Today's Statement on the report of the Commission for Assisted Dying from the Church of England from the Bishop of Carlisle is an excellent offering and shows the integrity that I expect (hope or long for) from within our denomination.
The 'Commission on Assisted Dying' is a self-appointed group that excluded from its membership anyone with a known objection to assisted suicide. In contrast, the majority of commissioners, appointed personally by Lord Falconer, were already in favour of changing the law to legitimise assisted suicide. Lord Falconer has, himself, been a leading proponent for legitimising assisted suicide, for some years.
The commission undertook a quest to find effective safeguards that could be put in place to avoid abuse of any new law legitimising assisted suicide. Unsurprisingly, given the commission's composition, it has claimed to have found such safeguards.
Unlike the commissioners, we are unconvinced that the commission has been successful in its quest. It has singularly failed to demonstrate that vulnerable people are not placed at greater risk under its proposals than is currently the case under present legislation. In spite of the findings of research that it commissioned, it has failed adequately to take into account the fact that in all jurisdictions where assisted suicide or euthanasia is permitted, there are breaches of safeguards as well as notable failures in monitoring and reporting.
The present law strikes an excellent balance between safeguarding hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people and treating with fairness and compassion those few people who, acting out of selfless motives, have assisted a loved one to die.
Put simply, the most effective safeguard against abuse is to leave the law as it is. What Lord Falconer has done is to argue that it is morally acceptable to put many vulnerable people at increased risk so that the aspirations of a small number of individuals, to control the time, place and means of their deaths, might be met. Such a calculus of risk is unnecessary and wholly unacceptable.
I include also the CofE's 'Opposing suicide':
"The Church of England is opposed to any change in the law, or medical practice, to make assisted suicide permissible or acceptable.
Suffering, the Church maintains, must be met with compassion, commitment to high-quality services and effective medication; meeting it by assisted suicide is merely removing it in the crudest way possible.
In its March 2009 paper Assisted Dying/Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia, the Church acknowledged the complexity of the issues while explaining its position, noting that the compassion that motivates those who seek change equally motivates the Church's opposition to change.
In January 2012, the Church reitterated its views by responding to a report from the Commission on Assisted Dying with a statement from the Bishop of Carlisle.
Principles behind the Church's position
• Personal autonomy and the protection of life are both important principles that are often complementary but sometimes compete.
• Personal autonomy must be principled and not without regard to others.
• Protection of life should take priority when there is a conflict between the two.
• When protection of life is impossible that does not undermine these principles.
• Every human being is uniquely and equally valuable, hence human rights are built on the foundation of the 'right to life', as is much of the criminal code.
• An obligation on society, doctors and nurses, to take life or to assist in the taking of life would create a new and unwelcome role for society.
Assisted suicide in practice
There would be problems ensuring that any law permitting assisted suicide would be sufficiently safe-guarded against abuse.
Elastic interpretations of the law: any law, however tightly formulated, would have to be 'interpreted'; doctors would vary in their approach and consistency would be impossible to achieve with 'wider' interpretations of the law becoming acceptable.
Hidden pressures on patients and staff: even with safeguards, it would be impossible to ensure that no vulnerable, terminally ill patient would feel under moral, economic or social pressure to accept assisted suicide.
A redefinition of healthcare: trust in the health service is crucial to the health and well-being of individuals and of the population; to introduce assisted suicide into the NHS (the only way the 'right' would be universally accessible) would be to change fundamentally the nature of that trust.
The doctor and nurse/patient relationship would change: the nature of this relationship would change fundamentally and irrevocably if assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia were to become part of the 'treatment' that health professionals were to be able to offer their patients.
The effects on palliative care: assisted suicide would require large resources, with no guarantee it would be safely and fairly administered, putting further pressure on the already under-resourced psychological, social, family and spiritual support services needed to address all of the needs of terminally-ill people in a full palliative care-package.
Hallelujah!
Showing posts with label Christian care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christian care. Show all posts
Thursday, 5 January 2012
Being 'In Control'
The last forty-eight hours has featured many radio broadcasts and a few discussions on the knotty subject of killing the terminally ill. Sorry I meant of course terminating the terminally ill. No wait, I meant 'euthanising'. No, that's not right either, is it?
Got it! The last forty-eight hours has featured many radio broadcasts and a few discussions on the knotty subject of 'assisted suicide' and I have to admit that I am struggling with it for a number of reasons and at a number of levels.
One common justification of the the need and the act goes something like this: "If the person was a dog you'd do the right thing and put them down!" Now this is very true, but of course what we are saying here is that those who are terminally ill become sub-human and are to be regarded on a par with lower-level animals. So, become terminally ill and cease to be human? Sorry, but my faith, intellect and compassion can't go along with this - dignity is surely lost here, not afforded?
The next justification surrounds 'quality of life'. Which is sad because for many heading down this path seem to confuse quality with the ability, or potential, to earn or otherwise 'contribute' to society. It's sad because there are many people who will never work, never gain qualifications, play sports and never engage in a host of other stuff and yet they have a quality of life and they contribute to the lives of others.
I watched a young man who suffered spinal damage and yet teaches rugger from his wheelchair and has quality of life, influences others and is an inspiration. In an interview the reporter asked about another person, almost as badly damaged, who had opted to die. The man's assessment was that each chooses their own path and that he felt it had been wrong, but he wasn't that bloke.
I have seen severely broken people who although unable to communicate conventionally did communicate and although they'd never walk caused others to be moved and their very presence brought out something rather precious in those around them. Quality of life? Contributing and making a difference? Guess it depends on what you're looking for and what you want to see.
The issue of control is the biggest. "I want to control my life and decide when I die and decide how much trouble there is in my life and I, I, I, I (si si senora! - Rugger playing gene kicked in - sorry). "I want to be in control of my life and this means I can control when I come into the world and when I leave it." These words from someone suffering a terminal disease indicate the level of panic and distress, impotence and lack of rational thinking for none of us control when we come into the world, for we cannot determine when the plan and sexual endeavours of our parents took place but we can decide spiritually (see John1. 12 - 13: However, to all who received him, those believing in his name, he gave authority to become God's children, who were born, not merely in a genetic sense, nor from lust, nor from man’s desire, but from the will of God who were born, not merely in a genetic sense, nor from lust, nor from man's desire, but from the will of God.)
Unless we act against it, life continues until life ends and although it may not be an easy path it is still life and if one or more of these exists:
* The ability to engage with others,
* To listen to great music, books or other audio material
* To watch films, see paintings, images and people that touch us,
* To read, write or do both
* To be cognisant (and this is a problem with vegetative states - although now it seems there is awareness and even here things aren't as we presumed).
Then surely life exists! It might not be the easiest, most comfortable, as planned, in-control, life - but it is by any rational definition 'life'!
Now, thanks to the Commission os Assisted Dying (I suppose Commission on Killing the Ill would have caused a bit of an upset - there's something about some names that just doesn't work!) whose view is that if you have less than a year to live then you can get permission (two doctors signatures) to end your life. You have to be of sound mind and apparently do it yourself, it can't be administered (so you have to do it before you lose motor functions MD sufferers take note!)
What we have proposed here is not a last ditch act but a first shot desertion!
Where there is life there is hope and where there is God there is life - now have to go and join these ends. Feel free to draw more lines or make connections for me as I'd really like some other input from those I might otherwise never engage with.
Pax
Got it! The last forty-eight hours has featured many radio broadcasts and a few discussions on the knotty subject of 'assisted suicide' and I have to admit that I am struggling with it for a number of reasons and at a number of levels.
One common justification of the the need and the act goes something like this: "If the person was a dog you'd do the right thing and put them down!" Now this is very true, but of course what we are saying here is that those who are terminally ill become sub-human and are to be regarded on a par with lower-level animals. So, become terminally ill and cease to be human? Sorry, but my faith, intellect and compassion can't go along with this - dignity is surely lost here, not afforded?
The next justification surrounds 'quality of life'. Which is sad because for many heading down this path seem to confuse quality with the ability, or potential, to earn or otherwise 'contribute' to society. It's sad because there are many people who will never work, never gain qualifications, play sports and never engage in a host of other stuff and yet they have a quality of life and they contribute to the lives of others.
I watched a young man who suffered spinal damage and yet teaches rugger from his wheelchair and has quality of life, influences others and is an inspiration. In an interview the reporter asked about another person, almost as badly damaged, who had opted to die. The man's assessment was that each chooses their own path and that he felt it had been wrong, but he wasn't that bloke.
I have seen severely broken people who although unable to communicate conventionally did communicate and although they'd never walk caused others to be moved and their very presence brought out something rather precious in those around them. Quality of life? Contributing and making a difference? Guess it depends on what you're looking for and what you want to see.
The issue of control is the biggest. "I want to control my life and decide when I die and decide how much trouble there is in my life and I, I, I, I (si si senora! - Rugger playing gene kicked in - sorry). "I want to be in control of my life and this means I can control when I come into the world and when I leave it." These words from someone suffering a terminal disease indicate the level of panic and distress, impotence and lack of rational thinking for none of us control when we come into the world, for we cannot determine when the plan and sexual endeavours of our parents took place but we can decide spiritually (see John1. 12 - 13: However, to all who received him, those believing in his name, he gave authority to become God's children, who were born, not merely in a genetic sense, nor from lust, nor from man’s desire, but from the will of God who were born, not merely in a genetic sense, nor from lust, nor from man's desire, but from the will of God.)
Unless we act against it, life continues until life ends and although it may not be an easy path it is still life and if one or more of these exists:
* The ability to engage with others,
* To listen to great music, books or other audio material
* To watch films, see paintings, images and people that touch us,
* To read, write or do both
* To be cognisant (and this is a problem with vegetative states - although now it seems there is awareness and even here things aren't as we presumed).
Then surely life exists! It might not be the easiest, most comfortable, as planned, in-control, life - but it is by any rational definition 'life'!
Now, thanks to the Commission os Assisted Dying (I suppose Commission on Killing the Ill would have caused a bit of an upset - there's something about some names that just doesn't work!) whose view is that if you have less than a year to live then you can get permission (two doctors signatures) to end your life. You have to be of sound mind and apparently do it yourself, it can't be administered (so you have to do it before you lose motor functions MD sufferers take note!)
What we have proposed here is not a last ditch act but a first shot desertion!
Where there is life there is hope and where there is God there is life - now have to go and join these ends. Feel free to draw more lines or make connections for me as I'd really like some other input from those I might otherwise never engage with.
Pax
Thursday, 22 December 2011
Church - where crisis and failure take on flesh
Government and statutory bodies legislate over homelessness but it is, more often than not, Church that engages with the reality of it.
Public opinion pontificates about the state of society, the demise of values and standards and the breakdown of the family but is, more often than not, the Church that finds itself engaged in and with the places where the rhetoric becomes flesh.
When the tutting classes are unfolding their newspapers and talking cobblers about the homeless getting what they deserve and how there is always work to be found if someone really wants it, the Church, once again, is to be found dealing with the realities.
In a week where temperatures have soared such that we will see less homeless people die over the Christmas period (something that demonstrates how little 'those people' care for the sensitivities of nice people) we ill still be living in the reality that across the UK there ar still around a quarter of a million homeless people and although many of those will 'bed hop' or find some form of accommodation (albeit perhaps very temporary) there will still be something around five thousand people sleeping on the streets of our capital city!
The figures this week speak of a life expectancy of 43 for homeless women and 47 for homeless men.
Now I am sure some reading this will point to alcohol, drugs and other 'brought upon themselves' conditions fort such an early demise, but there are other influences and factors behind the obvious and if we were to but take just a little time to understand them we would find that the underserving homeless are often anything but.
As we pray in our churches this Christmas Eve perhaps we might care to think of those who are homeless. Those who are on the streets because of:
+ Abuse - mental, physical and sexual
+ Mental Illness - Homeless people present double the symptoms of mental illness than those who are 'homed'
+ Military Service - the Military Covenant is to become law, but for the many (almost 25% of London's homeless as an example) medals, combat experience and having served their nation makes no difference at all - in fact it is a major factor for where they are now!
+ Folly - There are people on our streets who have made the wrong choices (haven't we all at some time?) but in each one of these people the image of the invisible God is made visible and in each of them is the potential to show God's grace and effect, potentially, restoration - we just need to be wise about it?
And so, this Christmas as we speak of a Saviour born in poor circumstances, sleeping in a stable, let's remember those for whom a stable would be luxury.
Pax
Public opinion pontificates about the state of society, the demise of values and standards and the breakdown of the family but is, more often than not, the Church that finds itself engaged in and with the places where the rhetoric becomes flesh.
When the tutting classes are unfolding their newspapers and talking cobblers about the homeless getting what they deserve and how there is always work to be found if someone really wants it, the Church, once again, is to be found dealing with the realities.
In a week where temperatures have soared such that we will see less homeless people die over the Christmas period (something that demonstrates how little 'those people' care for the sensitivities of nice people) we ill still be living in the reality that across the UK there ar still around a quarter of a million homeless people and although many of those will 'bed hop' or find some form of accommodation (albeit perhaps very temporary) there will still be something around five thousand people sleeping on the streets of our capital city!
The figures this week speak of a life expectancy of 43 for homeless women and 47 for homeless men.
Now I am sure some reading this will point to alcohol, drugs and other 'brought upon themselves' conditions fort such an early demise, but there are other influences and factors behind the obvious and if we were to but take just a little time to understand them we would find that the underserving homeless are often anything but.
As we pray in our churches this Christmas Eve perhaps we might care to think of those who are homeless. Those who are on the streets because of:
+ Abuse - mental, physical and sexual
+ Mental Illness - Homeless people present double the symptoms of mental illness than those who are 'homed'
+ Military Service - the Military Covenant is to become law, but for the many (almost 25% of London's homeless as an example) medals, combat experience and having served their nation makes no difference at all - in fact it is a major factor for where they are now!
+ Folly - There are people on our streets who have made the wrong choices (haven't we all at some time?) but in each one of these people the image of the invisible God is made visible and in each of them is the potential to show God's grace and effect, potentially, restoration - we just need to be wise about it?
And so, this Christmas as we speak of a Saviour born in poor circumstances, sleeping in a stable, let's remember those for whom a stable would be luxury.
Pax
Monday, 12 December 2011
Someone Ought To Do Something!
Ironically, coming on the day that I have realised that I hate someone, I find that they might be the same person who builds our church, brings relief to those caught up in debt, resolves all the ills of the global banking excesses and counsels those people who tick us off by their errant lifestyles.
I've had a telephone call from a lovely Christian person who has rung to tell me that they have noticed a new person begging in the centre of town. Apparently they looked really cold this morning as they sat in the covered shopping area begging.
I asked what the caller had done regarding the new addition to our community and asked what their name was.
"Oh, I don't know, " was the response, "I didn't talk to them. I just noticed they were there and thought that someone needed to do something about it, so I rang you."
Well, the good news is that 'someone' will do something about the new arrival (going to have a look now) but it's sad that people can identify needs but don't set about addressing them but pass them on to someone else.
Perhaps the Good Samaritan needs a rewrite whereby the hero of the piece merely phones someone who then takes care of the battered Levite?
When you see a need this Christmas (and after Christmas too) could you do more than just pray - because good as it is, there's something more that needs to be done. Mind you, it wasn't that long ago that one of our beggars (Mick Weir) froze to death in a bus shelter and despite all the good intentions, determined words and posturing, we haven't moved on from the attitudes and haven't made any provision for people such as him.
Perhaps we're waiting for someone to do it?
I've had a telephone call from a lovely Christian person who has rung to tell me that they have noticed a new person begging in the centre of town. Apparently they looked really cold this morning as they sat in the covered shopping area begging.
I asked what the caller had done regarding the new addition to our community and asked what their name was.
"Oh, I don't know, " was the response, "I didn't talk to them. I just noticed they were there and thought that someone needed to do something about it, so I rang you."
Well, the good news is that 'someone' will do something about the new arrival (going to have a look now) but it's sad that people can identify needs but don't set about addressing them but pass them on to someone else.
Perhaps the Good Samaritan needs a rewrite whereby the hero of the piece merely phones someone who then takes care of the battered Levite?
When you see a need this Christmas (and after Christmas too) could you do more than just pray - because good as it is, there's something more that needs to be done. Mind you, it wasn't that long ago that one of our beggars (Mick Weir) froze to death in a bus shelter and despite all the good intentions, determined words and posturing, we haven't moved on from the attitudes and haven't made any provision for people such as him.
Perhaps we're waiting for someone to do it?
Thursday, 8 December 2011
Making money from the poor - Pt 2
Following on from the visit to the car sales outlet the company has now made two telephone calls. The first of them tried to sell the car they'd originally gone to look at by trying to convince them that they were getting a good deal.
Our hero asked what the 'book price' of the car was and were given a figure that was quite a bit lower than the price it was being offered at. They then asked how much they would receive for their current vehicle and were told that this would be something lower than the book price. Adding the differences meant that they were effectively paying about £2,000 more than was warranted using the figures given in the trade valuation guides (which are of course only guides and not set in concrete).
When this was pointed out the salesman accentuated the fact that they would have a newer car and that it would cost them less as they'd reduced the interest rate for the purchase as well.
"How much is it now," asks our heroic would-be (or perhaps not) purchaser?
"It's 48.5%, gone down from 49.9%," comes the reply.
So let's stop for a moment to consider what we have before us
Let's say the car is going to cost the customer £6,500 and they're going to pay over five years at 48.5%
This means that paying around £300 a month will result in them handing over almost £17, 400.
This in turn means that they will be paying almost £11,000 for the privilege in interest rates.
Now, were our hero to go to a bank or some other reputable (that's if we still consider banks to be reputable) finance provider we would find that the rates ate somewhere between 6.1 - 7.9% and staying with our car priced at £6,500 (but from a more reputable dealer I would hope) the same car over the same period at 8% would run out at a total outlay of just under £8,000, a measly £131 a month and interest of under £1,500.
Those of us who have been 'collared' or work with people in our community need to get a bit savvy to companies who specialise in CCJ and poor credit history operations such at the one discovered here.
I never realised how much the poorer (and sometimes just merely unfortunate in terns of redundancy and other impediments to paying) side of our community is preyed upon by others and just how much they pay for the privilege of being abused.
The car salesman was working hard to get the would be customer so desirous of having a 'new' car that they'd sign up just to fill the craving that had been created.
What a disgrace and what an opportunity for us to come alongside and work to protect these people.
Pax
Our hero asked what the 'book price' of the car was and were given a figure that was quite a bit lower than the price it was being offered at. They then asked how much they would receive for their current vehicle and were told that this would be something lower than the book price. Adding the differences meant that they were effectively paying about £2,000 more than was warranted using the figures given in the trade valuation guides (which are of course only guides and not set in concrete).
When this was pointed out the salesman accentuated the fact that they would have a newer car and that it would cost them less as they'd reduced the interest rate for the purchase as well.
"How much is it now," asks our heroic would-be (or perhaps not) purchaser?
"It's 48.5%, gone down from 49.9%," comes the reply.
So let's stop for a moment to consider what we have before us
Let's say the car is going to cost the customer £6,500 and they're going to pay over five years at 48.5%
This means that paying around £300 a month will result in them handing over almost £17, 400.
This in turn means that they will be paying almost £11,000 for the privilege in interest rates.
Now, were our hero to go to a bank or some other reputable (that's if we still consider banks to be reputable) finance provider we would find that the rates ate somewhere between 6.1 - 7.9% and staying with our car priced at £6,500 (but from a more reputable dealer I would hope) the same car over the same period at 8% would run out at a total outlay of just under £8,000, a measly £131 a month and interest of under £1,500.
Those of us who have been 'collared' or work with people in our community need to get a bit savvy to companies who specialise in CCJ and poor credit history operations such at the one discovered here.
I never realised how much the poorer (and sometimes just merely unfortunate in terns of redundancy and other impediments to paying) side of our community is preyed upon by others and just how much they pay for the privilege of being abused.
The car salesman was working hard to get the would be customer so desirous of having a 'new' car that they'd sign up just to fill the craving that had been created.
What a disgrace and what an opportunity for us to come alongside and work to protect these people.
Pax
Saturday, 12 November 2011
Privileged Clergy, pressurised Parishoners
Returning to the issue of 'finance and the Church', time to respond to the comments made in the first-placed observation, namely:
"The clergy live in their privileged and comfortable lives whilst demanding that their poor and disadvantaged congregations pay for the privilege in the money the are pressured to give!"
Assuming that the 'privilege' is meant in some way to be monetary, for it fits with the general tone of the comment my first observation has to be that if they are then they're either doing it from private means as where I find myself the six of us work hard to keep our heads above water, especially with the current recession, rises in energy, fuel and just about every other cost! I realise that having six of us in a household is perhaps not the norm but it is for us.
As for, "demanding that their poor give!" Working in an Urban Priority Area I have to say that generally all of the those within the area we serve might well be considered poor with respect to many parts of the country (for 'poor' is surely a comparative) and even with in our own town we most definitely serve the 'have nots'. As for pressurising the congregations, I would have to say that generally, as a breed, clergy still tend not to lean on people to pay a tithe (which is actually the minimum of course) and yet there is this misconception amongst those outs, and I have to assume that the author of this comment was not a church member, that we are always out there with our begging bowls!
Where I am, and I cannot speak for others, our church building is used by the community without charge. Groups and individuals come and make use of our facilities and services and the answer is always the same, for Church (the people of God) should be paying for their buildings and the heating, lighting and whatever where it can and where it can't, if there is good reason for this (and I would have to say being a truly missionary church is pretty much the only caveat here) it should be supported by the other churches around it (i.e. at diocesan level or nationally). Now we get loads of flak from some because we don't charge, especially those who do charge for EVERYTHING and see us undercutting them (rather than ministering to the needs of those around us) and those who moan because of the difficulty we have in paying Parish Share (claiming we should charge for everything and pass the plate around at every opportunity), but that's life I guess.
Oddly though, the same people who complain that we charge for nothing are the very same people who get envious about the fact that we've decorated, installed central heating (where we had storage heaters), got new chairs, fitted a new kitchen (with dishwasher and double-ove, eight burner oven) and more besides - at no cost to the church (yep, all donated - even the plumber came and offered his services free!). God calls us to scatter our bread on the water - well we do and God has proved himself time and time again to be no man's debtor!
But clergy are indeed 'privileged' for the the calling that we have responded to is something that is a reward in itself but it's not financial. We might not be 'comfortable' but, generally speaking, we have dinner (and often lunch too) at home and are not subject to the pressures of working for someone else, for we set our own workloads and tasks for much of our working week. Now that is a privilege, but perhaps one that should see us offer to exchange places with people in the 'real' world of work or do a day with church members every now and then to keep the experience real. That said, we have but a very small number who are working and so, for me, this would be a bit difficult!
Those who are Church are also privileged and we all, for we are all 'Laos' (i.e. Church, God's people) should be paying sacrificially but from the outpouring of our hearts with gratitude and never because we are pressured by another.
Church should work at people seeing what they get for free and yet to do this without claims of exhibiting pride or generating envy on the part of others is something I just don't know how to do. So we do the stuff, live the life, house the homeless, feed the hungry and minister to the broken. The rest is up to God!
Pax
"The clergy live in their privileged and comfortable lives whilst demanding that their poor and disadvantaged congregations pay for the privilege in the money the are pressured to give!"
Assuming that the 'privilege' is meant in some way to be monetary, for it fits with the general tone of the comment my first observation has to be that if they are then they're either doing it from private means as where I find myself the six of us work hard to keep our heads above water, especially with the current recession, rises in energy, fuel and just about every other cost! I realise that having six of us in a household is perhaps not the norm but it is for us.
As for, "demanding that their poor give!" Working in an Urban Priority Area I have to say that generally all of the those within the area we serve might well be considered poor with respect to many parts of the country (for 'poor' is surely a comparative) and even with in our own town we most definitely serve the 'have nots'. As for pressurising the congregations, I would have to say that generally, as a breed, clergy still tend not to lean on people to pay a tithe (which is actually the minimum of course) and yet there is this misconception amongst those outs, and I have to assume that the author of this comment was not a church member, that we are always out there with our begging bowls!
Where I am, and I cannot speak for others, our church building is used by the community without charge. Groups and individuals come and make use of our facilities and services and the answer is always the same, for Church (the people of God) should be paying for their buildings and the heating, lighting and whatever where it can and where it can't, if there is good reason for this (and I would have to say being a truly missionary church is pretty much the only caveat here) it should be supported by the other churches around it (i.e. at diocesan level or nationally). Now we get loads of flak from some because we don't charge, especially those who do charge for EVERYTHING and see us undercutting them (rather than ministering to the needs of those around us) and those who moan because of the difficulty we have in paying Parish Share (claiming we should charge for everything and pass the plate around at every opportunity), but that's life I guess.
Oddly though, the same people who complain that we charge for nothing are the very same people who get envious about the fact that we've decorated, installed central heating (where we had storage heaters), got new chairs, fitted a new kitchen (with dishwasher and double-ove, eight burner oven) and more besides - at no cost to the church (yep, all donated - even the plumber came and offered his services free!). God calls us to scatter our bread on the water - well we do and God has proved himself time and time again to be no man's debtor!
But clergy are indeed 'privileged' for the the calling that we have responded to is something that is a reward in itself but it's not financial. We might not be 'comfortable' but, generally speaking, we have dinner (and often lunch too) at home and are not subject to the pressures of working for someone else, for we set our own workloads and tasks for much of our working week. Now that is a privilege, but perhaps one that should see us offer to exchange places with people in the 'real' world of work or do a day with church members every now and then to keep the experience real. That said, we have but a very small number who are working and so, for me, this would be a bit difficult!
Those who are Church are also privileged and we all, for we are all 'Laos' (i.e. Church, God's people) should be paying sacrificially but from the outpouring of our hearts with gratitude and never because we are pressured by another.
Church should work at people seeing what they get for free and yet to do this without claims of exhibiting pride or generating envy on the part of others is something I just don't know how to do. So we do the stuff, live the life, house the homeless, feed the hungry and minister to the broken. The rest is up to God!
Pax
Tuesday, 11 October 2011
World Mental Health Day
Yesterday was World mental Health Day - A day which hopefully raises the profile, and awareness, of mental health issues and encourages full, frank, open and honest discussion about this often problematic topic.
I was going to say that I struggle with my Christian faith at times, especially when it comes to mental health, but as soon as the words appeared on the screen I realised that in fact my struggle isn't with my faith or with God but with those who call themselves Christian. My reasons for this are easy to understand and simple to speak out (I hope). So I will try and explain them using some stuff from the Bible (it is what Christians do!)
James 2:14 - 17 (NLT):
"What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but don’t show it by your actions? Can that kind of faith save anyone?
Suppose you see a brother or sister who has no food or clothing, and you say, “Good-bye and have a good day; stay warm and eat well”—but then you don’t give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do?
So you see, faith by itself isn’t enough. Unless it produces good deeds, it is dead and useless."
This is the big problem with the issue of Christians and the poor, the homeless and the mentally ill (often, it seems, one and the same) for a number of Christians (and even more with other or no faith label). They walk past the focus of their pity and mumble, "God bless you," and hurry on by! But there is some help to be found in the Bible - Read on:
Micah 6: 6 - 8 (Revised Vic Version):
"What can we bring to the LORD?
What kind of offerings should we give him?
Should we bow before God with offerings of direct debits?
Should we offer him our debit card numbers and our Argos catalogue of gifts?
Should we sacrifice our children to pay for our sins?
No way people, the LORD has told you what is good,
and this is what he requires of you:
to do what is right, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God."
What God wants is us up close and personal. We are made in His image and this displays itself in creativity, in coming alongside (parakletos - just like the Holy Spirit does with us, bringing God into our daily reality), in finding out our names and listening to our stories. I struggle with people who merely give those who beg a coin and rush by for in doing so the neither resolve the problem nor help the person!
When we see a beggar we need to stop and find out their story, engage them and come alongside. This done we provide an answer to their need - a sandwich and a drink if they need food is the fulfilling of the most basic need. Giving them the money to buy it themselves is perhaps to just fund that which supports their problem and thus is a curse rather than a blessing!
If the problem is homelessness - then there are people who deal with that (I found out the numbers of the local hostels and places of help and would give those who claimed to be homeless or with specific needs a card with the relevant numbers (and a 'phone card to ring them). So often we fail to do what is right because we are too busy or just don't know the answers - but if we keep seeing the problem can we use this as an excuse? Obviously not because the Bible has that covered too:
Matthew 7:12 (NLT)
"Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you."
This is up there with the 'Judge not . .' passage (beginning of the chapter). If we lived our lives on the basis of treating others as we would like to be treated then we would see a very different world and as Christians, isn't this where we should be now? I see Christians expel people because of their actions and yet in the same breath tell me that those actions were initiated by the person's mental illness! As my dear old (long departed) Mum used to say, "There but for the grace of God go I!"
She understood that the line between those who have and those who don't is fine and fragile (especially in today's financially challenging times) and to afford people the dignity that we would like to be shown is surely the conferring of a basic human right let alone a Christian duty!
So three gold-plated rules from the Big Black Book of Life (BBBoL) - Three little things that would benefit our society, help support the mentally-ill and touch the weak, marginalised and oppressed (and that's before we bless those who have!).
Easy to explain - simple to do - so why aren't we doing them?
You may turn over your papers!
I was going to say that I struggle with my Christian faith at times, especially when it comes to mental health, but as soon as the words appeared on the screen I realised that in fact my struggle isn't with my faith or with God but with those who call themselves Christian. My reasons for this are easy to understand and simple to speak out (I hope). So I will try and explain them using some stuff from the Bible (it is what Christians do!)
James 2:14 - 17 (NLT):
"What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but don’t show it by your actions? Can that kind of faith save anyone?
Suppose you see a brother or sister who has no food or clothing, and you say, “Good-bye and have a good day; stay warm and eat well”—but then you don’t give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do?
So you see, faith by itself isn’t enough. Unless it produces good deeds, it is dead and useless."
This is the big problem with the issue of Christians and the poor, the homeless and the mentally ill (often, it seems, one and the same) for a number of Christians (and even more with other or no faith label). They walk past the focus of their pity and mumble, "God bless you," and hurry on by! But there is some help to be found in the Bible - Read on:
Micah 6: 6 - 8 (Revised Vic Version):
"What can we bring to the LORD?
What kind of offerings should we give him?
Should we bow before God with offerings of direct debits?
Should we offer him our debit card numbers and our Argos catalogue of gifts?
Should we sacrifice our children to pay for our sins?
No way people, the LORD has told you what is good,
and this is what he requires of you:
to do what is right, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God."
What God wants is us up close and personal. We are made in His image and this displays itself in creativity, in coming alongside (parakletos - just like the Holy Spirit does with us, bringing God into our daily reality), in finding out our names and listening to our stories. I struggle with people who merely give those who beg a coin and rush by for in doing so the neither resolve the problem nor help the person!
When we see a beggar we need to stop and find out their story, engage them and come alongside. This done we provide an answer to their need - a sandwich and a drink if they need food is the fulfilling of the most basic need. Giving them the money to buy it themselves is perhaps to just fund that which supports their problem and thus is a curse rather than a blessing!
If the problem is homelessness - then there are people who deal with that (I found out the numbers of the local hostels and places of help and would give those who claimed to be homeless or with specific needs a card with the relevant numbers (and a 'phone card to ring them). So often we fail to do what is right because we are too busy or just don't know the answers - but if we keep seeing the problem can we use this as an excuse? Obviously not because the Bible has that covered too:
Matthew 7:12 (NLT)
"Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you."
This is up there with the 'Judge not . .' passage (beginning of the chapter). If we lived our lives on the basis of treating others as we would like to be treated then we would see a very different world and as Christians, isn't this where we should be now? I see Christians expel people because of their actions and yet in the same breath tell me that those actions were initiated by the person's mental illness! As my dear old (long departed) Mum used to say, "There but for the grace of God go I!"
She understood that the line between those who have and those who don't is fine and fragile (especially in today's financially challenging times) and to afford people the dignity that we would like to be shown is surely the conferring of a basic human right let alone a Christian duty!
So three gold-plated rules from the Big Black Book of Life (BBBoL) - Three little things that would benefit our society, help support the mentally-ill and touch the weak, marginalised and oppressed (and that's before we bless those who have!).
Easy to explain - simple to do - so why aren't we doing them?
You may turn over your papers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)