Nativity

There is no point in letting the facts spoil a good story.I will sing the old Christmas hymns again this year with my fingers crossed, because of course they contain ideas about Jesus the Christ and his coming among us that cannot possibly be verified or justified. As with many things about the nativity record in the Bible,  historical credibility is sparse. Very few clergy 'believe' the literal truth of a star, a stable, a virgin birth. But the story is so charming, and sits nicely on Christmas cards, and in children's presentations, that it would be a shame to argue about it. We love to hear the story every year. It is the ultimate 'repeat' about which we never tire, as successive generations learn and celebrate it. As a church minister I once re-wrote two or three of these familiar songs, thinking to make them more 'believable. I was pleased with them, but there was a strong pew-based revolt, because people in the church did not want to give up the virgin birth, swathing bands, or even, oddly, children 'all in white waiting around.' I surrendered, and will again join the choir singing the tuneful mythologies of Christmas with all the other carol addicts. We like things to be the same at Christmas. It is great to see that of 656 films being offered on TV during three big days only 13 will be new. It was Browning's 'wise thrush' who sang his song twice over to 'recapture his first fine careless rapture'  Just so: we like repeats. We may have heard it all before, but as Humphrey Bogart requested of the night club piantist in Casablanca, 'play it again, Sam'.

correction to in difference

last sentence: 'We should be more selective about the people to whom we are indifferent. Like the other JC'

Indifference

We all have strong opinions about something or other. Jeremy Clarkson has many, and is never slow to express them. The media takes notice because the man is a celebrity. When the Duke of Edinburgh says he has no time for power-generating windmills it is widely reported. My opinions are also robust, but nobody will hear of them, because I am a nonentity: who cares what I think about anything? Clarkson has made a fool of himself, perhaps deliberately because his income depends on the sale of his books etc. In our time there are many opportunities for expressing opinions, and on Facebook no doubt millions of people are doing so all the time. The only other way to say what we really think - and we should do it more - is in conversation with close friends, who understand whether we are joking, or in earnest. Among strong opinions I hold is that Donald Trump should even now be prevented  from despoiling the north east of Scotland with a lot of unwelcome development. What else? And what about those who steal railway cable, memorial plaques and manhole covers for scrap metal? I would lock them up, and melt the cell key down for scrap..... English football needs an English manager..... Fundamentalist religion of any kind is inimical to humanity. Studdert Kennedy wrote: 'When Jesus came to Birmingham they simply passed him by: they would not hurt a hair of him, they only let him die. For men had grown more tender and they would not give him pain. They only just passed down the street and left him in the rain.' His poem was called 'Indifference'. We should more selective about the people to whom we are indifferent. Like the other JC.
 

quality

What is it that makes one person worth employing for £1m plus a year, while the masses have to get by on less, some very substantially less? The argument goes that there is a special band of superhuman beings who unless they are paid very large sums will leave the country and ply their expensive trade in some other part of the world. We cannot, apparently, afford to lose 'top quality' people to head up the really important commercial organisations, and public bodies that sustain our national life. There are some who follow the example of the wealthy people described recently by Ian Hislop on a BBC programme 'When Bankers were Good''. But the rest can go, and see if they really can con some offshore organisation willing to shovel money their way: I for one doubt it.  The people of real quality who undergird this nation are not necessarily the super-wealthy, and our future as a nation doesn't depend on them. Whether or not we thrive depends on more than financial tactics by governments of left or right. It depends, as Abraham found pleading for Sodom, on whether there were as few as ten 'righteous' people' in the city (Genesis 18). That may or may not include moral purity: it certainly includes people of compassion, and obedience to God's commandments.

Handshake

But quite a lot can be said, or left unsaid, in a handshake. I have watched Sepp Blatter offer a peremptory hand for someone to shake. To others he has offered a casual hand, unaccompanied by a glance. These gestures mean nothing, except as a means of dismissing the other person as of no account, They convey all the dignity of footballers going through the formalities at the start of a game, greeting their opponents with no interest at all. A genune handshake, accompanie by a gracious look, is something else. It conveys a meaning  that words cannot: admiration, appreciation, recognition, and yes, even apology. Mr Blatter was not surely asking for footballers to exchangec cursory handshakes as gestures of  casual greeting. A proper handshake is enough to seal a strong and warm basis for friendship, which is surely what he intended in his recent misunderstood comment. Thus a fragile relationship is being renewed on a quite different footing from anything that may have been the case before. The handshae which offers this message does not even have to be the double grip, so often  noted as between clergy and their flock, or business people. Not does it have to be coupled with a hug, which prevents eye-contact. I cannot see any better way to create or restore a good relationship between people than a proper handshake. Not the artificial ten-second job favored by politicians for media photographers, but the five-second, face to face, act of genuine communication that says all that needs to be said.

Pockets

The minister opens a Christmas bazaar, saying: 'Friends, there is good news and bad news about the money we need to mend the church roof. The good news is that we have enough to complete the job.' Applause all round. 'The bad news', he goes on, 'is that it is still in your pockets, purses, wallets and bank accounts.' As Christmas approaches,  we are being inundated with letters appealing for funds. Everything from frail old people to lost children and tired donkeys needs help. We are pensioners, and when we have given some carefully planned donations to certain funds, there is nothing left, and we inevitably feel very sorry. Do all these excellent causes depend on us? Of course not. There must be a  worthwhile response to the effort they make to send out appeals to so many people. The national exchequer, we are always being told, can do no more now with its restricted budget. So roads can hardly be mended, youth clubs must close and all the good things being done by local authorities and others to make life worth living have been curtailed. Of course, there IS money in the nation; it is just not in the right pockets. If we all put a small percentage of our total financial possessions into a pool, we would be able to do everything that health, education, social servicves etc is being prevented from doing because of 'the cuts'. We have more money than needed to rebuild the nation. It is still in our wallets and purses, though,, and taxation notwithstanding, looks likely to stay there.

growth

The answer, we are cnstantly being told, is 'growth'. It will resolve our economic problems. It will set us  on a new course to fiscal renewal. It will create jobs and put money back into the pockets of High Street spenders. So let's hear it for growth. But what, actually, is it? I am a sec mod abacus man.A succession of well-intentioned teachers failed to interest me in arithmetic, and when my school report said I had achieved seven percent in the subject I thought my father would be pleased. 'Seven out of ten is OK, dad,' I suggested. 'No, no, son,' he corrected me. 'Seven percent is seven out of a hundred.' It makes me one of the great majority who are confused about high finance, or even low finance, and I am glad to leave it to the likes of Mr Peston and Mrs Flanders, who nightly tell us about the sorry state of the financial world. In financial terms, even I can understand that if we are going to pay for the things we need we must somehow acquire money. And if we want more things, then we need to get hold of more money. Even abacus man can understand that. But what if abacus man has a philosophy grounded in the very simple idea put about by Saint Paul, who said he had 'learned in whatsoever state I am therein to be content'? It sounds, now, 'so first century', so lacking in ambition. 'Content'!!!... so retro. It flies in the face of everything we now need to take seriously if we are to rescue the world. But what if it is the basis on which we might,  au contraire, save the world?