Yesterday I read an essay entitled "Baptists: the Fount of all Heresy" which made me smile, and which probably explains a few things.  I also came across mention of an obscure, and new to me, sect called the Muggletonians, which sounds like something out of J K Rowling's writing.  I am somewhat intrigued by the vast number of whacky-sounding sects that emerged during the 16th/17th centuries, including one which was attributed to one of my own, nominal, forebears - the Gortonites were a weird lot (nuff said, you all cry) whose founder was expelled from Britain.  Not sure that any of this gets me anywhere, but it is fun to discover just how weird England might have been in those days.

Today I am writng my sermon on Matthew's Portrait of Jesus picking up something of the motif of Jesus as the new Moses, of fulfilment and its link with righteousness, notably as expressed when Jesus tells John to baptise him to 'fulfil all righteousness.'  My nice big fat two-volume commentary on Matthew suggests that this is a tricky phrase to explain, but that Jesus' baptism is a sign of identification with ordinary people, and perhaps especially the sinners, tax-collectors and prostitutes that are mentioned in Matt 21:32.

So far, so good, but what then of the Great Commission with its command to baptise others, a topic that has not appeared anywhere else in Matthew.  Setting aside its liturgical, proto- (?) trinitarian formula, or suggestions that it is a later addition and may or may not be what Jesus actually said, what does it then mean for the new disciple to be baptised?  To identify with Jesus, as we so often assert?  OK, but if so, does that mean to identify with what Jesus saw himself identifying with?  In other words, does our baptism 'function' in some way in us identfiying ourselves with the 'sinners' of our own day rather than as somehow morally superior and hence (horrid theological phrase coming up) over against them?  With my non-sacramental view of baptism, I think I can read it as a conscious decision to identify with Jesus and hence, in imitation of him, with other people, and that has huge implications for mission.

This is probably a highly dodgey reading of the text, but what do any clever people out there think?

This morning I heard Kate Adie in the radio, doing a newspaper review and commenting on the current situation regarding terrorism in the UK.  She spoke a lot of sense, words that resonated with my own feelings.

Firstly, she observed that most people of all races, religions, nationalities and occupations are decent.  Extreme ideology is not restricted to any one demographic sub-group, and suspicion of middle eastern doctors in general is unfounded.

Secondly she spoke about the shortness of memory that colours British society, recalling how in the 1970's she - along with other journalists - was on 'bomb watch' in London.  Certainly I recall two bomb scares leading to evacuation when I was in the first year of secondary school (in Northampton, 1974), numerous bomb scares and bombs when I was a student in London, not least when foreign nationals used to kills each other with car bombs in the west end, or when an explosive device was found outside McDonalds in Oxford Street.  Tube station closures due to bomb scares were common place and you just got on with it.  Anyone remember the Harrod's bomb in 1983?  In 1993 there was the Warrington bomb, did we go into panic mode?  No, we got on with life.  Further, the father of one of the victims got involved in the peace process, turning tragedy into opportunity; this does not diminish the tragedy or injustice of a life cut short, it just speaks of a different response to it.

I feel for the people in Paisley - I have driven through it countless times going from Glasgow airport to East Kilbride on business trips - and I do have an idea of what it is like to have terror on your doorstep, but, as a nation, let's not get paranoid or forget that, as Kate Adie observes, most people are decent, law-abiding citizens who just want to get on with life.

My visit to Manchester today revealed two things to me...

1. There is a conspiracy to stop any post grad. theology being done because both LKH and John Rylands libraries have packed away most of their theology books while they refurbish their libraries.  Whilst this is good, because it forces me to take a break, it is annoying to go all that way and find, yet again, not a lot to borrow
2. It was a graduation day and lots of (extremely young-looking) graduates and their proud parents were cluttering the food court.  The graduation outfits have improved dramatically since 2002 when I completed my BA!  The 'new' colours are much to be preferred - gone are the red and yellow jester suits for PhDs in favour of fairly tasteful black with purple and gold trim.  Also, thankfully, gone is the fur trim on the batchelors' hoods (Artificials everywhere can be released from captivity and will no longer be intensively farmed for their fur) and the rather insipid faculty colours in favour of a uniform purple and gold.  I am suitably relieved by this, as, assuming I do one day complete this doctorate, the thought of prancing around in a red and gold jester suit did not appeal one iota.

The essay is done, proof read, revised, updated, even in parts rewritten, and the New Revised Standard Version has been duly bound in cardboard ready to deliver to Manchester today.  I am meeting fellow student, blogger, and all round good egg, Kez (who is way too intelligent) for lunch when we will do the deed.  Now it is time for something that is just for fun, and here it is, nicked from ReverentFun.com enjoy!