A lawyer stood up to put Jesus to the test, saying, ‘Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ He said to him, ‘What is written in the law? How do you read?’ And he answered, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbour as yourself’. And Jesus said to him, ‘You have answered right; do this, and you will live’. But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbour?’ Jesus replied, ‘A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers … ’.
Luke 10: 25–30
Contextual Bible Study (CBS) is one of the outcomes of a theological concentration on place and space, framed by an understanding via liberation theology that context is all important. Where theology is worked out is neither random nor incidental; it is a significant determinant of what conclusions are reached. An understanding that this applies to how Christian scriptures are interpreted is captured in the notable phrase of the feminist theologian Phyllis Trible, describing certain biblical passages with reference to women as ‘texts of terror’.1 While reading the Bible in particular situations has been criticised as being little more than the finding of analogies, Lawrence comments that:
In fact, it is only in the collision of various contextual readings that liberatory narratives have been constructed: master narratives couched in patriarchy, slavery and racism have been exposed as oppressive by those counter stories from below.2
Thus she assembles reading groups in various locations including a fishing village, an inner city parish, a rural village and with the deaf community. A reading group with a second set of homeless people was a natural development of hearing personal stories via interviews.3
The outcomes of such reading are described in the sections which follow, again with extensive quotations to illustrate substantive points as well as to provide the reader with a sense of these encounters. In each case, the biblical passage to which participants were asked to respond is included first.4
Jesus full of the Holy Spirit returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness. Forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing at all during those days and when they were over he was famished. The devil said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command this stone to become a loaf of bread’. Jesus answered him, ‘It is written one does not live by bread alone’. Then the devil led him up and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And the devil said to him, ‘To you I will give their glory and all this authority for it has been given over to me and I will give it to anyone I please. I you then will worship me, it will all be yours’. Jesus answered him, ‘It is written worship the Lord your God, and serve only him’. Then the devil took him to Jerusalem and placed him on the pinnacle of the temple saying to him, ‘If you are the Son of God throw yourself down from here for it is written He will command His angels concerning you to protect you, and on their hands they will bear you up so that you will not dash your foot against the stone’. Jesus answered him, ‘It is said do not put the Lord your God, to the test. ‘When the devil had finished every test he departed from him until an opportune time. Then Jesus filled with the power of the Spirit returned to Galilee and a report about him spread through all the surrounding country. He began to teach in their synagogues and was praised by everyone. When he came to Nazareth where he’d been brought up he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day as was his custom. He stood up to read and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because it has invited me to bring good news to the poor. He sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour’. And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. Then he began to say to them, ‘Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing’. All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his mouth. They said, ‘Isn’t this Joseph’s son?’ He said to them, ‘Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb ‘doctor cure yourself’ and you will say ‘do here also in your home town the things that we’ve heard you did at Capernaum’’. And he said, ‘Truly I tell you no prophet is accepted in the prophet’s home town.’ (Luke 4: 1–24)
Initial discussion focused around the final sentence and the concept of going back, especially going back home. This led naturally to some thoughts about home: what it is or where it is. Dan talks about the freedom of ‘roaming’ but its disadvantages in terms of employment. He goes on to cite an example of someone who because of abuse was at home nowhere, not even travelling:
Dan. So for her to go back home is not happening, do you know. She’s never, wherever she’s been, it’s like, I’ve met her in a few different places and she’s never at home wherever she is. If she went back to where her parents and her family are from, do you know, there is no comfort there. She’s looking for that comfort. But she’s never got comfort with a companion either because she’s learned to distrust people.
Susannah. So she’s not finding that travelling around either really. No.
Dan. No.
Fiona’s understanding is slightly different: ‘[You] prefer travelling and then find somewhere and settle down. Well, I haven’t found somewhere but I have found someone’.
Susannah returned the focus to the biblical passage and asked for more specific responses to the temptations of Jesus. The image of the devil asking Jesus to worship him in exchange for power over the whole world elicits a discussion about contemporary society and the bargain offered by the economic system:
Niall. If you work you can have a car, if you work you can have this. It’s all there, isn’t it.
Dan. From the day we’re born it’s been like that really. You are told you’ll get an ice cream.
Niall. It’s the desire not to be equal, I think, isn’t it. We want to be above somebody else.
Susannah. Oh, that’s interesting, isn’t it. So almost here the devil is saying to Jesus well, you know, if you do this you’re going to have more power than anybody else. I’m going to give you …
Niall. Yeah, give you what technically you are not going be the same as everybody else, you’re going to be above everybody else. And that’s what the system basically tells everybody to be.
The third temptation brings reference by one speaker to the Second Iraq War and Tony Blair being the one who is tempted, but on further questioning he says that he is not convinced by his own argument.
Once while Jesus was standing by the lake of Gennesaret and the crowd was pressing in on him to hear the word of God he saw two boats there at the shore of the lake. The fishermen had gone out of them and were washing their nets. He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little way from the shore. Then he sat down and taught the crowds from the boat. When he had finished speaking he said to Simon, ‘Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch’. Simon answered, ‘Master, we’ve worked all night long but have caught nothing. Yet if you say so I will let down the nets’. When they’d done this they caught so many fish that their nets were beginning to break. So they signalled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both boats so that they began to sink. But when Simon Peter saw it he fell down at Jesus’ knees saying, ‘Go away from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man’. For he and all who were with him were amazed at the catch of fish that they had taken. And so also with James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. Then Jesus said to Simon, ‘Do not be afraid, from now on you will be catching people’. When they had brought their boats to shore they left everything and followed him. Once when he was in one of the cities there was a man covered with leprosy. When he saw Jesus he bowed with his face to the ground and begged him ‘Lord, if you choose you can make me clean’. Then Jesus stretched out his hand, touched him, and said, ‘I do choose, be made clean’. Immediately the leprosy left him. And he ordered him to tell no one. ‘Go’, he said, ‘and show yourself to the priest and as Moses commanded make an offering for your cleansing for a testimony to them’. But now more than ever the word about Jesus spread abroad. Many crowds would gather to hear him and to be cured of their diseases. But he would withdraw to deserted places and pray. After this he went out and saw a tax collector named Levi sitting at the tax booth and he said to him, ‘Follow me’. And he got up, left everything and followed him. Then Levi gave a great banquet for him in his house. And there was a large crowd of tax collectors and others sitting at the table with them. The Pharisees and their scribes were complaining to his disciples saying, ‘Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?’ Jesus answered, ‘Those who are well have no need of a doctor but those who are sick. I have come to call not the righteous but sinners for repentance.’ (Luke 5: 1–16 and 27–32)
Out of the four sessions reading the Bible with homeless people, this one provoked the most responses and the most interesting responses about the person of Jesus. The text tends to be heard and imagined in literal detail, so one participant suggests that his experience of fishermen is that if he talked to them like Jesus did, they would throw him over the side. How could a carpenter be telling fishermen what to do? But there is also:
James. Maybe he were a better fisherman, maybe he had new ideas that he could introduce to the older guys who had the boats and they could listen and … I mean, there’s always people with new and fresh ideas, isn’t there.
Fiona chooses another aspect of this account and comments on Jesus needing ‘time out’. She draws parallels with her own experiences of needing space for reflection or recuperation:
I get a picture that Jesus, because he calls him Master and people ask him to do so many things but he wants to go away sometimes and withdraw, doesn’t he, and just be on his own for a bit. Because you know, everyone is asking him and asking him and asking him. He needs his space as well, doesn’t he. That’s what I like about it, that’s what’s so human about him. Do you know what I mean? He needs his space as well so he can cope. Because it can get too much sometimes. But he still comes back and he still helps. But he needs that space as well to go meditate or whatever … Yeah, I think he needs to like sort of recoup. And also he’s got to think about himself. If he’s not sort of good within himself, and hasn’t got that inner strength, he won’t be able to help other people so much. It’s nice to know you can connect with that. Sometimes with things, you know, everyone needs that, a bit of quiet time. So something you can relate to.
Susannah asks what meaning they ascribe to Jesus’ instruction to Simon: ‘from now on you will be catching people’. This evokes the kind of comment that with a less transient group might be explored more fully:
James. Cannibalism. [laughter] Well, the fishing, when they’re fishing they’re fishing for food, aren’t they? So I mean, they could assume that, they could think this guy is a bit of a cannibal.
Followed by Jesus as a fairground attraction:
James. Like Ripley’s Believe It or Not!5 You know, have you seen them in Blackpool, one of them ones. ‘Come and see a man who catches men, not fish!’ [several laugh].
Meanwhile Fiona has a more conventional interpretation:
He just wants to spread the word. He wants them to spread the word, doesn’t he … They are going to well, spread the word. Yeah … This amazing man is around.
In response to the healing miracle there is discussion about why Jesus asks the man with leprosy not to tell others. All participants are immersed in the story at this point, almost as if they are bystanders, or have a clear picture in their imaginations. Again the focus is on the person of Jesus:
Fiona. I just think he doesn’t want to be big, it’s a bit of a crap word but bigheaded. He doesn’t want to be like, you know, I’ve done all this, I’ve done all that.
Tom [at same time]. He’s obviously tired out from doing things, isn’t he.
Fiona. He wants to do it in moderation. You know, don’t tell everyone because it will spread in its own time, people in their own time will hear and see. He doesn’t want to get swamped. Again this is the space thing, isn’t it.
James comes back into the conversation at this point and wants to combine the two previous images, extending the idea slightly. He has little confidence in what he is saying but in the context of this study his remark is especially insightful:
Well, how you interpret it, there can be two different interpretations. One where you’re looking at it sort of sensationalist sort of I am a fisher of men, he might be a cannibal, bogeyman. And the other side then is a modest person, saying ‘Don’t tell anyone I’m the bogeyman, please keep it quiet. Maybe I want to do good work and good deeds. But also I am a bogeyman, because I need to be, because I can change things’. I mean, I’m just going off the top of my head. ‘I can change things …’.
The final part of this reading considers why Jesus eats with sinners, and who might be viewed in the same way now. Participants mention traffic wardens, health and safety executives, wheel clampers, politicians, and also homeless people. These remarks are made with no self-pity:
James. Homeless people. They’re unpopular with people. I used to hear comments by people. [Jim agrees] I don’t know what it is but I’ve had some cruel words, I suppose. Vindictiveness.
Tom. Yeah, we’re not here from choice, are we?
Fiona. It’s like a stigma … And most people I’ve met, I mean, we’ve both had full-time jobs, but there’s a lot of mental illness out there. And I’ve met so many people that have been, you know, like upstanding citizens and they’ve just fallen. It’s not their fault, you know. And that’s what angers me. But you do get some horrible comments, don’t you. You just get, ‘Get a job’, ‘Scum’, ‘Drug addict’ – and you just think, you don’t know me. Do you know what I mean?
Tom. Try wearing my shoes for a day.
One of the Pharisees asked Jesus to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee’s house and took his place at the table. And a woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment. She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing them with the ointment.
Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, ‘If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him—that she is a sinner’. Jesus spoke up and said to him, ‘Simon, I have something to say to you’. ‘Teacher’, he replied, ‘speak’. ‘A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed five hundred pounds, and the other fifty. When they could not pay, he cancelled the debts for both of them. Now which of them will love him more?’ Simon answered, ‘I suppose the one for whom he cancelled the greater debt’. And Jesus said to him, ‘You have judged rightly’.
Then turning towards the woman, he said to Simon, ‘Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has bathed my feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little’. Then he said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven’. But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, ‘Who is this who even forgives sins?’ And he said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace.’ (Luke 7: 36–50)
Responses to hearing this biblical passage weave backwards and forwards, focusing on the woman and her tears, on Jesus and the issue of debt, back to the woman, to Simon as religious leader and host, back to debt and finally back to Simon. Not all of this movement is directed by the session leaders. The very first comments relate to the strangeness of the story and why it is there at all; there are issues linking the ice breaker with the process of hearing and reading; there is a possibility of a group reading; and there is evidence that single speakers can have a disproportionate effect on outcomes.
Fiona’s reaction to the meaning and history of the woman in the story shows an empathy and identification with her actions towards Jesus:
She was a working lady and she doesn’t want to be like that anymore … Well, she wants to be saved, doesn’t she, and forgiven, and she was wanting to be normal … Doesn’t want to. She wants respect and probably to be loved. Just. Someone just to say to her it’s okay, you’re just who you are and you’re forgiven. You’re … You know. So yeah. She just wants that comfort.
Later comments include:
Glenn. Scorned by society. Feels bad about herself. Guilt ridden.
Michael. A lonely old woman.
Al. But then again she could be saying that I’m not bothered about you, I’ll take you as I find you, kind of thing, do you know what I mean. I’m not bothered if you’ve robbed, broke or stole or whatever. I’m here to whatever. I don’t care who you are, anyway whatever, do you know what I mean, it doesn’t matter whose feet it was, I’d still wash them, do you know what I mean?
Michael. She’s quite confident though, isn’t she?
There is some interest in the gesture of kissing feet, recognition of cultural and temporal distance, and the down-to-earth: ‘Especially if he had boots on and his feet were stinking’.
The issue of debt raises a variety of responses, some of which challenge regular interpretations of the story and Jesus’ own teaching. One participant indicates that it is the action of writing-off debts which is important, and not the amount, so in fact they are both equal. Another says that the one who has the smaller debt annulled will be disappointed he has not asked for more in the first place. Some of these debtors’ reactions will also depend on their personal circumstances and why they were in debt: ‘[if] it was life or death time or whatever, then they’d feel more obliged than what he would [be] just putting it on the horses or whatever kind of thing’. The first speaker later links this story of debt to contemporary economic circumstances; description of the letter referred to dominates discussion:
So if they’re paying 70 billion back, what’s the debt? They didn’t say what the debt was, just the interest, kind of thing. I was thinking to myself, Dear, Hiya Prime Minister, and I wrote him a letter, I’ve got 15 pages written now and I haven’t finished it yet [several laugh].
Attitudes to Simon as host and religious leader are also instructive, including differing views about welcome and hospitality. There is humour as well.
Glenn. He’s surprised that Jesus isn’t revulsed [sic].
Al. I think he’s put his car keys in the bowl the same as everybody else does [laughter from males].
Al. Say now, say like for example I was like planning on going to see the kids in Carlisle, so I’ve travelled 400 miles all the way to Carlisle, I would get there, which I was expecting But if I turned up and they thought ‘Oh, it’s only Dad’, and carried on with whatever they were doing, that’d be like a disappointment kind of thing to have, do you know. It’s like four years since I’ve been there and it’s like … But anyway, so say I went up there tomorrow, knocked on the door, Deborah and Sean, ‘Oh, it’s only Dad’, and carried on with their day-today life, so, bloody hell, I’ve never seen them for four years but yet they’re still continuing as if I don’t exist.
Michael. Coming back to what you were saying about knowing him, how long he’s known him, see if you came round my house and I’d known you a year, and you’ve been coming round my house for a year, you know where the cupboard is, you know how to make yourself a cup of tea, I’m not going to offer you one. Same thing with the water and his feet, I’m guessing.
They return to Simon before the end of the session, and despite Al’s attempts to monopolise the discussion with his own agenda, he also adds this perception: ‘He was kind of like bigging himself up … Slagging off this, slagging off that, whatever’.
Despite the discontinuity of this conversation, the engagement with the event at Simon’s house and the response to ideas about lifestyle, debt and hospitality include the potential for a group reading: that these homeless people have something particular to say about this biblical episode because of their common life experiences. It may be coincidental that the ice breaker for this session focused on optical illusions and at one stage Al had difficulties finding the sentence in the written text he wished to highlight. He says: I’ve got no glasses on … [reading] For I ask Jesus to be with him and he wants, went … I can’t see without my glimmers’. Differences between hearing and reading texts and issues of literacy come to the fore.
Jesus said, ‘There was a man who had two sons. The younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of the property that will belong to me’. So he divided his property between them. A few days later the younger son gathered all he had and travelled to a distant country, and there he squandered his property in reckless living. When he had spent everything, a severe famine took place throughout that country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed the pigs. He would gladly have filled himself with the food that the pigs were eating; and no one gave him anything. But when he came to himself he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired hands have bread enough and to spare, but here I am dying of hunger! I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands”.’
So he set off and went to his father. But while he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion; he ran and put his arms around him and kissed him. Then the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son’. But the father said to his slaves, ‘Quickly, bring out a robe – the best one – and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. And get the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found!’ And they began to celebrate.
‘Now his elder son was in the field; and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing. He called one of the slaves and asked what was going on. He replied, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fatted calf, because he has got him back safe and sound’. Then he became angry and refused to go in. His father came out and began to plead with him. But he answered his father, ‘Listen! For all these years I have been working like a slave for you, and I have never disobeyed your command; yet you have never given me even a young goat so that I might celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours came back, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fatted calf for him!’ Then the father said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. But we had to celebrate and rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and has come to life; he was lost and has been found.’ (Luke 15: 11–32)
Given the subject matter of this episode, it is perhaps not surprising that this reading prompts the most coherent conversation amongst these homeless people. It might be possible to say that there is a group reading which comes out of this, reflecting an ownership of the text and an engagement with the experiences of all the characters. Raymond immediately identifies with the family dynamic:
Well, a similar thing happened with me and with my brother … While he was away, he was fighting in Japan at the time, but when he came back, he thought he should rule the roost kind of thing. And I’d been working all the time he’d been away, even though I was very young, and supporting me mother. And yet when he came back he thought he should take over, which I thought was wrong.
In this account, it is the older brother who returns, but Raymond is also the younger brother who spent a large sum of money quickly. Another participant describes a literal inheritance:
Raymond. Went through the money quickly. I think I’m a record breaker with that … Six grand in a week … Well, I gambled a lot of it. I bought a lot of things, like clothes, I bought, a brand new piano and all that kind of thing. I didn’t waste it all. I did have a lot back.
Michael. On my 18th birthday I inherited £13,500 but it was too easily, and spent it in two weeks on crap. I haven’t got one thing to show for it. If I knew now what I knew, even though it was only a few years ago, if I knew then what I knew now I wouldn’t have done that. But you do these things. You’ve got a learning curve. And next time I get that amount of money … Because I will! [laughs] But yeah, no, and I would have, I was just about to say, I’m definitely the youngest.
The father’s reaction evinces further comments about the verisimilitude of the story, with Glenn suggesting that the older brother will be more welcoming than the father, that as the younger son he would have too much pride to return like this; but his final comment relating to his own experience implies a greater truth in the biblical account than Glenn was prepared to allow. The memory he evokes parallels very clearly both the actions and emotions of the Lucan father:
I don’t think he would have gone home in the first place. He would have been too proud, he would have known he’d messed up. And if he had have gone home, the father would have been like, ‘What the fuck are you doing here?’, and the older brother would have been, like, ‘Really good to see you’. He would have probably been the most accommodating … There’s no way I could go crawling back as they say, you know. There you go. [laughs] … I would go grudgingly if I thought they were like completely accepting of the situation and I knew that I’d be saving myself a lot of aggro, I’d go with them, I wouldn’t feel too bad about it. But if they tried to force me to go, then I would be like ‘No, sorry, I’ll stay and make a man of myself’ and stay away … The only time my old man’s ever told me that he loves me is that night when I got back from running away. He was crying and hugging me then.
At the end of the session, there is another parallel drawn, between the spendthrift son who is likened to indulgent bankers, and the hardworking older son likened to those who are now paying for the indulgence.
The story is brought into a contemporary focus with the reference to the family of Ozzy Osbourne of the rock group Black Sabbath. Discussion ranges across the potential similarities, explaining the story to those who do not see the connections, fragmenting into different side conversations before the session is brought to a close.
Raymond. Ozzy Osbourne, yeah. That’s the nearest to it in modern life, I think, isn’t it. Pretty near. Because he’d got a son and a daughter and they both were wayward, you know, but I don’t know how they are now. I think, I think …
Dan. Okay, well, Ozzy Osbourne was a member of a rock band. Yeah … Sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll is what he stood up for. Since, he’s probably given up on all of that because of his mental state. [laughter] He’s gone from illegals to pharmaceuticals. But he’s got two kids, I think it’s two kids, and a wife. And they’re all living off of his erm, yeah …
Raymond. He’s got three kids. Yeah, he’s got two daughters and a son. The other daughter is out of it altogether. She isn’t in it.
Dan. Well, she’s the runaway, yeah? She’s the one who’s living off his bank account, whereas the other two are in the spotlight, getting into it. He’s gone from music to television, yeah. And then, yeah, there’s a daughter gone off with his bank card.
Tony: So who would Ozzy be in this story that Susannah talked about?
Steve: He’d be the father. And then you’ve got the two kids there with him, they’d be like the eldest son, and then the one that’s ran off would be the youngest one …
Michael. Yeah. But actually, the other two kids that he has got, actually do work, because both of them have had their own TV shows, one of them’s had, well, tried to get a number one hit and was useless.
The description of these four sessions illustrates the contribution of CBS as a method of reading, especially with groups on the margins. New, exciting, and perhaps unlikely images may replace tired, dull metaphors. However, it is not claimed that such a reading supersedes or improves upon other biblical readings; rather that it adds to what might already be known. Additionally, there can be no claim for universality here. This would run counter to any notion of contextual readings, and deny the specifics of this group, not least who took part and why, who left part way through, why one person did not give permission for his words to be used, and so on. These are the comments of a shifting group of homeless people at a particular time and place. In terms of this project aimed towards a theology of homelessness some questions remain: if not universal, then how far is it possible to say that there is something special or even unique about how homeless people might hear and read the Bible? How do such insights and images relate to the previous biographies and analysis of homeless narratives? Does starting with the Bible stories rather than the listener or reader affect conclusions, especially theological conclusions?
1 P. Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narrative (London: SCM, 1992).
2 Lawrence, The Word in Place, p. 126.
3 See also Cornwall and Nixon, ‘Readings from the Road’. In the extracts Susannah refers to Susannah Cornwall, the lead researcher.
4 In this text the pseudonym Dan has replaced Danny in the original article to prevent confusion with Danni.
5 ‘Believe It or Not’. Available at: http://www.ripleys.com (accessed 26 January 2012). This site contains stills, videos, graphics and stories of the weird and wonderful, particularly in North America.