Here goes...

In Heathrow airport recently, I saw a small yellow sign, pointing to the 'Multi-Faith Chapel'. Having a little time until my flight left, I wandered in that general direction, round various corridors, through a 'Relaxation Area', with people lying on what looked like sun loungers (only there wasn't any sun), until I found the centre of religious life in the vast sea of humanity known as Terminal 4. It was a small, square, rather drab room with not much in it. A table in one corner held a number of books: various copies of the Qu'ran, some Islamic tracts, a scruffy copy of the New Testament in Polish, a Gideon Bible and a few other assorted religious texts. A small cabinet had some prayer mats, there was a sign telling you the direction of Mecca and a distinctly scratched table which looked like it had been bought from a car boot sale, with a laminated sign saying 'Table/Altar for Christian use' containing some copies of the Bible. The walls were bare exc...

Martin Luther on Prayer: But why should we make our prayers known to God? Doesn't he already know them, even before we begin to pray? Doesn't he himself come to us first, inspiring us to pray? Answer: St. Paul says this to teach us what a righteous prayer should be. Namely, that it should not be thrust into the wind, prayed onto some doubtful excursion, as those who do not consider whether God hears it or not, always remaining uncertain--in fact they think they will not be heard. That, however, is neither to pray nor to ask, but instead is to test and mock God. For, if someone asked me for a pfennig, but did not believe or think that I would actually give him one, then I would not listen. I would think he is mocking me, and is not being serious. Now then, how much more will God not listen to such howling! A prayer should be made known to God, that is, we should not doubt that God hears us and that it comes to his attention, we should be assured that they reach him. If we do ...

Just had an email from a friend in Egypt. Egypt always seems to steer where the Arab world goes, so what happens these is important for the world - some stinging criticism of the west here too... Dear friends, Egypt needs your help to complete the revolution it began last year. It was started by truly pro-democratic forces that were tired of oppression and corruption; the result was the downfall of Mubarak. Unfortunately the Islamists jumped on the bandwagon when they saw the uprising beginning to succeed. In the confusion they broke open many jails to release their and Hamas' members. Because of their intimidating use of religion and the manipulative economic tactics they use to buy votes, they "won" the presidency by the slimmest of margins (just over 50%). Unfortunately it seems almost certain that Egypt's top military leaders at that time cut a deal with the Islamists and handed them the presidency in return for not being held accountable for their own corr...

Euro 2012 has been growing on me. I hate the adverts with fake fans waving flags, corporate sponsors pretending to like football, The facepaints, the Mexican Waves - and Ireland’s footballers’ (but not the fans’) performances have been disappointing. On the whole, however, it has been pretty good so far. But there is one thing I have particularly enjoyed – the fact that no-one can buy this tournament. If you have read my previous blog, you will be aware of my depressed state about the state and future of football. Clubs who got rich by winning the lottery, instead of long-term hard work and careful management won the big prizes. Cardiff have had to change their shirt colours because their new Malaysian owners think red is a lucky colour and the Chinese prefer dragons to bluebirds. The thing I really like about the Euros is that no-one can buy the cup. Money is irrelevant in this competition. Players play for teams not because they are paid a fortune, but because it is their count...

Ever since Man City won the Premier League and Chelsea won the Champions League I have felt rather depressed about the state and future of football. I’ve have fired off the odd frustrated tweet about how Money has finally won the day, but usually get messages back accusing me of sour grapes because Man United didn’t win anything this season. 140 characters is not enough to mount an argument, so this is to explain my point. It’s not that I don’t like them. I actually quite like watching Man City play. Mancini, Kompany etc. have been truly gracious in victory (Chelsea are a different story, but I won’t go there!). And for the umpteenth time, yes of course I know Man United have spent a lot of money in recent years. It is impossible to win anything big in football these days without spending money. The point however is how that money has been acquired and the degree to which that money swings the ability to win trophies. The difference between Man City & Chelsea and all the other ...

Last weekend, there was a bit of discussion around wearing the cross as a public demonstration of Christian faith. Cardinal Keith O'Brien suggests  Christians should openly wear a cross as a symbol of their belief. Giles Fraser , however perfers the empty tomb as a symbol (interesting - what would an empty tomb lapel badge look like?). For him, the cross is a symbol of torture and the domestication of Christianity to empire. To my mind, both miss the point about the way the cross works as a Christian symbol. Originally it was pagans who mocked Christians with the accusation that their leader had been executed on a cross - a form of execution reserved mainly for slaves and criminals - those to be humiliated. The cross was the asymbol of defeat and shame with which Christians were taunted. And yet before long, those very Christians turned the accusation on its head by decorating their churches and signing themselves with the cross with a delicious touch ...

It’s taken me a while, but I’ve been thinking a bit about David Cameron’s recent foray into religion. It received a bit of a mixed reaction from all sides, including the usual rants from the atheists, but also perhaps a surprisingly lukewarm response from Christian voices. Some liked his reminder of our Christian heritage, some thought it was unrealistic given the levels of secularism we now have, some felt his vision of Christianity was too moralistic. I also read a piece by George Monbiot recently in the Guardian about what he called “The great political conflict of our age – between neocons and the millionaires and corporations they support on one side, and social justice campaigners and environmentalists on the other. ” and a lightbulb went on in my mind connecting the two pieces. David Cameron’s version of Christian faith is one of standards, morality, maintaining order and uprightnesss. It is typical of a more right-of-centre appreciation of religion for bringing order an...