Dust extractor cyclone

Having watched a number of videos about home-made cyclones I decided it was time to invest in one now I have a table saw. The amount of sawdust it produces and the frequency with which my shop vacuum filter clogs meant I needed to do something.

So I ordered some parts from Amazon and waited for delivery. Disappointingly the cyclone part of the kit isn't coming for a couple of weeks, so I'm still emptying and unclogging the vacuum.

Eventually I was looking around the garage and noticed two old buckets. One had tile adhesive in it and one I think was paint. I use them for rubbish but it's time to repurpose them. I also had a bit of waste pipe.Now to get all Heath-Robinson and see if these two old buckets would do the job. Neither had a lid so I cut a ring from 9mm mdf and used a few dabs of CA glue to stick it to the smaller bucket and then some silicone sealant to make sure it was airtight.

I used the middle of the ring to make the top hose connection, primarily because the first hole I cut was too big! The side connection was another bit of pipe secured with a small bit of wood screwed through the pipe and the wall of the bucket. Again lots of silicone to seal.

Because I didn't have a lid for the bottom bucket I just used some broad black insulating tape to the strap the two together. The tape round the top was to hold the mdf in place. An old hose from another vacuum cleaner and the thing was built.

To test it I emptied the contents of the cleaner on the floor. The filter was already clogging up although I'd cleaned it a few hours previously.

Amazingly it worked! I didn't think the buckets were big enough to create a separator but they did. When I opened the vacuum cleaner there wasn't a hint of sawdust in it at all. Because of the tape I can't open the cyclone, or rather can't be bothered to open it, but all the use must be in there.

It's all very exciting and possibly the most exciting thing I've ever made.

What a Native American Prayer taught me about my own spirituality

I did a funeral the other day for someone who was described as being very spiritual but not in a traditional Christian way. I often hear variations on this description, often accompanied with some sort of apology for some reason. The apology is probably because I'm an ordained minister and therefore represent orthodox spirituality to them (if only they knew me better!).

I also think that for many people they actually don't associate church with spirituality but rather religion, which is totally different in their eyes. To be honest, sometimes they might be right.

In the preparation for the service I'd been asked to look at finding a way to introduce a prayer I regularly use (God be in my head and in my understanding...) in a way that allowed the people their to express their own spirituality and that of the deceased person. For them kindness or goodness would be more appropriate than "God". In thinking about that I'd come up with a form of words that meant I could sill say the prayer as it is and yet make room for people to connect with it as they wished. I often do this with the Lord's Prayer by offering an invitation to join in saying it but not making it an obligation if someone is not comfortable doing so. It's a simple act of pastoral kindness in my view and not some sort of denial of my faith!

So, having sorted out the prayer I was taken a bit by surprise by the Native American prayer that was read by someone at the service. It's called "The Great Spirit Prayer" and here are the words:

Oh, Great Spirit, whose voice I hear in the wind, whose breath gives life to all the world. Hear me; I need your strength and wisdom. Let me walk in beauty, and make my eyes ever behold the red and purple sunset. Make my hands respect the things you have made and my ears sharp to hear your voice. Make me wise so that I may understand the things you have taught my people. Help me to remain calm and strong in the face of all that comes towards me. Let me learn the lessons you have hidden in every leaf and rock. Help me seek pure thoughts and act with the intention of helping others. Help me find compassion without empathy overwhelming me. I seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy, Myself. Make me always ready to come to you with clean hands and straight eyes. So when life fades, as the fading sunset, my spirit may come to you without shame.

What struck me most about this prayer is the humility it expresses. This isn't the kind of prayer you might hear most Christians utter as they plead for their finances or job prospects. It's not what you'll hear in some churches as calls for revival or heavenly interventions are made. But as Paul did with the monument to an unknown God, if you substitute "Lord our God", for "Great Spirit" it is a prayer that we can say. Yes there ay be odd elements that we might be careful about (lessons you have hidden in every leaf and rock), but overall it expresses a simplicity of faith that I fear we have somehow lost.

Our problem is that we've disconnected ourselves and our faith from the world around us and reduced it to a form of words we must articulate and not a life we are called to live. The idea of living in harmony with our environment s not some New Age philosophy but surely an expression of our place in a created order for which we have responsibility.

And who wouldn't want to act from a pure heart and not with anger?

Our selfishness has robbed us of being able to walk humbly with our God. We'd rather agonise over the rights and wrongs of dropping £1 in the hand of a homeless person than simply doing it as an act of pure heart seeking to help others.

The downside of evangelicalism is that we've pursued an orthodoxy that protects the gospel from corruption, but in so doing we've limited its expression through the simplicity of a life lived in relationship with the God who loves us and misses us.

Rolling Tool Cabinet Completed

Barring a few adjustments (I managed to fit the drawer pulls unevenly because I didn't pay enough attention to making the jig properly), the rolling cabinet is finished.

The original top section was built some time ago. It might even have been 10 years ago! It has 5 drawers that lock when the tote drops in at the back. I haven't bothered building a locking mechanism for the bottom half. It just didn't seem worth there effort and I rarely bother with the closing up the top box anyway. It was in the original design I saw in a magazine so I built it that way.

I've since fixed the drawer pulls and it looks nice and functional. I'm in the process of making some drawer dividers to help organise stuff when I start filling it up. The whole point of making this thing was to try and get my tools sorted. I'm forever trying to remember which tool box/caddy/tote/box they are in. Hopefully this will bring many of them together and I'll only have to search through one box to find most things.

Quite what I'll do with the other tool boxes I don't know. I'm sure I'll find a use for them. Either that or give them away!

This is the first time I've used ball-bearing style drawer slides. Working out how to install them wasn't complicated. I might even change them for full-extension versions at some point. That's assuming there's enough space to do that. I don't fancy making new drawers just to accommodate new slides.

Context please! 1 Cor 15:33 is not about evangelism.

I was listening to a Christian Radio Station in the car as I do from time to time. I don't listen to any radio station a lot because they're all a bit repetitious and I get bored with the same play lists, ads, and in Christian broadcasting-appeals for support!

Anyway, I tuned in on a few days last week and one item frustrated me immensely. Not entirely the fault of the presenter I hasten to add, although he was guilty of nudging the responses in a particular direction and during the time I was listening no-one picked that up.

So here's the thing in question. He quoted 1Cor.15:33 "Do not be misled: 'Bad company corrupts good character'". To a man, and woman, all the responses I heard assumed that the 'bad company' in question referred to those who do not share a Christian faith. But is that Paul's point?

Read the verse in its context and it would appear that Paul is a long way from talking about evangelism here. The argument is about the resurrection and those who deny it. As with much of the letter, Paul is writing to address issues within the church. Paul's 'bad company' would seem to be in the Christian community not outside of it.

All those who sent a text to point out the importance of sharing our faith are right, but that's not what they should have been reflecting upon. The real question we might want to address is: "Are we good or bad company in the church?"

That's the importance of context.

Mobilising the Table Saw Bench

This is not original to me. I saw it on the New Yankee Workshop, and Norm got it from some set-building place he visited. It works well.

Wheels in the "down" position

 The wheels are mounted on the rail that is hinged to the lower side rail.

A block is hinged to the leg. This block locks the wheels in the down position so that the bench can be wheeled around the workshop.

Wheels up!

In the second picture the wheels are unlocked and the bench sits on the floor. You can just see the wheel rail angled up under the block.

To move the bench you simply lift it at the side and the wheels drop down to the floor, the side blocks swing towards the leg and then the wheel rail comes up under the block and they lock in the down position.

To set the bench down on the floor you simply pull on the rope and that pulse the blocks inwards, allowing the wheels to flip up and the legs to sit on the floor.

Clever!

I didn't follow Norm's plan exactly (mainly because I didn't remember all the details), so my version is maybe not quite as robust and I may decide later to revisit it and improve it. For now it seems to work okay.

Table Saw Bench

So, having taken the plunge and bought a table saw I set about building a workstation for it. I could have bought a stand, but I want to be able to wheel it around the garage so that I can put it out of the way when I'm not using it. It also gives me a chance to try out the saw and make something.

The saw I chose was a Bosch GTS10J2 for those who might be interested. I'd looked at quite a few cheaper machines, but in the end decided that spending more was probably a wise move and hopefully this machine will last a long time. It's one definite advantage over many of the cheaper ones I looked at is that the fence is full length and locks at both the front and the back of there table.

It's a really nice machine as far as I can tell and the cutting I've done so far has been as good as I hoped.

My bench design is quite simple. I wanted something that would allow me to use the side extension on the saw and offer a bit of extra surface to the left (the extension is on the right hand side). It would also offer some storage facility that can be developed later. Maybe I'll turn it into a place to keep power tools. Initially I thought I'd build it so that the table was proud of the left hand side surface, but after building it I think flush is better, so I'll need to shim the top. Not a big issue.

I started by ripping all the pieces for the legs and rails. As you can see I used some 18mm ply that I'd been using for my makeshift saw table (that's why there are some grooves in it). The legs are 75mm square and the rails are also 75mm. Each leg is made of two pieces glued and screwed together.

Having made up the legs I attached the rails and added a couple of cross braces for rigidity. I used a small block to position the lower rail and then the upper rail was square to the top of the short leg.

I then added the vertical supports of the side table and an 18mm ply shelf for the table saw to sit on. Using a left over piece of ply. I checked the level with the saw and a 5mm shim was all that was needed to level things up.

I'll make a proper side top and maybe add a shelf at the bottom later. I've also got an ingenious idea for the rolling base that I saw in an episode of the New Yankee Workshop.

As for now, I'm pretty pleased with how it's turned out. There's something immensely satisfying when things go well. I look forward to many a happy hour using this little machine and experimenting with what I can do now I've got it.

Next stop: a bigger workshop so I can have a lathe too!!

Woodwork projects: Rolling tool chest

I haven't done many woodwork projects for ages even though I've had several ideas of things I want to make. One of those things was a rolling base for the tool chest I built years ago from scrap ply left over from a blanket box I made.

I've finally got around  to making a start and I used my circular saw and saw board on a makeshift saw table to cut the main pieces to size. I mention this because I was still wondering about getting a table saw, but didn't think I could justify it. Well, cutting all the pieces for the cabinet and realising just how hard I was making it for myself pushed me over the edge and I bought a table saw. Too late for the cabinet project, but I got one and have been in the process of building a bench for it (more of that in another post).

I started off by making a simple cabinet. No. fancy joints, just simple rebates. The sides are 18mm ply and the back is 9mm.

The drawers are made from 12mm ply with 5mm ply bases. There are 7 in total, 3 deep and 4 shallow. The 12mm ply was a little bowed and it gave me all sorts of bother making the drawers. But I got there in the end. Each drawer will be fitted with slides that should make opening and closing the drawers nice and Smooth. They will be finished off with an 18mm face which hopefully will agrees some of the bowing in the 12mm ply fronts. I may have to add some fixed central dividers to pull int the backs too. We shall have to see.


I've also used some of the scrap material to make some trays, experimenting with different sizes. I'm also going to make an adjustable system for at least one of the smaller drawers.

The cabinet will be fitted with castors to make it mobile.

At the moment it's on hold, awaiting me buying some castors, a delivery of the fitting for the drawer slides and while I make a bench for my newly acquired table saw!

Why we marched

I'm not sure I would have gone on my own, but Anne prompted a conversation and we ended up joining the march for a "Peoples Vote" on Saturday. The estimates range from 500-700 thousand people protesting peacefully for a vote on the final deal for leaving the EU.

From the banners and placards you got the feeling that some of those who were there simply wanted to be able to express an opinion via a vote on the final deal, whatever that might be. For others, like me, it was about wanting to say that a vote needed to include the option to ditch the whole process and remain a member of the European Community.

Of course someone is bound to say, "We had a vote, get over it, you lost." But had the vote gone the other way there is every likelihood that the leavers would still be campaigning and would not have given up the fight so easily (except for those for whom is would be politically expedient to do so). Add to that the absurd assertion that another vote is an affront to democracy and you wonder why we every bother having general elections every five years if a single vote determines an everlasting position. As one banner put it: "When is less voting more democratic?" I'd like at least one journalist to ask that question of the likes of Nigel Farage and Theresa May.

But these are not the only reasons we joined the crowd on Saturday. My greatest regret over the referendum was the lack of a positive voice for the EU. I didn't hear a single MP or MEP (where were they during the debate?) speak positively of all the benefits that the EU had brought. Neither did I hear an MP accept responsibility for successive governments failing to implement EU regulations on things like migration while Leavers and leave-supporting newspapers continued to tell the public that it was the fault of unseen and unaccountable Eurocrats in Brussels.

So we wanted to say that we still believe that being in the EU is far better, offers a brighter future and greater opportunities than the nebulous "Global Britain" concept being thrown around. We wanted to say to future generations that we tried our best, that we did something, even if we still end up leaving.

For the love of playing tennis!

A moment of magic caught on camera!

In case you didn't see it, that's a sliced backhand, half-volley winner!

Under Stairs Storage

When we first moved into the house we needed to do something with the space under the stairs, but I wasn't quite sure what to do. We had an old chest of drawers, so I built some storage around it and spent the next few years thinking about how best to finish it off. Well, earlier this year I came across a storage solution by Clever Closet.

Here's the end product:

There are three large storage drawers and a double door cupboard. What you lose in physical space (the framework takes up space and the drawers are obviously smaller than the total volume of the space) you gain in organised space.

This is the empty space before the installation. What you can't see is the gas meter at the high end of the space. A small trim needed to be removed from under the sloping woodwork and the carpet needed to be trimmed back to a straight line.

After that it was a process of building and installing the unit and doors. The fitter was excellent. Me being me, I was very curious about the build and how it all would fit together. The angle of the staircase can vary from house to house as regulations and building practices have changed.

The system is modular, and if you look closely at the framework you might be able to see a series of predrilled holes in the sloping part the framework and the end panel. Each hole represents one degree of angle and enables the framework to be assembled as near to the angle of the staircase as possible. Any small variation is covered by the trim.

Once the frame is in and levelled up using the adjustable feet the drawers get added and the drawer fronts, doors and trim are added to give the finished look.

The whole job took about four hours and everything thing has a primer/undercoat finish ready for a final finish. Even like this it looks good and actually brightens the hall!

The cost was around £1000, but it's well worth it for the end product.

Am I in trouble over plastic roads?

Apparently I might have dropped my council in it as a result of my innocent enquiry about plastic roads. I wrote a short email to my local representatives to ask whether the council had looked at the use of waste plastic additives in road surfacing and in their reply I was told that:

Several trials around the Country have taken place and the feedback we’ve received so far is that the material has failed due to various such as temperature issues with the mixing of the addictive.  Therefore we’ve decided to hold fire and continue to monitor for further developments.  We do not want to waste tax payers monies on a treatment that may have a shortened design life.

I'm guessing that something is missing between "various" and "such as", but that's how it came. Well, further investigation was required, so I did a search of the internet and couldn't find any related research about failure rates in asphalt using plastic additives. The obvious next step for me was to ask the company about it, and they were let's say surprised.

Reading the LA's response carefully, it seems to imply that the problem isn't with the additive but with the production process. I understand the local authority's need to be cautious, but where's the evidence for failure? If it's the process, then who is monitoring the process in order to get it right? It would be nice if they had responded with some data. All the research I've been able to read points to longer lifetimes for these surfaces not shorter ones. Polymer modified bitumen has been around for some time, but using plastic waste diverted from landfill and recovered from the oceans is new. So the process ought to be within the grasp of industry.

20M tonnes of asphalt is produced in the UK each year and using waste plastic as an additive could recycle 60,000 tonnes of waste that currently goes into landfill. So I think it must be worth pursuing this technology and if there is an issue, then let's see the evidence.

Plastic Roads

Screenshot from the Macrebur website

I often wonder if studying Environmental Science in the late seventies was a decade or two too early. Were we ahead of the curve in a world that was only just waking up to some of the realities of what we were doing to our environment? Perhaps it's still true given that we have an incumbent in the White House who denies climate change, has relaxed EPA targets for the coal industry and apparently would prefer fossil fuels rather than have a wind farm obscure his view across a golf course.

Anyway, I still consider environmental stuff to be an area of interest, and it's clearly something that should concern us all. I keep an eye on the developments of ocean clean-up programmes, and would one-day love to build a near-zero carbon footprint house. Personally I'd like to see all new build housing have solar panels and battery storage, rainwater collection and recycling. Although I've never investigated it, I wonder if that's part of the reason some new developments have ponds and lakes so that rather than sending all the rainwater into the sewer system, it diverts to a water feature.

Back to the point, plastic roads. While we look to reduce the amount of unnecessary plastic used in our day-to-day lives, we also need to think about what to do with the accumulated waste, and that's where plastic roads come into the picture. Some time ago I saw a short news item about a company that was investing in and developing the use of plastic waste as an additive for road surfacing. A recent article in the Guardian reminded me of this and I did a quick search for the company.

It's working. Road surfaces are being laid across the country using a pelletised form of recycled plastic as part of the mix. Not only is this using waste, it's also potentially extending the life of the road surface and of course reducing the usage of raw materials. You can read more about it on the company's website: Macrebur.

I've written to my local councillors to see if my council is exploring the idea and I hope they either are or will be doing so.

Why you can't hit a tennis serve straight down into the opposite service box

Okay, so it's not quite true, but the question is where does your contact point need to be if you could hit down on your serve. All the coaches I know teach an upward strike on the ball. That's not the same as hitting up through the ball, rather it's striking the ball with an upward motion, imparting topspin. The flight of the ball is upward initially but it soon sets to drop towards the service box.

A friend of mine who also plays tennis was telling me the other day that his coach claims you can hit down and attempted to demonstrate doing so. My friend was not convinced that he was in fact hitting down.

Anecdotally I've heard you need to be 6'10" (2.08m) to get near hitting down, so I decided to do a bit of maths to see if I could work out where the contact point needed to be to hit your serve straight down into the service box. I decided to make some assumptions to make the maths a bit easier, and there are some things that to be honest would be too time consuming to include.

So, here we go.

The distance from the base line to the service line (BL to SL) is 18.3m. The net is 0.9m tall. The SL is 6.4m form the net.

A tennis ball is an average of 6.7cm in diameter. For the ball to miss the net by 1cm, the centre of the ball has to be 4.35cm above the net. That means the height from the ground to the centre of the ball is 0.945m. Using some simple trigonometry, the tangent of the angle at the net is 6.4/0.944 (6.77). If the distance from the BL to SL is 18.3m then by using Tan we can calculate the height of the contact point above the BL (18.3/6.77)=2.7m.

So, a ball hit down from 2.7m and following a straight line would miss the net and hit the opposite service line. But there's a snag. Well a few snags actually. First, there's gravity, then there's drag, and of course there's the speed at which the ball is struck. There's also spin that will affect how the ball moves through the air.

Let's deal with gravity first. Gravity will cause the ball to drop as it travels through the air. Gravity causes an object to fall at 9.8m/s². So, from 2.7m it would take approx. 0.62secs to fall to the height of the net. But it's not simply being stopped, so that doesn't really help!

The distance from the contact point (2.7m above B/L) to the net along a straight line is 12.02m. If you hit a serve at 160km/h (100mph), it would travel that distance in 0.27secs. So, how far does the ball fall under gravity in 0.27secs? Well there's a formula for that:

d=gt²/2

That works out at 0.36m. That suggests that a ball hit at 160km/h in a straight line towards the opposite S/L will not clear the net!

At its simplest, moving the contact point up by 0.36m would mean the ball would clear the net, and because it continues to fall, it will land inside the service box. So now we have a contact point at 3.06m (10'3").

Drag will slow the ball down as it flies through the air. From what I've read, and again without lots of verified data, it seems as though the accepted impact is that by the time the ball reaches the S/L it has probably slowed down by 60%. As the ball slows down, the impact of gravity will be more significant. In other words it will drop further for each unit of horizontal distance it travels as it decelerates.

If you stayed with me so far (and remember we're trying to keep this as simple as we can), let's assume that the ball slows down at an even rate as it travels. Using those simple assumptions, deceleration will allow the ball to drop 0.045m. Again, keeping things simple, that moves our contact point to 3.11m (10'5").

I'm 6'3" and wth my arm fully extended the sweet spot of my racquet is not high enough to reach that point and create the correct angle. With my normal service action I usually leave the ground, so it's probable that I get my racquet high enough, but only just, to do this, and I need to hit the ball at 100mph to do so! What happens if you slow the serve down to say 80mph? Well I could do the maths, but I'm not going to. The obvious answer is the contact point will need to move higher to compensate. If everything is directly proportional then that could be as much as another 2' of height (60cm). In other words, you'd need to be 8' tall!

The simple conclusion to all of this is that when your coach tells you that you need to strike up through the ball, then trust him/her. They ay not do the maths, but the understand tennis!!

When faith becomes a platitude

At the end of May I wrote this post in the wake of yet another school shooting in America. I could have written it as a response to the ever increasing knife attacks in London. The only difference is that in the US "prayers and thoughts' get wheeled out as if that's sufficient. That's what bothers me.

I'm angry. Angry and frustrated. I'm angry and frustrated because yet another school shooting has occurred in America and more lives have been lost. But that alone is not all that is winding me up today. It's also the response.

President Trump offers his prayers, a good and proper thing to do, but he can do more. He has the power and authority to create a climate for change. To tell people that it must stop, that more guns are surely not the solution. To tell them that even if they have a constitutional right to bear arms then they need to give up that right for the sake of the nation and in the name of sanity.

Now I know that there are those who profess a faith and subscribe to the pro-gun lobby. I also know that there are those who will tell me that I'm not an American, I don't live in America and it's none of my business. Okay, I understand that, but I'm going to speak anyway because there's more a stake here than national political and identity.

Our faith is being undermined when powerful people invoke prayer without action as a sufficient response. Prayer is not a political tool. Jesus said some interesting things about faith that lacks action. For example, in Matthew 25 we read several parables that follow similar themes. There are the wise and foolish virgins (5 are prepared, 5 are not), the 'talents' or bags of gold and the sheep and goats-a parable about judgement. It is in this last parable that Jesus speaks about the righteous who act 'For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I needed clothes and you clothed me...' If you know the passage, you know that their action wasn't predicated on who was hungry or thirsty, they simply responded with action to the things they saw. The unrighteous see the same things but do nothing.

So why this passage? Well in the first place I'm not about to use it to condemn or judge people. That's not the point. The point is simple. Faith demands action. It simply cannot stand by. It cannot be a platitude.

The gospel remains a powerful message, not only about how we relate to God but also about our responsibility in the world. It has something to say about poverty, about homelessness, about guns and violence, about economics and exploitation, about refugees.

Yes, I'm still angry that powerful people dispense faith without using their power to make a difference.

What wins a tennis match?

With Wimbledon upon us it's time to dust of that old racquet at the back the cupboard and venture out  onto the tarmac of the local park courts. As you sit patiently waiting for someone to finish and the court to become free you begin to imagine hitting glorious forehands and backhands in between screaming aces and delicate drop volleys. The reality of course is rather different as you chase balls around liked a crazed puppy and regularly have to leave the court to fish the ball out of the undergrowth where it disappeared as you skied one over the fence. It's not as easy as it looks on TV.

Tennis is actually a very technical game and to do it well takes skill and practice. A millimetre out at your point of contact with the ball can make a 1.5m difference by the time it lands at the other end of the court, if in fact in lands in the court at all! But once you've learnt the basics and you can serve the ball into the court and rally it can be a lot of fun, and as you develop your skills you will discover the pleasure of hitting the ocassional winner cross-court or down the line as they say. But how many points do you need to win by hitting outright winners? And how many points do you need to win over the course of a match in order to win the match?

Statistically it's surprisingly fewer than you might think. In fact the ATP No 1 over the last 20 odd years usually averages around 55% over the course of a season. Some matches come down to a single point, and there are times when the winner of the match actually wins fewer points than the loser. It's all to do with the way the scoring system works. Whether you win a game "to love" or after four or five deuces doesn't matter when it comes to winning games. It's those points that decide games that are the most important ones to win.

Here's another interesting statistic. Hitting glorious winners is great, but how many points on average are decided by winners? I took a quick look at the stats for three matches at Wimbledon. Here's the data:

Look at the winners as a percentage of total points won. 36, 29 and 14%. A third or fewer of the total points won come from outright winners. So when your coach tells (as mine constantly does) that you need to reduce your error count, they might just be right! There simple truth is that more points are won by forcing an error from your opponent than by hitting winners. It's not a big sample, but it is a pattern most tennis players and coaches will have seen over and over again. 

If this is the case at the highest level of the game then how much more true is it at club and social level? Keeping the ball in play, making fewer errors will probably win you more points and more games and therefore more matches.

On Players and Officials

You may have seen this series of images. It's appeared on Twitter and Facebook, posted usually by rugby fans, but not exclusively.

It's a bit disingenuous, in my opinion, to use this particular set of images to highlight the differences between player-offical relationships in the two sports. We all know that footballers surround the referee and argue and abuse the officials over decisions. And yes, rugby is different. Players know that there are sanctions that will be applied if they argue or suggest the referee isn't doing their job properly or fairly. Not so in football. Perhaps that's part of the problem.

My issue with the pictures is that I'm pretty sure Chris Robshaw, for example, isn't shaking Nigel Owens hand because he's just given a decision against England, and that Cristiano Ronaldo isn't arguing with the referee because the game has finished. So we have two different contexts, and setting them against each other doesn't help the argument that there needs to be more respect and self-discipline in football, and that it could learn from rugby.

But rugby is far from pure and saintly. Let's not forget that. More worryingly is that some players are beginning to adopt the worst traits of football when it comes to their relationship with officials.

Something else that needs discussing and addressing is not just the question of role models and how the antics of high profile footballers impacts younger players, but what those younger plays are being taught. Martin Keown was talking some time ago on the BBC about being coached to surround the referee and one wonders whether young players are taught to throw themselves to the ground at the slightest of contacts in order to win penalties and free kicks. Surely such play-acting should never be coached.

VAR ought to be helping officials make better decisions, but it also ought to be letting players know that they will be seen and sanctioned for their actions. It might mean a lot more yellow and red cards are shown for a while, but in the end perhaps some of the simulation we've seen and some of the hostility too will be removed from the game. Perhaps, if a player is guilty of abusing an official or diving or some other form of attempted deception, then it's not they that should spend 10 minutes off the field in a "sin-bin" style approach, but their team's goalkeeper. It might make them think twice about shouting into the face of a referee or rolling around in agony when accidentally stepped on by an opponent (mentioning no names of expensive Brazilian talent).

I'm still here: Me and the Missional Movement

Making the decision to re-read a book can remind you of things once influential in shaping your thinking but largely forgotten or subsumed in other trains of thought. I ought to re-read far more than I do on that basis! Anyway, I started to re-read something and it reminded of me of why I think the way I do about church, mission and community.

Ever since I wrote a rather lengthy, and somewhat pretentious essay about the commissioning statements of Jesus and the Early Church, I've been asking questions about the kingdom, mission and the church. It finally crystallised with the emergence of the language of the missional community. As I tried to figure why, if it was the heart of the church's reason for existing, evangelism was so hard? Was it just down to the spiritual battle against the forces of darkness, or was it because somehow we'd lost the plot and prioritised the 'winning of souls' in a way that skewed the role of the church.

Suddenly the vocabulary of the missional movement gave me a way to both understand and express what I was feeling. The church wasn't here to lead a movement but to follow one. We weren't on a mission as much as we were in partnership with the God of mission. It was his mission, not ours.

That leads us the question "What does that mission look like in my community?" If the kingdom of God is among the people with whom I spend my time, how do I alert them to that reality? How do I stop trying to turn everything I do into a precursor for evangelistic engagement?

Well, I'm struggling to answer some, if not all of those questions, but I find myself every so often involved in seeing glimpses of what the rule of God means in the everyday interactions of my life. It usually comes as I sit and talk with people and they share their struggles and ask me what I think. One lesson I learned at college from a long serving minister was never give advice. If it works, they become dependent upon you, if it doesn't they blame you. So the best course of action is to explore ideas with them. I've had two or three of these encounters recently.

I don't carry a sign or a card identifying myself as some sort of life coach or counsellor or guru. I'm just me. I listen and more often think 'what am I supposed to say to that?' I try to reflect things back and somehow to allow the kingdom of God to reveal itself. I was once described as being ruthlessly committed to grace, and I think that still stands.

Grace changes everything. The unfolding story of the bible is of God's desire to be with his people. To share daily life with his creation. The tabernacle has long been a wonderful example to me of how far God will go to be at the heart of the community of his people. He does this not by providing an escape route but by making it possible for him to dwell amongst the people he loves. The tents and screens have less to do with keeping people at bay and more to do with God figuring out how to live amongst them without destroying them. Oh, and by the way, that's not the church, it's much, much wider than that. To equate the church with the kingdom is to miss the point almost entirely of the narrative of scripture.

So I try to be 'grace'. I can't think of a verb that does the idea justice. Gracious, graceful, just don't cut it. Perhaps grace-filled is the closest. I try to be the kingdom not just preach the kingdom. It doesn't always work. I'm trying to partner with God by living as best I can in the midst of a community. I guess we'd call that incarnational and I guess it's what Jesus did and what he calls us to continue to do in his name.

Russell Brand and the kingdom of heaven

I read with increasing interest and fascination a recent article (Oct 17) about Russell Brand's encounter with faith and spirituality, born out of journey form addiction to sobriety. As many evangelicals might rush to try and work out if they can now call him a Christian or not, I was much more interested in his journey and the reflections and observations he was making about the teaching of Jesus the role spirituality can have in the rehabilitation process through which every recovering addict must go if they are to get free of their addiction.

Brand is on a spiritual journey, that much is pretty obvious, but it's some of his observations that caught my eye. Asking questions about what the realised kingdom looks like for a world crippled by addiction to superficial fulfilment; that the purpose of religion is "love and connection"; the relationship between forgiveness and being forgiven and the impossibility of redemption until you are willing to forgive and let go. So many fascinating things.

Then I got to thinking about the church and it's preoccupation at times with sound doctrine rather than practical outworking of the gospel. How many times did I hear the cry, "What we want/need in this church is good, sound Biblical teaching." When what was actually needed was a simple attempt to try and live out the values and expectation of the kingdom. Russell Brand picks this up when he comments about Jesus telling the rich young ruler to give up all he has and follow him. 

He references Jesus’ command to the rich young ruler in Matthew 19 who asks, “What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” Brand says, referencing Christ’s response, “Give away all your possessions and follow me—that’s a pretty radical thing.”
Brand says the reason why this idea is so radical is because it strikes at the core of the values so many people secretly hold: that money and materialism can cure our unhappiness. “I think the reason that the economic arguments Christ offered are not promoted is because they are deeply at odds with the way we live,” he explains.
Instead of focusing on unhealthy patterns centered on self-fulfillment, the message of the Gospel offers an alternative: caring for others and helping those in need.

A difficult passage for many a middle-class, house-owning, financial security seeking, wise-stewardship leaning congregation. It's not that we don't want to be fully devoted followers of Jesus, we just can't afford to go that far! And yes, I understand that there is a specific application in this passage, but let's not allow ourselves to excuse ourselves from the possibility that our discipleship might be more costly that we'd like to think.

There's something wonderfully simple about the kingdom when you boil it down to love and connection. It's not perfect, it's not polished, it's not about excellence. It's not about providing the best, loudest, most technologically clever experience of worship. It's about being something so much more than such superficial thinking. And yes, it is superficial. Going to a worship event doesn't have to be better than a rock concert. 

My relationship with the institution and practice of church is, to be honest, non-existent these days. I don't go, I don't want to go! I'm busy coaching on a Sunday and even if I could move it all to Saturday I'm not I would suddenly feel a deep desire to wander back into the pattern I left behind 6 years ago.

But the kingdom still bothers me. The implications of what Jesus taught still cut through the busyness that surrounds me. I might not be concerned about filling the church, but populating the kingdom still sits on my agenda.

As yet another mega-church leader faces allegations about their behaviour I wonder if the drive to succeed, to be excellent in all we do, is a route to power that ultimately demands a high price from us.  Is the church too corporate, to reflective of the world's values and less expressive of the values of the kingdom?

I'm not sure where the answer lies. Maybe we need to stop, sit at the feet of Jesus and listen.

It's midday and my alarm reminding of that fact has just gone off. It's time to say the Lord's Prayer. That's why the alarm is set, to remind me stop each day. Some days I simply say the prayer, somedays I'm in the middle of trying to drill a forehand winner down the line, some days I take a little more time to reflect on the words. Maybe today is a more reflective day.

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 and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who have trespassed against us. Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For yours is the kingdom, the power and the glory. Forever and ever. Amen

 

Changing Cars: Going Hybrid

It has to be said that driving a brand new car is an expensive indulgence, but I have to own up to rather liking it! It just so happens that every car I've owned, I've had from new. It's a guilty pleasure.

Anyway, the time has come to change my current car, a Mazda 5, for something new and shiny. Although I like driving new cars I find the process of buying one tedious and stressful. But this time I had a different plan in mind because I wanted to go a little greener and began looking at hybrids. The kind of car I like to drive hasn't been readily available as a hybrid, but with the arrival of the Prius+ a number of years ago, an alternative to the typical MPV became available.
It's not everyone's first choice but it's what we have chosen as our next new car.

Hopefully we'll adapt to the automatic gearbox quickly. It's a bit unnerving to start with when you don't quite know where to put your left foot or what to do with it! But once you get out one the road it's a nice, rather relaxed smooth drive. I actually collected the car just before Easter and immediately drove it to Bedford, Eastbourne and Saffron Walden over the weekend! I think I can safely say I've got used to it now!

The ever increasing complexity of the technology that goes into a modern car continues to dazzle. Even more so with the transition to a hybrid and all the data that is available about when you're running in EV mode, how the power is being generated and distributed, and all sorts of other things. I remember when most new cars came without a radio let alone a satellite navigation system and proximity sensors.

If you're a so-called petrol head then you'll probably find the Prius+ a boring, uninspiring drive. That's fine. I didn't buy it as a performance car, I bought it because it suits our needs, it's a hybrid, and it's comfortable. My first refuel suggested I got around 50mpg, and apparently that's likely to improve over time.

So there we have it. The money is spent, the car is bought and the next 4 or 5 years of driving are sorted out. The Prius is the first step in moving away from simple combustion engines towards something greener. The next change will be Anne's Kia, but quite when and what to, I'm not sure. Perhaps another Toyota in the form of a Yaris hybrid.

In 4 or 5 years time I will probably look at at a PHEV version of something. Technology will have moved on and there may be a much wider choice of such vehicles than there are currently. Maybe we will even go fully electric. I can imagine a day when you pull into a service station and simply swap out the batteries rather than recharge before going on your way. I'm guessing too that battery technology will change and maybe we'll have 1000 mile ranges available by the time ICE's go out of production completely.

In my ideal world we will have a house that has all electricity from renewable energy so that charging our electric vehicles is carbon neutral. Is that so far fetched?

After Vegas: After Parkland: After the next time?

I wrote the following after the Las Vegas shootings but in the end decided not to publish it. No particular reason, it just didn't seem appropriate at the time. I don't know why. But history has repeated itself and once again I fid myself looking in form the outside and asking the same questions. Something in me wants to let those within the USA who want to see change that they are not alone in the world. 

It's been a few days since the awful tragedy in Las Vegas unfolded. Along with many of my fellow UK citizens, I remain somewhat dumbfounded by the continuing reluctance of a civilised society to change its attitude and its legal system with regard to the ownership of guns.

We don't challenge the US from the outside with some sense of superiority. We challenge because we don't understand how a nation can continue to be wedded to the idea that guns, and the apparent ease with which they can be acquired, are not a factor in these events. We listen to the arguments that guns don't kill people, people kill people and shake our heads. Why? Because we can't understand how other cannot see the simple logic that if you put a gun in someone's hand you increase the possibility of it being used.

The sad truth of it is that it appears to those of us on the outside that the nation is so entrenched in its defence of an amendment to its constitution that it's forgotten that it is an amendment and could be changed if there was the political will to do so. That's what amendments are. Changes. Alterations to improve or clarify. And surely by now everyone can see the need for clarification and change.

In 1996 Thomas Hamilton walked into a Primary school in Dunblane and killed 16 children and a teacher. As a nation we said, "No more, this has to change." We changed our law. There were some who raised objections, who questioned the knee-jerk response, but we made the change. We understood that he was unstable. We could have described him as 'sick and demented'. We could have called his actions 'pure evil'. We probably did. But then we acted.

From the outside it appears that the US has decided that the death of children is bearable (Sandy Hook) for the sake of retaining a freedom that looks more like an irresponsibility that it does a right. In the aftermath of what has been reported as the worst mass-killing in recent history, will the same attitude prevail?

Steve Turner, a Christian poet, once wrote:

History repeats itself.
Has to.
No one ever listens.

Is anyone listening now?