I’m later than I expected, but as I said last week or so, I am retired! I have the Tosh back-up disk from 2012-Juli-20 handy, in case I get another message that my Toshiba laptop needs some media. This computer has a pre-programmed interface, but I am not using it, nor do I know much about it. That is why I get these little announcements and media messages, I think.

I posted the four points I wrote on yesterday and printed them as a web page. The whole sounds better than I expected it to. And now, I want to elaborate on that in writings, or should I start a separate document? I’ll start with the writings, the full document can come later.

The walking is still restricted, but I did do some shopping in the neighbourhood. Tomorrow I’m seeing Steve my Doc again, then to Sarah and BJ and the theatre with Shirley in the evening.

An Elaboration:
The four talking points of ‘My Belief so far’, expanded.

Point 1: Indoctrination and Confession.
At the dinner table and at other times, I as the oldest with my siblings later, was read to from the ‘Children’s Bible’ by Anne de Vries, who later became friends of my parents. This author was from the province of Drenthe, all country, and a guy who knew how to tell a story. Later on the adult bible appeared and so did the teachings in the denominational Elementary and Junior High schools. In addition, there was the weekly Catechism [Heidelberg] instruction by the minister for several years and the double - 10am and 5pm - Sunday church services not to forget.

Through all this it became clear that the Bible was the guide for conduct, living and convictions of held belief. The last one presented a problem to me, because if the Bible was to be our guide to a true belief, why was there so much dispute among the different denomination in my Dutch society as I observed this in my youth.

After much reading and study I came to the insight that it was our human interpretation that was cause of the disagreements, but that the Bible as a guide was not the reason for all the differences of opinion.

Empowered by this newly gained insight I was ready to do confession of faith. This presented a bit of a problem, because I had as yet not taken the so called ‘Confessional Catechism’ classes. But, after having been duly examined by two elders and possibly due to my family standing as well as my own youth work, I was allowed to take part in the Confession ceremony that Easter in 1954.

This event meant that I was now a confessing member of my denominational church, ‘De Gereformeerde Kerk van Neederland’ as that was called, a staunchly Calvinist and upright community. As such a member, I was allowed and expected to take part in the ‘Lord’s Supper’ [Eucharist] ceremony, which took place every three months and was supervised as to who could attend.

It involved the eligible members to go up to the front of the congregation and there to take a seat at the long table over which the minister presided, according to the church forms. He pronounced the formulae over ‘the bread that we brake’ and ‘the beaker from which we drink’ which represented the body of Christ and the New testament respectively. These two meant that our sins were forgiven in the Christ’s offer of his body - the bread - and that the believer was now renewed in the New Testament - the wine - teachings.

It is a powerful symbology, because eating and drinking in community means that you trust each other and it represents assimilation of content in the psychological sense. We still use the ritualised meals for getting together, be they less formal than ‘Holy Supper’.

So, I was now a fully confessing member of the church and of the faith I was brought up in. Yet, ‘I did not feel anything special’ said a friend of mine who had gone through the same confession process and the following official supper. ‘Neither did I’, was my reply and for me this could still come. It did, but the new insight and awareness was of a very different kind, which brings this part to its conclusion.