Why is my head in the cupboard?

I could make today's blog an NY travelogue:
* The subway (fun)
* Staten Island ferry (glide past the Statue of Liberty, for FREE!!!)
* Times Square (not square at all)
* Grand Central Station (oh, so grand)
* Rockefeller Tower (stupendous views from the top)
* Fifth Avenue (window-shopping at Tiffany's)
* Metropolitan Opera House (for ballet, not opera - Puck was outrageously athletic)
And all this in one day.

BUT, what you all want to know is...
why was my head in the cupboard???

My hotel room is a homage to the art of being compact. It has what you need - a bed, a closet, an air-conditioner (sticking out the window like all the best movies) - but little else. The restroom (spot the NY lingo) is amazingly similar in size to the one on the plane - including a shower. But my greatest delight is the sink. Like all else, this is small. No problem - sinks don't need to be large. Above the sink is a small, mirrored cupboard. Very useful, I hear you think. Mmm... yes... except...

The sink is about twelve inches deep. The cupboard above it is eight inches deep. That leaves four inches of leeway to get your head above the sink while cleaning your teeth. My head is bigger than four inches!

Can I twist my head sideways to fit? No.
Can I duck under the cupboard, while imitating Quasimodo? No.
Can I miss the sink, and dribble over my toes instead? Definitely.

Two days on, I found the solution: if I open the cupboard door, and stick my head (diagonally) into the cupboard, squeezing between two shelves, I gain almost three inches. Just enough to save my toes.

I shall have lasting memories of New York - but one of the most vivid will be sticking my head in a cupboard...

The real thing

Today, I enjoyed the best burger I have ever tasted. Courtesy of 'Big Nicks' burger bar on Broadway, made and cooked to my specifications - it was succulent, flavoursome, huge(!) and truly scrumptious. If bliss could be summed up as a burger - this one was it!

And yet... with such a treasury of delight to choose from (there were over 40 burgers on the menu) - people still go to McDonalds. Why??!!

* Is it that they've never tasted the real thing, and genuinely don't know how good a burger can be?
* Is it that they've tried both, and actually prefer a Big Mac?
* Is it that they feel comfortable among the crowds, knowing that their McDonalds cheeseburger will taste the same in any country in the world?
* Or is it - as an American suggested to me tonight - simply that McDonalds is cheap, and just round the corner?

I wonder if the same is true for Christianity? I know so many people who have never tasted genuine, biblical Christianity. They think religion is about rules, not a relationship. Their picture of God, if they think He exists at all, is either that He is grumpy and judgemental, or well-meaning but impotent. They've never tasted the real thing - the God of grace, who is truly good and wholly sovereign.

I suppose there really are some people out there who have eaten at both McDonalds and Big Nicks - and honestly prefer McDonalds. But my guess is that the majority of Bic Mac fans have simply never tasted the real thing. I suspect, sadly, that the same is true of most non-Christians.

Twitchers and Turtles

At the end of 48 hours in sticky Manhattan I've discovered that New Yorkers are friendly, and that Central Park doesn't have proper names for its lakes. I've been on my own since arriving here - and wondered how that would be in a city I've only seen in news bulletins and movies. Would I be safe? Would I get lost? (The answer to both questions is Yes!)

* Stuck at JFK, with no idea how to phone the people I should have met, an incredibly helpful staff member showed my how to buy a Sprint phone card, and even dialled the number for me. Thanks Tara!
* Having discovered the people I was meeting had gone on without me, I caught my first Yellow Cab. In the movies, cab drivers either chat non-stop, or turn out to be villains in disguise. This one preferred the ball game...
* A walk into Central Park in the morning brought me to 'The lake'. (The park also houses 'The pond', 'The pool', 'The reservoir' and 'The loch'!) Great views, and an unexpected sighting of a melee of turtles squeezed together on twin rocks. Later, I went to Belvedere Lake, which seemed a rare exception in having a proper name - only to discover that it's now called Turtle Pond. (With an absence of turtles...)
* Back at The Lake, I met a delightful bird-watcher, who was at great pains to clarify that he was NOT a 'Twitcher' as we Brits like to say, but a serious bird-watcher. I learnt how big his patch is in the park, the precise start and end times of his daily bird-watching stroll, and how to recognise an American Robin (much bigger than ours, with an orange breast and white rings round its eyes - I've met several today). This is the most I will ever want to know about bird-watching - but he was a joy to talk to.
* Later, on my way to 'The reservoir', I stopped to bask in the cool, smooth tones of a Mississippi jazz band. Their CD is my first official souvenir of my trip. Hey man! After which, a hot dog felt like the NY thing to do.
* Foot-sore, but content, I ended up in the Guggenheim Museum. This Frank Lloyd Wright marvel is swathed in scaffolding - but still a wonder to behold. I loved the building - and the art - and my Scottish genes loved the reduced entrance fee! Inside, another friendly American chatted knowledgeably about Japanese art - slightly bizarrely, we were in the Neo-Impressionist section at the time!
* After the l-o-n-g trek back to my hotel, it's now 6.15pm. But my body clock knows it's really gone 11! I hope I'll feel more awake for our first choir concert tomorrow night - or my singing may be rather random...

Too complicated?

Over the weekend I listened to a recording of a training session for children's leaders. The content was good. The Bible-handling tools were helpful. And the trainer encouraged his listeners to be wholehearted about their preparation. All of which I agreed with. But it left me wondering - as I often do after my own training sessions as well - whether it was just too complicated...

Last year, I led a training morning on Biblical Storytelling. We spent half the time working on how we understand a Bible passage, and the rest on using storytelling techniques that will support the main teaching point of the passage, rather than distract from it (or change it!). Afterwards, someone came up to me and said it had felt like redoing his English GCSE!

I don't remember doing any literary criticism at school (although I guess we must have done). I honestly had no idea that the tools I use to understand the Bible could also be applied to Dickens! If they are good tools, that's fine - but it concerns me that 'correctly handling the word of truth' (2 Tim 2v15) can feel like swatting for exams...

I don't want to put children's leaders off by giving the impression they have to be a literary experts to understand the Bible - but at the same time I want to encourage them to be serious about teaching God's fantastic Word faithfully. I shall keep pondering about the best way to do this...

Behind the times?

Last year I had the privilege of editing a book called FAQs. We did some research at the Big Issue training days we run for children's and youth leaders, where we asked them which youthwork questions they most wanted answers to. We then collected the top ten Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and asked a range of experienced children's and youth leaders to answer them. FAQs is the result.
The book is reviewed in the latest issue of Youthworks magazine. I think it's a helpful and thought-provoking review. There are some quotes you would expect me to like, such as:
'this brilliant book brings many a biblical insight to both children's and youth work'
and
'every chapter is rooted in theology and yet maintains a practical approach'.
My thanks to the reviewer!

However, the quote that really got me thinking was this:
'while the authors convey some significant truths about this work, their perspectives all seem behind the times of today's youth ministry'.

Hmm... Do I agree that the perspectives in FAQs are behind the times? It's certainly true that none of our contributors reflect the newer expressions of church and youth work that are being tried by some youth workers. But is that a lapse? Or a choice? One of the questions that we all have to face, whenever a new approach to youthwork comes along, is whether we will embrace it or stand back from it. The view of 'Bible-centred youthwork' that is explained and encouraged in FAQs may well seem a little old-fashioned. But we believe wholeheartedly that we are first and foremost Bible teachers, and that teaching God's Word and helping young people engage with it for themselves, should be at the heart of what we do. Personally, I don't think that's being behind the times - but if it is, I suspect that I'm going to stay there!

The flavours of God

Yesterday, while visiting my parents' church, we were encouraged to taste the flavours of God. I'm currently teaching an overview of the Old Testament to two classes of 9 & 10 year olds in a local school - so it got me thinking about some of the flavours they would see through Old Testament eyes. One of the (many!) reasons I love exploring the Old T with children is that God's faithfulness shines through so clearly. They see that God is both Promise-Maker and Promise-Keeper. His people are often faithLESS, but the Lord is always faithFUL. The Old T also introduces us to many kings and rulers - some of them, like Pharaoh, with extraordinary levels of power. BUT, no one can stand against the Lord. He is the Real King (another of my favourite titles for God).

Our wonderful God is the Promise-Maker, the Promise-Keeper and the Real King. Strong positive concepts - shown by thrilling Old T stories, that capture children's imagination. But, I've also been spending time in Psalm 103 recently, so here are some more flavours to savour:

• He 'forgives all your sins' (v3)
• He 'redeems your life from the pit' (v4)
• 'He does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities' (v10)
• 'As high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is His love for those who fear Him' (v11)
• 'As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear Him' (v13)
• 'The Lord has extablished His throne in heaven, and His kingdom rules over all' (v19)

You can see why I get so excited about exploring the Old T with children. I long for them to meet the Real King, who makes and keeps amazing promises, and who is 'compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love' (v8). Such wonderful flavours...

May to December

Happy Christmas! Yes, I know it's only May... but I'm currently writing the booklet for an Advent Calendar pack, so my thoughts are nestling snugly in December. I have been thinking about the 'stable' in the middle of the Christmas story. When I was a Schools' Worker, I used to do a True-False quiz about the Christmas story - where 'True' meant it came from the Bible narrative, and 'False' meant it had been added to the traditional story. Added bits included things like, 'Mary rode on a donkey', 'Three kings came to visit Jesus', and 'The kings were called Melchior, Balthazzar and Caspar'. (No donkey is mentioned; the visitors were Magi, not kings; and we aren't told their number or their names.)

But what about the 'stable'? One of my aims in creating this blog is to think through some of the issues related to teaching the Bible faithfully to children. How much can we leave out when 'simplifying' for young children? How do we decide what stays and what goes? And are there guidelines for the use of imagination in storytelling, so that the finished story remains true to God's perfect Word?

So... what about the stable? Traditionally, the nativity centers round a stable, preferably with a rabble of animals keeping watch. But the Bible doesn't mention a stable anywhere. It simply tells us the building Jesus was NOT born in (the inn) and that His first bed was actually an animal's food box (Luke 2 v 7). So, one of my 'False' statements in the above quiz was 'Jesus was born in a stable'.

My understanding of likely housing in Bethlehem at the time is that many homes would have a section where they kept the animals at night - effectively the animal's part of the house, complete with a manger with some fodder in it. Jesus COULD have been born in a separate stable, but it's more likely that He was born in the animal's part of someone's home.

My question is, does it matter?
• IF we're helping children to see that the Bible is God's book, which is always true, and is the place to find the facts about God's actions in history - then it matters that we don't blithely tell stories about stables that are never mentioned.
• IF the key teaching point we are making is that God's Son was born in Bethlehem as the promised Messiah, in perfect accord with God's wonderful rescue plan - then while His birth in obscure, rough circumstances is a relevant part of that event, maybe the exact location (stable or house) isn't.

What do you think? I'd love to know...

Creating a blog...

Well, I've just created my first (and only?) blog. NOT a quick process! Back in the dark ages - 1980 really - I did a Computer Science degree. The first computer I worked on filled a whole room. Within three years, every Primary School in the country had at least one microcomputer - mostly the fabulous BBC Micro, with 32K of memory in total!! (A great machine - I once helped write a program for controlling a robot arm via a BBC micro. It may have been small, but it was amazingly versatile.)

In those early days of microcomputers, one of my jobs was to write booklets explaining to people how to use a new piece of software. I discovered then that most manuals were written by people who already knew how a system worked, and therefore didn't explain it very well. Having just created my first blog, I can confirm that nothing much has changed. I got here in the end, but with a lot of frustrating trail and error along the way...

It was FUN though!

Untidy photo

This is me at work - showing how carefully I file pieces of A4, visual aids, Ribena-berries, and so on. A children's worker keeps everything, just in case - that's my excuse anyway!