!!).
Anyway, as is my wont, I digress.
Another good piece of advice is that unless one wants to 'monetize' (one has to ask oneself whether that is really a word one!) or need to have the most hits (in which case can I suggest that myriad numbers of minimally dressed people, a plethora of expletives and the like will do the trick. I look forward to seeing how you're going to make it Christian, but we all have our challenges :) ), then don't bother.
You will attract those whom find you valid or give them a sense of security in that THERE ARE people out there who are thicker than them. The problem only comes if you care and need to be affirmed. That said I will have to find out how many hits this blog does get, because people ask and my answer of 'ten' doesn't seem to hold much sway (they know I know that they know I'm exaggerating wildly!).
Seems that size really matters, just not sure whether it's those who have the numbers or those who don't that worry about it!
Pax.
ps.I really enjoyed one of the adverts today. Apparently if I copy some of the content from sites that attract a large number of hits, people will also find my blog and come to me to see what I've got to say about that topic, and of course when they find out the answer is 'nothing', they will keep on coming back too!
pps. Wonder if that works for sermons too?
This gave me a problem in that perhaps I've been a little foolish in thinking that you posted links to, and quoted, those blogs which challenged, informed or in some way touched you. Perhaps I was wrong and that the basis of posting links and having a blogroll (that is a list of blogs which are recommended) is all part of a quid pro quo sort of arrangement (I remember my Latin teacher telling us us that although it meant 'this for that' it was best remembered as "What's in it for me?").
I have to say that I consider it to be a rather mercenary exchange and one that might lead the poor purveyor of a blog to point to the blog of another as a merely commercial or advertising rich opportunity, which surely indicates a certain cynicism and a potential lack of integrity. Now I am sure that no one links to, or quotes, another source just to look good or attract attention or applause. Then again, remembering marking essays I was also sure that every quote, even though totally out of context was there for a purpose other than to make me think the author of the (sometimes vague and tedious) essay had actually read the set books. Of course, should the opportunity present itself in a tutorial to engage with the topic, it often transpired that perhaps I should have been more cynical.
Still, Augustine was indeed (as one student wrote) a Hippo and Julian was one of Norwich's finest and most spiritual sons! Not only that but Paul had his name changed when he became a Christian as he gave his Saul to his maker (where do students get this stuff, I'm sure I've never taught such things!!!).
Anyway, as is my wont, I digress.
Another good piece of advice is that unless one wants to 'monetize' (one has to ask oneself whether that is really a word one!) or need to have the most hits (in which case can I suggest that myriad numbers of minimally dressed people, a plethora of expletives and the like will do the trick. I look forward to seeing how you're going to make it Christian, but we all have our challenges :) ), then don't bother.
You will attract those whom find you valid or give them a sense of security in that THERE ARE people out there who are thicker than them. The problem only comes if you care and need to be affirmed. That said I will have to find out how many hits this blog does get, because people ask and my answer of 'ten' doesn't seem to hold much sway (they know I know that they know I'm exaggerating wildly!).
Seems that size really matters, just not sure whether it's those who have the numbers or those who don't that worry about it!
Pax.
ps.I really enjoyed one of the adverts today. Apparently if I copy some of the content from sites that attract a large number of hits, people will also find my blog and come to me to see what I've got to say about that topic, and of course when they find out the answer is 'nothing', they will keep on coming back too!
pps. Wonder if that works for sermons too?
Thursday, 27 January 2011
Holocaust Memorial Day 2011
This coming Sunday sees us hosting our annual Holocaust Memorial Day service.
This year's theme is 'Untold Stories'. Here's the preamble from HMD :
"It’s easy to talk about the numbers murdered and persecuted during the Holocaust and subsequent genocides. It’s less easy to appreciate what these figures mean. The millions murdered under the Nazi regime of hatred aren’t a statistic. They were individuals. Somebody’s friend. A mother. A father. A child. A colleague. A neighbour.
There are millions of stories we will never know. But we can still honour the memory of those affected by genocide by playing a part in these Untold Stories. We can listen and learn from them, we can tell others the stories we hear. Some stories are not easy to hear. They can speak of danger, pain and suffering. We must not shy away from these stories – it is vital to recognise the consequences of exclusion and persecution in order for us to learn the lessons of the past.
We all have the power to play a part in the lives and words that are remembered, it is our role to ensure that the Untold Stories from the past do not get lost. On HMD 2011, we are asking everyone to tell these stories that enable us to learn from history, from the real stories of those who are no longer with us in order to create a safer, better future.
And something to watch.
HMD 2011 Untold Stories from Holocaust Memorial Day Trust on Vimeo.
Not too late to include HMD in your Sunday service, and if you think it is, start planning for next year.
Pax
This year's theme is 'Untold Stories'. Here's the preamble from HMD :
"It’s easy to talk about the numbers murdered and persecuted during the Holocaust and subsequent genocides. It’s less easy to appreciate what these figures mean. The millions murdered under the Nazi regime of hatred aren’t a statistic. They were individuals. Somebody’s friend. A mother. A father. A child. A colleague. A neighbour.
There are millions of stories we will never know. But we can still honour the memory of those affected by genocide by playing a part in these Untold Stories. We can listen and learn from them, we can tell others the stories we hear. Some stories are not easy to hear. They can speak of danger, pain and suffering. We must not shy away from these stories – it is vital to recognise the consequences of exclusion and persecution in order for us to learn the lessons of the past.
We all have the power to play a part in the lives and words that are remembered, it is our role to ensure that the Untold Stories from the past do not get lost. On HMD 2011, we are asking everyone to tell these stories that enable us to learn from history, from the real stories of those who are no longer with us in order to create a safer, better future.
And something to watch.
HMD 2011 Untold Stories from Holocaust Memorial Day Trust on Vimeo.
Not too late to include HMD in your Sunday service, and if you think it is, start planning for next year.
Pax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)