Some reflections on Xanthe's dedication.

Xanthe is now seven months old.  Those seven months have gone by extraordinarily quickly, during which I have developed practical skills I never believed I would need and an unusual ability to remain alert in spite of all the sleepless nights.

It's interesting that, already, differences are emerging between my parenting approaches and those Anna prefers.  Inevitably, these stem from personal and family experiences.  They also are the product of the expectations of those closest to us. of our respective views of the world and ultimately how we see ourselves.

The small matter of the baby's rite of passage came up, and in some respects we are in agreement.  Neither of us believes that a bit of water and some religious mumble-jumble will do a child much good.  Similarly, we don't believe in imposing religion upon a child's life.  I personally struggle with the notion of baptism as being anything but voluntary.  But we also are both of the view that we wish for our family - and extended family - to be as involved in Xanthe's life as possible and we saw the value in something that would celebrate this new life while also looking to the future - perhaps actually going beyond traditional rituals and practices while loosely confirming to them.

Anna's from a more typically religious background than I am; her father is the minister of an independent church in Cumbria that seems to swing between socially liberal and conservative philosophies depending on the issue. We certainly have some interesting conversations.  They don't "do" religion in the classical sense either, which I find quite positive.  However, sadly in their proclaimed irreligiousness such people become religious: my brother had specifically requested before Xanthe's birth to be a godparent (one reason why this was important to us) but apparently their church does not believe in them.  Wasn't there a chance of incorporating this into a dedication ceremony for a family member?  It seemed not, at least without creating internal family feuds.  

It does make you wonder, if they can't  accommodate family requests what chance is there of actively reaching out to others in need of inclusion such as LGBT people?

Godparents were important to us not from the perspective of religious convention, but because mentoring and supporting parents in the roles is vital in a child's development.  And in my brother Adrian and my friend Bob, not only had we found two incredibly supportive mentors with a real interest in Xanthe's development, but some incredibly good role models.  Both have very different life experiences which will enrich Xanthe's cultural and social understandings as she grows up.

It would have been quite a nice thing to have a dedication ceremony in Anna's family's church but neither of us wanted to labour the point about inclusivism, and we certainly didn't wish to exclude people we'd already asked to be godparents.  

Fortunately the Salvation Army was on hand to allow us a "dedication" rather than a Christening ceremony.  I like the Salvation Army, although I don't really buy into where it comes from theologically. They've been quite good to me in the past, to put it mildly.  And, on this occasion, they allowed us to create our own  ceremony including a secular song that I'd written, performed by Xanthe's cousins.  We were able to fully involve both family and godparents in ways that we wanted and while there were many Christian references the religious content wasn't laid on very thick, always positive for those present who struggle with ecclesiastical speak and religion more generally.

The event itself took place last Saturday; indeed, as we had hoped, it turned into a celebration of a young life with huge potential.  It was also a way of bringing our rather diverse family and friends together, of making people feel significant and involved, and for enjoying some pretty good food.  It also made a statement of how deeply Xanthe is loved and the dedication many people have to care for her.

These events are important for so many reasons.  It's a milestone in Xanthe's life and a means of drawing people who are important to us (and therefore to Xanthe) together.  And, in our case, it sent out a strong signal of inclusiveness.  Everyone was welcome, because they are a part of Xanthe's life.  We are all the products of hundreds of relationships: they might vary in terms of how they positively affect us, but there can be no denying that they make us who we are.  And, as Xanthe's father, those people who have shaped my own life inevitably influence Xanthe's in unseen ways.  No doubt my attitudes and worldviews were forged by my own family, friends and countless people I've come into contact with.  This was reflected by hidden tributes to people who were not present and will never have the privilege of knowing Xanthe personally: a Gaelic reading in memory of my friend Bill Beaton, a rendition of Le Lac de Come in honour of Dr Jose Belda, who taught me the piece and inspired me to study medicine, and my own song being written to the tune of The Dark Island in tribute to an elderly lady named Mrs Williams who, during my time at Oban High School, contributed in no small way to my personal well-being and who, rather amazingly, decided to take up learning the accordion at the age of 90.

The problem with such events is that, too often, they are overtly religious and lack any kind of scope for actually focusing on the child themselves.  Surprisingly many still find the need to endure such tedious ceremony, often in spite of their lack of belief. That wasn't for us.  Similarly, while there are beautiful humanist naming ceremonies which I'm happy to promote, we also wanted to include many family members who have particular Christian beliefs and may have struggled with an entirely non-religious service.  We felt that inclusivism was a more fitting message than any other and are certainly very grateful to the Salvation Army, who allowed us to make Xanthe's dedication all things to (almost) all people and, most importantly, for accommodating the many very personal and unique requirements we had.

It was a surprisingly beautiful and inclusive ceremony.  Actually, come to think of it, given our respective families that isn't too hard.  Plenty of people from different backgrounds including some LGBT people - all who have one thing in common: they're part of Xanthe's life.

Christenings, dedications, naming ceremonies...ultimately, whatever they are called, they should be about introducing a child to a world of love, with people close to him or her pledging commitment to their well-being.  It isn't God's day, it's the child's - and the family's.  

The last word goes to Xanthe's godparent Bob and his wife Helen who wrote to us afterwards: "We were honoured to be part of your dedication service and lovely family party/celebration.  Thank you for inclusing us.  How fortunate Xanthe is - to be born with such a lovely, lively family,with such a splendid cohort of uncles, aunts, cousins, etc. It was very good to be part of Xanthe's big day."  

No doubt, it's one of many "big days" Xanthe will have throughout her life.  I imagine that some might turn out to be a little more expensive...

National Trust responds to my complaint!

The National Trust has responded to my complaint in relation to the promotion of creationist theory at the new Giant's Causeway visitor centre in County Antrim, Northern Ireland.

The National Trust drew my attention to a statement they have made in which it claims that they have acted in the interests of diversity and in recognition of the fact that "some people" hold different views.  It also had this to say:

"Hello Andrew, thanks for sharing your concerns. Just to reassure you, the exhibition showcases the science of how the stones were formed, the history of this special place and the stories of local characters. One of the exhibits tells the story of the part played by the Giant’s Causeway in the historic debate about how the earth’s rocks were formed and about the age of the earth. Of course we fully support the scientific explanation for the creation of the stones 60 million years ago." 


So, that's all right then.  Sadly, this didn't deal with the thrust of my complaint, which was as much about the naivity of the National Trust's decision-making and the unintended consequences of throwing a sop to creationists.  And so, I have replied:

"Many thanks for responding. Reading that statement only partially allays my concerns. Clearly the NT does not support the creationist view, but of course I did not for one moment believe that it did. The very best thing that can be said is that the NT has been incredibly naive about this, especially as the creationist group it has been in discussion with is already claiming this sets "a precedent to be applied elsewhere". 

"What I don't understand is the need to sit down and enter into discussions with organisations like the Caleb Foundation in the first instance; and, if diversity really is the issue, why were representatives of other religious groups and non-fundamentalist Christian churches not approached for their views? Also, if alternative views really do need to be given a wider airing on the basis that "some believe them", I'm imagining that bogus beliefs that aliens created the Pyramids should also - holding to that principle - feature alongside historical explanations at the appropriate sites. Would the NT approve of that? Of course not. 

"The NT has inadvertently sent out a signal to creationists that their opinions have been vindicated, and has been seized upon by creationists as such. The spokesperson for the group is correct - a precedent has indeed been set. The genie now needs to be put back into the bottle.

"You state that 'for some people the debate continues today'. Indeed, but what kind of people? Uninformed and often narrow-minded people. The NT really should have been careful not to be perceived as giving credence to the views of such individuals but, sadly, it failed to recognise the unintended consequences of its decision. I feel personally offended by this; not least that creationist groups have had far more input into plans for the Visitor Centre than have NT members."


I remain saddened that such a reputable organisation has seen fit to help the creationist cause, however well-meaning its reasons.  This is a setback to so much the National Trust professes to stand for.  I genuinely hope it reverses its unwise decision and, in future, thinks twice before sitting down with groups like the Caleb Foundation to solicit their opinions.