I am writing this in the middle of November. We have just returned to Zurich, after a trip to England for our son’s wedding, having spent 17 days in England. I thought that I might get away from “Key Beliefs” and “Fillers” and write on something topical. It is always interesting to see what particular themes the English newspapers have taken up, to report on the daily comings and goings, repeating what has been said before (when there is not much new), together with the usual English comment and speculation, before they lose interest and move on to the next topic.
One of the topics that ran during this time was the “Occupy” protest on the steps of St. Pauls. After visiting a friend near Blackfriars, I took a stroll past St. Pauls in the mid-afternoon. I was only there for about ten minutes, so can hardly claim that my experience was deep and profound, but I did enjoy the carnival atmosphere, watched a dance routine being rehearsed, saw someone practicing his juggling, and watched the free tea and coffee being dispensed at one of the more industrial sized tents (I regret that I did not have time to partake of this offer), together with a noticeboard, showing the more serious matter of lectures, discussions and talks.
The whole affair was lightly policed, in contrast with the (only slightly) more conspicuous police presence on Paternoster Square, the entrance to the Stock Exchange and at least two U.S. Investment Banks, being the symbol of those general activities against which the “Occupy” participants are protesting.
In all this (civilised) protesting, discussions about Health and Safety and the resignations of various St. Pauls’ staff, there was very little said about God. So I searched for some reference to God in all these reports and statements by St. Pauls’ staff, whether resigning or staying, by protesters, other public people, and clergymen, who might have had something to say on this subject. (*1)
Even the Archbishop of Canterbury seemed unable or unwilling to make any connection with this topic and God, although the Archbishop was reported as being in agreement with the proposal for a tax on Banking (*2). I say “seemed”, as the Archbishop of Canterbury might have made such a connection, but the newspapers, being generally bored with the topic of “God”, may simply have failed to report it.
One story from the New Testament that has been used in these discussions is that of Jesus and the money changers in the Temple (*3), although I do not remember what the context was. This was put forward as demonstrating that Jesus would have supported the protest.
I might have understood this point if the protest was against the entrance fee for a visitor to St. Pauls (although I am personally neutral on the subject) and that the Church had made St. Pauls, a place of worship, into a place of commerce. Also, if the stock exchange had set up business there, then the analogy might work. But at the moment, I am struggling to see who exactly the protesters think Jesus would eject from St. Pauls. The people who collect the money from visitors at the door perhaps?
There were other sub-stories, not least of which was that “Health and Safety” was given for closing the church. A very secular reason, the facts of which I found hard to get, but I think that I am right in saying that if you were just a visitor, who had come to look around, then it wasn’t safe. However, if you had come to worship, then it was safe. In a funny sort of religious way, this might make sense.
Overall though, the main point that I am missing is on what basis do the Clergy side with the protesters. There was, as far as I know, no appeal to the Bible or to God. Perhaps the clergy in question are not sure of their spiritual grounds (or perhaps it doesn’t matter anymore). After all one could look pretty stupid these days saying that “This is wrong, because God / the Bible says so”. I couldn’t help feeling that the whole statement from a Church viewpoint could have been more powerful, if God had been brought into the discussion, however unfashionable that might be.
So all in all, a jolly secular affair.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1 – I have avoided references to “The Church”, as I am not sure who speaks for it.
Note 2 - Guardian website on 2 November, reporting on an article in the Financial Times.
Note 3 – Mentioned in all three Gospels (Mt 21.12; Luke 19.45; Mk 11.15). http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2021&version=NIV
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
