I enjoy eating alone. I also enjoy eating with family or friends. It’s a matter of ‘both and’ not ‘either or’. However I know that while some people don’t particularly enjoy eating alone, I do.

This has been the case for a very long time. While I was at boarding school in Christchurch, New Zealand, I used sometimes on a Sunday evening go to the Chinese restaurant in Armagh Street before returning to school and roll call. It was probably the only Chinese restaurant in Christchurch and maybe the only restaurant. 

In those days when we went out for a meal it was to a hotel, usually the United Service Hotel or, if it was lunch, to a department store restaurant, Beaths or Ballantynes. I can’t remember the name of the Chinese restaurant but to have chicken chop suey there on my own was, I thought, the height of sophistication and enjoyment.

When I was first ordained an English family friend gave me as a present the possibility of eating at a good restaurant, wherever I happen to be, at her expense, once a week. She said that she wouldn’t give me money because she was sure I would give it to the poor. I hope she was right. She knew that I loved food and going out to restaurants so this was her gift. 

So as a curate in Manchester I would go once a week to the Midland Hotel and sit at what became my regular table in the dining room observing life around me enjoying the food, on my own.

At home in London I’m not particularly interested in breakfast or lunch but to plan what I will have for my evening meal, prepare a tray, cook the food and then to eat perhaps in front of the television or listening to music is a matter of total enjoyment.

Here in Bangkok whether it’s at the street market in Patpong or the rather smart French restaurant, Indigo, I love the food, the atmosphere, and observing and being part of the world around me.

I am convinced that if the ingredients of what I am eating are the same and the manner of cooking identical and the temperature at which it is cooked is consistent to a degree, despite everything being exactly the same the food tastes different even as the setting is different. Not better or worse, different, and enjoyable, even when eaten alone.

On Saturday I attended the blessing of an apartment block and being in Bangkok it was performed by Buddhist monks. I understand that the blessing happens every year. Monks are invited from the local temple to perform the rite and are given food and other offerings including money in envelopes. I don’t know how much.

I arrived after the five monks who were to perform the ritual. They were sitting cross legged on mats in a ground floor room of the block with sliding doors open to the apartment’s forecourt. There were rows of chairs outside. I sat outside next to a charming retired professor of French at Thammasat university. She had an apartment in the block as did the friend who had invited me.

While we waited for the ceremony to begin the professor and I had the usual ‘organ recital’ that seems common among the elderly – her knees were the primary problem – and then she talked about her studies in Paris and in Montpellier as well as her work as a translator. I gathered later that she was considered quite formidable in the university. That didn’t particularly come across. Her charm did.

She and I took part in the ceremony from outside. Others from the apartment block were inside also sitting on the floor. Our participation consisted chiefly of maintaining a prayerful attitude, hands together in front of us rather as I was taught to pray as a child, while the monks chanted. After this part of the ceremony the monks were offered quantities of food. The sliding doors were then closed to enable them to have their lunch in air conditioned privacy. It was about eleven in the morning. Buddhist monks don’t eat after midday.

When the monks had finished eating the residents cleared away the food remaining for us to eat later and there was more chanting. For this I went into the room and managed to get down on the floor to an appropriate position when in the presence of monks. My position was not altogether orthodox, I can’t sit cross legged, but I could manage with my legs tucked to one side.

There was the offering of gifts some of which I offered but hadn’t actually given – it didn’t seem to matter – and there was a blessing including sprinkling of water and more prayers. It was not particularly intense or demanding and I found it rather moving. We then all relaxed to chat.

The senior monk, who told me he was 74 years old had good English, seemed chiefly interested in what football club I supported. I said Chelsea because my son-in-law and English grandson support Chelsea. The monk was not impressed. He was an Arsenal supporter. 

We covered a fair range of subjects none of them deeply theological and he asked me how much Thai I could speak. I gave him my limited vocabulary which includes the words for ‘hello’, ‘how are you’, ‘thank you’, ‘cheers’, ‘go straight’, ‘turn left’, ‘turn right’, and that was about it. 

He said, “But you are in Thailand. You don’t know the most important word!” 

“What’s that?” I asked.

“Money!” he said and laughed. 

When the monks got up to leave in the temple minivan as he passed me he smiled, shook his head, and said, “Money!” And chuckled to himself.

Materialism is not the prerogative of the West it seems. 

There is nothing wrong with a generalisation as long as it is recognised for what it is – true in general but not necessarily in the particular. I was always taught that while one could argue a case from the general to the particular one could never do so from the the particular to the general.

Be all that as it may it is great to be a New Zealander when travelling. It seems that people of other nationalities know that New Zealand is beautiful and New Zealanders are friendly – in general that is.  Thais by the same token are helpful and polite. This generalisation I have found to be so true that sometimes when asking a Thai directions they will seem to know the answer when actually they don’t but they don’t wish to be impolite by not being helpful. It can lead to confusion. 

Sitting in the lobby of the Oriental Hotel in Bangkok a few evenings ago I could not help but be aware of a group of visitors who were loud and inappropriately dressed. There is a dress code for the lobby of the Oriental. The group were of a nationality which I would say are generally noisy and aggressive tourists with little awareness of their surroundings or the customs of the country they are in. After the group had moved on the atmosphere in the lobby returned to its usual quiet and calm. Some guests exchanged glances of agreement and relief.

But what interested me was the memory of some nearly fifty years ago sitting in the lobby of the same hotel observing a group of tourists who were loud, inappropriately dressed and had little awareness of their surroundings or the customs of Thailand. The behaviour was the same. The nationality different.

My observation would now be that American tourists are generally friendly, aware and interested in the country they’re visiting and respect the customs they encounter.

I’ve realised that national characteristics among groups of tourists as well as in individual human beings can change for the better. At least I hope it works that way. And that I must not hold onto past held generalisations. Long may New Zealand tourists, I among them, continue to enhance our reputation. I wouldn’t like it at all if we New Zealanders were ever generally considered rude.

Christmas Day was wonderful not least because it followed a totally familiar pattern. 

Church, a perfectly adequate sermon (I preached); presents, bubbles, toasts (including absent family and friends); pulling crackers (paper hats, trinkets, and jokes); food (10 pigs in blankets, 5.2 roast potatoes per person and much more); wine (superb, not house, brought by a friend); the King at 3.00pm; flaming brandy over the Christmas pudding; and a game for everyone (not charades). It couldn’t have been better. 

There were to be thirteen of us but that was not a problem as I have a stuffed toy wombat to make it fourteen to sit down. However on Christmas Eve my younger son happened to meet an 83 year old American travelling on her own so we invited her. I put the wombat back on top of the wardrobe.

Every Christmas my mother used to say, “You behave so much better if there’s someone who’s not family.” She was right of course but I’m sure we would have behaved well anyway. Peggy, the American, was wonderful. She and I agreed that often, when travelling, the best times are the ones you hadn’t planned for. And I remembered from the Letter to the Hebrews, ‘Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.’

Familiar patterns are wonderful and unfamiliarity is wonderful as well.

At the door of the Church of the Annunciation at Nazareth there was a sign:

 ‘Please, No Explanations in the Church’. 

It was there to stop tourist guides doing their thing with tour groups and thereby  destroying the peace of the church for those who simply wanted to be there with God or simply to be still.

It’s a sign I would like to see by the door of every church, especially at Christmas. This is not a time for explanations in the church. In a sense I rather doubt there is ever much of a time for explanations in the church: The church is there for people simply to be.

As an old friend spends his time reminding me – we are not human doings we are human beings. That above all is everything Christmas is about – being. 

Being with family, friends, food, presents all of that and for me being with God  – The Divine Being who is always with me – God With Us.

Merry Christmas