If Not Them, Then Who?

Wow - two blog posts in less that 24 hours, something must be wrong?

This kind of a loose follow-up to last nights post. Since a number of church leaders, Bishops and Archbishops criticised the coalition governments welfare reforms earlier this week, there have been a number of articles in the majority of the mainstream newspapers claiming that these Bishops are out of touch with their congregations, the majority of whom (apparently support welfare reform), and as always when the church speaks out against the establishment, how the Church shouldn't meddle in politics.

Firstly, just for the record, I am willing to admit I am not fundamentally against welfare reform. However, the word 'reform' means to make something better, that obviously isn't happening in this case. I also believe that you can't reform the welfare system without also tackling raising the minimum wage, zero-hours contracts, corporate welfare and social justice.

The main question I would like to ask (and I'm not promising any answers.), Is around the age-old statement that is always brought up in this situations - 'The Church shouldn't meddle in politics'.

If the Church shouldn't meddle in politics, the who should (apart from politicians obviously)?

Unelected Journalists and newspaper editors?
Multinational  and Large Ltd Companies whose heads often don't live in the UK and often don't pay tax here?
Lobbyists? Getting paid to try and persuade ministers to change government policy for the benefit of a few, not the many.
Charities?
Other members of the Media?

Or, in a 21st century democracy, should everyone be allowed to be involved in the political debate? Can we really have a proper debate whilst we have a largely biased right-wing media?

There's no easy answers. What do you think?

An Open Letter to David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith

Dear Mr Cameron and Mr Duncan Smith,

This week, you have come under considerable criticism, from a number of church leaders over your changes to the welfare system and the effects it has had on the poorest and most vulnerable members of or society. Mr Cameron, you claim that the changes are part of a 'moral mission'. If this is the case, I will not criticise your aims, however your methods may need reconsideration.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask you to do something.

It is my understanding that you both profess to have a Christian faith, albeit one Anglican and one Roman Catholic. I hope that despite the differences between your denominations, the core belief in the teachings of Jesus unite you more.

I know you are both incredibly busy men and have family lives to balance as well as your governmental roles, but I would like to ask you both just to find some time just to take time out and think about the change you have made to the welfare state and the impact of these changes upon the people affected. Maybe even take time to pray about this as well. Try to put to one side Party Politics and political ideologies and just think about these changes and there affects and whether these fit in with the teachings that you profess to believe in.

There are two miracles recorded in the gospels of Jesus feeding large crowds. The feeding of the 4,000 and the feeding of the 5,000. I don't recall in either case Jesus saying to his disciples "I'd love to feed the crowds and give them what they need, but if I do I'm afraid I may encourage them into a dependency on handouts, take away their aspirations and make them lazy".

Margaret Thatcher once said "No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he had only good intentions. He had money as well". I think she may have missed the point of the parable. There is actually much we can learn from this parable in our modern society for both our attitudes towards immigration and welfare. Yes he had good intentions and he was also rich - he had money. The point I think Mrs Thatcher missed was, the Good Samaritan was willing to spend his money on helping those less fortunate than himself and he was willing to do so with a blank cheque and without expecting anything in return. He did it because it was the right thing to do.

My understanding of Jesus' teaching is that he told his followers to love their neighbours as themselves, love their enemies and follow his example.

So please, take time out, think about the changes you have made and think about what you believe, and how important those beliefs are. Sir down, think, pray, then decide which beliefs are more important, your political ones, or your religious ones.

Yours sincerely,

David Slaney