16 November 2010
So the new government is going to conduct a survey to discover the levels of happiness in the country. At last politicians have realised that there is more to life than the economy – a reality which many of us have promoted for a long time. I just hope that given politicians habit of wanting to measure and control everything, we don’t end up with ‘targets’ for being happy – with pictures of smiling citizens lining the roads whenever a ‘beloved leader’ passes by!
Yet the pursuit of happiness and wellbeing is fundamental to being human. I can’t recall meeting anyone who has set out either to be miserable, or to be unhealthy. It is the changes, chances and realities of life which erode our sense of wellbeing and undermine our happiness – and this is something which politicians need to understand.
If the government is really committed to happiness then they have to accommodate the simple truth that it is very difficult to be happy if you have lost your job; it is hard to be happy if your benefits have been cut or removed; it is impossible to be happy if the chaos of poverty becomes your everyday experience. But most importantly they need to understand that for many of us, we cannot be really happy ourselves when we know that others are suffering and have become victims of the need to balance the budget.
But ultimately happiness is an inner and spiritual quality beyond the reach of legislation and politics. Happiness is something about how we shape our lives and order our priorities. Indeed we can do much to promote our own happiness and well being. Learning how to love, to be loved and forgive are sure foundations to a happy life. Discovering how to value others and preserve one’s own dignity are each ways of securing our sense of wellbeing. Controlling our anger, greed and sexuality each contribute to stability in life from which we can live at peace with ourselves and our neighbours.
Governments have a responsibility for providing a context and an economy which promote happiness, but in the end it is how we live our lives, relate to each other and share out the good things of life which secures our future. It is all summed up in a verse from the Bible written many centuries ago, it just says – do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with your God.
18 August 2009
Article in the Cleethorpes Chronicle – 14.08.09
The name and memory of Peter Connelly, known for so long as Baby P, joins a sad and far too long list of children who have died at the hands of those whom they could have expected to give them the love, protection and security which is surely the right of every child. This week the release of Peter’s name, along with the names of those who were responsible for his wicked injuries and death has brought Peter’s short and tragic life back to public attention.
There can be no excuses for Tracy Connelly, Stephen Barker or Jason Owen whose actions and inactions caused and allowed Peter to suffer so much. Once again we are reminded that the vulnerable – whether they be young or old – are at the mercy of those who have them in their care. Yet vulnerability is at the heart of being human for it is the stuff of our early years, of our old age and, for some, it is their experience throughout life.
A symptom of a healthy family is the care and attention it gives to its most vulnerable members and the same is surely true for a community. It is how we invest in and support the most vulnerable in society which reveals the quality of our communities. As we reprioritise our public spending in the wake of the current recession, we must be wary of those politicians who would look for savings in our support for the vulnerable, the sick and the casualties of modern life. As I see it, their care, through the work of the social services and other agencies, is a good gauge of the health of our nation.
Jesus said “By their fruits you shall know them” and that remains a good measure for many things, not least in our attitude to the vulnerable. Baby Peter is a sad reminder that when the strong take advantage of the vulnerable – then pain, suffering, misery, death and wickedness are ever present. The only remedy is for the strong and capable to be vigilant and to demand that the vulnerable are supported and protected. Another phrase of Jesus comes to mind: “whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me”.
2 October 2008
Well after some weeks off writing this blog, I feel it is time to get back to it. Thank you to all those who have been prompting me so to do.
At a very gloomy time for news, for me a bright spot has been the success of the group of retired Gurkhas in their fight for the right to settle in Britain. Leaving aside the immigration issues, the story is a very good example of a reality that being in power and having the support of lawyers officials etc., does not always mean that you are right. Here the government were wrongly advised and thank God for the impartiality of the courts. But does it always have to entail litigation?
We have developed a culture where it has become acceptable to be just inside the law. Such a culture pervades government, business and even the voluntary sector. It enables those in power to sit very likely to the needs of the powerless or to upholding what is right, because they know that, in the main, the powerless do not have the resources to champion what is right. Only the well resourced can take the risk of challenging the powerful, for if the powerful are in the end deemed to be just on the right side of what is lawful, then the financial consequences for the powerless can be disastrous.
The Gurkhas have been able to wage a very public campaign, but how many other instances are there of people with power and position, supported by lawyers, assuming they can do what they like because they are just inside the law? Those of us with power need to be certain that our first motivation is to do what is right, rather than what it is expedient. At times there will be those who will prompt the powerful to see what they can get away with, but the world is a better place when powerful are prepared to be wrong in the eyes of those driven by expedience, for the sake of doing what is right.
As we look at the turmoil on the global financial markets, how much of this is being driven by those who have lived just inside the regulations and just inside the law, justifying their risks because they can get away with them for short term advantage, rather than starting from a desire to do what is right for the long term.
The power to be wrong in the face of expedience, may, in the long-term, lead to a far healthier future – especially when you are dealing with people. When we work with people doing what is right builds trust – doing what we can get away with, erodes it – will the Gurkhas ever trust the government again?
25 July 2008
How many demonstrations in London end with a rally addressed by a Prime Minister and member of the G8?
After a remarkable piece of logistics, we all decamped to London today to march through the heart of the capital city calling for renewed energy to be put into achieving the Millennium Development Goals as promised by the year 2015.
The Millennium Goals are about justice and I can’t really describe how I felt to be walking alongside Bishops from places where justice is an elusive quality, where poverty is the norm and where corruption blights the lives of millions. To me this is what needs redeeming in this world and this is what God’s mission in Christ is all about – the flourishing of humanity.
Over lunch I talked with a Bishop from east Africa who told me how his mind was on his son who had been beaten up and left deaf in one ear by the police, just before he left his country to come to the Conference. It was a horrific story and as he shared it, the pertinence of what we are about was reinforced – how can anyone flourish when they are the victims of corruption and injustice.
One march does not change much, but we needed to demonstrate that we are united in the cause of justice. The flow of purple cassocks caught the attention of the press, media and passers-by enabling us to remind people that eight years ago promises were made by the rich and powerful in the world to address poverty, injustice and the chronic economic imbalance which so blights the lives of many. There is much to do to deliver on those promises and only seven years are left to do it.
I talked with a number of Bishops and their spouses and heard how they were immensely encouraged to hear the Prime Minister’s passion about achieving the Millennium Development Goals. They also recognised that it is only a worldwide Communion, such as ours, which would receive the attention of a world leader.
The day continued with the Bishops and their spouses receiving hospitality both from the Archbishop and then from the Queen at a Garden Party at Buckingham Palace. In the beautiful and peaceful setting of the Palace Gardens I took a moment to reflect that we had spent a day immersed in the contrasts and complexity of life. During our day we have travelled together, witnessed to our faith, shared in hospitality, engaged with the powerful and promoted the cause of justice – we must try to do more of this!
16 July 2008
I thought that the war on terror was being waged against those who are intent on destroying our civilisation.
I thought that a war on terror was being promoted to protect the values which deliver the freedom which we have won and celebrated from Magna Carta, through to reformation, revolution and two world wars.
I thought that it was a war being waged to defend the way in which we champion the weak, how we protect the freedom of the individual to speak and think, how we ensure that the rights of the individual are safeguarded against the abuse of the powerful and to reinforce our determination that all should live equally under the rule of law. Yet the sickening sight of 16-year-old Omar Khadr being interrogated at Guantanamo Bay asks searching questions about the the nature of our civilisation and our willingness to live with the risks which come with allowing people to live in freedom.
Once we allow ends to justify means, then we are on a slippery slope to behaving exactly in the same way as those who we claim to be a threat to our way of life. Guantanamo Bay, ‘extraordinary rendition‘ and ‘waterboarding‘ are examples of how quickly the values of a society can be set aside to achieve the end of safety. In our own country we witness rights before the law, which have taken centuries to become a feature of our version of civilisation, being set aside on the premise that we will be safer and that we should trust those in power. The film Taking Liberties suggests how our basic liberties have been eroded since the war on terror began.
There continues to be popular support for many of the incursions into our basic values from a public which wants to be safe – and in many ways I am in tune with that desire, especially when I am travelling on the London tube etc. But lurking in the back of my mind is the question – can you be civilised and free of risk? Isn’t a free society one where we make ourselves vulnerable because we give other people the same rights as we expect?
Western civilisation has the Christian story deep within its foundations. The story of a God who comes to us full of risk and vulnerability as we encounter him in the man Jesus. If we take risk and vulnerability out of our attitude to freedom and out of our way of life – then we become a very different society, for into the vacuum created by the absence of risk and vulnerability comes power and control (“because we know what’s best for you etc.”).
Those who feed on the risk-averse nature of our culture to justify their actions are in danger of usurping the very civilisation they claim to be defending.