The Strange World of Economics

I'm no expert on economics and have long struggled with the strange notion that when house prices fall they say it is a bad thing. Common sense would dictate that when house prices fall more people will be able to afford to buy a house, therefore it must be a good thing. I appreciate that when people have borrowed a high percentage of the price of a house and then the value drops, and then they want to sell, they are rather stuffed, but surely a house is something you buy to live in, not to make money on?

But this week's goings on seem even stranger. We are facing a severe "credit crunch". The main reason for this seems to be that for a long time people have been spending too much. And to fund that spending they have been borrowing more than they can afford to pay back. Now pay-back time has finally been called, things go pear-shaped. So what does the Government do to try and help? It reduces VAT with the declared intention of encouraging people to spend more! Are they mad? Are they really so short sighted that they have forgotten the fact that we are only in this mess because people spent too much in the first place? They should be encouraging people to only spend the money they have got, not encouraging the financial institutions to lend them even more.

Stuff is really nothing

Interesting find of the week - according to New Scientist, physicists have now proved mathematically that material stuff (i.e. everything around us) is really no more than "fluctuations in the quantum vacuum". In other words, stuff is really nothing. So if scientists can take what everybody knows to be true and prove the complete opposite, how much easier should it be for them to "prove" the existence of God - something that the majority of the world's people believe to be true anyway? And if they did, would Professor Dawkins and his cronies then change their attitude? Hmmm ..... interesting concept. Professor Dawkins bases his atheism on the lack of scientific evidence for the existence of God. But if his fellow scientists provided a scientific proof (which, it appears, they are now quite capable of doing), would he then believe it?

Christian v "Green"

I am an avid follower of Sam Norton's blog "Elizaphanian" but a recent posting annoyed me somewhat .......
"the criteria for decision making between the Christian and the Green eventually diverge. The Christian is finally concerned with human flourishing; the Green is finally concerned with the health of the planet."

Does he think that being "Green" is a religion in its own right that poses some kind of threat to Christianity? Or does he just think that life is to be led in little boxes or cubicles from which we should be shielded from the thoughts and activities of the people in different boxes?

"Green" is used as a term to indicate someone's interests and concerns. It doesn't mean they are not interested in anything else. You can have a "Green Christian" just as easily as you can have a "Conservative Christian" or a "Socialist Christian". Not only is this a possibility but, I would say, it is essential for Christians to be "green", given the mandate in Genesis to be stewards of the Earth.

Sam goes on "I don't believe that a Christian perspective can see the environment as an end in itself." ...... " The Christian seeks the elimination of the sin, with a glad consequence of restoring environmental health."
This sounds very much like a "sitting on the fence" position to me........ a blame culture. His stereotypical Green, on the other hand, would say "Never mind why it happened or who is responsible .... what are we going to do about it?"
If you ever read this, Sam, which do you think is the most Christ-like approach?

What is the Church?

Good quote from Bishop Gene Robinson while being hassled about his homosexuality :-

“None of us is on the selection committee. God is on a committee of one, and he is the selection committee. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ. The most likeable and the most unlikeable, the most loving and the most hateful are all God’s children. It’s time for us to stop worrying so much about the Church. The Church is not ours to win or lose. The Church is God’s.”

It must be true - I read it in the paper!

It never ceases to amaze me how the local press can take simple facts and draw completely the wrong conclusions from them. The latest example is in the Evening Gazette (7.11.08). The headline declares "Official: we're second most relaxing town". The article goes on to explain that Colchester has been ranked the second least stressful place to live in the country. The reason for this ranking is, apparently, the fact that we have the second highest ratio of stress relieving businesses and organizations to population in the country. These include massage therapists, yoga classes, anger management groups and leisure centres. Colchester boasts one of these to every 4,600 population. But what sustains these businesses? Surely the fact that they are all still in business points to the fact that Colchester is one of the most stressed areas of the country ...... otherwise they would have no customers. I appreciate the local rag trying to put a positive spin on things but the evidence does not really support the headline.

Samhain

Today marks Samhain, the Celtic New Year festival, closely associated with Halloween, and the cause of much twitchyness and unease among some Christians. "A Pagan festival", they say, so it must be bad!
I have long been interested in the interface between paganism and Christianity and continue to be amazed at how, when a new religion comes along, everything that went before it tends to be immediately written off as sinful and the "work of the devil" by the adherents of the new faith. I, for one, intend to lobby for the rehabilitation of Samhain.

The word means "summer's end" and is still the word used in Irish Gaelic for "November". It marked the last day of harvest and was associated with a festival of the dead when the dead were honoured and tales were told of the ancestors. Nothing un-Christian in that. Most Christian churches have a "harvest festival", though usually a bit earlier in the year now. They also celebrate All Souls Day and All Saints Day at this time of the year to celebrate and honour the dead. In fact this is a widespread custom in many religions and cultures and usually follows the end of the harvest.

Bonfires were associated with Samhain and, in fact this is where the word "bonfire" comes from. It is derived from "bone fire". The day marked the start of the winter season when difficult decisions had to be made. Food was in short supply and would not be plentiful enough to feed all the cattle through to spring. So a proportion of the cattle and sheep were killed at this time. Some of the meat was used for the feast and the bones were burnt in the big fires. Christians too indulge in bonfires at this time of year in commemoration of the Gunpowder Plot and I have never heard calls for their abolition as being un-Christian.

The only thing about Samhain that could possibly be interpreted as un-Christian is that it marks the start of "the Dark season", whereas, six months later, Beltane marked the start of "the Light season". Before Christianity the dark season was often associated with evil ........ it was cold, it was dark, nothing grew, many of the flocks and herds died due to lack of food or being buried in snow drifts. It was definitely not a pleasant time. Modern advances, however, have allowed us to cope with winter much better. It is no longer the threat it once was. Although, last week, we had the first October snowfall in London since 1934, winters, in general, are becoming much milder and some years we get no snow at all. The only "evil" that remains is the long dark nights and we can't do much about that. It is a consequence of the latitude we live at.

At the start of the "dark season" let us remember and look forward to the fact that "the light came into the darkness, and the darkness has never put it out". Happy Samhain.