Crimperman.org

Scott Zirkel drew this cartoon of Katie as a Jedi to encourage her

A heartwarming story came across my feed today. It tells of how Star Wars fan Katie Goldman (7) came home and asked her mum to change her school water bottle to a pink one because the kids in her class were teasing her about her Star Wars one which was apparently “just for boys”. The story is a wonderful example of humanity at its best and I won’t repeat the whole thing here. Go read it and then come back. As ever in these stories my thoughts turned to my own kids. My son is Katie’s age and my daughter is not far off and whilst not fans like Katie they both like Star Wars.

In case you want to read it later, Katie’s mum blogged about her daughter’s plight, this was read by a fellow Star Wars kid who is now all grown up and is also a girl – Jen Yates. She posted a message to other Star Wars fans to help encourage Katie. They responded and then some, including some of the actors in Clone Wars. Now people are wearing Star Wars clothes to work to support Katie and help negate the bullying.

It’s a great story and is rightly being trumpeted as a victory for all that is good about the Web but here’s what caught my attention. The web, like any other medium, would have failed Katie as it fails many other kids who are bullied had it not been for one thing: somebody acted. Had Katie’s mum said nothing, nothing would have happened. had Jen Yates just read the story, thought “how sad” and then gone back to WoW or whatever else she does with her time, Katie would not be famous or — more importantly — helped. Had the other fans Yates contacted done nothing, Katie would now be taking her pink bottle to school.

Somebody acted. Would you?

I follow someone on Twitter, @artsyhonker who every morning tweets “Good morning! What will you [blank] today?”. The blank is replaced by a different encouragement/question each day. Today’s one was “What will you persist in today?”. I am pretty certain she has already done this one but following the same lines I would like to say to you

Who will you encourage today?

That encouragement might be telling somebody they are doing okay, saying thank you for something they do as part of their job or in the case of Katie Goldman, telling them that they are not alone.

May the force be with you, Katie and all the other Star Wars kids out there.

Recently a phrase I hadn’t heard for a while has popped into my “life stream” again. (By which I mean I’ve heard it a few times recently). It is “the wisdom of the crowd” and it refers (usually) to the way that online forums and social media allows many people to share “wisdom”. Often this will be where one person can ask a question and get several answers with the best one normally floating to the top via some kind of peer review. This review will be a function of the interface or quite often just indicated by contributors saying “I agree with them”.

But are crowds really all that wise?

You can buy these posters from Despair.com

There has existed for some time a series of de-motivator posters which are intended to be a humourous counter to the often cheesy motivation posters that once (and maybe still) adorned office walls. One of my favourites is the one to the right. The caption reads “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups”. Sometimes the wisdom of the crowd is not only found to be lacking but that lack is amplified by being within a crowd. A good example of this, as others have said, is the Facebook cartoon picture chain.

Someone – nobody knows who but best guess is that it started in Greece in November – started a chain by suggesting everyone on Facebook change their profile picture to a cartoon character from their childhood. Not only was this bringing a warm glow of nostalgia to Facebook but – the chain said – it was supporting the NSPCC in its campaign against child abuse. Of course the problem was that not only did NSPCC have no idea about this but that simply changing your picture in no way supported their cause. Many, including myself, advocated also donating to NSPCC. And yet the “wisdom of the crowd” meant that people were copying the status text verbatim and changing their picture without stopping to think if or how this was going to help stop child abuse.

Skip forward a few days and a second chain began going around. This one decried the first chain claiming that the people behind it were in fact a paedophile ring and that this was confirmed on “Tonight’s news”. No link or reference was given to the news item or even which night it was on. And yet again the “wisdom of the crowd” meant people began copying this new status verbatim and swiftly removing their cartoon profile pictures. Once it gained enough traction it was picked up by the Daily Mail and the circle was complete.

So I ask again are crowds all that wise?

All is not lost

To be honest that’s a rhetorical question. The answer is to be found just a day or so later. Despairing as others have at the speed at which particularly the latter chain propagated I was pleasantly surprised to see a number of comments appearing against the “it’s all run by paedophiles” status updates. Suddenly people were asking pertinent questions: “Which news program was this on?”, “Did you actually see it?” for example. Others suggested using well known hoax websites such as Snopes.com. Others highlighted the tell-tale signs that both of the chains were probably not founded on any real truth. Slowly, much slower than the original chains though, the wisdom of the crowd is percolating through.

So it seems the crowd can be wise if you give it time. Perhaps the issue is how fast we expect the online — and thus the offline — world to move these days. Instant updates on our mobiles, feeds to our laptop, netbooks, desktops and tablets all drive us towards a dangerous tendency to knee jerk reactions. Even those of us who would consider ourselves above falling for such urban legends could still do with applying some patience before we fly off on a rant about other well-meaning souls. I lose track of how often I have seen (and sometimes joined in) the ridiculing of Facebook users by those on Twitter. And yet Twitter has it’s own variety of such chains. Every now and then you’ll see a flurry of auto tweets from some wunder-app which promises convenience and delivers annoyance. “I’ve found the greatest…” the tweets start and sometime later are followed by “Remove that app – it’s a spambot” or similar.

The truth is that crowds — like the people they consist of — have both wisdom and foolishness, common sense and little sense and can be incredibly annoying and uplifting. Often these things occur shortly after each other or even simultaneously. People, whether on their own or in a crowd are remarkable things and the world is frequently both better off and worse off for having them in it. “People” is also a term that includes me, in all my stupidity and (somewhat rarer) wisdom. I would like to apologise to anyone I have upset or offended with any outburst or ill-thought out flippant remark. I should remember that I everyone is still learning (and that includes me) and that my time would be better spent trying to help rather than ranting.

So here’s the idea: why don’t we all start taking a moment to wait, reflect and consider before posting any tweet, facebook status update, blog post or even opening our mouths. For the Christians among us it is worth noting that patience is a fruit of the Spirit. Wisdom is not in that list.

Should our churches adopt this model for teaching? (image by weathertation CC:By-NC-SA)

Yesterday I attended Evangelical Alliance’s Social Media for Social Change event in London and thoroughly enjoyed it . As others have noted there was probably greater emphasis on social media than social change but this was not really surprising or a negative thing. Something that came up almost as a side comment in one of the Q&A sessions was the issue of teaching within our churches. A comment was made about how the education system underwent a change from “a sage on a stage to a guide by your side”. This is rather catchy but it does sum up the issue well. I attended school well within the “sage on a stage” era but still encountered teachers who would very much work with me and were approachable, encouraging and available. They really did guide me through my studies rather than dictate what they felt I needed to know to pass an exam. By stepping away from he blackboard, taking time to listen and being more human they gained a greater respect from me than other teachers. Coincidentally I find I can now – all these years later – remember more of what they taught me than those who simply lectured.

A change or a return?

Anyway back to the church. Can and should the way teaching is undertaking in our churches undergo a similar change as the education system? And if so how? A round table discussion took place at the conference on these very points and various concerns were raised. Moving people out of their comfort zones is a risky business. Churches who had tried something other than a preach-cum-lecture approach had received significant negative feedback and yes as expected threats were made.

And yet something in me thought of this passage from Luke 4:

¹⁶ When he came to the village of Nazareth, his boyhood home, he went as usual to the synagogue on the Sabbath and stood up to read the Scriptures. ¹⁷ The scroll containing the messages of Isaiah the prophet was handed to him, and he unrolled the scroll to the place where it says: ¹⁸ “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, ¹⁹ and that the time of the Lord’s favour has come. ” ²⁰ He rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down. Everyone in the synagogue stared at him intently. ²¹ Then he said, “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” ²² All who were there spoke well of him and were amazed by the gracious words that fell from his lips. “How can this be?” they asked. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” _{Luke 4:16-22 NLT}

When Jesus finishes reading the scriptures he sits and every eye is on him. This is because it was traditional at the time for Rabbis to sit in the synagogue when they taught. By sitting down Jesus indicated he was about to teach. I’ve been to a few Bar-Mitzvahs and most synagogues I’ve been to are not arranged in the same way as churches. There is no pulpit and the “congregation” are not facing in one direction. They sat around the teacher and listened. Another way to put it is that the teacher sat among them. Scholars suggest this may have been how synagogues were arranged in Jesus’ time. How different is this to the arrangement in our churches? Another difference is that Jesus when he teaches permits and even encourages interruption. Witness how he permits the children to come to him and how often we read of someone asking a question while he is teaching. How often have you sat in a church and somebody has raised a question only to be told that they can “have a chat” later with the preacher – which often sounds like “Sit down and be quiet while I make my point”. (I do appreciate why this is done and that it is not often what is really meant but it does sound like that).

A challenge

So here’s the challenge:

Can and should the teaching methods in our churches change? What would happen if the preacher/teacher sat among the congregation? What would happen if they were not only allowed but encouraged to ask questions?

It’s interesting to note that this happens in many churches already. Those who run a “cell church” model will already meet in a more “guide by the side” way. Home groups are often similar and many a youthworker will tell you that is how they work. All these are often successful within those contexts and yet when all this is put aside and we come to “do proper church” we revert back to “the sage on the stage” model. Another point to make is that I personally — and I know I am not alone here — am uncomfortable with the gravitas that is automatically bestowed upon anyone standing up the front. Sometimes it feels like you are taken as some kind of super-Christian when nothing could be further from the truth. Thankfully this is on the wane as people are remembering that preachers put their trousers on (if they wear them) the same as everybody else and might even get annoyed if they get their foot stuck.

I’m not sure how or even if this change should take place but surely it must be worth thinking about?

Photo by Bradley Newman CC:By-SA http://www.flickr.com/photos/bradley_newman/68921818

Some interesting thought patterns have been sparked off in my head by Twitter this week.

Cracked pedestals and treasure

The first is the fallout following Stephen Fry’s “fall from grace”. To be honest that’s a complete misnomer but what happened is that Stephen Fry – possibly one of the most popular people on twitter was quoted (he says mis-quoted) by the press as saying some things which at face value seemed rather sexist. The shock which reverberated around Twitter wads almost tangible. Millions of people “follow” Stephen Fry and is (particularly here in the UK) hailed as a sort of public treasure. Indeed he has been hailed as a National Treasure here many times. With excellent TV shows like “Last chance to see” and “QI”, he has somehow — and without him seemingly seeking it — been elevated to almost being worshipped by many who see him as a sort of modern-day wise-man. It’s important to note here that Mr Fry has not promoted himself in this way, he has to the most part been himself and because he comes across as likeable it is his “followers” who have elevated him to a high pedestal. He has as Shakespeare put it had “greatness” thrust upon him to the point where his word is often taken as truth simply because he says it. Again I imagine he’d be shocked at this but that is the scenario that was built around him. With all such situations it is inevitable then that the pedestal would reveal cracks and when it was even suggested that it did many of those who put him on it then criticised Stephen because he was up there. The irony of all this is not new. Stephen Fry is not the first “celebrity” who is worshipped and then pulled down or – in this case – vilified if he shows himself to be human. In fact the UK seems to have a real propensity for such behaviour. What is flavour of the month will next month be rejected as “uncool” (or whatever this month’s word is) simply because it has gained some traction.

Now set against all this we have the situation where those who worship God and in particular Jesus are more frequently portrayed as having some kind of delusion or ridiculed for daring to believe what “everyone” considers to be fantasy. The fact that Stephen Fry is himself a proponent of some of this is another ironic twist here. Don’t get me wrong I am sure Mr Fry has encountered more than his fair share of bigotry in the name of faith which has no doubt helped formed his opinion of religion. For that and other similar cases I am ashamed but it is interesting that in this dichotomy exists. On the one hand we have a world which seems to be increasingly obsessed with celebrity and is even redefining that term on a regular basis to suit whatever or whomever is on the flavour-pedestal this month. Andy Warhol was not a prophet when he said everyone would have 15 minutes of fame: he voiced something which then became a life-plan for many. On the other hand we have those of us who worship someone who is unchanging, ever-faithful and eternal and we are ridiculed. As I tweeted the other day:

Irony = In a world which worships that which is destined to fail, those who worship the One who is not are ridiculed.

Or as Jesus put it (better)…

“Don’t store up treasures here on earth, where they can be eaten by moths and get rusty, and where thieves break in and steal. Store your treasures in heaven, where they will never become moth-eaten or rusty and where they will be safe from thieves. Wherever your treasure is, there your heart and thoughts will also be. _{Matthew 6:19-22 NCV}

It’s all about the numbers

The second thought is along a similar line. There’s been some research again on social networking and the impact it had. These things will never go away. People always want to understand why something is popular or well-used. I guess for many of them this is so they can figure out to make some money out of it but maybe I’m being extra cynical there. Mostly we’re given the impression that “success” or “influence” on Twitter or Facebook is down to how many connections you have. For Twitter it’s how many followers you have; with Facebook it’s how many friends. Consider then the use of those words: follower and friend. Whereas Twitter calls a follower someone who is fed what you type but doesn’t always read it, Facebook calls a friend someone you have or wish to have some loose connection with. For some this is simply that your friends or followers have heard of you (see Stephen Fry above) for others it’s a bit more personal. Either way it’s an empty defnition which seems to apply an intimacy to relationships which often could barely support being called that.

Consider what Jesus meant when he spoke of his friends or his followers. Following and friendship Jesus said, is about sacrifice. Terms like laying down your life, taking up your cross spring to mind. We throw words like friend and follower around with great regularity these days and I am not suggesting we find a new term for people-i-have-a-loose-connection-with on Facebook or people-who-say-things-I-want-to-see on Twitter but I maybe those of us who consider ourselves followers or friends of Jesus should make clear in our own hearts and minds what that means. As for the numbers we should remember how many followers and friends Jesus has. We should also remember that any greatness does not stem from the number of relationships he has but the effort he puts into them.

The skill, talent and dedication on display here is inspiring. The message too. That’s all

Those who know me will know I care about freedom – a lot. I use it in my work and I have written about it here. I am particularly concerned about freedom within the Church. For too long now there has been a growing trend of possessiveness within the Church. Driven by some kind of mimicry of the way some businesses act, Christians have been placing higher and higher importance on protecting “their” works. The collective name for these works is the mythical Intellectual Property. Mythical because try as I might I can find nobody giving a legal definition of what it is or what its limits are. So we have draconian copy protection and threatening remarks placed upon Christian music and resources – resources which as I have said before surely should be permitted to be used to equip and encourage the rest of the family? In an earlier post I said:

It seems frankly daft that those who are using God given gifts to create wonderful ways to give him glory would seriously want to sue a fellow Christian for making an additional photocopy

Albert Einstein said “There are only two things that are infinite: the universe and human stupidity and I am not that sure about the former”. It seems Einstein was right and my remark that it would be daft for Christians to sue each other over such things did not mean it wouldn’t happen. I have recently heard about two incidents where a Christian group is suing (or threatening to sue) another one because they feel their “Intellectual Property” is being infringed.

Absence of grace

How about practising what you preach?

The first one is the SteelRoots debacle. A UK Christian youth ministry has been threatened with legal action by a large US Christian media company – “The Inspirational Network Inc” (INI). Their crime? They use the same name for their ministry as one of the media company’s “ministries”. Looking close shows that other than Christian and Youth there is very little similarity between the two. The chances of somebody mistaking the UK ministry (which is a combined effort from local churches and Christian groups) for a US-based (e.g. not a UK company) TV station is pretty remote. And yet the big company has seen fit to bully the smaller ground-level ministry because they have the same name. INI claim that their broadcasts are sent to “98% of all UK households”. I call cowdung. Most estimates say there are around 22million households in the uk. At the best estimate there are around 10 million Sky customers. Take off some for pubs, clubs etc. add some for cable customers and you’ll end up with around the same number so that would be about 50% of UK households.

But facts and figures aside, this is a ridiculous situation! As ChurchSofa has said: what if no two churches were allowed to have the same name. SteelRoots UK has not sought to “trade” off the name, reputation or any other part of it’s US namesake and yet the threats have been sent. This action is entirely lacking in grace, love and adds nothing to the already tarnished name of Christianity. I bet nobody will be saying “See how these Christians love each other” upon reading this! In a final twist the SteelRoots·com website has a set of devotionals, one of the ones for today has this memorable quote:

“What if everyone around you watched your life to see if you were really a Christian? Would you pass the test? What if our actions can mean the difference in someone’s decision for Christ?…” (emphasis mine)

What indeed.

Absence of grace 2

The second incident has grabbed fewer headlines but is no less ridiculous or infuriating. A UK church published a poem it thought might encourage their members in the church newsletter. A copy of the newsletter was put on their website. It turns out the poem – which I believe was out of copyright in the UK – was under copyright in the US. Yep, you guessed it: the church received an e-mail from the US lawyers representing the “owner” of the poem. Their demands were simple – “You used our client’s poem, please pay us £7000″. SEVEN GRAND?! What happened to giving them a ring? What happened to asking them to put some kind of attribution? But again as I have said before what was the purpose of the poem? Was it to show off how clever the poet was, or was it to show how good God is. Maybe it was meant to encourage other Christians? Again this is a prime example of Christians behaving like the rest of the world – and worse than that – like the worst aspects of the rest of the world! If you use something from this site ( and you are welcome to in a non-commercial way ) and I want you to stop, then isn’t it better for me to call you, send a friendly “would you mind not doing that?” e-mail than a threat of “pay up or else”? And if you question why I restrict commercial use of my work, it’s simply because I offer this stuff for free and I don’t want anyone else being charged for it. The Creative Commons licence I use means that should someone want to use it in a commercial venture they need only ask (but I might still say no). Non-commercial uses nned not ask and can just go ahead. So go ahead use my cartoons and artwork and my poems (such that they are) in your church bulletins and projection systems. As long as you are not charging people for the work or to get in, I’m fine with it.

Do not write in anger

You may have guessed that I am angry about this. I was angry when I heard about last night but following my own advice I decided not to write about it then. I slept on it so I could write with a clear head. The trouble is these incidents and ones like them are ungracious, bullying and just plain wrong. As someone once said if the law supports this behaviour then the law is an ass! So although I have a clearer head I am still angry. If I wait until I am no longer angry I won’t be writing this piece.

I’ve been saying this for many years and now I am glad I am not alone: ENOUGH! What the heck are we doing to each other here? Christians caring more about some misplaced sense of “loss of earnings” and infringement of “intellectual property rights” than they do about loving each other and letting God have the glory. Why can’t Christians share any more? I’m pretty sure that Sundays Schools and youthwork programmes around the world are still teaching that sharing is good. As a father and a youthworker I know I try to pass that lessons onto those who are part of my responsibility and I am guessing I am not alone. So why are we teaching that if our actions don’t show it?

I don’t like to rant about others behaviour without offering suggestions for alternatives but I won’t waste space repeating myself here. Go read about the m108 project,  my proposal for a way for Christians to free themselves of these proprietary mammon-oriented principles.

As a closing remark. I once heard a sermon where the preacher asked how many people owned a TV, more than 10 CDs, more than two pairs of jeans, a car, a fridge etc. After the show of hands he turned and said “So you all own all this stuff? That’s odd because in my Bible it says ‘The earth is the Lord’s and everything in it’”. That’s the point here. This stuff, the poems, the names we use, the music, the artwork is not as precious as we think. Is “our” work so much better than God’s? He gave it to us to share, enjoy and look after. We slap copyright on it and threaten each other if we dare use the same name or share something that blessed us. To sort of borrow a phrase from the Daily Mail (of all places): this is Christianity gone mad and it has to stop! The only way it will is if we stop it.

A few posts back I included an excellent video about judging. In my remarks I mentioned how well it was made and that I’d like to see more videos of that quality from the Church.

I found another one with an equally important message for Christians.

I’ve often read the analogy of God not being a vending machine but rarely have I seen it put so well and so clearly as this.

Judging (or not) was the sermon theme in our church on Sunday. One of the illustrations used was a story of a man who had various events happen to him. At each one his neighbours would decalre it a blessing or a curse and the man would say “all I know is that this happened” and refused to judge the situation beyond that. The principle is that we can all too often write something (or someone) off too early. We just don’t know what God has around the corner.

It put me in mind of this video (particularly the part from 3:30 to 4:00). How often do we write someone off, dismiss and belittle them on first sight. Christian’s have a reputation in some quarters of being narrow-minded, judgemental and holier-than-thou. Ever wonder how we got that reputation?

And let’s not do what I first did when seeing this and think how awful it was of “those” Christians to judge the people featured in the video as if I was somehow better than “those” Christians. Am I? Are any of us?

Always?

On a side note. This is a really good video. It’s well made, it’s not cheesy and it has a message which it delivers clearly and succinctly. I would love to see more of this kind of video from Christians and fewer of the lyrics-of-someone-else’s-song-on-somebody-else’s-landscape-photos type.

Like many of you I get a lot of well meaning fluff in my e-mail Inbox. Not spam but the e-mail equivalent of a chain letter. Much of the fluff in my inbox is Christian in nature and whilst I read it I rarely accept the “challenge” of passing it on unless I feel it is exceptional.

What if we treated our Bible like a mobile phone?

To be honest most of the ones I receive fall into the “Chicken soup for the soul” category – very lovely but a bit sugary for my taste. Sometimes I get one that really does move me and once in a while I get one that acts as a wake up call. I know , I know I could have chosen different words there but in this case it actually does apply. I’m putting (an edited version) of it up here because I just don’t like forwarding chain-letter e-mail but I do feel this particular message applies to a lot of the iPhone generation of Christians. Hope it helps.

Have you ever wondered what would happen if we treated the Bible like we treat our mobile phone?

• What if we always carried it around in our handbags or pockets?
• What if we placed on the table in front of us when out dining in case it demanded our attention whilst eating?
• What if we flipped through it several times a day?
• What if we turned back to go get it if we forgot it?
• What if we used it to receive messages from the text?
• What if we treated the Bible like we couldn’t live without it?
• What if we gave it to all the kids as gifts?
• What if we used it constantly when we travelled?
• What if we used it in case of emergency?
• What would make us say, “Hmm, where is my Bible”?

I’d just like to add a final one of my own.

• How many of us seek out a mobile-Bible app for our ‘phone and then leave it to collect dust in the apps list?

Have a good Monday (or whatever day you are reading this on)

Fizz the puppy

We have a puppy!

Fizz is nine weeks old and is what used to be called a mongrel. She’s what my dad calls a “Heinz 57″. She’s a mutt and we love her. Her dad was a collie of some kind and her mum was part-labrador, part-spaniel, part-pretty-much-every-other-breed I think. She’s very cute and like all puppies she manages to capitalise on it.

As with any puppy, Fizz needs to be house-trained. Being thoroughly modern owners we’ve read “Puppies for dummies” and searched every dog website there is. Most of them seem to be thinly disguised adverts for dog products of some kind. We decided to invest in some “pee pads”. These are the inside of a nappy spread out into a square and they are impregnated with some chemical that allegedly attracts puppies to pee on them. They are the modern equivalent of having newspaper all over the floor. The idea is that they make it easier to train your puppy to go on the pad and then you gradually move the pad closer to the door and eventually outside. This trains the puppy to pee outside.

Dogs can’t read

I know that’s obvious but in our research we forgot that Fizz did not read “Humans for dummies” or browse the many “How to train your new owners” Dog websites. Specifically she did not read the instructions on the packet of pee pads. She didn’t know what they were for nor that they were for her own good. In short she didn’t use them. No, she actually hated them. The wunder-chemical did nothing to attract her to them and whenever we put her on the pad — at the allotted time or when she looked like she was wanting to go — she would sit with that “naughty puppy” look on her face then after half hour of nothing we would let her off and she would pee on the rug. The one time she did “go” on the pad, it was more by fluke than design – we still heaped much praise on her as instructed but it was a one-off. She was getting good at recognising when she needed to go but had no desire to go where we wanted. Such is the way with puppies.

So what could we do? Three days of this had left us with a puppy who was in danger of becoming neurotic about paper on the floor and was still peeing and pooping everywhere else. She seemed to understand this wasn’t the plan but it was like she felt she had no option. We decided to skip the pee pad and starting taking Fizz into the back garden. We had been avoiding this as she hasn’t been vaccinated yet but our garden is enclosed and we have no other dogs.

It worked. From day one Fizz has trotted outside onto the grass and done what comes naturally. within 24 hours she had a regular toilet routine down and she also scratches at the back door to let us know if she needs an interim “leg-stretch”.

And grace..?

So what has any of this to do with grace then? Well when you are standing out in the cold waiting for a puppy to “go wee-wee” you do a lot of thinking. On one of these it occurred to me that the reason there are so many ways to house-train a puppy is because puppies are all different. If they were robotic we could just program their software to act how we want. They’re not robots. they are living things with minds and individuality. The reason this technique worked for us is that it suited Fizz. Other dog owners will experience more success with pee-pads and others still will swear by them (as opposed to at them). Then it occurred to me that humans are like this. We’re fickle, what suits one doesn’t necessarily suit another. It’s long been known that some students thrive in class but are hopeless in exams. Others are the opposite, being able to swot up and regurgitate the relevant facts but not apparently being able to get along in class very well. As someone once said, You are unique – just like everyone else. God knows this. He designed us that way. God seems to like diversity.

As has been often said, he didn’t make us as robots – we have free will. That’s all well and good but it has side effects, not least of which is the one that we could (and do) use our free will to reject the very idea of God altogether. It’s that dangerous game that parents play and none more so than God. The game is that you pour your heart and soul into bringing up your kids and you can at best only hope they won’t reject you and walk away. Most times kids like anyone will respond to a loving upbringing by loving their parents but that love does not always mean they will be what their parents had dreamed. And those with multiple children will know that what works with one child is almost as likely to not work with the next. People, like puppies are diverse. Imagine coming up with a single method of house-training every single puppy which not only works but suits every puppy’s individual needs and desires. It’s almost impossible, that’s why there are so many. If you want another analogy imagine coming up with a fool-proof weight loss programme which would not only work but suit the individual needs of every person who went on it. Again impossible.

Now consider the diversity between two puppies or two children with the same parents. Now project that upwards to the 6 billion people currently on the planet (never mind all the ones who are no longer on it). Imagine trying to come up with a single way to recompense for the diversity of wrong doing and – yes – sin among so many people. Yet God did. In a single act Jesus dealt with the entire range and amount of sin the human race could collectively muster – ever. And yet not one person is dealt with the same. Each person who comes to what we Christians call the “throne of grace” is forgiven completely and finds all their sin, guilt and even shame dealt with once and for ever. Yet each person will leave with a different experience. Each encounters a very personal and real Saviour who reacts and interacts with them in a way that best suits them. In short each encounters grace which sufficient.

That’s why it’s amazing.