Are we all supposed to be this sensitive?

Is it just me, or is the fact that (fellow) Christians are already protesting about THIS really annoying?
Is there nothing “we” can be tolerant about?

A bit of background is probably necessary here – Paul is a new play by Howard Brenton which is being staged at the National Theatre at the moment.
Howard Brenton is well-known chiefly because of his play “The Romans In Britain”, which was infamous for Mary Whitehouse launching a private prosecution against the play’s director for staging a production which simulated gross indecencies. Whatever the true meaning of the scenes that outraged Mary Whitehouse and her supporters, that is forevermore going to be remembered.
Try here for some extra background.

But, Paul seems a rather different kettle of fish. This is the story of St Paul, but is told from a secular point of view. I admit now that I haven’t seen it – and anything I refer to is from the reviews I have read. But a secular retelling of a Biblical life is a good thing, as far as I am concerned – it has been done with the life of Jesus countless times – maybe not quite on the same scale, but it has. And ok, Howard Brenton is perhaps no stranger to controversy – but there is nothing particularly controversial about the play except the one element of questioning whether the resurrection actually took place, and I admit that this probably quite rightly causes a little bit of caution in Christians. But it's an interesting theory - forces us to actually THINK about the nature of faith, and question, which can only be healthy, surely?

According to Nicholas Hytner, there were 200 complaints on his desk before the play had even previewed, and all the complaints were on the assumption “that the play is about Paul being homosexual and misogynist; they assume it's going to be a prurient hatchet job.”

I can see how the idea would provoke some worry amongst a certain type of Christian, but why must they always assume that everything that approaches faith from an unusual angle is out to offend and provoke? I may be hilariously isolated on this, but really, guys, learn to relax a little.

Now, to me, this sounds quite good. I’m interested, and I probably wouldn’t be if no one had protested about it – mainly because I would never have noticed it! It might just be me, too, but I love the quotes that bookend this:

Paul
A new play by Howard Brenton

Forgive me brother, let’s keep our relationship strictly commercial. I hear people get killed in Judea because of religious arguments. All I want is a tent, not a new god.

A divine revelation on the road to Damascus moves Saul to renounce his former life. He changes his name, converts from Judaism, and devotes himself to preaching the Gospel.

Taking the remarkable life and moral teachings of this profound religious thinker, Howard Brenton explores the extraordinary phenomenon of faith. While offering a secular reading of the story of Christ’s resurrection, at the play’s heart Paul preaches from his Letter to the Corinthians, the eloquence of which cannot fail to move.

An irreverent, provocative new play by the author of The Romans in Britain.

Though I command languages both human and angelic – if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing. And though I have the power of prophecy, to penetrate all mysteries and knowledge, and though I have all the faith necessary to move mountains – if I am without love, it will do me no good whatever.

Doesn't sound as offensive as we're led to believe it is. And presumably people got a bit excited because it looked like this could be a Jerry Springer Mark II. I'm glad they have been disappointed by the fact its not. But then, I couldn't stand the debate on Jerry Springer either - to me, it was a very intelligent and funny show. Yes, I didn't like bits of it, but there's this thing called suspension of disbelief. It's quite handy when you're watching/reading/listening to FICTION. How can people see us in a serious light if the loud minority (and I think it is a minority - and if its not, it should be) take the first opportunity to shout their complaints without thinking whether anyone would seriously be swallowing what they're seeing and believing every word. You don't go to the theatre to learn hard facts, you go to enjoy yourself. Perspective needs to be remembered. After all, how are we supposed to show people the good reasons to follow God when all they see if what "we" don't like, not what we do?

I actually think that this is an important play. There have been so many instances in the last few years where mainstream theatre hasn't been brave enough to put on a play which questions belief - and this production in particular is an important milestone as far as I am concerned. This is a serious play, which is, according to the Metro, "...a rare thing: a thrilling drama that grapples with big ideas."

What's wrong with that? I can't think of a more worthwhile kind of play to see, to be honest. It's a hard balance, I understand that. But its a risk worth taking, and people really should be less sensitive towards interesting ideas - it is not mocking the Christian faith, it asks questions about the nature of faith. And that, after all, is a very worthwhile exercise in a society and culture looking for something to believe in. And besides, the play itself doesn't renounce the gospel, it does not criticise the Christian faith, but in many ways affirms it and backs the moral covenants and values preached.

I want to go and see this play, and I certainly wouldn't have too many doubts with performing it given half the chance - theatre is fantastic for sparking proper involved debate on subjects, and this would release a debate and a half. It might not even be out of place if used in an alpha course, as they both share the common theme of exploration of faith.

I'm angry because they claim to represent Christians. I'm sorry, but I respect myself and my faith too much to be considered represented by you. We can't outlaw people discussing the nature of faith and our own backgrounds - in fact, that's something we don't do enough ourselves.

Anyone agree/disagree?

He has a name!

Just a quick note to say that the little man now has a name. Last night we decided to call him Luke Matthew Fosten. Please keep us in your prayers all you people who pray, and those that don't - just remember us from time to time - especially little Luke... I'm sure he'll know you are thinking about him even if we don't!

Happy Three Weeks To Him...

So, the little man is three weeks old, and still hasn't got a name. And, no, despite the temptation, I am not about to offer the names we're choosing from so you can all vote on it... No matter how much you ask.
Life isn't too bad - he's already got the hang of the sleeping-when-it-gets-dark thing (for the moment, anyhow - I don't want to jinx anything!) and Nik's enjoying being with him all the time instead of going to work - who wouldn't - even if he does stop her getting simple things done (like getting a drink) because he doesn't like not being held when he's awake!

And me? I had a great weekend in Whitstable for GOGI last weekend - I really enjoyed being there, and doing what we all did over the three days, and I'm already looking forward to planning the next one - leading worship there was a pleasure (it's always lovely to have a seperate dedicated chapel to use rather than the usual setting up wherever we can - which I have absolutely no problem with, but its brilliant to have a quiet space like that where people are encouraged to be still and relax before anything is even said, and the chapel at St Vincent's, while certainly not being huge, does that as well as anywhere else I have been).

Using media in worship always presents problems, and I have, over the last two or three years while I developed the ideas of using media clips of all sorts and sources, mastered the art of reading something while setting up the next clip for those occasions when plans go a little awry and I am relying solely on my laptop... I did have to use the skill a few times, but generally the technology behaved, and people seemed to get something out of what I was doing. I was sad to leave, in a way. I always enjoy GOGI, and as my ideas go, I enjoy this one more than some of the others... But I also feel quite at home doing the events connected with it - even more so this time now I have been out of FURY for a large part of the year... It felt like a bit of a homecoming.

Having said that, I was very glad to get home and see my little family again - its very hard not to miss the little one (and Nik, of course!). Sunday evening was nice and quiet as we all settled back down to being together again - and mercifully, the little one decided he finally needed to sleep after being awake all day...

Yesterday was my first day in my new job - so it was quite scary (with tonnes of information being heaped my way and little brain capacity to keep it all in!), but it worked out ok, I think. Today is day two, and has been a little more active, with actual work being pushed my way, so I'm happy (despite the nightmare journey into work - three trains cancelled at Orpington, the one I finally got was delayed by 30mins, and then it abruptly terminated at London Bridge, so I had to change... missed the next one as it was full, and finally wandered into work about 15 mins late... And I was hoping to be early and everything! Oh well.)

One October Night...

Well, 8 days on, and life has definitely changed (shockingly)!

Last Saturday was an awesome and scary experience. We woke fairly early, but had breakfast in bed - seeing as Nikki was ill at her desk the day before, we decided that the day should probably be approached slowly... I emerged from the shower clean and shaved to find a shocked Nikki standing next to the bed saying that she thought that her waters had broken. This was at about 12.15pm. We had to go and get her checked in hospital, as she wasn't having any contractions at the time, and we got there at about 3pm. She was examined and told that it was definitely her waters that had broken but she hadn't begun to dilate yet. While we were in the lift up to the hospital, she had the first contraction, and by about 5 I was phoning the labour ward to ask for a midwife to come round to help as Nikki was in so much pain (it was one of the more unusual phone calls - me trying to talk to the labour ward with Nikki screaming at the top of her lungs next to me).
When the midwife arrived at about 6, she warned us not to expect any miracles, and that there might still be a long way to go and examined Nikki. She was shocked to find out that Nikki was 4.5cm dilated, and things were looking like they were moving along quite fast. In the end, it moved faster than any of us realised - and with the second midwife arriving and hastily setting up equipment, but it almost wasn't fast enough! At 9.04pm, less than 5 hours after the first contraction, the very beautiful and as-yet-unnamed baby boy arrived into the world.

It was a surprisingly fast and (relatively) easy labour for Nikki, and she even got the home birth she wanted - the little man arrived with Nikki leaning on the side of the bath...

So here all the adventures begin. He's already a master Poo-maker, and has even now already conquered the tricky arts of feeding and sleeping - and has already managed to pee all over his clothes on several occasions while being changed. He has also already developed a rather good smug grin when you've just fixed the new nappy in place and he decides to go again... and he can burp to a top professional standard (daddy is, of course, very proud)...

And you know what? We've never been quite so tired (Nikki especially), but we've never been so happy either.

The Most Amazing Night...

Tonight, at about 9.05pm, Nikki gave birth to an 8lb baby boy. He is absolutely perfect, and I am sure I will write so much more over the coming weeks and months. But right now, if I turn round, I am greeted by the sight of Nikki asleep in the bed, and a beautiful little son in the basket next to her.
At the moment he remains nameless, but here are a couple of pictures to keep you happy!

Are YOU Ready?

This all came up when a friend of mine asked if they could test how ready I am for fatherhood. The test consisted of one question only. This question is number one below, and I have added a few more to make it a proper assessment. It’s certified by several examining boards, but they cannot find your exam papers, so they won’t be able to give you any marks. Have a go; see if you’re ready to be a dad!

Am I ready to be a dad?

An easy-to-do assessment of how ready you are to be a father. Play along and see how you do!

Do I have CDs that will make my children cringe when I play them?
a) Oh yes. Plenty.
b) maybe a couple.
c) Definitely not, I strictly listen to "trendy" chart pap.

Do I sigh when I find out that 12 year olds have lost their virginity while drunk?
a) Yes.
B) No.
c) Why should I? That's normal, isn't it?

Am I already dreaming of the nice things of being a dad, and desperately trying to ignore the bad things?
a) Definitely.
b) Nope, my feet are rooted to the ground.
c) There are no bad things. I’m going to get it pissed and then watch it choke on a spliff while I ride round on my stupidly tiny motorbike.

Have I practiced changing the nappies yet?
a) Nope.
b) Every day for at least an hour.
c) Only on the pets when I was drunk.

Is the most common thought you have about names for the baby?
a) No. I think about it, and have a few favourites, but I am not obsessed.
b) Are you kidding? I have notepads full of suggestions I carry with me!
c) I thought they already come with names...

Are you hoping to be there for the birth?
a) Yes, but I am scared I'll faint!
b) No. I will be there. I have bored everyone at work letting them know that the birth may be soon, so I may have to leave early that day…
c) Depends if I can use my ps2 at the same time.

Will you have a video camera with you to record the occasion?
a) No. I want to be part of things and might be needed to do something important.
b) Yes. It's our family heritage, and my duty.
c) If I can nick one in time.


Answers:

Mostly a's - you're ready to be a dad. Just the right amount of crackpot-logic and future embarrassment is stored in your mind to deal with situations with the casual use of the phrase "ask your mother". Ideally prepared.

Mostly b's - Oh dear. You'll probably chant ancient african birth rituals in the birth tee-pee in which your wife/partner/soulmate/spiritual connection has chosen to bring your poor offspring into the world. You will probably name them Rufus. Or Bangalore (because that's where you both "found yourselves").

Mostly c's - You are a chav. You will probably break up with the 12-year-old mother of your child next week, so what's the point in thinking about this? You should have been neutered at birth. With Burberry scissors if that would make it a little easier for you.

Shocking or just pathetic...?

Two things have really caught my attention recently - one is this, a debate which has been sparked off by the Alpha Course cinema advert which has just been launched, and the Christian Advertising Network's Christmas campaign (which I rather like, I have to admit). In turn, reading about this led me back (somehow) led me back to this - and the whole debate on the BBC's screening of Jerry Springer The Opera.

I hated the debate that rose out of the showing of it. I could see where many Christians were coming from, and that there is a certain amount of double-standards in the way that Christianity was treated in relation to other religions (ie. Christianity is seen rather more as "fair game" than other religions) but I don't see how that could be on the same level as some of the arguments that went on.

There's a commonly-held view that the church as a whole (let's forget about denominations and the rest of it for my rather vague purposes) is out of date, and desperately trying to convince the outside world that they are wrong, and what happens inside the church is what is right. Perhaps this isn't so unfair a statement than it first appears - and to my mind, the reaction of some Christians to the show demonstrated this to be true.

OK, so it can be offensive to sensitive people. I won't argue with that. But it is a show designed to shock. Stewart Lee (the writer) has had a good record on religious humour that is genuinely funny and incisive, not just the kind of joke that your minister begins his or her sermon with on a Sunday morning or needlessly shocking like some comics do these days - there's a point to what he says, and he questions sensibly as well as using flights of fancy.

There is always a risk when you get to religious humour - there's a very fine line to walk which usually means you either sacrifice a few people's sensitivity or any genuine humour. It's either going to be funny or shocking, and Jerry Springer - The Opera does both of these, and does them well. It is always the shows, comedians and the like which tread this line who become legendary - Bill Hicks, Peter Cook, Monty Python etc. They don't just influence comedy, they influence culture and the society's climate we live in. There's nothing wrong with challenging either the establishment or the beliefs of others, but challenging is different from insulting or discriminating against.

I hold the belief that religion is as much fair game for comedy as anything else in life. Whether I am right or wrong, I'll live the best life I can and leave the judging to the Big G. I'm also not particularly sensitive when it comes to comedy - not a great deal shocks me, and I really enjoyed JSTO, but I can distinguish between fiction and reality quite easily these days. I'm not sure why people have such a problem with having a sense of humour. I understand that not being able to not take everything totally seriously all the time is a) not healthy and b) going to drive you mad.

This, I believe, is as true for religion as anything else. If we think about it, a lot of what we do in churches is tradition - and some of it can look ridiculous (especially to "outsiders"). I read the Bible several times a week, and I take what I can from what I am reading, but I don't think laughing at the Bible is a crime for which people should be ex-communicated and burnt in the fires of hell. After all, being able to laugh at ourselves is something the British are supposed to be able to do rather well, and its pretty healthy for you I think. If a belief in God is part of who you are, then why shouldn't you laugh at that part of you as much as anyone else?
People who take the Bible utterly seriously and live by the exact word rather than the spirit is the kind of person who develops into a really picky referee. And yes, the clue to what type of person they are lies in the word fundamentalist. Mentalists.

Kapeesh?!

Back from the wilds

What a busy wee chappie I have been recently. I can hardly walk for the aching in my muscles...

In the last two weeks - Nikki and I have been to our first ante-natal classes - we've had two now in fact, and I've been down to the wonderful north coast of Cornwall.The ante-natal classes were fine - quite fun really. The first week we did a lot of getting-to-know-you stuff, which are usually cringeworthy and not very nice to go through, but these weren't too bad. We did some quizzes in small groups to see how much we already knew, and then talked about some of the practical things about babies- ie. poo and nappies.Week two was slightly less interactive - we talked about the birth, what happens, when it happens, and where the dads should stand if they feel like they're going to faint. Interestingly, it wasn't in the middle of the room so you could be looked after... We also did a bit on massage, and I've had to add massage to my list of duties now!

My trip to Cornwall was lovely, but too short for my liking, and in the end it was hard to keep paying attention in the class after having spent six hours previously on trains getting home from Cornwall in time! Aside from the journey it was nice to see the place again, and made sure that a lot of the worries I have had are pushed firmly into perspective once and for all! And of course, it gave me some lovely scenery to go and look at when I got too nervous to watch the last day of the test match on Monday! Next time I go, we'll be accompanied by a wonderful little poo machine! Still, at least it's a good excuse to start buying all those beach toys again!

Pip pip for now!

The Ways of the Jungle

I do not claim to be a fashionable person, nor am I a considerably talented social observer. But I am a harrassed office worker in London, amongst other things. I have decided that I should keep a log of some of the rules, laws, annoyances etc that dominate my life as a reluctant commuter.

1.Unless you are an athlete or other sporty person, vests are not meant to be worn without something over the top.

2.The phrase "that's not a skirt, it's a belt", is not a compliment. Even when it's said by someone's dad. And it's usually accompanied by a grimace of disgust. There is a reason for this.

3.Baseball caps. Good idea in sunshine. But not when you are in a suit. Or it is cloudy.

4.Briefcases, I'm fairly sure, were not made to be used as battering rams.

5.Walking behind some people in London is like waiting to die.

6.Escalators only carry you up the stairs. You have to start walking once you reach the top.

7.Standing in front of empty seats is a VERY annoying habit.

8.If you watch some of the sharp-suited businessmen walking down Charing Cross Road, there is always one who studies female bottoms as they pass, and he is usually going to be the one who walks into the lamppost or stop traffic because they've just wandered out into the road. One day something will hit... (hopefully)

9.If you are going to make other people listen to what you've got on your personal stereo, make sure it's something good and not Girls Aloud...

10.People who are grinning maniacally at you on the train are probably not mad, and are probably not planning to fillet you like a big piece of Cod, they are probably just listening to Terry Wogan.

11.When did tracksuit bottoms become acceptable clothing to go out in?

12.Velour tracksuits. Why? And why is it always the larger people that wear them? Do they not realise what they look like? (OK, so stupid question...)

13.Deodorant is like gold dust on trains.

14.T-shirts and blazers. They don't go together. I mean, come on - even Busted got that right, and I... didn't really like them much.

15.People who read while they are walking, particularly in stations, are the ones who are likely to walk into someone or something. (I saw this a few weeks ago. And I am ashamed to say I felt rather smug...)

I will be back with more of these sometime!

Practicing to be a dad

Having no fingernails left after yesterday morning's tense finish to the 2nd Test Match at Edgbaston, I'm back at work and starting to feel some withdrawal symptoms! I've refound my love of cricket this summer (which had turned more into a vague passing interest in the last couple of years), which is something that Nik doesn't share, but she's brilliant, and happy for me to play in at the weekends (well, she says she is!).

I won't bother with the deep analysis of the game or anything because that'll be done to death, and I really don't think I have the knowledge to do it anyway!

The last week or two, since I last posted here, things have levelled off again after the drama of a couple of weeks back. Baby's getting hiccups, boogying along to Louis Armstrong songs and improving their kicks so much it sometimes look like they're trying to escape early - but not the conventional way!

I'm practicing becoming a dad, too. I'm making sure my "That's not a skirt, it's a belt", "Ask your mother" and "You're not going out dressed like that, are you?" are all top-notch... Obviously the judge of a good dad is how bad your jokes are, so at least I'll be ok there!

Anyway, I'm off to see the recording of a BBC Radio 4 show tonight, "Think The Unthinkable". Should be good!