Was travelling in the car this morning when Today covered the dismal business of the cancer Charity Maggie's Centre refusing to accept a donation from Jerry Springer the Opera after "advice" from "Christian Voice".
Stephen Green the spokesman for Christian Voice not only slickly swept aside the suggestion that their actions (including picketing Cancer clinics if they accepted the donations) amounted to blackmail - but went onto to suggest that their "advice" had "saved" the charity from a "PR disaster".
Couldn't help thinking that Maggie's Centre might have missed a PR disaster but that Christian Voice had succesfully served up yet another PR disaster for the Christian gospel.
I for one will be making a donation to Maggies Centre if only to demonstrate that not all Christians put this kind of insidiuos McCarthy type action before the health of people. Our faith and Our Lord do not need these kind of defenders.
If you wish to join me in making a donation on line you can do so here
Oh heck...It does make me so cross that the likes of Mr Green can claim to speak for Christians...His approach seems to barely stop short of intimidation.
Just been reading Richard Giles "Creating Uncommon Worship" (there is a connection, I promise, unlikely though it seems)
He laments the loss of the "People of The Way" as a label for Christ's followers, since this carries within it the reality of our unfinished, pilgrim condition. Perhaps we should reclaim it here and now, to rescue our calling from the sort of distortion perpetrated by "Christian Voice"?
Posted by: Kathryn | 24 February 2005 at 10:08
That story pretty much made me want to scream - it's so frustrating trying to do anything and be Christian when we all get tarred with one brush.
Kathryn - People of the Way - sounds fantastic to me.
Posted by: Serena | 24 February 2005 at 10:14
Interesting how Green avoided discussing whether this was blackmail, because that's exactly what it is: "Refuse the donation or we'll picket your offices". Indeed, it's somewhat disingenuous for him to say that Maggie's avoided a PR disaster with his help, because there wouldn't have *been* any danger of a PR disaster *without* his "help".
Kathryn - I'll sign up for "People of the Way", too :-)
Posted by: John | 24 February 2005 at 12:06
i heard the story on R4 too. so sad to hear the way christian voice articulated their arguement. what amazed me was that the actors from jerry springer opera show had sacrifically given up their earnings to donate to the charity - seemed more christlike to me!
Posted by: barky | 24 February 2005 at 14:43
Here here to Barky!!!
Posted by: Diana | 24 February 2005 at 18:21
I suppose it would be too unliberal to suggest taking action against Christian Voice for misuse of the name, misrepresentation, impersonating followers of Jesus, etc. Used to be called excommunication. How come it's only the rabid Right who ever think about practising it now? I'm sure there was something at the back of Common Worship Pastoral Services about bells, books and candles, wasn't there?
Posted by: tony | 24 February 2005 at 19:00
Sorry that you find it so easy to snear at brothers in Christ who are standing up for the Gospel and for the Lord Jesus Christ - perhaps if we had more clergy willing to stand up for God then the Church of England would be in less of a mess.
Posted by: Jason | 24 February 2005 at 19:20
Hmm food for thought there Jason. The one thing that I thought I had achieved in writing that particular post was to avoid snearing - which I accept would have been very easy given how fundamentally I diasgree with the Christian view expressed - and how strongly I object small unrepresentative groups hijacking the gospel for personal objectives - but it seems I failed.
What I thought I written was
1.to focus on the actions of Stephen Green (which was basically blackmail)and to lay them open to Gospel standards.
2. To suggest that actually if God who is God is well able to defend himself/herself and does not need us to offer human defence - certainly if it as the expense of people receiving healing. If I may put it starkly it would seem to depend on whether you believe that our God is motivated by vengeance and revenge or love and healing. If it is the first he needs our help - if it is the later then he does not for love will prevail.
3. That the idea that Britain (or England)is a Christian country (see the Christian Action website)actually leads us down dangerous roads with fascist tendencies. Sure I would like everyone in Britain to be willing embrace the Christian faith - I have no interest in enforcing such a position.
Posted by: Tom | 24 February 2005 at 19:35
Tom-
The point that God is able to defend himself is true (not to say a cliche :o)), but not to the point, since one wont be able to find any members of CV that would deny this. But if they wouldnt deny it, what is the point of saying it?
Normally it's widely accepted that God can work in us and through us. If we stand up for justice and righteousness, then we're being his coworkers.
One should also distinguish between being involved in a fight (which all Christians are) and seeking vengeance. Fights are against principalities and powers; vengeance would be against human individuals whom it is not our place to judge.
Ive demonstrated with CV but I have no illusions that Britain is a Christian country. Is that what they believe? On the contrary, they always seem to be pointing out evidence that it isnt.
But I long for it to be a Christian country, & will work to that end. Because Christianity is what makes sense, innit? Logical, statistical, spiritual sense.
Posted by: Christopher Shell | 02 March 2005 at 20:28