Dancing in the snow

Post by Ash
Snow and ice doesn`t generally behave as we would want it; on tap, so to speak, and dolloped in just the right place for just the right space of time. Wouldn`t it be wonderful if it fell say on our gardens, fields and woodlands, but left our roads, railways and airports free of the nuisance, irritation and dangers that we`ve all experienced in the last week ?



Children of course love the stuff. Not for them the worry or responsibility that eventually fills the adult mind when a journey or burst pipe has to be coped with. More often than not they simply see the uncluttered possibilities of joy and opportunity. Life is exciting, the glass half-full.

Isn`t this in a sense what the Christmas story is about ? Challenges will abound, and often from the most unexpected sources. But whatever one`s beliefs, convictions or prejudices, the events of 2000 years ago remind that life can be about hope, peace and love, even when confronted with the most difficult of circumstances.With the unfettered optimism that characterised our youth and a desire to treat others with kindness and love, we too can be touched by the blessings of this story.

New Meeting members Kate and George are currently spending their Christmas in Melbourne. They tell us that the christmas service at Melbourne Unitarian Church ended with the the following wonderful thought; " life is not how you survive the storm but how you dance in the snow" . Well the white stuff, just like life, doesn`t travel in straight-lines, but may your `dancing` to the the message of Christmas give you strength to cope with the `corners`, whatever they may be.

Everyone at New Meeting House joins me in wishing you ,your friend`s, your family, both here and across the world, a healthy, happy and peaceful Christmas and New Year.

The real `big society` ?

Post by Roger M.

What do you think about David Cameron`s idea of the `Big Society` ?

How are people persuaded to act in the way you want ?

(a).By the way of power-force them.

(b).By the way of money-bribe them.

(c).By the power of love and friendship.

Suppose you are in a position of total power and decide to share it with nine others. You are left with one-tenth of what you had.

Suppose you have £1,000 and decide to share it with nine others. You are left with one-tenth (£100) of what you had.

Suppose you decide to share your love and friendship with nine others. How much do you have left ? Not less but more; perhaps even ten times more. Why ? Because love, friendship and trust are the only things that exist by sharing. The more we share, the more we have.

Power and money both have the same result; if we win, you lose. If you win, I lose. With love and friendship we both win ! The health of a society depends upon them.

If this is what David Cameron and his `Big Society` is all about, let`s give it a go !

Lighting up my life

Post by Graham

What light`s up my life ?

Firstly my family. It brings me great joy to see my two sons who are as different as chalk and cheese and who fought like cat and dog when they were young, get on so well together in later years.They keep in regular touch with each other and even share secrets to which I am not privy.What a delight it is for me to see them together, enjoying each other`s company.

Secondly, the laughter and exuberance of children;their naturalness,friendliness and openness to new ideas. My work with them in the local primary school is invigorating and enlivening. They are keeping me young !

Thirdly, unexpected acts of kindness from strangers. It happens more often than you think. It is not a rare occasion to find yourself in a spot of bother and discover someone completely unknown comes to your aid.

Fourthly, stories of self-sacrifice of aid workers, carers and the like. It amazes me that such people have so little regard for self and that their whole life`s mission is to be there for others. They are an example to us all !

Finally, something as simple as a lovely smile, once again often from an unexpected source. There are too many people with long faces nowadays, and to receive a beautiful smile, particularly from a stranger in the street, is a real blessing.

To sum up:what gives me real pleasure is anything that reveals the divine in us humans. It is there in abundance if we look for it.

Note: This blog also appears in the December 2010 edition of MU Now, the magazine of the Midland Unitarian Association. www.midland-unitarian-association.org.uk/

Biblical Inconsistencies in the accounts of Matthew and Luke

Post by Ian

Literalists often claim that the Bible holds no inconsistency in the accounts. The mental gymnastics that have to be undergone in order to come up with this position ensure that only people who are of the same opinion will ever believe the same. There are plenty of inconsistencies in the Bible, as is only to be expected with a book written over hundreds of years, by several different authors, edited at various points in its history and subject to clerical transcription errors.

The inconsistencies in the New Testament are most easily demonstrated in the accounts of Matthew and of Luke. Where the material has not been taken from Mark, these two accounts differ widely. The simplest inconsistencies to demonstrate are those of the genealogies and the infancy accounts.

Genealogy of Jesus
The genealogies of Jesus, showing the descent of Jesus from David are different in Matthew and Luke. The genealogies have been the subject of much discussion and commentary. Several attempts have been made in the past to try and resolve the accounts, the most well known being that of Annias of Viterbo at the turn of the 16th Century.

Annias suggested that the account in Luke was the genealogy of Mary. The suggestion is rejected by the majority of Biblical scholars as there is nothing to support the claim. Annias used forged document in order to support his claim, which had been rejected by the end of the same century. In addition, the Lukan account contradicts other traditional genealogies for Mary - which have her descended from Nathan, with immediate descendency from Joachim (Heli), Barpanther and Panther (writings of John of Damascus, Justin Martyr & Ignatius).

Infancy Accounts
The accounts of Jesus' birth differ in the locations used within Matthew and Luke. The traditional nativity story mixes these two accounts in an attempt to harmonise them. They are actually two separate accounts making points about Jesus' fulfilment of prior prophecy regarding the messiah. Attempts to reconcile them again skew chronologies and add in further locations that are not in the accounts. Matthew's account highlights Jesus' Davidic descent and kingship. Luke highlights Jesus' message being for the common man.

Firstly, chronology:
The account of Matthew is set some ten years prior to the account in Luke. This can be calculated using known historical events.

Matthew includes Herod the Great in the infancy story. Herod died in 4BC, so that account is usually dated at around 6BC.

Luke includes a Roman census in his account. While there was no Empire-wide census at any time, there is a census that took place when Quirinius became governor of Syria. This census took place between 6AD and 7AD.

Hence, approximately ten years lie between the accounts.

Secondly, the locations in the accounts:
Matthew starts his account in Bethlehem, where Joseph has a house and is living with Mary. Once the child is born they continue to live in the house until visited by the Magi. Following the visit, the family flee to Egypt (having been warned of Herod the Great's impending massacre by an angel). They remain in Egypt until told of Herod the Great's death (again by angel). The family return and settle in the town of Nazareth in Galilee.

Luke has Joseph and Mary living in Nazareth to begin with. On hearing of the census they travel to Bethlehem, where Jesus is born (in a stable). The family is visited by shepherds. After eight days, Jesus is circumcised according to the law of Moses. When the time of their purification passes (thirty-three days), the family travel to Jerusalem in order to present Jesus at the temple (again, in accordance with the law). When Joseph and Mary had done everything required by the Law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee to their own town of Nazareth (Luke 2:39). They return directly to Nazareth from Jerusalem.

So, in conclusion, there are inconsistencies. The accounts are different. No manner of mental gymnastics can rationally reconcile the accounts.

Above all: this is only a problem if one subscribes to the doctrine of literal inerrancy that Charles Hodge came up with in his Systematic Theology (1871–1873). For non-literalists, the accounts form two interesting and complimentary accounts of Jesus' birth and life. They complement each other, but definitely contradict each other in places.

Welfare that works ?

Blog by Ash

The Coalition Government`s `way forward` on wefare matters has become much clearer with the November 4th release of the Ian Duncan-Smith inspired, `Universal Credit:Welfare That Works`.

In a nutshell, this White Paper proposes wholesale reform of the existing benefits system, combining current Income Support, Income -Based Job Seekers Allowance, Income-Related Employment and Support Allowance, Housing Benefit, Child Tax Credit and Working Tax Credit into one `Universal Credit`. Ian Duncan-Smith hopes that this, together with a more effective taper as individuals move from benefit to a job (individuals to lose 65% of benefit payments per £ as they move into work, as opposed to the curent 95% loss),will make work more attractive, breaking a cycle of benefit dependency that he believes has gone on for far too long. Within two years of the 2013 launch, he estimates, 300,000 adults will be raised above official existing levels of `poverty` (a level measured as those on 60% or less of the average UK income), and more importantly and by association, 350,000 children. Amen we would all say to that I`m sure. Oh, and £5.2 billion of Tax Credit fraud will be averted.

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation though, this would still leave over 2 million below that poverty line. So if it works it will be a much-needed start in the right direction, but much greater effort and determination will be required to finish the job.

There has been a lot of hoo-hah in the media about the matter. The Sun has started a campaign on behalf of its readers (it claims) to help David Cameron rid the country of `benefit scroungers`(together with illegal immigrants).The Guardian on the other hand has given only a cautious welcome, wondering if the other austerity measures imposed by the government will in effect`neuter` the undoubtedly honourable intentions of Duncan-Smith.

Rowan Williams has bravely popped his head above the parapet and predictably been attacked as an out of touch do-gooder for his much reported statement "I don`t immediately think it`s fair". A full transcript of his response however indicates a clear realisation on his part of the economic dilemma faced by the government, and a request for them to address the fundamental injustice apparent through the widening inequality in British society. He also pleaded that sight be kept of the obvious truism; "people are often on benefits not because thay are wicked, stupid or lazy, but because their circumstances are against them"

A `Churches Together` alliance of Methodists, Church Of Scotland, United Reformed Church, Baptist Union Of Great Britain and the group Housing Justice and Church Action On Poverty

have also aired their views, less widely reported that;"there is a serious danger that people living in poverty will be staigmatised by government announcements that imply they are lazy or work shy". For good measure they sought, and gained, a government retraction on the alleged size of tax credit fraud at£5.2 billion. In fact the figure was nearer £1.6 billion (still unacceptable of course).

No matter our opinions on this matter, the fact remains that in these increasingly difficult economic times, welfare reform of any magnitude will have a significant impact. There will be those at the bottom of the `pile`, and those who may be in work in low-paid activities, who will struggle to cope. Our church building stands in a pleasant part of Kidderminster town centre in the ward of `Greenhill`, yet even here the last census reported that 17% of children lived in workless families, and 22% of children lived in families receiving Working Tax Credit; the poorest families. That`s an average of one in five, living in straightened circumstances with all that entails for life-opportunities. We don`t need to look very far for somewhere that requires welfare support; it`s on our doorstep.

So what will our response be at New Meeting House ?.We are involved in social action; how can we be more effective ?

And what is the response of the Unitarian movement in general toward these issues ? Is there a consensus view? Our Victorian forebears would certainly have been `in there` leading the charge.The Cross Street Chapel Congregation of those days,according to the fine report by Geoffrey Head, "used their wealth and respectability with discretion and judgement; yet they did not back off when their convictions took them to the edge of the permissible and legal". I suspect they would already have expressed their views on such reform to local and national politicians, and agitated for change that really does work for the poorest. They would also have instituted local support mechanisms.

Times and circumstance change, but surely Unitarianism also has a public view on `Welfare That Works`, that needs airing.Ian from New Meeting has already entered the fray (see previous blog) What do you think ? Surely, at the very least, Ian Duncan-Smith and his fellow politicians need to know !

Is it really a punishment to work?

Post by Ian

For the past few days, the argument over the benefits changes has swung back and forth. Especially with the proposed policy of forcing people who have been on benefits for a while to perform community service. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has come out against the plans, stating that the plans will lead people "into a downward spiral of uncertainty, even despair". Why? Is the Archbishop really saying that going out and doing something for the small sum people get as a benefit will lead them in to despair? Of course, the full details have not come out yet and these plans will have to be implemented appropriately. However, I can't see why a few hours of work for the benefit received would bring people in to despair. Let's take the Jobseeker's Allowance as a guide (£65 a week). That benefit equates to around 12 hours work at current minimum wage levels. So, what can be done with 12 hours? Well, litter picking has been mooted as an idea. There's never enough time or money available for the council to keep up with people dropping the litter in the first place. Add to that, clearing up graffiti and painting walls. This might actually get people thinking about challenging those who produce the graffiti. How about just sitting and chatting with an elderly or disabled person for a few hours? It doesn't have to be manual labour, even this small thing can help immensely. Add to this any other skills people can bring, or want to put their minds (or hands) to. Get companies involved, to see if they can accommodate someone for a few hours at a lower cost in order to get people in on some training and experience. This could be a way to provide career changing skills at a low cost - giving the unemployed person another skill to add to their CV in the quest for a new job.

But, I hear, there's the law of unintended consequences. Arguments have been made that people will resort to crime, as the punishment they'll get for minor offences will equate to the same thing (community service). There's the argument regarding the community service done by the unemployed will put council workers out of work. Personally, I think the benefits outweigh the potential drawbacks. This is a way of getting people doing things in their communities, getting to know people in their communities, working to improve their communities, and so on. We might actually get back the pride of doing work for the community, and see our communities thrive as a result.

I would hope that the policy is thought through, and does not end up being exploitative. Hours of community service should be calculated on at least the minimum wage level equivalent. The proposed 30 hour work placements are just wrong. However, I think we should not be looking on this policy as a punishment, but rather an opportunity to make communities closer. The policy is a chance to regain that pride of earning the money we get, instead of expecting an "entitlement". It's a policy that needs some work, but is a good thing in principle. Here's hoping that the MPs will modify the policy appropriately as it goes through parliament.

The role of women in the church

Post by Ian

Always a topic of debate in the more traditional doctrinal churches, the role of women has been hotly contested - especially in the Orthodox and Catholic churches. However, there's evidence in the Bible that women not only taught in the early church, they helped fund Jesus' mission. There's even evidence in the Bible of a possible female disciple. Not one of the twelve, named in Mark, Matthew and Luke; but possibly one of the seventy. Firstly, the role of teacher in the church. Women are mentioned throughout Paul's final salutations in the Letter to the Romans (Romans 16). A lot of the women in this list are in high positions of authority in churches. Junia (or Julia) has been generally edited out as Junias, but the oldest and most authoritative texts have a female name. The reason, she is counted as an apostle of Christ by Paul. Paul generally addresses his letters to "brothers and sisters" within the texts. This alone is significant as Paul obviously expects both men and women to be present at its reading - something that was not necessarily true of Judaism of the time. Acts 18 describes the actions of Priscilla and Aquila. These two are always mentioned together, husband and wife, obviously a team in their ministry. Galatians 3:28 states that there is no male or female, as we are one in Christ.

Yet it is also Paul, generally showing a very egalitarian attitude throughout his letters, who gets the blame for the main piece of scripture against women teaching in church. Passages like 1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34 have been used to ban women from the priesthood in the Orthodox churches. At least we have the argument that the Timothy letters are of the pseudepigrapha, written much later in Paul's name. But Corinthians is a letter that scholars agree is written by Paul. So, what did Paul actually think? Is the passage in Corinthians a later addition? Personally, I agree with those who regard this passage in Corinthians (34-35) as a later scribal addition to the text - possibly as a result of a marginal note referencing Timothy being incorporated in the text during copying.

Let's then look at Jesus' mission. In Luke (Luke 8:1-3) states that the Jesus and his disciples were supported financially by a number of women. Jesus addressed women directly in his teaching. He used women as examples of exemplary faith. It was a woman who first saw Jesus after the resurrection and who was sent to spread the message of his rising.

Also, in Luke (Luke 10:38-42), there is an indication of the discipleship of at least one woman - that of Mary, sister of Martha. She sits at the feet of Jesus, listening to his teaching. To sit at the feet of a teacher was the position of a disciple. For Jesus to allow a woman to do this, accept the role of disciple, was unusual. Jesus not only allowed it, but rebuked Martha when she commented on it and asked for Jesus to send Mary to help her.

To me, the Bible shows that Jesus and Paul both considered women to be important contributors, and even teachers. Both considered men and women to be equal, working together and being taught by each other.

But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honour to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honoured, every part rejoices with it. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.
1 Corinthians 12:24-27