Dead roots lurk beneath the green shoots of Britain's economic recovery

Really interesting but frightening analysis of all our economic and social woes in this Guardian piece

 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/25/dead-roots-beneath-green-shoots-britains-economic-recovery-austerity-recession

 

 

Spiritual capital and progressive localism

An interesting piece on the relationship of faith to our post secular society from my colleage at William Temple Foundation

 

Chris Baker

 

 Posted on 04/03/2014 at 9:22 am.

 

http://www.publicspirit.org.uk/spiritual-capital-and-progressive-localism/

 

 

 

David Cameron and the Pearly-Gate Scandal.

Over the last couple of weeks there has been a flurry of discussion in the press and the blogosphere following David Cameron's speech to Christian leaders in Downing Street and his article in the Church Times. It does appear this prime minister unlike the last one does do God with a vengeance – well actually not with a vengeance but a cuddly pastoral one wrapped neatly in the flag - perhaps not so much the Union Jack as the flag of St George.

Responses have ranged from the satirical ...and from the predictable anger of the militant secularists to the commentary of political hacks such as Alistair Campbell. Most of the responses are rather disappointing as they lack in depth of religious literacy. Two of the better ones come from Theos and from my Evangelical Alliance colleague Danny Webster – though I think Danny has been rather too gentle in his posts. My response here is an attempt to critique the PM's intervention and a range of different levels, hopefully to give some greater clarity about the theological, political and sociological positions he seems to take.

1. DC's personal faith

Personally I welcome that the PM has testified to his Christian faith, and that even in the office he holds that he is willing to talk about it. I am willing to take it at face value and that he is sincere – God sees the heart and alone will judge all of us for our small and big hypocrisies when they come to light. Clearly Cameron has experienced the comfort of Christian pastoral ministry and been blessed by his experience of worship. However, his description of his faith is rather tentative, and his Christian formation is of the college chapel, middle to high Anglican variety. There does not seem to be much claim, or a great deal of evidence that he is a "sold out" disciple of Jesus the Messiah, or that he has really applied himself to understand the Scriptures or to seek first the Kingdom of God. All of which makes his use and warm commendation of the word "evangelical" somewhat curious, to say the least.

2. DC's electoral agenda

The immediate political context of the PM's public statements about Christianity include the European and Local government elections and a General Election which is now barely a year away. Frankly the Tories are running scared of UKIP who are riding high in the polls for the European elections in particular, and who could easily take enough right wing votes in 2105 to prevent the Conservatives from taking enough seats to form a government. In particular the polls seem to show that a significant number of conservative evangelical Christians who would normally vote Tory have been so angered by the Government's support of legislation for same sex marriage that they say they will vote for UKIP, who were one of the few parties to oppose the proposals. At the same Cameron was needling to mollify the mainstream church by praising their contribution to society through their many programmes of social action. He is also no doubt aware that the Christian vote, though not a solid block in the way it used to be in American elections, is well worth having, and that the demographics of church goers, especially evangelical ones, predict they are just the sort of people who are likely to vote even in European and local elections, and that they may place their cross on the ballot paper - consistently with their Christian beliefs and values. If making positive noises about Christianity is to the Conservatives benefit, then we are entitled to suspect the Prime minister's motives.

3. DC's wider political agenda.... welfare cuts and the big society

For two decades now it has been commonplace for governments of various political flavours in the UK to encourage the involvement of faith communities in social action and charitable work in local communities. It has become more complex as the political agendas of community cohesion and anti-terrorism have been added to government priorities, and financial support for faith groups has not been in the form of free gifts. Increased regulation, performance management regimes with pedantic levels of monitoring and the implication that any verbal proclamation of faith to service users is taboo, have made many Christian churches, and others reluctant to partner in government programmes, though the PM urges him to call on him as "dynorod" if it all gets too blocked up. Under Cameron two new elements have emerged – the re-branding of charitable action as the Big Society (though no-one is really sure what the concept actually means). Curiously the PM suggests Jesus invented the Big Society. Someone with a bit more Biblical knowledge might have traced it back earlier at least to Moses and the prophets, but maybe that will appear in the version of the speech to be rolled out to the Board of Deputies and the Chief Rabbi, while for Muslim audiences it will be attributed to Mohammed (PBUH).

Secondly the programme of austerity that means that voluntary action is increasingly pushed back to earlier models of charity supported by donations and public subscription. Welfare reform and the increased volume of rhetoric against the "undeserving" poor (which resonates with the concerns of the struggling workers of middle England) is one more element of the neo-liberal project begun in the 1980s whereby wealth and power is being concentrated even more strongly in the hands of a tiny capitalist elite. For these elites, it is the role of philanthropists, and the naively generous believers of various faith communities to give as much as they choose to whoever they care to help in order to ameliorate poverty and destitution. Economic and social justice, redistribution of wealth through taxation and state distribution of benefits to people in need are nowhere on Cameron's agenda. A minimal safety net is provide as long as it is politically necessary, but increasingly it is a safety net with large holes – and of course Christians have a long history of mending nets, and being fishers of men, so the church can take up again its pre- Beveridge charitable role. Ekklesia among others have exposed the attack on welfare.

4. Why Christians don't trust DC

One suspects that the government political machine is well aware that Christians among others do not trust our political leaders. In the first place since the expenses scandals politicians of all parties are held in low regard. While Christians who cite Romans 13 may still respect leaders of the state because of their office, they may be sad and disillusioned about the evident lack of integrity in politics. Morally conservative Christians have said and written some extremely negative things about the PM for his promotion of same sex marriage, while socially active and more radical Christians, many of whom are also conservative evangelicals theologically, are dismayed at the assault on the poor and those who seek to serve them. Church leaders across the denominations have joined together to demand action on the scandal of food poverty in the UK and been met with more than mere indifference. Many of us are are appalled at the attempts by the Mail on Sunday to discredit the work of the Trussell Trust as the leading organiser of food bank provision. There seems to be a contradiction between what government says about the value of such Christian action in conversations with us and what it then proclaims against those of us who give so much in time and resources.

5. What could it mean to be a Christian nation?

So says the PM we are basically a Christian country. Whether that is true or not it is probably a political mistake for a PM to say it, as this is what raises alarm bells among many. First of all it suggests some notion of theocracy. And the track record of nations being ruled in the name of God from the Holy Roman Empire, Henry VIII, Philip II of Spain, to contemporary Iran and Saudi Arabia – or indeed against the name of God as in the French Republic, the USSR or North Korea – is a fearsome one. Secondly to be a Christian nation necessarily excludes, where is the place for Jews, Muslims, Hindus or atheists. I can certainly not be an equal one with Christian citizens, however they are defined. Thirdly while a minority of Christians would find it attractive, and seek to frame all laws in accordance with their understanding of Christian teaching for many of us it would bring discomfort. Christianity in Britain is diverse, and some of us with memories of Roman Catholic or Dissenting forefathers who were persecuted by the established church and monarchy would be much more comfortable with a secular state with freedom for all faiths and none.

6. Is England Christian?

So finally at the sociological level is David Cameron right to suggest we this country is a Christian one. It is the case that our cultural heritage has been shaped by Christian faith over more than 1500 years. Church buildings, the language of the Bible and prayer book, some assumptions of legal and political institutions, of monarchy and Parliament deeply rooted in our culture. In England the established church has a privileged position, in law, in representation in the House of Lords and in its chaplaincy role in many public institutions. Of course much of this is contested, and much of it may be eroded away in years to come. Most of the broad measures of Christian commitment remain in a trajectory of decline. Christian affiliation according to the Census declined from 72% in 2001 to 59% in 2011 with increased numbers reporting "no religion" and "Muslim". Various survey measures tell the same story. Church attendance figures are also in long term decline and congregations in general have a rapidly ageing demographic profile. A few areas such as cathedral worship, and churches in London seem to buck the trend, and migration from countries where the Churches are stronger has brought both numbers and vitality to urban Christianity in Britain.

Nonetheless Christianity in England maintains a strong presence, and a well organised institutional life. There are churches in most neighbourhoods, supported vigorously and actively by people of strong personal faith. Many work hard and effectively to serve their neighbours, and to bring Christian values into professional and community life. Generally they long for others to share the same faith, but find it hard to present their beliefs in a confident and convincing way. Compared with political parties, trade unions and most other social organisations the churches are strong. England may not be a Christian country but it is one where Christianity cannot be ignored. However David Cameron's intervention on the theme and the responses to it suggest that Christianity could be much better understood, and that among politicians that it could be better practised, rather than patronised and damned with faint praise.

New blog on 'Messy Church' for William Temple Foundation

 

My blog on 'Messy Church' for William Temple Foundation can be viewed here: http://williamtemplefoundation.org.uk/blurred-encounters-in-a-messy-church/

 

if you are looking for something interesting to read, do regularly visit the blog section of the site >> http://williamtemplefoundation.org.uk/blog/

Building an Alternative Welfare System

 As I have already argued the growth of inequality and the neo-liberal campaign to reduce labour costs and to turn the working class into a disorganised precariarat who will bear most of the risks inevitable with capitalism has marched forward across the globe. The result is destitution for many, economic insecurity for most and growing discontent, while a tiny minority of plutocrats amass wealth and power with scant concern for morality or humanity. Increasing numbers of economists such as Professor Thomas Piketty, are arguing that capitalism in this form is no longer working.

Commentators such as Will Hutton are questioning the morality of gross inequality and unbridled executive pay deals, though he notes..

I doubt if any CEOs signing letters much worry about morals or religion and even practising Christian business leaders, such as HSBC's chair Stephen Green, while wringing their hands and searching their souls, do not offer a bold lead.

In a previous post I set out some of the things that Christians and the organised church are called to do in the face of the current crisis of inequality and destitution in the UK. But if we are to make a long term difference we need to engage in some hard thinking, and hard politics in conversations with the poor and powerless and the rich and powerful if we are to bring renewed hope for a good society. It is not sufficient to play a little part through our local church projects or to agree with David Cameron's recently renewed and highly debatable claim that Jesus invented the Big Society.

And it certainly will not do to accept the inevitability of church-based food banks becoming a permanent feature of welfare provision, by accepting the funding and associated eligibility criteria and control that is now on offer from local authorities. For example Blackpool Council has funded the Methodist led work of the Blackpool Food Partnership, and Lancashire County Council has just invited local food banks to apply for funding or reimbursement of food parcels at the rate of £26 per bag.

The conversations about being a good society initiated by Churches Together and Church Action on Poverty are a useful initiative, enabling Christians and others from a wide range of social background to share stories and express views. It is important too to engage critically with the discussions of the Together for the Common Good initiative and with the current Parliamentary enquiry into food poverty. However, in the long term and in the world of real politics some serious policy thinking about welfare and wealth distribution is required. It will need significant effort on the part of economists and politicians, and a massive campaign against the tide of the times to reassemble a society in which there is some reality behind assertions that we are all in it together.

One interesting and useful idea that was much discussed in the 1980s and has recently re-emerged is that of a Citizen's (or Basic ) income. Its advocates give many reasons (here are ten) in support of the policy. The Citizen's Income Trust promotes debate on the desirability and feasibility of a Citizen's Income by publishing a newsletter and other publications, maintaining this website, maintaining a library of resources, and responding to requests for information. While there may be many complex economic arguments with which we will have to engage, and a long uphill struggle to turn these ideas into political consensus or legislation, the idea does seem to have moral force from a Christian perspective. At the practical level a citizen's income could overcome the scandal of policies that produce destitution, and at the political level it could enable us to overcome the toxic rhetoric that divides the deserving from the undeserving poor and turns the "strivers" against the "scroungers". But best of all at the moral or theological level, a citizen's income would signal the good news that all human beings created in the image of God, and living in society under the common grace of God, have equal and intrinsic value in the sight of God. A person's worth when all is said and done should not be measured by their personal wealth.

How Christians should be tackling poverty in the UK.

If as we have argued in the previous blog poverty in the UK is absolute, and best described in terms of destitution, gross inequality and oppression, what is to be done? How should Christians, working through their local churches and alongside other people of goodwill in their communities be striving to make a difference?

First of all we have to admit that it is not going to be possible, this side of the return of Christ to abolish poverty and injustice altogether. This is not so much that as Jesus put it, "the poor you will always have with you" for it is possible to read these words as an ironic commentary on Deuteronomy 15;11…. addressed to a disobedient people... In John's gospel (12;4-6) he was in fact responding to Judas the crooked banker in the midst of the disciples. Indeed as he earlier verse in Deuteronomy (15.4) has it .. there need be no poor among you for God has given you a rich and fertile land. And with the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts 4 the church in Jerusalem demonstrated how it was possible to abolish poverty within a community.

The difficulty rather is that there are huge social, economic and ideological forces ranged against the poor in the contemporary world..It is these, whether understood in terms of secular politics, or as structural sin "embodied" in the "powers and principalities" that rule in the heavenly realms that will obstruct and hinder in our struggles. But that does not mean that nothing can be done or that we are always doomed to impotence and defeat.

There are three main levels at which we should be working, which are in Boff's terms the personal, the pastoral and the political.

At the personal level it is morally impossible for a Christian or any human being, who having food and other resources to pass by on the other side when we see a brother or sister who is destitute and starving. We are bound to share what we have and to give generously following the example of God who has graciously given us all things. There is in this sad world a place for food banks, soup kitchens and furniture stores and the churches and communities of Britain have recognized this and responded. Many of us already give food, money and unpaid labour in such projects. However, charity is not enough – even at the individual and household level. We can go one step further by helping people with signposting and advice, advocacy in face of bureaucracy, in offering money management courses and credit unions, programmes to address addictions, job clubs, mentoring and job creation enterprises that may make people self-sufficient economically, and new hope in Christ whereby individuals may see their personal lives turned around.

Yet still this is merely doing to and working for, or serving the poor. At the pastoral level it is better by far in terms of humanity and empowerment, and in following the example of Jesus if we can walk alongside the poor, in solidarity with them, in listening to and amplifying their voices and the stories of their experience, and in learning from them something of the depth of faith that keeps them going, and the blessedness they have been promised. Some of us may be called to be involved in radical new Christian communities such as the Comfort Zone in Blackpool, others to move in and live deep (as the Eden Network puts it) in deprived urban neighbourhoods, if we are not there already either as a lifestyle choice or constrained through our own lack of wealth.

At the political level the challenge is even greater. We can of course use our votes, write to our MPs and Councillors or lobby the government. We may advocate for specific reforms, such as the end of benefit sanctions and the bedroom tax, for curbs on legal loan sharks and a capping of interest rates, for fair fuel tariffs, for the introduction of the living wage. We can join and support campaigning groups such as Church action on Poverty and CPAG. We can even join a political party, and stand for election, or infiltrate local political structures such as community forums and health boards and seek to make a constructive difference there. People supporting and advocating justice persistently in democratic societies do sometimes win small victories and bring in worthwhile reforms – the names of Wilberforce and Lord Shaftesbury easily come to evangelicals' minds.

However, history seems to teach us that long term and deep rooted political and social change comes through the struggles of organised social movements. The trade unions, the Indian Independence movement inspired by Gandhi, the Civil Rights movement led my Martin Luther King are the most obvious examples. Christians are often far too reluctant to take part in organized resistance and the struggles of the dispossessed. In today's society we need to engage in new forms of organising, using electronic social media, subverting the stories of the mass media and mass lobbies and demonstrations. Make Poverty History in 2005 showed that the churches in Britain could mobilise for international justice. Why can't we do it for economic and social justice in our own land?

But even this is not enough. Increasingly politics is about narratives and the powerful forces linked with neo-liberal economics seem to have persuaded all the parties that they can only win elections by persuading voters in the "squeezed middle" that they support the interests of hard working people. The rhetoric is about "the strivers" against the non working "scroungers". Of course here they intend us to understand the reference to the poor, the unemployed and the welfare dependent, rather than the non – working scroungers who make fortunes by gambling with vast sums of capital, and find ways of dodging taxation on their ill gotten gains. As Christians committed to the equal value of all human beings before God, and to greater generosity and equality in society, we need tell convincingly a counter narrative. We will need the best of our Christian and progressive economists to bring forward sound alternatives to neo-liberal dogma. And we will need to find powerful communicators with access to the media to publicly and prophetically declare a different truth.

Though we may not succeed in abolishing poverty until kingdom come, we can at least make some difference if we can work together in the Spirit of Jesus at all these different levels.

There is an interesting Catholic take on Matt 24;11 here http://www.catholiccincinnati.org/56108/the-poor-you-will-always-have-its-not-a-prediction/

Understanding the Language of Poverty in the UK today

I was pulled up short this week on reading again a draft document from a colleague at the church Urban Fund

When people refer to poverty in England, they are not generally referring to the complete lack of material resources that millions of people around the world experience. Thankfully, that kind of 'absolute' poverty is mostly absent from this country. Poverty in England is a relative concept

This reflects a widespread assumption that has been oft repeated over the last fifty years. However, in my own experience I fear this is no longer true. Every week at the homeless drop in Preston where I volunteer meals are served to over 50 people, who are permanently skint, and depend on the circuit of soup kitchens around the town for their food. In Blackpool the numbers reported in similar ministries are even higher. Across Lancashire in 2013 the 26 different food banks issued at least 30,000 food parcels to people who had been formally referred as not being able to afford any food. At the different job clubs run by local churches and community groups there are constant stories of people who have nothing to live on because they have been "sanctioned" - all benefits withdrawn because of some trivial breach of harsh regulations. And then there are thousands who are trapped deep in debt by the legal loan sharks, to whom they turned when for a short term fix to their desperation and destitution. I've not yet mentioned addictions, where the pushers of booze, drugs and late night high street gambling have preyed on human weakness and continue to destroy lives. Many of these people are not yet living on the streets, or sleeping rough – thanks often to the genrosity and forbearance of families, friends and various charities – though the numbers are rising and are likely to grow exponentially. If this situation is not absolute poverty, what is?

The most frightening aspect is that much of this destitution is the outcome of deliberate policy. Thirty years of neo-liberal economics has promoted the rapid growth of inequality so that a small elite controls the financial institutions, and holds sway over the world's governments. Gross inequality has been shown to be detrimental to the health and well being of all not just the poorest. In global capitalism real wages have been supressed, and welfare spending has been cut. Austerity policies have turned the screw on the poorest, with specific cuts hurting the disabled, social housing tenants and the jobless who are disciplined by benefit sanctions to take a job, any job that is on offer, rather than being offered incentives to look for gainful and meaningful work. All this of course is undergirded by a propaganda machine that labels and demonises the workless as "scroungers.

Nonetheless the emergence of absolute poverty in the UK does not mean that relative poverty has gone away. Huge numbers of people may be in work, or even managing to survive on their benefits yet may be living in poverty when they are considerably worse off than the majority of the population; when they lack sufficient resources to achieve a standard of living regarded as normal in this society. This kind of poverty is about exclusion, as individuals and families are excluded from participating in economic, social and cultural activities that are considered, or promoted by advertisers and role models of popular culture, as essential.

Definitions and benchmarking of relative poverty vary, but two methods are common. Governments and economists seem to prefer a mathematical formula based on the proportion of households who fall below an income threshold based on 60 per cent of the national median income. Using that measure, around 13 million people, including 3.5 million children, are estimated to be living in poverty in the UK. The calculation is relatively easy if the data is sound, and in principle comparable over time. However, strange quirks can occur as inequalities grow, or as GNP falls with the possibility that the numbers within the definition go down, while their struggle to manage on their income becomes worse. Social scientists on the other hand prefer the "breadline Britain" approach, based on the proportion who cannot afford a basket of consumer goods considered to be essential for a decent life, by the average British resident, sampled by opinion polling. Again there are problems with such relative definitions, as aspirations and expectations of the decent life can rapidly change, and may vary widely across a diverse population. There are for example especially among practicing Christians many who are more than content with the material blessings God has entrusted to them, and generously give much of their income away – and in the extreme case there are religious orders who have taken a voluntary vow of poverty, and see lack of possessions not as a problem but as a blessing.

Poverty then is a complex phenomenon and hard to define. It is clear that its impacts are multi-dmensional. Although many people manage brilliantly on low incomes, and remain resourceful and hopeful usually lack of resources begins to impact on physical health through the lack of a good diet, poor housing, and unheated living space. In a world where a person's worth is measured by their personal wealth lack of resources brings lack of status, and with that a lowered self image and lack of confidence. The stress of struggling to make ends meet impacts on mental well-being, and can drive people to depression, substance abuse, crime, suicidal thoughts and actions as well as relationship problems. Families can become unstable or break down, often making the cost of living higher for the individual. Communities can find it harder to trust one another, and housing policies often concentrate households with economic and social difficulties closer together. Services in such areas are often over-stretched and under-funded, and over time are tolerated with low expectations. Aspirations for improvement are lowered with the result that people find it pointless to strive for education, decent employment or political change.

The interrelation of these factors and the link to local area deprivation is well captured in a publication from the Church Urban Fund, "The web of poverty"

All these problems are closely interlinked, trapping individuals and whole communities in a 'web of poverty': poor education dampens aspirations; unstable home lives and domestic abuse are triggers for homelessness and drug and alcohol misuse; unemployment and lack of opportunities promote crime; low income makes healthy eating unaffordable; dependence on benefits disempowers people; mental health problems lead to social isolation; and the closure of local services damages community cohesion

The document goes on to name poverty of identity, poverty of resources, and poverty of relationships as three distinct dimensions. However, in my view the analysis is flawed if we see these factors as in an almost Trinitarian relationship with each other. It must surely be the case that economics – lack of resources - is the primary driver of the other aspects of poverty. This must especially be the case if we understand the growth of absolute poverty, and the growth of inequality as politically driven. In the driving seat of course are those who already have much, and in their greed are always demanding more, at the expense of the ordinary and the most vulnerable, the least and the lost. It is they of course who also control the language and dominate the discourse around poverty. Only those who have much to gain in terms of a "divide and rule" approach to the electorate could promote a language of poverty built on terms such as "the underclass", "scroungers and shirkers", "teenage lone parents getting pregnant to get housing", "addicts begging to feed their habit" and "benefit tourists and asylum seekers"

The language of relative poverty and social exclusion may seem more liberal and can surely have some beneficial uses when trying to bring on board those who are in low paid work or are striving to better themselves. However, if my analysis is to any extent true then it is arguably time that we forgot about the complex, confusing and contested notion of poverty. Rather we should be speaking and acting compassionately and politically in the vocabulary of inequality and destitution and declaring that behind these symptoms we discern oppression.

It is my contention that such an understanding is profoundly Christian and soundly based in Scripture..

In the Old Testament, "poor" can be translated by six major and three other terms—totalling about 300 references, and revealing a broad understanding of the causes, reality, and consequences of poverty. The poor person is the downtrodden, humiliated, oppressed; the man pleading and crying out for justice; the weak or helpless; the destitute; the needy, dependent person; and the one forcibly subjected to the powerful oppressor. …..........

Throughout the Bible the majority of references indicate that the poor are the mercilessly oppressed, the powerless, the destitute, and the downtrodden. Nor is their poverty taken for granted in Scripture. It causes concern, anger, and protest. It is challenged and opposed. And its source is seen as injustice and oppression by the powerful.

This quotation is not taken from some Marxist inspired volume of liberation theology, or even from Pope Francis but from a decidedly evangelical source that is nearly 35 years old

Lausanne Occasional Paper 22 Christian Witness to the Urban Poor

Report of the Consultation of World Evangelization Mini-Consultation on Reaching the Urban Poor held in Pattaya, Thailand from 16-27 June 1980 Sponsored by the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization

This paper is still well worth reading in full and the appendix which meticulously lists every Bible reference to poverty is available here

http://www.lausanne.org/docs/pattaya1980/lop22app.pdf

It is worth noting that the report was drafted by members of the "MiniConsultation on Reaching the Urban Poor" under the Chairmanship of Rev. Jim Punton, who also served as International Co-ordinator of the pre-COWE study groups on Reaching the Urban Poor. Final editing was by Dr. Colin Marchant.