Marriage Matters

Quote
“Marriage halves our griefs, doubles our joys, and quadruples our expenses.” English Proverb

News
National Marriage Week from 7th-14th February provides an opportunity to take stock of the whole institution of marriage. Earlier this week, Ian Duncan-Smith, the UK Work and Pensions Secretary, announced that £30 million would be made available for marriage and couple relationship support.

It goes without saying that marriage is a relational issue, but contrary to popular opinion, it is not just a private matter between two individuals. Many more relationships are affected by a marriage, and its success or failure, than the two primary participants and their immediate family.

Family life is marked by seasons of interdependence; some bring joy and fulfilment, others stress and resentment. Up till the second world war, extended families in Britain provided most care and support for the young and old, the sick and bereaved, and those who had fallen on hard times. Local charitable and voluntary institutions stepped in where extended families failed. Only in the aftermath of the war did state involvement become institutionalised with the goal of providing “cradle to grave” support for all.

The vision of a welfare state was a welcome relief to both families and an economy decimated by the war, but it had the unintended consequence of weakening the vital role of extended families as the first institution providing care and support. Gradually family obligation and charitable responsibility were eclipsed by a mentality of welfare entitlement – underwritten by the taxpayer.

As the welfare state becomes economically unsustainable, the most viable alternative is to encourage and support the extended family once more (although it must be recognised that even if the spirit is willing, high costs of housing, transport and even food may limit people’s ability to take on more).

This will require more than policy adjustment – a deeper cultural change is needed. One thing is clear though: any move by the government to provide support to couple relationships, on which the strength of the extended family hinges, is a worthy social investment.

Read on...
The Relationships Foundation issued an annual update to their report into the cost of family breakdown to the UK taxpayer, estimating it at £41.7 billion every year. You can read the details here.

Walk the talk
The burden of caring for family members often ends up unequally shared. Is one of your siblings doing a lot more of the work in caring for an elderly parent, for example? Is there something you might do to share the burden more equally?

The last word
From the Bible, Galatians 6, verse 2: "Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.”

Egypt: covenant, people power and peace

Quote
“Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon, which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.” Martin Luther King

News
The world is watching the unfolding events in Egypt with bated breath, as so much hinges on how the popular uprising against President Mubarak’s rule will come to an end. The BBC reports that Mubarak has three constituencies to deal with: the US-led international community, the armed forces and the Egyptian people, and that he has sought to appease them in that order.

As demonstrations emerge in several Middle-Eastern cities, a central question is what authority do the people have to change their government in countries without a mature democracy that includes regular elections, viable alternative leadership, and a tradition of peaceful transfer of power?

From a relational perspective, a nation is governed on the basis of covenant, whether that is stated explicitly or not. The legitimacy of government depends in part on the provision of justice, and maintenance of law and order. So when the security forces withdrew entirely from Egyptian cities last week, releasing violent prisoners and abandoning the streets to looters, they turned on its head the covenant to provide security and safety to the people.

Similarly, whenever protesters resort to violence, they violate the covenant to abide by the law and respect their fellow citizens’ lives and property.

The trust which holds any society together is rapidly ebbing away in Egypt. The challenge facing both demonstrators and government is to negotiate change without further violating the fundamental nature of the implicit covenant that binds them together. The extent to which this happens will determine how peaceful and just the transition will be.

Read on...
A study on the politics of ancient Israel by Nick Spencer summarises the multi-polar framework for authority (that includes the individual, the family, local communities etc.) in contrast to the bi-polar one of just the state and individuals; it forms chapter 3 of the Jubilee Centre booklet "Apolitical Animal", which you can download here.

Walk the talk
Consider the covenants that you are party to, perhaps as a husband or wife, as a parent, or part of a congregation. Why not take a few moments to consider how faithfully you are fulfilling your part in that covenant, and if there is anything you need to attend to?

The last word
From the Bible, Mark 10, verses 42-43: “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant”

Multiculturalism under pressure

Quote

“If there were only one religion in England there would be danger of despotism, if there were two, they would cut each other's throats, but there are thirty, and they live in peace and happiness.”  Voltaire

News
Ethnic and religious tensions have been surfacing in Britain in the past few weeks. Media stories about the sentencing of two gang leaders for grooming teenage girls for sex focused on their ethnicity.  The discussion included differences in values between ethnic groups, and was exacerbated when some journalists started to blur race, ethnicity and religion.   

Then this week, Baroness Warsi, Britain’s first woman Muslim cabinet member, stated that Islamophobia is becoming more and more culturally acceptable in Britain, and the Home Office banned Terry Jones, the US preacher who threatened to burn Korans, from coming to Britain to address a far right rally. 

Britain has been following a multicultural path for some decades; the idea is that ethnic diversity is not only to be welcomed but also reflected in national law and social policy.  While toleration and respect between people of different ethnic groups in Britain has improved greatly over this period, the fundamental dilemma remains: how to maintain freedom of conscience and religion for all, but still insist that people of all backgrounds abide by a common set of laws, even if those are shaped primarily by the majority culture.

While an economy is growing and there are jobs for all, ethnic differences are more likely to be swept under the carpet; but when unemployment is rising and the economic future is gloomy, then tensions are more likely to re-emerge.  

Angela Merkel made the controversial statement last October that multiculturalism in Germany is dead.  Whether or not Britain goes the same way depends on whether we can hold to the path that ensures both personal liberty and cultural integration at the same time.

Read on...

Professor Julian Rivers, who studied in Germany as well as Britain, wrote a Cambridge paper about Multiculturalism in late 2001.  To read his more in-depth analysis of the issues, click here,   

Walk the talk

In the history of most nations there are stories of immigrants who, individually or collectively, ended up being a great blessing to their adopted country. Why not research the story of one of them and celebrate his or her contribution to the life of your nation?

The last word
From the Bible, Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a foreigner lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him.

The foreigner living with you must be treated as one of your native-born.”

Speculation, food prices and the poor

Quote

“There are two times in a man's life when he should not speculate: when he can't afford it, and when he can.”  Mark Twain

News
In recent days the prices of many commodities are reaching highs not seen for several years.  The overall commodity food price index has increased by 27% in a year; staple foods have risen even more: wheat by 49%, maize by 53%, sorghum by 33%. 

Poor harvests are partly to blame – droughts in Russia, Ukraine, Argentina and the US have reduced grain supplies, and floods in Canada, Pakistan and now Australia have wiped out a large part of their crops.  Falling global stocks, export bans by Russia and India and rising demand from China have all helped to push prices higher.

However, a more sinister factor is at work: speculation.  Investment banks, pension and hedge fund managers have poured over $200 billion into food futures markets in the past 2 years, with sums speculated at record highs.  These markets were established to reduce risks to farmers and consumers by dampening price fluctuations, but now foodstuffs have become financial and speculative assets, traded without regard to the impact on the livelihoods of genuine producers and consumers of the commodities – especially the world’s poor, who spend 30-50% of their daily earnings on food.

Every financial transaction is ultimately relational, because the outcome affects people either positively or negatively.  Ideally every purchase should benefit both buyer and seller; no monetary decision is ever relationally neutral.  Yet the decisions of major financial institutions to invest billions in speculating on food prices shows a complete disregard for the consequences of their actions on the poor.

There is a world of difference between what is legal and what is morally and relationally legitimate.

Read on...

The World Development Movement has produced a report entitled, “The great hunger lottery.”  It examines the impact of food speculation in more detail and recommends the re-regulation of the food futures markets to reduce destabilisation and volatility of prices.  Read the report here.

Walk the talk

Most of us are unwitting participants in food price speculation.  If we have a pension or savings in a bank, part of our money could well be invested in these markets.  Perhaps the most practical thing we can do is be better informed; why not write to your pension fund or bank and simply ask if your money is being invested in food speculation?  The ensuing conversation could be more enlightening than you imagine!

The last word
From the Bible, Proverbs 11:26 “People curse the man who hoards grain, but blessing crowns him who is willing to sell.”

A divided house in Washington

Quote
“All legislation, all government, all society is founded upon the principle of mutual concession, politeness, comity, courtesy; upon these everything is based...Let him who elevates himself above humanity, above its weaknesses, its infirmities, its wants, its necessities, say, if he pleases, I will never compromise; but let no one who is not above the frailties of our common nature disdain compromises.” Henry Clay (1777-1852), US orator, politician and presidential candidate.

News
On Wednesday, the Republican party took control of the US House of Representatives following November’s elections, although the upper house (the Senate) as well as the White House remain Democrat. The prospect for the next two years is a tug-of-war with the House of Representatives passing legislation reflecting the views of Republican voters, which will be curtailed by the Senate and/or vetoed by the President.

To start with, President Obama’s healthcare reform bill will be formally repealed next week, but the Senate will promptly reject the repeal. Getting any legislation passed and enacted over the next two years will require careful negotiations and the art of compromise. Will Republican and Democratic congressmen and women resort to locking horns in party political acrimony, or will they surmount their party prejudices and seek to govern as responsibly as they can a nation facing immense challenges?

This is becoming harder due to the polarisation of Republican and Democrat voters, to the point where party affiliation not only covers political views but is a source of personal identity also. Policy responses to issues fall strongly along party lines: those who are pro-life, anti-tax and anti-regulation are almost all Republicans, while voters who are pro-choice, pro-redistribution and pro-federal government are Democrats. The problem is when one side begins to demonise the other, extending a conflict of opinion to one of character and motives, with far more damaging consequences.

There is a vital relational condition at the heart of any society characterised by peace and justice: cooperation. The extent of this depends on how broad a consensus of values exists to ensure mutual respect, toleration and acceptance of others. In our language of Relational Proximity, we call this commonality – shared values, purpose and identity. America or any other nation’s ability to live at peace with itself depends on voters and politicians alike ensuring they value their shared identity as members of one society more than their differences of opinion over parties and policies – no matter how great these are.

Read on...
An article from an American news website during the November elections explores the polarisation of American voters now and in previous decades, including differences in values and socio-economic status as well as policy responses. You can read it here.

Walk the talk
Once we have formed our broad political outlook, we tend to read only the news sources which reinforce our political colours. If that describes you, then why not read from time to time a news source which reflects a different viewpoint? Although you may take offence, try to persevere until you have found some common ground that you agree with and let that close the gap a little.

The last word
From the Bible, Matthew 12:25, Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand.”

Joseph’s agonising dilemma

Church tradition over the centuries has sanitised the Nativity story, leaving it a far cry from the earthy reality and scandal of the actual events surrounding Mary and Joseph.  Paintings and images of the Christmas story are often idealised and domesticated, reducing the gripping drama of the Nativity to something rather tame.

Joseph is a key figure in the actual story, and the French painter James Tissot sought to express something of the intense pressure Joseph was under as he was unwittingly catapaulted into what would become the fulcrum of world history. 

 

The scene is Joseph’s workshop in Nazareth; the carpenter is depicted as an older man, following church tradition (but probably incorrect historically).  He is unable to concentrate on his work, although he has clearly been industrious that day, judging by the piles of wood shavings all about.

Some women are filing past on their way back from fetching water, and they have caught Joseph’s attention.  Perhaps he is hoping for a glimpse of his betrothed… or is he wishing he had set his heart on one of the other suitable maidens in the village instead? 

Either way, his mind constantly went back to Mary’s gut-wrenching announcement, which had landed him in an impossible dilemma.  Either he must denounce her publicly as an adulteress – which he had every right to do – with the possibility that the elders would condemn her to death by stoning.  Or he could break all ties with Mary by divorcing her quietly, which would bring much humiliation to her family.

The third alternative was unthinkable: to marry her quickly, knowing full well that he was not the father of her child, and in spite of the shame and disgrace which a shotgun wedding would bring to both families.  Deep in Joseph’s heart, beneath the seething emotions of anger and foolishness and betrayal, he couldn’t quite dismiss the thought that this might be the right thing to do. 

The women who were chatting gaily as they passed in front of his door had no idea whatsoever how much hinged on the decision that the anxious carpenter had to make.  That night he had the most extraordinary dream, after which he his heart was firmly set on the third option. 

Joseph is described as a righteous man, meaning that in all his relationships he sought the way of justice, mercy and truth.  Faced with this excruciating dilemma that was not of his choosing, he wrestled on until he found the way which was right in God’s eyes, and then resolutely stuck to it and all its implications.

For a while Joseph experienced shame and embarrassment in the 1^st century world of Nazareth; yet because of his decision to protect and love and provide for Mary and her son, he has been earning the applause of men and women in every nation and generation since. 

May your heart be stirred and inspired as you reflect on the tapestry of relationships at the centre of the Christmas story. 

WikiLeaks: democracy, diplomacy and keeping secrets

Quote

“Good breeding consists in concealing how much we think of ourselves and how little we think of the other person.”  Mark Twain

News
The WikiLeaks furore is perhaps an example of what happens when an irresistible force (the assumption that the internet exists to make any information accessible to anyone, anywhere) collides with an immovable object (the assumption that western governments must have the right to restrict access to information in order to accomplish their goals).  

Both sides in the dispute claim that what they are doing is right.  Julian Assange writes, “I grew up in Queensland where people spoke their minds bluntly. They distrusted big government as something that could be corrupted if not watched carefully… The dark days of corruption [before 1989] are testimony to what happens when the politicians gag the media from reporting the truth.  These things have stayed with me. WikiLeaks was created around these core values.”

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, states, “People of good faith understand the need for sensitive diplomatic communications, both to protect the national interest and the global common interest… In almost every profession – whether it’s law or journalism, finance or medicine or academia or running a small business – people rely on confidential communications to do their jobs. We count on the space of trust that confidentiality provides. When someone breaches that trust, we are all worse off for it.”

At heart this issue is relational.  It is about trust and the appropriate level of disclosure to third parties about something pertaining to another person in a relationship.  WikiLeaks assumes that there is an absolute value in the public knowing everything that US diplomatic or military officials write. 

Yet the obligation to disclose the truth is relative to the relationship.  We don’t owe truth to our enemies; it is appropriate to leave lights on when leaving our house empty, to try and fool a burglar.  For diplomats there is a time for discretion, and a time for openness – and no less so for journalists.  One key criterion for deciding is to ask which relationships might ultimately be improved through this disclosure, and which ones might be harmed – and how?    

For whistleblowers to bring justice to a situation, they must be wise in choosing when and what to reveal.  The risk is that WikiLeaks have gone overboard with the scale and content of these leaked cables, such that any wrongs they were trying to redress will be eclipsed by the wider scandal they have created.

Read on...

The Jubilee Centre published a Cambridge Paper 3 years ago on a related topic – making and breaking promises, explored from a biblical perspective.  To reflect more on this please go to www.jubilee-centre.org/resources/promises_promises

Walk the talk

We regularly decide whether or not to disclose some information or an opinion about another person.  To what extent is our decision based on the desire to win an argument, or to defend our reputation?  We would do well to evaluate more carefully the impact which a disclosure would have on relationships, directly or indirectly, and whether the results are actually what we want. 

The last word

From the Bible, Proverbs 22:11 “He who loves a pure heart and whose speech is gracious will have the king for his friend.”

Friday Five is written and sent out by Jonathan Tame of Relationships Global www.relationshipsglobal.net