A Nativity invitation

This Friday Five is to wish you all a very Happy Christmas – or ‘Festive Season’ if you don’t celebrate the Christian festival.  Unfortunately in the western world, Christmas has become so commercialised that it barely makes any connection with the event which lies behind it.  To discover another perspective, let’s turn the clock back to 1644 and a painting by the French baroque artist Georges de La Tour, called ‘Nativity – Adoration of the Shepherds’.

 

In the biblical story, the shepherds were the first people to learn about the birth of Jesus, from an angel who said, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people.  Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.”

 

De La Tour sees the shepherds as symbolic of ordinary people – in contrast to the wealthy, influential Magi who would later come and worship the child.  In fact only one of the characters gathered next to the prayerful, watchful Mary is obviously a shepherd, with a lamb and his staff in his hand.  Next to him is a more shadowy figure, holding a musical instrument, then a woman carrying a pot with a lid on it – perhaps with some hot soup for the family.  Lastly an old man, who holds the candle and shields it from any draught which might blow it out.

 

The artist seems to understand that people from all walks of life can come to Christ, to know and be known as they are – bringing what they have in their hands.  The shepherd came with the tools of his trade, the musician brought his talent, the woman her hospitality, and the old man his wisdom and experience.

 

What is in your hands?  Whether it’s your professional skill, your creative talent, your daily service to your family, or your age and experience – bring it all, says De La Tour, to this ordinary yet glorious child whose coming bridged the unfathomable distance between heaven and earth. 

Humour and its relational consequences

Quote

‘Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humour to console him for what he is.’  Francis Bacon

News

The tragic death of nurse Jacintha Saldanha, three days after the hoax phone call by two Australian DJs to the hospital where the Duchess of Cambridge was being treated for morning sickness, has led to some serious soul-searching.

It is not yet known the degree to which the hoax call drove Mrs Saldanha to suicide, but it was almost certainly a contributing factor.  Hoaxes have been part of radio broadcasting for decades, but their humour relies on the victim coming to realise it’s a joke and calling the perpetrator’s bluff.  When that fails to happen, what began as a prank may become a more serious deception.

Humour is culturally determined, so when two DJs from Australia phone a hospital in London and speak to an Indian nurse, there’s a big risk that the funny side will be lost.  However, the radio station’s decision to broadcast the conversation was probably not based on the (failed) humour but on the media scoop of having got so close to the Duchess of Cambridge – despite the obvious breach of patient confidentiality involved.

But the damage has been done, and in this tragic case it’s irreversible.  What should happen to repair the harm done?  A problem like this is not ultimately going to be solved by financial means (e.g. the radio station putting its advertising profits into a memorial fund), nor by legal measures (e.g. regulators reviewing the station’s broadcasting license or their compliance with the law).

Although these steps are of some value, at the end of the day relationships of respect and then reconciliation can be neither bought nor legislated.  They will come from greater relational thinking and awareness, and might lead to more relationally careful broadcasting.

And when things do go seriously wrong between people or groups, the response which is essential to begin the process of restoration and healing is the simple relational one from the heart: saying sorry.

Read on…

Humour is an essential part of life, but as we’ve seen, is not without risks.  For a Christian perspective on this, you can read James and Kate Williams’ Cambridge Paper on humour, scripture and Christian discourse here.

Walk the talk

Relationally responsible humour does not exclude poking fun at others, provided it’s done with sensitivity and you can also laugh at yourself; how are you doing on that count?

The last word

From the Bible, Numbers 22, verse 30: ‘But in response, the donkey asked Balaam, "I'm your donkey that you've ridden on in the past without incident, am I not, and I'm the same donkey you're riding on right now, am I not? Am I in the habit of treating you like this?"  "No," he admitted.’

Taxing questions

Quote

“The government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases:  If it moves, tax it.  If it keeps moving, regulate it.  And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”  Ronald Reagan

News

Weeks of negative media exposure about the failure of Starbucks to pay UK corporation tax for years has brought about a U-turn in the company.  What the Starbucks board had perhaps considered an accounting success – posting a notional loss on their £400 million turnover in UK– has become a scandalous liability.

British toleration of tax avoidance is wearing thin, especially as the prospect of five more years of austerity is affecting millions of people, by squeezing incomes and heaping pressure on family relationships.  Increased tax revenues are in everyone’s interest, especially the poor who rely on welfare.

As the law currently stands, multinational companies can effectively choose how much corporation tax to pay in a jurisdiction, without acting illegally; it illustrates the glaring discrepancy between the letter and the spirit of the law. 

The anger generated over this underscores the reality that laws are intrinsically relational, since they act to establish or protect certain relational ideals.  Breaking the law involves an offender and a victim, and damages the relationship between the two parties; so tax avoidance is more than just an accounting device, it is harmful relationally as well.

It is perhaps awareness of this which is driving Starbucks to change their corporate accounting.  Up to now they have prioritised the relationship with their shareholders, by maximising net profits, and assumed that their rapport with customers and local communities would be unaffected.  But this no longer looks sustainable as consumers and the media join politicians in criticising the company.  Starbucks may be willing to pay some corporation tax now, but a deeper cultural change may be necessary to restore trust and respect in the other relationships on which the business depends.

Read on…

The Cambridge Paper ‘Render unto Caesar? The dilemmas of taxation policy’ offers a perspective from the Bible on taxation in the context of modern democracies.  Though the statistics are dated the principles aren’t; read the paper here.

Walk the talk

Tax avoidance schemes won’t be an issue for most of us, but the plight of those around us who are struggling due to the recession should be.  Might you volunteer some of your time at a debt counselling centre, a foodbank or another caring initiative towards those who struggle materially or relationally?

The last word…

From the Bible, Luke chapter 20, verses 21-25: “ ‘Teacher… Is it right for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?’  Jesus saw through their duplicity and said to them, ‘Show me a denarius. Whose portrait and inscription are on it?’
‘Caesar’s,’ they replied. He said to them, ‘Then give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’ “