This evening I received an email from [...]]]> On Sunday, part of my sermon had a go at unethical business practices and how we, as consumers, and as Christians, had a part to play in making ethical choices in our consumption. Well, here’s my opportunity to speak out against downright dishonest and misleading business practice.

This evening I received an email from Virgin Media, my phone and internet provider. A friend had already received one, so I knew it was going to appear sooner or later. Here’s the main text from it

We’re writing to let you know about a change to your monthly bill. Now that eBilling is our main billing option, we won’t be offering our £1 discount from 1st October. But don’t forget, there’s still a £1.25 charge for customers who choose to have paper bills, so you’ll carry on saving £1.25 a month – and a few trees too.

Now, I can’t help think that not only is this somewhat disingenuous, but it’s downright dishonest. I think it deliberately seeks to mislead and misrepresent the ‘savings’. I’ve not used paper billing for a long time. In fact, I don’t think any of my utility bills or banking have used paper billing or statements for a long while – my bit to ‘go green’. So, the truth of the VM change is that it will be costing me an extra £1 per month. But apparently I’ll be saving £1.25 – so that’s all right then.

Short-cutting safety systems and using overworked labour may the headline unethical business practices, but things like this are every bit as insidious. They might not cost lives, but they undermine the ethical integrity of business. If one can get away with it, then they all will and will push the boundaries even further. Why not simply be more honest and say they’re dropping the £1 e-billing discount and charging an extra £1.25 for paper billing. Yes people may well grump about it, but prices and ‘offers’ change. You can always shop around if you really want. But at least it’s honest and has a degree of ethical integrity.

Summarize the Bible in five statements, the first one word long, the second two, the third three, the fourth four and the last five words long. Or possibly you could do this in descending order. Tag five people.

So… here goes…

Witness

God’s Love

Humanity turns away

Jesus died [...]]]> Stewart has challenged me to:

Summarize the Bible in five statements, the first one word long, the second two, the third three, the fourth four and the last five words long. Or possibly you could do this in descending order. Tag five people.

So… here goes…

Witness

God’s Love

Humanity turns away

Jesus died for everyone

Live in forgiveness and faith

I tag:

Mrs Gerbil

Nelu

Daniel

David

Dave

I’m also conscious that, in previous years, my [...]]]> It occurred to me that I hadn’t blogged for a while and indeed the last one was over a week ago. But that last blog post contains the root of the lack of blogging – the usual step change in activity when a new semester starts.

I’m also conscious that, in previous years, my semester-time blogging is often dominated by whatever theologian is occupying my thoughts at the time. Usually this is simply a way of getting their ideas straight in my own head – the by-product being that I inflict my ramblings on the wider world (well, those who choose to read them anyway). So, in keeping with tradition, it looks like it’ll be Barth this semseter. And that’s where the catch-up comes in. We had approximately 40 pages ‘left over’ from last week’s class. That meant that we had 110 pages to do for this week. Amazingly I got through it (more or less – to within a few pages anyway) and feel as though I have actually ‘caught up’. The slightly bizarre aspect to this week’s reading though was the language. I could actually hear it being spoken! You can’t spend four years studying Divinity at New College and not be exposed to Barth and so as I read I could hear echoes of the words Barth uses from past lectures (and all delivered in an Irish accent).

The side-effect of having churned through so much reading is that I feel my brain is back in gear again (to a degree) and so future reading assignments don’t feel just so daunting. It’s also helped by starting to get the measure of the ‘Death’ course and realising that it’s not going to be onerous.

There has been catch-up in another sense as well. At the beginning of the week I got an email from Andrew, my supervisor in Brussels. He was popping over for a training course and we managed to get together for an hour or so as he passed through Edinburgh. As is often the case we ended speaking about people and realised that the old adage that “it’s a small world” is so very true. It also made me realise (upon reflection) that the links we make at university, on placement and just generally through the church, will stay with us and that that ‘small world’ can often be our source of support and encouragement. It provides the breadth of experience that we can bounce ideas off; it is a source of ‘corrective’ voices when we get too carried away with our own ideas and lose sight of the bigger picture; it is the community that provides the sense of being part of a bigger plan, a bigger ‘work’.

So, duty done – blogging caught up with – but, as always, in the ‘duties’, the opportunity to keep reflecting.

Instruct all Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not to issue press statements or otherwise talk to the media or to make decisions in relation to contentious matters of human sexuality, with respect [...]]]> The minutes of Monday’s GA session are available online and the wording of the so-called ‘gagging clause’ read as follows:

Instruct all Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not to issue press statements or otherwise talk to the media or to make decisions in relation to contentious matters of human sexuality, with respect to Ordination and Induction to the Ministry of the Church of Scotland, until 31 May 2011;

There were, of course, some get-out clauses for some projects and councils. It seems to me that this is aimed primarily at the official bodies of the Kirk and not at individuals. In other words, there cannot be an ‘official response’ to the discussion, but personal opinion should be allowed.

Update:

I just caught, on the webcast, a statement about the moratorium. It is, as yet, a draft but it states that individuals are also expected to comply with the spirit of the agreed motion.

So, whilst not a hard and fast ruling on individuals, there is an expectation that individuals won’t make statements to the press. It still leaves a bit of wriggle-room to allow public discussion.

I’ve seen so many variants of who can comment and who can’t and under what circumstances that I’d really like to see the actual words. My impression is that the ‘gagging order’ is aimed at the councils [...]]]> Does anyone have the definitive version of Dr McPake’s motion (as amended) from Saturday night at GA?

I’ve seen so many variants of who can comment and who can’t and under what circumstances that I’d really like to see the actual words. My impression is that the ‘gagging order’ is aimed at the councils and committees of the church, but I’d like to know if it extends to all who are under the discipline of church courts.