Went to Kendal on Friday for the funeral of my colleague that passed away recently.
It turned out to be more of a memorial service - no coffin or anything - so I felt vaguely let down, as did my other work colleagues I think.
The mood was quite light. The Eulogy was quite humourous, with ripples of laughter going across the congregation. I have no doubt that its what the family (and my dead friend) would have wanted, but it didn't work for me. I needed something with a joy at a deep level rather than superficial, and with more acknoledgement of the grief of parting.
Anyway, it meant I had an excuse to be in the area, and so I took my wife and pre-school child along too. We found a good play area (The Fun Factory) right on Bowness Bay. Last time we went this had closed down, but it was now very much open. Soour daughter had a really nice time playing there while Mrs and I sat by the window overlooking the lake. Really nice! Then we moved to the pub next to the main jetties In Bowness Bay - I have to recommend it. They do a generous and ridiclously cheap carvery, and you can sit by a large window with a view up the lake. Wonderful!
Sunday, July 15
Thursday, July 12
Openly sexist moan about covert sexism
Scenario 1
Dominant woman says to husband “I want a big family”. Husband doesn’t really want kids, is not interested in childcare, but dutifully impregnates her multiple times, because he loves her and wants her to be fulfilled. Wife then says to husband “They’re your children too, so you have to help pay for them and look after them”
That all seems very reasonable, doesn’t it?
Scenario 2
Dominant husband says to his wife “I want a motorbike”. Wife dutifully doesn’t really want a motorbike, isn’t interested in Zen (or the art of motorcycle maintenance) but she buys him one because she loves him and wants him to be fulfilled. Husband then says “It’s your motorbike too, so you have to help maintain it and clean it”.
That doesn’t seem reasonable.
Why? It's not fair!
Dominant woman says to husband “I want a big family”. Husband doesn’t really want kids, is not interested in childcare, but dutifully impregnates her multiple times, because he loves her and wants her to be fulfilled. Wife then says to husband “They’re your children too, so you have to help pay for them and look after them”
That all seems very reasonable, doesn’t it?
Scenario 2
Dominant husband says to his wife “I want a motorbike”. Wife dutifully doesn’t really want a motorbike, isn’t interested in Zen (or the art of motorcycle maintenance) but she buys him one because she loves him and wants him to be fulfilled. Husband then says “It’s your motorbike too, so you have to help maintain it and clean it”.
That doesn’t seem reasonable.
Why? It's not fair!
I don’t actually want a motorbike. I’m just making a point. I didn’t want a big family; I only have one because that’s what she asked for. The kids are her idea, her wish, her dream, her project. So why am I expected to do the hard work in what is actually HER hobby?
Bored
Bored Bored Bored Bored Bored Bored.
When will my project kick off again? Pleeeease, somebody give me something to do!
When will my project kick off again? Pleeeease, somebody give me something to do!
Fifty shades of grey
A rather stuffy middle aged woman at church posted on her facebook page “I have got Fifty shades of grey – it’s not as good as I though”.
She’s not the kind of person you would expect to be redaing that book.
But scroll down on her page – it’s a monochrome copy of a Dulux colour chart – 50 shades of grey!
(Well. I thought it was funny).
Meanwhile my daughter, whose nickname at work id mysteriously “Greybone”, is now being called “Fifty shades of Greybone”.
My daughter’s friend had a copy of the book, so my daughter showed a page to my wife (I was away at work). She only scanned it briefly, but told me it was ‘very descriptive’.
We discussed.
Initially, my wife was saying it was a good thing: she distinguished it from porn because that is ‘in your face’ whereas this ‘makes you work’. Also, husbands would be excited to think their wives were reading it – probably true. (Blush). But I countered that it still corrupts, and that if I was reading a male equivalent she would not be happy. She couldn't argue with that.
Later I confided to her that part of my vocal opposition was largely for the benefit of my eavesdropping daughter, to whom I need to set a good example, but that I would secretly be pleased for my wife to read it. (Blush again). Even though I still regarded it as porn and therefore technically sinful.
This morning my wife said that maybe the Lord had hidden her Kindle to stop her from polluting it with 50 shades. She vowed not to download it, and reasoned that if she was right, her Kindle will re-appear today.
She’s not the kind of person you would expect to be redaing that book.
But scroll down on her page – it’s a monochrome copy of a Dulux colour chart – 50 shades of grey!
(Well. I thought it was funny).
Meanwhile my daughter, whose nickname at work id mysteriously “Greybone”, is now being called “Fifty shades of Greybone”.
My daughter’s friend had a copy of the book, so my daughter showed a page to my wife (I was away at work). She only scanned it briefly, but told me it was ‘very descriptive’.
We discussed.
Initially, my wife was saying it was a good thing: she distinguished it from porn because that is ‘in your face’ whereas this ‘makes you work’. Also, husbands would be excited to think their wives were reading it – probably true. (Blush). But I countered that it still corrupts, and that if I was reading a male equivalent she would not be happy. She couldn't argue with that.
Later I confided to her that part of my vocal opposition was largely for the benefit of my eavesdropping daughter, to whom I need to set a good example, but that I would secretly be pleased for my wife to read it. (Blush again). Even though I still regarded it as porn and therefore technically sinful.
(Side story: she has lost her Kindle, which she was using to download scriptures and devotional books.)
This morning my wife said that maybe the Lord had hidden her Kindle to stop her from polluting it with 50 shades. She vowed not to download it, and reasoned that if she was right, her Kindle will re-appear today.
(Failing that, she’ll probably go and buy the book!)
Relics of tradition
I had this email conversation with a Roman Catholic Priest:
My Question: I have heard it said (I forget where) that for a Roman Catholic Altar to be consecrated it must contain a relic of a saint. Is there any truth in this?
As a side comment, I hear that this is vaguely linked to the origin of graveyards around churches - at the resurrection the saint will rise (from his relic) and lead the way for the others in the graveyard.
Q: Thank you for a pretty much instantaneous answer!
What is the theology of this custom? Numbers 19:11-16 (especially 16) indicate that that a dead body would defile an altar. (compare also 1Ki 13:2). I know that is the Old Testament and that the New Testament heads in a differnt direction, but the NT is still built on the old and for such a radical 180 degree reversal from a body defiling an altar to being part of its consecration is surprising.
My comment: Thanks again for your reply. I remain staunchly protestant, although slightly more educated. I continue to have a fundamentally different view of the Lord's table from Rome, but within the premise of the Roman view your answer to my query is an intellectually tenable position that I can respect, while politely disagreeing.
So, what do you think?
My comments are along these lines: Caholicism seems to be much more rooted in physical things than Protestantism. We feel that the Roman Catholic approach bordes on superstition and magic, and we feel that their faith has been displaced from Christ onto objects. This would be idolatry, as explained eloquently in the book of Wisdom 14:15-21 which they would include as canonical scripture. They feel that the fact of the incarnation means that God IS in touch with the physical world, and there are examples in the Bible - for example - of people being being healed by touching clothes or passing under a shadow. We counter that we 'worship in spirit and in truth'.
In any case, it would seem rather weird and macabre if protestants started digging up their dead pastors, cutting up the bodies and distributing bits around the country and putting them under the table they use for communion. Probably get arrested, or at least some negative media coverage!
My friend's point about the resurrection changing the way we view a body is valid. But I still think the whole thing is misplaced faith and distracting from our focus on Christ and turning people into idolators.
Sorry if this seems strong: I don't intend to offend, but that's the way I see it.
My Question: I have heard it said (I forget where) that for a Roman Catholic Altar to be consecrated it must contain a relic of a saint. Is there any truth in this?
As a side comment, I hear that this is vaguely linked to the origin of graveyards around churches - at the resurrection the saint will rise (from his relic) and lead the way for the others in the graveyard.
His answer: It is the custom , though I don't believe that it is absolutely required at present. Relics are never place in a movable altar, only in a fixed, or built in altar
Q: Thank you for a pretty much instantaneous answer!
What is the theology of this custom? Numbers 19:11-16 (especially 16) indicate that that a dead body would defile an altar. (compare also 1Ki 13:2). I know that is the Old Testament and that the New Testament heads in a differnt direction, but the NT is still built on the old and for such a radical 180 degree reversal from a body defiling an altar to being part of its consecration is surprising.
A: You are forgetting about the resurrection. It changed the way we look at the body. Yes it is a very ancient custom it was an early first century custom to offer mass on to of the tombs of the martyrs
My comment: Thanks again for your reply. I remain staunchly protestant, although slightly more educated. I continue to have a fundamentally different view of the Lord's table from Rome, but within the premise of the Roman view your answer to my query is an intellectually tenable position that I can respect, while politely disagreeing.
His reply: Disagreeing is not a problem. I often disagree with myself! Thanks for the note.
So, what do you think?
My comments are along these lines: Caholicism seems to be much more rooted in physical things than Protestantism. We feel that the Roman Catholic approach bordes on superstition and magic, and we feel that their faith has been displaced from Christ onto objects. This would be idolatry, as explained eloquently in the book of Wisdom 14:15-21 which they would include as canonical scripture. They feel that the fact of the incarnation means that God IS in touch with the physical world, and there are examples in the Bible - for example - of people being being healed by touching clothes or passing under a shadow. We counter that we 'worship in spirit and in truth'.
In any case, it would seem rather weird and macabre if protestants started digging up their dead pastors, cutting up the bodies and distributing bits around the country and putting them under the table they use for communion. Probably get arrested, or at least some negative media coverage!
My friend's point about the resurrection changing the way we view a body is valid. But I still think the whole thing is misplaced faith and distracting from our focus on Christ and turning people into idolators.
Sorry if this seems strong: I don't intend to offend, but that's the way I see it.
Monday, July 9
Back to work?
Head a project meeting this morning. The project manager decided that the project approval group on 24th July is 99% likely to choose the cheaper option, so I was instructed to continue on this basis. So I might actually do some work now, which will reduce my blogging for a bit.
Supporting son, seeing spillway
Took my son to an open day at his future university on Saturday. Looks really good. I think he will have a really good time there.
On the way, stopped casually at the reservoir spillway that I designed which is under construction. Looks really good. Co-incidentally met the headworks controller who was able to show me round more formally and we were able to discuss a few points:
• He would have preferred the bare concrete walls to be stone clad (not for me to decide)
• In recent heavy rain some water and spilled from the temporary channel. This was at least in part the contractor’s fault for having an abrupt bend in his temporary diversion channel. Fast-flowing water doesn’t do abrupt bends. So some freshly laid concrete had been damaged and they had to do it again and were now moaning that they had lost all their profit in the job.
• I was concerned that we had put the ‘compensation flow measurement’ device in the wrong location, omitting one flow stream, but he set my mind at rest that when this flow stream was operation the compensation flow would not be measured anyway.
And so on.
Also over the weekend, helped the same son with his scholarship application. We have been trying to get on to this for weeks but there always seemed to be something in the way. The deadline Midnight Sunday – loomed and concentrated our minds. So while he desperately scribbled answers to the questions onto reams of paper I typed them frantically into the online form. We finally hit the ‘submit’ button just as the clock turned to 00:00!
Which is technically past midnight, so I hope they still allow the application.
On the way, stopped casually at the reservoir spillway that I designed which is under construction. Looks really good. Co-incidentally met the headworks controller who was able to show me round more formally and we were able to discuss a few points:
• He would have preferred the bare concrete walls to be stone clad (not for me to decide)
• In recent heavy rain some water and spilled from the temporary channel. This was at least in part the contractor’s fault for having an abrupt bend in his temporary diversion channel. Fast-flowing water doesn’t do abrupt bends. So some freshly laid concrete had been damaged and they had to do it again and were now moaning that they had lost all their profit in the job.
• I was concerned that we had put the ‘compensation flow measurement’ device in the wrong location, omitting one flow stream, but he set my mind at rest that when this flow stream was operation the compensation flow would not be measured anyway.
And so on.
Also over the weekend, helped the same son with his scholarship application. We have been trying to get on to this for weeks but there always seemed to be something in the way. The deadline Midnight Sunday – loomed and concentrated our minds. So while he desperately scribbled answers to the questions onto reams of paper I typed them frantically into the online form. We finally hit the ‘submit’ button just as the clock turned to 00:00!
Which is technically past midnight, so I hope they still allow the application.
Friday, July 6
Barely a man?
I did a little test on the BBC website which purports to decide if you have a mostly male or mostly female brain.
Apparently I am only just male, about 55% of the way along the line bewteen fully female and fully male.
Unexpected reults:
Did it predict correctly for you?
Apparently I am only just male, about 55% of the way along the line bewteen fully female and fully male.
Unexpected reults:
- I am a poor empathiser
- I am a good empathiser
Did it predict correctly for you?
Laying down History
In case you hadn’t noticed, I’m still quiet at work and hence busy on the blog.
I’m actually a bit more upset about my colleague passing away than I thought I would be. I guess I expected it during one of his crises a few weeks ago, and since he survived that I thought he was going to pull through. So the expected became unexpected.
I have been thinking a lot recently about how history comprises things happening. I know that’s obvious, but its getting into my consciousness via the ‘philosophy’ channel at present.
Before things happen, we have no knowledge of them. No certainty of knowledge, at least – we might foresee or plan, but until it does happen we can’t guarantee it. Some we foresee for years, others not even for seconds. They just happen, and then the world changes. We go from one situation, one normality, to a new situation, which immediately becomes the new normality.
Take for example, Glasgow - a city which has always had two football teams, reflecting a cultural and religious division across the city. And then one year, one football club runs into financial trouble and closes. Its phoenix successor is cold-shouldered out of the league. And all of a sudden everything had changed.
Then there is the Scottish food company which takes 75% of all pigs produced in Scotland. It’s going down, and will take all of those farms with it. A new reality, a new normality, is dumped on us.
It was the same when Woolworths - my wife’s favourite – closed (we used to tease her for any visit to any town being incomplete without going into the Woollies there)
Each of these things is a shock. It takes the wind away from us. We gasp, and wonder how life can continue when normality is shaken.
But of course all these are ‘first world problems’. It’s worse if you were a Haitian who woke to find your capital city flattened by an earthquake, and then devastated further by crime and disease. A new normality.
Is it like dealing cards from a pack? You never know what the next one will be, but as soon as it is laid you see it and it cannot be changed. And then almost as fast as you recover from that a new equally unexpected card is laid on top. Almost like archaeological or geological layers, that let us see and analyse history but not change it.
Has God shuffled the cards, or has he fixed them in advance? And for all those random dice rolls, did he roll the dice once only before time began to fix the outcome of each and every game of bones?
I get a related feeling sometimes when I am driving, particularly along a winding road. The three dimensional landscape in front of me seems to become a flat disc; the scenery appears at the middle and rushes to the edge. (Imagine a video of a bath tub vortex being played in reverse; it would give a similar effect.) I know the road ahead, yet it still remains invisible until it appears at the centre and expands.
It’s the same with the lead in my pencil. Each layer of graphite is already there, but I know nothing of it until I scrape it onto my paper.
My son plays ‘minecraft’ on the computer. The contents of the earth are fixed by the terrain generator, but then your little man goes and digs, not knowing what he will find, and unearths the various materials that he needs if his search is successful.
I guess, thinking aloud, that the unforeseen future that we face, that shocks and surprises us every day, is already known to God. He has already seen it, and prepared us for it. I believe he has already written it. He put the lead in my pencil. He was the programmer that made the minecraft-like universe for us to explore. He made the road that unravels itself into my visual disc. He made the card deck, and arranged its order. He determined when companies rise and companies fall on the stock market. He can already see the parts of the gold price chart that have not been revealed to us yet. He knows what the outcome of the Scottish independence referendum will be. He knows the day I will die and what will kill me. He wrote that day.
This sounds perhaps too determistically Calvinist – I see ‘the plan’ not so much as a single line as a branched tree in which decision is possible but the outcome of each choice is pre-determined and within the overall plan, and there is foreknowledge as to which twig you will end on.
So, though I remain as shocked as anyone else by the daily news, yet I remain confident in his sovereignty. “For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” Jer 29:11
I’m actually a bit more upset about my colleague passing away than I thought I would be. I guess I expected it during one of his crises a few weeks ago, and since he survived that I thought he was going to pull through. So the expected became unexpected.
I have been thinking a lot recently about how history comprises things happening. I know that’s obvious, but its getting into my consciousness via the ‘philosophy’ channel at present.
Before things happen, we have no knowledge of them. No certainty of knowledge, at least – we might foresee or plan, but until it does happen we can’t guarantee it. Some we foresee for years, others not even for seconds. They just happen, and then the world changes. We go from one situation, one normality, to a new situation, which immediately becomes the new normality.
Take for example, Glasgow - a city which has always had two football teams, reflecting a cultural and religious division across the city. And then one year, one football club runs into financial trouble and closes. Its phoenix successor is cold-shouldered out of the league. And all of a sudden everything had changed.
Then there is the Scottish food company which takes 75% of all pigs produced in Scotland. It’s going down, and will take all of those farms with it. A new reality, a new normality, is dumped on us.
It was the same when Woolworths - my wife’s favourite – closed (we used to tease her for any visit to any town being incomplete without going into the Woollies there)
Each of these things is a shock. It takes the wind away from us. We gasp, and wonder how life can continue when normality is shaken.
But of course all these are ‘first world problems’. It’s worse if you were a Haitian who woke to find your capital city flattened by an earthquake, and then devastated further by crime and disease. A new normality.
So History comes at us as this series of events, and is laid down unchangeably forever.
Is it like dealing cards from a pack? You never know what the next one will be, but as soon as it is laid you see it and it cannot be changed. And then almost as fast as you recover from that a new equally unexpected card is laid on top. Almost like archaeological or geological layers, that let us see and analyse history but not change it.
Has God shuffled the cards, or has he fixed them in advance? And for all those random dice rolls, did he roll the dice once only before time began to fix the outcome of each and every game of bones?
I get a related feeling sometimes when I am driving, particularly along a winding road. The three dimensional landscape in front of me seems to become a flat disc; the scenery appears at the middle and rushes to the edge. (Imagine a video of a bath tub vortex being played in reverse; it would give a similar effect.) I know the road ahead, yet it still remains invisible until it appears at the centre and expands.
It’s the same with the lead in my pencil. Each layer of graphite is already there, but I know nothing of it until I scrape it onto my paper.
My son plays ‘minecraft’ on the computer. The contents of the earth are fixed by the terrain generator, but then your little man goes and digs, not knowing what he will find, and unearths the various materials that he needs if his search is successful.
I guess, thinking aloud, that the unforeseen future that we face, that shocks and surprises us every day, is already known to God. He has already seen it, and prepared us for it. I believe he has already written it. He put the lead in my pencil. He was the programmer that made the minecraft-like universe for us to explore. He made the road that unravels itself into my visual disc. He made the card deck, and arranged its order. He determined when companies rise and companies fall on the stock market. He can already see the parts of the gold price chart that have not been revealed to us yet. He knows what the outcome of the Scottish independence referendum will be. He knows the day I will die and what will kill me. He wrote that day.
This sounds perhaps too determistically Calvinist – I see ‘the plan’ not so much as a single line as a branched tree in which decision is possible but the outcome of each choice is pre-determined and within the overall plan, and there is foreknowledge as to which twig you will end on.
So, though I remain as shocked as anyone else by the daily news, yet I remain confident in his sovereignty. “For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” Jer 29:11
Rest in Peace
My colleague, a health and Safety officer and one of the strongest and most cheerful members of our workplace Christian fellowship, died yesterday, a few weeks after his formal retirement, having been diagnosed with a cancerous tumour in his brain a few months back.
He will be sadly missed, and we look forward to our future reunion.
He will be sadly missed, and we look forward to our future reunion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)