Big Profits from Cheap relationships

This was written for the Church Times in January 2010.

Some people’s New Year Resolution is to find more exciting relationships. At least that is what we are told by online dating agencies. For them, January is always a busy month, but business this year is currently outstripping others.  Agencies have reported record increases of visitors to their websites over the last fortnight – related, it seems to the number of people snowed in, and so ‘working’ at home. In the middle of last week, with the ice at its most treacherous and the country’s workforce enjoying an extended lie-in, visitors to one website soared by 55% with most logging on early afternoon.

Brisk business for the dating agencies suggests slower business for companies: firms might well be curious to know how much real work was actually done at home. But, even without benefits from the bad weather the online dating services are clearly not suffering from recession.  According to a leading market research group, the number of Britons paying to register for online dating services is set to grow from 2.6 million people in 2006 to six million by 2012, creating revenues of around £368m.

Controversially, those reporting the biggest increase are websites specifically for extra-marital affairs. I turned up one such website and found that people bored with their marriages or current partners can enjoy a ‘discreet romp’ with any number of others for a small registration fee of £15.99. From the shadowy profiles offered it appeared that around 700 of its registered members were at that moment roaming around online looking for a discreet liaison. Another such agency launched in 2001 now boasts ten thousand ‘all married’ members, mostly ‘high-flying professionals’. Men outnumber women three to one. The site owner claims proudly that ‘infidelity has gone from being a niche market’ to ‘verging on mainstream’.

If this is a growing trend, then why? Many commentators focus on the recession. As companies flounder and people are made redundant, inexpensive forms of escapism are in demand. An internet affair is exciting, easily available, temporary, and very cheap. As some site owners point out – this is not dating, there is no need even to buy flowers or dinner; you just head for the bedroom where money worries and nagging spouses can be forgotten in a short, no-strings sexual encounter. The fact that infidelity is smoothly arranged between people who risk the same makes it even safer – and guarantees lucrative profits to service providers.

The assumptions behind this analysis are problematic. They demean the nature of relationships, treating them as another aspect of consumerism. When marriage fails to meet requirements, traders step in and offer infidelity as a more effective commodity. In reality, marriages in a consumerist society are often undermined by the greater demands of work, becoming entangled with money and success. Too often they are required to spice up pressured lives  or to provide a respite from stress, yet without the commitment of time and energy given exclusively to each other which any marriage needs to grow strong.

Studies repeatedly show that most people looking for a relationship still see fidelity  as part of love. That shouldn’t surprise us as it’s woven in to the very meaning of marriage and central to its Christian roots. Faithfulness provides a secure base for the experience of intimacy as well as the freedom to enjoy the ordinariness of relationship together. But  we may need to demonstrate in our own lives that marital commitment breaks the stranglehold of our culture; that ‘for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and health’ eliminates the need for trading, and cuts the heart out of consumerism.

January 2010

Hope for Haiti

This was written for the Church Times in January 2010.

The devastating earthquake has brought Haiti’s needs into the consciousness of millions. A neglected half-island in the Caribbean suddenly comes under the spotlight of international scrutiny and its shocking statistics widely disseminated. Thanks to relentless coverage, most of us are now all too aware that this country needs help.

My own experience of Haiti  parallels the media reports. Tearfund is involved in Haiti precisely because more than half its population live in acute poverty, with very high rates of unemployment and illiteracy.  Urban slums offer no clean water or sanitation and, even in the country’s capital, streets are shrouded in darkness as electricity supply is erratic. But the poverty is more than economic. Environmental degradation means both soil and species have become endangered and with 98% of its forests felled the country is particularly vulnerable to flooding from hurricanes. In 2008, four storms in as many weeks left a million homeless. Health care, social welfare and public services are thin; disease and malnutrition are rampant. There are regular outbreaks of diarrhoea, hepatitis, typhoid, dengue fever, and malaria.  HIV is a massive problem, and the country has an infant mortality rate even worse than that of some African nations. To this litany of woes we must add Haiti’s high crime rate and disastrous political history, where corruption, passive governments and turmoil have left a country struggling with instability.  The autocratic, fourteen year regime of Francois Duvalier (‘Papa Doc)’ reinforced voodoo, tortured opponents and put to death some 30,000 Haitians. To suggest that the country suffers from a legacy of hardship and low morale amongst ordinary citizens would be a major understatement.

My last visit to Haiti in 2008 coincided with a period of instability and a spate of hostage-taking. The British Consulate had pulled out of the country three years earlier because of heightened security conditions. Before I went, I phoned a contact in the Foreign Office about guidance for British Nationals. ‘Don’t go,’ was the simple reply. My Haitian hosts assured me that I would be safe in their home, under their protection and I was. Their generous care and hospitality offered me the privilege of observing aspects of Haitian society from the inside.

The media reports give an accurate picture but tell only half the story.  Certainly, there is vast poverty, corruption and crime along with high susceptibility to natural disasters. But alongside all these is the remarkable truth that Haiti has been enjoying something of a spiritual growth over the last two decades. Nominally a Catholic country, where Voodoo has held grip over many people’s lives,  Haiti has seen a surge of  Christian awakening at grass roots level. I was aware of dozens of new churches which had sprung up since my last visit- apparently more than 600, mostly Protestant, in the capital alone. Both traditional denominations and new charismatic churches have seen growth. On normal Sundays, Port au Prince gives very visible evidence of keen Christian observance; with thousands of people dressed in Sunday best, walking to churches and carrying Bibles. I was preaching in one such church, and with its doors open on to the street during two hours of worship, it felt as if we were part of a whole metropolis which had erupted into praise.

 

In a country which knows such hardship and suffering, there is always a danger that faith can become culturally separate and pietistic, offering a distraction from pain by focusing on internal ‘spiritual life’ Mature Christian leaders in Haiti have been only too aware of this danger. At a personal level the Gospel has long been integrated with social concern. Educated and more affluent Christians take responsibility for the welfare of individual families in the slums, paying even to educate their children. But denominational leaders and seminarians invited me to explore with them how the Christian faith might impact the needs of  Haitian society in a more structured way.  Micah Challenge – a global network committed to integral mission and advocacy – brought 70 leaders together, to address poverty, economics, children, HIV/AIDS, gender, ecology, education and business all within a theological and biblical context.. With so many sharing the vision together, practical co-operation was suddenly possible; Christian initiatives could get off the ground.  I came home believing that through the vision of the Christians I had met, God really could empower ordinary Hatians to change society.

Then comes an earthquake so devastating that it might well rip out the heart of faith itself. Homes and people are gone, church buildings ruined, lives shattered. For Christians this is surely a test to the utmost. The messages from Haitian friends describe the carnage, the hunger, the bodies piled on the street. Yet hope and trust remain. They will rebuild. ‘We have our treasure in earthen vessels’ writes one. ‘But we are not destroyed. For God holds the power for our future.’

Cambridge

January 2010

 

Abuse is Not Intimacy

This was written for the Church Times in September 2009.

Years ago, I was challenged at the end of a talk to make a response to St Peter’s insistence that women are the ‘weaker vessel’ (1 Peter 3 v 7).  The questioner clearly saw this as implying some kind of female inferiority which was incompatible with the gender egalitarianism I was expounding.

This week the issue came up again in a very different context. St Peter wasn’t mentioned, but the underlying ambiguity was evident enough.  A report published by the University of Bristol and the NSPCC surveyed 1300 youngsters aged between 13 and 17 and found that 90% of the girls had been in an intimate relationship. One third of the girls had suffered sexual abuse in relationship, with seventeen percent saying they were forced to have sex.  A quarter of the girls reported violence at the hands of their boyfriends, and one in 16 said they had been raped. Experiences from the boys in the survey also indicated the presence of violence, with one in seventeen saying they had been pressured into having sex.  In the words of one commentator the report showed ‘immense peer pressure’ among teenagers to behave in certain ways, which can result in ‘disrespectful or violent relationships with girls often bearing the brunt’.

The findings have produced some stunned responses, even from those who commissioned the research. Professor David Berridge was shocked to find exploitation and violence in relationships starting so young, and described the rate of violence as ‘appalling.’ Diane Sutton, head of NSPCC policy and public research was shocked that ‘so many young people view violence or abuse in relationships as normal’.

And indeed, shocking it is.  That such abuse should be identified as intimacy is a denial of human value. Yet this is not a problem which originates with teenagers, but often handed down by those who are older. The two groups of girls who were found to be particularly at risk were those with older boyfriends and those who had already experienced violence from adults within their family.  It seems part of a societal legacy of relational dysfunction and disrespect, which all too quickly creates a pervasive culture of abuse.  Perhaps we should not be so surprised when this is mirrored in the experiences of teenage intimacy.

So how should we respond as Christians? It goes without saying that we need to both teach and model something better – relationships which are committed, faithful, respectful, safe and non-coercive. That we actively pursue the fruits of the Spirit in our own marriages and friendships. The very least the Church could do is to open a new window on love joy, peace, patience,  kindness, goodness, faithfulness. gentleness and self-control ‘against which there is no law’.

But we might also need to revisit that statement by St Peter.  Within his culture the woman was  indeed the ‘weaker vessel’ ;  not spiritually,  but within the structures of patriarchal society. Today also, women might still be said to be ‘weaker’- not in any sense of inferiority or inadequacy –but in cultural terms,  with potential economic and physical vulnerability.  Yet women’s sexual vulnerability is no justification for discrimination or stereotyping, even less for abuse.  There should be no incompatibility between promoting an egalitarian society which celebrates difference and acknowledging that girls have always been in need of protection. The two go together.  The problem comes when male power and gender violence are accepted as normal, and we fail to censure those who are predatory and abusive.  St Peter had a better idea: that men live considerately in relationships and ‘bestow honour’ on women.

September 2009

 

More than Justice

This was written for the Church Times in May 2009.

So which of us has not backed the Gurkha campaign, or nodded consent every time Joanna Lumley spelt out their case? For weeks, the public mood has been overwhelmingly in favour of their right to settle in the UK, and victory last Thursday came not a day too soon.

The anatomy of the successful campaign has been minutely examined. Of course there was the combination of glamour, colour and courage, with the striking visual impact of a beautiful celebrity flanked by ageing Nepalese war veterans. Then, the personal link through Lumley’s father who fought alongside the Gurkhas during the Second World War, was a media winner, and gave the campaign weight and  authenticity. Public perceptions of the soldiers themselves as noble, altruistic, brave and loyal despite their treatment, highlighted the injustice of their present situation.  And the current disrespect for politics and politicians no doubt increased the public outrage, and made this the right campaign  at the right moment.

But now that the cameras have packed up and the cheers have stopped, what will the campaign leave behind?  Certainly, a just outcome for brave people who risked their lives for the country they now want to live in, and a satisfaction that Britain can actually do the right thing when it has a mind to. But I hope there might be something more, something less headline-grabbing, perhaps, but crucially important for the way we do public affairs.

For me, two other things made this campaign different from most. The first was the overriding sense that legality must be brought into line with morality. Although it was legal to exclude Gurkhas from residency rights, being legal did not make the situation moral. For morality is more profound,  embedded in a deep sense of what, in Lumley’s words is ‘the great and good thing to do.’ So the battle for the Gurkhas was being fought not just at the level of individual rights but at this much more foundational level of what constitutes universal morality.

The second thing was the tone of the campaign. It was so different from the strident, petty, point-scoring self-righteousness which has become part of our political consciousness. Instead, courtesy, graciousness, willingness to praise those who  listened and an affirmation that the decision-makers would do right became the hallmark of the celebrity’s response. Was this a clever media strategy? Perhaps, but it demonstrated also a willingness for co-operation and trust rather than confrontation and cynicism. After the Home Secretary broke the news the contrasts in communication were huge. Opposition politicians rushed to make political capital, sneering at climbdown and ‘public embarrassment’, triumphing that the government had been dragged ‘kicking and screaming’ to make this decision. Joanna Lumley simply said thank you, and enveloped the judiciary, the government, the media and the public in a warm blanket of gratitude and praise.

If the success of this campaign simply reinforces celebrity culture or triggers more political gloating, its triumph will be tinged with failure. For it could challenge us much more deeply. It could help us glimpse a New Testament vision which puts law in the context of the demands of morality and urges us to search our consciences. It could help us to see what is meant by not bearing false witness, but speaking of opponents with fairness and truth. It could even help us see the effectiveness of St Paul’s advice: to let our communication be full of grace and seasoned with salt.  If this justice campaign brought new attitudes into our culture, it would be even greater victory for the Gurkhars

Cambridge May 2009

 

Lost Childhoods

It has been interesting to read the figures on teenage pregnancies in the light of the recent report commissioned by the Children’s Society.  In discussing childhood struggles today, A Good Childhood, Searching for Values in a Competitive Age had looked at aggressive consumerism, poverty and inequality and pinpointed the ‘excessive individualism’ of our culture. Its conclusions that ‘more young people are anxious and troubled’ and that children’s lives are ‘more difficult than in the past’ have been well reported.

Now, almost on cue, preliminary statistics released from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) give a graphic illustration of one aspect of these problems, teenage pregnancy. Figures for the first half of 2007 show conception rates for girls under 18 at 42 out of every 1000 girls. It is by far the highest rate in Western Europe- six or seven times higher than that of The Netherlands. In girls between 13 and 15 years, the conception rate is an alarming 8 out of every 1000.

The responses to these figures have been mixed. Some have insisted that they are a blip on an otherwise downward trend. But even if this is true, there is little in them to celebrate. One advisory agent commented with some satisfaction that, although the pregnancy rate was high, more than half of them did not result in motherhood. But since that means that large numbers of young girls are undergoing abortions it is barely a cause for congratulation.

We understand those who see the problem as one of morality, the rejection of the consequences of sexual behaviour by a ‘me’ generation. We hear the call for re-education in sexual attitudes and values. We also understand those who link the problem to poverty, for poverty in childhood is one of the most consistent predictors of disadvantage and social problems. Britain is the most unequal of rich countries in Europe, with 22% of our children categorised as poor. (In Sweden it is 8%.) Sexual experience often accompanies deprivation, for sex can provide a cheap and temporary distraction. As the Children’s Society report acknowledged, reducing child poverty itself could change lifestyles and empower more youngsters.

Yet if the research is right, we may need to go beyond both moral judgements and material solutions. We may need to address deep problems of disillusion and distrust, identity and emotional struggle in some teenage lives. We may need to ask why so many youngsters have little real sense of self-worth; why there is a deep unmet need for affection,  why many experience ‘skin hunger’ and sadness. Henri Nouwen once wondered what it must feel like to fear that no-one loves you without conditions and you can’t be vulnerable without being used. Without some experience of the love that God gives, it is no surprise that youngsters seek substitutes.

Perhaps, more than the rest of Europe, our particular form of spiritual malaise is tied up with material burnout. The Netherlands might not be any more Christian than the UK in its churchgoing, but the legacy of the faith remains in the way its children are nurtured and valued. Adult patterns identified by the Children’s Society of aggressive pursuit of personal success give us less energy to spend with young people, and less time to understand their world. It was St Paul who told us that when he was a child he spoke, understood and thought as a child, and not until he was an adult did he put away childish things. We may need to learn how to re-evaluate our time and give our young the space to be children.

March 2009

 

Prophets and Priests

This was written for the Church Times in January 2009.

The forecasters have been out in force for 2009. Predictably, what they see in store for us in the coming year is gloomy, whether we look at it on a national, global, or personal scale. Take the economic front. Not only are American car manufacturers,  financial institutions and the dollar all forecast to be under great pressure, causing inevitable global ripples, but the UK will suffer its own further losses. House prices will continue to fall, savings will yield little income and 600,000 jobs could go this year, leaving many more people in acute financial hardship.

To drive the consequences home, we also hear from the country’s lawyers that they are expecting a considerable rise in the divorce rate. As money crises push relationships to breaking point, couples are not finding the emotional and spiritual resources to enable them to stay together. The forecasters even offer us a date where they expect to see a great rush of new separations: January 12 – the first Monday after return to school from the family Christmas holiday.

Finally, climate scientists are assuring us that 2009 is likely to rank in the top five years of the earth’s temperature rise, and that from the end of this year the rise will be more accelerated and less reversible. It will take enormous international political will to put into effect the measures to prevent this.

So what do we make of these predictions?  Responses have varied from those who see them as inevitable and therefore unavoidable whatever we do, to those who dismiss them as the ranting of misery-mongers who simply hype incidents into trends. Yet  accurate forecasts are neither mechanistic inevitabilities nor mere scaremongering, but are in a strong part predicated on human action and attitudes. In this sense we could see them as prophetic, and those who make them as linking us to the prophets of old.

The Hebrew prophets might have been speaking into different times and situations, but their warnings were for people and nations, and when their words were heeded, disasters were averted. When Joseph prophesied a famine after seven years of plenty, people took note, and made the kinds of preparations which got them through the long crisis. When the people of Ninevah listened to the predictions of Jonah they repented and the disaster was averted. Our present-day forecasters are not claiming divine inspiration – their predictions are not prefaced by ‘Thus says the Lord’. Yet, God can and does speak through the most secular of prophets, and the call for people to weigh what is said and respond with humility and wisdom is always there.

It is therefore the church’s responsibility to make a response, especially in the public arena and to policy-makers. In the messages of both Archbishops was a critique of the government’s failure to respond adequately to the financial crisis; five further bishops have challenged the record on poverty, policy and distribution. Their words are biblically significant. We have often privileged the rich. As a nation we have not used the seven years of plenty to provide resources for the seven years of lean.

Yet our response as Christians goes beyond speaking out. We also need to be there, in active compassion, for those who face unemployment, struggle with debt, and need help to plan domestic finances. We need to be around for those who whose marriages can no longer take the strain, and whose children may face the sorrow of breakup for years to come. 2009 will challenge the church too- not least to look beyond its own issues and reach out in love.

Cambridge

January 2009

A Question of Access

This was written for the Church Times August 2008

Having spent a couple of months on crutches, after a ligament injury in my knee, I’ve been particularly tuned in to how people relate to those who are disabled.  Response to my situation has, understandably, been tempered by surprise and curiosity and has varied from jokes and hilarity (‘I bet the other person came off worse!’) to mildly patronizing concern (‘Are you sure you can make it to the door?’)

Media stories this week about attacks on the disabled have particularly grabbed my attention. Reporters have labelled these as ‘hate crimes’ which, they claim, show a deep-seated hatred within society towards disabled people. Dr (Sir )Tom Shakespeare, geneticist,  sociologist, and co-author of The Sexual Politics of Disability disagrees.  He sees this not as hatred but bullying; people who themselves are insecure and socially inadequate picking on the vulnerable because ‘it makes them feel better to put us down.’ Tom Shakespeare was recently intimidated and humiliated himself as schoolgirls on the metro jeered at his restricted growth. Yet rather than encourage excitement about ‘hate crime’ he challenges us to address the ordinary ways in which people with disabilities are treated.

I’m sure he’s right. It’s easy to be distracted by appalling extremes. A publication last month found plenty of material in the everyday realities of disability. The Report:  ‘The Experiences and Expectations of Disabled people’, commissioned by the Government Office for Disability Issues, interviewed nearly 2000 disabled people, and addressed  key policy areas including employment, education, transport, health and discrimination.  The results show that in spite of years of progress, people with disabilities still experience disadvantages in most of these areas. Restricted job opportunities, discrimination, housing problems, health concerns, difficulties with access and financial problems were all among the issues shared.  Because of the cumulative weight of these factors, half of those interviewed lived in a household with an income less than the national median. Worry about future finances was widespread.

The disadvantages reported in most of these areas were considerable, yet the needs expressed by those with disabilities were modest. Social inclusion, normality, participation, good health care, freedom of access were high on most people’s list.  Nearly half of disabled people felt that something as simple as improvement to public transport would make their lives better.

It’s sobering to reflect how our Churches respond to some of the issues in the Report. There are certainly problems of access and inclusion. But not just over lack of ramps in old buildings or services without disabled facilities. There can also be problems of access to full participation and access to God. We can turn disability into dependency, where those who are disabled become the special recipients of charity and concern, whilst their gifts remain unused. We can also romanticise disability – heralding it as a high calling, with the disabled as an inspiration to us all. We can even be embarrassed by people who are disabled, seeing disability and the Gospel as spiritually incompatible, for surely a loving God wants everybody to be healed? (I was told by someone, ‘put your crutches down and walk, trusting God.’ I do trust God- and  have proper respect for a torn ligament!).

Our theology of the incarnation ought to give us a firmer basis for Christian  attitudes and practice towards disability. God neither banished the pain and struggles of the world nor idealised them. He entered into them, becoming part of our ordinary human condition, facing its hardships and limitations. Experiencing God’s Spirit in each other can transform us into an inclusive community which accepts the needs of all, and allows unrestricted access to God.

August 2008

Dangerous Truth

This was written for the Church Times in June 2008

In the Church we have an ambivalent attitude towards journalists. Blame of the media is almost a mantra – especially for its obsession with sex in the vicarage and its appetite for lurid stories. I’ve listened for years to allegations of bias, distortion, sensationalism, and dumbing down, and agree that they’re not unfounded. I could produce as much evidence as the next woman.

But there is a very different side to journalism too, which is profoundly challenging to the Church. Two significant events over the last ten days have paid tribute to this. The first was the One World Awards which drew together NGOs and media companies to celebrate some outstanding global contributions to broadcast and print journalism over this last year. The second was the dedication of the new skylight sculpture, Breathing, erected on top of BBC Broadcasting House in London to commemorate journalists killed in the work of newsgathering.

It is appropriate that the two events came close together. In the award ceremony, we saw some amazing films produced by people whose commitment to telling the story on behalf of others took them into places of restricted access, hideouts and undercover reporting. Clips from the skilful short-listed programmes produced tears and laughter almost in equal proportion. Days later, the memorial inauguration reminded us of the costs of covering the news in these conditions, and the death toll of those who have been killed in an attempt to open up truths which the powerful want to hide.

The statistics are very sobering. According to Richard Sambrook, the BBC’s director of Global News, every week for the last ten years at least two journalists or news staff somewhere in the world have lost their lives, and numbers are increasing.  More than 200 were killed since the start of 2007, with 160 attacks on news people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo alone. Nearly 90% of the murders on journalists there were committed by military or other security services. The losses are both personal and global. Two young BBC reporters killed this last fortnight – Nasteh Dahir in Somalia and Abdul Samad Rohani in Afghanistan– were well-known voices to millions and admired for their fearlessness. They faced threats from Taleban, corrupt officials and ruthless drug lords for the murder of journalists is one of the cheapest forms of censorship, and intimidates others into repression and silence.

The sculpture which commemorates their bravery and commitment now projects a beam of light from Broadcasting House one kilometre into the night sky for thirty minutes every night. It is almost biblical in its symbolism. There is so much in the Gospels about exposure to the light, which penetrates the darkness with truth. And the light that beams from the new sculpture reminds us of all  journalists who have died refusing to be intimidated by blackouts, embargoes, cover-ups, deceptions, lies, and tyrants who suppress the truth.

Truth is from God wherever it operates and its very nature is to set people free. St John identifies Truth with Christ, and we cannot come to Christ without being prepared to face the truth and be freed from idolatry and self-delusion. Those who are called to be professional truth-tellers are on the front line of the battle for freedom. Open reporting of news is one of the greatest gifts which any culture can offer its citizens. For security will never come through those who stockpile weapons and trade in arms. It can only come through those who create open access to truth, hold others accountable, and are ready to expose wrongdoing whatever the cost.

Cambridge

June 2008

 

 

 

Loss of Trust

This was written for the Church Times in January 2008

Issues of trust are cropping up all over the place, mostly involving the lack of it. We fear we may not be able to trust banks with our deposits, or internet firms with our debit card numbers. We’re reluctant to trust world leaders and now it seems our own government cannot be trusted with our personal data. The loss of computer discs containing the entire child benefit records and the personal details of 25 million people is certainly very grave. It is grave because out there are others we cannot trust. They are ready to defraud us, even to steal our identity. All the time we are in danger of being fleeced and attacked. In fact, some kind of cosmic worry is emerging where we’re anxious about everything from the reliability of our health tests and the safety of our children, to the threat of terrorism. It seems that everything and everybody needs securing. This lack of trust is very costly. We’re told we need weapons to defend ourselves against rogue states, and security systems on homes, cars, computers, churches and mobile phones. Hundreds of thousands of employees, from retail security guards to club bouncers are taught to practice professional distrust. Distrust is big money, and of course, there are many people and companies who are happy to talk it up.

The main response seems to be to rely on surveillance and technology to meet the challenge. Lead is being stripped from church roofs, and so a dye will make the stuff unsaleable. Computers needs protecting against viruses, so sophisticated security systems are devised. Identity cards, or more accurately identification cards, are to be high-tech solutions to the problem of identifying one another. And in many ways this technological response seems inevitable; anonymous relations cannot easily be transformed into personal trusting relationships. The process of increasing distrust is inexorable.

Yet, perhaps this does not have to be the case. Actually, trust is a necessary part of human relationships and human economy. We trust the electrician, the surgeon, the mechanic, the teacher, the plumber and the babysitter. Today the vast majority of jobs are professional in the sense that we expect fellow workers to hold to standards for us: to examine our brakes on an MOT or do a breast scan correctly. We trust the postal system, the building society, the sewerage service. Our train and bus systems function on extraordinary levels of trust. In all of these situations what is good for the other is paramount, even when we do not know the person involved. Most of the time we trust that people will operate as good neighbours and we relate to them on the same basis.  In fact our society has long absorbed the necessity of the second great commandment; there is no real alternative to neighbour-love. It is the generator and guarantee of trust which we tend to take for granted until it breaks down.

When trust does break down criminal, unlawful or negligent activity must be held to account so that the principle of neighbour-love can be re-established. Institutions should also be trustworthy so government departments must be held to account. People are, in Alister Darling’s words ‘entitled to trust’ the government. Perhaps the greatest weakness of our present situation is not failure of technology, but failure to acknowledge the sheer centrality that trust and trustworthiness is to our lives. Its absence costs us billions, complicates life and destroys peace. Its presence sweetens the soul and allows a complex economy to flourish. Jesus’s summary of our responsibilities towards each other remains the bedrock of human society.

January 2008

 

Gathering the Resolve

This was written for the church times August 2007

Nearly 30,000 people were at the Big Green Gathering in Somerset. Coming by car was discouraged, parking charges were heavy, and the whole site was powered through sun and wind, apart from the odd camp fire. But there was a quiet resolve about the five day event. People were going to meet people, and have fun. A man in monk’s habit wandered past the tent selling relics and indulgences:  “Bits of the true cross, fingernail clippings from St Paul; earwax from St Ethelreda.” He did not seem to be expecting sales. “Life – not available on television” stretched across another punter’s chest.

More pointed were the gatherings in the campaigns field. Events from the previous week provided the urgency.  Floods in India, Bangladesh and England, heat waves and crop failure in Southern Europe demonstrated again the costs of global warming. A key document from the Centre for Alternative Technology (CAT) provided a focus for action. This study, Zero carbon Britain, sets out an integrated model for properly meeting global warming, and like George Monbiot’s Heat, addresses the full range of issues with thought, enthusiasm, and the substance of good answers. It is becoming clearer what should be done in each sector. The report’s suggested measures include: a move to greener eating patterns with less focus on meat production, housing insulation on a large scale, energy efficiencies across industry, use of coaches and electric vehicles, drastic changes in fuel taxation. The details underline a resolve to care for the planet and an awareness that we’re all in this together.

Our involvement was around transport, and we went to meet many groups involved with different aspects of transport action. Insights were passed on, new possibilities opened up; together we saw with some coherence the moves that must be made.  Yet even as little victories are won there is confrontation. CAT thinks contraction, while Brown thinks growth. Coalitions oppose road building, but motorways expand. Government will not do anything decisive about plane travel. Car use continues largely untouched and subsidised, whilst coach systems remain under-investigated. Global warming issues seem to stay at a low practical priority. One of the groups, ‘Plane Stupid’ offered careful and cogent arguments against air travel expansion. But opponents are already demonising them, treating them like terrorists because of their coalition’s planned demonstration at Heathrow. When vested commercial interests are threatened, proper debate goes out of the window. .

In this developing scene of climate change activity, Christian resolve seems barely evident. Sir John Houghton, the climate change scientist is, of course, solidly behind the CAT document, setting out the principles of action and affirming its direction. His own work in the area has been urgent and prophetic. The Bishop of London keeps the issue on the agenda, Christian individuals recycle, organisations like Arocha work at sustainable and meek living. Yet, we remain incoherent as a group and even though we’re a significant numerical presence, seem incapable of acting together. We might love our neighbour and seek to care for God’s planet, but in so many of our churches and organisations we have not begun to translate this even in the basic way we use energy. Christians could commit to cut our carbon footprints decisively. We could actively back energy-lean policies and oppose indulgent ones. We could eliminate waste. We could collectively work on greener living. But we don’t. And until we resolve to live out this Christian calling with definite policies and conviction, at least as urgently as these secular stewards, we will be remain part of the problem instead of deliberately embracing solutions.

Cambridge

August 2007