Today's BT contains a little article about Bevin Boys and finds our very own Baptist Bevin-boy and former BUGB General Secretary, the Revd Bernard Green.  He worked, so the BT says in the "South Leicestershire Colliery in Coalville."  This would not be a good thing to say to people round here!  Coalville is not in South Leicestershire, check a map!  South was, so I am told by locals, the name given to the area, now a small village, some 2-3 miles from Coalville.  You call such places Coalville at your peril - I have the scars to prove it!  People here simply talk of 'South Colliery.'

If Revd Green, then a 19 year-old lad, worked in South, then one of his nearest Baptist churhces, at merely mile or so away, was Dibley.  Did he worship here?  I don't know.  Maybe he worshipped at the one a couple of miles in another direction.  Do my people know?  Again, I don't, yet, know, but I suspect not.  Is it judged relevant?  I doubt it.

I'm not really questioning whether or not we ought to know the answers to this (I think we probably should know if he worshipped in our congregation) or even if his presence was relevant (he wasn't the only Baptist Bevin-boy, plenty of my congregation, and others, were), I am just amused that the BT, in its inimitable way, and with a very different agenda from local congregational history, reports this.

Our Congregational History offers the following on WWII:

"... in 1938 the Rev C W Gregory came from Shore, but resigned three eyars later. The Rev C Walter Rose BA commenced his ministry in June 1942, during World War II, with its terrible upheavals and strain, leaving an aftermath of problems for Church and Nation.  Our own locality was more fortunate than many, and the Church at [Dibley] sustained its life with considerable vigour."

I assume it was WWII, not Rev Rose's ministry, which left the aftermath...!  The "considerbale vigour" was matched by a reduction in membership of more than 30, so I now know how to descirbe my own ministry better.  And as for a whole World War summarised in three sentences, even I couldn't manage that!

Also in this week's BT it says that Gildersome Baptist Church in Yorkshire was rebuilt in 2000 - not when I went there in 2003 it wasn't!!!  It has been refurbished, but that's not the same thing at all. 

Can I really give any credence to anything I read?!  And what does all this mean for my research.  Hmm.

... it would not get very good marks for presentation.

Ok, this is not orginal, someone else will have done it so much better, somewhere else, but I am too bog-eyed from proof-reading to look.

Neither Paul nor Jesus (as recorded) give references, simply asserting 'it is written.'  Of the few references supplied in the New Testament one of them (I can't remember where, but "it is written") is blatantly to the wrong prophet.  I'll let them off publication houses and page numbers - a tad tricky with a hand written scroll...

Paul in one of his letters (Romans?) manages to submit an incomplete sentence - long, complex, even erudite but... 

Mark's Greek is almost as bad as mine, he muddles tenses and clearly did not have a 'proficiency in Koine Greek' certificate before he registered.

Any others?

I think this is proof I need to lie down in a darkened room!!

Over at Faith and Theology I came across this rather fun 'meme.'  I am pretty safe that no one will ever tag me with any 'memes' and to be honest they are usually more fun to read than to respond to, but this one I quite like, so here are a few off the top of my head comments...

I confess that I have never heard of most of the theologians people blog about

I confess that I never understood a word of my philosophy of religion classes but still managed to get a good mark for the assignment

I confess that I have long forgotten which heresy went with which heretic and never really cared anyway, because I think that so-called heresy is a necessary corrective to, well, heresy of the so-called orthodox variety

I confess I'm a happy heretic

I confess that I'd like God to be a universalist even if I can never quite get there; if not can God be anihilationist please

I confess I don't like theological labels

I confess that I often wonder if one day I'll wake up and think its all a load of tosh (but after 30+ years of wondering that, maybe I won't)

I confess that I like debate and sometimes play advocate for the dark side just to make it more fun

I confess that I am stubborn, pedantic, workaholically-inclined and have an odd sense of humour

Oh yes, and I also confess that Jesus is Lord and I am truly glad to count myself among his followers

A late night blog trawl and I saw something that sounded like I ought to have read it - a reference to What is a Healthy Church? a USA publication that picks up 'nine marks of a healthy church' as follows: -

1. Expositional preaching
2. Biblical theology
3. Biblical understanding of the Good News
4. Biblical understanding of conversion
5. Biblical understanding of evangelism
6. Biblical understadning of Church Membership 
7. Biblical church discipline
8. Promotion of Christian Discipleship and growth (one for you Kez?)
9. Biblical Church leadership

I have no idea what the book actually says, but these 'marks' sound somewhat different from those in the UK published  Healthy Churches Handbook which are as follows: -

1. Energised by faith
2. Outward looking focus
3. Seeks to find out what God wants
4. Faces the cost of change and growth
5. Operates as a community 
6. Makes room for all
7. Does a few things and does them well

I know which set I prefer, and it's not American!  So I don't think I'll feel too bad about not having read this imminent new work or its predecessors in time to write about it. 

Why, I asked myself was I getting 'Congregational Studies in the Uk' every time I referenced said book directly from Endnote?  Yes, it was 'UK' in the data entry table but, aha, Chicago 15th A does not like the UK or even OK or indeed anything much except USA.  Chicago 15th B likes UK, but does other things I, or my supervisors, don't like.  Oh, I love it, not, but it is quicker, and more accurate, than manually typing in all the references, which as I have 158 at the last count, is definitely a good thing...

At least I have now found out how to make it reference doctoral theses correctly from said format, but there's still some tweaking needed here and there.

Ah well, into the final stages of editing now...

UPDATE

OK, so another ten minutes of messing around and I discover in the 'preferences' menu that I can set UK as something for it not to alter the case of, have found out to do multiple citations prperly and half a dozen other useful things.... Grrr.