Edmund Goss in his autobiography recalls an incident concerning his father: 'He was accustomed in his brighter moments...... occasionally to sing loud Dorsetshire songs of his early days, in a strange, broad, Wessex lingo that I loved. One October afternoon he and I were sitting on the verandah, and my father was singing; just around the corner, out of sight, two carpenters were putting up the framework of a green house. In a pause, one of them said to his fellow: "He can zing a zong, zo well's another, though he be a minister." My father who was holding my hand loosely, clutched it, and looking up, I saw his eyes darken. He never sang a secular song again during the whole of his life.'

The Rev. Philip Goss was happy, light hearted, almost for a moment carefree and he expresses his joie de vivre naturally but innocently in the silly songs of his youth. The workman in the garden, because of his stereotyped view of the Victorian clergyman, indicated, without real censure, that this is not what he expected of the typical minister. Philip was so upset at failing to meet his expectations that from then on he subdued his natural inclinations and was never again to entertain his son with jolly ditties.

How different was Jesus. His life style and that of his disciples did not conform to the expectations of the Pharisees and scribes. Jesus and his followers actually enjoyed themselves. There was much party going, eating and drinking, witty conversation and laughter. It wasn't seemly. Genuinely devout folk took their religion seriously and prayed and fasted. The more miserable you looked the holier your reputation.

Jesus' response to the criticism of his disciples and, by implication, himself was not shamefaced or defensive. Jesus was never, never, this. He says in effect, "Look, it isn't natural for my disciples to be unhappy while I am with them. You wouldn't expect the bridegroom's friends to be sour faced and miserable at his wedding reception. They would enjoy the bridegroom' company. In much the same way my disciples enjoy mine."

This is a remarkable statement on the part of Jesus and a pointed rebuke to all those religious people who misrepresent natural, essentially innocent, behaviour.

My mother, as a girl, loved, what was then known as, gym. It was probably this early physical training that encouraged a life-time of good deportment. She walked briskly with a straight back and her head held high. It became unconscious, innocent and natural. Imagine then her shock when she learned that the women of the Suffolk village to which she had moved as the pastor's wife were accusing her of strutting around as if she owned the place. They found the way she walked offensive. Well my mother never did learn to slouch but certainly the bounce went out of her stride. She was not as resilient as her Master.

I am absolutely appalled that churches are prohibiting adults from touching children as part of their child protection policy. Why does the existence of a relatively small number of predatory paedophiles in our society mean that I cannot be affectionate and playful in the company of pre-pubescent children. In Britain today you can stroke a cat and play with a puppy but you must not touch a child. Children enjoy being chased and caught and held and released to go through the same procedure again. They will cry, "More! More!" To ban what is innocent fun would not appeal to Jesus. I do not believe that by prohibiting physical contact in church youth clubs or schools the incidence of abuse of young children is going to be reduced by any significant amount. Most abuse takes place in the home. Does this mean parents are going to be stopped from touching their children? Jesus was not politically correct in his day and age and he would not be politically correct today. There is no way he would condemn innocent behaviour. He might say something about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel!

It is a cruel thing to kill or stifle the natural expression of an inner joy that you do not share and cannot understand. When I was younger my brother Paul sometimes irritated me. When he met people he was, 'all over them'. I accused him in my heart of being smarmy; putting on a show to make a good impression. But I was wrong. My brother liked people a lot more that I did. He was very gregarious. It was a pleasure for him to meet acqaintances and friends and he expressed his delight exuberantly. What was unnatural behaviour to me because of my unsociable disposition was natural to him. If I succeeded by cold and cutting remarks to inhibit his effusiveness I would deny both my brother, and those he made a fuss of, their happiness. I have written in the past tense because it seems to me that as my brother has got older he has become a bit more like me!

There are still those in the church who frown on youthful enthusiasm, friendliness, displays of affection, extrovert behaviour, passionate preaching and even the joy of doing something well. Too often natural and innocent behaviour is modified to pacify the kill-joys. Perhaps we need to follow the example of Jesus, in this as in all else, and tell the old miseries and safety first merchants, those who say, "We mustn't lay ourselves open to ....", where to get off.

Go to Luke5v36 DONT BE SILLY