Is it just an ego trip?
Or cravings for immortality?
A platform or pulpit from which to spread alarm and despondency,
heresy and long-held, opinionated views?
Just a sign of old age, looking for something to do, inability to break the habit of a
lifetime by airing various bees in one’s bonnet?
Probably and partly all of those unworthy reasons.
But principally, as mountaineers are reputed to
say when asked why they climb a mountain:
“Because it is there”.
The web is there, the opportunity to form and maintain a website is a challenge, as is
the mystery of the workings of computers, and continues to be a challenge because I
do not understand its basics and only work it out by trial and error and constant
frustration. All of which is good for the soul.
Also, through the years and for various reasons, I have effortlessly produced articles
which , never in immortal prose, great literary style nor filled with deep wisdom, have –
one hopes – prompted people to think, to react, to disagree. It seems a shame to lose
such pearls and not share them with others.
[ Some articles have actually appeared in obscure publications. One was received so
enthusiastically by one old priest in the north of England that he wrote to me
expressing the view it was the best on the subject he had ever read and it ought to be
published in every Catholic paper. My natural delight was marred somewhat when the
editor of the magazine – a very learned priest – cheerfully told me that “ Yes, old Fr.
Bloggs has been a bit ‘ga-ga’ for years”.]
This site will not be exciting.
It will not be a technical wonder with graphics, illustrations, graphs,
mobile cartoons, links, opportunities for instant and automatic replies.
It will not even have an index - things will just appear as the Spirit
moves me - since all these things are beyond my very limited abilities now and very
likely to remain so.
Anyone sufficiently interested, moved, infuriated to get in touch please feel free to do
so on: scond@btinternet.com
Musings from the sidelines.
An American President or someone of like prominence is reputed to have said that he
prefers a man on the inside of his tent spitting out rather than one on the outside
spitting in - but said it with less delicacy. [ Reputedly said by Lynden B. Johnson of J.
Edgar Hoover. Whether it was an original cruel and witty dictum or not is disputed].
Having retired from 45 years in four Parishes I find myself on the outside of the tent but
have no intention of fouling the inside.
These musings are not intended to be gratuitous criticisms.
There is no bitterness or ill will or resentment. I was happy in parish work and the
people and Diocese have been good to me. I tried to do my best but found more and
more as time went on that I was out of step until I reached the stage when the penny
dropped and I realised that I must be wrong; I could not possibly be the only one in
step, seeing things as being simple. These musings are prompted much more by a
deep sadness and continuing surprise and amazement that we - all of us in the
Church - have failed in so many things and just do not seem to be learning.
All the statistics and experts keep on telling us that religion is on the decline, on the
fast and slippery slope of being side-lined. Church attendances are down, priests are a
dying breed, churches are being closed and parishes amalgamated or ‘clustered’.
Questions are being asked and eagerly answered in the negative: “Does religion
matter?” “ Do people need it?” “Has it got any logical leg to stand on?” “Does it
impinge on the daily life of anyone in this 21st century?”
{ For what it's worth: the same cry was going up way back in the
tenth century and one of the replies came from a Jewish Rabbi who cautioned: " One of
the main causes for irreligion is the ridiculous arguments advanced in favour of
religion."}
What nobody seems to be asking is the basic question:
“ What is religion?”
If they do, then the usual
answer seems to be that it is a belief in a God and must be Christian, Hindu, Jewish,
Muslim, or even some new- world worship of nature, the stars or whatever. That sort
of response really only gives us the faith or sect or denomination a person may have.
According to its roots the word ‘religion’ probably comes from the Latin ‘religare’ which
means to bind, to bond. Would it not, therefore, be better to think of religion as a bond
with God, a relationship with God, a personal relationship with one’s own personal
God? Even if only a god as a power, an influence, a dominant force.
Thus on forms to be filled when going into hospital - or prison - the answer should be
either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in the space where it asks ‘Religion?’.
‘Yes’ if I have a relationship with God.
‘No’ if I have none.
The very first thing this attitude to religion would stress is the distinct possibility that a
person can have religion, be linked with God, without belonging in any way to a church,
sect, society or group. Outstanding examples of such individuals were many holy
hermits of all sorts who never went to Mass on Sundays, presumably received no
sacraments, did not join in a parish, belonged to no diocese, never heard a sermon or
contributed to a collection and some who sat for forty years on top of a pillar.
Even the most pessimistic and negative statistics indicate that a great majority of
people not calling themselves anything have a belief in God and the after-life, say
prayers and do, in fact, have a bond or relationship with God. Just as innumerable
‘lapsed’ Catholics admit they never go to church but have beliefs , do pray, still think of
themselves as real Catholics.
Why?
Is it possible that the theory held through the ages and obvious in all religious
literature is right? Are human beings made in the image and likeness of God in such a
way that they find it, by their very nature, important to have something, someone
superior to themselves but outside and beyond themselves to measure up to, to which
or whom they can relate? Was St. Augustine right when he said: “ Thou hast created
us for thyself and our hearts cannot be at rest until they find repose in thee.”?
People, individuals, are seeking and looking. They find they have needs other than
just work and play and personal relationships. Sure, we are all shallow and allow
ourselves to be distracted by everything around us. But so many individuals want
information, need a vision, look for ideals to be presented to them at the point at
which they are – not where the informants, visionaries, idealists reckon they ought to
be. They want to be assured and encouraged that no matter what their circumstances
may be there is the distinct possibility and need for them to form a relationship with a
God outside and beyond themselves. They have to be encouraged to look up and
assured that there are as many ways as there are individuals in which a relationship
with a ‘god’ can be built up, a real and genuine purpose be seen and accepted as the
centre of their lives and the eventual outcome of each life.
This does not mean that we, each individual who feels a need, is searching for a
deeper meaning to life, should indulge in a D.I.Y. relationship with God and invent a
new denomination with his or her ideas of the nature of God, his relationship to us, our
worship of him. We must have a ‘bottom line’ that God, by his very nature and his
creation and conservation of us all, has revealed himself (most recently and
significantly and in a unique way through Jesus Christ), has made it know what his
relationship to us is and has left a Church - a community of believers - to maintain
without fault the essential and everlasting and unchanging truths. But a very clear
distinction must also be made between such basic and divine truths and customs,
practices, common usages and all kinds of genuinely thought to be helpful, even
essential, aids to our salvation brought in through the centuries.
All our efforts in the Church, in national or diocesan initiatives, in parishes, groups
or even by individuals seem to be aimed at those who are already fully committed. Or,
at a stretch, those who are committed but are regarded by the experts to need
‘educating’. We are surrounded by individuals who, starting at the ‘top’, are steeped in
the worship of God, know their theology and their Bible, are experts at the liturgy and
are deeply involved in the practicalities of Church life at all levels. Going, then,
‘downwards’ through those who simply attend because they want to pray, have a gut
feeling it is the right thing to do, those who just use the church for special occasions,
those who do not allow the official Church in any shape or form to impinge on their lives.
All have an equal right to be considered in what the Church is supposed to do:
awaken, support and strengthen the personal relationship of every individual with their
own God. To evangelise - a word which in a fascinating way derives from the old
French, through liturgical Latin right back to ancient Greek and means ‘the bringing of
good news’. Surely the best – even the only – way to do this is to be simply there; to be
seen as a collection of ordinary human beings who happen to believe in similar things
and bond together to help each other in that belief and behaviour towards God and
man.
Instead, ‘believers’ are regarded as being different, being goodies, setting
themselves apart from and even above others. Often, when they show human frailties
or even wickedness, they are branded as hypocrites. Somehow we fail to impress on
the world around us that we are all ‘normal’, all frail human beings who are simply trying
to put into practice a relationship with a God who gives us a purpose, a motive, a
reason for existence.
All this is aggravated by disputes, silly arguments, disagreements about utterly
unimportant details of worship, practice, tradition among members of the Church(es).
Even more so by solemn but unnecessary pronouncement from Church authorities -
such as rules about girl altar servers, or initiatives in worship, translations of texts, new
forms of catechetics which are all acclaimed as the best invention since sliced bread.
The picture presented is so often that we live in another world whereas what we ought
to be showing is that we live in the same world as everyone else but are simply aiming
- in a very wobbly and imperfect way - at another world by using our surroundings,
our circumstances, our opportunities and even our natural skills and inclinations in a
normal and healthy fashion.
The worst thing ever said to me – and said quite often – is “ You are not like a
priest”. Invariably - I hope - it was a comment which was well meant, a compliment.
But it continues to be deeply worrying and depressing. What am I supposed to be like?
Never hiding my priesthood, almost always wearing the dog collar, I simply take the
easiest route by being myself. As a priest, as myself, I tinker with internal combustion
engines, clear drains, keep all sorts of animals, have an interest in football and always
have an eagerness to know about what other people do. I quite unconsciously have as
real an interest in the work of a brain surgeon as I have in what percentage of profit a
retailer can expect on turnover or what the procedure is about the weekly waste
collection, where it goes, how picking up plastic bags can endanger the health of
dustmen. None of these interests interfere with or diminish my essential nature as a
Christian, a Catholic, a priest.
Fr. Gerard Meath was a Domican priest who I would like to think was a friend of
mine for many years. In my first Parish where there was a lovely new church and I
squatted cheerfully in a caravan he used to visit me frequently. On one occasion he
dropped in to find me in a more than usual miserable state complaining that I was not
getting anywhere, was not converting the world – never mind the parish – and that all I
had done of any note that day was to mend an old lady’s alarm clock. With all the
wisdom, experience and seniority which I respected he pointed out that my bit of repair
work was, in fact, a priestly act! Anything I did – he did – was a priestly act because it
was a priest doing it.
In the same way, surely, anything done by a religious person - one with a
relationship with God – is a religious act. Anything done by a Christian, let’s say even a
Catholic, is a Christian and Catholic act. We do not have to be special, put on a
veneer, wear hearts on sleeves. We simply ‘are’ what we are and evangelise, spread
good news, let others know that we are normal and that ‘religion’ is normal.
Think about it; muse on it; put these musings into the context of your own life
and circumstances and decide, once and for all, that the answer to the question:
“Religion?” is either “Yes” or “No”.