Good church websites are important though, if people are looking for churches or whatever they will often Google stuff now. Some of the varying examples of church websites I am aware of are as follows:

My favourite is Burlington Baptist Church’s. This website has a good mix of visuals and most importantly good quality useful content which is up to date and relevant. From the front page you can find what you need. The content also shows the way the church is engaging with the community, including the pod-casts from local candidates in the forthcoming election. The minister has a blog link which is regularly updated. The thing is though, this is a relatively large church with a team staff and a good knowledge of IT and contemporary media within it. Many churches don’t have the resources to produce and maintain sites like this.

A more “normal” website which has a fresh contemporary feel, but is not so high maintence is that of Carville Methodist Church. It has info on regular activities and has useful info for outsiders including a Google map to the location and details of the mission statement and values aswell as history. If you look in the What’s On section it is really good that it has stuff to look ahead to. It is noticeable some of the events advertised are starting to get out of date and so perhaps a bit more regular updating of this section, however again this throws up issues of resources and manpower available. Emmanuel Church in Durham also has a fresh contemporary look.

Two websites which are useful and probably standard for alot of churches are those of Elvet Methodist Church and Herne Bay Baptist Church. Both of these are up to date with current useful information, but they have less of a contemporary feel than the previous ones I linked to. A good feature of the Elvet site is the latest news box which draws the eye. The HBBC site has some really good info and is updated regularly, aswell as having a good library of sermons. The one problem with this is that the home page leaves half the screen blank. However, they are good sites and show the positive visions of the churches. They are also very user friendly which is the key thing.

The report mentioned earlier says “good content and ease of use was far more important than a sophisticated image or a multiplicity of functions.” What I think the Burlington site showed though, is that where you get the whole package it is noticeably impressive and can be seen to reflect a good product. I know all of the churches I’ve linked to and know that all are good outward focused, bible believing churches. However, I also know they have diverse congregations and the content does reflect the skills and knowledge available within the churches.

After the lecture TOH went up to said bishop to get another pic for her collection. He informed her, upon being told she had this strange hobby of collecting pics of her with bishops that “he’d heard of her”. This was said in a deadly serious way, and not as an “off the cuff” humourous comment. Atleast she didn’t include a comedy inflateable banana called Morris in this one, which she did with + Southwalk.

He was asking her about what kind of binding and what colour and she was increasingly becoming aware of what she was doing, handing over the last 3 years of her life ready to get it bound prior to submission. I did asked her before I shared this on here, but basically I just wanted to share with you guys because it was a special moment and I am dead proud of her. I don’t understand a word of what she’s written really – it’s Mathematical Physics – but I do know she’s worked really hard on it and completing it, particularly within the three years,  is a huge deal.

One advantage of living somewhere like Durham is people get days like this and the emotions involved. The women in the bar was determined to get the Tom Collins’s just right when we went into do cocktails to celebrate this achievement.

There is a FAF St. George’s Day celebration on 24th April at the Sage, (and yes I know St. Georges Day is 23rd, but obviously this is the day they could get the venue for).

FAF have a channel on You Tube with lots of folkie types giving messages support. It also has this clip of some of the country’s finest folkies at the FAF launch at Sidmouth last year.

I have been in a situation where I have gotten fed up of people’s inability to be honest with one another. For very good reasons a bunch of lovely people have decided it is kinder to be complete hypocrites over the years than actually be honest. There is one young woman who sticks out because she is generally more honest and I admire her greatly for this. I know there are degrees of honesty, but sometimes I really believe it is right to say to people, “no, I don’t think you are right for this because” or “I personally don’t think x,y or z but understand you and others do”. Equally sometimes it is right to just be civil if you find somebody difficult rather than feigning friendship and then bitching about them.

As I was thinking / getting wound up about this two-faced attitude last night I took a look at my own life and the part I have played. I realised that I need to stop trying to get the splinter out of others eyes and get the log out of my own. I had alot of people who were friends on Facebook because, (i) I’ve met them once, (ii) I share some electronic sites with them but don’t regularly interact with them,  (iii) they were people I didn’t really get on with but thought I should be friends with or (iv) they were interesting friends of friends I added but then had nothing to do with. Thus, I was in the situation where I had alot of people I could count as “friends” who weren’t even really associates. I also had a bunch of people I was referring to as friends who were more people I sometimes shared spaces with. Additionally through status updates I was keeping up an almost voyeristic insight into peoples lives when actually I didn’t really know them. For example last night I was able to explain why somebody was stressed as a result of having read a status update and thread when I don’t really know this person.

So what have I done. Well, I’ve looked at who I keep on the following basis: (i) are they family?, (ii) are they close friends?, (ii) are they neighbours? (iii) are they people I work with in some form or another?, (iv) are they electronic friends but people I have/ have had meaningful interaction with? (iv) are they people I actually care about from the past and so want to keep up a link with? and (v) are they people who it may be useful to network with if my life heads in a particular direction? (Although after the last 24 hours I am thinking I’ve been stupid thinking about that direction). I’ve probably not done a total job, but I have managed to trim back my Facebook friends by about two thirds. Also I’ve thought about whether they actually use Facebook. We seem to keep alot of other people who don’t use it on there as friends to keep our numbers up. Basically my thinking is it doesn’t matter how many friends we have on facebook it is the quality of relationship we have with them that matters.

The service marking the end also marked the beginning of another stage in the journey. This was for many on an individual basis, aswell as corporate. There was a baptism/confirmation, confirmation, transfer of membership from a UK Methodist church, coming into joint membership with a US church and extension of membership to be both Anglican and Methodist. It was all v. cool and quite moving aswell as v. hopeful.

Lindisfarne has a reputation for being a thin place and there is, I believe, something in the air. Yesterday though I felt nothing spiritual in my visit, but I did get to spend a wonderful day in the fresh air with my daughter. At the moment that is a huge blessing.

In the evening we headed over to Gateshead. Third Party had gotten tickets, for my birthday a while ago, to go and see Seth Lakeman at the Sage. It’s the forth time I have seen Seth play and I have to say it’s brilliant to see the way he just gets better as time develops. He and his band played a cracking set which was amazing in places and very good in others.

There were a few things about the gig which I think mark him out as something special. Firstly, the diversity of the audience. I don’t think I’ve ever been to an indoor gig which was so like a festival field in terms of the mix of ages and stuff. There were loads of families with young kids there last night, aswell as some teenagers/ twenties, middle aged people and some older folks. It was lovely to be in a space like that enjoying folk with such a wide group of people. Too often, as I have introduced TOH to Show of Hands and Fairport, etc the comment has been made that “this is like being in church with everybody else being really old”. The way Seth changes instrument mid song is also something special to behold. His change from 4 string half size acoustic guitar, (probably has a technical name I don’t know), or the banjo to the fiddle in a song he is also singing in is something special. For me the use of the double bass and banjo/ mandolin in the band also added something special. Also being a festival performer who is now moving into bigger indoor venues works for him. The venue was all sitting, but his set is not really a set for such sitting down to. As such whilst, as one friend put it, “we were all too bloody British” and so only got on feet right at the end by the end of the set Hall One of the Sage had effectively turned into a festival field.

All in all a brilliant day, and one where God was felt in it. Not in some “spiritual” type way but through the time spent with Third Party, the enjoyment of being out in Gods creation and through enjoying talented artists sharing the huge gifts God had given them aswell as getting some work done. It all worked wonderfully, even down to Third Party having an empty seat next to her at the gig, despite us being in the forth row from the front in an auditorium where the downstairs and first two tiers at the sides and back were full.

I have realised that “contemporary” looking church overhauls can bring out the worse in me. Tonight I realised a little bit about why. I have a thing about “the preaching of the word”. Now, practically I’m one of those people who likes to see people preaching from the lecturn, but I need to see a pulpit there, for symbolic purposes only and a plain cross above it. It’s mad I know, but I like to see it the pulpit there even if I know/hope it won’t be used because it distances the preacher from the people. Within this though I also like the concept of having spaces which are suitable for alternative forms of worship and have a desire to see space for people to chill and sit on the floor and stuff. This juxtoposition of the traditional and the (post)modern being important for me came into focus as I sat through the meeting tonight when I saw the picture of my “ideal worship space”. The picture was of a worship space with a wooden pulpit to one side and then a labyrinth in the middle.That was one of the most beautiful pictures I had seen in a long time.

 There was lots of stuff being discussed which to be honest I didn’t care too much about one way or the other and some of it I seemed to care about but I didn’t really. I mean I like chairs in proper rows but I know why curved stuff makes sense in worship even if it makes me feel vulnerable and awkward. What did make me have a real adverse reaction was the engraved glass and tapestry type look which is so common these days. It bought out something in me that I can’t describe, a kind of panic. I think the panic comes partly because to me the pulpit and plain cross thing communicate “low church” or “chapel” to me, and that connects with me in a way the wood on the deus being in the form of sacramental objects (font and communion table particularly) doesn’t. This post I did a few weeks ago on sacremental positions may sum up a bit of why I react as I do.

Anyway, whatever, I know that I will just have to come and worship in whatever space we end up with…it’s not about my tastes, it’s about coming to worship God.

The Times’ Ruth Gledhill blog column has a summary of the Bishop of Winchesters arguments against this. The Evangelical Alliance has also commented, giving their concerns. Within both there are two main issues (i) the potential for anti-discrimination laws to be used to force churches to give services which they can’t agree to on conscience and (ii) the confusion between civil and religious ceremonies.

These, I believe are valid concerns on one level, but they are also being used to scaremonger and create smokescreens. Here is my take on the whole thing. Firstly, the possibility for individual churches and ministers to refuse to conduct certain ceremonies and sacraments on grounds of conscience must be respected. Any amendment must include wording that specifically respects this right. This is not the same as the Catholic Adoption Charities issue, as the EA suggests. Whilst I believe they should have been given the exemption they were seeking the fact is they are a publicly funded service and this was the argument against, individual churches in this situation aren’t. Therefore, there is no reason why an exemption cannot be given. However, I believe within every locality, where there is a difference of opinion within denomination or the dominant thinking of the denomination is that civil partnerships are positive some kind of religious ceremony should be available and officially sanctioned. It may be that some churches decide that they do not wish to allow the civil ceremony to take place within the church but they will facilitate ceremonies including a blessing and the wording of such services will be included within official service books. The reasons why this may be a good solution were put forward by Bishop Gene Robinson when he was describing his own relationship, in a talk at Greenbelt last year.

This leads onto the confusion between civil and religious services. The civil element of any service has the role of fulfilling the requirements of the state and giving legal protection to the couple involved. On one hand this is marriage and yet on another it isn’t. Then there is the religious element. Following Catholic teaching, (flowing from Aquinas) and Protestant teaching (flowing from Luther) the theology invovled relates to partnerships that come together to produce children. In our modern society many heterosexual couples are recognised to be married but don’t have children for various reasons. Marriage then has a wider meaning in modern society than the theological material thrown about often chooses to recognise. However, I understand why some in churches may choose to keep marriage as a heterosexual sacrament. This is where the sanctioning of particular services of blessing which recognise same sex relationships which are loving, monogomous, faithful and equal, (whilst people may bring differnet gifts to them) are important if people wish to stand before God and their friends and families and say we want to commit to each other publicly. Yes, churches should be able to combine both elements the civil and the religious if they wish, but equally they should be able to say actually we don’t want to do this, but we do want to support civil partnerships by blessing them.

Personally, I would be happy to go into a office somewhere and sign a civil partnership agreement without ceremony, but I would desperately want a religious blessing of that relationship. As it stands at the moment I could do the former, but I would not be able to have a blessing of my relationship within church. If this law helps change that situation, by moving the Methodist Conference and others towards recognition of these services I would be very pleased. Yet, as I say I would not expect any minister or church council to be forced into agreeing to this type of service on their premesis if they weren’t happy with it. I know this becomes more difficult in Methodist and Anglican churches which aren’t congregational but through situations where people in individual churches have and haven’t welcomed people for various reasons to married in church, or bring their children for baptism we can see this discretion between ministers and churches on issues of conscience is possible.