I have to admit that I am struggling a great deal regarding the issue of human rights in that everyone appears to believe that their rights trump those of everyone else around them and to not endorse something is to be 'phobic' (a word meaning 'not agreeing that my rights are supreme and the way I live is the only way').
The Secularists witter on about the wicked, oppressive and awful Christians.
The Homosexuals witter on about those oppressive and cruel Christians.
The Humanists witter on about how you don't need to be a person of faith to be kind and show love and bemoan the fact that the naughty Christians think they have the monopoly on being 'Christian' (which I would have to say that, of course, they do - the hint being in the name rather than the corruption that refers to an act).
The Christians witter on about how Secularists and Humanists are blinkered and irrational and how Homosexuals run back to 'homophobia' as a defence for what has been for a goodly few years (want to start counting from Jewish roots or merely from the 'Christian' bit) a firm part of their faith. Of course in doing so they also drone endlessly on about 'persecution' and 'anti-Christian bias' and (like the other three groups - do themselves no real good in the process).
Why can't we see some balance, respect and commonsense?
Over the next few days I will be attempting to bring my views to the fore as I tinker internally with some of the issues that others are challenging me with (and it's funny that so many people are applauding one BA worker for wearing a cross up here in the Midlands) and hopefully might find some commonsense and dialogue from others too.
I have also posted this as a thread here: http://bit.ly/SJghcu in the hope it will attract and start something worthwhile. If you're not a member, then sigh un (proper names please - contact details are not available unless you opt to have such).
Pax
Showing posts with label oppression. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oppression. Show all posts
Wednesday, 16 January 2013
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
Formula One and Civil rights
And of course the response to the knotty of issue of civil rights and F1 should be that they have little to nothing to do with each other.
F1 boss, Bernie Ecclestone, has made the point that F1 is neither religious or political - it is concerned purely and simply with taking the circus into town and making money (my paraphrase). Of course in doing so damned China when he said that there was no difference between holding it in China or in Bahrain. A statement which is much less true now that it was at the time of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 and one that, I would assume, might cause some offence to China's attempts at democracy.
Last night I was listening, in the early hours of the morning, to radio reports from Bahrain as protesters were apparently shot at and (definitely) subjected to tear gas attack. As this morning the radio carried the words of a man approaching death through hunger strike, a desperate act reflecting a desperate situation; I reflected upon the folly that F1 is and maintains by its presence in this nation.
Bahrain International Circuit's chairman Zayed R Alzayani has paralleled what is happening in his country and the potential for incident at the Grand Prix to the idiot who nearly lost his head by swimming into the path of the boat race competitors. He says of those protesting, "There are idiots everywhere in the world. Does that mean we just sit at home and lock ourselves up?"
No of course not, we just want them to stop the oppression and cease locking its residents up!
F1 boss, Bernie Ecclestone, has made the point that F1 is neither religious or political - it is concerned purely and simply with taking the circus into town and making money (my paraphrase). Of course in doing so damned China when he said that there was no difference between holding it in China or in Bahrain. A statement which is much less true now that it was at the time of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 and one that, I would assume, might cause some offence to China's attempts at democracy.
Last night I was listening, in the early hours of the morning, to radio reports from Bahrain as protesters were apparently shot at and (definitely) subjected to tear gas attack. As this morning the radio carried the words of a man approaching death through hunger strike, a desperate act reflecting a desperate situation; I reflected upon the folly that F1 is and maintains by its presence in this nation.
Bahrain International Circuit's chairman Zayed R Alzayani has paralleled what is happening in his country and the potential for incident at the Grand Prix to the idiot who nearly lost his head by swimming into the path of the boat race competitors. He says of those protesting, "There are idiots everywhere in the world. Does that mean we just sit at home and lock ourselves up?"
No of course not, we just want them to stop the oppression and cease locking its residents up!
Monday, 4 April 2011
First step
One of the biggest shocks to shape the ministry in the place I find myself today is the realisation that I am not called by God to drag people into the church building but to get the Church out of it. I am not called to 'bring people back' to church, because they've never been there and so return is impossible. I am called to bring God's blessing where it is already to be found, merely pointing the recipients to what is already there and effecting an introduction between the two parties.
What I, and those with whom I stand, am called to is to be light in the darkness of everyday reality and salt which brings flavour to be bland and bleak consumer society. I do this in the privileged surroundings of a nation whose Christian history has made it tolerant, and welcoming, of people from other nations and faiths. It is good and right that we have always, in the main, exercised religious tolerance, save a 'bit of a problem' with Rome exacerbated by some of our bloodier monarchs and will hopefully continue in this trend.
What would be a great sadness is for us to lose our birthright, nationally and as Christians, through the abuse of our welcome or the fear of legislators and those in authority. The guide is that all who inhabit our land, do so within the laws of this land and whilst there is warrant for people to have their own legal bodies for such issues as divorce (as an arbitration body ie. sharia and beth din), the law of this land is supreme and has absolute authority.
The means by which this is enabled is for those who are Christians to make proper, balanced and informed stands.
When I lived in West London, it wasn't the 'ethnics' who called for Christmas to be cancelled and the money that would have been used for decorations to be sent to a women's cooperative in South Africa. It was the council who wanted to promote their own agenda (non-Christian) and used to support this, the misinformation that the reason was the 'other faiths'.
Oddly, it was the Sikhs, Hindus and other non-Christian faith groups who pushed the council into funding the lights and saved Christmas. It was other faiths who spoke out about the importance of Christ and Christmas. The Christians were silent. Christians (weak, nominal or dechurched) showed themselves to be weak and impotent and to generally be people of 'no faith'.
When, as a member of a SACRE (Standing Advisory Committee on Religious Education) we were asked to approve the dropping of formal religious assemblies within the borough's schools, the CofE (having the casting block vote) supported this every time. The voices of dissent for such action came from, yes - you have guessed - the member of the 'other faith' groups but of course, their voices went unheeded.
Where we find ourselves today is the heritage from such realities as this. From the legacy of people who were willing to have a 'meek shall inherit the earth approach' that was modelled on the doormat!
There is still time to embrace people of other faiths as just that. People who have other beliefs. We don't have to do services together (for as I understand it, all gods do not lead to the one same God) and we don't have to agree (another of the curses of multifaith and ecumenical gatherings). We are different faiths and so, although we will find areas of ethical behaviour that coalesce the reality remains that we are very different - and this is right!
When a church wanted to build a new building to accomodate them and their community work, restrictions were placed by the council on parking, noise from the building, light polution and a host of other issues. When the same council was asked to approve the building of a mosque in the very same area, no such restrictions were applied. It is this obvious bias and lack of equality which causes some to claim that other faiths and other tongues are afforded more rights that our native tongue and faith.
The reason for the decisions? The council didn't want to appear as if they were 'prejudiced' and so exhibited to all the fact that they were.
Lesson the first - open-handed, open-hearted, seeking equality and equity for all, regardless. Jew or Gentile, Muslim or Sikh, Secular Humanist or Theist. This is living biblically and is the way by which the kingdom (of God) will be won and the state of our country maintained.
Ex 22: 21 "You must not mistreat or oppress foreigners in any way. Remember, you yourselves were once foreigners in the land of Egypt."
Lev 19:33 "When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him."
Zec 7: 10 "Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other."
God's words, not mine. If you don't agree, take it up with Him!
Pax
What I, and those with whom I stand, am called to is to be light in the darkness of everyday reality and salt which brings flavour to be bland and bleak consumer society. I do this in the privileged surroundings of a nation whose Christian history has made it tolerant, and welcoming, of people from other nations and faiths. It is good and right that we have always, in the main, exercised religious tolerance, save a 'bit of a problem' with Rome exacerbated by some of our bloodier monarchs and will hopefully continue in this trend.
What would be a great sadness is for us to lose our birthright, nationally and as Christians, through the abuse of our welcome or the fear of legislators and those in authority. The guide is that all who inhabit our land, do so within the laws of this land and whilst there is warrant for people to have their own legal bodies for such issues as divorce (as an arbitration body ie. sharia and beth din), the law of this land is supreme and has absolute authority.
The means by which this is enabled is for those who are Christians to make proper, balanced and informed stands.
When I lived in West London, it wasn't the 'ethnics' who called for Christmas to be cancelled and the money that would have been used for decorations to be sent to a women's cooperative in South Africa. It was the council who wanted to promote their own agenda (non-Christian) and used to support this, the misinformation that the reason was the 'other faiths'.
Oddly, it was the Sikhs, Hindus and other non-Christian faith groups who pushed the council into funding the lights and saved Christmas. It was other faiths who spoke out about the importance of Christ and Christmas. The Christians were silent. Christians (weak, nominal or dechurched) showed themselves to be weak and impotent and to generally be people of 'no faith'.
When, as a member of a SACRE (Standing Advisory Committee on Religious Education) we were asked to approve the dropping of formal religious assemblies within the borough's schools, the CofE (having the casting block vote) supported this every time. The voices of dissent for such action came from, yes - you have guessed - the member of the 'other faith' groups but of course, their voices went unheeded.
Where we find ourselves today is the heritage from such realities as this. From the legacy of people who were willing to have a 'meek shall inherit the earth approach' that was modelled on the doormat!
There is still time to embrace people of other faiths as just that. People who have other beliefs. We don't have to do services together (for as I understand it, all gods do not lead to the one same God) and we don't have to agree (another of the curses of multifaith and ecumenical gatherings). We are different faiths and so, although we will find areas of ethical behaviour that coalesce the reality remains that we are very different - and this is right!
When a church wanted to build a new building to accomodate them and their community work, restrictions were placed by the council on parking, noise from the building, light polution and a host of other issues. When the same council was asked to approve the building of a mosque in the very same area, no such restrictions were applied. It is this obvious bias and lack of equality which causes some to claim that other faiths and other tongues are afforded more rights that our native tongue and faith.
The reason for the decisions? The council didn't want to appear as if they were 'prejudiced' and so exhibited to all the fact that they were.
Lesson the first - open-handed, open-hearted, seeking equality and equity for all, regardless. Jew or Gentile, Muslim or Sikh, Secular Humanist or Theist. This is living biblically and is the way by which the kingdom (of God) will be won and the state of our country maintained.
Ex 22: 21 "You must not mistreat or oppress foreigners in any way. Remember, you yourselves were once foreigners in the land of Egypt."
Lev 19:33 "When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him."
Zec 7: 10 "Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, the alien or the poor. In your hearts do not think evil of each other."
God's words, not mine. If you don't agree, take it up with Him!
Pax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)