Narratives and the Nativity

Quote
“I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.”  Stanley Baldwin, three times British Prime Minister.

News

David Cameron’s speech on the 400^th anniversary of the King James Bible in Oxford last weekend, in which he stated that Britain was still a Christian country, was met with a predictably wide range of responses and comments. 

"I was surprised that he put his views so forcefully, it was an interesting political angle,” stated an Anglican vicar.  The President of the National Secular Society responded, “Mr Cameron's promotion of faith for other people when his own is so wishy-washy is typical of a politician who thinks religion is a useful means of social control.”  But a member of the Muslim Council of Britain declared enthusiastically, "It's very seldom I get excited by what our prime minister has to say and this is one of those times.”

Newsworthy events – especially those with political implications – can be reported in quite different ways depending on the purpose and viewpoint of the writer. Take the two different accounts of the Nativity in the New Testament – one written by Matthew (Jewish, used to work in the finance industry), and the other by Luke (Greek doctor-cum-historian).  Each told the story from a different angle, and their prudent editing reflected the audience they wrote for.

Matthew recounts the events for Jewish people to convince them that Jesus is indeed their Messiah-king, descended from King David and whose birth fulfils various Old Testament prophecies.  But Matthew’s inclusion of the Magi’s visit and Herod’s massacre of infants in Bethlehem underlines the radical political consequences of this.  The child born in Bethlehem had come to establish a kingdom, allegiance to which would challenge and supersede loyalty to any political authority on earth – especially the Roman Empire, who would later put Christians to death by their thousands.

Luke, on the other hand, writes for a non-Jewish audience – people from a diversity of races, cultures and backgrounds – showing that this Son of God was born for the whole world, a universal saviour.  Luke’s account reveals the radical social consequences of the Nativity: the story is told from Mary’s point of view and gives prominence to two other women – Elizabeth and Anna.  Then he introduces the shepherds – social outcasts – as the first people to be told of the birth of Jesus, and through the old man Simeon he declares the child to be “a light to the Gentiles”.  Luke thus introduces the infant Jesus in a way that starts to level out the deep social inequalities of the time based on gender, class, wealth and ethnicity.

At one level the Nativity is a story that any child can understand and marvel at.  At another, it heralds a seismic shift in the relationship between God and the human race, and between people of every status and creed.  David Cameron spoke of the historical influence of the Christian faith on British culture, but this story is not over.  Its power to transform hearts and relationships, and in turn the political and social order, has much life in it yet.

Read on

The full text of David Cameron’s speech about the influence of the King James Bible on English language, politics and society, can be read here.

  

Walk the talk

As you celebrate Christmas this weekend, why not take the opportunity to discuss the more subversive implications of the Nativity story with someone you are sharing the celebration with?

The last word
From the King James Bible, Luke 1, verses 52-53, Mary declares about God, “He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree. He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.”

‘Occupy’ demonstrations and the dangers of inequality

Quote
“The love of property and consciousness of right and wrong have conflicting places in our organization, which often makes a man's course seem crooked, his conduct a riddle.”  Abraham Lincoln

News

The High Pay Commission published its long awaited report last week after a year of research into executive remuneration in the UK.  Chairperson Deborah Hargreaves stated, “There's a crisis at the top of British business… When pay for senior executives is set behind closed doors, does not reflect company success and is fuelling massive inequality it represents a deep malaise at the very top of our society.”

That malaise is being expressed visibly by the Occupy movement, whose tent cities in Madrid, New York, London, Rome and other financial centres are bracing for winter.  Inequality is the key issue, and campaigners in the US rally under the banner, “We are the 99%”.  At the heart of their protests is the sense of injustice that top executives, especially in the financial sector, have seen their salaries rise substantially over the last 3 years, while the vast majority of the working population face falling real incomes in an era of austerity. 

Not only is income distribution becoming more unequal, even greater inequality exists in asset ownership.  The top 1% of Americans now own 37% of the nation’s wealth; the bottom 80% own just 15% - and the gap has widened more rapidly in the last 3 years than it has for decades. 

The Occupy movement demonstrates that trust in business elites is in sharp decline; no longer is it assumed that their wealth generating talents and entrepreneurial skills will benefit the wider population.  Something has gone badly wrong with Capitalism, but the search for alternatives struggles to move beyond a call for more regulation, taxation and red tape.

Capitalist economics is primarily about generating a return on capital; what might a more relational economy look like?  Drawing its inspiration from the Judeo-Christian ethical tradition, ‘Relational Thinking’ understands all financial decisions to be expressions of relationships – for example between buyer and seller, lender and borrower, employer and employee, taxpayer and government.  Ensuring these relationships are close, fair and lasting is essential to a successful economy; rising inequality is a sign that they are moving in the opposite direction.

The clamour against financial injustice is growing globally; in the quest for ways to recover values and agree a moral framework for markets, the concept and language of relationships offers a fresh perspective.  The challenge is to incorporate relational values into the structures and working practices of organisations; reducing the accountability gap between capital providers and users and between company board members and their lowest paid staff is a good place to begin. 

Read on

‘Transforming Capitalism from Within’ by Jonathan Rushworth and Michael Schluter sets out an alternative, relational approach to the purpose, performance and assessment of companies.  This report proposes far-reaching reforms as to how companies could operate as ‘Relational communities’ in a sustainable and profitable way, rather than as vehicles within which all parties compete for short-term financial gain.  Read the executive summary here.

Walk the talk

Every time you make a financial transaction over the next week, pause first to think about the relationship inherent in the matter; is there anything you might do differently to make that relationship closer, fairer or more long-lasting?

The last word
From the Bible, Luke chapter 12, verse 56: “You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky. How is it that you don't know how to interpret this present time?”