The Mighty Thor: Mjolnir. Weorth. Weorthscip.

 

As we all probably know by know, I am a geek, and I am also child of the eighties. Raised in the period of Mrs Thatcher, perms, shoulder pads, and the best Saturday morning cartoons ever. But we’ll get back to them later. The cartoons, not Mrs Thatcher. Or perms.

So it will be no surprise that the other weekend I watched Avengers: End Game, the culmination of eleven years of superhero movies. A three-hour bladder straining marathon if ever there was one. It was also quite thought-provoking that the twenty-somethings at the cinema had probably grown up with the movies, which also really made me feel very nearly but not quite forty.(there’s two years to go).

The films tell the story of a group of superheroes called the Avengers – no, not the ones with Mrs Peel and John Steed – rather Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hawk Eye. Creations of the late Stan Lee at Marvel Comics in the 1960s. Born Stanley Martin Leiber in 1922, he was from a Jewish immigrant family. Born in Manhattan, and originally trained as a dress-maker, after WW2 he became a comic book writer and publisher and working at Marvel Comics created some of the best-known comic book heroes such as Spiderman, Iron Man, the incredible Hulk, Thor. When, late in life, he was asked if he believed in God he said ‘I’m not going to try to be clever. I really don’t know. I just don’t know.’ Whilst his faith in God may have been agnostic, his faith in humanity and humanity’s potential for greatness, for bettering itself was profound. In 1968, at the height of the civil rights movement he wrote:

Let’s lay it right on the line. Bigotry and racism are amongst the deadliest social ills plaguing the world today. But, unlike a team of costumed super-villains, they can’t be halted with a punch in the snoot, or a zap from a ray gun. The only way to destroy them is to expose them – reveal them for the insidious evils that they are. The guy who is an unreasoning hater – one who hates blindly, fanatically, indiscriminately. If his hang-up is black people, then he hates ALL black people. If a redhead once offended him, he hates ALL redheads. If a foreigner beat him to a job, he’s down on ALL foreigners. He hates people he’s never seen – people he’s never known – with equal intensity – with equal venom. Now, we’re not saying it’s unreasonable for one human being to bug another. But although anyone has the right to dislike another individual, it’s totally irrational, patently insane to condemn an entire race – to vilify an entire nation – to vilify an entire religion.

Sooner or later, if man is ever to be worthy of his destiny, we must fill our hearts with tolerance. With love. For then, only then, will we be truly worthy of the concept that mankind was created in the image of God – a God who calls us ALL - His children.

And it’s this idea of worth that was writ large in Avengers: End Game. The Mighty Thor, come down from Asgard, is a member of the Avengers, here to defend Midgard. Thor, the son of Odin the All-father, God of thunder, lighting and storms. The God of strength and protection; the God of Oak trees and fertility. He also has the power to heal – his chariot is pulled by two goats called Tann grisnir and Tanngjostr and once, when he got hungry, Thor killed and ate them, but thanks to the power of Mjölnir resurrected him and continued on his way.

He’s not just a member of the Norse Pantheon, but of the German one too – he’s referred to by the Roman author Tacitus.

He’s the reason why Thursday is called Thursday. Thors Day.

Sadly, the ancient Norse and German pantheon has been corrupted by white supremacists. It started well before Mr Himmler got his hands on it, and there is a very real spiritual battle going on between those who follow the genuine old Norse religion and those racists who have adopted it for their own ends.

Thor gains his power from his mighty hammer Mjölnir. Rather like the Sword Excalibur in the legend of King Arthur, or from my own childhood, He Man’s Sword of Power or Lion-O’s Sword of Omens. They can only be handled by the one true king, or handed down through generations and/or from divine beings.

Inscribed on the side of the hammer Mjölnir is the legend

Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.

Whosoever holds this hammer.

The word ‘worth’ comes from the old English word ‘weorth’ and it’s also the route of the modern English word ‘worship’. In Old English and Saxon weorth is to do with being appreciated, to be well or highly thought of; honourable; noble; to be valued. Whilst weorthscip refers to a condition of being worthy, dignity, glory, distinction, honour. Or being the best. It was only in the C13^th that worship came to be given it’s modern meaning.

In the Movies Thor is played by the jaw-droppingly good-looking Chris Hemsworth: all flowing blonde locks and able to bench press 300 pounds. That’s 136 kilos. It’s nice to have God you can fancy. (perhaps fancy is too mild a word. Ahem).

In Endgame, however, Thor is defeated. He’s depressed. He’s let himself go and has turned into a drunken slob. Never stirs from his rubbish-strewn house. No longer a six-pack, more several kegs of lager. The film had been criticised in some circles for body-shaming, because of the banter between Thor and his friends in the Avengers who tell him to get his act together, to put a shirt on, put down the beer tins and cream cheese and do something with his life. As someone who has struggled most of their adult life with body image and weight, I didn’t find it body-shaming at all. In fact it’s the opposite. It’s empowering.

Because Thor, even though he no longer possesses a God-like body – the God-like body sold to us by Hollywood and the Media as the only thing for men and women to make us happy, successful and give us value – picks up Mjölnir.

Thor is still worthy.

Thor still has the power.

You don’t have to be a six-foot plus blonde Adonis to wield Mjölnir.

You don’t have to be a Chris-Hemsworth-alike to be Worthy.

You just have to be you.

I’m not saying it’s wrong to want to look like Chris Hemsworth or to aspire to such a level of fitness. I’m not saying you shouldn’t work out. But work out for the right reasons. In this Mental Health Awareness Week, sadly around 1.25 million people in the UK have or have had an eating disorder of some form, and that includes anorexia, bulimia as well as over-eating; the NHS suggests 6.4% of all adults have or have struggled with an eating disorder, with about 40% struggling with anorexia or bulimia as a result of trying to conform with societies’ and the media’s notions of being beautiful and being worthy. And, despite the public perception that eating disorders only affect teenage girls in fact 25% of those who suffer are males.

Exercise, being fit and healthy is good for you and proven to help with making you feel good and has many long-term health benefits. But you don’t want to be the person who, when it comes to write their eulogy or tombstone the most important thing someone can say is ‘they had amazing abs.’

Just as Thor in Endgame was worthy, so are we. We are Worthy for who and what we are right now.

And for many people – most of us in fact – I think that’s a struggle. To acknowledge that we are enough. We need to give ourselves permission to say ‘I am enough’ that ‘I have worth’. It can be easy to live in a bubble of self-doubt, self-pity, throwing ourselves into work and finding worth through ‘being productive’ or trying to like and love everyone but never doing the same for yourself.

This is what my Personal Trainer said the other day:

Breaking that bubble is scary. It’s a challenge. But it’s also a giving of permission. Permission to be happy. Loving and trusting yourself that it’s OK to do this. That it’s OK to be happy. That it’s OK to practice self-care. This will make you more you. Give yourself permission. Pause. Slow down. You can give yourself permission to do less; you don’t have to feel obligated to say yes to everyone and do things. That’s not what life is about. Go out there and do something that you want to do. Go out and try it. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t work that’s OK. The important thing is you went for it. Did the work. Your worth isn’t based on success or lack of success. It’s based on you being you. You don’t have to be perfect. You just have to be the best you, and the most you, you can be.

We don’t need Thor’s magic hammer, or He-Man’s sword of power to be worthy.

We don’t need to look like Chris Hemsworth or any other A-list Hollywood celebrity to be worthy.

Because we are worthy as we are. And at times it can be hard to realise that, to remember that. So perhaps we do, at times need Mjölnir to remind us that we are worthy. Even Thor needs reminding that he’s worthy too – in one story when he’s lost Mjölnir and goes into a sulk, Odin asks him ‘Are you the God Thor or the God of Hammers?’

But it’s not from Mjölnir where Thor, or where we draw our strength or worth. It’s from within us. Because we weorthy. We are significant, of value, appreciated, highly thought-of.

And, to quote He-Man

The truth of love will always guide us.

The strength above will be inside us.

Forever more we'll be together.

Our hearts will soar with one another.

For the honour of love.

By the power above.

We Have The Power!

Reflections on the Pride Rainbow

You can’t have failed to notice how Manchester City Centre is quite liberally covered with Rainbows. Manchester is certainly getting in the mood for Gay Pride. Rainbows have been in the news, too. Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself a Christian, when fundamentalists claim that “the Gays” have somehow “Stolen” the rainbow, as if Christianity has the sole copyright on the rainbow – it appears in all three major Abrahamic religions and in others besides, including Zoroastrianism and Buddhism.

In Christian and Jewish Theology the Rainbow is a symbol of hope and a symbol of a promise. It occurs in Genesis, following the mythical flood of Noah when God sends the rainbow as a sign of peace and his promise to never destroy, or flood the world again. Never again, says God, will I try to wipe out life on earth. Look! here’s a rainbow as a sign of my covenant with you and all of creation for ever.

So when some groups of Christians trying to claim that like Prometheus, the gays have snuck into heaven and stolen the Rainbow I really have to chortle. And it would be funny if it wasn’t so sad that some Christians haven’t understood the message from Noah – God said he wouldn’t flood the world any more, but yet when faced with natural disaster, with flooding and fire, it’s God punishing us wicked humans, for allowing gay rights. But didn’t God said he’d not flood the world ever again? … I’ll leave that with you. But if I’d have known when you came out you got X-men style superpowers to control the weather I’d have come out a long time before I did. It’d brilliant on holiday. Good weather. Everyday. Manchester would certainly be sunnier!

If anything, the use of the rainbow by Gay Pride is perfectly theologically sound. And is indeed a challenge to those who use religion to fuel their own bigotry. A sign of hope, a symbol of a promise never to hurt or destroy. An emblem of peace.

The world-wide symbol for  Pride is the rainbow, and the rainbow flag. But it’s not just any old rainbow. The [Gay] Pride flag was designed by the artist Gilbert Baker, a gay artist living in San Francisco. He met and befriend Harvey Milk, the gay rights pioneer, who challenged him to come up with a design representing the gay liberation movement.

The first two rainbow flags were hand-sewn for San Francisco Pride in 1970. No one quite knows what inspired Baker to adopt a rainbow as the symbol for the first Gay Pride; it might have been the striped ‘Flag of all the races’ which was popular amongst Hippies and Civil Rights Activists; or it might have been the recent death of Judy Garland who had become a gay icon and her seminal 1939 song ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow’ a Gay Anthem. In fact, I have sung it as a hymn; it was wonderful.

But don’t think it matters where the flag came from, so much as what it means.

Each of the coloured stripes has a different meaning

Red for Life

Orange for Healing

Yellow for Sunlight

Green for Nature

Indigo for Serenity

Violet for Spirit

Universal values. A universal message. A message of wholeness; of bringing healing; reverence for nature; of peace; and (despite the very secular nature of Gay Pride) spirituality. Reminding us that the spiritual self is not to be shut out of any aspect of our life.

May we be reminded, that as it takes so many colours to make up a rainbow, so it takes so many different people, to make a family, to build a community. May we be reminded that God is gendered within us. That God who is beyond gender and sex and sexuality, is in male and female and intersex; is gay, straight, bisexual or queer. Or none of the above. That God celebrates and rejoices in difference and diversity. And so should we.

May God walk with us, in all our rainbow glory.

Blessing

Leader: To all the colours of the Rainbow:

Response: We stand with you when we are persecuted.

To all the colours of the Rainbow:

We celebrate our diversity.

To all the colours of the Rainbow:

We welcome all in God’s family.

May we celebrate all life;

May we bring healing and wholeness;

may we dance in Sunshine,

And rejoice in Nature.

Let us find Serenity

And share the Spirirt. Amen

Wonder Woman.

I've just returned from watching the latest installment of the DC Cinematic  Universe. It was a roller-coaster of a movie; alternating between gut-wrenching realism of the horror of the First World War, tears of joy, of sadness and giggling. Yes, actual humour - oh, and colour- in a DC  movie. That's a first. But I digress.I actually left the Cinema wondering whether the writer was a  Unitarian or a Quaker from what it had to say about war and humanity. It is a movie with a philosophy. It raises questions over the automatic trust we put on our 'heros'; the way we glorify war and dehumanize our villains.

The movie follows Diana, Princess of Themyscira as she encounters the world of Men/Man. In the movie, the God Zeus created the world and populated with humanity in his image. Humanity was noble, loving and kind (so not the hoary of Zeus of Greek myth then....) but Ares (God of War) sees humanity and is jealous. He inflicts upon humanity greed, jealous, spite, hate, causing war and violence. It's a fall from grace moment. Not through eating of the tree of knowledge, but a fall due to violence, greed, hate. The Rev. Edward Higginson, Minister at the Unitarian Chapel on Westgate, in Wakefield during the mid nineteenth century wrote that 'Original Sin' - if indeed there is such a thing - was not sex, nor knowledge. It was violence. Sin entered the world, he mused, not when Eve bit into the apple, but when Cain slew Abel. The first act of violence, of hatred, was the first sin. And has tainted humanity ever since.

In the movies mythology,  Ares rebels and kills all the other gods and wages war Zeus created the Amazons to fight Ares, to protect humanity and the earth. With his dying breath, he creates Thermyscia and hides it away from the world of men, waiting until needed...

As a youth Diana learns important lessons about war; Altho' it is their Sacred Duty to defend the World from Ares, Hippolyta (Diana's mother) tells her daughter (who is more than little bit too interestd in war and weaspons) "War is nothing to hope for". Moreover, "Fighting doesn't make you a hero."

Diana is plunged into the midst of the First World War, that war 'To End all Wars.' A war she believes is inspired by Ares and is determined to rid the world of Ares and therefore war. But it's not that simple. Nothing ever is.

Diana wrestles with her own morality. She believes in killing Ares she will end war. But after killing a chemically-enhanced-DC-Movie version of General Eric von Ludendorf, there is no peace. The warlord is dead the but fighting continues. Shock reveal! The British politician who was arguing for an armistice was Ares all along, urging on all sides, 'whispering into the ear' of generals, scientists and politicians, creating ever more terrible weapons to 'win the war' and decimate humanity.

You see, Ares ( like many Christians do) see humanity as irrevocably broken. As a fallen race, as damaged, full of darkness. Surrounded by the horror of the Western Front in 1918 even Diana admits he's right

"I used to want to save the world, this beautiful place. But the closer you get, the more you see the great darkness within. I learnt this the hard way ..."

 Diana experiences the limits of her own understanding of justice—a simple desire to set things “right” in the world—and discovers that the “good guys” are not always good and that darkness and light  co-exist in mankind. Although Diana sees that corruption, she still believes that humanity deserves a chance.

Yes, the world can be an ugly place. A terrifying place. The recent events in Manchester and London show us that. Perhaps humanity is broken, filled with darkness and needs wiping off the face of the planet.

But Diana has seen the other side of humanity. Predictably she's fallen in love with the male lead Captain Steve 'Above average actually' Trevor. Whilst she has seen the ugly side of humanity, has seen and experienced the darkness, she has seen something Ares has not: Love. The light of love. That of God in humanity. Or, if you prefer, that of Good in humanity.

She sees love in all its facets: in human relationship, in friendship, comradeship and sacrifice. It's in the moment of the sacrificial death of Trevor that Diana realises the power of love. That love is the most powerful force in the Universe.

" It's about what you believe. And I believe in love. Only love will truly save the world."

It's about what you believe and she, like me, and many others, believe in Love. There's been worse battle cries ("Truth! Freedom!Justice and a hard-boiled egg").

Whether you see humanity as broken, irrevocably damaged or not - or somewhere grubby in between - is about perception. Humanity is capable of great beauty, of great joy, and great evil. Jesus, the Dalai Lama, Stalin and Suicide Bombers are all part of the same human family. And, as Diana learns, you can't out-source evil, you can't shrug off the evil in men's hearts to an external being. Be it the devil, doctrine or Ares. Diana expected the war to end when Ares died. It didn't because humanity is damaged, in some respects broken. Humanity is messy. The answer wasn't so simple. We cannot wash out collective hands, like so many Pontius Pilates, of all those dark spaces in humanity,  of all those terrible things we have done. We have to take ownership of them.

If, like Ares, you want to see humanity as fallen, as evil as broken then you'll see the darkness. That will be all you can see.  But if you see the light, humanity is not broken, far from broken because of Love. But more than that: Love wins out.The light wins out. Love is stronger than hate. Love is stronger than death.

Love is about the self, friends, family and is sacrificial. And all those other things St Paul wrote about it (patient, kind etc etc)  It is the most powerful force in the universe. Diana's final battle cry which brings down evil
 
"You get what you believe, and I believe in Love. Only Love can truly save the world"

 is mine also.

If you experience the world as broken and unlovely you will only see the darkness.
But if you experience the world as ok a bit grubby but lovely, you will see that light and the love. You will be that love.

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

Come and find the quiet centre

We don't usually think about Spring until the winter blanket spends more time on the floor  being used as a cat nest than it does on the bed… We notice the lawn needs cutting, and have to fight our way into the garden shed, and, no matter how neatly we left the garden hose coiled up, and having already tied together the contents of the shed in a knot that would have bettered even Alexander, in the quest for more prey, explodes like an angered boa constrictor, twisting its seething coils around the poor unfortunate who has dared enter its sleeping lair.

When the first hint of sun produces a rash of bare legs, pale and blinking in the sunlight, flocking together for safety like so many albino flamingos.

It means school holidays aren’t far away, when parents can lovingly offer their children for temporary adoption to grandparents and others can begin their rounds of the Saturday morning taxi service to sport.

It also means winter is coming to an end. The days are lengthening. The days are warming. Buds are bursting. Trees are in blossom. Spring is.

Winter, the season of fear has passed, giving way to Spring, the season of hope and renewal.

The late UU Minister Rev. Max Coots, wrote a lovely book called Seasons of the self. I highly recommend it. As the title suggests it is a book of meditations on the seasons of the year,

 presented in a very personal way. In one of those meditations, he talks about the coming of Spring, when the snow melts and frosts subside and we begin to discover all the things...
broken toys,
newspapers,
garden tools,
dried up leaves.

All the things we had forgotten about because they were covered over
by the snow or frost that lay over the ground. And then he writes this:

“Spring is a courage after Winter-weakness
that sends us to cleaning out,
as though the dirt that Winter stored
must be chased away like ancient witches.

“Spring is a courage.
It lets the empty stem of the cherry fall free to look as dead
as it had been when it stood tall in Wintertime.

“Spring is a courage that lets the old things die
and scatters them across our eyes -
the things that ought to be done and over with.

“Spring is not so much a dying time
as it is a time that shows what has already died.
It’s not an easy sight!

“Spring is a finishing, and it is a beginning too...”

In Winter we don’t think much about growth. With the coming of Spring we are reminded that out of death there can come new birth,
if we nurture it,
care for it,
love it.

But Spring also shows us that naturekind and humankind are continually in relationship. In the process of God’s creativity, as told by the storyteller in Genesis, we see the interplay between naturekind and humankind.

A great light was divided in two...
Light was ingredient to the survival of plants and creatures,
as a means of photosynthesis,
as a means of evaporation,
and as a measure of time.

Dry land was formed...
This formed the habitats of diverse creatures.
Plant life emerged with instrumental value
as a source of food
and oxygen
and soil nutrients.

Creatures evolved into more complex relationships
of birds, fish, cattle... and humans.

Humans were equipped and called to be responsible for the care of naturekind.
They were also intended to be in relationship with each other.
With this relationship, humans were charged to be fruitful and multiply,
and to create a community through loving inter-relationships.

And the storyteller says: God experienced great joy in creation...

In a unique way God related to humankind, because humankind is called to be the image of God.
Embodying something of God in each and every one of us. Filled to bursting with the potential of life and of love. Embodying something God-like in the care of nature, in human loving, in relationships.

But during Winter we don’t think much about these things.

It is only when Spring arrives and washes away the fear of Winter do we also see the pollution left behind, we need to get out our broom and do our spring cleaning. To tidy up the whatever is left of last year, of the winter, to sift through the detritus in our gardens and our homes, to throw away what is bad, clearing away mess and cutting back dead wood to find space to being anew and to encourage new shoots and new buds. So too with our own spiritual practice; tend and nurture the buds of our faith, see it grow and sprout. Embrace new shoots and new growth. Experience the dynamic of fresh growth.

So as Spring bursts forth around us, let us heed the advice of Shirley Erena Murray, to find the 'quiet centre' in our lives, in our spiritual lives...to do some spring cleaning, to 

 

find the room for hope to enter, find the frame where we are freed:

clear the chaos and the clutter, clear our eyes, that we can see

all the things that really matter, be at peace, and simply be

REGULATIONS FOR ENGINEMEN 1847

REGULATIONS FOR ENGINEMEN
 

At a Meeting of the Board of Directors held on the 11th of September, 1847, it was Ordered, That the following code of Rules and Regulations be, and the same is hereby approved and adopted for the guidance and instruction of the Officers and Men in the service of the London and North-Western Railway Company, and that all former Rules and Regulations inconsistent with the same be cancelled. Ordered, That every person in the service do keep a copy of these Regulations on his person while on duty under a penalty of five shillings for neglect of the same. By order of the Board of Directors. CAPTAIN MARK HUISH,                  General Manager,      London and North Western Railway.

White Trousers

"Far be it for me to question your authenticity, but why are you wearing white trousers?"

The answer, in a nutshell, is simple: unbleached, undyed, simple weave cloth such as canvas is cheap, hard wearing and can be boil washed. Most European armies during late 18th and most of the 19th centuries adopted unbleached canvas (linen, cotton or hemp) trousers  for fatigue and other dirty duties, including mucking out horses, because of this. 

Unitarians Take to the Rails

The Liverpool & Manchester Railway, which opened on 15 September 1830, was dominated by Unitarians. The railway was the brainchild of  two Unitarians: Joseph Sandars of Liverpool and John Kennedy of Manchester, owner of what was then the largest cotton spinning mill in Manchester (and by extension, perhaps the world).  John Kennedy was a member of the Mosley Street congregation in Manchester – other members included the industrialists Edmund Potter FRS, and Robert Hyde Gregg (he was also a Proprietor of the L&MR). Kennedy’s daughter married Edwin Chadwick, the noted social reformer who worked tirelessly to improve urban sanitation and public health. Sandars, a wealthy corn merchant, was a member of the Paradise Street congregation in Liverpool. Amongst the proprietors were the following Unitarian notables:

Robert Hyde Greg
William Potter

Richard Rathbone

WIlliam Rathbone (not to be mistaken of the Unitarian Liverpool MP of the same name)
Henry Booth (see below)
Thomas Booth

J. Sanders

W W Currie - the son of Rev. James Currie.

Unitarian Directors included Sandars, Kennedy, Rathbone, Booth and James Cropper.

 The project took nearly ten years to complete – the Board of the Liverpool & Manchester Railway appointed George Stephenson of Newcastle as it’s chief engineer. Stephenson had been a pupil of the Unitarian Minister Rev. William Turner of Newcastle and was a member of the Dissenter’s (latterly Unitarian) chapel at Wylam. Wealthy Newcastle industrialists the Walkers had founded the chapel; George Walker had been president of the Warrington Academy (1798). Company Secretary and Treasurer was Henry Booth, a well-connected Liverpool Unitarian. It was Booth who suggested to Robert Stephenson (George’s son) that he adopt the multi-tube boiler (patented by Marc Seguin in France in 1828) for his locomotive the “Rocket” which he was to enter in the Rainhill Trials of October1829 to find the best type of motive power for the new railway. Booth also had shares in "Rocket" and stood to make a considerable sum of money if the Stephensons won the trial and therefore the contract to supply the locomotives to the L&MR. The Liverpool Chronicle levelled charges of corruption at the L&MR, suggesting that  because of the relationship between Booth, Stephenson and the Directors of the L&MR the Rainhill Trials were merely a publicity stunt. The Unitarian owned and editted Manchester Guardian came to the defence of Stephenson and the Board. The London based Mechanics Magazine criticised Stephenson and the L&MR Board - but these were penend by Stephenson's rival Charles Vignoles as part of his personal anti-Stephenson campaign.

“Rocket”, of course, won the day but at the time there was a suggestion of foul play due to the connections between the Stephensons and the Board of the Liverpool & Manchester Railway. “Rocket” was by far the best locomotive demonstrated, and one that incorporated many (but not all) the design features of the mature steam locomotive. “Rocket” had been built to do one job and one job only: to win the Rainhill Trails and she was effectively an evolutionary dead-end. It was the “Planet”  - built by the Stephensons which first ran 4^th December 1830 – that is generally considered to be the ‘mother’ of the steam locomotive. The speed of development can be shown by the fact that whilst  “Rocket” (1829) weighed 4 tons and had top speed of c.20mph, “Planet” (and her six sisters) came in at 9 tons with a top speed of c.30mph – a speed at which Unitarian polymath Dr Dionysius Lardner suggested the human being would suffocate. Having been fireman on the replica “Planet” at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, at only speeds up to 10mph, I take my hat off to those early enginemen as “Planet” has no cab and only a very flimsy (and quite low) safety rail to stop you falling off!

 “Rocket,” other than Ericsson and Braithwaite’s “Novelty” was the only serious competitor –Joseph Brandredth entered the “Cycloped” which was nothing more than a horse-powered self-propelling treadmill on wheels, whilst Timothy Hackworth’s old-fashioned entry “Sans Pareil” should have been disqualified for being too heavy. Hackworth, however, vehemently complained that “Sans Pareil” was not over weight. The Judges remained resolute but the Directors, however, approved Hackworth’s entry, perhaps to make the competition less of a ‘one horse race.’ Hackworth, a fierce and bitter rival of the Stephensons, levelled a charge of corruption and industrial sabotage against them: unable to cast the cylinders for “Sans Pareil” he had them cast by the Stephensons but during the trial one of them burst, and he duly cast blame on the Stephensons. Part of the intense rivalry between Hackworth and Stephenson may also have been religious: both came from the village of Wylam but whereas Stephenson was a Unitarian, Hackworth was a Methodist – and a lay preacher to boot. Hackworth refused to do any work on Sunday - not even to get "Sans Pareil" ready for the trials - whilst Messrs. Stephenson and so such qualms! There may also have been some class rivalry going on: both were self-made men, but Stephenson had risen rapidly in society whereas Hackworth had not.

It also has to be remembered that "Rocket" was the only locomotive built in a specialist factory - R. Stephenson & Co's works in Newcastle. Hackworth built "Sans Pareil" in his spare time, using what little savings he had; despite the Rainhill Trials being advertised in January 1829 for some reason Ericsson and Braithwaite only learned of it in July leaving them with only a few months to build "Novelty". The pair had previously experimented with building steam-powered fire engines, and given the short space of time they had, "Novelty" is probably based upon the technology they developed for their steam pumps. Furthermore, only "Rocket" had any pre-Trial testing, both in Newcastle and at Rainhill carrying out demonstration runs and, when "Novelty" and "Sans Pareil" were out of action, carrying passengers over the trial course.  The leaking boiler of "Sans Pareil" and the teething trouble with "Novelty" (water feed pump; air compressor; boiler joints) would have been ironed out had there been any test period - but, as George Stephenson said the "Novelty", "had no goots" - Ericsson and Braithwaite built two "Novelty" class locos for the L&MR in 1830 but neither proved succesful over the 35-mile route and had to be rescued by one of Stephenson's engines.

Such was the pace of technological development, that "Rocket" was obsolete within  months. The L&MR ordered four "Rocket" type locomotives from R. Stephenson & Co. on  26 October 1829 ("Arrow", "Dart", "Comet", "Meteor"), first running in January 1830. They inorporated many lessons learned from "Rocket":-

Cylinders at 8 degrees (rather than the 38 of Rocket) which made the loco more stable
A Steam Dome (to reduce 'priming')
Internal steam pipe (from the Dome to the cylinders)
Larger wheels (five foot diameter)
Larger cylinders
Valve chest on top of the cylinders (Rockets were underneath and therefore transposed and inverted)

 In turn, these were rapidly superseded in June 1830 by "Pheonix" and "Northumbrian" which sported an integral firebox and an ash box at the front end - but not yet a smoke-box proper.  The obsolescence of "Rocket" is shown by the fact it had a working life on the L&MR of about four years; it was heavily rebuilt in 1830 following a severe accident to bring it into line with "Arrow" et al through lowering of the cylinders and fitting a steam dome. After about a year of being laid-up out of work, "Rocket" was sold in 1836 for use on the Naworth colliery.

 So were the Rainhill Trials fair? Probably not! "Rocket" (despite being the most reliable locomotive present) and her design team had the advantages of not only having a fully-equipped Locomotive Factory and experienced designers and engineers to constrcut it, also had the advantage of running-in trials and being able to test and modify the locomotive before the trials began. Furthermore, Stephenson, through his Unitarian connections, knew the 'great and the good' and was probably able to use them to his own advantage - George Stephenson was excellent at self-promotion and putting himself forward as the best man for the job.

Unitarians in Liverpool and Manchester had a degree of political and industrial clout and influence far stronger than their numbers would suggest. Charges of ‘insider trading’ were levelled against them by the largely Tory, Anglican Liverpool Corporation and for demonstrating favouritism to fellow Unitarians with regards to contracts, employment and apprentices. George Stephenson – chief engineer of the Liverpool & Manchester Railway – the company founders and most of the Board were Unitarians. Was the victory of the Stephensons at Rainhill and the subsequent very lucrative contract to supply locomotives to the Liverpool & Manchester already a foregone conclusion? Yes.

"It's the New Sodom, I tell you"

Whilst walking my way down Market Street in Manchester this morning,  making my way to Chapel, amidst the debris of Gay Pride, side stepping mountains of half drunk champagne bottles, tattered rainbow flags and pink streamers, I couldn't help but notice amongst the detritus not only passed out drunks but homeless peoples, whose only possessions appeared to be in a few black plastic bin bags which looked scarily like the banks of rubbish being thrown on the dustcart by the council workers.

I was moved by the sharp dichotomy. The contrast between those who spent the night on the street in their party clothes because they had drunk too much, and for whom this would be something to tell their friends later - high jinks indeed - and those for whom every night was spent on the street, and we wearing their only clothes. and for whom there would be no high jinks,

And yet, this was taking place in Manchester, at the Pride Big Weekend - a festival to welcome and celebrate the LGBTQI communities, to celebrate, welcome and affirm. To support and uphold those who are differant; those who within a few short decades have had their lives transformed. Manchester, welcoming thousands of visitors and thousands of pounds spent in shops and bars.

But yet.

But yet  where was the welcome, the hospitality, for those who are down and out and quite literally have nothing?

On Saturday - again in Market Street - I was stopped by a Christian lady who warned me that Manchester "Is the new Sodom, I tell you! Repent!".

And I agreed. Which shocked her. But  not in the way I believe she intended me to reply.

The sin of Sodom was not homosexuality. It was about wealth. And power.  And the abuse of power. Of not showing hospitality, especially to the least:

"For this was the guilt ... of Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food and prosperous ease but did not aid the poor and needy" (Ezekiel 16: 48-49)

The sins of Sodom were Pride, Greed, and Inhospitality.

This is contrasted elsewhere in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah with the radical hospitality shown by Abraham  and also Lot toward strangers, toward unexpected guests in his house. Abraham was told by "God" that he would be rewarded for showing such hospitality.

The sin of Sodom is not homosexuality (although there is attempted rape....)

And yet this weekend, in Manchester I saw just that: greed and inhospitality. Whilst Manchester opened its arms to the LGBTQI community and the power of the "Pink Pound", people were living on the streets, in bin bags and tents. And were even asked to "move on" from the area around Canal Street, as if they were human detritis but be cleaned up by the council bin men to make the area nicer and litter free for the party-goers. The hypocracy is mind blowing:  an event to welcome "the other," those whom less than fifty years aho whose choice of lover was illegal, was treating "the other" and the downtrodden as little more than human waste, to be tidied up off the street for a Big Weekend to celebrate inclusion and community.

How do we as the LGBT community respond to the other, to those who do not conform within our community (those who do not fit the idealised gay man or woman or neatly fit into our compartments) and how do we respond to those who literally have nothing?  A three-year old report suggests that 20% of all homeless youth in the UK are LGBT - thrown out as unwanted, as damaged goods by their parents - and with the highest rate of suicide amongst homeless youth (69%).

So yes, I do agree with the Christian lady with the pamphlets and a bible  - this is a new sodom and we do need to repent. Repent of our sins of pride, of greed, and show hospitality to all.

The Church needs to repent of Sodomy, too: for two thousand years it has been persecuting, torturing and murdering gay people in the name of a "God of Love". Subjecting LGBT people to extreme acts of inhospitality. Because of policies of exlcusion, condemnation and denial by the Church towards LGBT people; by the response of Manchester council to the plight of the homeless (being moved on; installing spikes etc) i it is they who are the sodomtes rahter than the LGBT community and the homeless. Rather than LGBT people, it is they who deserve the anathema carried by the word 'Sodomite.'

"He hath shewed strength with his arm : he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He hath put down the mighty from their seat : and hath exalted the humble and meek.He hath filled the hungry with good things : and the rich he hath sent empty away."

Thunderbolts from Titfield

  I recently stared working at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester as a Trainee Fireman. No, not the big hunky fellas in the yellow helmets… but rather, the filthy guy in blue overalls shovelling coal on a steam train.  A boyhood dream realised – to learn to drive a steam train. And you don’t just start with learning how to drive the thing, oh no: you start at the very bottom literally – underneath it with an oil can. Learning how it works by cleaning the thing. Crawling all over it, under it, under it in your overalls, oiling it, cleaning it, polishing the brass until you can use it as a mirror... and then learning how to fire the engine. It’s a ... Long process. Glamorous it is not. But it is so very, very fulfilling.

Feed the Birds

 Early each day to the steps of Saint Paul's
The little old bird woman comes
In her own special way to the people she calls,
"Come, buy my bags full of crumbs;
Come feed the little birds,
Show them you care
And you'll be glad if you do
The young ones are hungry
The nests are so bare
All it takes is tuppence from you
Feed the birds, tuppence a bag
Tuppence, tuppence, tuppence a bag
Feed the birds," that's what she cries
While overhead, her birds fill the skies

All around the cathedral the saints and apostles
Look down as she sells her wares
Although you can't see it,
You know they are smiling
Each time someone shows that he cares

Though her words are simple and few
Listen, listen, she's calling to you
"Feed the birds, tuppence a bag
Tuppence, tuppence, tuppence a bag"

We are the Daleks

The Daleks. A uniquely British science fiction "baddy". Nothing more than a dustbin armed with a sink-plunger and an egg whisk. Evil killing machines that can't be stopped by the best that human arsenals have to offer  - other than a flight of stairs.

Who do you say I am?

The above pictures were taken at Paris Pride. And, undestandably many Christians - especially Roman Catholics - found these tableaus offensive. I can understand why. But, at the same time, I think they are the most wonderful piece of challenging Queer Theology.

The image of Jesus kissing another man was branded disrespectual (despite kissing on the lips being perfectly common in the 1st century CE). And I think it's been branded as such because it makes Jesus human - it gives him not only a sex but also a sexuality with all the messy human stuff that goes with him. The whole point of Incarnational Theology is that the "Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us". The word became Flesh. Not a Ken Doll - shiny, and handsome but never having to worry about which side he dresses. Jesus was a human being - just like you and I. Messy, complicated. Mucky. Too often we put him up on a pedestal like a plaster saint: we make him perfect. Long haired. Blue eyed. Killer abs. Walking a few inches off the ground. We forget he was a first century Jew lilving in the levant (olive skinned, dark hair, probably not very tall by today's standards). We make him "perfect" , "sinless" (the Gospel writers try to do that too...) and by so doing we lose the essential humanity of Jesus. We lose the fact the he was a man. With working genitals and probably used them. I think the fact that Jesus kissing another man can be taken as offensive and disrespectful is becaues we don't want Jesus to be human. We can't handle the idea of Jesus having sex. We don't like our heros to be mucky. We don't want our teacher, examplar,pioneer to be just like us. We want them to be better than us. To be superhumna. But by making Jesus superhuman is to totally negate the incarnation.

But the whole point is that Jesus, messy and complicated as he was, he was able to become "one with God" and he says we can do it to - put aside the self and the selfish ego and live a life of servcie and oneness with the self and with God. And because he, a mucky complicated human being could do so, so can I. Sex, desires and sexuality included.

And the image of Christ Crucified with a sign reading "Homophobia" rather han INRI reminds us that LGTBQ+ people have been crucified by the intollerance of the Church  for centuries. Not literally crucified - usually they were burned at the stake - but metaphorically crucified. Made a scapegoat. In the image of a Queered Jesus, crucified by homophobia is to remind us not only of his sacrificial love for all but to remind us of the inhumanity man has shown to man.
 
The death of Jesus is a reminder that a life of love, serving others and of radical hospitality (Jesus never turned people away and used stories, such as the good sammaritan or the women at the well to challenge everyday stereotypes and prejudices) can be world changing and can be threatening and challenging. And it's dangerous. Jesus didn't die to literally save sinners  by being the only acceptable "sacrifice" but rather he "saved sinners" by what happened after his death. His death was a tragedy - just like the death of other radical leaders (spiritual and temporal). He made a decision to change the world, to challenge the powers that be and went to his death because of that. His was a sacrificial love. His death *did* change the world - his death inspired others to stand in his place; just as the death of Rev Jim Reeb 50 years ago at Selma did or the death of Dr Luther King. The death was a tragedy, but the transformation it inspired in others is the miracle. Love coming out of darkness and tragedy.

So yes, Jesus can represent all these things: He can represent the world being crucified by the greedy and wealthy in the name of money; he can represent the animals and species being crucified by man; he can represent man being crucified by man through his own inhumanity. Jesus can represent LGBTQ persons being crucified. Who do you say I am? he asked. I say he can represent all these things: not just because he is an archetype, but because his sacrificial love was world and life changing and transformational.

Fun with Flags

No, not this one....

But this one...

Flags have been in the news a lot over the past few weeks, with objections being raised to the flying of the Confederate Battle Flag and also the Pride or Freedom Flag – one US Christian commentator described the Pride Flag as being “anti-Christian” and  a “banner of fascism and intolerance” and that it should be banned, whilst at the same time arguing it was OK to fly the “stars and bars”.

The flag which today is most associated with the Confederate States of America – those states which seceded from the Union in 1861 over the right to own slaves – is the Confederate Battle Flag, a flag introduced after the Battle of Manassas in 1861, because the Confederate State Flag was too similar at a distance to the Stars and Stripes of the Union forces. Today, it is often erroneously thought to have been the flag of the Confederacy, but it was not.

The Flag of the Confederate States went through several iterations: the first was rectangular, with two horizontal red stripes separated by a white stripe of equal width. In the upper left canton was a blue field, bearing nine, later thirteen, white states – one per state of the Confederacy. It looked like this:

   But because this was too similar to the Stars and Stripes a new flag was designed by newspaper owner William T Thompson  in 1863 and dubbed “The Stainless Banner” because it was predominantly white The body of the flag was white, and in the upper canton the familiar red field with the blue saltire cross. 

 

 In describing his flag, Thompson stated

“As a national emblem, it is significant of our higher cause, the cause of a superior race, and a higher civilization contending against ignorance, infidelity, and barbarism….”

Furthermore the white field of the flag represented racial purity

“We are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause.”

The Confederate Battle flag only came to prominence within the last 50 years or so because of its adoption by the Klu Klux Klan and later, as a response in many former “Southern” states as a response to the Equal Rights movement. Even today, in the discussion in the US to banish the flags of the Confederacy for good, many still hold on the idea that the Confederacy was not racist at all, merely

 “a symbol of patriots who were willing to die to protect this country and make sure it remained as the founders intended….Freedom with as little interference from the federal government as possible…. A war for southern independence”.

The Pride or Freedom Flag, by direct contrast was designed by the artist Gilbert Baker for the 1978 San Francisco Gay Freedom Day Parade.  Just as the fifteen stars on the Confederate flag represented the states of the Confederacy, so each of the six stripes of the Pride Flag has its own meaning
Red for life

Orange for healing

Yellow for sunlight

Green for nature

Blue for art

Purple for serenity

 Is it flown horizontally so that the stripes form a natural rainbow. The original flags were hand-sewn as a peace demonstration; it grew in popularity after the death of Harvey Milk and the burgeoning of the Gay Rights movement in the US.

It has often drawn controversy: in 1998  in the US John Stout sued his landlords – and won- after they forbade him from flying a pride flag; in 2004 Westminster City Council forbade the display of the pride flag by gay businesses. The decision was later overruled and only this year, again in the US, one Christian group has complained about the placement of rainbow coloured candles in a front garden, for being “relentlessly gay”.

So I ask this question, which of the two flags – the Confederate Battle Flag or the Pride Flag is really a banner for intolerance? I suppose it all depends which side of the political spectrum you sit, but the Confederate States of America- despite their romantic image via the likes of Gone with the Wind or The Blue and the Grey extolling the virtues of an idealised south –  was a country established over racism, over slavery. Whilst those who apologise for the South will say it was all about small govmint and states rights, what it actually was about was slavery. Stars and Bars or Rainbow Stripes? And if the flag, the symbol embodies the country or movement it represents, displays their virtues, then the Pride Flag is a flag of hope, a flag of freedom, and  - despite the machinations of the Christian Right, a Christian emblem, embodying the virtues of life, of healing and spirit. Moreover, it embodies the values of humanity. There's nothing fascist or intelorant represented in the values - the virtues - represented in the Pride Flag.

You chose. But I know which flag as the side of history with it, and as we approach the Gay Pride time of year, let us all fly our Rainbow Stripes with pride.

Vive la Revolution

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

After hearing the news of the defeat of Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo, the Unitarian William Hazlitt was:

‘…staggering under the Blow of Waterloo. The reappearance of our Imperial Idol on the coast of France, and his triumphal march on Paris is like a fairy-vision, excited our admiration and sympathy to their utmost pitch...Waterloo... the greatest and most fatal in its consequence that was ever fought in the world...the Sun that illuminated the Day of Austerlitz has finally set; the Lamp of Liberty is extinguished.’

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. The motto of the French Revolution, a Revolution which terrified the crowned heads of Europe who, for twenty years, desperately tried put the Genie of Liberty back into the bottle.  Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, are not just words uttered by dead politicians; the motto of a system of government once (still?) reviled in Britain. And contrary to the assertion of Hazlitt, the Lamp of Liberty is not extinguished. It cannot be extinguished, dimmed and guttering it may be: the Lamp of Liberty burns in all our hearts as the Divine Spark of Wesley; the Inner Light of George Fox, the still small voice of calm of Longfellow; the conscience of Emerson.

Unitarians supported the French Revolution because it’s values chimed with their own: Freedom, Reason and Tolerance. Freedom of thought, of belief, of action, the freedom to live an authentic life; the importance of Reason in understanding and interpreting the world; and Tolerance to accept the ideas, opinions and beliefs of those with whom we may not agree. Values many Unitarians still value.

These values are values of inclusion, of welcome, of radical hospitality.

Liberty to think for yourself, to make up your own mind, to be authentic and live and authentic life.

Equality – that all people are worth of the same dignity and respect; to treat others as we would have them treat us.

Fraternity – the recognition that we are all part of the same human family. That we are all “one”, one before each other and one before God.

The ‘Lamp of Liberty’ is rekindled every time freedom prevails over injustice; the Lamp of Liberty is rekindled every time equality triumphs over oppression; the Lamp of Liberty is rekindled every time the essential one-ness of our human condition is recognised.

And this is not just a political statement, but a religious one as well. Jesus of Nazareth no less urged his followers to ‘Love God, Love another and love your neighbour as yourself’; to ‘do unto others as you would them to do unto you’ to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us; that blessed are the peace makers and those who suffer for the sake of righteousness.  Jesus never told his followers what to believe, but more importantly – and one attended with far more difficulty – how to behave. This is a vision of radical inclusion where no one is cast out and all are welcome in the name of love.  No one is left outside ‘in my father’s  house there are many rooms.’ To paraphrase St Paul, if we do not have love we are nothing but a noisy gong or crashing cymbal – lots of noise but nothing else. ‘These three shall abide: Faith, Hope and Love, but the greatest of these is Love.’ This is a radical vision and message of a world set free, set free by love: love of the self, love of neighbour and love all that we find holy.  As the hymn-writer says

“We would be one in building for tomorrow, a greater world than we have known today; We would be one in searching for that meaning which binds our hearts and points us on the way. We would be one in living for each other, With love and justice strive to make all free. As one, we pledge ourselves to greater service, To show the world a new community.”

May we forever strive to encourage the values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity in our own lives and in the world at large.