Hello and Happy New Year (if indeed it is New Year where you are). Hope you are enjoying yourself this evening (if indeed it is evening where you are). If you are not enjoying yourself that much that really is ok too – most of us are only pretending (see diagram).

I quite like thinking up New Year resolutions. The important thing is to not take them too seriously so that when you break them it doesn’t matter too much.

I haven’t decided upon mine yet, as there is still several hours to go. When I decide upon them I will write them in a notebook. I will be starting a new notebook (a 9 x 14cm Moleskine heavy-paper no-lines sketchbook in case you are interested). One of my resolutions will involve bicycling, and another a new club I plan to start. I can’t give any more details than that at the moment. New hobbies make good resolutions, so if you’re stuck for ideas you could start there. In order to start them you may need to give up some old hobbies, otherwise a state of excessive busyness could result.

Please do share your resolutions and impending hobbies (serious or otherwise) in the comments below.

Happy New Year in any case, and all best wishes for 2011.

This is an extract from my Church Times cartoon today which makes no sense on its own, so click here without delay for the full version.

Just to say (for those who aren’t fed up of me going on about it) that I’ll be blogging from the G20 meeting in London’s Docklands over the next few days. Details here.

Barring technical malfunction (not out of the question by any means) I’ll be blogging in these two places:

1. The Church Times blog
2. On my Twitter page

As I’ve said on my Church Times blog post if you have any questions for world leaders I’d be glad to have them. I may well not get the opportunity to ask them, but you just never know.

See also:

• Website for the event, ‘A world to believe in’
• maggi dawn: A World to Believe In
• maggi dawn: The Archbishop of York and Jeremiah’s underpants

Update:

• The Archbishop of Canterbury – Archbishops to visit Cambridge

Inevitable
I find it quite amazing when doing a Google search for sharia inevitable to see how many news websites report Rowan Williams as saying this, with quote marks around ‘inevitable’, when he didn’t even use the word ‘inevitable’ in the famous interview at all.

Unavoidable
Rowan did use the word ‘unavoidable’ in the interview, but:

• It was the interviewer who introduced the word, a point which the BBC transcript of the interview omitted to mention. Context is everything. Well, it isn’t everything, but in this case I think you need the context to understand the answer.
• The question itself is a misquotation. “you’re words are that the application of Sharia in certain circumstances if we want to achieve this cohesion and take seriously peoples’ religion seems unavoidable?” This isn’t what the text of the lecture says at all. The word ‘unavoidable’ in the lecture is talking about something else altogether.

Matt Wardman has gone into some depth about the BBC and their role in the whole affair.

As I mentioned yesterday I spent the day at General Synod. I did get an overwhelming sense that everyone there (bar the two members the papers managed to drag up at the weekend) was entirely supportive of the Archbishop. Here’s posts by two synod members which sum up pretty well what other people were saying:

Paul Roberts » As the dust settles at General Synod
It was good to meet Paul – we had a chat in the gallery and he pointed out some synod features – about which I’ll say more at some point.

Mark Russell’s reflections: Rowan Willams
Mark: I was the scruffy-haired looking guy that was sitting with the Ridley people you spoke to at lunchtime.

The group was set up today and includes a number of General Synod members who would like to counteract the unkind sentiments expressed by a few of their number in the press. The aims are as follows:

Joining the group affirms that you believe:
1) The media has misinterpreted the spirit of what Dr Williams was talking about in his lecture
2) As an intellectual, and a spiritual leader, Dr Williams should feel free to express a carefully considered opinion.
3) That Dr Williams is one of the most gifted minds in Britain, and his views should be given careful consideration.

As it happens General Synod starts tomorrow in London. All being well I shall be going along on Wednesday for the afternoon session. I will be making observations.

See this post by ‘Cranmer’ in which he links to some examples of the sort of nastiness that needs to be counteracted by good people everywhere.

First of all, see this on the Archbishop’s own site: What did the Archbishop actually say?

For contributions that are more useful than anything you’ll find here see Bishop Alan, Kester Brewin, Doug at MetaCatholic Richard Peat, Matt Wardman and Distinctly Welcoming.

I think Paul Vallely is talking good sense with this column: Williams is snared in a trap of his own making – Independent.co.uk.

Meanwhile, The Times has an Exclusive (in bold letters). The story is that someone, somewhere is calling for the Archbishop to resign but wishes to remain anonymous. It is apparently a senior Church of England clergyman, presumably one who does not have the courage of his convictions.

If you would like this unnamed senior Church of England clergyman to resign please write in anonymously , or get someone else to do it for you.

Update: Good comment by Richard: connexions » Blog Archive » The Archbishop & Sharia (2)

Further update: Justin Lewis-Anthony unpacks Rowan’s speech a bit.

Sorry to not bring you more today. I have a heavy cold and am trying to do my paperwork. I really must not look at the computer again until this evening.

I was distracted this morning by the Archbishop of Canterbury’s recent speech about Religious Offence and who should be allowed to cause it. I haven’t decided what I think yet. He says some good things, but I’m not sure I agree with all his conclusions. All I can say is that it needs more thought than has been given by some prominent bloggers, who don’t bother to look up the original speech and just hurl abuse. This seems to be a more well thought out critique. I’d be interested to read comments by those who agree with the Archbishop.

Today’s reports in the Times and Cambridge News are saying that Tom Ambrose is to be sacked – ‘‘Bully’ vicar Tom Ambrose to be sacked‘ was the headline in Ruth Gledhill’s first piece, though later on after she had heard from Tom on the phone (blog link worth reading) the story was softened to ‘Vicar branded a liar and a bully should be sacked, tribunal rules‘. The Cambridge News also has an article.

I have little inside information, but it really does appear from the outside as if justice has not been done. John Pettigrew, an ex-blogger whose opinion I trust who was at the Tribunal, and he says this in Ruth’s comments:

Yes, Tom has lost. Personally, I have little idea why. He’s not always a sensible man, but he is not the monster he’s being painted as. And it is certainly the case that there is no breakdown between “the parish” and the priest. There is a breakdown between certain members of the PCC and the priest, and quite a bit of collateral damage scattered around. At the Tribunal itself, I had the distinct impression that the prosecuting lawyer was simply trying to score points and to unsettle witnesses, rather than the proceedings being a tribunal seeking facts.

(Update) Also:

The view of most of the “ordinary” parishioners at Trumpington (i.e. those outside the circles of politics that bedevil the parish) seems to be that this has been a power play from the moment Tom arrived in the parish. Neither side is guilt-free, but I am perfectly clear in my own mind where the causes lie, and they’re not with Tom. To dismiss him would be a manifest injustice.

I recommend reading the whole post if you’re interested in more background.

This is the Trumpington church website. I suspect John has something to do with it as he is good with that sort of thing.

Those who pray might like to remember Tom and his wife Gill at this present time.

Update: Reports like this one from HR zone really irritate me:

1. They’ve lost the quotes around the word ‘bully’ (as used by the Times) from the headline, thereby telling the reader that the vicar in question is guilty
2. The other side of the story isn’t reported, and there is no link to enable the reader to hear the other side of the story.

Don’t worry – I’m not here in person at 00.01 on January the 1st. This post is posted by the Autoblogger, specially activated ahead of time using a pulley and a very long piece of string.

Anyway – Happy New Year!

We are back from going to and going fro. A splendid time was had by all. Well, most. The cats probably didn’t enjoy spending Christmas in a cattery cage but they haven’t really told us about it out of, one assumes, politeness.

OK, resolutions. Last year I set my sights too high I think. This year I plan to draw more, put things away when I have finished with them, join an environmental organisation, do the bins the night before, cut dilly dallying by 12-15% and generally be a marginally better person. How about you?

Update: From Diamond Geezer – The hell that is central London on New Year’s eve.