Comment (April 2010)
Back to menu
Bishop’s Letter
with Bishop Martin Wharton
In 2009, a poster in one of the British National Party's Election Campaigns showed a picture of Christ with the caption "What would Jesus do? Vote BNP"
One of their current website campaigns is to "Keep Britain Christian". These are yet further examples of the attempt to portray BNP policies as compatible with Christianity. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As we approach the forthcoming Local Elections and the General Election, there is a widespread disillusionment with the mainstream political parties in our country. Some may say there is a good reason for such disillusionment. However, it would be tragic if large numbers of people did not bother to vote or if they voted for an extremist party, such as the BNP, as a protest against our politicians.
We need to be very aware that there are those who are all too ready to exploit the present situation by advancing views that are the very opposite of the values of justice, compassion and human dignity which are deeply rooted in our Christian heritage. The conscious adoption by the BNP of the language of our faith should disturb us – especially as the effect of those policies is not to promote Christian values and social and community cohesion, but to foster fear and division within our communities, and particularly between people of different faiths and different racial backgrounds. In their carefully worded campaign material, intolerance is often cloaked in the language of culture and faith. BNP supporters and candidates have claimed to have established a 'Christian Council of Britain' which erroneously stresses the 'godly importance of race and nation'.
Last year a statement from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York warned against the dangers of voting for any party "whose core ideology is about sowing division in our communities and hostility on ground of race, creed or colour". We should never forget that there is only one race, the Human Race. We should never forget that every single human being, regardless of background, is made in God's image and must be treated with dignity and respect.
General Synod in 2004 stated that any political movement that seeks to divide our communities on the basis of ethnicity is an affront to the nature of God revealed in creation and scripture and is a grave danger to harmonious relationships.
The Synod called on all Christians in England to nurture a loathing of the sin of racism and to model the teaching of Christ in loving all our neighbours.
Whenever the General election is to be held – in May or June - it is vitally important that the people of this country use their vote, and use it in the forthcoming local elections too.
The BNP has openly stated its intention to contest the local elections in Newcastle, especially in the light of recent boundary changes. Both local and general elections are an opportunity for the renewing of a vision of communities united by mutual respect, high ethical standards and the pursuit of justice and peace. A low voter turn out could seriously damage democracy itself. Simply by doing nothing we could be helping extremist parties we do not stand for. We should not allow ourselves to be misled by the BNP propaganda. The BNP is NOT a party that stands for Christian principles.
Back to top
Too Many Prisoners?
by David Peel
The Cedarwood Trust was set up in 1980 by Newcastle Diocese and North Tyneside Council, as a pastoral care organisation. As such, we minister to those among the local community who are sent to prison, 15 at a recent count, and sometimes their families.
We visit prisoners, correspond with them and receive telephone calls. We have also encouraged three members of the neighbouring parish of St. Peter's, Balkwell, to become voluntary visitors at HMP Frankland. Some people, even some church-goers, criticise us for doing this work. But the demand seems deeply embedded in our Christian tradition: "Do good to those that despitefully use you"; "Inasmuch as you do it to the least of these my brethren ...". More basic, though, is the claim that we are all God's children ("Our Father ..."): it is not they who go to prison, but some of us. Each one is our neighbour.
We find the prison staff, including the chaplains, to be as co-operative as possible. We also find Christian faith held to by some prisoners, who are therefore emissaries of the Gospel in what can be a very dark place.
Prisoners have been judged by the police, prosecutors and, once convicted, the courts. Sometimes the press has judged them unfavourably, and some crimes attract the condemning judgement of fellow prisoners. We can fall into the same trap, but knowing, as we usually do, the prisoner's personality and circumstances, helps us to resist this to some extent ("Judge not ...").
Many, although not all, prisoners have lived in poverty. Many, although not all, have been abused and neglected in childhood. Many, although not all, suffer psychiatric illness. Many, although not all, have taken refuge in drugs or alcohol. While not being excuses, these are some of the factors which prompt crime. People are imprisoned to deter them and others from offending, to protect the public for the time they are imprisoned, and to help them become more fit for membership of wider society once they are released.
Since the early 90s the prison population has doubled, to 85,000, partly because longer sentences have been favoured, and partly because people have been sent to prison for offences which would not previously have attracted custodial sentences. Britain now imprisons a higher proportion of its people than any other Western nation except for the U.S.A.
It costs up to £40,000 to keep someone in prison for a year. About 60% of adult prisoners re-offend within two years of release, that number rising to about 80% of young offenders. There are many effective ways of dealing with some offenders which do not involve imprisonment but which have better results. These include restorative justice, justice re-investment and pay-back community service.
Many people, including me, believe that much of the money currently spent on prisoners should be diverted to extending the use of these tried and tested alternatives to custody. Doing this would result in fewer people being in prison, and so would give prison staff increased scope to work usefully with those whom the community really does need to put away for a time.
With a general election looming, will any party or candidate advocate a reduction in the prison population over five years of, say, 5,000 per year? I'd like to think so.
Click here to read 'Prison fellowships - Catalysts in the community' in the News section.
Back to top
And did those feet?
by Simon Webb
The current invitation to the pope to visit the North-East of England is inspired partly by the fact that no pope has ever visited our region which, it must be said, is a long way from Rome.
It is undoubtedly true that no Roman pontiff has visited us before, but it is quite possible that a man who was soon to become pope did make a flying visit in the middle of the twelfth century. The pope in question was Hadrian (or Adrian) IV, then known as Nicholas Breakspear of Abbot's Langley in Hertfordshire. Nicholas is the only Englishman so far to have become a pope. Having been rejected at the Monastery of St Albans, he started his career as a poor scholar in France. He became an Austin Canon at the monastery of St Ruf, just outside the walls of the city of Avignon, and worked his way up to the position of abbot.
The other canons soon took against their new abbot and complained about him to the then pope, Eugenius III. Eugenius told the canons to find a new abbot, and made Breakspear Cardinal-Bishop of Albano, near Rome. It is unclear what the restless Provencal canons found to dislike about Nicholas.
Eugenius himself thought so much of Nicholas that he sent him off to Scandinavia to sort out some problems in the churches there. It is then that Breakspear, by now a papal legate, might have come to the North-East. In those days the usual route from Italy to Scandinavia was via Britain, and it is entirely possible that Breakspear took a ship from one of our local ports, and thus crossed the North Sea.
When Nicholas returned to Rome in 1154, he found that Eugenius was dead, and as the highly successful returning legate from Scandinavia, he himself was elected pope almost immediately. He reigned until 1159 when, as some say, he was choked to death by a fly in his wine.
Simon works at the North East Religious Learning Resources Centre at Carter House in Durham (www.resourcescentreonline.co.uk). His book on Nicholas Breakspear (ISBN 978-0956455109) is published by The Langley Press at £3.99, and is available at the Resources Centre's bases at Durham and at Church House in Percy Main. You can also order it from any branch of Waterstone's, or through online bookshops.
Back to top
The defence of the realm
Leonard Skinner reports on a lecture about Britain's military role in world affairs and asks: Is this something Christians should be reflecting upon?
General Sir Richard Dannatt (pictured) was once an undergraduate at Durham University. He choose a military career and was commissioned (1971) into the Green Howards; he was awarded and M.C.
The army has been his life's work, and still is - lately retired as Chief of the Defence Staff he has been appointed as the defense advisor to the Conservative Party. He had been the senior figure in the forces' Christian Union. He gave the 'Insights' lecture in Newcastle University recently. Two adjacent rooms also screened the lecture, while the Curtis Auditorium was filled. I listened and took notes, very conscious of missing points while I was registering others. My account is therefore incomplete, but my 'impressions' may be worth sharing, and indeed may provide some down-to-earth questions for Christians.
The key phrase was 'strategic defence review'. The constant impression given was that this process should not be piecemeal or occasional. We must think out what part our country should play in world affairs. Then would come the policy decisions about manpower and equipment and therefore expenditure. What is our place in the world? What do we want to achieve? What then do we need to do?
He was not condemnatory of what had been done in the past, but was advocating that there should be regular reviews, by statute, every four years perhaps, not undertaken by the political leadership. Decision-making should be led by the needs demanded by foreign policy and defence and not simply by ad hoc "what we can afford" calculations. There must be balance, integration – of forces - of government departments - comprehensiveness.
What are the threats? What is the nature of future conflict? Complete integration of the three services was not the way, but everything that benefits from three-service cooperation must be affected. The Staff College is already a shared resource.
The impression was of working towards new decision-making procedure, the realm of 'mission command'. We need decisions taken at the top, but then a top-down progression, with delegation, with supervision, but with involvement in planning at all levels, and not by route or dictate. We must not take on more than we can do, and must realize that a modern campaign can be quite a long drawn out affair.
There was an impression of cautious optimism so far as Afghanistan was concerned. And it is something that will set the agenda for future reviews. He thought that we should be at work there. Those who armed the Mujahedeen and then withdrew have a debt to pay to the Afghan people. Defeating the Taliban is not the ultimate objective. We must win the hearts of the people and offer a better way of life. We may win a battle, but then we must hold the liberated territory and build structures for normal civilized life. We know that power and influence there is not so much within central government but in families, clans, tribal leadership. The Taliban are being used by the Islamists for their almost neo-fascist ends. And they intend to come here. There was no doubt of the impression given here - fanatics move into the ungovernable ground of a failed state and if they are not defeated abroad, their actions will spread to our own land. But there was obviously no enthusiasm for violence toward Iran - "robust dialogue" is what is needed.
Financial aspirations for the forces have not been met. 35 billion pounds' worth of 'potholes' still wait to be filled in. This is money that is already 'lost' to the services; cutting back even beyond that seems inconceivable. So much equipment in use on the battlefield for the moment will need desperately to be replaced. Finance for research in the universities has been progressively reduced - it must be re-estimated. My impression was that he was lukewarm about the retention of 'Trident' - to cut it now seems off-limits to the majority political parties - but perhaps in 10 years' time? We should note that without it, all the protective submarines and so on would in fact become available elsewhere, but also that money for Trident is not taken from the defence budget itself, but from another governmental source.
We stand at a strategic cross-roads and the logic of our situation will drive decisions forward. Do we confirm our present position or adjust it? We need clarity in national ambitions. Although we want to work with other European nations, only ourselves and France and Germany have the capacity for world engagements - and at present Germany does not mean to undertake them. Practical relationships then are needed with France - e.g., it might be wasteful for both countries to build an aircraft carrier each. It was, however, 'in the DNA' of our country that we should lay a leading role in world affairs.
The military/public relationship was now a good one; people understand the separation between policies and the fighter men and women who have to enact them. General Dannatt expressed the forces' gratitude for the support now being given to them.
Click here to read 'Now is the time to ditch Trident' in the News section
Back to top