Tag Archive for Church

Church: Counter-Cultural, Revolutionary and Subversive

[This is the first article in a series of two in which I explore the position of the Church in the world. In this first article I cover how the Church is called to be counter-cultural, revolutionary and subversive in its relationship with the world. In the second part I will make clear the Church’s responsibility to remain submissive to the governing authorities.]

God’s Kingdom, Not Man’s

The Church, and those who are members of the Church, live in the world. Whilst being present in the world, Jesus Christ is clear that His people are not of the world. This means that although the Church is found to be a part of the world around us it is not part of the same kingdom. The authorities and powers of this world are not the powers to which the Church appeals or is bound to.

Christians, and the Church of which they are members, have been transferred out of the kingdom of this world and into the Kingdom of God. If there be any contrariness or conflict between that which the world (and the rulers, authorities and powers of the world) insist upon and the laws of obedience to God, then it must be the Christian’s duty and the Church’s duty to be obedient to God, not man.

Jesus, though He is Lord and Saviour and is both the highest authority and the only way of salvation, has nevertheless allowed the forces of rebellion against God to prosper in this present world. Those who belong to the world do not know God nor His people. Yet whilst the world is under the sway of darkness, those called out of the world by Jesus are now children of Light, even though walking in this dark world.

The Counter-Cultural Church

The Church has always had a tension with the cultures in which it is found. The Jewish nation and the Roman Empire in which the early church existed tried to suppress and subvert the Christian world-view. Yet the Church, for its part, sought to live by standards which were alien to those authorities. The religions, customs and etiquette of the non-Christian cultures did and does impact upon the Church, yet equally the Church is a force and lifestyle that runs counter to the prevailing winds of fashion and culture.

The standards of behaviour demanded by cultural sensibilities, or the lack of morality by which they so often express themselves, are to be resisted by Christians and the Church as we seek to live according to God’s standards and not those of the world around us. These are so often in conflict, and for a peace-loving and peacemaking Church it can be a profound challenge to stand up to the debauch culture and determine to live in such a way that will mark us out as “misfits in the world”. The Bible calls Christians “strangers in the world” and expresses our position in this world as temporary residence, not a lasting citizenship.

The Subversive Church

The Church is profoundly subversive. The whole point of the Church’s existence in the world is to convert sinners into saints. Neil T Anderson, in his book “Victory over the Darkness”, said that the Church is “a military outpost under orders to storm the gates of hell. Every believer is on active duty, called to take part in fulfilling the Great Commission.” The role of the Church is not to placate and appease, but to actively seek to undermine the values, institutions and norms of a world fallen under the sway of evil.

An important point here is concerning the theology of Dominionism, which teaches that the Church should seek power and influence through laws and power structures. I do not believe that this “lording it” is what Jesus calls His Church to do. What I do believe is that the Church should use what we might term “soft power” in contrast to the “hard power” of theocratic authority. This soft power takes the form of example, persuasion and, above all, prayer.

The Revolutionary Church

The Christian Church has always been called to be revolutionary. It is not sufficient to accept the status quo and it is not sufficient to appeal to cultural, legal, or traditional norms as a defence for actions or inaction.

The Church is engaged in a deep and profound war against the forces of evil and corruption and should never engage in actions or inaction that compromises its basic calling as a Christian witness in the world and to the world. (Of course, as I will discuss in the second part of this series the Christian and the Church as a whole is called to obey the authorities, whether religious or secular – yet if there is a conflict or contrariness between what the authorities demand and the laws and principles of God then the Christian and the Church must choose obedience to God over and above any duty to the religious or secular authorities.)

The Church which was founded by Jesus Christ and built upon the rock of the testimony of Peter is expressly called to advance a kingdom that is contrary to the kingdoms of the world. It is, therefore, a revolutionary movement seeking to call people out of every nation and into God’s own holy nation. It is counter-cultural and subversive and seeks to revolutionise human interaction, values and principles.

The methods by which the Church does this are not the hard power of force and compulsion. No, the method of God’s Kingdom is love. Christ calls the Church to love as He loves – a self-sacrificial, God-centred, and other-focussed love. Sharing the Gospel is part of this, but there is also that aspect whereby Christians are called to make a positive impact upon the world. As the Church should not have worldly power, the way in which this revolution is carried out is by bearing witness, through words and actions, of the love of God.

The world may not understand that the Church and individual Christians have love as the primary purpose (and, to be fair, many Christians do not appear to demonstrate this particularly well), for the love of God is alien to those who do not know Him. But for the Christian such love should compel us to make a positive impact upon the world, not only through the sharing of the Gospel but also through social and political action with love and not power as the motive and aim.

[Part 2, on being submissive to authority, can be found here.]

Share Button

Does the Church Understand Protest?

This weekend past there were demonstrations organised by the unions against the austerity programme that has been implemented by the Government. Christians took part in these and peaceably showed their support for a grass-roots movement against swingeing cutbacks and the victimisation of the poor.

Yet a week before, on the anniversary of Occupy LSX – the camp outside St. Paul’s Cathedral that became the focus of the Occupy movement in the UK – Christianity Uncut and Occupy London staged an ill-received protest at the cathedral.

Protest at St. Paul's Cathedral

Christianity Uncut members unfurl a banner outside St. Paul’s Cathedral – (Photo Credit: Christianity Uncut)

The protests involved a member of Occupy Faith standing reading a prayer; a group of four women chaining themselves to the pulpit; and a further group outside unfurling a banner. Except for the prayer reading, which was formally invited, the protests were not sanctioned by the cathedral and the cathedral made a strong rebuke to those who took part in the action.

Yet is not protest at the heart of the Gospel message? Jesus did not come to make peace, but came with a sword to divide the sheep from the goats. He Himself drove out the money-changers from the Temple; rebuked the religiously hypocritical; called the puppet king Herod names.

Yet so many in the Church (and in my usual manner I use the capital “C” to indicate the universal Church comprising of all believers without denominational bias) seem to regard protest as something inherently evil.

Sometimes a form of protest is allowed, such as in the prayer reading by Occupy Faith at St. Paul’s, or an orderly march through a police-ordained route with a set start and stop time and a clear chain of command that the police can use to control the procession.

Yet the form of protest that has written the British democratic history has not always been the kind of clean-shaven, well-to-do garden party. And we shouldn’t expect it to be.  (It is sad that if the triumphal entry into Jerusalem which we commemorate on Palm Sunday were held in Britain today it would require prior police approval.)

Many in the Church find the idea of protest unappealing – that is for their own consciences – yet equally they should not seek to prevent those who wish to make a demonstrable impact on political discourse.

A democratic society is a fragile one in many ways. We lack the clear autocratic mandate to wage war against enemies or impose necessary but unpopular polices. Yet we are also at constant threat from our own leaders, albeit if those leaders are oftentimes unaware of the danger. The threat of straying too far from the public will is a real one, and public protest is the important mechanism by which the masses make known their dissatisfaction to the privileged (and every member of a government is privileged in that degree) before such gruesome aspects of people-based rule as riot and uprising are manifest.

The response from St. Paul’s to the peaceable and respectful protests two weekends ago show that the Cathedral has not learned from its general rejection of Occupy LSX. And the general distaste which many in the Church have for peaceful direct protest reflects more on their own middle-class comfortability  than the Gospel message of the Man who died on a murderer’s cross to set the captives free.

Share Button

Can the Offender Tell the Offended to Forgive?

As I wrote on this website a while back, I felt that the Christian response to the seeming collusion of the authorities at St. Paul’s Cathedral in the forced eviction of the Occupy camp on their doorstep would be to forgive and move on.  I felt that this would have been the correct response, even though praying Christians were dragged from the steps of a church – a sight that should be abhorrent to every person of faith.

Yet those who were so offended chose instead to seek understanding of how fellow believers could treat them in such a way.  This is most understandable, and the letter that those of the Ring of Prayer sent to the Chapter of St. Paul’s was polite and stressed that any meeting would be “in a spirit of love and respect”.

Yet such a move was roundly rejected by the Chapter, and instead the Rt. Rev. Michael Colclough wrote back saying that the matter should be “put behind us so that we can all continue our work of proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ”.

Then perhaps we can read the open letter, bravely and courageously put, by Tammy Semede, and perhaps understand the great distress and pain that those at the cathedral caused their brothers and sisters.

Tammy’s letter is both heartfelt and shows a serious flaw in the thinking of the Chapter of St. Paul’s.  Can he who has offended his brother then say “let us put this matter behind us”?  If I stole from you and you asked to meet me in a manner of love and respect to discuss the item I have stolen, should I then say “no, I will not meet but you should forgive”?

Yes, we must move on.  But in my view the authorities at the cathedral need to be taking some very serious assessments of their policies and attitudes.

And perhaps it is a question for the wider Church: are we so enamoured with the grandeur and pomp, the wealth and riches, the rotten carcass of Western consumerism and the sell-out to big money, that we can no longer discern that it is we, the Church, that have been acting not as the oppressed and the persecuted, but as the conniver in the oppression of the poor.

Many in the Church are good men and women, working hard to provide for those who are without, both spiritually and practically.  Yet we also have those whose links to the Establishment outweigh any imperative to help the underclass and any scrap of decency is merely a whitewashed tomb.

As the events at St. Paul’s fade to memory, let us now learn the bitter lesson that we are more comfortable with those who have reputation and wealth than with those who are the modern-day lepers and outcasts.  Let us learn the lesson, let us repent most earnestly, and let us be the hands and feet of Jesus, not the treasurers of the Sadducees.

Share Button

After Forced Eviction, Now is the Time for Forgiveness

After the eviction of Occupy LSX from the land outside St. Paul’s Cathedral there are many who are hurt.

Christians who had formed the “Ring of Prayer” initiative were praying on the steps of the cathedral when the police dragged them away, with the report of at least one policeman kicking a praying Christian.

Yet the presence of Christians and others praying and urging a peaceful eviction did bear fruit, and the eviction was largely a peaceful affair.  The majority of the protesters left without needing to be forcibly removed, and though there were reports of some water bottles being thrown by a hardcore group who built a makeshift “fort” the level of violence was remarkable by its absence.

An excellent report in the Independent highlighted one concern: how much and how willingly was the Cathedral involved?  Jerome Taylor and Charlie Cooper at The Independent write:

A carefully worded statement released by St Paul’s after the eviction made no mention of the forcible removals from the steps of the cathedral. Instead, it effectively welcomed the clearance of the camp, stating only that the cathedral regretted that such a removal had to be done by bailiffs.

“In the past few months, we have all been made to re-examine important issues about social and economic justice and the role the cathedral can play,” the statement said. “We regret the camp had to be removed by bailiffs but we are fully committed to continuing to promote these issues through our worship, teaching and [the St Paul’s] Institute.”

Indeed there were reports that after the Cathedral lights were briefly turned off just before the eviction began police could be seen on the building balconies.  Such reports led to speculation that the cathedral was actively facilitating the eviction, yet at the present time it is seeming that those on the balconies of the cathedral were not police.

The events with the floodlights, and St. Paul’s following comments, leave important questions laying unanswered as to how pro-active the St. Paul’s authorities were in the eviction.  A spokesperson for St. Paul’s made a comment when pressed saying:

“The police did not ask for permission from us regarding any aspect of the action taken last night, but we were clear that we would not stand in the way of the legal process or prevent the police from taking the steps they needed to deal with the situation in an orderly and peaceful manner,”

It either shows naivety or dis-ingenuity that St. Paul’s would not realise that such a green light to the police would be taken in a sweeping manner, and a video from the night shows police telling Christians on the steps that they did have permission from the cathedral to remove them.

Yet the eviction is passed.  It was largely peaceful and for that we must be very grateful.  That many Christians have stood up and sought peace in this matter testifies to the love and grace that Jesus grants us.

As such, we must now move on.  St. Paul’s Cathedral were in an unenviable position given their strong links with the City.  I believe they made a series of blunders and moral failings.  Yet we must forgive and move on.  No profit is to be found in constantly berating past mistakes.  Church Peace seeks peace, and peace cannot occur when bitterness and desire for revenge of any sort is harboured.  As God has forgiven us, let us now forgive St. Paul’s and pray that the future may be brighter for the cathedral than it may appear at this time.

 

Share Button

Praying Christians Dragged From “House of Prayer”

In the early hours of Tuesday 28th February the Occupy LSX camp was evicted from the land outside St. Paul’s Cathedral.

Although reports indicate that the eviction was largely peaceful, there are statements that some protesters were kicked and dragged by police.

The eviction had been expected, and according to the Guardian the majority of protesters packed up their belongings and began to leave before the forcible eviction began.

The “Ring of Prayer”, organised by Christianity Uncut, took place, although many Christians (including Giles Fraser, the Canon Chancellor of St. Paul’s who resigned over plans for eviction) were prevented from entering the area.

According to Christianity Uncut the Christians who were kneeling and praying on the steps of the cathedral were dragged away by police, and Jonathan Bartley, director of the Christian think-tank Ekklesia, is reported as testifying that he was kicked repeatedly by police and then dragged away.

The situation where Christians engaged in peaceful prayer are dragged from a supposed “house of God” is reminiscent of scenes not seen since the great religious reformations and political revolutions of the past.  As such, though the alleged collusion of the Cathedral authorities shows that many who are called by the Name of Christ are having difficulties deciding on whether to support the system of Western capitalism or the system of service and sacrifice, there is a strong movement of both Christians and non-Christians that will not be silenced.

The opportunity for Christians to connect with those who truly care about our society has never been greater, nor been so important.

Share Button

St. Paul’s Cathedral and Occupy – Reply to Joint Letter

Last week Church Peace, along with 14 other initial signatories including Simon Barrow (of Ekklesia think-tank), Rev. George Pitcher (journalist and minister) and numerous other prominent academics and clergy, wrote to the Chapter of St. Paul’s Cathedral.  82 further names were added to this on the letter published on this blog.

Our request was that the Cathedral make a public statement saying that they oppose a forcible eviction of the Occupy camp situated outside St. Paul’s.

Church Peace has now received a reply to this letter from the Rt. Rev. Michael Colclough, the Canon in Residence at the cathedral.

This comes as the application for appeal from the Occupy camp against the eviction by the City of London Corporation has been heard by the Court of Appeal.  After submissions from the appellants and the Corporation had been heard, the court adjourned and reserved judgement until the 22nd February.

The reply to our letter makes no mention of the primary purpose of our writing.  It is polite and makes a statement of defence of St. Paul’s well-known stance.  It is frustrating that the Canon has stated that:

We very much agree with Occupy and the Corporation about the priority of caring for vulnerable people whenever and however the camp disbands.

This fails to acknowledge that it is Occupy that has been raising the issue of protecting the vulnerable and has made requests for assurances that the Corporation has not responded to.  It is also disappointing that a forceful removal has been re-framed as “disbanding”.

There is, however, a positive aspect to this letter, in that the Cathedral Chapter have committed themselves to continuing to speak with the camp and seek a satisfactory and peaceful outcome, and they have said that “we are also discussing with Occupy how assemblies might continue to meet periodically outside the cathedral.”

Yet time is running short for a peaceful solution.  Occupy, as a group, are committed to peaceful resistance of any eviction, as are a large group of Christian believers who have signed the “Ring of Prayer” pledge.  Whilst the protest is peaceful; St. Paul’s are advocating for a peaceful and periodic assembly; and the Corporation is seeking a forceful and ugly confrontation based on the principle that tents cannot be used as a means of protest, Church Peace will be continuing to ask all concerned that a value-based and ethical compromise be found.

The full letter received from Rt Rev. Michael Colclough, Canon Pastor of St. Paul’s Cathedral, can be viewed here.

Share Button

Joint Letter to St. Paul’s Cathedral

The following letter is being sent to the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul’s Cathedral and cc to the Bishop of London.  We have a number of signatories including Rev. George Pitcher and Simon Barrow (co-director of Ekklesia).

 

Dear Dean and Chapter of St. Paul’s Cathedral,

We are writing to you to express our grave concern at the prospect of a forcible eviction of the Occupy camp currently situated in the grounds of the Cathedral.

We understand that the semi-permanent camp has resulted in challenges for the Cathedral and we are not unsympathetic to this.

We also accept that ultimately the decision on eviction is the City of London Corporation’s.  The Cathedral, however, is not powerless in this situation.

We commend you and others for efforts to seek a compromise solution and we are saddened that these seem not to have borne fruit as yet.

We are very much concerned for the impact on the Church as well as the camp of a forcible eviction.  The Name of Christ will not be honoured by such an action, and the stance of the Cathedral will be seen as being at least in part responsible.

We do not believe that the Church should ever be in a position where it is identified with oppression.  Its mission and ministry is, rather, about freeing people.

We therefore hope that the Dean and Chapter of St Paul’s Cathedral will make a public statement saying that they do not support a forced eviction of the Occupy camp.

Signatories:

Mark Hanson (Founder, Church Peace)

Simon Barrow (Co-Director, Ekklesia)

Dr Zoe Bennett (Theologian, Cambridge)

Dr Andrew Francis (Co-ordinating Group, Radix Community UK)

Rev Ray Gaston (Tutor, Queen’s Foundation for Ecumenical Theological Education, Birmingham)

Savitri Hensman (Christian writer, Hackney)

Symon Hill (Christianity Uncut)

Rev Vaughan Jones (United Reformed Church)

Dr Gillian Paterson (Theologian, London)

Rev George Pitcher (St Bride’s, Fleet Street)

Rev Ian Rathbone (Elim Pentecostal Church)

Prof Christopher Rowland (Biblical scholar, Oxford)

Jill Segger (Quaker journalist)

Rev Dr Steven Shakespeare (Department of Theology, Philosophy and Religious Studies, Liverpool Hope University)

Jordan Tchilingirian (Research sociologist)

 

(If you would like to indicate your support for this letter then please leave a comment here.  Please do not make lengthy comments or negative comments – the intention is to gather names of those who support this letter.  Many thanks.)

As at 1pm on Wednesday 15th February we have had an additional 82 names added to the letter.  Many thanks to all!

We have received a reply from the Chapter of St. Paul’s and this can be viewed here.

Share Button

Occupy London and the Right to Protest

This was originally published on the Rabel Christian Civil Liberties page on Google Plus.

Occupy London and the Right to Protest
The Occupy movement in London has brought to a head the limits to protest in the UK and has also challenged the Church on whether to support protest or the status quo

The court case judgement, passed last Wednesday, which effectively stated that an occupation form of protest is not protected by the human rights of freedom of assembly and freedom of expression, has markedly raised the stakes in the Occupy movement in the UK.
Already, plans are being pursued which would make occupation of buildings a criminal offence, even if they had remained empty and neglected for years, and now the decision has been made that, although a continuous protest could be held at a location, there would have to be a night-time pause in the protest with a resumption in the morning.
The potential of this is to make a semi-permanent camp, such as OccupyLSX, an illegal protest, and given that the causes and aims of Occupy require a semi-permanent camp, this will be a new low in the right to protest in the UK. Previous occupation protests, such as the women peace activists at Greenham Common, went on for many years.

The Church
The role of the Church has also been brought into focus, and there are deep divisions in the role the Church should play. Many Christians have sided with the Occupiers and have pledged to form a “ring of prayer” around Occupy LSX should eviction go ahead.
Yet others have come out firmly against the methods of Occupy and support eviction.
The question that should be on every Christian’s heart, however, is not which side we should support, but which course of action is most in-keeping with Christ’s teaching. Should we protect the “sale of doves and pigeons” and defend the “money-changers” over the real need to urgently reform the political and econmic structures of Western consumerism? Should the need to be submissive to the authorities trump the need to take action against economic injustice? Should we support only government condoned forms of democratic expression?

What are your views on this? Please do comment and share.

Share Button

St. Paul’s Occupy LSX – Proposal for a Solution

Now, I have been warned well that I should not try to interfere or meddle in the arguments and disputes between Occupy LSX and the City of London Corporation.  The case has been heard by a judge and he will make judgement in due course.  I am not well positioned to be involved in this, and, to be honest the dispute between Occupy and the Corporation is outside the remit of Church Peace.

Yet the situation as regards Occupy LSX’s relations with St. Paul’s Cathedral is of my concern: I am a member of the Church of England and a member of the Universal Church, if not prominent or well-known.

I have a great concern that the Church, and St. Paul’s in particular, should not assume the role of oppressor.  If anything, the Church should be in the position of being the oppressed, for it is in being persecuted by wicked men that we are conformed to the sufferings of Christ and become more like Him.  The Church should not be in cahoots with those who would oppress, whether that oppression is violent, vitriolic or financial: a Biblical imperative which the Rev. Giles Fraser would probably be quite sympathetic to.

As such, I am saddened that the registrar of St. Paul’s Cathedral decided to give evidence in support of the City’s eviction plans.

Jesus, the Man and God whom St. Paul’s represents, was born into this world as a poor and rejected child.   Born to a woman who it was presumed had been immoral, turned away by everyone in Bethlehem despite being heavily pregnant until finally a kindly inn-keeper gave an outside shed as a maternity ward, so poor that at his circumcision dedication service His earthly parents gave the pauper’s sacrificial offering.  If anything the Occupy LSX camp with it’s lowly position yet high ideals is closer to the meaning of Christ’s life than the majestic church of Christopher Wren.

Yet we must also be careful.  Although many regarded Jesus as a rebel in His time, He never engaged in lawlessness.  Lawlessness is a deceitful threat that accompanies the Occupy movement, even if that threat is consciously rejected and not knowingly followed.  Lawlessness must be rejected and eschewed.  Government is not a generally and intrinsically evil institution.  The laws, traditions and institutions of the UK are in desperate need of radical reform, yet I do not believe a forceful and ill-thought out revolution is the answer, even if that force is largely peaceful.  That is my view.

Occupy LSX has stood for over three months, and much has been acheived.  Ultimately, though, the wickedness of men both oppressors and protestors cannot be dealt with by reforms or revolution.  The fundamental reform and revolution must be in our hearts, and that can only come through Jesus Christ, the Cross and the Resurrection.

Solution to Occupy LSX at St. Paul’s

With that preamble said and the admission that St. Paul’s has found itself in an almost impossible position, I would like to make a tentative proposal for a possible solution to the impasse.

Occupy should not disappear.  It has an important role.  Yet a semi-permanent camp is not practicable for a working city and a working cathedral.  Also, the occupiers themselves would be well-advised to maintain family, work and friendship links outside of the Occupy camp and technological communication.

As such I would like to propose that St. Paul’s could agree to host 2 Occupy events each, and every, year until such a time comes that the aims of Occupy are realised, whether in current form or a form to develop.

The spiritual aspect of Occupy’s aims are important, and as such would it not be a good idea for the Cathedral to host two events each year, at Easter and at Christmas?  With that situation, the Christian message of justice tempered with mercy and grace would perhaps find an opening in a disparate group, and the fervour and passion of the occupiers may even shake the Church out of her complacency and cosiness with the established systems.  Would it perhaps be an idea for the Occupy camp to host political events and for St. Paul’s to hold spiritual events during these 2 times each year?

Of course, for the movement to remain Occupy there would have to be a camp and a general assembly, but if this was limited to only as many tents as could be safely pitched on St. Paul’s owned land and limited in duration to perhaps a month, then it could possibly be practicable.

There would also need to be a gaining of mutual respect, especially as regards the rather old-fashioned principle of hosts and guests.  It would clearly be the case that St. Paul’s Cathedral would host the camps and that the occupiers would be guests, yet the old-fashioned host/guest principle requires the hosts to be servants and the guests those that are honoured.

Closing

I shall close this proposal, tentative as it is, by saying that I hope and pray for a peaceful resolution to the situation, whether this particular proposal goes anywhere or not.

And I pray that all involved: City, Cathedral and Occupy, may have a wonderful New Year.

 

If you want to add to or suggest other proposals then please do comment or email Church Peace at admin@churchpeace.rabel.org.uk.  Thank you.

Share Button

Great Encouragement as Christians Engage

To some it was an unfortunate accident, yet it is becoming clear that God had much wisdom in putting Occupy LSX right on the steps of Britain’s leading Cathedral.

Although there have been some bumpy patches in the relationship between St. Paul’s and the Occupy camp, the new emphasis on dialogue has enabled the Bishop of London and St. Paul’s Chapter to show a Christian kindness – that of showing those who have often had no voice other than protest that they can engage in constructive political debate within the system whilst at the same time protecting their status as those “outside of the system”.  On the 7th December representatives from Occupy London met with the FSA and it has been reported that the discussions were fruitful.

Christian Actions

There have also been moves by the Christian community to engage with the protesters, and on the 1st December the Not Ashamed Campaign held a rally and prayer meeting on the steps of St. Paul’s which included listening to Occupiers and also speaking to them of the necessity of Jesus – that only He can truly be Saviour and Lord.

It is wonderful to hear of such actions.

The Archbishop of Canterbury

In a separate move, Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote an insightful piece for the Radio Times magazine and asked the question of what Jesus would be doing in regards to Christmas and the Occupy protests.

He stressed that it is not a question of whether Jesus would support or oppose Occupy, but that He would not be sitting quietly by yet rather be there and be asking some searching questions on motives.

Despite many reports claiming Williams was saying Jesus would take sides, he was careful not to give endorsement nor condemnation, but rather to get to the heart of the matter – our heart.

Encouragement

It is, indeed, an encouragement that many Christians from various denominations and of various hues and influence are each, in their own particular way, engaging with Occupy LSX and seeking to use the wonderful God-given opportunities to reach out to, to listen to, and to both encourage and challenge the Occupiers.

In many ways the work here at Church Peace is being done in a God-ordained organic way without Church Peace needing to shout out, and that is good.  But the need to reach out to the wider protest movement and to defend the peaceable nature of the current protests and Church response is still required.

Share Button