HT to Steven

Sometimes inspiration is as much how you say it as what you say.

I’m sitting thinking about a sermon for Sunday.  It’s Pentecost, one of those Sundays which is hugely important to the church.  It’s also one of those festivals which comes around every year and has had every angle of it preached on over the years.

I want to say the right things… but I also want people to be inspired.

So, in my usual Monday practice I went looking for inspiration in my usual places.

I found it on Roddy Hamilton’s site:

When those who trust love no longer wait for someone else to fix the problem of the church,

when faith is too important to hand it over to leaders to sort out,

when justice leaves behind those who think she is but a subset of the church’s work rather than the whole thing,

when followers give up on those who procrastinate about inclusion,

when diversity becomes an invite to a table of bread broken safely among people wearing their hidden truths across their foreheads,

when communion is a feast served by non-ordained women, children and men who know heaven won’t implode in doing so,

when the doctrine makers use marker pens to write ‘sorry’ over half their words,

when creeds are written in questions rather than in statements,

when dandelions become the plant of choice breaking out just where the ground has been cleansed against it,

then it is Pentecost.

Hope, justice, equality… but sometimes how you say it is just as important.

Thanks for inspiring me Roddy.

Compromise is one of those interesting words that can be both positive and negative, mostly depending on the person viewing or making the compromise’s opinion.  It can be a noun and a verb.

Compromise means:

a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles

something intermediate between different things

an endangering

In some ways those definitions are a little odd.  The word comes from the joining of ‘com’, which means together, and ‘promise’.

A joint promise.

When I first heard that the Liberal Democrats had made a deal with the Tories I was angry.  When I heard that the Lib Dems had given up on some of their key policies I was even more angry.  What I didn’t see was that the Conservatives made the same moves.  They gave up some of their key policies too.

It would be easy to be cynical while watching David Cameron and Nick Clegg during their joint press conference today.  There were jokes about it looking like a wedding.  Cameron was asked about something harsh he had said about Clegg.  Clegg had to defend his party’s very involvement.  And all the time they stood together talking about hope, about change, about realising that working together means putting other people first.

I sneered.

But what if they are serious?

What if they really mean it?

What if they really do want to put the country before party politics?  What if they really will find a middle way?

Isn’t that at least worth giving a chance?

But then that would mean I’d have to compromise…

No excuses.

The polls are open from 7am until 10pm.  You don’t even need to take your polling card, just some ID.

If you don’t want to vote for anyone then spoil your paper because they count those too.

If you want to know how to vote then watch the video here.

Voting is your right.  Exercise it.

If the Guardian had a vote it would be cast enthusiastically for the Liberal Democrats. But under our discredited electoral system some people may – hopefully for the last time – be forced to vote tactically

The first-past-the-post system is undemocratic.  But that’s not the only reason to vote Lib Dem.

It has been interesting watching both Labour and Tory alike warning of the dangers of a hung parliament, or a balanced parliament as those seeking influence in the post election fall out have taken to calling it.  Big majorities are good when things need radically changed but that doesn’t seem to be where we are.

All the major parties, and I’m including the Scottish and Welsh nationalists in that, have very little difference in policy terms between them.  If you don’t believe me look at how well the Scottish Parliament works with a minority government.  There is something grown up about having to convince other people that what you want to do is a good idea.  Governments shouldn’t have to rely on whips bullying people through the division lobby.

The Leader’s Debates have changed the face of British politics forever.  We will surely move ever closer to a presidential style election.

In many ways Nick Clegg’s rise has been a parallel of the USA’s Presidential elections where often being an unknown candidate can be a benefit.  People listen to the new guy.

I heard a commentator saying this morning that David Cameron has spent the last year encouraging people to vote for someone young and new… and then Clegg came along and Cameron has been left shouting “Not him!  I meant me!”.

Labour seems to have lost their way.  The Tories seem to have discovered their past.  But what of these Liberal Democrats?

They seem to inhabit the centre ground more comfortably than either the red or blue parties.  Perhaps a fundamental commitment to real representative democracy puts you in a place where listening, compromise and co-operation are natural ways to achieve consensus and move forward.  Clegg has even had the audacity to suggest that the next parliament work together to tackle the economic crisis.  (I wonder if secretly Brown and Cameron are quite excited about the prospect of Vince Cable being Chancellor?)

What has been missed in the razzle dazzle of the three TV debates is that there are 650 elections happening next week.  Every one of us has a choice to make and no-one will arrive at their polling station to find Brown, Cameron and Clegg on their ballot paper.  Oddly, the party leaders could lose their constituency votes.  It’s unlikely, but where would that put us?

You see the BBC, Sky and ITV don’t pick the Prime Minister.  The pollsters don’t pick the Prime Minister.  We, the voters, don’t pick the Prime Minister.  The party with the most MPs don’t even pick the Prime Minister.  The Queen can ask whoever she wants to try to form a government.  Wouldn’t it be fun if she picked George Galloway for  laugh?

Our electoral system is a joke.  In my constituency Labour will win.  They have a majority of 11,000.  Our bit of the electoral map will be staying red no matter who I choose to vote for.  And that’s the problem for the Lib Dems.  Opinion polls might not translate into votes.  Even if they do get 30% of the vote our system means that they could still end up with fewer seats than the other two big parties.

And don’t get me started on the House of Lords.

And while I’m talking about electoral reform, how long are we just going to ignore the ‘West Lothian Question’?  Surely the English are going to wake up at some point and realise that Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs are voting on education, health and law and order legislation which doesn’t apply in their countries!  Seriously England, are you ok with that?

So, whatever the election result next week, things are going to change.  Proportional Representation is coming, the House of Lords is changing and even Parliament itself might be smaller and differently formatted.

And that’s all good because it has come about because people are beginning to engage in politics again.  It was great to see a woman in the Question Time audience reminding the politicians that they work for us.  I hope that’s a sign of things to come… that we care enough to get involved.

You get the government you allow.  We have allowed people to lie and cheat us because doing something about it was too much effort.  Disengaging isn’t the answer.  We get government however few people vote.

So, on May 6th I’ll be voting.  Will you?

My vote will go to the Liberal Democrats.  It was going there before the election was called but the negativity of Labour and Conservative alike has just confirmed my choice.

But what about May 7th?  Or is an X in a box our contribution to society?  (I wonder if that’s a Big Society?)  Voting is the easy bit.  Not leaving the running of the country to someone else… well that’s a bit harder.  Fancy it?

The Bill, one of the most controversial for years, was placed in ‘Wash Up’ following the calling of the General Election.  Wash Up truncates the legislative process.  Instead of 2 readings and a committee stage which can last up to 50 hours the DE Bill received 2 hours of discussion.

The Digital Economy bill deals with copyright, illegal downloading, TV and a whole range of other issues and is quite simply a bad piece of legislation.

Speaker after speaker exposed holes in the legislation.  Tom Watson, Labour MP for West Bromwich East, seemed to be one of just a handful of people who actually understood what they were talking about.

Part of the debate was around how people who infringe copyright in the digital arena would be dealt with.  If you have wi-fi and someone uses it to illegally download files then you will get a letter.  Obviously the government haven’t heard or proxy servers, changing IP addresses or hacking wi-fi.

Stephen Timms, the Labour Minister responsible for the bill, actually suggested that people could make their wi-fi completely secure by adding a password.

The level of ignorance was stunning.  Both Labour and Conservative front benches were painfully lacking in understanding of the real issues that this bill will impact.

Not one speaker supported copyright infringement.  What those opposing the bill recognised is that copyright law needs completely overhauled so that it protects the people and ideas and creations it should protect but doesn’t punish those who don’t need or deserve to be punished.

John Redwood asked a simple question about the point at which copyright is breached if for example he paid for content, printed it and gave it to his wife.  Would that be a breach?  Or if he gave it to a friend?  Or if he posted it on his blog?  Or if he sold it?

Stephen Timms didn’t understand the question!!!

As someone on Twitter said, “It’s like watching 5 year olds talking about qualtum mechanics”.

This is apparently the home of democracy.  What happened last night was nothing like democracy.  It was a joke.  A bad joke that Labour and the Tories stitched up between them.

So, make sure your router has a password or you could be getting a letter from Big Brother sometime soon.

This weekend was the United Reformed Church’s Synod of Scotland meeting.  For the last few of years Youth Forum for 12-16 year-olds has met alongside Synod.  This year, following FURY Assembly’s plea to highlight the plight of the Invisible Children of Uganda, Youth Forum spent the weekend considering how we could tell the story of children who are abducted and forced to fight.

Every night hundreds of children gather in towns because staying at home in the countryside at night is too dangerous.  The Lord’s Resistance Army abduct children, kill their families and force them to become child soldiers.

The issue, highlighted by Invisible Children, is one which shocked and moved us.  We were delighted that following the young people’s presentation Synod discussed and debated how they could help.

The Synod of Scotland resolves to encourage churches to investigate the issue of child soldiers, to raise awareness of their plight, campaign for an end to this inhuman practice and to pray regularly for these children, their families and their communities…. to make these invisible children visible.

We also heard a report that the project we highlighted last year, a leprosy colony in Malawi, has been successful in achieving some of it’s ambitions, a process kick-started by the Youth Forum highlighting the needs of the project to Synod.

It’s easy to think that the problems of the world are too big, too far away, and that we are too small to affect change.

This weekend has been a reminder that we can make change.  It reminded us that we can shine light into dark places.

The article explores the reaction to Venables’ return to custody and who has the right to know.  It also, perhaps more interestingly explores the reaction of ‘the public’.

Venables and Thomson were tried and convicted in an adult court.  They were found guilty and sentenced to a custodial sentence.  They were released on parole.  No-one has ever denied that the crime they committed was horrific.  No-one has ever suggested that they shouldn’t be punished.

What Masters’ suggests is that two 10 year old boys may be as much victims as their own victim.  And that seems to be something people don’t want to hear.

When they were convicted a crowd gathered around the police van, banging on the sides.  If the van had stopped and opened it’s doors the boys would have been taken out by the adults and killed.

If you read all of Masters’ article and scroll down to the comments you will see that 17 years later there would seem to be a significant number of people who would still volunteer to pull the switch, administer the lethal injection or pull the rope tight.

I don’t believe that children get to a point where they abduct and torture smaller children without influence (or lack of it) from adults.  I wonder what my children learn when they see a group of adults calling for the execution of children?

I have children.  If one of them was killed I would feel the same way.  I would want revenge.  I would want to kill whoever did it.

And that’s why it’s right that I should play no part in the administration of justice in a scenario like that.

The bigger question for me is why society, or at least a proportion of it, seems to completely dismiss the chance of rehabilitation, restoration and, dare I say it, forgiveness and why we seem to have reached a point where we see children as ‘evil’ and beyond hope?

What does that say about us as a society?  What does it say about forgiveness?

He points to some powerful and moving stuff but it led me to a question…

Do we avoid the dark side of faith in our worship?

The Bible has some rich resources for times of hardship and suffering.  Lamentations, Psalms, Job… all full of pain but honest and real and full of faith.

Do we weep in worship?

And if not, why not?

(The DEC Appeal still needs your help.  Please click on the button on the image below and help if you can.  If you are a UK taxpayer don’t forget to Gift Aid your donation. Thank you.)

My employer, The United Reformed Church, has given its full support of the ‘Robin Hood Tax’ campaign launched on 10 February by a broad coalition of domestic charities, aid agencies, unions, faith organisations and green groups.

I don’t like the name but I do support the idea.

The campaign is calling on the leaders of the UK’s main political parties to support a global financial transaction tax on banks – of around 0.05% – to help repair damage caused by the global economic crisis, to protect public services at home, fight poverty abroad and help foot the bill for climate change environmental measures.

Financial transactions are one of the few transactions that aren’t taxed.  You pay tax on the interest you earn on your bank account and on almost everything you buy.

Commenting on the moral imperative for such a tax, the Revd John Marsh, Moderator of the General Assembly of the United Reformed Church said: “The human suffering caused by the global financial crisis has been immense and the impact on vulnerable households in the UK and abroad devastating.  Whilst it cannot restore lost jobs and livelihoods, this global financial transaction tax will go a long way to restoring public trust in financial institutions by raising up to £250 billion a year to fund critical development programmes here and abroad.”

Mr Marsh concluded: “Implementation of the global financial transaction tax would also serve to shift the public discourse from blame and retribution to hope: a governmental commitment to the common good is desperately needed in these stark times.”

In November 2009 the United Reformed Church adopted a motion in support of the financial transaction levy (the forerunner of the proposed global financial transaction tax).  The adopted motion highlighted the United Reformed Church’s concern over the impact of the economic recession on the poor and vulnerable; the possibility of cuts to social benefits and public services being advocated by political parties in the lead-up to the General Election; and the likely impact the enormous deficit in public finances will have on the UK’s commitments to international development and climate change adaptation and mitigation.

Why not sign the petition and show your support for the Robin Hood Tax.