World Conference of Friends 2012

 “For us it is about creating heaven here… not about an insurance policy to make it better in the next life”, says Marigold Bentley, speaking about being a Quaker on 4thought.tv.

Being a Quaker “give me access to be surrounded by radical thinkers and radical activists.”

Many years ago Marigold Bentley went to work in Palestine and found religions in conflict. Then she went to Ramallah Quaker Meeting and “in the quiet of that small group… I thought… this is really what it’s about”.

Watch the short video here.

I am leaving for Kenya in two weeks.  Between getting vaccinations for exotic tropical diseases and finding a travel alarm clock, I have been preparing for the thread group I will be leading at the World Conference of Friends.
The thread groups are three-day afternoon workshops near the beginning of the conference that explore the theme at greater depth.  My thread group is part of the sub-theme "Salt and Light" and it is called "Convergent Friends: worship and conversation."
Preparing for this thread group has been a little daunting.  Although I have led workshops in the past, it has always been as a co-leader.  This is my first workshop as a leader instead of co-leading.
Fortunately, I am not alone.  I have the wonderful support of my elder, Lucy F.  Even though we are in different cities, Lucy has been providing good counsel and grounding this ministry.  I am looking forward to being able to work together in person!
I have also been thinking about what it means to be a convergent Friend.  In a recent Friends Journal article, Robin M defined convergent Friends as:Friends who are seeking a deeper understanding of our Quaker heritage and a more authentic life in the kingdom of God on Earth, radically inclusive of all who seek to live this life. In my description of the thread group, I said, The term “convergent Friends” describes a movement of Quakers coming together across the branches of Friends to try to discover the best of our tradition.Earlier this week, I was reminded that the convergent Friends movement looks different depending on where you are coming from.
On Sunday evening, Sarah H and I drove up to Camas Friends Church for Convergent Friends Worship.  Camas Friends has been hosting a convergent worship once a month, inviting Friends from the meetings and churches in the surrounding area to come together to worship.
When we arrived, Friends were greeting each other and having coffee and tea.  We saw several people we know from different meetings.  After greeting each other, we settled into worship, which began with a time for Bible reading as led, then open worship, and ended with responses to a query.
For Friends from unprogrammed meetings, the time dedicated to Bible reading would be a change from their usual practice.  Friends from programmed meetings might not be used the amount of time spent in unprogrammed worship.  And at Freedom Friends, we don't often spend time responding to queries.  So for all of the Friends gathered there, parts of the worship were familiar and parts were new or different from their usual practices.
One of my hopes for the thread group is that it will be like that worship—that some parts will feel familiar and other parts will be new or challenging.  I think it helps if the parts that are new for some are familiar for others, so that those who are more comfortable can help ground those who are experiencing something for the first time.
But, most of all, I pray that in our worship and conversation, we will feel the presence of the living God among us.

By Sophie Bowman Two months ago I went to North Korea. Well, as much as is physically possible for a foreign person in South Korea. I went and visited the demilitarised zone and Panmunjom, crossing into North Korea within the confines of one of the blue meeting rooms that straddles the border in the Joint Security Area (JSA).

I have been in Seoul since September, and, although I have entertained the thought that North Korea is just about 50 kilometres away from my home, it has never felt very plausible. When I travelled that 50KM… I didn’t have some sudden realisation to the tune of ‘oh god, they’re just over there!’. It was more akin to the feeling of rain slowly soaking into your clothes, even though you’re wearing a rain coat. It’s something that I already knew, a truth that has always been there, but is so easily overlooked from the bundled up life – of coffees and busy streets – that I approach it from.

The only way to visit Panmunjom, unless you are a soldier or some kind of dignitary on a diplomatic mission, is to go with a tour group. It is not cheap, nor will you see any more than you can see on television or in photographs. Still, having taken such a strong academic interest in inter Korean relations, and people’s perceptions of North Korea here in the South, it seemed strange not to go. Finally then, I signed myself onto a tour. While expensive (135,000KRW, with VIP Travel), it was surprisingly easy, which I think might have had something to do with my British passport, as tourists from places like Hong Kong were unable to arrange to get on the full tour during their holiday visits to South Korea.

Looking across the river to the civilian control zone

It was a long day, being picked up from a subway station near our house at 7:30 in the morning and returning to the centre of Seoul at 4pm. The first half of the day was a much more open tour, with Australians, Singaporeans and Brits in my tour group, and large groups of Chinese, Japanese, and overseas Koreans doing the same tour route. First we visited Imjimgak Part, a park beside the Imjin river, just before the entrance to the civilian control area; where tourists from warmer climes were playing in the snow. Even at the start of the day I began to feel uncomfortable that this was a tourist destination, and began wondering why I had come here myself.

Messages of hope…

The pristine winter sunshine and biting cold seemed to jar strongly with the clutter of barbed wire, checkpoints and bunkers that lay stretched out and scattered around to the north of the park. As our tour bus drove out of the park, and towards the next stop on the tour, we passed a small and shabby looking amusement park, more like a mini fairground; it was empty.

After Imjingak Park we visited Dora-san Station. A huge, modern building with a roof that is shaped in two waves of steel that are meant to represent a pair of hands, a greeting.

Dora-san Station, the brand new, unused, gateway to the North

205KM to Pyeongyang

 

The vast station concourse was empty apart from our small group of tourists,  some South Korean guards and the obligatory gift shop. Apparently the station sees two trains a day for commuters living in the civilian control zone, one train in the morning, and one in the evening which begin at the Imjingak station, just a few hundred meters away.

 

 

History of Dora-san Station

“Not the last station from the South, But the first station toward the North”

After leaving Dora-san Station our tour bus headed up a winding road toward the Dora-san Observatory. For most of the people on the bus, who would not be going on to visit Panmunjeom, this was the highlight of the tour. On top of Dora mountain the observatory looked out over North Korea, with views (through binoculars) of  the villages at the border, the buildings in the Joint Security Area, the giant flagpoles that both sides have erected, and Kaesong city in the distance.

Tourists Spying out to North Korea

The last stop on the morning tour was a visit to one of the tunnels that have been dug into the South by North Korea. After looking at a museum-type display on the creation of the DMZ and the history of the tunnels, our group was ushered into a cinema where we were shown a dated movie, summing up the history of the Korean war, the DMZ, the tunnels below out feet and more. While we had been looking around the exhibition, separate tour groups had watched the same film in Chinese.
After leaving the small cinema we were ushered to the tunnel entrance, where we were given safety helmets and sent on our merry way down the steep slope built to the tunnel. As we walked down, people passed us coming up the slope, red cheeked and out of breath, and we passed a middle aged woman sitting on a small bench trying to catch her breath.
The tunnel was narrow in places and wider in others. Damp and dark, with rough walls and an uneven floor. After walking for a few minutes, we came to a blockade, with a small hole in the middle, where we could see through to another blockade. That was it.
Climbing up out of the tunnel was not easy for some of the people in the tour group. Infact, at the point where the climbing begins, there was also a monorail, but we were told that it was more expensive and that it did not run frequently. A keen hiker, I charged on up the slope and panted up to the top, but it was quite a while before one or two of the tourists reached the top, complaining.

After the tunnel visit, our shuttle bus took us back to Imjingak Park where we re-boarded the the bus that had taken us from Seoul. After a short drive, I was dropped off, leaving the rest of the group to return to Seoul. The restaurant I was left outside was nice enough, a basic restaurant catering to tourists and some locals too. I ate bulgogi, alone, while eyeing up the new group of tourists that I had just joined, much more western than the tour group I had just left.

After finishing my huge lunch, I boarded yet another bus, a big coach with lots of empty seats. I had a seat number assigned to me, and on the two seats across the aisle from me a middle aged British couple were sat, chatting away about this and that. When we drove again into the civilian control zone, the area looked very different to the places I had seen that morning.

The atmosphere was intensely masculine. Our bus was passed by a line of young soldiers on their military service, carry guns and big backpacks. Some waved, some just stared into the windows of our bus, curious, but not particularly excited. Barbed wire, armourments and thousands of present but unseen weapons made themselves felt in one way or another. We passed a small group of soldiers performing some kind of exercise beside a small river, and then drove on, through concrete tunnels, which we were told were filled with dynomite.

Driving on towards Panmunjom we passed small areas of land that were being farmed. We were informed that the farmers of this land farmed with a military escort and could only tend to their crops between 7am and 4pm. Our bus finally approached the tiny the small cluster of buildings, a village I suppose, beside where the gift shop and briefing room straddled the parking lot, and houses, a church and more ageing american style buildings stood in the near distance, making the place almost like somewhere time forgot. It was then that I thought I understood why everyone called this ‘the last cold war frontier’,  because even the homes inside the DMZ seemed to date from that era.

As our huge bus parked up and our small group piled out a coach load of Korean school girls were boarding a similar bus, having completed the tour. They waved and smiled at us, giggling and fussing over the tall soldier that had been their guide. We passed them and went into a briefing room, where we were given tags to say that we were UN guests, and told all that we could and couldn’t do, everywhere we could and couldn’t photograph, and given a slideshow talk on the history of the landmarks we were about to encounter.

Re boarding our bus, we now had a new driver, a young soldier in uniform, and an escort, a tall soldier with broad shoulders and a face to rival any Korean actor. Our guide told us how proud she was of these boys, and explained how only the most handsome, well built army recruits were chosen to serve in the joint security area, naturally, as it is where their country is showing itself to its enemy.

After all the build up, it felt very sudden when we finally found ourselves looking out at the view of North Korea that I’d seen in a thousand photographs, the blue meeting rooms straddling the border, and the North Korean building beyond, with soldiers with their sunglasses fixated on the middle distance. Looking North

It all seemed much smaller in real life for some reason. Everything new in Korea tends to be built illogically large, but having been built in a hurry sixty years or so ago, these rooms were small and shoddy, not up to modern Korean standards at all.

Is This It?

Our tour group could barely fit inside the small room, navigating around old chairs and tables, crossing over into North Korea and taking photographs with another handsome guard. After entering the room, the old british lady who had come with her husband exclaimed: “Is this IT? We came all this way, for THIS?” I couldn’t help but laugh, in some way, I felt the same too. Even worse, I had seen all of this before, every detail, in photographs and documentaries. What did I get by being there? What could I possibly ‘sense’ in this stifling military air, other than a sense of military standoff which should be expected  even by the oblivious observer. The reactions of the tourists around me were as interesting as anything else. Some of the east asians were positively excited, feeling a thrill at being so close to big bad north Korea. Others, asian Americans and westerners took to the whole thing with a slightly more solemn tone, but none the less, cheesy photos were the order of the day. Is the DMZ a tourist theme park as much as a buffer zone?

The Bridge of No Return

After getting back onto our bus, we slowly drove past the Bridge f No Return, where we were told we were allowed to take photographs. It was at this point that I took some photographs which go me into trouble. When they told us we could photograph, I took pictures in all directions, taking in the wintery trees and unexpected natural beauty so close to the standoff. Later, in the gift shop, I was approached by the tall handsome soldier and asked to show my photographs. A little abashed and confused, I handed over my camera, “this one, this one, this one: you need to delete”. Completely harmless, not particularly well shot, photographs of trees and bushes. My tour guide seemed very embarrassed and was quite apologetic. I told her it was fine and that they weren’t good photographs anyway. Later I was kicking myself, I should have taken the opportunity to have my photograph taken with the soldier so I could show my friends and proclaim “this is the guy that deleted my photos, isn’t he dreamy”.

Worlds Worst Gift Shop

The gift shop was positively awful. It seemed like a bunch of American army guys had compiled the most tasteless pile to tat possible, militaristic thing, tacky Korean souvenirs and North Korean alcohol, and had a good laugh when they wrote the price tags. It was quite a frustrating end to what had nearly been a very profound experience, and I felt glad, in retrospect, that I didn’t have enough small change to buy an ice-cream there. Still, the rest of the group bought all kinds of tat, army hoodies, t shirts, history books and bits and bobs that I could never imagine being useful or treasured possessions.

On the bus on the way back to Seoul, I got into a long conversation with the elderly british couple. They were in the middle of a tour of Asia, with Korea as the centerpeice. They had already spent time in Hong Kong, and come on the DMZ tour after visiting Busan and Gyeongju. Next week they were off to Cambodia before heading back to midlands England. The husband had a keen interest in history and had read a lot on the Korean war, as well as Korean history in general. Also, both of them seemed to have developed a profound respect for Korea’s economic boom. It struck me as a bit of a generation thing. Being of an age where they could remember Korea as a country for sending charity donations and missionaries to, and remembering a time before the pocket computers we spend half our lives looking at in South Korea, the economic development must seem all the more amazing, and the hardship and political tyranny that brought it about, all the easier to overlook.

When we arrived back in Seoul at 4pm, my body was not tired at all. No, a day of riding on buses and taking photographs had not tired out my muscles one bit, but I was half brain dead. The emotional and mental pressure of spending a day with UN forces anxieties and the constant reminder of proximity to a very very dangerous but somehow aloof and absent North Korea was stifling. As I got off the bus and walked though the familiar streets of central Seoul, I did entertain the thought “they’re just over there!”, but, I felt far to tired, to much in a daze to worry about it.

This post was first published on Sophie’s blog http://sophieseoul.wordpress.com where she writes about life in Seoul.

Quakers in Britain addressed the queen today as part of her diamond jubilee events.

Here is the full text:

Loyal Address to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II on behalf of the Religious Society of Friends in Britain (Quakers) on the occasion of the Diamond Jubilee

“May it please The Queen
As representatives of the Religious Society of Friends in Britain, called Quakers, we offer our congratulations on the occasion of your Diamond Jubilee.

We give thanks for the commitment you have shown through six decades as monarch and for your steadfast upholding of the value of faith to our nation’s wellbeing.
We recall your speech to the United Nations General Assembly in July 2010 when you reflected on the leadership required in the waging of peace. Quaker tradition from the days of Charles II has led our Society to stand for conscientious action to find new ways to create peace, to seek equality, justice and active nonviolence and now to address the urgent work needed to sustain the earth for future generations.
We lament the resort to armed conflict as an instrument of policy. We welcome your personal commitment to peace, such as you have shown in relation to Ireland.

Our commitment to equality led us in 2009 to seek a change in the law to provide for same sex and opposite sex marriages on an equal basis. This is because of our deeply held belief that we see the light of God in everyone which leads us to respect the inherent worth of each individual and each loving relationship. We see the recent move to allow the celebration of civil partnerships on religious premises as a step towards full equality in marriage.

Last year, Quakers in Britain met in the worshipful stillness that is our tradition, and made a strong corporate commitment to become a low-carbon, sustainable community. Quaker John Woolman’s words in 1772 still sound clearly to us today: ‘The produce of the earth is a gift from our gracious creator to the inhabitants, and to impoverish the earth now to support outward greatness appears to be an injury to the succeeding age.’

This concern grows from our faith, and cannot be separated from it. We have long been aware that our behaviour impoverishes the earth and that it is our responsibility both to conserve the earth’s resources and to share them more equitably. The environmental crisis is enmeshed with global economic injustice and we must face our responsibility, as one of the nations which has unfairly benefited at others’ expense, to redress inequalities.

The global economic system is posited on continued expansion and growth, and in its pursuit of growth it is often unjust, violent and destructive.  We must ask the question whether this system is so broken that we must urgently work with others of faith and good will to put in its place a different system where the values of equality, simplicity, peace and truth can flourish. 

We see all this work as pursuing justice and building peace.

We pray that God’s light may continue to illuminate your path. May God’s blessing rest upon you, your family and all people.”

The address was signed by Christine Cannon, clerk, on behalf of Meeting for Sufferings, the standing representative committee of the Religious Society of Friends in Britain.

A slighter shorter oral version of this text was read to the queen by Joycelin Dawes, clerk and chair of trustees at Quaker social Action and associate tutor at Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre in Birmingham. She was among twelve Quakers who attended.

From chapter 11, one of two one-act plays in the novel. *** Uma: (To Pee-U:) What’s your full name? (In one sudden flourish Alice takes off her grey tank top and sits at the middle of the table topless. Sandro … Continue reading →

Representatives from Quakers in Britain, Liberal Judaism and the Unitarian and Free Christian Churches welcomed the announcement last week of the government consultation to consider how to make civil marriage available to same-sex couples.

Quakers in Britain, Unitarians and Liberal Judaism have long campaigned for equality in marriage because of their deeply held beliefs in equality and justice.

The three faith communities, recently joined by the Movement for Reform Judaism, are seeking a permissive law which allows religious liberty and have no wish to impose their understanding of what is right on those of a different understanding.

The ban on holding civil partnerships on religious premises was overturned by the Equality Act and the Unitarians were the first to register a religious place of worship, Cross Street Chapel in Manchester, for registration of civil partnerships after the new regulations came into effect in December.

Derek McAuley, chief officer of the General Assembly of Unitarian and Free Christians said: “The hosting of civil partnerships in our churches and chapels is a step towards our ultimate goal of full equality for lesbian and gay people. Our stance refutes the simplistic argument that people of faith and rights for LGBT people are necessarily in conflict. Unitarians will look in detail at the consultation paper and respond on the basis of our long-term commitment to inclusion.”

Quakers are keen to respond to the consultation too. At their Yearly Meeting in York in 2009, Quakers in Britain sought a change in the law so that same sex marriages can be prepared, celebrated, witnessed, reported to the state, and recognised as legally valid, without further process, in the same way as opposite sex marriages are celebrated in Quaker meetings.

“Quakers believe marriage is a celebration of the committed union of two people who have found love for each other,” explained Paul Parker, recording clerk for Quakers in Britain. “We can see no reason, religious or otherwise, why marriage and civil partnership should not be equally available to all our couples who wish to register their commitment in Quaker meeting houses.”

Rabbi Aaron Goldstein, co-chair of Liberal Judaism’s Rabbinic Conference, said: “Thankfully, morality in our society continues to progress. Some of society’s institutions, religions in particular, have a far slower rate of progression. Previously that might have been acceptable because religions held a unique ‘authority’ over their flocks. This is not so today. Where religion and civil society intersect, government should support those of faith who are at the vanguard of change, who do so with integrity out of religious and intellectual conscience, without compelling those who wish to currently demur. That is why today Liberal Judaism is seeking Equal Marriage.”

Equality. Photo: MebS09/flickr CC.

by Hannah Brock

‘Good luck in that godforsaken place’

Those were the words a colleague of mine was left with by a friend as she left her office in the UK for the last time before joining the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI).

I too am serving in the West Bank as a human rights observer with EAPPI. And this weekend I had some days off, so I thought I’d attend some religious services that would give me the space to look for God in this place that, as my colleague’s friend suggests, can often feel like she’s packed her bags and left.

To start with, on Friday evening I attended a prayer vigil that marks the end of my week on a regular basis. Whilst numbers can vary, there are stalwart folk who attend week in, week out. These include Franscican Sisters who run the local baby hospital, members of the Christian Brothers order that are based in Bethlehem, and Clemence, my Arabic teacher and the lady whose house is closest to the wall – the separation barrier – that runs round most of Bethlehem.

The Prayer Walk. Photo: Hannah Brock

These faithful people have been walking back and forth, back and forth, praying along a length of this wall together for eight years now: every Friday evening, at 5.30pm, without fail. Together we say the rosary in English, Arabic, and whichever other languages are represented there that week. Praying the rosary is entirely new to me, and perhaps in other contexts would feel uncomfortable. But after some weeks (and becoming sure that I know the words), it has become a welcome devotion to end my week. Saying “pray for us sinners” is unlikely to have as much resonance anywhere else for me, as we walk along a barrier that divides one people from another.

For Clemence it must also be a particularly powerful statement. The wall and the checkpoint that sits within it stand on Clemences’ land, confiscated to construct the separation barrier almost a decade ago. I feel blessed to have this opportunity to stand in solidarity with her, and the others present who are, entirely non-violently and serenely (although we I’m sure they do not always feel it) making a public (the prayer is seen by soldiers and security guards at the checkpoint) and private (through their intercessions) show of resistance against the separation barrier and the divisions it entrenches.

Next, my Sunday morning was spent in Ramallah, with the small group of people who make up the Quaker Meeting there – the only one in the whole of Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. I found a warm and welcoming Meeting. We were two at the start, and gradually swelled to nine by the end of the hour. What with the tea and chat afterwards, the mostly American, British and Canadian accents found there, and the copious notices at the end, it felt wonderfully familiar! If I’d temporarily forgotten where I was however, returning to Jerusalem through the Qalandia checkpoint brought my slap bang back to the occupied Palestinian territories.

Finally, on Sunday evening I attended a Taizé service in West Jerusalem. Jerusalem is invisibly divided between East and West Jerusalem. Until 1967 Israelis and Palestinians lived most separately, either side of the ‘green line’ – the armistice line at the conclusion of the 1948 Arab/Israeli War. In 1967, during the Six Day War with Egypt, Jordan and Syria, Israel occupied East Jerusalem, along with the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula. Out of all these occupied territories, Israeli has also annexed East Jerusalem.

Sunday night was my first walk through the Israeli side of the ancient city. Walking through West Jerusalem (the Israeli side), upon every face that I looked, I couldn’t help thinking “you have been in the army”, “you know how to fire a gun”, or “when you grow up, you’ll be in the IDF” (the Israeli Defence Force).

The Israeli army relies on conscription of people for two or three years from the age of 18, and then again for one month a year every year, often until their early ‘50s. Some groups are exempt from this, including women with children, those not ‘physically and psychologically fit’, the 20% of Israeli citizens who are Palestinian, and the Haredim (an ultra-Orthodox, conservative Jewish group) – an exemption that is becoming increasingly controversial.

Incidentally, organisations accused of inciting people to refuse to serve in the Israeli army have suffered severe repression, including, in the case of New Profile, a year-long investigation that included raiding the homes of members, detaining and questioning them without charge, and confiscating documents and computers – this represents a ‘serious violation of freedom of expression’ according to a Association of Civil Rights in Israel’s 2009 report.

To return to my spiritual weekend: Taizé prayer is a form of service that stems from a religious community (funnily enough, in the town of Taizé), in the South of France. Their simple workshop includes the singing of short repetitive songs, often in canon form, long spells of silence, and some reading of scripture. I normally love the singing in particularly, and as a Quaker the silence feels deep and centred, but last night, the words of the chant ‘Da pacem Domine, da pacem O Christe in diebus nostris’ (Give the peace God, give your peace o Lord, in our days) felt hollow and unheard.

At the end of the weekend I’m back where I started, both geographically and spiritually! I didn’t get a lightning bolt revelation of divine feeling about being in the Holy Land. But now I think about it, when I stand at the checkpoint at 5.00am of a morning, and see a person in front of me – in front of all their fellow Palestinian workers and the Israeli soldiers – find a plastic bag or piece of cardboard box  on which to bow down to Allah when the call to prayer is sounded (when s/he has probably had to get up at 2.00am in the morning, to wait in line for hours in order to get to work), well then maybe I’ll find the Spirit at work right in front of me.

 

Hannah Brock is serving for three months with the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI). EAPPI brings internationals to the West Bank to experience life under occupation. Ecumenical Accompaniers (EAs) provide protective presence to vulnerable communities, monitor and report human rights abuses and support Palestinians and Israelis working together for peace. When they return home, EAs campaign for a just and peaceful resolution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict through an end to the occupation, respect for international law and implementation of UN resolutions.

by Stephen Cox

A review of Pushing at the frontiers of change: A memoir of Quaker involvement with homosexuality by David Blamires and published by Quaker Books

David writes that “it is a little odd being a historian of your own life…”  This book sets out how Quakers moved from having little particularly interesting to say about human sexuality, to our current position.  David Blamires was a named author of  Homosexuality from the Inside, 1973, the first Quaker book in the UK to be by gay lesbian and bisexual people, as opposed to being ‘about them’.  He was closely involved with the early days of Friends Homosexual Fellowship, he was at the Monthly Meeting which asked Meeting for Sufferings to address same sex marriage in 1987, and he was one of the authors of This we can say, the book which started as an attempt to rewrite Towards a Quaker view of sex and which ended up as a second thoroughly unofficial publication.  He was at the Woodbrooke conference in 2007 which was on the road to York 2009.  Hence David can often comment on our fifty year progress from his own experience, as well as careful research in the files.

Some of the story is familiar through Quaker folk memory, but much is underreported, and if nothing else this book might balance more triumphalist accounts.  Let us remember that Towards a Quaker View of Sex, for example, the only Quaker publication to win acclaim, influence and notoriety outside the Society in the last hundred years, was pretty much disowned by Sufferings, as deviating from traditional Christian teaching.  David is clear that sometimes we ducked the challenges, and we need to remember these times too.

For what it’s worth, where I know the story from my own experience, David’s facts are sound and his judgements fair.  He’s gentle with those hostile to change, where another author might have exposed some of the stranger accusations thrown around Quakerism over the years.  And I enjoyed learning more about how the different ebbs and flows of this story intercepted with broader Quaker life.

It has been an extraordinary fifty years. Wolfenden, decriminalisation, Gay Lib, HIV-AIDs, and Section 28 are matched with Quaker publications, conferences, organisations, and the Swathmore Lecture, a Minority of One.   1994-1995 saw the new Faith and Practice, This we can say, and the first stirrings to celebrate same sex relationships in our meetings ‘officially’.  It also represented my own appearance on the Quaker scene.

From that point on, I spent several years wrestling with a paradox.  Many Friends were openly gay, lesbian or bisexual, or friendly towards them.  People who didn’t know much about it, tried to understand.  Meetings were quietly welcoming.  We were not like most other churches.  And yet meetings seemed curiously inert when faced with the great social cause of making LGBT life outside the meeting house better.  For example, to note that a self proclaimed prophetic organisation committed to equality, with a love of freedom of thought and of education and protecting the young, full of teachers, had said practically nothing about Section 28 or the age of consent, was shameful.  And a great ecumenical Friend offered the view that Quakers should say nothing at all about LGBT equality in the ecumenical movement…

I believe that until recently Friends had made a trade off.  Same sex relationships were seen as a pastoral issue, with much emphasis on welcoming non straight people in our meetings without too much division.  Consciously or otherwise, there was a trade off.  Non straight Friends did not push meetings hard to be vocal.  All of us colluded to keep the issue a pastoral one, for peace and quiet in our meetings.  I wonder if it felt easier for Friends to work on AIDS, compassion for the ill and dying, than on resisting a brutal political attack on brave teachers and gay teenagers.  The sociology of when Friends stay quiet would be fascinating.

The story of Quakers and homosexuality is, often, one of small groups doing the hard bit, of official caution, of weighty Friends discouraging one from going on too much [‘although I am sympathetic’] and, in the immortal words of a Friend in my first meeting “Things can take a long time”.  But we should always say that Quaker quiet acceptance was valuable, for me lifesaving, and should not be lost in the clamour of social concerns.

The new century saw a more outward looking approach.  Quakers welcomed civil partnerships, but their secular nature stirred a holy disquiet. This led to York, which the book blurb describes as joyful and profound.  And, contrary to the opinion of many, York is not the end.  Same sex marriage is stirring up strong forces, who will do all they can to prevent it.  Section 28 is repealed but many schools are paralysed with fear.  And there is a story to tell, to other churches, to the millions who have lost faith because of prejudice, and abroad, where in some countries it is still 1950, in some 1850, and in some about 50 BC.

David celebrates much but his tale throws down a challenge.  We have only ‘pushed at the frontier’ sometimes.   Sometimes we have played a part in social change, even if only being a home for those willing to voyage out into the battle.  Sometimes we were led by the Spirit and led opinion too. Sometimes, we have sat on the sidelines by choice, or we have not found the words to engage with the struggle of the day.   At York we found unity, a voice, and a cause.  We shall see how the next fifty years judges us, or indeed, the next five.

Pushing at the frontiers of change is available from the bookshop at the Quaker Centre in London priced £6 for the paper copy and £3.50 for kindle and ipad versions.

Photo: JD Hancock/flickr CC

by Stuart Masters

Advices and Queries no.35 – Respect the laws of the state but let your first loyalty be to God’s purposes.

In the authorised version of Quaker history it is received wisdom that James Nayler, although a man of deep spirituality with a significant gift for preaching and writing, was an unstable and ‘Ranterish’ character who brought the Quaker community into disrepute. This perspective assumes that it was Nayler’s conduct in Bristol in 1656 that forced the movement to exercise greater control over its more turbulent adherents by establishing a system of corporate structures and community discipline. I want to argue that modern Quakers should question this received wisdom by adopting a sceptical and critical approach to all narratives that seek to explain events in a way that blames the victims for the suffering and persecution they endure. I will try to do this with reference to the actions of Jesus in ‘cleansing the Jewish Temple’ and modern examples of civil disobedience.

Nayler’s Ride into Bristol

On a rainy Friday afternoon on 24 October 1656 James Nayler entered the City of Bristol accompanied by a small group of bedraggled followers. They led him on a horse as they waded through the muddy streets singing ‘Hosanna’ and ‘Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Israel’. This was clearly and intentionally a re-enactment of Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem on ‘Palm Sunday’. However, like this biblical scene, Nayler’s re-enactment did not bear the hallmarks of a ‘triumphant’ display of earthly power. Instead it seemed to represent an inversion of the world’s expectations. Nevertheless, the entire party was arrested and taken to jail. Those in power within the English Commonwealth, who had become increasingly alarmed by the rapid growth and subversive nature of the Quaker movement, saw this as a perfect opportunity to crack down on Friends by making an example of Nayler. He was taken to London to be tried by Parliament for blasphemy even though this assembly had no legal jurisdiction to do this. The charge of blasphemy rested on the accusation that Nayler was claiming to be Jesus Christ. However, as his testimony to Parliament makes clear the Bristol event was an outward sign dramatising the Quaker belief that Christ had returned in spirit and would dwell within all who accepted him. He said:

“I do abhor that any honours due God should be given to me as I am a creature, but it pleased the Lord to set me up as a sign of the coming of the righteous one. . . I was commanded by the power of the Lord to suffer it to be done to the outward man as a sign, but I abhor any honour as a creature.”

Despite this unequivocal statement, the political objectives of Parliament far outweighed any consideration of justice and Nayler was convicted of ‘horrid blasphemy’. Only narrowly avoiding execution he was sentenced to a particularly brutal form of punishment. This included being pilloried and receiving 310 lashes through the streets of London which very nearly killed him. He was pilloried again and had his forehead branded with a letter B for blasphemer and his tongue bored through with a hot iron. Following a largely ritualistic flogging in Bristol, he was imprisoned for an indefinite period at Bridewell. After his sentencing Nayler responded:

“God has given me a body; he shall, I hope, give me a spirit to endure it. The Lord lay not these things to your charge. pray heartily that he may not.”

James Nayler receiving his punishment.

The case was used to maximum effect for propaganda purposes and in the aftermath Quakers suffered more intensive persecution at the hands of the authorities. Nayler was all but disowned by significant sections of the Quaker movement due to the alleged damage he had caused and for daring to challenge the leadership of George Fox (there had been significant conflict between the two men in the lead-up to the Bristol incident and Nayler’s followers were instrumental in pressing his leadership claims). Although Nayler was later released from prison and reconciled with the wider Quaker movement, his health was broken and he died in October 1660 after being robbed while travelling home to Yorkshire to visit his family.

Jesus Cleanses the Temple

Jesus’ ‘triumphal’ entry into Jerusalem represents the beginning of the end of his ministry. Shortly after this event, Jesus visited the Temple in Jerusalem which was the centre of Jewish worship and viewed figuratively as the ‘footstool’ of God’s presence. It is difficult to over-estimate the religious and political significance of this sacred place. Having witnessed what was going on in the Temple during his first visit, Jesus returned the next day and drove the money changers and all those involved in buying and selling from of the Temple courtyard accusing them of turning it into “a den of robbers”. It would appear that this action sealed Jesus’ fate. The Sadducees, who were part of the Jewish elite and collaborators with the Roman occupiers, decided that Jesus was a subversive and a threat to social order. In order to protect their power and privilege, he had to be neutralised. Not long after, Jesus was arrested by the Temple authorities who, in collusion with the Romans, had him executed by crucifixion. His followers scattered and the Jesus movement appeared to have been crushed. As we know however this was by no means the end of the story.

How do we respond to the actions of Jesus in the Temple courtyard? If we apply the approach traditionally used to interpret the ‘Nayler incident’ we will have to conclude that Jesus’ behaviour was irresponsible, blasphemous and downright provocative. It was bound to get him into trouble, endanger his followers and bring his movement into disrepute. He deliberately caused a disturbance within Judaism’s most sacred place and threatened social order in the circumstances of Roman military occupation. Was this not madness? Did Jesus have a death-wish?

Modern Non-violent Action

In the modern era we have seen many important examples of individuals and groups choosing to consciously break the law or contravene social conventions as a form of non-violent action.

The architect of modern non-violent resistance, Mohandas Gandhi, used a method of non-violent direct action he called Satyagraha in the struggle for Indian independence. In the Salt March of 1930 Gandhi organised a massive campaign of civil disobedience to protest about the British monopoly control of salt supplies. This involved a range of unlawful acts including tax resistance and led to beatings and imprisonments on a large scale.

In the US State of Alabama on 1 December 1955 a Black woman by the name of Rosa Parks refused a bus driver’s order, based on State law and practice, to give up her seat for a white passenger. She was arrested and jailed. This act of disobedience prompted the Montgomery Bus Boycott and galvanised the modern American Civil Rights Movement. In this struggle for racial equality many activists were beaten, jailed and murdered by white racists.

In 1986 the Israeli technician Mordechai Vanunu, outraged by his government’s covert development of nuclear weapons, passed information about this programme to the British press. He was then lured to Italy by a Mossad agent, where he was drugged, kidnapped and transported to Israel to be tried in secret for treason and espionage. Following his conviction he was imprisoned for 18 years. Much of this time was spent in solitary confinement. Since his release in 2004 he has suffered severe restrictions on his speech and movement.

How do we respond to the actions of these people? If we apply the approach traditionally used to interpret the ‘Nayler incident’ we will have to conclude that their behaviours were criminal, seditious, treacherous and knowingly designed to undermine law and order and social well-being. What they did was bound to get them into trouble, endanger their communities and bring their beliefs into disrepute. They deliberately broke the law and provoked conflict in sensitive and difficult circumstances. Was this not madness? Did they all have a death-wish?

Of course, how we respond to these examples depends on where we stand on the issues concerned. Quakers and many other people would regard Jesus, Mohandas Gandhi, Rosa Parks and Mordechai Vanunu as heroes, liberators, justice-seekers and role-models but to those in power they were dangerous, they were the enemy. They threatened the very values, beliefs and practices that bind societies together and they undermined the security and well-being of God’s favoured nation or empire.

Revisiting the 1650s

Throughout most of the 1650s the burgeoning Quaker movement waged a provocative but non-violent spiritual campaign (the Lamb’s War) against the established church and the Commonwealth Parliament. They disrupted church services, confronted the clergy, disputed with opponents in public, refused to show deference to their ‘superiors’, staged startling happenings such as ‘going naked as a sign’, and dispensed threatening prophetic warnings to those in power. Not surprisingly, they were regarded by those in power as a very serious threat to social order at a time of great political turmoil. This is why they made an example of James Nayler and used his actions as an excuse to persecute the Quaker community as a whole.

What provoked radical groups such as the Quakers was the failure of the commonwealth regime to deliver the promises made during the English Civil Wars that victory would lead to far-reaching social, political and religious reform. The expectation that a new society would be created based on greater equality, democracy and religious freedom was disappointed. For much of the period, the country was under military dictatorship, dissenting groups were persecuted and the army was busy slaughtering thousands of people in Ireland. In these circumstances to hold James Nayler responsible for his punishment and the persecution of the Quaker community is simply to blame the victim. Nayler’s behaviour at Bristol was entirely consistent with the essential character of the early Quaker movement. His actions involved no violence, no coercion and no threats to people or property. He simply enacted an outward physical sign representing what he had found to be true inwardly and spiritually.

Let’s Stop Blaming the Victim

It was those in power who illegally tried James Nayler and tortured him almost to the point of death. It was those in power who flogged Quakers in the market places, locked them in the stocks and the pillory, provoked mobs to attack them and threw them into disease-ridden dungeons at the mercy of brutal jailors. The time has come to stop blaming the victim and instead defend James Nayler as a Quaker hero, justice-seeker and role model.

This article was first published by Stuart Masters on his blog, A Quaker Stew. Visit http://aquakerstew.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/why-do-we-blame-victim-in-defence-of.html to read the article on Stuart’s blog.

Lent Day #21 (40acts): Simplify. Another odd one from 40acts. This time we’re encouraged to simplify by chucking stuff out. To help us, they’re promoting a book about chucking stuff out and they’re giving some copies away free. Surely they should make it twice the price and encourage us to stop taking in more stuff? [...]

Day #20 (40acts): Be polite on the road. Ha. Today when I was cycling over Waterloo Bridge I saw a kid chuck some litter over the side of the bridge. He was wearing a team tracksuit, along with the rest of the group and some adults. So as I cycled passed I called out ‘litterbug’. [...]

Lent Day #19 (40acts): Love your bags. I’d rather have hoped that we might have got beyond getting people to reuse bags by now but it seems that we’re still having to do the basics. I’ve talked to the staff in my local corner shop about this and they say that if they don’t automatically [...]

Day #18 (40acts): Share a joke. Why do Quakers sing hymns so slowly? They’re busy reading ahead to see if they agree with the next line. Why are Quakers pacifist? Because by the time they’ve decided on what side to fight, the war is over. Day #18 (action): Taking care of polar bears and arctic [...]

The 1948 Lecture by Edmond Privat, reviewed by John Hall:

The Swarthmore Lecture that wasn’t

The 1948 Yearly Meeting was held for the first time in Scotland: in Edinburgh. 

The Swarthmore Lecture was to be given by the Swiss Quaker, Edmond Privat (1889-1962) who was an ardent pacifist, human-rights activist, writer and journalist.  He was a member of the Neuchâtel Group of Switzerland Yearly Meeting.  As a friend of the Nobel laureate Romain Rolland and of Gandhi, he worked for the independence of India and other oppressed countries and, with his wife Yvonne, organised help for refugees.  He was also the founding editor of L’Essor and other leading Socialist newspapers.  He is probably most famous now as the great promoter and pioneer of Esperanto.  He wrote many books.

As it happens, Privat was not able to deliver the Swarthmore Lecture as, in an early session of the Yearly Meeting, a number of Friends objected to its liberal approach.  The lecture was given but not as part of the Yearly Meeting programme and it was not published until the following year.  It is now out-of-print, but many second-hand copies are available on the Internet in both hard-back and paperback versions.

Early in the lecture, Edmond Privat tells this story: ‘In time of peace, and recently enough, a lecturer addressing an audience in a protestant church, asked those ready to give their life for their country to stand up.  Almost everybody rose from their seats.  Then he called upon those willing to give their life for their Christian faith.  Two old ladies and a hospital nurse rose in their turn.  “Now,” said the speaker, “you know which your religion is, for your true faith is the one for which we are ready to make the greatest sacrifice.”‘  Privat uses this story to argue that national history is far from the truth as it is only one sided; it is the history of solely one’s own country.  Only by sharing our national histories can we get to the Truth.  From the problem of being concerned only with history from our own nation’s perspective he goes on to explain how that can lead to war and war is not only beastly, but it corrupts private morals and destroys the ethics of the state and its officials.  In peacetime, the Church is mostly against war but in wartime just the opposite.  From his view of the world just after the close of the second world war, Privat makes a biting criticism of the Church as it subscribed in wartime to patriotic and nationalist views at the expense of universal truths.  Further, he attacks the role of the media.  As he says,

everyone knows that public opinion is mainly manufactured by the press. … During all war it is a rule to heap responsibility on the back of the other party.  Further more, all kinds of tales of atrocities must be added to the load, some true, some not. … Brutal desires of the most primitive kind, like rape, burst out first on imagining the enemy’s behaviour.  Exaggeration follows and leads the way to imitation.  That is how reprisals begin. … He who believes in an inner spiritual light cannot possibly … keep loyalty to nation above all others.  If he believes the essence of ethics to be rooted or lighted in the human soul, he cannot accept a national worship leading to hatred of other men.  The clash of loyalties, so tragic among nations, is still more so between religions.  That is why we should always control our own ideas and be ready to criticize our own ways of thought. 

Thus, while Indian pacifists under Gandhi were ignored, Polish pacifists under the poet Zygmunt Krasinski were praised in western cathedrals for their ‘Christian faith’.  As he says, ‘Painting and wishing other religions as black as possible in order to make one’s own shine more is poor faith and no loyalty to Christ’s way.’  Privat proposes that Truth can come from many sources, not necessarily Christian.  So he praises the theology of Gandhi and links him to Paul Ceresole, who later became a Quaker.

The front page of the Clash of Loyalties

Privat then turns his eye to Quakerism.  He writes glowingly of the London Yearly Meeting’s response (LYM Epistle 28 May 1930) to revolutionary Russia’s attacks on religion.  He describes how George Fox’s ‘early disciples went as far as pasting up posters on the doors of churches advising people not to try to find God there, but to go home and make the discovery deep inside.’  At the same time,

wise Friends faithfully read the Gospel to keep constantly under sight the life, the message and the sacrifice that serve them as criterion and standard to measure things.  Christ’s example is their compass.  If their inner light leads them the same way, they know they walk the right path.

Privat is complimentary too about William Penn and the mutual relations with the ‘Red Indians’, and the British government’s with India, which led to independence, and self-government.  As he says,

if you must be two for a quarrel, you must also be two for a reconciliation.  There is no reason why the Society of Friends should ever be ashamed of doing too much relief work as if it were not the best way of spreading thought and indeed a far more efficient language than argument.  This is not just material relief but also ‘the friendly hand on the shoulder.’

In a change of tack, he says that ‘Science is only the cold part of truth, love is the warm side, but they should not stand apart, otherwise you get science making atomic bombs and love stopping at boundaries.  Truth is one.’  He then quotes a number of different sources of that Truth, such as a speech by Adam Czartoryski to the Polish Historical Society in 1861 when he said that ‘More heroism is needed to court death in uncovering one’s breast than in defending one’s life with the sword.’  Likewise, French scholar, Victor Bérard who wrote that we should ‘keep our cultural influence clean of political lordship!  If you don’t, you will lose both’; perhaps an argument for the recent separation of the BBC World Service from the Foreign Office.

Privat concluded his lecture with an attack on the traditional and sentimental view of God.  The inner light opens us to the sense of the universal and eternal.  ‘The future belongs to a religion of the spirit, showing a better way to that all-embracing sense of oneness which Jesus expressed as God’s point of view.’

In a Yearly Meeting session, a number of Friends described by Howard Brinton, a visiting American Friend, as ‘fundamentalist’, objected to the lecture, which they claimed was ‘too liberal’.  The lecture was cancelled with no explanation given.

Brinton, considered Edmond Privat’s liberal theology to be about as liberal as that of George Fox and Robert Barclay.  As a result, he spoke out during the Yearly Meeting session where he pointed out that ‘both kinds of theology were important to Quakerism, the fundamentalist philosophy of the Puritans who persecuted the early Quakers, and the liberal theology of Fox and Barclay.’  This remark was not well received by ‘fundamentalist’ Friends a dozen of whom immediately rose up to defend their position.  Two weighty British Friends, T. Edmund Harvey and Henry T. Gillet criticized this behavior as un-Quakerly.  According to Brinton, they ‘scolded the Yearly Meeting for not remaining quiet after an important message.’

The issue was what these days we would call one between Universalist and Christian-based Friends.

Privat was allowed to give a talk, entitled The Clash of Loyalties, subsequently published as a book under this title, during the time of Yearly Meeting, but not as the Swarthmore Lecture, the only time it was ever cancelled.

The ultimate dystopian British novel 1984 was written in 1948.  It was also the year of the Arab-Israeli war.  Was London Yearly Meeting then part of a Christian Zeitgeist?  Has that now moved on?  Perhaps, Edmond Privat was ahead of his time.  I like to think that fifty-four years later, explaining the liberal approach to Quaker theology would not lead to a cancellation of the lecture.  Indeed, I hope that the Society of Friends would see the lecture as properly interpreting to its members their message and mission; and to bringing before the public one important strand of the spirit, aims and fundamental principles of Friends, just as the Swarthmore Lecture Committee intends.  I should also like to hope that Yearly Meeting would not again exert its power in such a way, and would not now think it right to censor an admirable message such as Edmond Privat’s.

 

A butterfly entering into the world. Photo: Michelle Bartsch/flickr CC

The thread groups for the FWCC Conference in Kenya have been posted and I am completely conflicted. Good thing I don't have to sign up for them ahead of time. The thread groups will happen over the course of three days and I have the option to take two.

Do I want to do lectio divina lead by Friends from Iowa Conservative and Pacific YM? I've been leading lectio divina somewhat awkwardly in the Meeting for Theism with Attention to Jesus group, and it might be imminitely practical for me to explore how other people do it. It's interesting and might be useful, but at the moment, it doesn't seem all that exciting.

What does have me excited is the thread group on Eschatology and Utopias. Let's do some theology! About Revelation! And Millenialism! From a personal, intellectual and spiritual level, I think this might be the most benefical for me. Nobody ever wants to delve deep into this stuff with me and so much of early Friends theology is based on this sort of New Creation/Second Coming stuff. The old rules don't apply because the Kingdom is now. Clearly, this is my first choice.

But if my first choice is the thing that feeds me, it seems that my second choice should be about what I can bring home to the people who are sending me. And those people are NCYM-C, right? Do they want me to lend my voice as a Young Conservative to difficult conversations about Human Sexuality or how Conservatives fit into the Convergent Friends Movement? Or should I attend a thread group about something that I know nothing about and have no idea how it might translate into my life and work? There's a thread group on translating Quaker and other Christian texts into Indigenous languages in Bolivia. There's another one on Climate Change, Food Security and Deadly Conflict being co-lead by people from SAYMA and East Africa YM.

In part, I think that some of my inner conflict about this is coming from the fact that I don't know why I'm going to Kenya in the first place. I mean, I'm excited to go. And Way has opened for me to go. And other people, who I trust completely, have had the leadings to make this happen for me. But do I know why God wants me in Kenya? Not yet. But there's still time. I don't leave for four weeks.

In the meantime: prayer, vaccinations, and buying a raincoat.

Love,
E.B.

An Ecumenical Accompanier has won a prestigious music award for a song about the situation in Palestine and Israel.

Penny Stone took part in the Ecumenical Accompanier Programme in Palestine and Israel (EAPPI) in 2010 and from her experience the song “Breaking the Silence” was written and won the Alistair Hulett Memorial Trust Song Competition. The mission of EAPPI is to accompany Palestinians and Israelis in their nonviolent actions and concerted advocacy efforts to end the occupation. The role of participants in the programme includes monitoring and reporting violations of human rights and international humanitarian law; supporting acts of nonviolent resistance alongside local Palestinian and Israeli activists; offering protection through nonviolent presence; engaging in public policy advocacy and standing in solidarity with the churches and all those struggling against the occupation.

The words of the song, “Breaking the Silence”, are taken directly from testimonials of Israeli Defense Force soldiers as they speak out against the very things that they have done. These have been collected by an Israeli peace group, Breaking the Silence, in order to help wider Israeli society understand the nature of the occupation.

Penny Stone won the Alistair Hulett Memorial Trust Song Competition (the song can be heard through this link), which is a part of the work of the Alistair Hulett Memorial Trust. The trust exists to promote social justice and equality through music and struggle. Alistair Hulett was a singer, songwriter, international socialist and revolutionary.  

The song is not the limit of Penny Stone’s creativity. Last year she and fellow EA Karen Chalk performed a sell-out dramatical/musical show, Still Life, in Edinburgh. It is based on their experiences of living in the West Bank for 3 months.

Still Life will be performed at Friends House in London on 21/04/2012.

EAPPI is administered in Britain and Ireland by Quaker Peace & Social Witness (QPSW), under the auspices of the World Council of Churches. Partner churches and church-related organisations of QPSW include: Baptist Union of Great Britain; CAFOD; Christian Aid; Church of Scotland; Church Mission Society; Churches Together in Britain and Ireland; Iona Community; Methodist Church; Pax Christi UK; Scottish Episcopal Church; United Reformed Church and USPG.

You can support the work of EAPPI by donating here.

The separation barrier at Bethlehem. Photo: Andrew E Larsen/flickr CC

And Jesus said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 18:3 I never liked the verse where Jesus tells his disciples to become like children much.  It was a verse that I heard a lot growing up, and it always seemed to be one of those verses that people quoted to put others in their place.  Or one that inspired people to write creepy "Jesus is my daddy" contemporary worship songs.
But then, at one of the School of the Spirit residencies, my friend Judy G gave a message during worship that changed how I felt about the verse entirely.  
Judy said that she was at her meeting one Sunday when a young girl, maybe four or five years old, came in with her parents.  The girl was wearing a lovely dress and seemed quite proud of it.  
A Friend approached the girl and said, "You look so pretty in that dress today!"  
She responded, "I know!"
That is how little children are.  They haven't yet learned what adults have―to respond with false humility or with very real self-loathing.  They are joyful in their beauty.
With that in mind, I think Jesus was right to say what he did.  Be like those children.  Know that you were made in the image of God.  You are beautiful to God.  And the love of God that comes through you makes you beautiful to others as well.

“I will be loved for who I am, or not at all!” – Christian de Neuvilette, Cyrano act 3. In my most recent book, The Deception of Surfaces, there is a little refrain: it’s not the wrapping that matters; it’s the … Continue reading →

Five Christians, who were forcibly removed from the steps of saint Paul’s cathedral in London as they prayed during the eviction of the Occupy London camp, have today delivered a letter to the canon pastor of the cathedral, Michael Colclough. In the letter they ask the cathedral authorities to clarify whether they gave the police permission for the forced removal, which saw police dragging praying Christians from their knees. The court order authorised eviction of land belonging to the City of London Corporation, but did not cover cathedral property. The cathedral authorities have made no public statement on this point since the eviction on 28 February.

Christians outside saint Paul's cathedral. Photo: Jez Smith.

Twenty clergy, including eleven Anglicans, have counter-signed the letter in support.

The five Christians five – George Barda, Jonathan Bartley, Siobhan Grimes, Symon Hill and Sam Walton – have asked for a meeting with senior representatives of the cathedral. Their letter offers to meet “in a spirit of love and respect”.

The letter was handed in at the cathedral at around 10.00am today (13/03/12). The letter states:

“We were profoundly shocked to be forcibly removed from the steps of a church while we prayed… After praying in the middle of the camp area, we decided to pray on the steps, not least because many of the occupiers were sitting there, some of them in a state of considerable distress.”

It continues:

“Please can you tell us what permission was given, either explicitly or implicitly? Please can you tell us if you consider that the police were right to remove us from the steps and, if so, why?”

Keith Hebden, a Church of England priest in Gloucestershire, was one of the clergy who counter-signed the letter in support. He said: “Now that those involved, including people of faith, have been violently removed from the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral, I ask them to make clear, not only what part they played in complicity to the violence, but also what they intend to do in the face of real and pressing issues of injustice.”

The five were photographed by the media at the time and appeared in national newspapers. Sam Walton, a north London Quaker, told Nayler that he was reciting the Lord’s Prayer as he was removed from the steps by police.

Day #17 (40acts): Make an emergency kit. This one is said to be for example a kit to carry in your car to give someone if you see that they’ve broken down, or a make-up kit “for the moments when your female colleague has a meltdown in the office loo”. I have to say that [...]