Another construct of time and existence.
But it is always through the appreciation of ordinary things that we find the mundane unique.
"The one great crime on [our part], is worry. Whenever we begin to calculate without God, we commit sin.
It is very easy to trust in God when there is no difficulty, but that is not trust at all, it is simply letting the mind rest in a complacement mood; but when there is trouble, there is death, where is our trust in God? The clearest evidence that God's grace is at work in our heart is that we do not get into panics."
Christian Disciplines, Oswald Chambers
Source: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/redefine-marriage-threaten-social-advances-of-women-rights-of-children-uk-l
“Changing the legal definition of marriage will likewise reflect and support a different view of what marriage is and what it is for.”
According to Rivers, any such change will confirm and bolster the already dangerous trends of “excessive individualism of modern Western society, as well as the collapse of participation in all forms of social action.” It will “reduce” marriage to being only for “sexually-intimate companionship,” disconnecting the institution from its biological and societal functions.
It will also create a social threat to the wellbeing of children, Rivers said. Referring to the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child, he said, “Every child has a moral claim on her natural father and mother, grounded in the fact that they brought her into being and that it is in principle good for every child to be brought up by her natural parents committed in relationship to each other and to her.”“Breaking the intrinsic connections between marriage, childbearing and kinship risks the further commodification of children, in which children become ‘ultimate accessories’ – means to the ends of their parents, and ultimately subject to their agendas, rather than persons of equal worth, with an equal stake in the success of the marriage.”
The notion that natural marriage “discriminates” based on sexual orientation is the basis of the argument for same-sex “marriage,” Rivers said. But the real question is whether this discrimination is unjust. Rivers argues that far from traditional marriage being unjust, it “secures the equal value of men and women,” and “promotes the welfare of children.” Civil partnerships already grant other types of unions full legal security.
“Any law which sets criteria for anything discriminates,” he wrote. While it is right to prohibit distinctions based on sex, race, religion or age in political life, business or employment, “sometimes it is right to draw distinctions even on these grounds.” He gave the example of the law that prohibits children under 16 from marrying.
The government’s proposals have failed “to distinguish rationally between relationships and arrangements which are and are not to be treated as marriage in law.”
Moreover, redefining marriage to create a new “gender-blind” institution will threaten the legitimate social advances made by women over the last 100 years.
“Marriage as currently defined is the central social institution which expresses the idea that men and women are equally valuable as men and women. It is only marriage which harnesses gender difference to the purposes of social cooperation.
“Almost all other ways in which difference is acknowledged – from sports teams to public lavatories – depend on segregation. Sexual union in marriage reinforces a comprehensive ‘together-in-otherness’ of male and female.”
Rivers said that the arguments against same-sex “marriage” coming from religious convictions are legitimate and need to be heard – particularly in a country where the great majority identify themselves as Christian – but are not the only arguments worth making. The government’s proposal, he wrote, fails to address “the fundamental question of what a marriage is, and thus it fails to identify and defend the boundaries of any new definition”.
“At root,” he said, the meaning of marriage is socially, not legally defined. It is not the law that makes marriage what it is, but the law that follows the “socially-given expectations”. Marriage itself, in other words, is the underlying, objective reality with the law merely following that template.
Last weekend, I had the opportunity to travel to London for a training conference organised by Innocent Network UK. Given the duration of travel by coach, the journey served as a break whilst I listened to Arvo Part’s album Da Pacem, watched the sceneries and gave thought on what has happened since my return to Bristol.
Time has passed by at a terribly frightening pace and I have found myself constantly trying to keep up with what is going on at school. Some modules have been very difficult for me; I actually gave up on the reading materials because I could make no sense out of them. The idea of ‘free time’ has become obsolete as most of us start realising that we have so many things to attend to that we have to learn how to make time for things instead. A constant challenge is to not lose sight of what is fundamental and important in life.
I love how Oswald Chamber (O.C.) wrote about Paul having a strong steady spiritual coherence in his internal being – he could let his external life change as it liked and it did not distress him because he was rooted and grounded in God. This is in contrast to us, who are often being in coherent because of the amount of unrelated emotion and phases of external things we have in us: a mixture. Paul’s consistency was down in the fundamentals. I suppose this encapsulates what I have been learning since returning.
Amidst the current state of affairs, I have been constantly confronted with the theme of waiting and resting upon Him – “in returning and rest… in quietness and confidence… labouring to rest in Him”, as opposed to tending to the many things that cry for my attention and demand my ‘required effort and input to make it work’. In the case of being a law student in the penultimate year, this defies common sense as it is probably the norm to start worrying and thinking about my training contract.
Perhaps in one sense, it really is about what O.C. has written: learning to be grounded and rooted in Him through the seasons of waiting, resting and surrendering; not just in relation to school and career but also in all matters of life. I suppose it is about seeing Him governing and scrutinising over every minute detail in my life even in the routine and mundane schedule. On the other hand, it feels like an adventure as I move forward towards uncertainties (at least to the human understanding)- stepping out yet ‘not knowing whither’. It feels like a challenge to have that reckless faith and trust in defiance of logic.
My thoughts were interrupted as a bird flew into the path of the coach travelling down the motorway – the sound of something being smashed and a mangled mess of feathers flew pass my window.