BLOG.HALEWOODPARISH.ORG

To Be A Pilgrim

2011-08-21T07:15:27Z

Gloucester Pilgrimage

19th August 2011

Some of us are here on pilgrimage - an ecumenical group from Halewood, Merseyside, visiting some of the sacred places of Gloucestershire. (Mostly churches and tea-shops?)
We’re not the first pilgrims to visit Gloucester! Richard II came here in 1378, one of many thousands of pilgrims, to visit the tomb of Edward II.

The Bishop of Gloucester has also been on pilgrimage across the Diocese. He says, “Life is a journey with God”. A pilgrimage is a particular way of bringing that reality into focus.
For me, it’s a special kind of pilgrimage that brings me to my home town: I was born and brought up in Gloucester, went to school here, and this cathedral has been a part of my consciousness for as long as I can remember. (My uncle Ken was a Cathedral Guide and showed us round when I was seven years old!)

So, a pilgrimage which brings me home.

In our Halewood churches, we have been privileged to share our journey with many saints, some of whom have very recently completed their pilgrimages and gone home. Among them, we remember ‘St Ivy of the Dingle’ - our lovely Mrs Ivy Scott, born in Liverpool in the 1920s, into a world of hardship and larger-than-life characters that filled her stories. She loved Christmas: the lights in her house got more elaborate every year. On her 80th birthday, she turned up for her party, wearing fairy lights - working fairy lights, with a battery-pack! And at her funeral just days ago, on top of the coffin, a floral arrangement, complete with fairy lights!
And Ken McQueen: a quieter character than ‘our Ivy’, but a generous and compassionate Christian gentleman, who gave his life to loving and serving his family, his church and his community. ST Nicholas' was packed - standing room only! - with those who wanted to pay their respects to Ken and to support Georgina and the family.

I suppose it is possible to be a solitary pilgrim

But for most of us, our journey is best shared with companions. The story of Ruth involves a number of journeys: in time of famine, Elimelech and Naomi, and their sons, set out from Bethlehem to Moab. Elimelech dies and the sons marry Moabite women, Ruth and Orpah. When the sons also die, Naomi decides to return to her own country, and tells her daughters-in-law that they had best go back to their own mothers.
16 But Ruth replied, “Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God. 17 Where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the LORD deal with me, be it ever so severely, if even death separates you and me.”

To cut a -not-very-long story, short, Ruth is married to Boaz and becomes great-grandmother of king David, and named in the genealogy of Jesus. Because she went on a journey with someone that she loved.
The creed reminds us that we journey in the communion of saints - Hebrews 12:1-4 changes to a more energetic picture of a race, rather than a gentle stroll, set in the Olympic stadium: those who have already completed their race sit in the stands to cheer us on:

Hebrews 12

1 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, 2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

John 14 - Jesus: the way, truth and life...

Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. He has walked the path with us and for us. He accompanies us on our journey and leads us home.

Conclusion

We are pilgrims: our journey has meaning, significance.
Jesus has walked the path and accompanies us.
We journey together - both with our brothers and sisters, and with all who have gone before us.
And one day, we shall find ourselves at home.

"We will remember them"

2010-01-25T16:53:00Z

On 19^th December 2009, Corporal Simon Hornby, who was serving in Afghanistan with the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment, died as a result of an explosion whilst on foot patrol in Helmand Province. As you may know, Simon was from Halewood, having been to school at New Hutte Primary and Halewood Comprehensive. We offer our heartfelt sympathy to his wife, Holly; to Simon’s parents, Julie and Joe; and to the whole family in their loss. We trust that they will find strength and comfort from the tributes that have been paid to Simon, and that they will know the love and support of those around them. The Church community continues to hold them all in our prayers.

Those who knew him personally will feel the sense of loss that his death brings. To those of us in the wider community, Simon’s death brings home the reality of what we see on the news. We ask so much of those who serve in our Armed Forces: Cpl Hornby has paid the ultimate price; but the cost is also borne by those he leaves behind – the family and friends whose lives will never be the same, and the community which is diminished by his loss.

Simon’s funeral service took place at the Anglican Cathedral on Friday 8^th January. Hundreds of mourners attended – despite the bitter cold and with snow on the ground. His wife, Holly, and the rest of the family conducted themselves with great dignity on what must have been an unimaginably difficult day for them. Holly had prepared a personal tribute to Simon, which was read by two family members. Simon’s Commanding Officer, Lt Col Robbie Boyd, delivered the eulogy and described him as a distinguished and courageous soldier, a promising leader, and a great character. He had demonstrated his qualities whilst serving in Iraq, where he received a commendation for discovering an explosive device and spoiling an ambush. Simon was fiercely loyal to his family, his regiment and to his home city.

In the past few years, we have witnesssed a remarkable phenomenon in the public display of respect given by the people of Wootton Bassett to those who have died in conflict. The Wiltshire town has now seen over a hundred repatriations since April 2007, as the funeral corteges make their journey from RAF Lyneham. Despite the attempts by a few fanatics to hijack what is happening there, the people of Wootton Bassett are expressing something on behalf of the vast majority: that the death of someone who was serving their country is not to be taken lightly. Each November, at our Remembrance Sunday services, we struggle with the idea of ‘remembering’ those who have died in war. We read the names of the people of Halewood who lost their lives in two World Wars and whose names are inscribed on our War Memorial. Each year, that ‘remembering’ becomes more difficult as those wars become ever more distant. Sadly, we are now to add another name to the list of those to be remembered here in Halewood. Plans are underway to add Simon Hornby’s name to the War Memorial in the churchyard at St Nicholas’ and to hold a memorial service for him in church. When Remembrance Sunday comes, as we stand to hear the familiar Roll of Honour, and keep our two minutes’ silence, the inclusion of Simon’s name will bring home to us the reality that every name on our War Memorial and on our Remembrance list is the name of someone who had family and friends to grieve them.

“They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning

We will remember them.”

Alan Jewell

Happy New Year!

2010-01-13T11:35:00Z

For a few years now, Rose and I have struggled to find something we want to do on New Year's Eve. When the children were younger, it was great. My brother had kids around the same age as ours and my sister had a young grandchild, so we got together, played party games and enjoyed each other's company. Then the children get older and no longer want to share their New Year's Eve with their parents (and you can't blame them) - they have party invitations elsewhere.

And if we stayed in Halewood, we wouldn't be short of invitations (I believe!), but down in Gloucester we find ourselves looking for something to do, somewhere to go. Last year (2009), I was determined not to spend New Year's Eve watching the telly; but by the morning of that day, we still didn't have anything arranged. We wandered into town and called in at the Guild Hall, to see if they had any tickets left for a comedy club night that I had seen advertised. They did, so we took two.

That evening, we arrived at the Guild Hall and the only seats I could see that were not occupied were right in front of the stage, literally within spitting distance of the acts. (No, I wasn't expecting to spit at the comedians.) I don't know if you've seen any live comedy lately? I'm not talking Bruce Forsyth here. I'm a big fan of comedy on TV and love programmes like Mock The Week and Live at the Apollo, so I did have an idea of what to expect. Not that I had heard of any of the comedians on the bill for this show, but I do have a sense of where comedy is at. So, you'll know that modern comedians, especially when they are not on TV, tend to have an act that you wouldn't want to sit through with your mum in the room. And I'm 50 years old, you know!

So I suppose I knew what we were letting ourselves in for. I just hadn't factored in the whole 'sitting in the middle of the front row, right in the eye-line of the comedians' thing. On comes the compère. He begins to warm himself and the audience up. And then he spots me and asks my name. "Alan". "And what do you do, Alan?" Pause. "I'm a Vicar." Big laugh.

This is clearly comedy gold-dust. What more could you ask for from an audience than to have a Vicar sitting in the middle of the front row? From that moment on, the rest of his act is aimed at me and I feel like I'm in show business. "I must warn you, Vicar, that I tend to use words like... " He then uses the word that even Channel 4 bleeps out after the watershed. Yes, that one!

The next comedian comes on. He's been waiting in the wings and following the compère's opening. He soon picks me out, asks "Is that your wife?", looking at Rose, and she is then on the receiving end of a comedy song whose content I cannot describe here.

And so the evening went on. Did I enjoy it? Yes, I did. (I think that Rose found it more difficult knowing that everyone in the audience was watching us to see if we were laughing or not.)

In the interval, I'm stopped in the Gents by a man who wants to shake my hand. (Scary!) Another man is sceptical that I really am a vicar, so I tell him where my parish is and so on. Don't know if he believed me or not.

A couple sitting next to us, who are regulars at the comedy club, have seen the compère before: he always does the "And what do you do?" opening. Apparently, the one time they saw him struggle was when his victim said, "fighter pilot".

Note to self: if a comedian asks, "And what do you do?", I'm a fighter pilot.

Faith and Politics

2009-09-26T17:08:00Z

In May this year, Cllr Dave Smithson became Mayor ofKnowsley. At the same time, Cllr Mike Storey became Lord Mayor of Liverpool.Leaving aside the fact that they both belong to the same political party - andI really don't want to get myself oranyone else into trouble with accusations of political bias! - whatdo these two men have in common? One answer is that they both have Halewoodconnections. Cllr Smithson is a Halewood Town Councillor and Halewood resident,and Cllr Storey is Head Teacher at the Plantation School in Halewood. I don'tknow about you, but I find this encouraging: it seems good to me that Halewoodis firmly on the map in both Knowsley and Liverpool.

Another thing that both mayors have in common is a positiverelationship with the faith community. Cllr Smithson began his mayoral yearwith a service at St Nicholas’ Church, which was attended by Cllr Storeyand civic dignitaries from this and neighbouring authorities. Similarly, CllrSue Moretta began her year as Mayor of Halewood with a service at St Mark'sChurch, which she shared with Knowsley’s Mayoress, Cllr Sarah Smithson. I'msure that some people will be wondering if all this is a good idea: clergy andpoliticians cosy-ing up to each other. Mixing faith and politics has somethingof a chequered history. You may remember Alistair Darling saying on behalf ofthe then Prime Minister, “we don’t do God”, despite the fact that TonyBlair’s personal religious faith has been well documented. Darling was probablytrying to avoid any comparison with the situation in the United States,where religion has played a much more overt role in the political landscape.

Here we don’t want our politicians to appear too religious in case they are seen toidentify too closely with one particular community. Equally, we areuncomfortable with the idea that someone who holds political power might claimthat their manifesto has been handed to them personally from on high! Churchleaders too, need to keep some distance from the party political scene to avoidthe accusation of taking sides.

I was very pleased, however, when Cllr Smithson invited meto be his Chaplain during the mayoral year. As well as hosting his Civic Sundayat St Nicholas’, we are also looking forward to holding a Carol Servicein December this year. My other duties, such as they are, have not so farproved too demanding: it’s a simple enough matter to say grace or offer prayerson particular occasions. Having been asked a number of times, “Whatexactly does the Mayor's Chaplain do?”, I came up with the answer, “My job isto put the fear of God into the Mayor of Knowsley!”.

At a time when elected politicians are held in very lowesteem (as we have seen in the recent MPs' expenses scandal) - a situation thatdoes nothing to encourage people's engagement with the democratic process - Ihave to say that, in my experience, those who hold office locally are by andlarge well-motivated, committed people who want to make a difference to their community.Equally, those who belong to the faith communities of Halewood believe we havethe best interests of our community at heart, and sense that we are called towork and pray for the well-being of allwho live here. Christians believe that “God so loved the world”, and that God expectsus to love the world too. We’re not here simply to look after our owninterests, or just to occupy ourselves in narrowly religious practices.We are here to make a difference and some of us feel that we do that bestwhen we work in partnership with politicians, council employees and officers,people from other parts of the voluntary sector, and all people of good-will(of all faiths and none) as together we seek to make Halewood a better place tolive.

The Revd Alan Jewell, Team Rector, Halewood Ecumenical Team.

Jesus and Politics

2009-06-28T15:28:00Z

Written for the Mayor of Knowsley’s Civic Sunday at St Nicholas’, Halewood, 28^th June 2009.

I believe that when hairdressers are being trained, they are told never to discuss religion or politics with their customers. I don’t know if this is true, but it makes me wonder what it’s like when Desmond Tutu goes to the barbers…

“Going anywhere nice for your holidays, Archbishop? Got any plans for Christmas?”

Desmond Tutu is, of course, more than happy to discuss religion and politics. He once said:

“When people say the Bible and politics don't mix, I don't know which Bible they are referring to. It’s not the one I've been reading.”

I suppose the problem is with bad religion and bad politics – the sort of religion that supported apartheid in South Africa, segregation in the United States, and Nazism and anti-Semitism in Europe.

More recently, we have had the uncomfortable sight of the British National Party claiming to be “the only political party standing up for” Christian faith and culture. I’m not generally in favour of a blasphemy law (I tend to think that God does not need us to defend him in court), but the BNP came close to converting me with their election poster featuring an image of Christ crucified, a quotation from scripture (“If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you;” John 15:20) and tagline, “What would Jesus do?” – the implication being that Jesus would vote BNP to defend Christianity in this country! I’m not convinced that the BNP would welcome Jesus the Jew as one of their supporters!

So, what kind of politics emerges from the Bible that Desmond Tutu reads? Some ideas from the bible readings set for Sunday 28^th June:

In 2 Corinthians 8, we read that the mother church in Jerusalem is in financial need - again. Paul writes to the Christians in Corinth to encourage them to make a gift to help their sisters and brothers in Jerusalem. He reminds them of the example of Jesus who, though we was rich, became poor, so that we might become rich, at least spiritually. Other churches, Paul says, have given generously, sacrificially, but the church in Corinth seems reluctant. Paul wants them to see that it is not right for them to have plenty – more than enough – while their sisters and brothers in Jerusalem are struggling. He points out that in the Old Testament story of God giving his people the manna in the desert – the bread from heaven – each had just enough bread to eat every day: no-one had too much and no-one had too little. That’s how it should be amongst us, he says: no one should have too much; no one too little. Amongst Christians there should be a level of equality, not vast inequality between rich and poor.

So there’s a Christian, biblical principle – there should be a degree of fairness and equality in the distribution of wealth – but how to turn that into politics? Some would see this as a socialist ethic: “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need” – to use a phrase popularised by a certain Karl Marx. (Historian Arnold Toynbee described communism as a Christian heresy; others have pointed out that Marxism and communism had their roots in Judaeo-Christian soil.)

Others would argue that the scripture points in favour of capitalism: if the Christians in Corinth hadn’t created wealth, they would not have generated a surplus from which to help meet the needs of their poorer sisters and brothers in Jerusalem. They would say this wealth needs to be created in order to trickle down to those less able to generate wealth.

Getting from a biblical or spiritual principle to a political application isn’t always straightforward: hence Tony Benn’s assertion that the Labour Party owed more to Methodism than it did to Marxism; and Margaret Thatcher’s use, on becoming Prime Minister, of the Prayer of St Francis. Both Benn and Thatcher claimed to draw inspiration from Christian teaching, but their applications were diametrically opposed in political terms.

Because of this, I have never felt that there could be a Christian political party – although we were given the opportunity of voting for The Christian Party in the recent European elections. There are plenty of Christians whom I love and respect, but whose political views I do not share. We may draw our inspiration from the same source, but we differ over how to apply those principles.

Nevertheless, it is a biblical principle that there should be a measure of equality: God has provided enough manna to feed us all. Why then do some of God’s children live with obscene wealth and others die in obscene poverty? According to UNICEF, nearly 10 million children under five years of age die each year from causes related to poverty. Peter Singer, in his book “The Life You Can Save”, points out that one billion people in the world have less to live on each day than we would spend on a bottle of water². He argues that world poverty could be ended relatively easily, if those who had the wealth were prepared to give a modest proportion of it to help those who have none. If you have clean water coming out of a tap that you could drink, but you choose to buy bottled water, you have more money than you need – while there are people in the world who have no access to clean water. Singer is not a Christian, but his argument seems to me to be eminently biblical!

In Mark 5:21-43, we see Jesus healing two people – a woman suffering from haemorrhages and a child who has died. If we are familiar with the Gospel accounts, we are not surprised by these stories. We might be aware that, in Jesus’ own day, religious leaders had little to do with women and children, whereas Jesus’ own ministry valued and honoured both women and children. But we might miss the fact that his contact with both of these people – the woman with the haemorrhages and the child – compromised Jesus’ religious purity, according to the religious culture of his day. A woman who was bleeding was considered ritually unclean: to touch her was to become unclean yourself. (In the gospel we read that she touches him, rather than he laying hands on her, but Jesus affirms her as well and healed and tells her that she may go in peace.) Similarly, a corpse is ritually unclean and it makes you unclean to touch a dead person. Jesus takes the dead child by the hand and speaks to her, “Little girl, get up!”

A woman and a child – both are dangerous to Jesus’ religious purity. But that doesn’t stop Jesus reaching out to them, literally and spiritually, taking them by the hand and affirming them as God’s children.

From this we discern a biblical principle: the priority Jesus gives to those whom religion and society would exclude or marginalise. What would Jesus do? Reach out to those who are excluded, marginalised. How then should a Christian behave? What should the church do?

And how to apply this principle in the political realm? Again, that requires each of us to make a judgement, informed by biblical thinking and supported by prayer; but it is clear that when we vote and act, we are required to think what our voting and acting will do for those excluded and marginalised by our society.

It’s fair to say that today, those who seek and hold elected office are not exactly held in high esteem. In fact, the expenses scandal means that MPs have done the impossible and replaced bankers as the people we all love to hate. (It looks as though BBC executives might be next!) The biggest problem is when voters, or those who should be voters, say, “a plague on all their houses” and opt out. As we know, this simply opens the door to extremists. In my experience, local politicians are good people, committed to serving their communities – to making the world (or at least their part of it) a better place. We need those we elect to be clear about their principles. Those who seek to serve would do well to listen to the biblical principles of commitment to social justice and to the needs of those excluded and marginalised by society.

May God bless us – all of us – as we seek to love and serve Him in loving and serving the communities in which live.

Alan Jewell

Holy, Holy Holy!

2009-06-06T11:31:00Z

I was visiting a family recently to arrange the baptism of their two children. One was a baby, the other a three year-old. The parents were preparing the older child for the event and had explained to him that 'The Reverend' would splash water on his head and say, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit". Then, to see whether he had taken this in, they asked him to tell them what was going to happen. He said that the Reverend would splash water "in the name of the sun... and the moon... and the clouds..." A slightly unorthodox trinity, but charming nonetheless.

Aldersgate Sunday

2009-05-24T11:19:00Z

On 24th May, the Church of England invites us to commemorate two of its most important sons: the brothers John and Charles Wesley. I once had a liturgical wall-planner (Aren't I the lucky one?) which came from a publisher more familiar with the Roman Catholic calendar than the Anglican. It came with a set of stickers so that you could add the Anglican Saints’ days and festivals. I was interested to see they had produced a sticker for “Saints John and Charles Wesley”.

I have no doubt that John and Charles were both saints in the sense that the New Testament uses the term (i.e., all Christian believers); but they don't get the title ‘Saint’ (capital S), which the Church of England tends to reserve for those who get their names in the Bible. But there are plenty of saints that we are invited to commemorate: John and Charles Wesley are remembered as Evangelists and Hymn Writers.

Having said that the calendar invites us to commemorate them, actually, this year, it doesn't! The commemoration of John and Charles Wesley is, according to the Church of England, a “lesser festival”; since lesser festivals don't replace more important ones, today is actually the Seventh Sunday of Easter or the Sunday after the Ascension. So “Saints John and Charles” get missed out this year. But I thought I'd risk it and remember them anyway.

A couple of years ago my wife had a meeting that involved spending the day in London. I went with her and we made a weekend of it. So, I had a day in London all by myself: the world - or at least our capital city - was my oyster. I did what many of you would have done: I went to the Museum of Methodism, and treated myself to a bit of a Wesley pilgrimage.

The Museum of Methodism is situated on the City Road, in the crypt of the chapel that John Wesley had built in 1778 as his ‘London base’. Next to the chapel is the house where he lived during that time and where he died in 1791. For me, the highlight of my visit to the museum was being able to stand in the very pulpit from which John and Charles both preached. I’m not sure how to describe what I experienced while standing in that pulpit: but I felt something…

Did you know that John Wesley pioneered the use of machines that could pass electrical currents through the body? It was believed to be therapeutic. Wesley reasoned that, if it worked for rich people, then poor people should also have the opportunity to experience the healing power of electricity, and so he raised money to buy electric shcok machines.

I also enjoyed the tour of John Wesley’s house: what struck me was how small and simple the rooms were. The Wesleys were not much given to ostentation or luxury and John lived a simple life: he drank tea from a gallon teapot, and didn’t like spicy or fancy food – but he did enjoy a glass of claret with his meal. He also lived the single life, his wife having left him after 15 years of an unhappy marriage, and without them having had children. In fact, his home and life were shared with his preachers and many other visitors. Next to his bedroom is the little prayer room where Wesley began every day – having got out of bed as early as 4:00AM. (Not something I’m inclined to imitate, I’m afraid.) This room is still thought of as the ‘power house’ of worldwide Methodism.

I wasn’t able to spend much time in the Chapel itself – the BBC had taken over for a broadcast the following morning – but my guide managed to sneak me in past the BBC engineers, and their equipment and cables, so that I at least got chance to have a look around. This time, I didn’t manage to get into the pulpit (I might have tried, if no-one had been looking!), but I did see the chamber organ that belonged to Charles Wesley.

John Wesley was buried in the grounds of his Chapel – in what was regarded as ‘un-consecrated ground’. (Unusual for a Church of England priest!) His mother, Susannah, is buried just over the road from the Chapel, in Bunhill Fields Cemetery – again, not a Church of England burial ground, but the last resting place of such Nonconformists as William Blake, Daniel Defoe and John Bunyan.

After seeing Susannah’s grave, I made my way to Aldersgate Street, to the spot where, on 24th May 1738, John Wesley attended a meeting at which Luther’s preface to the Epistle to the Romans was being read. Wesley wrote in his journal:

“while he was describing the change in the heart through faith in Christ I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation; and an assurance was given to me that He had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death.”

There’s not much to see there today – the meeting place having been demolished long ago – but there is a plaque commemorating this event, the significance of which is felt around the world to this day.

Fairy Tale Wedding

2009-05-23T12:32:00Z

A vicar we knew once went into the pulpit with a book of fairy tales. He opened it at the last page and began to read:

"And the Prince and the Princess got married and they all lived happily ever after. The end."

The vicar then proceeded to tear the page out of the book. The congregation was impressed - apart from his young daughter, whose book it was. The point he was making was this: it is only in fairy tales that the wedding is the end of the story.
Of course, your own wedding day shouldn't feel like the end of anything; the only thing that is coming to an end is your single status. Everything else that is at the heart of today is all about tomorrow and continuing, developing and making new. This is clearly not the end of the story.
Having said that, with the amount of time that you have spent preparing for today, maybe it has been difficult to think beyond the wedding. All the things that you have been planning for so long, all the essential details - the dress, the flowers, the decorations, the food and drink... By this time tomorrow, all those things will be over, finished! But that still doesn't mean it's the end of the story.
Lianne and James: your two stories have for some time been coming closer together: today, in front of family and friends, you are saying that you want your two stories, that have become one, to remain one story, forever. The story of Lianne and the story of James have become the story of Lianne & James.
But there is another story, it's an "old, old story". Old, because it began before either of you was even thought of; before this church was built; actually, before the foundations of the world. It is the story of God who created the world in order to love it; and who brought us into being in order to love us. It's the story of how God sent his Son Jesus, to show us what love looks like lived in a human life and to invite us to become part of that "old, old story".
And even though it is an old, old story, it is the story of the one who "makes all things new". The story of Lianne & James is part of that much bigger story: the story of how God invites us to know his love and to love one another. We can read His story in the bible and in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. But - and here's the thing! - God invites us to write some new chapters, with his help, of course, but they are our story. Lianne & James have chosen to write these next chapters together. Family and friends are here as supporting characters; but, as with the very best stories: who knows what lies ahead!
Lianne & James: we wish you well; may you know God's blessing as you write this story together.

My Three Mayor Day!

2009-05-22T16:58:00Z

You know the expression, A Three Dog Night? (From Australia, apparently: on a cold night you snuggle up to a canine friend to share body warmth; on a colder night, you might need two dogs. A three dog night, then, is as cold as it gets.) Well, yesterday I had a three Mayor day! It began with a brief conversation with the Mayor of Knowsley before the start of a Governors' meeting at Halewood College; my second was the Mayor of Halewood at the coffee shop at St Nicholas'. (OK, so it was the recently superseded Mayor of Halewood.); and my third was the new Lord Mayor of Liverpool at a surprise buffet lunch for his 60th birthday, given for him by the staff and governors of Plantation School, where he is Headteacher.

Yes, I'm very well connected these days - on first name terms with an array of Mayors. Pretty soon, I'll be too haughty to talk to the likes of you.

No offence.

(BTW What is the collective noun for a group of mayors? A chain?)

The New Mayor of Knowsley - and his Chaplain!

2009-05-18T10:29:00Z

On Friday 15th May, Councillor Dave Smithson became Mayor of Knowsley. Dave is a resident of Halewood and well-known to us as a local Councillor, and as someone whose involvement in the community includes taking an active role as part of the steering group for Halewood CultureFest.
The Mayor is the Borough's 'first citizen' and in formal terms has precedence at any gathering in Knowsley (except where Her Majesty the Queen, or a representative of the Queen is present). The Mayor's role is to represent the Borough and to work for the well-being of all who live and work in Knowsley. For the past year Dave has been Deputy Mayor to Councillor Michael Foulkes and on a number of occasions Dave has stepped in when the Mayor himself was not available. Dave is being supported in his role by his wife, Councillor Sarah Smithson, who will be Mayoress for the year.
One of the ways in which the Mayor uses his year in office is by nominating certain charities for his support. In Halewood, we were very pleased to learn that Dave has chosen Listening Ear and the Butterflies project. (His other named charity is Lyndale Cancer Support, based in Huyton.) When it comes to raising money for his chosen charities, Dave has a hard act to follow: Councillor Foulkes raised some £42,000 during his mayoral year!
I am very pleased to say that Dave has asked me to be Mayor's Chaplain for the year. This is an honorary post, and I do indeed feel honoured to have been asked! My first duty was to say Grace before dinner at the 'Mayor Making Evening'. As someone who spends quite a lot of time speaking in public and saying prayers, you might have thought I would have taken this in my stride: those who know me better will understand how nerve-wracking I found it! Although it was a formal occasion - with the Octagon room at the Huyton Suite packed with luminaries from Knowsley, and guests from Stadt Moers and Montana, Bulgaria - I managed to hold onto the microphone without dropping it and even got a laugh before saying grace. (Not sure if the Mayor's Chaplain is supposed to get laughs: maybe there's a protocol handbook I should get hold of?) Grace over, Rose and I enjoyed a very good meal, good company and a delightful evening. (Maybe being Mayor's Chaplain won't be so bad after all?!)
The next event I have in my diary is the Mayor's Civic Service. This will take place at St Nicholas' at 11:00AM on Sunday 28th June. I am thrilled that we are able to host this event for the Mayor and guests. Look out for more details nearer the time.
I don't know what other duties I will have to perform during the year, but I have been promised that at least some of it will be fun!
I believe that Dave's election as Mayor of Knowsley is a positive one for Halewood, not least in making sure that Halewood is on the Knowsley map and in ensuring that here in Halewood we have some sense of what it means to be a part of Knowsley Borough. Without straying into party politics, I can say that I have been impressed with Dave in the contact I have had with him. Equally, we have appreciated having Harry Birch as our Town Mayor in this past year, and look forward to another good year with Councillor Sue Moretta in that role.
At a time when those who seek elected office are held in lower esteem than ever, and when more people than ever seem disenchanted with the whole business of politics, I have to say that my experience of those who represent us and work for us at a local level, in Halewood and Knowsley, is that these are people who are committed to their community, to making a contribution and to serving others.
We pray for our Town and Borough Councils and all who serve our community.

Within the Rules...

2009-05-16T16:10:00Z

On Monday this week I met with our parish Bursar to submit my monthly expenses claim. Let me be clear: everything on the list was within the rules. The moat around my mansion does not clean itself. The pipes under the tennis court do not mend themselves. And if you think that the claim for manure was excessive, well, all I can say is that that is a lot of horse manure.

Just to be clear: I'm joking. My expenses claim rarely has anything on it other than a mileage allowance. (If you're interested, it's 40p a mile, as it has been for years. HMRC won't allow anything higher without regarding it as a perk. And did you know that clerical shirts - the ones you use with a 'dog' collar - aren't even tax deductible? They're not required by the Church of England's Canon Law, so I'm not required to wear one; therefore they are not tax deductible. Imagine!)

MPs expenses have been in the news, of course. And, remarkably, MPs have taken over from bankers as the people we love to hate. Bankers must be loving it!

A couple of things worry me about the present scandal: one is that we conclude that "they're all at it", and that they are all as bad as each other. "A plague on all their houses!" This will do nothing but hasten the process of disengagement with politics that is all too familiar; and that can't be a good thing. I believe that the majority of people who go into politics do so with the best of motives - they feel they have something to offer to make the world a better place. So what is it about the system that turns MPs - apparently - into money-grabbing monsters? (Is it that they feel they are underpaid, and so are making up their remuneration to a level that they feel they are worth?)

The second consequence is that the only beneficiaries at the ballot box will be the extremist parties. They may attract more votes from the disenchanted, and, with fewer people voting for the mainstream parties, we may see more extremist MEPs returned in next month's European elections.

There is an issue: since when was it admirable to operate simply "within the rules"? Don't we expect more than that from those in public life? We certainly do in private life. I heard recently that the law of the land does not require anyone to prevent another person's death. If you see someone running towards the edge of a cliff, you have no legal obligation to intervene. Or if you saw a child fall into the canal: legally, you don't have to do anything. But how do we feel towards someone who could have saved someone's life and chose not to, because they were not legally required to do so? We don't admire them, that's for certain!

Generally, we don't admire those who live by the letter of the law, rather than according to the spirit.

Jesus' Approach to Rules

On the Sabbath day Jesus heals the sick: it's against the rules, according to religious people. But Jesus says that there is a more important principle - how can it be wrong to do good, especially on the Sabbath? The Sabbath was made for us - it's good for us. We weren't made for the Sabbath - as something to rule our lives. The rule is good, but only as something that points to a principle; if keeping the letter of the law violates the deeper principle, then it is right to break the rule. The principle is the thing.

Or take the 10 Commandments: isn't that a list of rules? It can be seen that way. The Rich Young Ruler who came to ask Jesus about his place in heaven, and St Paul, both believed that they were blameless under the law - "I have kept the commandments since I was a child". That's if you see the commandments as a set of rules - a list of tick boxes: I haven't murdered anyone, therefore I have kept the commandment. But Jesus says, If you hate someone, or if you call someone a fool, you have violated the principle that is behind the commandment. (Did you see the Michael Portillo programme on violence? He concludes that we are all capable of being violent; that's why we have rules to inhibit violence. And that's a good thing!)

Traditionally, Anglican churches had the 10 Commandments written up on the walls for everyone to see, and to learn. But wouldn't it be better to put up the Sermon on the Mount? Jesus' manifesto is not a list of rules to be kept, but a set of principles to guide our conduct. The New Testament says that we live by faith, not by rules.

A New Comandment

In today's Gospel reading (John 15:9-17), however, Jesus says,

If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love.

But doesn't that sound like a rules approach? Doesn't that go against what I have said? I don't think so! Jesus' commandments are not a set of rules. Actually, what Jesus specifically tells us to do isn't all that much! We are to love God and love one another.

Love? A rule? It's not! It's a principle, an attitude; a way of being. (What would you say to someone who said, "I love you - within the rules"?)

There's a bit in the Monty Python film, The Life of Brian, where the crowds are hanging on Brian's every word, because they believe him, mistakenly, to be the Messiah. Eventually, in frustration, he tells them to 'go away'. (I paraphrase!) They pause and then ask, "How shall we go away, Lord?"

I suppose people want rules: they give us security. But since when was a life of faith meant to be a secure thing?

Jesus says that we live within the love of God. The proper way to behave, then, is to love God and love one another. If we are doing that, then we remain within the circle of God's love. We can choose to opt out, if we wish, but the default value is that we remain within.

Being human, we say to God, "How shall we love one another? What are the rules for loving one another?" I suspect that God's answer, a bit like Brian's answer in the Monty Python film is, Why do you need me to tell you? Go away and work it out for yourselves!

Within the church there are many who want the rules to be spelled out more clearly. I believe that living as Christians will mean that we never arrive at a place where it all becomes clear. Take the slogan, What Would Jesus Do? This is an interesting starting point; but beware of those who provide the answers too readily! There are plenty of circumstances where we cannot know what Jesus would have done. (Would Jesus have taken out a tracker mortgage?) The question is, What is the loving thing to do in this situation? And then, according to our understanding, we get on with it.

As a society, we are critical of those who break society's rules - rightly - and we have sanctions to limit the harm that they can do. But as human beings, we don't admire those who only keep the rules. The person who is truly human, truly alive, truly Christian, is the one who lives, not by rules, but according to a vision, a dream, and who acts in line with the principles of that vision - even if it means breaking the rules.

Call Yourself a Preacher?

When I was training for ministry, we had to submit the text of our sermons to our Tutor for comments and suggestions before we were allowed to inflict them on an unsuspecting congregation. My sermons often came back with the same comments: It starts well, but what do you want your hearers to do as a result of your sermon?

In the early years of my minstry someone once told me, "We are getting used to your non-prescriptive style..." (I think it was meant as a compliment!)

I never was very good at that bit, telling people what they should do. I'm still not. Maybe that makes me less than ideal material to be a preacher. But I have come to believe that it is right not to presribe. I don't think Jesus does,

With Jesus and with Brian I want to say, Work it out yourselves, people!

Good Friday

2009-04-09T18:08:00Z

I have been asked to speak at the open-air act of worship that "Churches Together in Halewood and Hunts Cross" have organised for Good Friday. Well, I say I have been asked... I was asked last year and the event was forced indoors by the wind and the rain, so the person producing the orders of service simply left my name on for this year's service, on the grounds that I didn't get chance to preach out of doors last time. Well, I think that was the reasoning, anyway.

I'm planning to use something that I have done before as a primary school assembly. (I reckon that if it's good enough for primary school, it's certainly good enough for the nice folk of Halewood and Hunts Cross.)

I will produce a small copper coin. So small, in fact, that no-one will be able to see it and I shall apoloigse for the fact that it is not the easiest visual aid for an open-air service (or primary school assembly). I keep it in a little plastic bag to avoid losing it.

With primary school children, I start by trying to give them an idea of how old this coin is. The oldest member of my family is my dad and he is 80. I know someone in Halewood who is 95 years old and have met someone who is 100. So, think of someone who is a hundred years old - imagine that! But my little copper coin in older than the oldest person you know, even if that person is a hundred or more. In fact, my coin is over 200 years old. Actually it's more than 500 years old. More than a thousand years old. My little copper coin, in its little plastic bag, is nearly two thousand years old!

The other coins I have in my pocket (must remember to put some there!) all have a picture of the Queen on them. The Queen, as head of the country, is the only one who is allowed to issue coins, so they put her picture on them. My little copper coin has no one's face on, but it does have a couple of symbols. The person who issued my coin was called Pontius Pilate.

Pontius Pilate was governor of the Roman province of Judaea from AD26-AD36. We might never have heard of him, but for one thing. That thing is recorded in all four gospels and means that he even gets a namecheck in the Christian creeds. Specifcially, the creed produced by the First Council of Constantinople in 381, which says of Jesus:

"he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate"

And Pontius Pilate issued my little copper coin! (It is a lepton, for those who are interested. The lepton, a very low value coin, may have been the 'widow's mite'. ) I like to speculate on where this coin may have been - in the purse of someone in the crowd welcoming Jesus to Jerusalem on the day we call Palm Sunday; or of someone in the crowd when they demanded that Pilate put Jesus to death.

So this little copper coin goes back nearly 2000 years and connects me, in a way, to Pontius Pilate and the events of today, Good Friday.

But there is something else, something far more important, that connects me with the events that we remember today. Because although my coin can, in some sense, take me back to those days, the significance of Good Friday isn't something that was left behind in history. Because the death of Jesus on the cross, which really happened in Judaea 'under Pontius Pilate' means something to me today.

What does it mean?

It means that I can know God as my Father and my friend; because the bible says that God loves the world so much that sent Jesus to die on the cross, so that I could know God as my Father and my friend.
It means that I can hold my head up in God's presence, not afraid of his judgement, because it was while I was a sinner that Christ died for me.
It means that I can face the future with hope, because Jesus died so that I could live eternally.

My little copper coin wasn't very valuable when it was issued nearly 2000 years ago. It's worth a bit more than that today, but there is nothing that is worth more to me than what I have in Jesus - because he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate.

Big Brother

2009-04-09T05:07:00Z

Day Five in the Big Brother household...

I'm sure there's mileage in presenting the life of the disciples as a reality TV show. You throw together an assorted bunch of odd characters, put them into a confined space, give them a variety of bizarre tasks to perform and watch their every move. Of course, in the TV shows - Big Brother or I'm A Celebrity - what we are looking for (apparently) is conflict. It seems impossible to make a TV show without it. Even The Great British Menu has Jennie Bond talking up the rivalry between two chefs in the hope of injecting some drama into the proceedings. (Have you noticed how the title sequence of Menu has the chefs wielding rolling pins and other paraphernalia as if they were weapons?)

We also want to see the assembled celebs or wannabes behaving badly - it seems.

So, let's turn now to our disciples. The gospels follow their shared life with unblinking eye and their portrayal is hardly flattering. Unlike the church's stories of saints from later centuries, the New Testament is no hagiography. Time and again we see the disciples behaving badly: they are rebuked for their lack of faith; we see them failing in their allotted tasks; we are given revealing moments when their self-centredness and ambition are laid bare; and we see the conflict in their relationships with one another. In the days of Holy Week we see how, between them, they will deny, betray and abandon Jesus.

And what does Jesus, their big brother, do?

"during supper Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going to God, got up from the table, took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him." (John 13:3-5)

Unlike the TV producers who are simply trying to create sensation, Jesus is in the business of creating a new community, one in which housemates will outdo one another, not in taking centre stage, but in choosing the lowly position; instead of vying with one another for status, they will look for ways to serve one another. And, instead of conflict, Jesus says:

I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.’

Of course, they won't live up to his example. But at least we are given a model of what it means to be truly human, truly alive.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

2009-04-05T12:21:00Z

True and humble king,
hailed by the crowd as Messiah:
grant us the faith to know you and love you,
that we may be found beside you
on the way of the cross,
which is the path of glory.

Making Palm Crosses

A few years ago, rather than giving people Palm Crosses as they arrived, we gave them palm fronds, along with the instrucitons to make their own. During the talk slot, they were invited fold their palm fronds and make a cross. Actually, that was pretty much the end of the talk - no-one could make and listen at the same time and it sparked many conversations about who had made the better cross.

The point of the talk, had anyone been able to listen was simple: the palm leaf of celebration becomes the Cross; the 'Hosannas' of Palm Sunday give way to the 'Crucify him!' of Good Friday.

Fairy Stories

In the days before political correctness, a fairy story could end with a knight in shining armour - prince charming - arriving on a white charger to save the princess, his damsel in distress. These days, the feisty princess has to rescue him right back (as in Pretty Woman) or be a hero in her own write (a la Shrek). But in the old days that's what happened. In other stories, the Lone Ranger or the cavalry could arrive to save the day.

The idea of a rescuer arriving on horseback, in the nick of time, makes an appealing, romantic fairy tale.

Thsi time last year, we heard that George Bush thought it 'romantic' to send in young men and women to Afghanistan to save the world. He was 'envious', he said, of those on the front line and thought it must be fantastic to be there, and, if he were younger... (Whereas, in 1968, when he was younger and could have gone to Vietnam he found himself otherwise engaged.)

We still like the idea of a rescuer arriving to put things right. In the Gospel for Palm Sunday, the scene is set: we see Jesus preparing to ride into the city of Jerusalem, a city that needs a rescuer, because it is a city that is occupied by a foreign military regime. What they need - at least, they think - is someone to throw off the shackles of Roman oppression.

And so, here comes Jesus: even his name means "God saves" (or "God to the rescue") and the crowd greets him with the word, "Hosanna!" which means "Save us!" It's perfect: this man will start and lead an uprising that will get rid of the Romans, and they will have him as their king instead of the one that the Romans have appointed.

What's Wrong With This Picture?

But what's wrong with this picture? Jesus appears to have chosen the wrong mode of transport! A warrior king arrives on a stallion. He is coming on a donkey! We tend to assume that someone's mode of transport tells you something about them. The Dutch Royal family may ride bicycles, but that's not what we expect. If your financial advisor arrives in a beat-up old Nissan Micra (no offence), you probably wouldn't trust him to make any money for you. On the other hand, if he's driving a top flight Porsche, you might begin to think he's over charging for his services!

The Gospels' picture of a king riding a donkey has its background in the Old Testament, and in the prophet Zechariah specifically:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem!
Lo, your king comes to you; triumphant and victorious is he, humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. (Zechariah 9:9)

Triumphant, victorious - and humble? Words that don't always go together!

But we shouldn't have been surprised: this king comes into the world in a stable, not into a palace or castle, and is laid in a manger, because there was no room for him at the inn. Not an auspicious start for any sort of king.

Before his public ministry, he goes into the desert for 40 days and, weak and hungry, he finds himself at the end of his tether. On (Maundy) Thursday we'll hear how this king puts on overalls so that he can be the servant. And on (Good) Friday, we'll see how he follows his chosen path to its illogical conclusion: the king, born in humility, becomes the servant of all, and the servant of all goes to his death on the cross, like the lowest of the low, the scum of the earth.

And if that's what the king is like, what ought his people to be like?

The New Testament tells us

That God loved the world that much he gave his son, King Jesus, to ride humbly on a donkey into Jerusalem, to his death on the cross. Therefore, sisters and brothers, how ought we to love one another?

Non sequitur

2009-04-02T12:13:00Z

Non sequitur - Latin, "It does not follow"

Have you ever noticed that when people speak to Jesus, or ask him a question, he almost never gives the obvious answer. If it's a question, he will reply with a question; if it's a statement, he will turn it around; if it is a suggestion, he will take the least obvious action. He is - it would appear - the master of the non sequitur. what Jesus says or does never seems to follow (logically, at least) from what went before.

Of course, when we look at what Jesus says or does in the context of his mission, these things begin to make sense; it's just that, at the time, he appears obtuse. (Am I allowed to say that about Jesus? Notice that I say that he appears obtuse!)

In John 12:20-36, we see Jesus and his disciples, along with many, many others - both Jews and God-fearing Gentiles - in Jerusalem for Passover. John has previously recorded Jesus being anointed by Mary (the sister of Martha and Lazarus), in preparation for burial, Jesus tells us; and then we see his entry in Jerusalem (the events of our Palm Sunday) as her king (welcome or otherwise). Part of the crowd, some gentiles (Greeks) approach Philip, who goes to see Andrew, to say that they want to see Jesus. Philip and Andrew (both Greek names. Significant? I don' t know!) go to tell Jesus, and Jesus offers the following non sequitur:

“The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Very truly, I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains just a single grain; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Those who love their life lose it, and those who hate their life in this world will keep it for eternal life." John 12:23

This is Jesus' answer to Philip and Andrew! But it's to a question they have not asked! And it does not appear to follow from their telling him that the Greeks want to meet him.

Except that Jesus is following a plan; it is God's plan for him - and for the world. Jesus has reached the point of no return. The Gentiles are coming to him, but Jesus knows that he will not truly be able to reach out to the Gentiles this side of the cross (and his resurrection). During his earthly ministry, Jesus is limited, as we all are, in what he can do. He can only be in one place at a time; only speak to a few people at a time; only heal a few. On the other side of the cross, the Gospel can be preached to the whole creation. But only on the other side of the cross.

Mothering Sunday

2009-03-21T23:51:00Z

So, how do we feel about Mothering Sunday?

Of course, asking the question feels somewhat dishonourable - as if one were questioning the idea of motherhood itself, something of which we are all, of course, in favour. But Mothering Sunday, as a date in the church's calendar, is problematic. It's difficult because not every woman is a mother and not everyone is actually playing happy families in real life. Some have raw memories of their own mothers or family life and some mothers are struggling with living up to the romanticized ideals of motherhood. In recent years, we seem to have added to this burden the idea of the 'yummy mummy': Angelina Jolie has just won some award for being the perfect 'yummy mummy'. According to MTV.co.uk:

The star has six children and a busy acting and humanitarian career - all the time managing to look gorgeous.

So, if she can do it, Why can't everyone? (Hint: she's very wealthy.) The Church hasn't always helped with our understanding of motherhood. Mary, our perfect mother, manages to combine motherhood with virginity - she represents the duty of giving birth to and sustaining children, without any of the messy unpleasantness of sex. She also suffers for her motherhood, perhaps suggesting that all mothers should put up with anything that life (or their partners or children) can throw at them, and to do so uncomplainingly. When we turn to the Bible, we might be surprised to find that it's not all that family-friendly. We may gloss over the polygamous patriarchs as belonging to another age and perhaps turn a blind eye to some of the ways in which women are treated as chattels. So what happens when we come to Jesus? Actually, Jesus doesn't say very much that comes across as terribly supportive of the family as we know it: his own family, he says, consists of those who do the will of God - rather than those to whom he is genetically related. On the other hand, part of me wants to resist the political correctness that means we have to issue a disclaimer that recognises that 'other lifestyle choices are available', as if having a mother was one option amongst many or that all other choices are equally valid. I do believe that children do better when brought up by a couple of parents, one of each gender, who are committed to each other. Not all marriages are happy and not all people make good parents, but, as a pattern, I would still stick with the mummy and daddy picture. (It's a false syllogism to say that because some families are not happy, families are not good.) So, for Mothering Sunday, I think I will preach on the idea of God as mother - radical, I know. Although I do remember that Julian of Norwich, in the 14th Century, had no problem with referring to God as a mother. And, before her, the Bible had already done that daring thing:

As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you . . . (Isaiah 66:13)

And Jesus speaks of himself using an image that is feminine and maternal:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. (Matthew 23:37 )

At the cross, deserted by all but one of his male disciples, Jesus is aware of a group of women, and his beloved John. He gives John to his mother, because he's going to need some loving care. And he gives his mother to John for the same reason. And Jesus gives all of us to one another in the new family that he has gathered around him at the cross: a family where blood and genetic ties are no longer that important. it is the family of all those who claim God as their Father (and Mother) - the family in which we are all brothers and sisters to one another. And, as John says,

Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God... (1 John 4:7)

Still Banging On About the Weddings Open Day?

2009-03-16T11:16:00Z

This is the article I wrote for our parish magazine...

Weddings Open Day at St Nicholas' Church

The Weddings Open Day at St Nicholas' began when I realised that for the whole of 2008, we had only 6 weddings booked at church. We have a lovely building, so people naturally assume that I must be really busy on Saturdays throughout the spring and summer, and they are surprised when I tell them how few weddings we actually do.

We all know that these days it’s not a straightforward choice between ‘church’ or register office, and that we find ourselves in a very competitive market - people have the option of getting married on a sun-soaked beach, in a Scottish castle, or even up in a hot-air balloon, or while scuba diving or bungee jumping… For many people, the convenient (and economical) solution is simply to get married in the hotel they have booked for their reception. Some travel agents even advertise ‘free weddings’ as part of a holiday package! So, why would anyone choose to get married in church? What we felt we needed to do was to raise our profile in the community, to help people think again about a church wedding.

To this end, we arranged a “Weddings Open Day” on Saturday 28th February 2009. (I originally thought of holding it on Valentine’s Day – very romantic! – but when we asked florists and photographers if they wanted to be involved, they all told us we were crazy, because, of course, it’s their busiest day of the year! Not my brightest idea… so we decided to put it back by two weeks, so that all those who were proposed to on Valentine’s Day could come to us to talk about the wedding. Genius!)

What we did was to have the church open from noon until 4:00pm for anyone who might be thinking of getting married or popping the question. The church was decorated with flowers and we had music playing – some canned, some live. We had a display of wedding dresses and photographs from weddings through the years. I have to be honest and say that I was surprised just how well this took off! There were 20 or more dresses – which made life interesting when you think how small the vestry is at St Nicholas': the struggle I had to make sure that I emerged for a Communion service wearing the right outfit!

We wanted our visitors to meet those who would be involved in their big day – the clergy, musicians, the verger, and so on – so that they would be able to ask any questions they might have; from who can get married in church, to how much it costs and what music or readings are appropriate. (You may or may not know that the Church of England’s recent Marriage Measure is an attempt to free up some of the regulations governing who can get married in a parish church, to make it possible for us to offer a more open welcome to couples, even if they don’t live in the parish where they would like to be married.)

We also managed to persuade a number of local businesses who provide wedding services to set up displays in the St Nicholas’ Centre – we had cakes, stationary, balloons, tiaras and so on. We also had some ‘top end’ designer wedding outfits – and very nice they were too (for someone who isn’t contemplating paying the bill!).

During the day we had a steady stream of visitors – some church members came to admire the displays and enjoy looking at each others’ wedding albums. (Discretion prevents me from the revealing the name of the person who took one look at my wedding pictures and threw her head back with laughter…) Many were surprised to see how young, slim and dark-haired some of us were on our wedding days. Other visitors included those who had already booked weddings with us and wanted to see how the church would look on their special day, and to ask a few questions about the service. We also had a few first-time enquiries about what would be involved in booking a church wedding.

The idea of an open day to encourage people to consider getting married in church created a stir of interest – we had articles in the Liverpool Echo andMerseymart; I did an interview for the Daybreak programme on BBC Radio Merseyside; and we provided a ‘talking point’ for ITV’s Granada Reports – “Should more couples get married in church? Or doesn’t it matter where you get married as long as you’re in love?” During the interview I gave to reporter Mark Tattersall, I made some erudite points and my argument was thorough, consistent and persuasive – or at least, that’s how it seemed to me. Of course, by the time it went out, my contribution was reduced to a couple of sentences and my routine lame joke about going to the pub if the bride is late. (I say this at every rehearsal: maybe I should stop now it’s been on the telly? As soon as the words left my mouth, I thought: “I bet that’s the bit they use!”) The TV piece didn’t actually explain what we were doing to encourage couples to marry in church, or why the church was filled with wedding dresses (maybe we were hosting a Miss Haversham convention?); but plenty of people saw it and commented. One said to me: “I saw you on telly tonight. The church looked lovely!” (Oh? And I didn’t?!)

I would like to thank everyone who was involved in our Weddings Open Day – the fab team who planned and organised it, those who prepared and cleaned the church ready for the day, those who loaned precious dresses and photographs, those who were there on the day providing help and hospitality, and everyone who turned up to support it. Now, for next year, we are hoping to… No, perhaps I shouldn’t give anything away! But if the planning group have anything to say about it, it’s going to be bigger and better!

You can see video and photographs taken on the day and see and hear the interviews on our website: there is a link on the home page (www.halewoodparish.org) to material about the Weddings Open Day

Alan Jewell

All you need is...

2009-03-15T08:02:00Z

We enjoyed last night’s quiz. And my Team – named, I’m afraid, “Alan’s Angels”. (Yes, I am sorry). Anyway, we won, thanks to a consistently good team performance throughout and an impressive last round from yours truly. (For the second time in a row, I passed on the question, “What was the name of Captain Ahab’s ship in Moby Dick?” The answer is Pequod. Maybe next time it comes up, I’ll remember it.)

I don’t seem to have any particular strengths when it comes to quizzes (maybe 70s pop) and I certainly have many areas of weakness (history, sport, geography…) but my peculiar gift is that I sometimes remember odd things. Q: Who had a hit with Simple Simon Says? A: The 1910 Fruit Gum Company. Last night it was, “How did Attila the Hun die?” The answer is, He died from a nosebleed on his wedding night. (What he was doing that gave him a nosebleed, I have no idea.) Now, admittedly, the reason I know this is because it was an answer on QI and I have watched every episode of QI since the programme began, and most episodes more than once. When I first saw QI, I remember thinking: At last! They’ve made a television programme for me! And I don’t entirely trust anyone who doesn’t like it. Or anyone who doesn’t love Stephen Fry. (You know who you are.)

So, it is to QI that I owe the knowledge that Eskimos (Stephen deprecates the PC word Inuit) actually don’t have that many words for ‘snow’. OK, so I don’t remember how many words they do have, I just remember that it’s a cultural myth that they have dozens or hundreds, or whatever, because of its importance to them. Actually, we have quite a few in English: snow, sleet, slush, drift…

Which brings me to my point. (Yes, I know I take longer getting here than Ronnie Corbett telling a joke.) How many words are there in Greek for ‘love’? Specifically, how many words in the New Testament might be translated into English as ‘love’? CS Lewis wrote a famous book entitled, The Four Loves, based on four Greek words for ‘love’. They are:

1 Affection (storge)

The love, or fondness, we feel for family, or others who share our lives.

2 Friendship (philia)

As in Philadelphia – ‘brotherly love’.

3 Eros

Romantic and sexual love.

4 Caritas (agape)

Love as defined by Jesus. This is the word that the King James Version translates ‘charity’ – the word found in 1 Corinthians 13, for example. ‘Charity’ has come to mean an organisation (like Comic Relief or Oxfam), but it means the love which is unconditional, independent of any qualities in the beloved and which does not seek anything in return. This is love as Christian virtue. And it’s the one we are not so good at…

The New Testament describes this kind of love as one of the three eternal qualities – faith, hope and love. “And the greatest of these is love”.

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

1 Corinthians 13:1-3

We are then invited to compare ourselves with this kind of love:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Vv 4-7

How are you doing? Marks out of ten? Or maybe you’d be more comfortable with a question about the year in which Sid Vicious died? (1979, by the way – you see, I do know some dates.)

We may know someone who demonstrates love like that – at least some of the time – but the only one who lives a love like that is Jesus. Jesus is patient, kind… and all the rest.

The bible says that we love, because we are loved. The New Testament tells us that “God is love”. CS Lewis describes God as full of charitable love:

He is so full, in fact, that it overflows, and He can't help but love us.

What is love? It’s what God is and what we were created for – to love and be loved. It’s not that we loved God, but that God loves us – “while we were still sinners” – and, in Jesus, God gives us his all. He invites us, in return, to love him and one another.

In the early church, the Christian writer Tertullian was defending the truth of Christianity against pagan attacks. He says that the one thing that can’t be denied is that these Christians love one another.

"Look," they say, "how they love one another" (for they themselves hate one another); "and how they are ready to die for each other" (for they themselves are readier to kill each other).

Usually quoted as 'See how [these Christians] love one another.' (http://www.tertullian.org/quotes.htm)

Sometimes, in the life of the church, we notice the things that we don’t do well – our pettiness, selfishness, squabbling. But church is supposed to be a place where you know that you are loved; and a community which gives you opportunity and encouragement to love.

Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love. God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins. Beloved, since God loved us so much, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God lives in us, and his love is perfected in us.

Me and My Media Career

2009-03-12T23:13:00Z

One more thing about Cirque Du Soleil - and the Weddings Open Day.

Quiddam starts with a couple sitting in armchairs. The man is reading tonight's Liverpool Echo. Now, it just so happens that this was the same day that my picture was in the Echo. So I'm watching Cirque Du Soleil and, for all I know, the Cirque Du Soleil fellow is looking at my picture in the Echo.

OK, so it's not a big thing, but it is my own.

The following Friday evening, I was on the telly. Granada Reports is our local ITV news and they sent two chaps, one in a suit, one with a camera, to talk to me about the Weddings Open Day. They had also asked to see the couple I had put the Echo in touch with. Something I have learned in my minimal experience with the media: they have the story written before they talk to you. It's almost as if they have a template and they just need from you the bits that fit the slots in the template. I did a thorough and well thought-out interview (well, I thought so, anyway) and all they took was two sentences. Two. Count them. Two. Not that I'm complaining, of course: I was on the telly!

I've recorded it so my mum can watch it and I've had a few cheeky so-and-so's asking for autographs. I've told them I'm far too busy to do autographs and far too important. That always goes down well.

The piece was presented as a debate-starter on whether people should get married in church or not, and it was done to encourage the audience to text and email in. They quoted me as saying a couple of things I didn't say (maybe should have expected that). But I'm not complaining: I was on the telly!

So, How was it?

2009-03-01T20:57:00Z

So, how was it? The much-vaunted Weddings Open Day? The first time you do anything like this, you always fear that no-one will turn up. Or that people will turn up and be disappointed. I'm pleased to say that we had a steady stream of visitors and overwhelmingly positive feedback. We had had some good publicity, with an interview on BBC Radio Merseyside, a nice feature in the Liverpool Echo and the promise of a spot on ITV's Granada Reports to look forward to.

The church looked magnificent, thanks to those who had loaned photos, albums and wedding dresses, and the creative and practical gifts of those who displayed them. The centrepiece was provided by a couple of mannequins dressed as bride and groom, supplied by a local firm. I was told that the dress was by (can't remember the designer's name, sorry!) and cost (I'm not prepared to say, sorry!). Anyway, she looked magnificent. My alb (white thing I wear at weddings) was in position too, to give the impression of a wedding taking place. Only wish I'd had the thing cleaned before the day: nothing worse than a grubby vicar.

If the designer dress was the centrepiece, the star attraction was a silk dress from 1946. In the photos we had of other weddings in the 40s, the bride was wearing, not a wedding dress, but a smart suit (which could be worn again). Wedding dresses were very difficult to get hold of, so this one was a bit of a star in its own right. Those who know about such things tell me that it was probably made from another, older dress - there was a seam that shouldn't have been there, had the dress been made simply from a new piece of fabric. Others tell me that their wedding dresses (even in the 50s) were made from parachutes. (There's probably a punchline to go with that, but I can't be bothered to fish it out.) And others had their wedding dresses died, re-worked and turned into evening gowns or christening robes.

What didn't strike me, until it was too late to say anything about it, is that the 1946 dress would have been worn exactly one hundred years after the very first wedding at St Nicholas' - when, in 1846, John Walker, the village blacksmith, married Miss Hannah Caldwood, in the very same place that we are trying to encourage others to make their vows.

In church this morning, the dresses and photos were still there for people to see, so i used them as a visual aid for my introduction to worship: in the bible, we read that God is like a faithful husband who frets over his wayward bride, and that Jesus, the bridegroom, is waiting for his bride, the church, to be ready for the big day. And heaven? It's like a wedding banquet, where everybody has plenty to eat and drink, but nobody gets drunk and it doesn't all end in a fight.