Thursday, 27 March 2025

 PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS...


GOD


I have a friend, an elderly lady now, who many years ago one night as she was getting into bed distinctly heard a voice say, "Go down to the public toilets and meditate."

I once lost my phone charger. I got in a bit of a panic. Then the forceful thought came into my head, 'Check the bottom drawer in the white wardrobe in Marianne's bedroom'. I did and lo and behold there was my phone charger.

Some time back I dreamt one night about venison. The next morning I had to visit a friend in ITU in Harefield Hospital. I decided to have lunch in the hospital canteen. On the menu would you believe it was venison pie!


These occurrences leave no doubt in my mind that God exists.


GENE



 

Luke 11:14-23
Whoever is not with me is against me

Room in Brooklyn,

Painted by Edward Hopper (1882-1967),

Painted in 1932,

Oil on canvas

© Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

Gospel Reading

At that time: Jesus was casting out a demon that was mute. When the demon had gone out, the mute man spoke, and the crowd marvelled. But some of them said, ‘He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons’, while others, to test him, kept seeking from him a sign from heaven. But he, knowing their thoughts, said to them, ‘Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and a divided household falls. And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are safe; but when one stronger than he attacks him and overcomes him, he takes away his armour in which he trusted and divides his spoil. Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.’


Reflection on the painting


Monday, 24 March 2025

 

Lessons from the Decline of Protestant Churches

Reports of the financial struggles and decline in membership among large American denominations have become so commonplace that they often elicit little more than a shrug. But every now and then, a report arises that warrants attention. A recent Religion News Service article gives helpful insight as to why “Protestant denominations are losing members, particularly the Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist and other historic mainline groups,” including the Southern Baptist Convention. The inclusion of the SBC is significant because, unlike the other denominations, which “have suffered schisms as they moved in more progressive directions,” the SBC is theologically conservative. Conservative Christians should take note. 

The article ironically features a photograph of two queer clergy. If ever one wished to render the church’s message obsolete and her existence pointless, adopting queerness would seem a most excellent way to do it. Queer theory is the perfect tool for demolishing any “oppressive” dogma or claim to transcendent truth. But if the church has no truth to proclaim, why does she exist? Or, more pointedly, why should anyone bother with her? H. Richard Niebuhr aptly summarized the irrelevance of liberal Protestantism: “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” And yet even that seems quite robust compared to queer Jesus and a gospel with no apparent purpose other than decrying traditional Christianity and affirming the fluid identities of autonomous individuals. One reason for the dying of the churches is that God’s truth died in so many of them many years ago. We are merely living at a time when the interest payments have come due.

Cuts to the administrative structure of these denominations look set to be swift and sharp. Yet that hints at another problem in American Christianity: a decades-long creeping prioritization of church agencies over local church ministry. Following the money is a sound way to see who and what an organization deems most important. Overpaid administrative agencies are one good example of this. Now, this is not a monopoly of the liberal mainstream. In the conservative Presbyterian world there are denominations where agency heads earn in excess of $300,000, typically much more than the average congregant or even the most well-paid ministers. Yet it is the ministers who preach each week and do the work of frontline ministry.

Ralph McInerny said that when a sports coach is paid more than the top professors at a university, something is deeply wrong. This principle applies to denominations too. Other denominations—conservative, orthodox denominations—not yet facing quite the same crisis should learn from this. The travails of the SBC indicate that the problem of church decline is not restricted to those who deny the Resurrection or choose their own preferred pronouns for God. Perhaps it has as much to do with priorities as with orthodoxy.

That message seems to be resonating with at least some mainstream leadership who are looking to more grassroots, parish-level organization as part of the solution. And they rightly note a growing anti-institutional dimension of modern American culture. Scott Thumma, co-director of the Hartford Institute for Religion Research, comments that “organized religion” does not appeal to many today but that “you have people who are still interested in spirituality, some sort of gathering around something higher than themselves, but not in these particular forms.”

Herein lies the deepest problem the churches face: the separation of “spirituality” from Christian faith and practice, two things that can only take place when anchored in an ecclesiastical context. In recent years, there have been calls for the re-enchantment of the world, calls that see our contemporary malaises, whether of morality, identity, or meaning in general, as the result of the prosaic world of instrumental reason that shapes so much of our cultural landscape. I sympathize with this to a point: The world is more than atoms, and life is more than a biological process just as surely as the roof of the Sistine Chapel is more than paint splashed onto plaster. 

And yet seeing metaphysical depth in this world is not the same as seeing truth in this world. The prophets of Baal lived in an enchanted world, and it did not save them. Mediums and astrologers live in an enchanted world, and yet offer nothing but nonsense to their clientele. If enchantment simply means seeing the world as a more mysterious place, it is useless as an idea. More pointedly, Christianity stands in judgment over and in opposition to all enchantments but its own, and the agency by which that is made a reality is the institutional church. Leaving the church for unspecific spiritualities is not encouraging. More likely it is just another manifestation of the therapeutic society’s fallacious answer to the human desire for meaning.

The Religion News Service article makes depressing but instructive reading, from its use of the queer pastors’ picture, to its revelations of the financial priorities of churches, to its commentary on anti-institutional spirituality. There are lessons here for all Christians.

Sunday, 23 March 2025

 Detterling let me remind you of the evening of Friday 16th December 2016 and that never to be forgotten leaving do in the Good Yarn:




I come to the front doors and everything is in darkness except for the Christmas lights twinkling on the windowsills. I come through the doors. Suddenly all the lights go on and I am greeted by a huge cheer and a sea of smiling faces from the jam-packed pub. Thunderous applause follows. The love, respect and esteem in which I am held is palpable.



Does that sound at all like the man you describe ?

Image result for the good yarn uxbridge

Thursday, 20 March 2025

AN OPEN LETTER TO DETTERLING FROM HIS NEPHEW CUTHBERT...

Dear old Uncle Detters,

Please take Gene up on his offer. Can you imagine how delighted Lucretia and Ffiona will be? 

And above all this kind gesture leading to peace between you and Gene.

Lucretia and Ffiona on the beach at Torquay

Your loving nephew,

Cuthbert

Sunday, 16 March 2025

Dear old Detters, yes, herewith an olive branch...




Detters your nephew is absolutely right. It is disgraceful that we should be at loggerheads - and twenty years of loggerheads! Detterling we must negotiate. But as President Kennedy once said: 'Let us never fear to negotiate but let us never negotiate out of fear'.

Now I propose to make a very generous gesture to you and family Detters. All... you, Delia, Sebastian, Cuthbert, Julian, Edgar, Lucretia and Ffiona will be delighted. This will hopefully confirm my intentions to seek peace.

Over the past year or so Detters I have observed, since the publication of Granny Barkes Fell in Woolworth's, your animosity towards me increase markedly. Now, we both have a responsibility to halt this.

Anyhow my proposal is this: that I invite Lucretia and Ffiona down to Uxbridge to spend Easter Week with me. Easter Sunday falls on 20th April. I will meet the girls at Kings Cross station. From there it is a straightforward journey on the Metropolitan Line out to Uxbridge. Marianne will be away until the evening of Friday 25th but I am more than capable of looking after the girls. First stop in Uxbridge will be a visit to Five Guys' burger bar. You know how much young people love burgers and Five Guys do the very best.



Five Guys' burger bar in Uxbridge

Then it is on to Chez Vincent and I settle the girls into their rooms. I will be home alone so no worries about space. Maybe then we will watch a Netflix film and milkshakes for a late evening treat.

Next morning is is up early to a healthy breakfast prepared by Gene. I will then show your grand daughters my work studio in my converted summer chalet in my back garden. I'm sure they will be thrilled to see the workspace of a professional writer. Then I will show them my garage housing my unpretentious Nissan and my 1957 Vauxhall Cresta lovingly restored by myself and my son Paul some years back.

1957 Vauxhall Cresta 


Then it's off up to London and what a whirlwind of activities over the next two days: 
Madame Tussaud's, the London Planetarium, the London Eye, the Houses of Parliament, the London Tate, the National Gallery, Oxford Street, Chessington World of Adventure, the Tower of London, Selfridges, Harrods etc. Exhausting just to think about it, but how the young girls will enjoy it!

Wednesday sees a highlight of the week. A two-day trip to Torquay. Staying at the Imperial Hotel. Did you know that this was the first five star hotel outside of London? At the hotel, in case anyone thinks something untoward might be going on, I will pass Lucretia and Ffiona off as my grand daughters. Hope you are okay with this Detters.

Imperial Hotel Torquay

In Torquay it will be swimming, sunbathing, sailing, surfing and lazing on the beach - me in my baggy swimming trunks and the girls in their bikinis. We will have such a great time.

Then Friday it's back to Uxbridge. Marianne returns on Friday evening and will join us in a slap up meal at Nonna Rosa in Uxbridge High Street.

Saturday morning I will leave the girls at Kings Cross for the journey back to Newcastle.

Detters the ball is in your court to make a response to this most generous proposal.

All the best,

GENE


Saturday, 15 March 2025

 

Navigating the Battlefield of Modern Romance

Rejection
by tony tulathimutte
william morrow, 272 pages, $28

Tony Tulathimutte’s breakthrough short story “The Feminist,” published in the literary magazine n+1, generated significant online controversy six years ago. The protagonist, an obsequious male feminist, fails to secure even a crumb of female sexual interest. Gradually, he becomes a rage-filled incel, convinced that his narrow shoulders have doomed him to the world’s most despised subaltern caste. 

I was impressed by the story, but I was also curious whether it would go the way of Kristen Roupenian’s “Cat Person.” Published by the New Yorker in 2017, the story went viral among the #MeToo crowd for its depiction of a young woman’s unenjoyable sexual encounter with an older man who styles himself a “cat person” before revealing his darker side; Roupenian’s subsequent story collection drew little attention. “The Feminist” was read by many as the male answer to “Cat Person,” hence its own virality. Rejection, Tulathimutte’s debut story collection, overrides any concern that he is a one-hit wonder. The book is packed with humor and delivers a brutal indictment of “the way we live now” without descending into didacticism.

Tulathimutte has a remarkable capacity for both empathy and ridicule, sometimes in the same sentence or even the same word, and his collection traverses wildly different dispositions and identities. The stories generally hew to the theme of romantic rejection, hence the title, though they also deal with rejection in a wider sense. Characters use and discard one another, or remain physically and spiritually isolated, as they navigate a dating landscape as arid as the Sahara and just as strewn with mirages. Identity, perhaps inevitably, is also a key object of concern. In her essay collection My First Book, Honor Levy writes: “Identity is a Swedish prison, comfortable but still you can’t leave.” In Tulathimutte’s world, identity is more like a Soviet gulag. One of his characters scorns the idea that “a checkbox on a form is a service tunnel to a stranger’s soul.”

One of the most impressive aspects of Rejection is how Tulathimutte plays both sides of the scorched battlefield of modern romance. In “The Feminist,” the first short story in the collection, he faithfully renders the carnage of the sexual revolution and sneaks in a critique of intersectional feminist pieties. He follows up “The Feminist” with “Pics,” in which a young woman’s heart is broken after she hooks up with a male friend who then rejects her. Everything about the story is pitch-perfect, from its simulation of a girls’ group chat to the protagonist’s performative idiosyncrasy she uses to shore up her wounded ego—buying a talking raven. 

The other stories include a sexually repressed, gay, Thai-American man with cartoonishly violent sexual fantasies and a demented start-up founder who optimizes himself into a particularly dark place. One after another, Tulathimutte’s characters deform their relationships by excessive analysis, locking themselves inside their own subjective prison cells. Rejection enacts “the barbarism of reflection” the eighteenth-century Italian philosopher Giambattista Vico predicted would overwhelm and enervate civilization, disconnecting us from our past shared senses of meaning. 

The characters all desperately need love, but they let themselves become nothing more than aching, unappeasable need, constantly sucking and teething at the world around them. Their lives are eaten up by the maintenance of appearances that are only rejected by a chorus of their equally deluded peers. Such rejection leads to rage, despair, or both. This is a world in which the unique value of the person is completely superseded by sexual status.

It’s a good evocation of how online modes of consciousness have changed people. Tulathimutte’s characters are uninterested in anything other than their own position in the greater social and sexual economy, the “domain of struggle.” (His work is comparable to Michel Houellebecq’s in this regard, but funnier.) At one point he writes: “Twitter was the right word for it, birdsong being a Darwinian squall mistaken for idle chatter, screaming for territory and mates.” Even the woman who buys the talking raven does so only to craft a quirky image; she has no authentic interest in birds. No one at any point establishes a relationship with reality. 

The final piece, “Rejection,” is an imaginary publisher’s letter rejecting the book itself. It is pure in its self-consuming, self-reflecting madness—a presumably tongue-in-cheek attempt to manage how the book itself will be perceived and to highlight all its flaws. It proceeds through all the stories, critiquing the author and pointing out his various feints and tricks and blind spots. This rejection letter is itself a crystalline example of “the barbarism of reflection,” the ouroboros of the mind gnawing its tail forever.  

Don’t ask this book for solutions—or even wisdom. It is an act of dissection, of seeing. And what it sees are the varied ways sexual relationships fail to satisfy (or even manifest) when the beleaguered human self is forced to conjure its own dignity, with no appeal to divine aid.