‘Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one,
for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever.
Amen.’
Jesus Christ (Mt 6:9-13)

Q: What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A: The word of God, which is contained in the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.

(Question II from the Westminster Shorter Catechism)

Another activity to resume after my holidays was violin lessons. I was wondering how much I’d have remembered after a few weeks without a lesson! My teacher got me to play a few scales, which seemed to go OK – well, she reckoned so anyway. She then told to play some of the exercises I’d been set. Surprisingly, I hadn’t forgotten anything, and she reckoned I was playing a lot more musically. I guess I’m used to hearing myself play the piano and compare my violin playing with that, but in terms of someone learning to play the violin, I guess I’m not so bad. 🙂

After a month’s hiatus, I was back on the football pitch yesterday evening. All things considered, it could’ve been worse. For a start, it took a while for my foot-eye coordination to sort itself out, athough that probably wasn’t helped much by the fact I hadn’t worn contact lenses for a month either! On top of that, I’d forgotten that football, being a non-contact sport, is anything but. Ah well, managed to keep running for the whole hour, as well as have a couple of shots at goal. Team lost by a whisker or two though. Woke up this morning with the odd ache and pain, although I’m not sure if that’s due to overexertion or from the odd rather physical challenge.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is central to the Christian, which is why it is mentioned in almost all of the books of the New Testament, and why the apostle Paul wrote to the church in Corinth:

If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 1 Co 15:13-14

From the Gospel of Matthew…

They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people. Mt 27:53

…through to the Revelation of John…

I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades. Rev 1:18

…there is testimony to the resurrection.

Yet, in many cases, many did not realise at first what was going on. When Jesus first appeared to Mary, she thought he was the gardener. On the road to Emmaus, a couple of disciples talked with the risen Christ, without realising who he was at first. The disciples had problems believing Jesus was sitting with them eating broiled fish, even though they could talk with him and touch him. In each case, people eventually realised what had happened and testified to his resurrection.

Today, the resurrection is as important as ever, but many people dispute it, even prominent churchmen and theologians, despite the clear teaching of the bible. If we do not hold the bible as the word of God, and so give it the authority appropriate to God’s word, we are in danger or losing touch with the Gospel. For the Gospel is not just about what Jesus did on the cross, but also what he did in his resurrection.

This evening’s birthday celebration was a little different from usual! After spending the day at Black Park, we descended at Sharon and David’s place for a murder mystery dinner. Dave had purchased a murder mystery game pack titled, “Murder a la carte: The brie, the bullet and the Black Cat”. On the invites circulated a while ago, the scene was set, and suggestions for suitable attire were made. The game is set in Casablanca in the early 1940’s (sound familiar?) with a motley group of individuals, and a murder. Everyone is a suspect, and the game was afoot this evening. I had been cast as Kurt Ramson III, a philandering, shady American, biding his time in Casablanca sheltering from the war. I even managed a rather dodgy sounding American accent.

The game started with some more scene setting, as well as information about various characters slowly appearing, either directly, or through discussion. By the end of the round of discussion, most of us were none the wiser as to who might have committed the murder, but the seeds of suspicion were being sown. After the first round of discussion, dinner was served, with the first course of soup. Once the first course was dispensed with, more clues were trickelled out, again some of it in the form of hard evidence, and some of it in the form of pointed questions to various characters. Again, after a little discussion, the second course was served. This pattern continued until all four courses were served, and rather sordid revelations about the various characters had surfaced. It then came to deliberations, and decisions.

After a lot of finger pointing and accusations, we made our decisions concerning the identity of the murderer and the truth was revealed. Yet, even if we had misjudged and got the wrong verdict, this seemed unimportant, the actual proces of the game was fun. It was interesting analysing the situation after each round, watching how various characters interacted, as well as learning about the intricacies of the relationships of each of the characters. The game was well structured and well-written, not that this was the greatest crime story ever, but that it was entertaining to experience.

A fun evening was had by all, as we each played out our characters and had a good laugh. Above all, the birthday boy and girl seemed to enjoy themselves.

Went round Sarah’s to watch Renaissance Man on DVD this evening. The film is a story of Bill Rago, a well-educated advertising executive, who loses his job and through the employment office ends up teaching a bunch of Army cadets. Little does he realise he might learn something as well as the cadets. The film itself is a little cheesy in places, but the overall story hangs together. Bill slowly realises he should listen to what he is rather reluctantly teaching – to be true to himself. That, instead of doing something out of pragmatism, it might be more worthwhile doing something you are naturally talented at and so will enjoy as well as be good at. Through doing so finds he actually wants to teach, and is a much better teacher than advertiser. Worth watching.

Now here’s something I didn’t expect! Almost a month after the General Election, and I’ve received a response to the email I sent to the parliamentary candidates for the constituency I live in. Ah well, better late than never I guess. None of the others have made any response (yet!). I’ve removed his mobile number from his response, as I’m sure he doesn’t want to receive random phone calls from people on the internet, otherwise the rest is a copy and paste operation!

Dear GeraldFirst of all apologies for the delay in getting back to you. I was
overwhelmed with emails in the final days of the campaign and I am only just
managing to catch up. Let me take each of your questions in turn:

“1. Abortion – Would you favour a reduction in the term for “social”
abortions i.e. those done for any reason other than to save the mother’s
life (at present 24 weeks)? Do you oppose late abortions carried out
because of foetal abnormalities?”

With respect to abortion I feel there must be a balance between protection
of the rights of the unborn and the mother. I appreciate that new
scientific knowledge is challenging current time-limits and would consider
the latest information as and when I found myself making a decision in
parliament. I appreciate that this may seem a little like avoiding giving
you a straight answer, but it is not an area I make any claim to be expert
on. Hence I would explore it in depth at the time and read up on the latest
advice from a range of experts.

On late abortions carried out because of foetal abnormalities it rather
depends how late you are talking. Generally though I think it is something
that the parents are best deciding, with advice from physicians, rather than
the state.

“2. Embryo research – Are you opposed to the use of human embryos for a)
cloning; b) choosing a child’s gender; c) chimeras (human cells blended
with cells of other species; d) hybrids (human cells implanted in other
animals; e) gathering stem cells?”

“3. Assisted suicide – Would you oppose any move to make assisted suicide
easier (no longer an offence)?”

This issue was first raised with me when I visited the Convent Care Home in
the Butts, Brentford. As I explained at the time, my view is that today, if
people can afford it, the reality is that they will go overseas –
Switzerland, for example. Hence the priority must become ensuring that
people of all ages are engaged in depth during their education on this
issue. This will mean they can come to an informed decision on the matter
and appreciate the various perspectives on euthanasia. Personally I can
not honestly say what decision I would come to faced with a terminal illness
and chronic pain. Hence I believe others too should be able to make an
informed choice, with the necessary safeguards in place.

“4. Euthanasia – Do you oppose the provisions of the Mental Capacity Bill
which a) require hospitals to allow patients with little hope of
recovery to die and b) require patients to be deprived of food and water
if they fall into a coma or become too ill to speak for themselves?”

My view is that we should do a better job of ascertaining people’s desires
before they get into such a terrible position. Families, doctors and nurses
can then act upon the person’s own wishes rather than speculating.

“5. Religious hatred – Do you agree that the measure contained in the
Serious Organised Crime Bill restricts freedom of speech, particularly
for Christians?”

Yes I agree that there are elements of the Serious Organised Crime Bill that
restrict freedom of speech and to which I am opposed.

“6. Civil Partnership – Do you agree that this measure weakens the
sanctity of marriage and is misguided?”

No, I do not believe Civil Partnerships weaken the sanctity of marriage. I
believe it presents a formalising of many peoples’ co-habitation
arrangements which for some, may encourage them towards marriage at a later
date. However, crucially I think it can provide children with greater
stability.

“Would you also be willing for your responses to be made known to others?”

Yes. Please include the caveat that these are brief responses and haven’t
gone into any of the nuances/ complexities that I know exist in these
debates.

If you would like me to go into further depth on any of these issues please
do not hesitate to contact me again by email.

Yours sincerely

Andrew Dakers
Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Spokesperson for Brentford & Isleworth

So there you have it. Some interesting responses. If Andrew Dakers decides to stand again in the next election, I shall probably follow up this email closer to the event and cast my vote after a little more consideration.