I often say to people, that if anyone had told me three years ago that one of the highlights of church life would be Thursday Afternoon Bible Study I'd probably have said "I don't think so".  I enjoy Bible Study groups, but would not usually rate them as among the 'bestest' bits of church life.

At the moment we are using the, now almost a decade old, BMS Discover Your Shape in Mission, and are having some great discussions.  Today it was third study, based on part of the book of Job, and questions of suffering.

Then it was tea and cake and chatter - it was very wide-ranging, someone told a joke speically for me:

Why did the chicken cross the moebius strip?

To get to the same side

Well I liked it.  Then I shared one I heard (bit sexist, sorry)

If a man says somewthign stupid and no-one hears, is he still wrong?

(Yes, according to one of my hearers)

Then we had a foray into Zen proverbs (trees falling in forests, one hand clapping), which totally bewildered one person, I had to make a moebius strip to demonstrate the joke, and we even touched on the humour of Adam Hills The Last Leg.

We had some real fun, lots of laughs, but we also shared some quite profound moments, stories of suffering, of people who have inspired us, and along the way recalled a whole range of hymns that have sustained us in difficult times.

Thanks ladies, and one gent, for another lovely afternoon.

Some friends of mine are running or walking the Race for Life in Glasgow in May.  All of them have been treated for breast cancer, and some are just coming to the end of 'active treatment' now.  This year I am taking a break from cancer fundraising, instead choosing a local charity to support, and helping someone else fundraise for an exhcange trip to Malawi.  However, if you would like to sponsor the group, then the link is here

Go GABBies and FABBies!

Yesterday the UK Government/Westminster Government passed the proposal that will begin the process to redefine the legal registration of marriages in England and Wales.  It has been interesting to see the informal responses of various friends on social media, mostly it has to be said from those who feel this is a step forward.

One of the questions, to which I am not sure we have a proper answer, is whether or not 'marriage' is the correct word.  I nipped into the coffee shop across the road from church as usual, and asked the proprietors what they made of the legislation (they are a gay couple in a CP).  They were quite clear: for them, marriage was not what they wanted, was not how they defined their relationship, but if it was what other people wanted, so be it.  I know a lesbian couple in a CP who do choose to use the word 'marriage' and refer to one another as 'wife'.  I know a lesbian woman 'down south' who was once in a heterosexual marriage and is now in a CP who is adamant that 'marriage' is not a term she wants to use, ever, because it is such a flawed institution.  I also know of, and in the past have known, pairs of people who are neither romantically attached nor sexually involved who were, and who still are, prevented from entering a legal covenanted relationship which would secure certain rights (e.g. tenancy or pension after death of one of them).

A few people up here are openly scathing about the Westminster legislation, pointing out how much better the proposed Scottish legislation is, and that may indeed be true, though I think it is always easy to criticise when you go second (especially if you don't have Henry VIII's church of convenience on statute)... ;-)  There is undoubtedly lots that could/should have been better thought through, but, for example, untangling several centuries of legislation around the C of E in order to make a 'better' law now would not exactly be a vote winner, nor would it be the best use of parliamentary time!

I pretty much know what I think (at this point in time anyway!) about what the word 'marriage' means, but I hope that I am gracious enough to give space and place to those who view it differently.  Given a clean sheet of paper, which will never happen, I would want to find a new name for legally endorsed, coventantally committed human relationships that lacks both the clinical coldness of 'civil partnership' and the historical baggage and presuppositions of 'marriage'.  At the same time I'd like to see a legal requirement for all such partnerships to be registered via a civil ceremony (as in most of Europe) which would then release faith groups to bless or not, as conscience allowed, without undermining important principles of justice in what is, after all, a secular society.

As I mull over how to take forward a Bible study on James 3, and 'taming the tongue' it is perhaps pertinent to pause, fleetingly, to be reminded of just how much 'baggage' and 'expectation' any word carries.

Two years ago, I used a couple of jigsaws to help me regain my powers of concentration after my surgery - really good if not totally successful.  Indeed, it is only in the last couple of months I've really felt my brain has been back to something nearing it's proper functionality.  I also discovered that I enjoyed jigsaws, and since then have done the odd done now and then.

Today I began one of this picture called 'cats in need' by Polyanna Pickering:

I think I've done around 100 pieces of the 1000 this afternoon.  It is quite challenging, but a subject that appeals, so well worth the effort.  It will keep me occupied for a nice long time, forcing me to relax and unwind after busy days.

So far, Holly cat has resisted the tmeptation to help...!

OK, so this is a spoof, it's not Anne Hathaway, but I still think it's pretty good... and was evidently done in a single take just as the orginal was...

If you haven't yet seen the film, I'd definitely recommend it.