interim mutterings

What I learned from going to Speaker's Corner

2011-02-18T17:56:00.011Z

The following is a sanitised version of the ideas I shared at our home group on 2nd Feb 2011.
1. The Hermeneutical Key (Gen 3v8-9)
Jay gives a whole talk highlighting theological differences between Islam and Christianity starting with these verses. The key point in these verses is that God on the Earth directly interacting with humans, something which could never happen in Islam. Two of the theological differences Jay talks about are sin and heaven/paradise.
In Gen 3 we see Adam and Eve hiding from God that is their sin has put a barrier between them and God. If God had visited the garden before (it seems reasonable to me that he would have done) then Adam and Eve wouldn't have been hiding from him, coz there wouldn't have been any sin. In Islam though God and mankind are separated even before sin comes, it is not sin that creates that barrier so sin in Islam isn't anywhere near as serious.
If man and God can walk and talk at the start then at the other end of history in heaven it seems reasonable that they will be able to walk and talk again. Certainly we will be in God's presence and be able to worship him. In Islam that separation will continue, God will not be in paradise with those that make it there. (Jay's paper)
2. The story of Joseph.
The Koran only has two complete stories; one of these is the story of Joseph in Sura 12. The bible story goes into much more detail; however amongst the details that they both include there are two differences.
The first is the price Joseph is sold into slavery for. The bible says that Joseph brothers "... sold him for twenty shekels of silver ..." (Gen 37v28). Here a shekel is a weight and 20 shekels is about 8oz. There is historical evidence that this is the right ball park figure for the cost of a slave in that era. Now the Koran says: "Then they sold him for a paltry price, a handful of counted dirhams; for they set small store by him." (Sura 12:20) and is talking about coins - something you count, yet coins didn't exist until 1000 years after Joseph. Showing that the historical details contained in the bible are accurate, yet the Koran gets these wrong.
The other difference is to do with Joseph's dream, the eleven stars and the sun and moon all bow down to Joseph's star. According to the bible in Egypt Joseph's eleven brothers all bow down to him, but Jacob is not recorded as bowing down to him and Rachel is dead (Gen 35v19) before the dream occurs (Gen 37v9). Thus what do the sun and moon refer to? the dream doesn't appear to be fulfilled. In Sura 12v100 Joseph claims the dream is fulfilled: And he lifted his father and mother upon the throne; and the others fell down prostrate before him. 'See, father,' he said, 'this is the interpretation of my vision of long ago; my Lord has made it true." In fact the dream isn't fulfilled that much better as Jacob and Rebecca don't bow down to him.
3. Trinity
Gen 1v1 "... God created ..." Here God is Elohim, which is the plural form - in fact it is a 3 or more plural. While 'created' is singular, this is grammatically incorrect in the Hebrew. This grammatically error could be God way of indicating that there is something unusual about him like he is not a unity but a trinity.
Gen 19v24 NIV: "Then the LORD rained down burning sulphur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens." Lord in this verse is YHWH the personal name of God that is often pronounced Yahweh or Jehovah. If we read back from this verse then we will see that the first Lord has been on the earth talking to Abraham for previous couple of chapters. While the 2nd Lord is in the heavens. So there are 2 YHWH's working together to bring about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Today the best known bible (memory) verse is Jn3:16 and probably the most important doctrine is the love of God. In the early church the most important doctrine was the incarnation and this verse was the best known bible verse.
In Exodus 33 there are two verses which would be contradictory with one another if God is only a unity. In v10 we have "The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend." that is Moses looking into God's face. While in v20 Moses is not allowed to look into God's face and is only allowed to look at his back. The trinity explains this seeming contradiction, in v10 Moses was speaking with the 2nd person of the trinity, while latter in the chapter it is the 1st person of the trinity that he is not allowed to look into the face of.
Relationships between human beings are fundamental to the way the world works. Why would a Unitarian God put relationships at the centre of his creation, but since there are relationships within the Godhead it would be quite understandable for a Trinitarian God to do this. Further in the bible God is Love, while in the Koran one of the names of God is 'loving'. Now love requires an object. For a Trinitarian God this is not a problem because there can be love for the Son from the Father and love for the Spirit from the Son and love for the Father from the spirit. While for a Unitarian God this is a problem because it makes him dependant/contingent upon his creation. This argument can be extended to show that love requires God to be a trinity not just a duality, but my understanding of that part of the argument is much more woolly.
4. Contradictions.
Jay did 3 debates with a Canadian Muslim called Shabbiar Alley in the 1990's. In the first of these Shabbiar produce a list '101 clear contradictions in the bible'. In the next debate Jay produced a paper giving explanations for these so called contradictions. Two of these are as follows.
2Sam24v1: Again the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.”
1Chron21v1: Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.
So who was it that wanted the census? The result of the census was bad for the people of Israel. Satan wanted this as he always delights in people suffering, while God wanted it as a punishment on his people. So they both wanted it.
2Sam21v19: In another battle with the Philistines at Gob, Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, ...
Now this contradicts the well known the Sunday school story in which David kills Goliath. However, in the Hebrew this verse doesn't scan it seems like there is a couple of words missing. In 1 Chron 20v5 it reads "... killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite ...". Which confirms that a couple of words have been lost, this could have happened as manuscripts were very fragile and if these words were at the edge they could have broken off.
5. Crucifixion
(We didn't get onto this issue due to lack of time.)
Sura 4v157 "... and for their saying, 'We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of God' -- yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them."The standard Muslim interpretation of this koranic verse is that the person on the cross looked like Jesus but was not Jesus. Allah played a big trick on everyone and changed the appearance of someone else to make them look like Jesus. When investigating a crime or other incident the police would want to speak to people who actually saw what happened. The gospel writers and other first century historians who also mention the crucifixion were writing a few years/decades after the event. The Koran comes 600 hundred years later and so is too late to give any credence with respect to first century events. Now Muslims might response to that by saying that Allah is a perfect witness and so we should accept his testimony over all other things (when the Queen spoke up in the Paul Bural trail it was found innocent straight away). But what does that say about Allah? It says he is a deceiver and 'the best of deceivers' at that. Would God really be a deceiver? And moreover there are 2 billion Christians in the world today who are still convinced of this deception.

wise men from the east

2011-02-05T18:18:00.000Z

At our first meeting in 2011 in keeping with the season (Epiphany) we looked at the story of the wise men. We had a wide ranging decision which, if I recall correctly, included wondering how people who are deaf speak with regional accents, but we were wondering off the point by then.

We did think that in some ways it was strange that astrologers should play such a prominent role in this infancy narrative given the Israelites aversion to such ideas. We then tried to see if we could marry up the two infancy stories that are in the gospels, something that we do at some level every time we have a Nativity service. It looked like it might just be possible, but would mean that Mary, Joseph and Jesus would have had to take a lot of journeys, some quite long. It was an interesting exercise, but in the end I think it showed that these narratives are actually quite separate, written by different people for quite different reasons.

In Matthew and the story of the wise men from the East we are being told something about Jesus and his significance. He is not just King of the Jews, but rather has come for everyone, including the gentiles. In Luke we have Jesus born in stable and visited by shepherds, he is poor and his visitors are poor too, this Jesus has come for the excluded of society. In Matthew they live in a house and are visited by rich people and given expensive gifts, in Luke they live in stable and are visited by poor shepherds who bring no gifts except the message from the angels.

This two pictures of the significance of Jesus are not contradictory, but rather complementary. Jesus did come for rich and poor, Jew and gentile.

finishing off 2010...

2011-02-05T17:44:00.001Z

.... better late than never?

In the couple of sessions at the end of last year we considered equality, what is it? and is it always a good idea? we followed this up by asking the question "Is Christianity fair?". We decided that in many ways it wasn't, for example the parable of the workers in the field all getting paid the same money for working different amounts of time. Generous maybe but not "fair" as we normally understand it. Which is just how the workers at the end reacted, you can just hear them saying "but it's not fair!".

Also we we looked at a TED video Diane Benscoter on how cults rewire the brain in which she talked about her experience of joining a cult and also how she left. It did raise the question, is the Church of England a cult? we thought probably not quite :-)

The Beatitudes of Our Current Church Culture - Empire Remixed

2011-02-05T17:29:00.000Z

The Beatitudes of Our Current Church Culture - Empire Remixed

In a recent sermon at Wine Before Breakfast, Joe AC, pastoral director ofParkdale Neighbourhood Church in Toronto concluded with these modern day Beatitudes from the perspective of our contemporary, self-satisfied church culture.

by Joe Abbey-Colborne

Blessed are the well off and those
…with ready answers for every spiritual question;
…they have it all.

Blessed are the comfortable;
…they shall avoid grief.

Blessed are the self-sufficient;
…they wait for nothing, they have everything they want,
…and they have it now.

Blessed are those who are not troubled by
…the injustice experienced by others;
…they are content with realistic expectations.

Blessed are the ones who gain the upper hand;
…they take full advantage of their advantages.

Blessed are those with a solid public image
…and a well hidden agenda;
…they are never exposed and see people
…in a way that suits their purposes.

Blessed are those who can bully others into agreement;
…they shall be called empire builders.

Blessed are those who can point to someone else
…who is a worse person than they are,
…they will always look good by comparison.

Blessed are you when people praise you, give you preferential treatment, and flatter you because they think you’re so great. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, because it doesn’t get any better than this.

This is the way our church has always made celebrities of the best and brightest.

Theology of Tax - Christian Aid

2010-10-01T13:00:00.000+01:00

At out meeting on the 29th September 2010 we looked at Christian Aid's campaign to Trace the Tax

This campaign looks at the way that companies can avoid paying taxes, both legal and illegal ways. This often results in developing countries not getting the tax revenue that they should get. Christian Aid is campaigning for transparency so people can see in which countries companies are actually declaring profits.

See Theology - Christian Aid: The Gospel and the rich: theological views of tax. which looks at the theology that underpins this campaign.

We started by thinking about attitudes to tax, in general individuals and companies see tax as something to be minimized as much as possible. There is a resentment of the tax that is taken by the government. Yet when we look at what tax is taken for, what it is spent on we (generally) value those services, eg. schools, health services etc. Often we make a distinction between tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal) but I think that CA's paper challenges us about this distinction. How far should we, as Christians, go in reducing our tax? There are no easy answers to this question.

The notion that taxation is a kind of coercive and illicit appropriation of goods (and indirectly labour) that rightfully belongs to the taxpayer plays an important part in Anglo-American political rhetoric.

For Christians, assertions of such ‘rights’ cannot provide the most fundamental level of moral discourse .... Christian ethics is in the last analysis not a matter of rights, duties and laws. The Christian life is a response to one simple fact, that what God wants for his people is ‘to worship him, to be his friends, to eat with him’. The earth does not belong to the property-owner, for human titles to wealth are relativised by the deeper truth that ‘the earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it’ (Psalm 24:1). The fundamental category with which we need to understand the material world is as gift not as possession. And the purpose of the gift is communion (page 23/24).

CA's paper takes as a starting point the idea of relational theology, which is informed by the work of Karl Barth. God is a God in relationship, ie. the Trinity. God is also in relationship with us. We then are in relation with God and with our neighbour. The parable of the good Samaritan tells us something of Jesus' idea of who our neigbour is and so when we, or multi-nation companies, avoid paying taxes that we should pay we are damaging that relationship with our neighbour.

It follows from all this that the avoidance of tax, just as much as the illegal evasion of tax, constitutes a wrong or broken relationship between people and state, as does the failure of a state to collect the tax that it is owed. The fact that probably the majority of individual and corporate taxpayers do not see tax avoidance in these terms is an instance of the structural sin referred to earlier (page 6).

The paper is very good and worth reading in full, not only for the underlying theology that informs the debate but for the examples of how this issues affects the lives of people in the developing world.

Life is not...

2010-09-28T21:29:00.000+01:00

R.S. Thomas writes, “Life is not hurrying on to a receding future, nor hankering after an imagined past. It is the turning aside like Moses to the miracle of the lit bush, to a brightness that seemed as transitory as your youth once, but is the eternity that awaits you.” We find our home in the moment even as we seek to become something more than who we are in that moment. This places our home in the present, but assures that it is never static. To claim such a static home would be to pitch our tent in Babylon and embrace exile apart from the transforming work of God. The Kingdom is here and now, but it is never just here and now. We must always be seeking God as we make our home in God.

Julie Clawson

Chief Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks - The Case for God

2010-09-28T21:13:00.000+01:00

For our first meeting after the summer break we watched a short programme made by Rabbi Sacks. He invited four people who didn't believe in god to speak to question him about his understanding of god.

One was the novelist Howard Jacobson, a secular jew. Jacobson's main problem with Judaism was the idea that god might be interesting in the minutia of his life, the rules about what can be eaten etc. Sacks disagreed, feeling that it was vital that our day to day lives are patterned by our faith.

I can't remember the names of the other guests! One was a scientist who saw no place for god, thinking that as we learn more and more about our world the space for god becomes smaller and smaller.

Another guest, again a secular jew, challenged Sacks for his response to the holocaust, asking where god is in that kind of situation? how does the believing jew respond. Sacks was clear that for him the response of faith was to fight against that kind of injustice, that god was there with the victims. That we should cry out against injustice.

It was an interesting programme that sparked some good discusion within the group.

our last meeting before the summer.... poverty

2010-09-19T16:35:00.000+01:00

When we meet in july we looked at poverty and how it can be defined and understood very differently.

Should poverty be measured in absolute terms (eg. $1 a day) or is it better to define poverty in relation to the wealth of others in the same (or even a different) society.

creeds

2010-06-17T21:35:00.000+01:00

In a previous meeting we had looked at the doctrine of the trinity, this led us on to looking at creeds and how the idea of the trinity developed and became fixed (to some extent) in the ancient creeds that we still say in church today.

We decided to follow on from this by looking at what is a modern example of a creed, and that is the Basis of faith of the Evangelical Alliance.

This had been revised in 2005, the previous version had been written in 1970.

It was interesting both to look at the content of the latest statement but also to compare the two and think about what had caused the compilers to change their ideas.

There were many differences, not least in terms of language, the 1970 statement used language that was not even usual for it's time being very formal and legal. The 2005 version used far more ordinary language. The 2005 version was also more inclusive re. women and men, the 1970 version spoke entirely about 'man' and 'men'. The 2005 version was quite a bit longer and often, it seemed, more explicit. We thought that perhaps this was as some ideas had being challenged since the 1970 statement was drawn up. For example there was no mention of Jesus' virgin birth in the 1970 statement but in 2005 it was mentioned, is this because in the gap between these statements people had questioned the idea of the virgin birth? In addition to being more explicit it introduced ideas about how evangelical christians should act, ie. to have concern for creation, justice and love, the 1970 version was almost entirely concerned with what evangelicals believed (should believe?).

There was a feeling that as soon as you try and put belief into a statement like this you create problems of interpretation, that you are both forced to try and be very precise without ever actually being able to completely nail down a meaning.

Personally I think that by their very nature creeds & statements of faith have the effect of excluding certain people (those who cannot sign up for it) from the group that has produced it. They are about defining who is in and who is out, who is orthodox and who is not. Much like the issues we currently have in the Anglican Communion in which different groups find it impossible to accept that others believe different things about, for example, woman being bishops.

Certainly there were some members of our group that would not have been able to sigh up for the whole of the Evangelical Alliance's Basis of Faith.

-----

Next meeting we'll be thinking about poverty, what is it and what can/should we do about it?

wwjvf?

2010-06-12T16:24:00.003+01:00

Who Would Jesus Vote For?

Not a serious discussion of which party Jesus would have supported at the recent election but a way into thinking about the election and how we as christians should decide how to vote.

An interesting, and robust, discussion followed and in particular highlighted different approaches to support for poorer people in society. On one had seeing this as principally the Government's responsibility (through taxation) and on the other hand the responsibility of society as a whole with a special responsibility on those who are wealthy to intervene.

Poverty is a topic we will come back to at a future meeting.

sayings from the cross

2010-06-12T15:44:00.004+01:00

For our first meeting after lent we looked at the seven sayings from the cross. As an exercise we had the sayings printed out on separate pieces of paper and were asked as a group to match them to the four different gospels. The seven sayings (in alphabetical order!):

I thirst
It is finished.
Father forgive them, for they know not what they do
Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.
My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?
My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?
Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise
Woman, behold your son: behold your mother

I know there are 8 here, but one is in two gospels.

We scored about 50% how well can you do?

My thoughts in doing this exercise were to highlight the way we can conflate the gospels into one and that perhaps this is not always a good idea as each gospel is telling the story of Jesus in a particular way. In the end we only scored about 50% (not sure what we would get if we just randomly assigned the sayings, Jane or Doug any thoughts?).

lost gospels

2010-06-12T15:31:00.003+01:00

At our meeting before lent (yes ages ago I know). We watched a programme about the many gospels that didn't make it into the bible. Many of these were written much later than the gospels that we find in the New Testament. Although the early church did not consider that these gospels should be included in what became the New Testament it was still interesting to see what kind of picture they painted of Jesus. What came across was the extent to which different writers 'saw' Jesus differently and told his story in a particular way to make a particular point. Something that we can see in the very different accounts we get in the four New Testament gospels as well.

This could be seen as a problem, eg. which of these accounts is the 'correct' one or it could be seen as an advantage as it shows there is not one orthodox way of seeing and understanding Jesus and his significance.

the trinity

2010-06-03T07:06:00.006+01:00

At our meeting on the 2nd June we we looked at the Gospel reading from the previous Sunday (John 16.12-15), which was Trinity Sunday. We had an interesting discussion about the development of the doctrine of the trinity and how long this took to become the established view of the church, finally being decided at church councils 325 and 381.

This lead to a discussion of creeds and how and why they were formed. To some extent at least they were concerned with defining who was and was not an orthodox christian. This still happens today and we looked at an example of a modern day 'creed'. The Evangelical Alliances Basis of Faith Statement, which we look at in more detail next week.

Below are some thoughts of Katharine Jefferts Schori the Presiding Bishop of the Anglican Churtch in North America.

http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/004388.html

The willingness to live in tension is a hallmark of Anglicanism, beginning from its roots in Celtic Christianity pushing up against Roman Christianity in the centuries of the first millennium. That diversity in community was solidified in the Elizabethan Settlement, which really marks the beginning of Anglican Christianity as a distinct movement. Above all, it recognizes that the Spirit may be speaking to all of us, in ways that do not at present seem to cohere or agree. It also recognizes what Jesus says about the Spirit to his followers, "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come" (John 16:12-13).

Robert Rowland Smith on Feeling Lonely

2010-05-28T09:59:00.004+01:00

http://theschooloflife.typepad.com/the_school_of_life/2010/05/robert-rowland-smith-on-feeling-lonely-1.html

I liked the idea of "essential solitude".

The "real meaning of Christmas"

2010-01-25T19:37:00.000Z

Well for our first meeting of 2010 we thought a little about the "real meaning of Christmas". A much used phrase, but what do we mean by it? What would Christmas look like if we stripped away all the cultural baggage that has been attached to it?

Well, not surprisingly, we didn't really come up with a definitive answer to this question, but on the way we did think about how the season of Christmas developed within the church and how it related to other existing pagan festivals. We also looked at Epiphany and found that this became part of the church calendar before Christmas. We also considered the church calendar in general and the two cycles of Christmas (based around a fixed date) and Easter (based around a moveable Sunday). This is why we get two variable periods of "ordinary time" between the two different cycles. One after Candlemas on 2nd Feb until lent starts, and one from the end of pentecost until advent.

Archbishop of Canterbury's Christmas sermon at Canterbury Cathedral

2009-12-28T09:04:00.002Z

The Archbishop of Canterbury - Archbishop of Canterbury's Christmas sermon at Canterbury Cathedral

And in the case of children, we shall do our level best to turn you into active little consumers and performers as soon as we can. We shall test you relentlessly in schools, we shall bombard you with advertising, often highly sexualised advertising, we shall worry you about your prospects and skills from the word go; we shall do all we can to make childhood a brief and rather regrettable stage on the way to the real thing - which is 'independence', turning you into a useful cog in the social machine that won't need too much maintenance.

The whole sermon is worth a read, not too long, but I especially liked this bit about how society treats children. The whole sermon is about an appropriate dependancy, on god and each other.

advent

2009-12-12T19:48:00.001Z

For our last two meetings we looked at the readings for the first and third Sundays in Advent, oh and we had a little party :)

the creation of Adam

2009-11-17T19:21:00.000Z

At our meeting on the 11th November we looked a three paintings of the Creation of Adam.

Before looking at the pictures we read the two passages that describe the creation of Adam.

Genesis 1.26-27. Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind^* in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth,^* and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.’
So God created humankind^* in his image,
in the image of God he created them;^*
male and female he created them. ²⁷

Genesis 2.7. Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground,^* and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.

The first was by Michelangelo and was part of the painting on the Sistine Chapel.

The second was by William Blake and was used to illustrate a poem. Elohim Creating Adam.

The third was by Benedict Cambell which was painted in 2003 and was a digital painting which was a reinterpretation of Michelangelo's painting.

We thought about why the artists had chossen to show Adam and God in the ways they had. We looked in particular at the differences in the pictures and what this might say about the artists' ideas about God.

this and that

2009-11-09T20:08:00.000Z

At our last meeting (28th October) we didn't have anything planned as such so had a general chat about the world etc.

We had a vigorous discussion about anthropogenic climate change and also the talked about the financial crises and it's impact on the developing world and international trade in general. In particular free trade that truly opens up all markets, not just the markets in the developing world (eg. USA and EC).

'Death tourism' leads Swiss to consider ban on assisted suicide | Society | The Guardian

2009-10-29T07:58:00.001Z

'Death tourism' leads Swiss to consider ban on assisted suicide | Society | The Guardian

Interesting in light of our recent discussions.

heaven in ordinarie

2009-10-25T16:24:00.000Z

For our meeting on 14th October we thought about how the "ordinary" is often overlooked. We expect to feel close to God on mountain tops and (hopefully) in church. However most of our lives we are not in these places, we are on the bus, at work, doing the washing up etc.

We started with one of the Quakers' Advices and queries. These are short suggestions/questions that Quakers are encouraged to read (both corporately and individually) and reflect on. The one we read was:

7. Be aware of the spirit of God at work in the ordinary activities and experiences of your daily life. Spiritual learning continues throughout life, and often in unexpected ways. There is inspiration to be found all around us, in the natural world, in the sciences and arts, in our work and friendships, in our sorrows as well as in our joys. Are we open to new light, from whatever source it may come? Do you approach new ideas with discernment?

We then looked at a poem by George Herbert (1593-1633) called 'Prayer'.

PRAYER the Churches banquet, Angels age,  
Gods breath in man returning to his birth,  
The soul in paraphrase, heart in pilgrimage,
The Christian plummet sounding heav’n and earth ;

Engine against th’ Almightie, sinner's towre,  
Reversed thunder, Christ-side-piercing spear,  
The six daies world-transposing in an houre,  
A kinde of tune, which all things heare and fear ;

Softnesse, and peace, and joy, and love, and blisse,  
Exalted Manna, gladnesse of the best,  
Heaven in ordinarie, man well drest,  
The milkie way, the bird of Paradise,

Church-bels beyond the stars heard, the souls bloud,  
The land of spices, something understood.

In this poem there are many images for prayer, some quite hard to grasp!

I partly got the idea for this topic from a Greenbelt speaker, John Davis who thinks that christians have a habit of devaluing the 'ordinary'. To counteract this he has written prayers about the everyday. See below for his prayer giving thanks for mobile phone masts.

We give thanks for mobile phone masts
Standing tall above our streets

Silent gatherers of our digital conversations; connecting us to satellites in outer space and friends in neighbouring houses; witnesses of our desire to communicate with others; beamers of text messages around the world.

We celebrate the holy mystery of radio waves - thousands of them criss-crossing through the air unseen, permitting us to catch and ride their frequencies as surfers ride incoming waves;
We celebrate the skills of those who have turned such mysteries to our practical use;
We stand beneath these tall grey masts, and we celebrate the wonder of new technology.

A blessing on those who call to ask us how we are;
A blessing on those who call to tell us where they are;
A blessing on those who call to invite us, kindly, to join them.

We give thanks for mobile phone masts
Standing tall above our streets.

Give us patience with those who play with their phones more than they talk to us;
Help us cope with those who use their phones so publicly they include us in their conversations;
Keep us calm if the person driving close behind us is dangerously on the phone.
Give us grace to know when to turn our phones on - to talk; and off - to rest;
Save us from radiation, repetitive strain injury, earache and excessive phone bills;
Keep us connected to the earth beneath our feet as much as the world between our ears.

We give thanks for mobile phone masts
Standing tall above our streets

Our initial reaction was that this was not a 'proper prayer'. But why is that? Because we have expectations about what 'proper prayers' are about and mobile phones don't fit that expectation?

We then talked about the influence of the media in advertising and various life style and celebrity magazines. They are selling a picture of the 'good life' that is anything but 'ordinary'. Our ordinary lives are drap and boring if we don't look like and smell like celebrities, we are encouraged to define our selves by what we consume and own and by the extremeness of our experiences.

But this is not something we can live up to and so we are at risk of devaluing our 'ordinary' lives. We need to reclaim the sacredness of everyday life. We finished with a Celtic prayer, the Celtic Christians had a habit of praying about the everyday things they did, making the beds, lighting the fire and so on.

Bless to me, O God,
Each thing mine eye sees;
Bless to me, O God,
Each sound mine ear hears;
Bless to me, O God,
Each odour that goes to my nostrils;
Bless to me, O God,
Each taste that goes to my lips;
Each note that goes to my song;
Each ray that guides my way;
Each thing that I pursue;
Each lure that tempts my will;
The zeal that seeks my living soul,
The three that seek my heart,
The zeal that seeks my living soul,
The three that seek my heart.

assisted suicide

2009-10-12T20:20:00.005+01:00

On the meeting on 30th Sep. we talked about the new guidelines on assisted suicide. Jim lead us through a selection of biblical passages that mentioned suicide. These included Saul, who interestingly enough asked his armour bearing to kill him, but the armour bearer refused and Saul falls on his own sword. We also looked at the passage where Judas kills himself (and briefly at the other passage where he does not!).

None of these passages really fit well with the current debate which is generally about people with terminal medical conditions being helped to commit suicide and whether the people who helped them would be prosecuted. In England and Wales suicide is no longer against the law (it was until the 1960's) but there is a law against assisting someone to commit suicide which has a penalty of up to 14 years in prison if convicted. The guidance was given as a woman with MS wanted to know that if her husband helped her commit suicide he would not be prosecuted.

We looked at the guidance and generally we felt it was a balanced way of addressing the issue, it did not make assisted suicide legal but did give guidance that could reassure relatives who acted with good motives to help someone commit suicide. We all felt that it should remain a crime with the possibility of prosecution, not least because this shows the seriousness of the act and might help reduce the risk of people encouraging or coercing people to commit suicide.

Some links, the first is particularly good, wish I had found it for the meeting.

assisted-suicide-guidelines-mental-health

assisted-suicide

terry-pratchett-assisted-suicide-guidelines

assisted-suicide-law-defences-recognised

long time no update...

2009-10-12T20:17:00.003+01:00

Not updated during the summer as nothing happened in the summer - well as regards house group anyway :)

We had our first meeting back on 16th Sep. and spent it catching up on all the things that did happen during the summer, everyone seems to have had a more exotic and less wet holiday than Helen and I did...

Tony Campolo

2009-06-23T20:20:00.000+01:00

For our meeting on 10th June a couple of us went to hear Tony Campolo speak at Westminster Central Hall. This was part of Premier Radio's birthday celebrations.

He spoke about power and authority and what characterises these two ways of being/leading. He felt that power was always cooercive, if someone has power you do what they say becasue they have the ability to punish you or force you. In contract someone with authority is followed because people regognise that they are right. He felt that Jesus was someone who had power and authority, but chose to give up his power and seek to persude people thorough his exercise of authority, which comes from his love and sacrifical vunerablity.

He felt that at times the church tried to get political influence (ie. power) when it should be trying to gain authority through the exercise of loving service.

(Doug if you have anything to add please do...)

Tony Campolo

Jesus the Jew

2009-06-03T21:21:00.001+01:00

At the house group on 27th May we watched an episode of a Channel 4 series - 'The History of Christianity'. This episode was fronted by Howard Jacobson, an atheist Jew. He looked at the Jewish of Jesus and the disciples. The programme also explored the history of Jews and Christians and how for a long time Christians blamed Jews for the death of Jesus and how this has lead to persecution of and discrimination against Jews.

It was interesting to get an 'outsiders' view of Jesus. Jacobson was ultimately impressed with the Jesus he saw in the Gospels, with the message that he was preaching. He was less taken with the Church!

post resurrection appearances

2009-05-25T18:03:00.000+01:00

At the house group on 13th May. We looked at some of the post resurrection appearances of Jesus. We noted that there are differences but that this was to be expected given that different people are recalling the events.

I thought it was interesting that Paul's list of appearances included his own on the Damascus Road without making any distinction between his 'vision' and the other appearances that we see in the gospels and Acts. Worth noting that Paul's letter is probably the earliest recorded account we have of the post resurrection appearances.

Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire

2009-05-10T09:42:00.001+01:00

by Brian J. Walsh & Sylvia C. Keesmaat

Good fun, if occasionally quite hard work! You'd want to be a little versed in post-modernity to get the best out if it. I like the conclusions they come to but I'm not completely convinced they they can come to them from Colossians, still feels at time that we want to make the bible (or in this case Paul) agree with us rather than accept that maybe he got it wrong :-)

random quotes

... the danger of wanting a god, without being willing to allow this god to speak in a voice that is radically other to our voice, is that the god we end up with is like any other consumer product we take of the shelf (p34).

... a worldview is only as good as the praxis or way of life that it engenders (p113).

There can be no indubitable foundation of knowledge, no uninterpreted experience, no completely transparent reading of the world. (Miroslav Volf) (p122)

We can probably tell as much about the real spirituality and the real worldview of a people by looking at the cars they drive, the food they consume, the gadgets that fill their homes and the garbage they throw out as we can by listening to the songs they sing and the prayers they pray (199)

Dealing with our differences

2009-05-04T12:29:00.001+01:00

This final session looked in particular at the Bible and how we understand it and use it. In thinking about this we considered the following passage:

2 Timothy 3.16-17 "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work"

We looked at this passage in other translations and some used the term 'God breathed' which we liked. This is related to the word 'inspired'. This seemed to be rather poetic language.

The passage says that scripture is 'useful', some of us felt that this was not a particularly strong word. It does not seem to preclude finding other things 'useful' in addition. Some of us felt that some Christians had put too much weight on this short passage and that a doctrine of infallibility was not really deducible from this passage. We noted that Paul in writing this is clearly not talking about what we undertaking as the New Testament which creates a kind of circular argument - ie. scripture is 'inspired' because it says so in scripture. We do not all agree with the statement that "The Bible is factually true and completely consistent."

Although we didn't think every single verse in the Bible contained useful instructions etc. we did feel that sometimes we are surprised by how some passages are understood by different people. For example some groups have found the genealogies very significant as in their culture it signifies authority.

We thought about how we can approach scripture in different ways which don't necessarily invalidate each other. For example the story of Abraham and Isaac can be seen as being about how Abraham was obedient to God and showed great faith, it could be seen as a foreshadowing of Jesus' sacrifice and it could also be seen as a condemnation of child/human sacrifice (not an exhaustive list!).

Other examples of conflict in the Bible. Paul and Barnabas had a strong disagreement - perhaps this is an example of how not to do it? Philemon and his slave Onesimus; is perhaps saying something about how relationships in Christ transcend all other relationships, ie. slave and master. Jesus suggested that anger was at the route disagreement. Matt 5.22

Ultimately we all saw the Bible as important and 'useful' but were all too aware that it could be misused and that people would always 'read' it differently.

lent

2009-04-17T09:07:00.003+01:00

At our last meeting before Easter would took a break from the dealing with conflict series of studies and had an evening where anyone could bring alone something that they wanted to share. This included poetry, art, reflections and scripture.

Dealing with conflicts in the Anglican Communion - part 3

2009-04-17T08:48:00.002+01:00

We now talked about the best way forward... GAFCON is creating a Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (presumably a deliberate reference to the Confessing Church in German under Hitler?). Lambeth wants a moratorium on ordaining bishops who are homosexual and also same sex blessings and to review the structures of the Anglican Communion to see how unity can be maintained, this being an issue of authority. Some of us felt that GAFCON's approach was too exclusive. That it might be possible to have some form of compromise, that we should at least try and find some kind of way forward that keep everyone together. Some of us also felt that it might be possible for different people, different communities and cultures to move at different speeds and it wasn't necessary or even desirable for all parts of the Anglican Communion to operate in the same way. But we also recognised that this can be difficult. Some of us felt that neither 'solution' was best, that to, in effect split, was damaging and to try and impose a practice/doctrine on the whole Communion was not helpful either.

Implications for St John's. We should recognise that there will be a wide range of views about these issues and that it will not be possible or right to try and get a "St John's" view of this issues. To recognise that people hold views sincerely and at times passionately and that we should respect each other as fellow Christians even as we disagree with each other on this and other issues.

Dealing with conflicts in the Anglican Communion - part 2

2009-03-22T17:07:00.009Z

Carrying on from last weeks' study, looking now mostly at approaches to scripture.

Some of us thought that GAFCON's idea that scripture should be 'translated, read, preached, taught and obeyed in its plain and canonical sense, respectful of the church's historic and consensual reading' might make finding something new in scripture difficult, it might tend to fix the meaning or rather interpretation of scripture.
The statement from Lambeth was much longer (as it always seems to be!) and seemed a bit of a fudge to some of us. The statement talks of using a range of different approaches to scripture 'under the guidance of the Holy Spirit' so perhaps both groups are making an appeal for having authority for their views?

We looked at two passages. Romans 1.18-33 A traditional way of reading this passage would be to see it as condemning homosexual acts. It has also been seen as being primarily about idol worship, also that what Paul writes about here cannot be compared to faithful, stable homosexual relationships that are part of 21st century Britain. How we see scripture obviously effects how we respond to this passage. If we take the GAFCON view their seems little scope but to see this passage as condemning homosexual relationships, however some Christians will not think that this passage condemns homosexual behaviour as we understand it now in our culture, they will want to take into account the change in context from when the letter was written to when it is being read now. Also they will want to bring to the passage knowledge about human sexuality that was not know by Paul. Both of these approaches take scripture seriously and see scripture as authoritative. Another approach is to accept that Paul really is condemning homosexual behaviour and to see that this presents us with a choice - we can follow Paul, ie. follow scripture or we can choose not to.
It was noted that this passage lists a number of sins that people fall into:

evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, ³⁰slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious towards parents, ³¹foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

and yet mostly the church only focuses on the sexual sins and other very common ones like gossiping and being rude to our parents are ignored! We wondered why the church over the ages has been so hung up about sex and sexual sin, some of us felt there was a fear of female sexuality at the heart of this. If we look back at our discussions about original sin we see that Augustine thought this was passed on during sex, which suggests that the church has had at least an ambivalent view of sex for a long time.

The other passage we looked at was Luke 14.15-24. It was suggested in the notes that some might want to identify the excluded with those who are excluded by the church now - eg. homosexual people. We talked about how this passage has been traditionally interpreted and also how it might have been understood by its first hearers. We felt that perhaps the first hearers of this passage might have been the poor and the outcasts of Israel, they might have seen it as a message of God's acceptance of them and rejection of their rich rulers. Traditionally we thought this was usually interpreted as being about Israel rejecting Jesus and the Gentiles becoming the new 'chosen people' (is this a 'plain' understanding of scripture?). Now another way is being proposed, that we widen the interpretation to make it about any group that is excluded. Asylum seekers in the UK came to to mind. Most of us felt that is was reasonable to 'use' this passage in different ways at different times and situations, and in general that the 'meaning' of scripture cannot be 'nailed down' for all time. If we think there is only one - received - understanding of scripture do we risk missing out on those moments of enlightenment that sometimes come when we look at a passage we might know very well but in which we somehow find something new revealed?

We wondered if GAFCON's position was tenable, do they always take the 'plain meaning'? - for example what does Jesus mean when he says that we must hate our Mothers and Fathers?. Perhaps they fudge things too? Perhaps Lambeth is more honest about problems of interpretation? Can we/should we use the bible tentatively? Some of us felt it was ok to live with doubt and uncertainty.

In general how should the church deal with disagreement? Should we always try and stick together or is it sometimes right to split?
Sometimes the local experience of church is more important than the institutional - we may not agree with the ideas of the institution but be happy in the local church. It will, inevitably, depend on the issue, however many of us were keen to hold onto the strength of the Anglican 'big tent' in which people can be together who don't agree on everything.
(still didn't quite finish, part 3 next week!).

Dealing with conflicts in the Anglican Communion - part 1

2009-03-13T14:51:00.003Z

This session looks at the different approaches that GAFCON and the Lambeth Conference have to the issues of homosexuality, scripture and the structures of the Anglican Communion.

GAFCON take the view that changing the traditional understanding of homosexuality is a "different gospel". The Lambeth statement talks of the variety of views in society and the church and how views have changed over time.

In terms of dealing with conflict GAFCON seemed to be taking an uncompromising line, their statement was unambiguous. Lambeth on the other hand clearly saw that there were a number of views sincerely held. No preference was given for any particular view. In discussion a number of points were made:

it seems that more people are know to be homosexual in affluent societies. Why might this be so? Possibly this is about affluent societies tending to be more tolerant of difference and therefore homosexual people are more comfortable to be identified?
societies have changed a lot over the years. Our society now is much more accepting of homosexuality that it was a few generations ago.
this issue might be so divisive that unity on it is impossible.

Looking at more statements form GAFCON and Lambeth specifically about homosexuality. GAFCON see the acceptance of same-sex unions as a "false gospel". Lambeth again recognizes the variety of views without preferring one over another, and talks of some people coming to a new understanding of scripture and pastoral theology which is more accepting of same sex relationships.
How did the group respond to this? Not surprisingly a range of opinion.

some agreed with GAFCON that this 'new understanding' was wrong, others felt that a new understanding of scripture was possible and desirable.
we can always see new things in the bible.

We also had a general discussion on this issue:

we talked about what might cause someone to have a homosexually orientation. There are many theories, eg. genetic, exposure to hormones in womb, sociological/upbringing. But there seems to be no clear answer. It seems that most people accept that it is not possible to make someone change their sexual orientation and so we have to have the discussion in light of this.
people seem much more concerned about male sexuality than female, eg. much more difficult for boys or men to behave in stereotypically female ways than the other way round. We wondered why this might be. Some of us felt that men were more insecure in their sexuality than women.

We considered how we might be able to deal with the tensions that this debate/disagreement creates. Again we had different ideas on this.

can't agree to differ - a split within the Anglican Communion is almost inevitable.
the idea of a 'Big Tent' in which there is a place for different beliefs. Seen as fundamental to the nature of the Anglican church.
is it possible for different parts of the communion to move at different speeds? see foe example ordination of woman to the priesthood and as bishops.
while the Church of England holds a tentative position people from both sides might be happy to stay - if a definitive position was adopted people might feel compelled to leave.
we need to listen to each other.

(out of time again! will continue next week).

dealing with peak oil - part 2

2009-03-10T20:34:00.003Z

Thinking about the story of Joseph and Pharaoh's dream. Anything for us to learn here? In some ways the situations are different, there was not a finite supply of food unlike oil. That said it gives an example of how planning and restraint can help people prepare for a difficult future.

We use oil for relatively unimportant things, eg. petrol in cars. We have better alternatives, eg. hydrogen. But there is little motivation for car manufacturers to switch, the amount of necessary investment is very high. The short termism of governments also hinders the development of alternative energy sources.

What ideas from the film could be adopted in Redbridge?

An allotment market, like current farmers market.
Give and take days - encouraging re-use.
High impact symbolic actions. For example Milan banned cars completely from the city centre for a weekend.
Reward people for recycling etc. rather than punish for not, eg. get vouchers for something [maybe LBR facilities like the swimming pool].
Free cycle system / encourage cycling and make safer.
Give clearer information on what exactly can be recycled.
Less street lighting.
Are the video displays on High Road really necessary? how much energy do they use?

What actions could we take in the next six months: as individuals; as a Church; and with other groups in the borough?

Create a lending/borrowing list at the church centre. People could list large items that they are happy to lend out, also people could use the same space to list wants/needs.
Regular sale of allotment produce.
Lists of items to give away and possibly things for sale?
Carry on doing small individual actions, refusing bags, avoiding packaging, walking and using public transport etc. refuse, reuse, recycle.

Using your ideas from Session 1, if we don’t agree on peak oil (for instance, don’t think it’s happening, don’t think it’s important, don’t think we can do anything about it, don’t agree on what we should do about it etc.) how should we deal with our differences at St John’s?

We ran out of time again so no answer to this question...:-)

Faith and Daytime TV

2009-02-19T07:47:00.004Z

Faith and Daytime TV

"Our theology has descended to the level of daytime television"

She is talking about how issues get polarized, there is no third way, seemed relevant. I though this quote summed things up nicely.

dealing with peak oil - part 1

2009-02-18T16:21:00.003Z

We watched the DVD "How Cuba survived peak oil - the power of community, our thoughts/response (no particular order).

there was a change in culture
the government relaxed some regulations, but enforced others.
local organisation was preferred over national and seemed to work better - fitting in with need to reduce transport costs.
big emphasis on keeping things local, so food production, housing, education and work all brought together. eg. lots of small Universities rather than a few big ones.
old ideas came back (small farms, oxen etc.) but also new technology was used.
quality of life was, arguably, better? people had less consumer goods but had more exercise and better diet, also were more involved with their neighbourhood. People shared more.
could what Cuba did scale to UK or London? we had our doubts.

Thinking about UK and alternatives to oil dependency etc.

thermal heating
hydrogen cars
nuclear power using latest generation of small efficient power stations, also makes power more local which is more efficient.
wind
tide

How should we respond internationally?

we need to share benefits of technology
we need to question our consumption
and we need to question our values - ie. that we find happiness through having / consuming things.

Journey to Jerusalem - Christian Aid

2009-02-11T19:03:00.001Z

Journey to Jerusalem - Christian Aid

from Christian Aid

During Lent we want to challenge you to go beyond hearing about the people in the Holy Land, hear from them instead.
Every day through Lent our virtual pilgrimage will take you on an interactive journey.
Using short videos, podcasts, photo galleries, prayers and stories it will bring the Holy Land alive.
We will follow a route that takes in many of the locations mentioned as part of Jesus' journey towards Jerusalem. And along the way you will be able to find out more about issues, connect with other users, share your views and take part in actions that will help change lives.

Bus slogan generator

2009-02-02T16:51:00.001Z

What would you put on the side of a bus?

Bus slogan generator

Half of Britons do not believe in evolution, Darwin anniversary survey finds | Science | guardian.co.uk

2009-02-01T16:58:00.001Z

Apparently people still not convinced by evolution :-)

Half of Britons do not believe in evolution, Darwin anniversary survey finds | Science | guardian.co.uk

dealing with early church disagreements

2009-01-31T12:21:00.004Z

The firsts of 4 studies to come out of the PCC awayday.

The group felt that how we reacted to disagreement depended a lot on the context, who we had the disagreement with and what it was about, eg. how important it was to us.

We looked at Romans 14 which is about disagreements about food and holy days. In general Paul seemed to agree that it didn't mater what you ate or what days (if any) you kept as holy, but for they sake of the "weaker" believer he recommended that people give way so as to not offend.

As a principle we felt we should avoid judging others, that we should have a sense of perspective, eg. just how important is this issue?

Then we looked at Acts 15.1-21 which is about tension in the early church around how much (if any) of the Jewish traditions should be adopted by the gentile converts, specifically about circumcision. Paul had a much stronger view about this issue - he was completely against requiring gentile converts to be circumcised. After an argument with the people proposing this he goes to Jerusalem to have a meeting of Church leaders to discuss this. This issue was seen as more important, more fundamental to the faith. It was tackled by having a meeting to hear all sides and then an agreement was reached, although it is interesting to note that only the speeches against the adoption of circumcision are reproduced here. It can also be seen that there was a slight compromise eg. gentile converts were to avoid certain foods and sexual immorality.

As a principle we could see that listening to the other was extremely important. Also to respective the other person and their motives even though we disagree with their position. In the speeches we have in this passage reference is made to what is happening in the world, to what God is doing in the world, ie. that the gentiles have the spirit. Reference is also made to scripture. So another principle would be to look to the bible and also to what is happening in the world for guidance on how to settle disagreements. We also felt we should be open to other opinions.

We have two quite different pictures of how the early church tried to deal with conflict, to apply them today would mean trying to distinguish between what are relatively unimportant issues (even if the people involved see it differently) about which it is ok for people to believe and do different things and those issues that are more important or about which is not possible to have to views/practices happening at the same time. For example I think that the issue of woman becoming Bishops in the Church of England is such an issue. Woman either can be/are Bishops are they cannot be Bishops.

Hope the above is a fair reflection of our discussions. Please add your own comments, especially if you disagree or think I have left anything out :-)

Sister Wendy on prayer

2009-01-17T11:46:00.001Z

The essential act of prayer is to stand unprotected before God.

happiness

2009-01-17T11:33:00.003Z

from John Naish's book 'Enough - Breaking free from the world of more'. Writing about the problem of the pressure to be happy...

Part of the problem is that what we call happiness is in fact a 'flow state' of unconsciousness, the sort of thing that happens when you're so engrossed in a hobby... that you just don't notice time passing. You lose yourself as your ego and your preoccupations fall away. You can't force this, but willing it to happen can cause a kind of self-help psychosis - the psychological equivalent of the watched kettle syndrome... [as] John Stuart Mill famously wrote 'Ask yourself if you are happy, and you cease to be so.'

interesting quote...

2008-11-25T07:59:00.002Z

You can either be a Christian school or a school for Christians. You can't be both.
Steve Chalke.
(Quoted in Third Way - December 2008)

more on creation myths

2008-11-24T19:48:00.004Z

At our last meeting on 19/11/08 we continued to think about creation myths - looking at creation myths from other faiths and cultures.

An interesting evening both to see how the Jewish/Christian creation myth shares ideas with other myths, but also how it is different.

origional sin

2008-11-09T18:55:00.003Z

meeting last week - 5/11/08

Following on from the prodigal son we all looked at the doctrine of original sin. an interesting talk followed with no firm conclusions or agreements, so no change there. we did spend a fair bit of time looking at the Genesis creation story and this got us to thinking about how other cultures' creation stories might touch on the subject of sin and the way the world is. So that is going to be our topic next time.

praying the labyrinth

2008-11-09T18:45:00.002Z

meeting 22/10

for this meeting we went to St John's Epping to learn a bit about the labyrinth and how it has been used in the church at different times, but principally it was an opportunity to walk it and spend some time in meditation/quite.

walking the labyrinth is an ancient practice that has been re-discovered by the modern church. a labyrinth looks like a maze but in fact has only one path.

see grace cathedral for more information.

prodigal son

2008-11-09T18:42:00.002Z

meeting 8/10/08

we looked at the parable of the prodigal son. before looking at the passage we tried to see how much we could remember of the story, when we checked we were pretty close except a few of us had remembered some things that were not there! this got us thinking about sin/forgiveness and so we decided to look at original sin at our next ordinary meeting.

breathe

2008-11-09T18:06:00.003Z

meeting on 24/9/08

we watched rob bell's dvd called "breathe" which was a meditation on the breath/spirit of god. the word translated breath can also mean spirit and wind - context is very important here!

Archbishops say extreme capitalism has become a new creed | Ekklesia

2008-09-26T09:58:00.001+01:00

Archbishops say extreme capitalism has become a new creed | Ekklesia

Thought this was interesting in light of our discussions at house group last Wednesday.

Huw

The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins

2008-09-24T07:50:00.003+01:00

Well this was quite annoying at times, I think he over writes, it could be much more to the point, also he is unnecessarily rude, in particular the names/labels he uses.

As to the arguments, less to fault him here, most of his arguments against "proofs" of God are fine, but familiar from Christian theologians. His arguments about how awful the church can be are also fine but again Wink, Wallis, Mclaren et al have been there before him.

Where I would take issue is with his selective rating of the bible (we all do this!) he talks about the awfulness of the "Old Testament God" but this is not news, he says Jesus is a little better (but can't resist adding "if he existed at all") but that ultimately the Old Testament and New Testament are exclusive, they are about the Jews only. He quotes some verses to back this up, but ignores? all the passages from the prophets that speak of caring for the alien and stranger, he misses Jesus on loving our neighbour and then defining the neighbour as "the other". He misses so much in the gospels that point to this message being for all people. It is annoying as if this is deliberate it undermines his argument and if it is a mistake then he really hasn't done his research.

His arguments about how natural selection could have caused the rise of religion, ie. mems etc. was, for me, not very convincing. Also his explanation for why we are good still leaves morality as some kind of accident of evolution (not that I have a better explanation).

Overall, not as annoying as I thought it would be.

everything must change - jesus, global crises, and a revolution of hope

2008-09-11T16:15:00.002+01:00

Brian d. Mclaren
This is a long a detailed book trying to get a handle on the crises that faces the world and what our understanding of Jesus' teaching/message might be able to say about that. It very clearly gets the issues that face us and in particular looks at things in terms of "framing stories" - the idea that our current framing story is leading to the suicide of our world. Mclaren offers an alternative framing story which is a particular reading/understanding of Jesus' message/kingdom. He is very critical both of the existing story and also the existing understanding of Christianity. Part of the existing story is about growth (for its own sake) and consumption, without reference to what the world can produce (raw materials) and cope with (waste). Also the underlying myth that power and violence solve anything and that at the heart of some understandings of Christianity there is a powerful myth of redemptive violence, ie. God needed Jesus to die for our sins.

To finish he calls for action in four areas:
* personal: everything from how we pray to how we spend our money etc.
* community: new kinds of community, eg. emerging church etc.
* public: social movements that to educate and demand change.
* global: NGO's, governments etc.

fresh expresions

2008-09-11T16:07:00.006+01:00

meet yesterday and looked fresh expressions of church, the examples we looked at were from the sacramental/Eucharistic tradition. we talked about what church might/could be and about the relationship between believing, belonging and behaving.

the sign at cana

2008-07-14T20:17:00.003+01:00

at the last house group we looked at the wedding of cana where jesus turns water into the very best wine. we were using notes that were written up by the people who wrote the studies for the bishops for the lambeth conference.

we thought a bit about what the disciples might have made of what they saw - if they would have related it to passages in the ot that talk of banquets that are about the redemption of Israel. also the significance of john using the word "sign" rather than "miracle" - a sign points to something and in john this is to jesus' glory.

heaven at last?

2008-06-22T15:04:00.002+01:00

Last week we finished our look at heaven and to some extent hell, all stemming from Tom Wright's book Surprised by Hope.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Surprised-Hope-Tom-Wright/dp/028105617X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214143551&sr=8-1

This book proved hard to summarise! so I won't try that here (also I have yet to read it). For me the main thing to come out of this was that creation is basically good, that this world is not going to be swept away and replaced by heaven, rather the image is of this world being redeemed & transformed as will people. So what we do here and now is important here and now, the possibility of heaven does not stop us caring and acting for justice in this world.

My thoughts anyway... please feel free to comment/disagree etc.

Huw

A good excuse to play on your computer

2008-06-13T20:34:00.002+01:00

If you are looking for a good excuse to spend idle time on your computer go here:

www.freerice.com

The longer you play, the more rice is donated; self indulgent time wasting made good!

what do we think of heaven?

2008-06-05T21:59:00.002+01:00

so far in this series we have looked at paradise/eden and then the fall from that paradise. next time we we look at what tom wright has to say about heaven (and how he thinks the Church has got it wrong), but this week we talked about what we think heaven is/is not and what images of heaven we see in popular culture. in particular we looked at how from very early on christians were influenced by greek philosophy and that this may well have contributed to an other worldly non physical idea of heaven and a tendency to equate the physical world with sin and see the soul as something independent of a body.

The Fall

2008-05-28T19:42:00.003+01:00

Last house group we continued to look at the creation stories in Genesis. The second story starts from 2.4b (or there abouts) this is generally considered to be a second creation story. This is one the one that deals with the fall - we were thinking about heaven and this story could be seen as a picture of a perfect world, before the fall. We also wondered if this story might be an attempt by the tellers to explain why the world was as it was for them, eg. hard and harsh. We also thought about the nature of Eve and Adam's sin and what it means to be "like God".

Stillness

2008-05-13T21:40:00.002+01:00

Habit Three: Stillness |:| Embody : create : coach : venture:

"The guru of stillness was exasperated with his student. The source of this exasperation was essentially that what he was teaching didn’t exist and the student was having a hard time with that. It was more about what wasn’t there than what was. The student couldn’t really handle that; ‘So. What you’re saying is that it is a bit like this? Or like that?’. ‘No, no, not like that! Or this, for that matter. Even a bit!’ He paused and finding depths of compassion and patience asked his student, ‘Are there spaces between your thoughts?’. ‘Well yes’, the student admitted. ‘Then make them bigger’."

Christian Aid Service 11th May 2008

2008-05-11T21:41:00.002+01:00

We had the Peace & Justice Christian service tonight. We finished standing around this table after lighting candles and saying together the prayer for Christian Aid week.

God of the rushing wind,
sweep through my indifference.

God of the fiery flames,
ignite my compassion.

God of the many voices,
open my mouth to speak out against injustice.

That through your Spirit
and my actions
this world may be transformed.
Amen.

creation

2008-04-26T10:54:00.003+01:00

at the meeting (23/4) we begin to look at the creation story as told in genesis 1 to 2.4a (to be precise!). we talked a bit about how many cultures have creation myths and why cultures have these stories, for example they might be about trying to explain why things are the way they are. the first creation story in genesis seems to give a picture of a world that is good, very good even where there everyone and even the animals live together. see in particular the implication that animals/humans don't eat meat.

somehow we had a very long discussion about what a soul might be and what might continue of a "person" after death. funnily enough we didn't actually come to any definite conclusions.

Human fertilisation and embroys bill

2008-04-06T14:34:00.001+01:00

At the last house group (2nd April) we discussed the bill on Human fertilization and embryos. A good debate despite the science being hard to understand!

A complex area to consider, but something we should do. Below is a link to an article by and anglican priest and scientist that argues that such research is playing god and that playing god is precisely what we should be doing.

The Tablet

Right brain - doorway to religious experience?

2008-03-24T08:42:00.003Z

Have a look at this video ( 18 minutes long)

http://www.microclesia.com/?p=320

This is from the cover of her book:

Jill Bolte Taylor was a 37-year-old Harvard-trained and published brain scientist when a blood vessel exploded in her brain. Through the eyes of a curious neuroanatomist, she watched her mind completely deteriorate whereby she could not walk, talk, read, write, or recall any of her life. Because of her understanding of how the brain works, her respect for the cells composing her human form, and an amazing mother, Jill completely recovered her mind, brain and body. In My Stroke of Insight: A Brain Scientist's Personal Journey, Jill shares with us her recommendations for recovery and the insight she gained into the unique functions of the right and left halves of her brain. Having lost the categorizing, organizing, describing, judging and critically analyzing skills of her left brain, along with its language centers and thus ego center, Jill’s consciousness shifted away from normal reality. In the absence of her left brain’s neural circuitry, her consciousness shifted into present moment thinking whereby she experienced herself “at one with the universe.”

it all depends on how you look at it

2008-03-21T10:32:00.004Z

PeterRollins.net � Blog Archive � What if it was the other way around?

... I was reminded of a story in which the philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe said in passing to Wittenstein, “I can understand why people once believed that the sun revolved around the earth”. In response Wittenstein said, “Why is that”? Anscombe looked up and replied, “Well, it looks like it does”. To which Wittenstein said, “yes, yes. But tell me, what would it look like if it was the other way around”?"

The point being that our prior assumptions will determine how we understand something, eg. the bible.

The atheist delusion | Review | guardian.co.uk Books

2008-03-15T15:18:00.001Z

Below is a quote that made me laugh, but the whole article is very good (quite long).

The atheist delusion | Review | guardian.co.uk Books: "Dawkins's 'memetic theory of religion' is a classic example of the nonsense that is spawned when Darwinian thinking is applied outside its proper sphere. Along with Dennett, who also holds to a version of the theory, Dawkins maintains that religious ideas survive because they would be able to survive in any 'meme pool', or else because they are part of a 'memeplex' that includes similar memes, such as the idea that, if you die as a martyr, you will enjoy 72 virgins. Unfortunately, the theory of memes is science only in the sense that Intelligent Design is science. Strictly speaking, it is not even a theory. Talk of memes is just the latest in a succession of ill-judged Darwinian metaphors."

For peace - John O’Donohue

2008-03-08T22:13:00.003Z

For peace

As the fever of day calms towards twilight
May all that is strained in us come to ease.

We pray for all who suffered violence today,
May an unexpected serenity surprise them.

For those who risk their lives each day for peace,
May their hearts glimpse providence at the heart of history.

That those who make riches from violence and war
Might hear in their dreams the cries of the lost.

That we might see through our fear of each other
A new vision to heal our fatal attraction to aggression.

That those who enjoy the privilege of peace
Might not forget their tormented brothers and sisters.

That the wolf might lie down with the lamb,
That our swords be beaten into ploughshares

And no hurt or harm be done
Anywhere along the holy mountain.

John O’Donohue, taken from from Benedictus, A Book of Blessings, newly published by Bantam Press. To browse, listen to and buy recordings of the
talks John has given at Greenbelt – in MP3 or CD format – go to greenbelt.org.uk/talks

How do we see the bible?

2008-03-03T21:54:00.001Z

Interactive Assessment | BuildingChurchLeaders.com

this is quick quiz on how we approach the bible, ie. hermeneutics (to be technical). it's quite fun, i scored 91 by the way...

huw

Small Ritual - Reading the Bible

2008-02-23T20:16:00.001Z

Small Ritual - Reading the Bible

i liked this and i thought it was relevant to our meeting where we talked about what is scripture, we looked at passages that might or might not have been in the bible and had to decide if they were biblical and if we thought they should be.

loose cannons? thinking about what scripture is

2008-02-10T15:29:00.000Z

First meeting of the year , January, we used material from the SCM book "Reading the Bible, approaching and understanding scripture".

We had various quotes to look at and decided both if we like them, ie. found them useful, truthful and if we thought they were in the bible or should or should not be in the Bible. This generated a lot of discussion, but few conclusions.

exploring different translations of the bible

2008-02-10T15:25:00.000Z

Second meeting of the year , January, we used material from the SCM book "Reading the Bible, approaching and understanding scripture" again.

We looked at how the bible has been translated over the years, how people make decsions on hw to translate and how it can be useful to look at different translations of the bible to help us understand what a passage might mean for us now.

national quaker week

2007-09-25T22:07:00.000+01:00

i came across this article in the guardian yesterday, riazzat butt tries out a quaker service being unused to silence...

The passing roar of traffic becomes a distant soundtrack. As the trivia pours out of my brain and on to the carpet, the sensation of silence becomes a luxury. My head, feeling heavier, droops and my shoulders fall. Watching the little hand move around the clock face, I realise I have never knowingly been so quiet, for so long, while awake. The hour ends, people shake hands and either make small talk or leave. It was like yoga without the movement.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2175616,00.html

significant comma?

2007-09-01T20:19:00.000+01:00

i was at greenbelt again this year and wanted to share a bit from the sermon at the sunday morning communion service, the sermon was given by ann morisy. she said that when we say the creed there is a very significant comma and that perhaps we should pause when we get to that comma. the comma she meant was the one in the phrase below:

born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate

her point was that this comma encompasses the whole of jesus' life on earth from the time of his birth to the time of his death and that perhaps we should not pass over it so quickly, there may be things we should learn from how jesus lived...

----------------
Now playing on foobar2000: The Arcade Fire - [Funeral #09] Rebellion (Lies)
via FoxyTunes

Let nothing trouble you — St. Teresa of Avila

2007-08-20T23:04:00.000+01:00

just back from barcelona thought i'd share this prayer of St. Teresa of Avila a Spanish mystic of the C16 ...

Let nothing trouble you.

Let nothing scare you.

All is fleeting.

God alone is unchanging.

Patience

Everything obtains.

Who possesses God

Nothing wants.

God alone suffices.

from carmelites.org

The Complex Christ | Signs of Emergence: Religion: Ignore God, It's About The Sacred

2007-07-26T20:58:00.000+01:00

short article about another article that looks at the anti-religious backlash (have i got that right?)

The Complex Christ | Signs of Emergence: Religion: Ignore God, It's About The Sacred

prayer

2007-07-16T22:07:00.000+01:00

“I don’t know what prayer is, but I do know how to pay attention.”

(Mary Oliver, poet)

i found this on maggie dawn's blog, which is always worth reading, link below.

http://maggidawn.typepad.com/maggidawn/2007/07/poems-prayers.html

next house group 18th july - note change of date

2007-07-01T22:25:00.000+01:00

next and last before summer - our "traditional" end of term nibbles, drink & chat - so not much different to our usual meetings :-)

next house group - 27th june

2007-06-15T21:57:00.000+01:00

our next house group will be on 27th june - we will be watching a c4 documentary about the situation in Israel/Palestine, this is being done by ron liddle, the same person who did the documentary we watched about athisism

Three ways to make sense of one God | Ekklesia

2007-06-07T07:26:00.000+01:00

This is an interesting (and quite long) article about the Trinity.

Three ways to make sense of one God | Ekklesia: "For example, I once heard a well-known theologian wrily observe that grasping Trinitarian language is not too difficult... once you realize that ‘one’ and ‘three’ aren’t numbers in a sequence (but rather ways of speaking of a singularity embracing beyond the merely numerical); that ‘persons’ in the Trinity are not human persons (the Greek means something like dramaturgical ‘masks’ or ‘appearances’, and was deliberately chosen to avoid what we now denote by ‘personalness’); and that ‘substance’ applied to God doesn’t mean ‘stuff’ (but true essence beyond our knowledge of ‘thingness’)!"

...

All of which brings us to that remarkable and famous icon about the Trinity painted around 1410 by Andrei Rublev. If we are swimming intellectually, this image will, I hope, begin to make what is being said more approachable. First, let’s be clear, this isn’t (as the untrained modern eye might assume), a representation of ‘God in three figures’ - a sort of celestial tea-party. Absolutely not. An icon is something to look through, not at. You need to go beyond the immediate appearance to ‘see’ what is ‘hidden within and beyond it’, so to speak. In this case, the three gold-winged figures are the visitors encountered by Abraham as he camps by the oak of Mamre. As he talks with them he finds himself mysteriously in conversation with God through being drawn into their curious communion, symbolized by the chalice. This only works if the picture, like the doctrine, is figurative – the opposite of what our modern minds fear, thank God, which is naive ‘literalness’.

next house group 13 june - the trap

2007-06-03T15:30:00.000+01:00

just a general reminder, next house group will be 13th june, not 6th as far too many people away on the 6th.

we will be watching the documentry "the trap"

black gold - the movie

2007-05-03T20:52:00.000+01:00

the url for the film that julia mention at house group.

http://www.blackgoldmovie.com/

Do verses from the OT apply to us today?

2007-05-03T14:30:00.000+01:00

Question I asked Jonathan:
I've been meaning to ask you for ages a question about the verse "you" choose for this year. This is an academic question, I in no way wanting to object to the pastoral side of this choice. This is a verse from the OT, and therefore was given to the people of God in a specific situation for a specific purpose. How is right to claim this applies to us today in the specific way you are doing?

Jonathan's Answer:
Thanks for your interesting question about the text for the year. I think there are several different ways to come at answers to your question.
One is to look at what the text may have meant in context. Some of the key OT commentators see it as being about looking forward to a new saving act from God which would be based on the pattern of God's saving acts in the past (e.g. the Exodus) but which would enable God's people to move into a new phase of salvation history beyond the Exile. In this sense, it would be possible to understand the passage as being fulfilled through the return from Exile. One problem with this approach is that it leaves the passage fairly firmly in the past. There would be little in the way of application that could be drawn out for today. On this basis, we would say that it is a prophecy that had a particular meaning for the people of its day but one that has little relevance for us today.
That isn't the way that the commentators see it however. Their argument is often that this passage demonstrates the way in which Israel's understanding of God developed and changed as it moved beyond the old traditions by witnessing to a God who was always at the front edge of Israel's life. The implication of this argument is that God is always doing something new and we need to look out for it - which is the main way in which I have used the text so far. This is an argument that comes out of context but it is the context of what this passage meant in the development of scripture rather than what it meant in the history of the Israelites.
This argument also links to an understanding of God that is found in several different parts and genres of scripture; the theme of God's creativity and the issue of the extent to which God's creativity is ongoing. This passage bases its statement that God will act in a new way on the implication that God is creative in an ongoing sense. It seems to me that it is important in our understanding of scripture to see the way in which individual passages link to the wider context, themes and issues of scripture as a whole and by talking about this passage in terms of God's ongoing creativity I am seeking to do that.
Interestingly, the way of understanding the development of scripture that the commentators are pointing out seems to me to be very similar that of Jesus. What Jesus does in his ministry, particularly in his symbolic actions, is to retell aspects of the story of Israel (the saving acts of God) and to apply those stories to himself. Where the OT texts see Israel as the servant of God, Jesus applies these texts by words and actions to himself. This is why the Gospel writers are able to point to so many OT texts that they say are fulfilled in Jesus' life, death and resurrection. Now, this is an approach to scripture that is not about understanding it in context in the way that we usually mean today. The writers of the OT texts that Jesus acts out, reinterprets and fulfills did not have Jesus in mind when they first spoke or wrote nor was Jesus, in his actions, trying to understand what those texts meant to the OT writers at the time that they wrote or spoke.
Another way of approaching the passage is to claim that its meaning wasn't fulfilled by the return from Exile but is fulfilled by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and I have also used this approach on some occasions in speaking about the passage and intend to do so some more in future. Again, this is not a way of understanding the passage based on its likely meaning for the person who wrote it at the time that person wrote but I don't think that it is invalidated for that reason.
I think the Bible is rich in layers of meaning (look, for example, at the allegorical way in which Paul interprets scripture in Galatians 4. 21-31; just like Jesus he pays no attention to what the passage he is interpreting meant to those who lived it out or to those who wrote the story down) and wish to use a variety of different ways of interpretation in order to reveal that richness as I preach (that is my aspiration - I do not want to claim that my inadequate attempts at sermons equate to the richness that is found in scripture). I think we need to be quite careful about our use of approaches to Biblical Criticism that we don't see used in the Bible itself and which we bring to the Bible out of our own (in this case, modernist) culture; often we can't see the problems with and limitations of these approaches because we are so emmeshed in the thought-patterns of our own or recently-passed culture.
I hope this helps in understanding where I'm coming from and in understanding why I think that one of the ways in which we can understand this verse and passage is to apply to ourselves in a way that is different from the way in which people at the time are likely to have applied to themselves. There is much more that could be said on all of this and I'd be quite happy to discuss it further either by email and in person.

house group 9th May

2007-04-27T18:53:00.000+01:00

Next meeting will be as above - we will be thinking about faith & politics, do they mix? should they mix? see Julia's original post below for more details. Thoughts links etc. can be added to comments of this post...

hg after this will be looking at "The Trap" documentary

Science& Faith

2007-04-25T08:01:00.000+01:00

interesting article in guardian...

"The God disunion: there is a place for faith in science, insists Winston"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2064897,00.html

/ link should work now if anyone has tried it before and had problems.

housegroup discussion material

2007-04-22T20:54:00.000+01:00

Is it right for church leaders to make pronouncements about politics? Can it be classified as being 'prohetic'? When should they speak out and within what boundaries? This came out of an article I read in the Church Times a few weeks ago written by Canon Alan Billings who among other things is Director for Ethics and religion at Lancaster University. I quote a little at the end of his article :- ' The modernchurch seeks to make up for its loss of political power by being preachy and didactic. As long as it does that, it will give its members the impression that the real business of politics can be done somewhere other than through the practise of politics itself. Those who think they are being prophetic are contributing to the disillusion with politics'. He had started his article by commenting on Archbishop John Sentamu pitching his tent in the cathedral and making some comments on the conflict between Israel and Hizbollah in the Lebannon.

Rowan Williams - the church needs to listen properly to the bible

2007-04-19T09:58:00.000+01:00

Rowan Williams gave a lecture on this topic in Canada recently, link to full text below. But I want to quote once section in particular speaking about scripture...

"... a written text requires re-reading; it is never read for the last time, and it continuously generates new events of interpretation. It is fruitful of renewed communication in a way that the spoken word alone cannot be. So to identify a written text as sacred is to claim that the continuous possibility of re-reading, the impossibility of reading for the last time, is a continuous openness to the intention of God to communicate".

http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches/070416.htm

Warning, it's pretty dense stuff :-)

house group 25th April 2007

2007-04-15T19:25:00.000+01:00

Any thoughts on what anyone might want to do? please post a comment.

Huw

Rowan Williams sermon - slave trade

2007-03-28T07:14:00.000+01:00

http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sermons_speeches/070327.htm

above is a link to the archbishop's sermon from the service that marked the 200 year anniversary of the abolition of the Atlantic slave trade. for those a the lent course this is the service that jean mentioned.

templeton prize acceptance speech

2007-03-20T12:32:00.000Z

Maggi Dawn, always interesting, has a quote from Charles Taylor's speech on getting the Templeton Prize. Fits in with our dicsussions of the trouble with athisism, well worth a look...

http://maggidawn.typepad.com/maggidawn/2007/03/templeton_prize.html

Giving fundamentalism a secular boost | Ekklesia

2007-03-15T07:23:00.000Z

Giving fundamentalism a secular boost | Ekklesia

"Media atheists of the narrower kind are fast becoming the new best friends of fundamentalist Christians. For every time they write about religion they are doing very effective PR for a fundamentalist worldview. Many of the propositions that fundamentalists are keen to sell the public are oft-repeated corner-stones of the media atheist's philosophy of religion."

He doesn't hold back here, but I think he has a point...

I really must get out more...

2007-03-09T14:22:00.000Z

In an idle moment in the office, or rather, searching round to do anything to avoid 'phoning a particular client, I wondered with all the bad press the internet gets which is more of interest to people, love or hate?

A search in Google on each word gets 228 million hits for hate, but a decisive lead for love with 921 million.

Thinking Anglicans

2007-03-08T15:46:00.000Z

Thanks for the link, I have not seen this site before, but I instantly knew from the name what flavour of opinion this would be! So the name worries me a bit, are we saying that those who won’t agree with this particular taste are unthinking? Seems a bit arrogant to me.

What do the rest of you think?

Mustard Seed Shavings: The God Delusion 8&9

2007-03-06T18:57:00.000Z

This is an interesting post that links in with our discussion of "The Trouble with Atheism"

Mustard Seed Shavings: The God Delusion 8&9

How do I add a link at the side?

2007-03-06T01:11:00.000Z

Where there is two links including the church's web site. Or can only managers do this?

Work Based EMail Group

2007-03-06T01:08:00.000Z

Jonathan's Work Based EMail's are now managed as a google group. See the home page. I've added the emails Jonathan has sent out already. All new emails will go via the group.

See this page

2007-03-06T00:54:00.000Z

You will get a formal invite soon. But in the interim see our wedding page.

Does evolution select for faster evolvers?

2007-03-05T21:19:00.000Z

here is an interesting article about evolution

Does evolution select for faster evolvers?

Lets get started!

2007-03-05T12:36:00.000Z

These are the links to Wikipedia articles on slavery I mentioned to Huw on Saturday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

An issue clearly not clear cut on whom to "lay the blame".

Hello from Jim

2007-03-05T11:25:00.000Z

Test to see if I can post correctly.

This is an edit, to test adding a label.

This is a second edit

St John's Church

2007-03-04T19:52:00.000Z

yet another test, this should be a link to our church website

Anti-Slavery - Anti-Slavery - Modern

2007-03-04T18:05:00.000Z

this is more of a test to see how easy it is to post...

Anti-Slavery - Anti-Slavery - Modern

first post

2007-03-04T17:50:00.000Z

well the idea here is that we can share ideas and continue discussions in between house groups...