Monday, March 26, 2007

BENEDICT XVI on Relativism.

"Today a particularly insidious obstacle to the
task of education is the massive presence in our
society and culture of that relativism which,
recognising nothing as definitive, leaves as the
ultimate criterion only the self with its desires.
And under the semblance of freedom it becomes
a prison for each one, for it separates people
from one another, locking each person into his
or her own ego."
Pope Benedict XVI speaking at a conference of
educationalists.

I chose this quotation, not because it comes from
a pope but, because he aptly expresses the problem
with 'relativism' as a sociological phenomenon.
For those of you who believe that 'relativism' is the
only absolute I would like to open up the discussion.
Benedict XVI points out the consequences of this
'relativism'; I would like to take issue with one of
its supposed foundations.

A few months ago I was listening to a debate about
'relativism' on the radio. Heaven knows where the
BBC get their pundits from but one of the panel
asserted that Einstein had provided the scientific
basis underpinning the philosophy of 'relativism'.
'Einstein proves Relativism to be true' [that is
everything is relative to each other - there are
no fixed points of reference].

While his fellow panellists acknowledged the
self evident truth of this I was shouting at the
radio! "You don't understand Relativity at all
do you!?" Even lay people have heard of e=mc2
which means energy equals mass times constant
squared. Einstein never said 'everything is
relative to everything else', he actually said mass
and energy are relative to a fixed constant - in
this case the speed of light.There are constants,
there are fixed reference points.

I suppose if something is repeated often enough
for long enough 'relativism' will become the received
wisdom. That however will never make it true.
The reality is that the human heart doesn't want
any reference outside of itself and its desires.
Whatever the BBC pundits say 'Relativism' has no
scientific basis - its basis is really found in our
self centred human nature.

I do not believe that for every proposition
there is always an equally valid opposite.
There is such a thing as objective truth, the
Cosmos does have its fixed reference points.

Monday, March 19, 2007

The REVELATION of
JESUS CHRIST.

The book of Revelation consists of seven
cycles of seven. After each of the 'sevens'
we get an action replay - taken from a
slightly different angle (which is why
there are so many "final" battles!) The
sequence can be charted as follows (with
the relevant chapters in brackets):-

Prologue (1)...........Letters (2-3) = 1st 7.
[replay]
Interlude (4-5)......Seals (6) = 2nd 7.
[replay]
Interlude (7).........Trumpets (8-9) = 3rd 7.
[replay]
Interlude (10-11)...Beasts (12-14) = 4th 7.
[replay]
Interlude (15)........Plagues (16) = 5th 7.
[replay]
Interlude (17-18)...Visions (19-20) = 6th 7.
[replay]
[No Interlude] Final 'Sabbath' Consummation.

Once one realises that the book isn't linear
but a series of repeating cycles then its
message and meaning become much clearer.
The book is not a Christian version of
Nostradamus, which is how it is often abused,
it is exactly what the author says it is; "The
Revelation of Jesus Christ" 1v1.

When our focus starts to slip from Jesus and
draws us into speculative conspiracy theories
alarm bells should start to ring! If the focus
isn't Jesus the message can't be Christian can
it?

Sunday, March 11, 2007

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION.

There has been a concerted attempt at some
British universities
to have the Christian Union
banned from their campuses. The ostensible
justification for this is that because 'CU's will
only allow believing Christians to act in a
leadership capacity this contravenes equal
opportunies legislation.

'CU's are affiliated with UCCF which has an
evangelical basis of faith open to public
scrutiny so one one is under any illusion
about what they believe and there is no
confusion about their purpose. It is entirely
reasonable to expect the leaders to share
these principles and if someone does not
they are entirely at liberty to join or create
another group more in tune with their beliefs.
I wouldn't be eligible to lead a university
'Islamic Society' but I don't feel my human
rights have been infringed. There needs to
be a good dose of common sense injected
into some of our academic circles.

The use of laudable anti-discriminatory
sanctions in this way will only discredit this
process. The suspicion is that those forcing
the issue have another agenda. On their
argument one would logically expect
the various student political groups also to be
banned on the basis that they too do not allow
those of opposing beliefs onto their executive
committees either.

The only purpose these actions can serve is to
hinder the lawful association and activities of
Christian students. In case someone suggests
that the use of the term 'Christian' is some
sort of ruse to subvert legitimate anti-racist
policies and de facto means 'all white', I would
point out that the vast majority of the world's
Christians are not of European origin they are
African and Asian! I would go so far as to say
that, properly understood, Christianity is one
of the few trans racial groupings you will find
on campus!

If you are in sympathy with my comments and
if you are a UK citizen then why not sign a
petition on the "No 10" website to that effect?
It will only take a minute... the link is...
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/culeaders
and please forward this blog to any interested
parties as a matter of urgency.

If you are not a UK citizen then do pray for the
witness of the church here which is being
squeezed by the forces of intolerance
masquerading as something else.

Sunday, March 04, 2007

"THE HISTORY BOYS";
a play by Alan Bennett.

The other day I went to see Alan Bennett's play
'The History Boys' at Wyndhams Theatre in the
West End. I am a fan of Bennett's work and was
looking forward to this production which had had
great reviews.

The plot-line is that half a dozen boys at a state
school in the 1980s are preparing for entrance exams to
Oxford and Cambridge Universities. The task of tutoring
them falls to two markedly different teachers. The
avuncular 'Hector' and the young, ambitious 'Tom'.
Hector sees his role as helping educate his students
to be rounded human beings while all around him
the priorities are 'targets', 'league tables' and 'exams'
rather than people. Hector is a very likeable
character; Tom however is more in tune with the
cynical spirit of the age - and the immediate task
at hand. So far so good.

The plot started to come unglued for me when a second
storyline was introduced. Hector is caught touching the
genitals of one of his students. Somehow this act is
passed off as a minor indiscretion which the buffoon of
a headteacher blows out of all proportion by insisting
that Hector takes early retirement (rather than have him
face professional disgrace). The audience's sympathies
were being directed to Hector, who, as I said earlier, was
in every other respect an appealing character.

There was a serious issue here which the author
glossed over. The "elephant in the room" was the
apparent abuse of trust between a respected teacher and
his students and we were encouraged to laugh it off.

Of course the "boys" portrayed were in their late teens
so there is no question of a teacher interfering with
'minors'. And yet I felt uncomfortable with the side of
the storyline we were being steered to support.

The "boys" were too self confident of their sexual
identity for it to ring true of teenagers. The implication
is that - underneath all that diffidence and callowness-
young people are much more knowing and consenting
than they truly are. The fact that the students Hector
fondled became 'accessories after the fact' is neither
here nor there and anyway isn't that the psychological
strategy employed by most paedophiles?

Sorry Alan I was a fan but I'm not so sure now.

ps Do you think I've blown my chances of getting into
Cambridge? I guess I'll just have to settle for Oxford
instead!

Thursday, March 01, 2007

TOTAL LUNAR ECLIPSE;
3rd March 2007.

For the first time in well over two years
a total eclipse of the Moon will be visible
from the UK. It can be sighted across
Europe and Africa, weather permitting
of course.

A Lunar Eclipse occurs when the Moon
passes into the Earth's shadow when
they line up with the Sun. All six hours
and five minutes of the event will be
visible from the UK.

First contact with the faint 'penumbral'
(partial) shadow takes place at 8:18pm
GMT, followed by a slight darkening of
the lower left hand edge of the Moon
(its leading edge). This shade should be
readily visible by the time of first 'umbral'
(full) shadow at 9:30pm.

The Moon will continue its entry into the
darkest part of the Earth's shadow, and
increasing 'bite' will be taken out of the
left side of the Moon until it is completely
immersed in shadow at 10:44pm.

During maximum eclipse (totality) at
11:21pm observers may witness a near
invisible Moon or one that is coppery-red
or orange in colour.

Totality ends at 11:58pm, with the last
umbral contact at 01:11am and last
penumbral contact at 02:24am.

Enjoy.