I've retired again

Mike Harrison has retired for the second time leaving the Engaging Steering Group in the capable care of the new Engagement Officer, Sarah Wheat, who will take over this blog.

Mike will continue to write on social justice topics at www.goosefire.livejournal.com and can be found on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/mikeonorme

The wrenching events unfolding in Israel and Palestine aren't random or isolated.

The wrenching events unfolding in Israel and Palestine aren't random or isolated. They're part of the system of occupation itself.   "To hate Arabs isn't racism, it's having values. #IsraelDemandsRevenge." Posted to an Israeli Facebook page in the last 24 hours.
The following article come from "Jewish Voice for Peace", a Jewish organisation dedicated to to peace in Israel and Palestine and counterbalancing the stream of highly efficient propaganda produced by the Israeli Government.

16 year-old Mohammed Abu Khudair was found dead in East Jerusalem, the victim of what appears to be a price tag attack following the killing of three Israeli teenagers on the West Bank. He was the 10th Palestinian killed by the IDF or right-wing extremists in the last two weeks.  We mourn his death as we do all lost lives. And we also know we must speak the truth, so that we may change the conditions that make such unthinkable violence possible in the first place.

The ongoing Israeli occupation is at the heart of this crisis.
In addition to these deaths, across the West Bank the army has sealed off entire towns, arrested more than 400 people, and raided over 100 homes. Gazans have been subjected to more than 34 bombing raids in the same period. These are not isolated or even rare instances of human rights violations, but the intensification of the daily enforcement of the Israeli occupation. Palestinians are subjected to home demolitions, checkpoints, arrests, and indefinite detention not randomly and occasionally, but daily and systematically.

The shedding of just one child’s blood is too much and cause for deep mourning. While we mourn the 3 Israeli teenagers who were killed in the West Bank, we also mourn families of the 1,384 Palestinian children killed by the Israeli military since 2000, according to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem. That’s 1 Palestinian child killed by the Israeli military every 3 to 4 days.

The Israeli government is endangering lives and both fomenting and feeding off an atmosphere of vengeance and racism.
The Israeli government has continued to show little regard for either Israeli or Palestinian life. The pronouncements of Cabinet ministers, IDF officials, and the Prime Minister Netanyahu make it clear that revenge, not justice, is the main agenda. Emerging reports suggest that the government knew the fate of the teens long before that information was released, but withheld that information - indicating that the government's primary aim has been to exploit the kidnapping to attack the infrastructure of Palestinian society. Meanwhile, hundreds  rioted in the streets of Jerusalem, chanting “death to the Arabs” and “we want war” while attacking Palestinians on the street, or in shops. Settlers burned down a Palestinian sheep farm in a price tag attack.

All lives are precious.
We refuse to mourn only the deaths of Palestinians, or only the deaths of Israelis. But that does not mean we can ignore the enormous power difference between Israelis and Palestinians, or pretend it is just a “cycle of violence” with no root cause or context. Each of these horrific incidents that harms both peoples happen in the context of an ongoing occupation, itself inherently a system of daily violence. And it is a system that by its very nature puts the lives, dignity, and human rights of all in jeopardy.

It is our responsibility to speak the truth.
The media in both Israel and the United States have thus far failed to offer critical reporting that can help readers understand the content of occupation or the degree of violence inflicted by the Israeli government’s escalation. But we can change that narrative - and we have to, if we want to end the occupation and injustice. 

Low Wages

My eye caught this story  written by David Cay Johnston and posted by Anna Rowlands:

Dr. Tao Sheng Kwan-Gett, a paediatrician, speaks of treating a dangerously unhealthy child suffering from serious neglect. He asked the child’s mother question after question about basics every parent should know. Again and again the mother had no answers. She just did not know the condition and activities of her child.

As Kwan-Gett spoke, his voice rose in cold fury, his face flushed with anger at the callousness of this awful excuse for a parent. Finally, he said he asked the mother directly how she could be so uncaring.

Abruptly, the doctor’s voice turned soft as he recounted the mother’s response. She and her husband worked such long hours at such below-minimum-wage pay that they were always desperate for sleep. They were barely able to pay the rent. Their choice was between neglecting their child and living on the streets, where life is nasty, brutish and often short.

“My anger,” Kwan-Gett said softly, “turned to sympathy.”

His words brought home the hidden and future costs of our callous mistreatment of tens of millions of workers whose incomes keep falling even as the economy recovers from the recession.

The price we pay today for low wages is as big as it is easy not to notice. Unless we change our public policies, that price will explode as a significant number of children grow up without proper care and diet, and with no reason to believe their own initiative will make their lives any better.

Where did this take place?  Prosperous America.  But there are many examples closer to home.  When I was Vicar of Caia Park, I frequently encountered families when Mum would do the day shift and Dad the night shift at ASDA, both earning the minimum wage and with results similar to the above story.

A Living Wage is part of the answer but changes to our tax  and benefits systems are required as well.  One of the biggest challenges we should be presenting to politicians as we move towards a general election is how they are intending to treat the working poor.

the most generous donors

I've just received a notification from the Charities Aid Foundation that they will be working with the Sunday Times to celebrate the most generous donors in the UK this year.  Last year's list included such worthies as Elton John (£24m), JK Rowling (5.6m) and the Beckhams (£3.4m).  

By far and away the most generous were the Sainsbury family.  I do hope someone will tell me they are exemplary in the treatment and pay the living wage to their staff right down to the cashiers, shelf stackers and cleaners.  Apparently the Sainsbury's gave away a whopping £165.3m, 30.6% of their wealth (Should that be wealth or income? Surely if it referred to wealth, a lot of shops would have been closed?)  That left them with a mere £374.9m to pay the bills.

I applaud rich people giving millions away which they may have earned from enterprise and talent and then use for the benefit of the community.  I hope only that none of it was built on exploitation.

But wouldn't it be nice to have a list which celebrated widows' mites?  I could make a few nominations for that.

Little injustices

When Jesus proclaimed the kingdom, he wanted us to enter into a new way of living.  Christians often talk about love but love without justice means very little.  Jesus' love had a sharp edge and challenges us out of our complacency to challenge injustice wherever it is found.

 Christians are good at responding to injustice when it involves generosity and service as food banks clearly show.  Where it gets more difficult is when we are complicit in injustice.  

We blame the bankers for many of the ills of the last few years.  We are sorry for the young people struggling to get on the housing ladder. But how many of us are quick to take advantage of the markup on our house price as soon as the housing market starts to move upwards again?

We support the Living Wage in principle.  No-one should have to work for wages that are insufficient to sustain the basics of life, housing, heating and food.  But we all take advantage of the value offers in the supermarkets that pay these wages and the next day service from Amazon which has some of the poorest working conditions of all.  And we find excuses not to join in when TCC (Together Creating Communities) or other activists call on us to hold government and employers to account.

We are horrified at the examples of human cruelty that reach our media.  Perhaps we even sign the petitions which sometimes ameliorate such wickedness but how easily we become campaign weary and leave it to the activists to write the Amnesty International letters.

We acknowledge that Fair Trade can make the world of difference to third world producers.  A few of us have even heard it first hand from the producers Christian Aid has brought to us in Fair Trade fortnight.  But some parishes fail even to return the pledge form to ensure the Church in Wales can claim to be a Fair Trade Church.  How easy it is to concede to the loud voice which had a cup of fair trade coffee they didn't like twenty years ago and hasn't tried any of the many other fair trade brands now on the shelves.  Are the clergy buying fair trade clergy shirts?  Are our churches using fair trade communion wine?

Jesus' kingdom message challenges us to act consistently justly.  We need to recognise that big injustices are often built on lots of little ones.

Anger about treatment of poor

Prominent church figures have been vocal in their criticism of the government's policies towards the poor.

We will be judged says Matthew 25 on how we treat those who are least our brethren, the weakest, the most vulnerable even the most unlikeable. David Cameron argues that his is a moral crusade to change their situation. Giles Fraser suggests the consequences of government policy suggest otherwise.

Yes, the church is bloody angry about these attacks on the poor, and rightly so

There is nothing 'moral' about the government's portrayal of the vulnerable as scroungers. It is a national disgrace

Giles Fraser

The Guardian, Friday 21 February 2014

'A whole class of vulnerable people is being disparaged whose greatest crime is to find themselves struggling to get by in the chill winds of a financial climate that was absolutely not of their making.

Why are we so angry? By we, I mean the clergy. Because this is what the government has been hearing via our bishops and archbishops over the past few days. So let me explain.

Apparently, benefit cuts are popular with the electorate. The idea has been sold to the public that there is a whole class of scroungers which prefers to lounge around on the sofa all day, watching telly, smoking spliffs and drinking lager. Going out and getting a job makes little economic sense to such people. They are lazy and dissolute. An insult to hard-working families everywhere. And nobody likes to have the piss taken out of them, which is what the sofa-lolling brigade have been doing to the rest of us. The "moral" case for benefit cuts is an attempt to re-establish a culture of personal responsibility. It is an attack on the feckless.

We are angry because this is such a distorted picture, an extrapolation from a tiny number of cases into some sort of general rule. And this rule is now being used to disparage a whole class of vulnerable people whose greatest crime in life is to find themselves struggling to get by in the chill winds of a financial climate that was absolutely not of their making.

Since Christmas, my church has turned itself into a homeless shelter once a week. Volunteers cook large batches of shepherd's pie for hungry people who have been wandering the streets most of the day. We provide a warm bed and a safe place to hang out for the evening. Camp beds are set up in the nave of the church. And bacon rolls and porridge are provided for breakfast. Unfortunately, business is thriving. There is a waiting list for beds. Homelessness has risen 60% in London over the past two years. And half a million people now rely on food banks.

It's not just churches that are volunteering in this way. And many who help out with us are not themselves religious. But given the local nature of the parish system, and given that churches have an outpost in every community in this country, the clergy are uniquely positioned to understand the effect that financial cuts are having on the ground. And what makes many of us so bloody angry is that the reality of what is happening is not being acknowledged by politicians in government. They don't feel the need to face this reality because the war against the scroungers is so popular. So long as the rightwing press keeps stoking our sense of indignation at those who exploit the system, the government has little incentive to admit the much wider reality that austerity is turning pockets of Britain into wastelands of hopelessness. The scrounger tag has become a way to blame the poor for their poverty. How convenient. Those who created this financial crisis have got away scot free, protected by their money and their lobbying power. So now we blame the poor, a much easier target.

David Cameron, in responding to the churches, has insisted that his is a moral vision too. But no moral vision worthy of the name can remain indifferent to the hunger and homelessness of others. This is morality 101. Indeed, far from operating out of a moral instinct, the government has poisoned the wells of public sympathy by amplifying a fear that vulnerable people are actually sniggering cheats.

Nothing about this shameless sleight of hand is moral. In fact, it's right out of the bullying handbook. Maybe – just maybe – he is feeling a little bit guilty about all of this. And we often blame those who make us feel guilty. Or we just ignore them. It's so much easier than admitting our own responsibility for the misery of others. No, prime minister: this is not moral – it's a national scandal.

Marriage

The House of Bishops in the Church of England has just issued a letter of Pastoral Guidance on issues surrounding same sex marriage which effectively amounts to saying that "nothing has changed really."   I was surprised that that they re-iterated statements from the 1998 Lambeth Conference which was a disaster for pastoral relations or, in simple terms, a fudge.

People are now rushing to pressure the C of E House of Bishops, by Facebook petition, to rescind their guidance.

I am sorry that the bishops of our neighbouring province have chosen to uphold what they understand to be the current religious rules rather than be guided by compassion and justice, but I do not think that I want future decisions in any Anglican Church to be resolved by Facebook petition.

In the Diocesan Human Sexuality Group we have developed a process of listening with respect to people with whom we profoundly disagree.  The group includes both people currently in civil partnerships and people who on grounds of biblical authority or church tradition find same sex marriage unacceptable but we are learning to listen to each other and each other's pain.  Perhaps more of this needs to happen in a wider arena.

It is also worth noting that we are the Church in Wales and some of the issues under debate are on the next Governing Body's agenda.  The GB may agree or disagree with the Church in England.

A recent survey of clergy by the Human Sexuality Group received a high level of response. 

• 80% of respondents would affirm same sex partnerships
• 67% are willing for the CinW to allow for the blessing of same sex partnerships
• 62% would permit an approved CinW blessing to take place in their parish and would be willing to preside.
• Conversely, those firmly against are 14%, 19%, 20%, 23%, less than a quarter.

I think it is safe to conclude that there is strong support from clergy in the Diocese of St. Asaph for the CinW to approve a service of blessing for same sex civil partnerships. 

More respondents opposed the provision of a CinW marriage service for same sex couples than were for it although those against same sex marriage never reached 50% in response to any of the questions asked.

I think we can conclude that there is not, at this point in time, sufficient support amongst clergy for the CinW to provide a marriage ceremony for same sex couples.

More respondents were willing to affirm same sex secular marriage than were not, which may reflect the fact that this is a done deal in the secular arena.

Let's now continue the conversation in the Church in Wales which listens to each other's wisdom and pain bound together in love in the Body of Christ.

Let us remember that each other we meet is made in God's image and likeness however different from us they may seem to be in lifestyle and outlook.  Let us resolve to treat each other with compassion and justice recognising that this may, or may not, reach the same conclusions as arguments based primarily on human rights which come from a different thought tradition.

Let Facebook be used for communicating information, sharing good causes and information about injustice, and for friendly banter but let's recognise that it is not at its best as a chamber for debating serious issues.