Part 512. Beyond the bible

 Following gestation over a long period my understanding of what it means to hold to  Christian belief has moved away from unquestioning acceptance of church creeds, doctrine and dogma. I do not regard scripture as literally the word of God, nor the result of God's inspiration, and therefore not to be challenged.  Scripture, creeds, doctrine and dogma are human creations in their entireties and not the result of activity by metaphysical or anthropomorphic sources. 

The bible is not a statement of rules set out by an omnipresent god 'out there' that have to be followed if we are to receive the reward of eternal life.   It sets out the ideas of authors over 2000 years ago.  The world has moved on.  Christian belief evolves: it is not set in stone by manuscripts written long ago.  But we should not consign the bible to the dump.  It is a valuable source and resource of concepts. Yet we need to remember that it is of human origin and not to be cloaked with the veneer of the divine.

It is my perception that we have allowed ourselves to be hemmed in by church doctrine and dogma and  by scripture.  No matter what method of biblical interpretation is used: literal, liberal, historical, progressive etc, we permit our ideas to be contained and constrained within the parameters or envelope of scripture. It is as though our understanding of God's purpose is fixed in work composed in a distant past

Surely we can do better than be boxed in by the gatekeepers and guardians of 'the truth'?  We can be inspired by concepts attributed by the authors of the synoptic gospels to a person we know as Jesus, but we need to appreciate that the concepts are subjective and capable of varied interpretations, not objective unchangeable 'truth'.  Flexibility, not rigidity, is the order of the day.

You might think I am a humanist, or even an atheist, in expressing the opinions very briefly outlined above.  I reject both appellations. It is my opinion that inherent within each of us is the power to love: to love our neighbour.  So I argue love is God within us, it is our task to tease out what that means.  Jesus points the way, but his is not the final nor only word.  Our understanding of what it is to love should not be bound by adherence, however interpreted, to scripture. It is not a user manual.  Yes, scripture may assist our use of reason, our understanding, and our actions; it must not be used to prescribe or proscribe how we apply the principle of love your neighbour.  

Postscript

The post above has been greeted with compliments and brickbats, as I suspected it would given  my ecletic audience.  It is my preference to keep posts short and this sometimes leads to brevity of expression taking precedence over the nuances of an argument.  The post encompasses many ideas  but lacks detail and nuance.  A poor analogy: the article is akin to providing the answer to a mathematical question without  supplying the working out.  My 'defence' is that many of my earlier articles detail the thinking that led me to the opinions expressed in the above post. 

Part 511. A challenging sermon at St. Paul's, Rusthall

On 3rd May 2026 it was a privilege to listen to this sermon delivered at Evensong by Tim Harrold, St. Paul's Licensed Lay Minister.   The sermon articulates the idea that God is with us and not  for us.   I consider the concept is of fundamental importance inter alia to understanding theology underpinning the pursuit of social justice and assisting those in need.  Tim has agreed kindly to the sermon's publication on this blog.

A Sermon for Evensong

Zechariah 4:1–10; Revelation 21:1–14 (NRSV), in conversation with Samuel Wells

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

This evening, I want to introduce you to one of my favourite contemporary

theologians, Samuel Wells. He is the vicar at St. Martin’s in London and the

author of over 40 books. There is one theme in particular that consistently runs

through many of his books which is very relevant to tonight’s readings. Samuel

Wells argues that traditional theologians have frequently been captivated by

the notion of “for” – invariably they see God and Jesus as working or being

“for” us, dying for us, rising for us and this is both wrong and decidedly

unhelpful. It makes our relationship with God a transactional one leading to all

sorts of problems. Instead, we need to focus on the more lasting gift of his

working “with” or ultimately being “with” us. As will become apparent, our

readings impact very differently through the lens of “with” and not “for”.

Let us begin with Zechariah. The people are rebuilding the temple after exile.

The task feels fragile, uncertain, and small. Into this, God speaks:

“Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the Lord of hosts.”

(Zechariah 4:6, NRSV)

We often hear this as reassurance that God will act for us—achieving what we

cannot. Certainly, that is the traditional historical theological position. Samuel

Wells invites us to hear something deeper: God’s Spirit is not simply a force

applied on our behalf, but the very presence of God with us in the work itself.

In his book God Companions, Wells reflects on how God’s primary desire is

not to fix things from a distance but to accompany us—to be alongside us in

our vulnerability, our incompleteness, our “day of small things.”

And so that phrase from Zechariah takes on new depth:

“For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice…” (Zechariah

4:10, NRSV)

Why should we not despise small things? Not because they will one day

become impressive, but because God is already present within them.

God is with us in the small congregation, the quiet prayer, the unnoticed

kindness. The Spirit is not waiting for greatness; the Spirit dwells in the

ordinary.

Too often we imagine God as one who steps in dramatically—solving, rescuing, 

intervening. But it’s this that can so easily become a source of tension

whenever we feel that God went AWOL and didn’t answer our calls or did not

prevent some deadfall calamity from hurting us.

The vision of Zechariah suggests something gentler and more enduring: a lamp

continually fed with oil, a steady, sustaining presence.

God with us.

And this brings us to Revelation.

John’s vision is often read as a promise of what God will do for us at the end of

time. But again, notice the emphasis:

“See, the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them; they will

be his peoples, and God himself will be with them.” (Revelation 21:3, NRSV)

The fulfilment of all things is not simply relief from suffering, but

relationship—God dwelling with humanity.

In another of Well’s books, A Nazareth Manifesto, Wells explores how the life

of Jesus reveals this very pattern: God does not stand apart, dispensing

solutions, but enters fully into human life—sharing meals, forming friendships,

walking alongside others. Salvation, in this vision, is not merely rescue but

presence. The cross is not a sacrifice that appeases God’s righteous wrath or a

conquest that defeats our last enemy. It’s a vision of a God whose purpose is

to be with us more intimately, more permanently, more comprehensively than

we can imagine. God is so committed to be with us, that Christ is willing to

endure even crucifixion to embody that ultimate commitment to be with,

So when Revelation continues:

“He will wipe every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; mourning and

crying and pain will be no more…” (Revelation 21:4, NRSV)

we are not simply being told that suffering will be removed, but that God will

be with us in such a complete way that all that diminishes life is overcome by

that presence. There will be nothing left for God to do for us, we shall fully be

God’s companions. God is with us through the very worst of life and in the very

separation of death – in, through, and beyond.

The theology of “with” insists that the method and goal of God in creation,

incarnation, and salvation are the same.

So what does this mean for us, here, at Evensong?

It means that our hope is not only that God will act for us in the future, but

that God is already with us in the present.

With us in the small things.

With us in the unfinished work.

With us in our joys and in our sorrows.

It means that prayer is not merely asking God to do things, but becoming

attentive to God’s presence.

It means that the Church is not simply a place where things get fixed, but a

community learning to be with God and with one another.

And it means that when we face difficulty or uncertainty, we are not waiting

for God to arrive—God is already here.

“Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit.”

“See, the home of God is among mortals.”

These are not separate messages. They are one: God’s Spirit is God’s presence,

and that presence is with us now, even as it draws us toward the fullness of

the new creation.

So let us not despise the day of small things. For in those small things, God is

with us.

Let us not imagine that salvation lies only ahead of us. For even now, God

dwells among us.

And as we go from this place tonight, into the quiet of the evening, may we

become more aware of that presence—beside us, within us, among us.

Not God for us.

But God with us.

Amen.

Part 510. An article by Chris Kratzer: a must read

 

I recommend this article if only because it sets out very well ideas previously articulated on this blog.  Don't be put off by the USA context: the principles apply everywhere.

I hope you'll read every word.

We've got to get this right.

When Jesus said, “You will always have the poor among you,” he wasn't suggesting that poverty is beyond repair. Instead, he was indicting the religious and political systems of the day that allow poverty to exist.

Because here's the truth that Jesus was confronting. Given the self-centeredness and greed of the rich, political, and religious in our world, poverty will never get solved. Not because it can't, but because those that can… won't. That's the brutal condemning message of Jesus.

We will always have the poor among us because poverty is big business. You don't have billionaires and harsh capitalism without it. Especially when the religious adjust their message and fabricate a gospel that enables and partners with greed.

See, the deeper message of Jesus is that everything you see is by design.

Things could be so much better for everyone, but they're designed not to be; not by Jesus, but by the selfish evil people of this world.

We could solve poverty, but we don't. We could make voting easy, but we don't. We could have schools without school shootings, but we don't. We could make food healthy instead of poisonous, but we don't. We could have a living wage, but we don't. We could have safe and environmentally friendly energy, but we don't. We could have universal free healthcare, but we don't. So many things could be so much better, but we won't.

Everything is by design.

That's why Jesus came offering a totally different vision and a totally different design for the world, but the religious and powerful despised it, because Jesus is terrible for the economy and ambitions of the rich, powerful, and religious.

And so, they killed him.

That's what happens when you speak words of truth straight to the heart of power…

“You will always have the poor with you; you pathetic, self-righteous, greedy, power hungry, self-centered gluttons.”

See, contrary to what most Christians will tell you, this is what Jesus means when he says “don't be of the world.” In the mind of Jesus, to be “of the world” is to be of a religious, political system of greed and power that envisions and designs a world where the rich, powerful, privileged, and religious are exempt from accountability and consequence, while the rest of us--the marginalized, condemned, discriminated, powerless, struggling, exploited, and vulnerable--pay the price.

In fact, Jesus “dying for the sins of the world” is evil's greatest diversion away from the real purpose and cause of Jesus which is to dismantle the evil systems of the world created by the rich and religious.

Think about it, if you want to keep people from breaking down the systems you create to exploit and oppress them, just brainwash them into believing that their real threat is a God who will send them to hell if they don't believe and live like you do.

That's right, the Gospel isn't about personal salvation nearly as much (if it all) as it is about systemic revolution. Our salvation is inseparably connected to the renovation and resurrection of the oppressive human systems the powerful create.

It's never been about people getting into heaven, it's always been about heaven coming down to us.

It's the meek inheriting the earth, not the rich and religious. It's the last being put first, not the powerful. It's the immigrant being welcomed, not marginalized, abused, and deported. It's the dismantling of patriarchy, racism, white-supremacy, bigotry, inequality, and greed, not the celebration and empowerment of it.

Because, when Jesus sees poverty, he sees the “beloved.” When Republican Evangelicals see poverty, they see “big business.”

When Jesus sees self-righteousness, he sees a “fake and empty” faith. When Republican Evangelicals see self-righteousness, they see a “fast-track to power and privilege” no matter what it takes.

When Jesus sees children, he sees “free school lunches,” shooter-less classrooms, critical thinking, and personal empowerment. When Republican Evangelicals see children, they see “free labor,” future cult members, and vulnerable sexual prey.

When Jesus sees queer people he sees “humans beautifully created in the image of God.” When Republican Evangelicals see queer people, they see “subhuman targets to hate and discriminate" for personal and political gain

When Jesus sees diversity, he sees the “fabric of God's creation.” When Republican Evangelicals see diversity, they see a “foe to their power and privilege” that needs to be destroyed.

When Jesus sees people, he sees “divine beings” to be loved, empowered, protected, and cherished. When Republican Evangelicals see people, they see “depraved souls” to be leveraged for personal profit, power, and control.

When Jesus sees cruelty, he sees the “opposite of all that is good, holy, and of the divine.” When Republican Evangelicals see cruelty they see it as a “spiritual gift and a sign of sanctification.”

Jesus sees Gaza, he sees “suffering and injustice.” When Republican Evangelicals see Gaza, they see “sandy beaches” littered with billionaire houses and members only golf courses.

When Jesus sees Israel, he sees a “people group” no more divine or favored than any other. When Republican Evangelicals see Israel, they see a “partner in crime” to spiritually justify and magnify their evil.

Everything is by design.

Addiction to social media is by design.

Fear of God is by design.

Unhealthiness is by design.

Hatred for minorities is by design.

Financial hardships are by design.

Racism is by design.

War is by design.

Poverty is by design.

Religious shame is by design.

Patriarchy is by design.

Injustice is by design.

Violence is by design.

Hunger is by design.

Discrimination is by design.

Favoritism for the rich and powerful is by design.

Fatigue is by design.

Sexism is by design.

Blame of the less fortunate is by design.

Demonizing the different is by design.

Division is by design.

Classism is by design.

Toxic masculinity is by design.

Ignorance is by design.

“You will always have the poor among you”

Why?

Because, everything we see is by design.

Part 509. Personal reflections

 When I commenced this blog I had no idea where my posts would lead me theologically.  It has been an adventure, full of doubts, questions perplexity, even anxiety.  Now I have reached an oasis of calm, peace and contentment. 

For many years  I was a lay preacher in churches of  a fundamentalist, conservative evangelical disposition.  The bible is the inerrant word of God and our lives are governed by  understanding the words literally.   Or, so I thought.  Studying for a diploma in theology introduced me to what  I considered to be novel concepts.  My studies gave me succour, that my nagging doubts were not uniquely mine, that there was a dimension of christian belief beyond the confines of biblical inerrancy. 

So began my journey to an acceptance of the idea that scripture is created entirely by humanity, that there is no metaphysical or anthropomorphic 'god' out there inspiring authors.  Scripture is an human construct. Postmodernism taught me that words have a fluidity of interpretation, meaning is not rigid and inflexible.  In fact, I knew this already from studying law reports and the processes involved in the development of common law. 

Eventually I came to the conclusion that the bible was useful as an expression of the thoughts of individuals 2,000+ years ago. In particular I was drawn to the ideas to be found in the synoptic gospels, ideas attributed by the authors to a person we know as Jesus.  The concept of love your neighbour is deep and profound: but  is not the sole prerogative of christians.  

My interest  in helping individuals at point of need and campaigning on issues of social justice is not driven by a conviction it is the christian thing to do. Rather, I have come to the conclusion that there is a motivation to love that is inherent in individuals.

Recently I have been reading works by Jim Palmer and Colin Coward.  I commend their work to you.  Below are links to more recent articles, the first by Jim Palmer, the remainder by Colin Coward.

The Existential Impulse

A Rumour of Angels – Peter Berger, Pope Leo and Donald Trump — Unadulterated Love

Mapping God: When everything is taken literally, meaning itself can swiftly start to unravel — Unadulterated Love

Time to redraw our God-map — Unadulterated Love

Part 508. The fragility of the voluntary sector

I have engaged with the voluntary sector in a variety of roles for thirty years.  Most of the organisations I was involved with have either closed or merged with other organisations.

Panda Playgroup.  Closed when premises demolished and no satisfactory alternative provided.

Crisis Recovery. Victim of covid.

Crossroads.  Merged with other Crossroads

Good Neighbour Project. Funding issues

Mental Health Resource.  Closed as funding did not cover costs.

Bridge Trust. Reduced funding led to merger with YMCA.

Church in Society. Closed by dioceses of Canterbury and Rochester.

Churches' Social  Responsibility Group. Taken over by Churches Together.

Venn House. Closed by Church Missionary Society.

Tonbridge Evangelical Free Church. Closed

Westwood Road Evangelical Free Church. Closed

Cousley Wood Evangelical Free Church. Closed

Number One: Shadow of former self. Cafe and playgroup closed.

Rusthall Community and Youth Project.  Inactive

The challenges facing the voluntary sector have been rehearsed in other posts on this blog.  What is happening is tragic. The decline of the voluntary sector impacts on the wellbeing of many, particularly in local contexts.  Vital support services are being lost to the detriment of communities and individuals.

Part 507. Spiked........again

The editors of the parish magazine have chosen to 'spike' my recent article.  (See posts 504 and 497)

It was their decision to make as they have no editorial constraints placed upon them by the Parochial Church Council (PCC).  I support editorial freedom and observe that the magazine reflects well the prevailing atmosphere within the church's community. Challenging articles are a rarity, it's all so twee and cosy.  Not my cup of tea. 

I am mulling over what to do next.   Probably it will be to attend the monthly Choral Evensong according to the Book of Common Prayer (the choir is excellent) and to withdraw my nomination to be a member of the PCC and deanery synod.

Part 506. 10 and 6 years on

Ten years ago the United Reformed Church decided same-sex marriages could be solemnised in its churches with the caveat that individual churches could decline to hold said services.  Six years ago the Methodist Church followed suit.

Meanwhile the Church of England has huffed and puffed to a position whereby same-sex prayers of blessing may be performed within an authorised service.  And that's it.  No stand-alone or 'bespoke' services of blessing although it can be argued that such services may be held within the provisions of the canons. Of solemnization of same-sex marriage not a glimmer. 

This year members of deanery synods in the Church of England will elect laity and clergy to diocesan synods and General Synod.  These elections are important as it is the latter body that decides on matters of doctrine. Changes in doctrine require two-thirds majorities in each of the houses of General Synod: bishops, clergy and laity.  Authorising same-sex marriage is a change in doctrine.  Will those seeking inclusivity secure enough seats to establish two-thirds majorities for change?  I have my doubts.  

Part 505. Just the job!

Occasionally one comes across an article that encapsulates your own opinions far better than you are capable of expressing.   The link below is to such an article.  I commend it for your attention accepting it will not be received with universal approbation, indeed there may well be vehement opposition.  So be it: courteous debate and discussion is to be welcomed.  

https://jimpalmerauthor.substack.com/p/20-things-jesus-didnt-say?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web&fbclid=IwdGRjcARYtFhjbGNrBFiz3mV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHor81ABdHmZ-9NVaw6W7thorJYSXO-hREpl4sqiFv5NQemJ4eRiUegVZlafo_aem_SgsVPwBRwRMPQgKHHqDTsw&triedRedirect=true

Yes, I have tested the link and it works.

Readers of my blog will not be surprised that I support the opinions expressed in Jim Palmer's post. It is not my intention to offend. I  believe theological discourse should be in the spirits of honesty and integrity and differing opinions respected.

Part 504. Matters have moved on.

 My April Fool's joke (post 497) deceived some of its recipients to the extent that not only did they think I was planning to be a candidate for the position of churchwarden, they wished me well in my endeavour.  A gentle letting down of expectation since then.

The upshot is I intend to stand for election to the parochial church council and the deanery synod.  I'll keep you posted on developments.

However there is a potential fly in the ointment.  Last year I had two of my blog posts published in the parish magazine under a pseudonym.  A  third offering finished up on the editor's spike.  I have submitted a further article (post 495) under my own name.  Will this one be published?   The article is topical and concerns the Church of England.  Failure to publish will send a clear message to me and might persuade me to consider attending United Reformed Church services given the URC's stance on inclusion.  

Part 503. Biblical truth, an oxymoron?

Don't you just love an oxymoron: honest politician, deafening silence,  civil war, alone together, Microsoft Works, organised chaos, etc.

But what of biblical truth? There are those who believe the bible is the word of God, texts written by authors inspired by the divine. Thus theology, doctrine and dogma are determined by belief in God given scripture within a spectrum of interpretation ranging from rigid, literal, conservative understanding of words to fluid, symbolic, liberal conceptual approaches.  Underpinning all is a belief that the words of scripture are authoritative, not of human origin but of an omniscient, transcendent, metaphysical, anthropomorphic God: statements not to be the subject of rejection  by humans but capable of varied interpretation. Implausible? You be the judge.

Some contra opinions:

'The Christian story does not drop from heaven fully written. It grew and developed over a period of forty-two to seventy years. This is not what most Christians have been taught to think, but it is factual. Christianity has always been an evolving story. It was never, even in the New Testament, a finished story.'

JOHN SHELBY SPONG 

'I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understandings and affirmations, statements not coming directly or somewhat directly from God.....I realised that whatever "divine revelation" and the "inspiration of the Bible" meant (if they meant anything), they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority.'

MARCUS J BORG 

'Properly understood the Bible is a potential ally to the progressive Christian passion for transformation of ourselves and the world. It is our great heritage. Along with Jesus, to whom it is subordinate, it is our greatest treasure.'

MARCUS J BORG

'My point is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are not smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now dumb enough to take them literally.'

JOHN DOMINIC CROSSAN 

'The Bible is based upon the construct of theism and anthropomorphism as its primary literary vehicle for expressing the reality of "God." Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, or intentions to non-human entities. 

The ultimate authority of one's life is not the Bible. The highest truth is not confined between the covers of a book. It is not something written by men and frozen in time. It is not from a source outside oneself. One's ultimate authority is the voice of truth within one's own innermost being.'

JIM PALMER 

'The danger that a mythology understood too literally, and as taught by the Church, will suddenly be repudiated lock, stock and barrel is today greater than ever. Is it not time that the Christian mythology, instead of being wiped out, was understood symbolically?'

CARL JUNG 

I am firmly in the latter camp, much influenced by postmodernism and ideas developed by Jacques Derrida.

So, my opinion is that 'biblical truth' is an oxymoron.  At this juncture may I prevail upon you to turn to post 502 and the words of Colin Coward.   They are an antidote to fundamentalist, conservative evangelical theology, a breath of fresh air to counter stultifying narrow bible based theology, doctrine and dogma that loses sight of the concepts of inclusive love and care for all humanity as ascribed to Jesus by the authors of the synoptic gospels: concepts of humans, therefore subjective, not to be cloaked with the veneer of objective God given authority.  It is the dynamic of the concepts that matters, not the precise meaning of the words in ancient texts of human origin.  As Spong said Christianity is an 'evolving story', not a set of texts fixed in time.

Part 502. Away with literalist, fundamentalist, conservative evangelical bible interpretation!

Below are  quotations from an article by Colin Coward.  It encapsulates opinions I have expressed often in this blog

Reflecting on the Holy Week and Easter stories over the past weekend, I have done so not thinking or believing that the Gospels are verbatim accounts given by, let alone written by those who witnessed these events. They are edited and re-edited stories based on oral accounts that had been told and retold and embroidered by the Jesus-followers, the first witnesses, the early Christian gatherings, and those who subsequently joined the Jesus-centred communities. To the oral accounts that formed the basis of the Gospels were added stories told to and re-told and experienced and embroidered by Paul (with the help of Luke).

Belief is a dilemma for me because I do not believe in what is rehearsed in church every Sunday and maintained by the authority of the institution as adequately representing an adequate vision of the Jesus who transforms life and culture. The Gospels and Acts and the history books of the Hebrew scriptures are not accurate, historical accounts of the events and lives they describe. History never is accurate but always a personal view and interpretation. The contemporary “traditional, orthodox, Biblical” ways of our religious systems do not, for me, embrace the essence and heart of Jesus’ life and teachings. We live with ideas about God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit that are human interpretations of Jesus’ teachings and essence. All knowledge is developed and communicated through the medium of human understanding. Any distortion or misunderstanding of the teachings of Jesus is the result of human failure to comprehend. Throughout my life I have been trying to disentangle the ingredients of distortion and error from healthier wisdom and truth, trying to be more aware of and recapture and synthesise the essence of a holy, sacred, incarnated transformational wisdom that helps us embrace the essence of life in all its fulness.

Whether we are aware or not, all of us are dealing with myths and the development of human interpretations and teachings and corruptions of the divine human we worship as Son of God.

We continue to have great difficulty in distinguishing the unhealthy divine attributions that are fundamental corruptions of Jesus’ life and teachings from the Jesus’ essence that is the catalyst for healthy, creative consciousness that make life in all its fulness into real presence.

Please follow the link below to read the article in full and also as a link to further posts by Colin Coward.

https://www.unadulteratedlove.net/blog/2026/4/10/incarnation-transfiguration-crucifixion-resurrection?

I have railed long and hard against fundamentalist interpretations of the bible used to support homophobia, misogyny, racism and self-centred individualism.  

Part 501. Opaqueness and lack of democratic control.

 

The link is to an article published in The Guardian considering the impact of private equity funding on a range of services/utilities essential to the life of individuals.  It points out with clarity the effect of the profit motive and the absence of effective democratic oversight and control.  The article notes that little information is in the public domain on the financial position of the companies engaged in private equity funding.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/07/capitalism-endgame-private-equity-captured-nurseries-care-homes

How is it possible to influence the decisions of such organisations that are beyond the clutch of public opinion/ opprobrium,  fulminating politicians and the voluntary sector, including faith groups?

What is required is for government to deliver systemic change to the financial and statutory framework within which private equity funders operate. I have seen little evidence of the major religious denominations arguing for change, but as the author of the article states cogently the present arrangements enable the funders to get richer at the expense of individuals, many of whom have difficult financial circumstances.  

Part 500. Disgraceful action: a shocker

 

Please read the article in The Guardian on  the government's decision - a Labour government for goodness sake - attacking financially individuals who will have the misfortune to become disabled.  It is a disgrace that a Labour government has seen fit to achieve financial savings by targeting some of the most vulnerable members of society.  The rich get richer and the poor poorer.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/02/labour-disability-cuts-universal-credit

The churches profess, well some do, to follow the social teaching of Jesus.  I have seen little, if any, concerted attempt by them to engage in an ongoing campaign to overturn the new policy regarding disability benefit.  They should be shouting their concern from the rooftops, calling the policy out for what it is: an attack on the vulnerable not in keeping with a fundamental principle of the teaching of Jesus, to care for the deprived, poor and vulnerable. 

Sifting through some old papers I can across the following published in 2010 by the Cabinet Office on behalf of HM Government - at that time the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition:

State of the nation report: poverty, worklessness and welfare dependency in the UK

The report has sections on:

Income poverty, inequality and social immobility

Worklessness: unemployment and inactivity

Welfare dependency

Poor health and educational disadvantage

Families and communities

Multiple disadvantage.

It is a depressing report, made even more so by the fact in the sixteen years following publication very little has been achieved in overcoming the causes of poverty and destitution.  It is political failure and one that should be of serious concern for individuals seeking to follow the teaching of Jesus.  For government the mantra is 'target the welfare budget' as a major element of economic recovery.  As the Taxation Against Poverty's  Nicolson Report: The Poverty Scandal makes clear this is a wrong-headed approach. (See Part 493 of this blog.)

Part 499. Quirky

This is the time of year when Church of England (CofE) parishes elect churchwardens.  Each parish should have two churchwardens.  The process of nomination and election is, in typical CoE fashion, set out in labyrinthine regulations. 

A prospective candidate has to be a baptised member of the CofE, on the church electoral roll of the parish, be aged 21 or over, a regular communicant and not disqualified on a number of grounds related to charity law and safeguarding.  A candidate has to be nominated by two persons either on the church electoral roll or on the electoral register of the local authority in the geographical area covered by the church parish.  Thus candidates for churchwarden may be nominated by non church members.

The election is held at the Annual Meeting of Parishioners (AMP).  It is possible that attendees who are on the civil register may outnumber individuals on the church electoral roll.  So in theory the parish could end up with two churchwardens nominated and elected by non church members!  A huge potential for mischief.  

However a procedure exists whereby the church minister may select one of the candidates to be a churchwarden and announce his decision to the AMP.  This person is withdrawn from the election process and the AMP then proceeds to elect the second churchwarden from the remaining candidates.  More scope for mischief.

Churchwardens are ex-officio members of the Parochial Church  Council (PCC).  Other PCC lay members are elected by the Annual Parochial Church Meeting (APCM) limited to church members.

Should the CoE be disestablished then the rules governing the election of churchwardens may well change so that it becomes purely an internal matter for the church and the decisions on election taken solely by the APCM.  Disestablishment is very low on the political agenda.  Whilst bishops would lose their seats in the House of Lords should there be a move to a second chamber elected in its entirety, of itself it would not be disestablishment.

 

Part 498. A stain on society

The extent of poverty and destitution in the United Kingdom,  researched and documented by The Joseph Rowntree Foundation,  is a stain on society in general and the  political/administrative class responsible for strategic policy in particular.  The dead hand of the Civil Service, together with the cosy political consensus of the main political parties (apart from tinkering at the edges) - the Blob -  has ensured no systemic change to achieve social justice for the poor and destitute. The Brexit vote was a voter rebellion,  a shot across the bows of the affluent by the poorer regions.  The lessons have not been learned, hence the reduction in votes for the main parties and the rise of parties promising radical solutions to the systemic failure of the establishment.  

See: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/03/weeks-green-mp-politicians-clue-cost-living-labour

But what of the voluntary sector: secular and faith based organisations: charities and community interest companies?  The sector's  record of campaigning successfully for systemic change to achieve social justice is abysmal.  When was the last time your church contacted a councillor, MP, local authority, government department, quango or private sector organisation to challenge the  status quo and campaign for social justice?  I don't anticipate an avalanche of positive responses. 

From a Christian perspective, or more accurately the perspective of a follower of the teaching in the synoptic gospels attributed to Jesus, ameliorating the plight of the poor, destitute, deprived, sick, excluded, hungry, homeless, addicted, or marginalised is commanded by the call to love your neighbour.  But it is simply amelioration,  continuing  from generation to generation.  It does not challenge causes, only bandages symptoms.  It is an opiate, a palliative,  not a solution. The failure of society, through the state, to tackle the issues, has resulted in the voluntary sector bearing the burden of making provision and thereby masking the extent of the issues.  Why should the voluntary sector have to provide foodbanks, clothes banks, debt advice, hostels, warm areas, free lunches, community facilities to lessen the impact of policy decisions?  One reason is that it is convenient for government not to have to raise taxation to meet the cost of systemic change to achieve social justice, an  issue well articulated by JK  Galbraith in The Affluent Society,

At this juncture I post again the following from Taxpayers Against Poverty: (See Part 493.)

This report is written in the shadow — and the spirit — of the late Rev Paul Nicolson, the founder of Taxpayers Against Poverty.

Paul spent his life insisting on a simple, uncomfortable truth: that poverty in a wealthy country is not inevitable, and that allowing it to persist is a moral failure and an economic folly. He believed that public policy should be judged not by rhetoric or intent, but by its impact on the lives of the poorest. That conviction runs through every page of this report.

The Nicolson Report: The Poverty Scandal sets out the reality the UK now faces. Millions of people are living with unnecessary financial hardship. Families are pushed into insecurity not because resources are lacking, but because choices have been made — repeatedly — to tolerate a system that over-taxes work, under-taxes wealth, and under-invests in the public services and infrastructure that make prosperity possible.

This report is not about blame. It is about responsibility — and about evidence. Poverty benefits no one. It damages health, weakens productivity, increases pressure on public services and limits opportunity for the next generation. We all pay the price.

But the message of this report is also one of hope. Poverty is not inevitable. With a fairer and more modern tax system, and with sustained investment in education, health, social care and infrastructure, hardship can be reduced and prosperity shared more widely. Wealth in this country has been built on shared foundations. Those foundations now need renewing.

This report calls for bold and determined leadership — grounded in evidence, focused on outcomes, and willing to challenge comfortable assumptions. Ending the poverty scandal is not an act of charity. It is one of the most important economic choices the UK can make.

To readers of this report — policymakers, campaigners, taxpayers and citizens — the call to action is simple: do not accept poverty as inevitable. Question policies that deepen hardship. Demand fairness in how we raise and use public money. Support solutions that prevent poverty rather than manage its consequences.

Paul Nicolson believed that change begins when people refuse to look away.

This report asks you to do the same.

Tom Burgess

The voluntary sector has an interest in maintaining current systems.  Much human and financial capital has been invested in at- the- point- of -need provision and there is a big consultation, training, research and support sector to assist front line organisations.  There is a symbiosis between the voluntary sector and government, a  cosying up, well-encapsulated in the latest government wheeze: The Civil Society Council. (See Part 489.) One is reminded of the final paragraphs of George Orwell's Animal Farm. 

Today is Good Friday, the day we are told Jesus was crucified by the Roman Empire egged on by the Jewish establishment in Palestine.  He was perceived to be a dangerous revolutionary, a threat to the stability of the Roman occupation, to the political and economic ordering of civic society by his call for social justice, to the settled status of the Jewish religious and legal establishments within the Roman occupation.

The quest for systemic change in society to achieve social justice continues.  Read the ideas of inter alia John Kenneth Galbraith, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jnr., Oscar Romeo,  Leonardo Boff,  Jurgen Moltmann, Gustavo Gutierrez, Desmond Tutu and Walter Bruegemann.  They articulate the economic, sociological,  political and theological concepts that underpin the call for systemic change, for social justice.  

In the Christian calendar Good Friday is followed by Easter Sunday, a day of grief followed by a day of joy, of resurrection. For many it is a factual account, for others it is symbolism or metaphore, of hope rising from the ashes of despair.  As followers of Jesus we are called to give hope to those in need,  the hope of a better future.

 

Part 497. A road ahead!

 I was somewhat depressed when I posted Part 496 at what I perceived to be rejection of my offers to volunteer within the Church of England.  However a new opportunity has presented itself: namely for the position of churchwarden in my parish.  A vacancy has occurred with the retirement of one of the two churchwardens.  I am minded to stand for election.  

Part 496. I've run out of road.

The song Keep Right on to the End of the Road  (1924 by Harry Lauder) is a call to perseverance, to stay strong and have hope despite the vicissitudes of life. Hardship is to be endured whilst holding on to love. Keep fighting for what you consider to be right.  The song could be interpreted as a secular version of the call of Jesus to follow him, to be guided by love to help attain heaven on earth.

Those who campaign for systemic change to achieve social justice and/or support individuals at point of need are only too well aware of the unremitting slog entailed.  It is a long, long road with no discernible destination in sight.  Hope there may be, but the destination is a mirage, a chimera.  Some set off with great enthusiasm and hope, wilt under the weight of expectation, stop and go back.  Others park up in a metaphorical lay-by and then continue the journey.  Others plod on, and on, and on.

I have landed in a ditch. My offers to assist to four individuals with authority/influence in the Church of England have been ignored.  So I remain in a ditch unable to regain the road.  I have run out of road. 

 

  

Part 495. Green shoots?

 For many the decision of the Church of England to terminate the Living in Love and Faith  (LLF) process was depressing, to put it mildly.  The immediate reactions of many understandably were ones of resignation and despair.

However, things may not be quite as bad as the initial reactions suggest.  Arising out of the decision to close the process General Synod approved the following:

commend the House of Bishops in establishing the Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Working Group and Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Pastoral Consultative Group for continuing work.

To date there has been little information concerning membership, terms of reference, process and timescales,  Whilst one might postulate that the LLF process is not dead, indeed life is extant in the two groups, neverthess one would not gamble the home on the assumption the outcome of the deliberations will lead to greater inclusivity.  

There is a body of opinion that the legal advice submitted to the House of Bishops regarding authorisation of stand-alone (bespoke) services of same-sex marriage blessing  was deficient.   It is argued, persuasively in my opinion, that said services are  legal under the provisions of existing Canon Law and, even if not, the liklihood of disciplinary procedures being invoked by bishops against clergy performing said services is minimal.  Clergy have indicated a willingness to perform such services and are being encouraged so to do by members of Together for the Church of England and Inclusive Church.

Full inclusion requires the Church of England to authorise same-sex marriage services.  This looks a long way off given the decision to terminate the LLF process.  Authorisation will require a two-thirds majority in each of the Houses of General Synod as it is a change in doctrine.  Therefore Together for the Church of England and Inclusive Church are organising campaigns to secure as many individuals supportive of inclusion elected by Annual Parochial Church Meetings (APCMs) onto deanery synods.  Members of the latter elect diocesan synod members and  General Synod members.  The two organisations are up against the well-organised and funded Alliance, Holy Trinity Brompton network and Church of England Evangelical Council.  My opinion is that the latter three organisations may have their membership of the new General Synod dented a little but nowhere near enough to threaten their blocking vote for doctrinal change.

It is my opinion that the way forward is to encourage as many parochial church councils and incumbents to offer same-sex stand-alone services to the extent that they become commonplace.  This will lead to public pressure for same-sex marriage in the Church of England and if needs be parliamentary legislation to enforce it.  To achieve this will take time but it will probably be a quicker route to full inclusion than the election to General Synod process.  A way has to be found to disarm the blocking power of the conservative evangelical group on General Synod..  It will be interesting to follow the steps the new Archbishop of Canterbury initiates to free the logjam.

Part 494. Rare as hens' teeth

In the Church of England the service of Matins (or Mattins if you prefer) according to the Book of Common Prayer (BCP) is as rare almost as hens' teeth.  So it is a delight to attend Matins and participate in a service accompanied by a fine choir and organist.

Sadly today was a major disappointment.  The choir sang very well, particularly the Anthem, but...there was no Te Deum, no Benedicite, Omnia Opera.  Instead we were treated to Benedicite by Sumsion.  The priest conducting the service informed us in a casual manner that there would noTe Deum as the choir has decided instead to perform Sumsion!  Not sure about the accuracy of that claim. Whatever else we had it was not BCP.

To add to the 'delight' of the service I sat through one of the worst sermons I have listened to in over thirty years.  It was shocking,  guaranteed to put any newcomer off attending future services.

Part 493. More on tackling poverty

Recently I read an article by TAP: Taxpayers Against Poverty.  Below is the foreword to its publication: The Nicolson Report: The Poverty Scandal (16.02.2026): 

Foreword

This report is written in the shadow — and the spirit — of late Rev Paul Nicolson*, the founder of Taxpayers Against Poverty.

Paul spent his life insisting on a simple, uncomfortable truth: that poverty in a wealthy country is not inevitable, and that allowing it to persist is a moral failure and an economic folly. He believed that public policy should be judged not by rhetoric or intent, but by its impact on the lives of the poorest. That conviction runs through every page of this report.

The Nicolson Report: The Poverty Scandal sets out the reality the UK now faces. Millions of people are living with unnecessary financial hardship. Families are pushed into insecurity not because resources are lacking, but because choices have been made — repeatedly — to tolerate a system that over-taxes work, under-taxes wealth, and under-invests in the public services and infrastructure that make prosperity possible.

This report is not about blame. It is about responsibility — and about evidence. Poverty benefits no one. It damages health, weakens productivity, increases pressure on public services and limits opportunity for the next generation. We all pay the price.

But the message of this report is also one of hope. Poverty is not inevitable. With a fairer and more modern tax system, and with sustained investment in education, health, social care and infrastructure, hardship can be reduced and prosperity shared more widely. Wealth in this country has been built on shared foundations. Those foundations now need renewing.

This report calls for bold and determined leadership — grounded in evidence, focused on outcomes, and willing to challenge comfortable assumptions. Ending the poverty scandal is not an act of charity. It is one of the most important economic choices the UK can make.

To readers of this report — policymakers, campaigners, taxpayers and citizens — the call to action is simple: do not accept poverty as inevitable. Question policies that deepen hardship. Demand fairness in how we raise and use public money. Support solutions that prevent poverty rather than manage its consequences.

Paul Nicolson believed that change begins when people refuse to look away.

This report asks you to do the same.

Tom Burgess

CEO, Taxpayers Against Poverty

I commend the report for your attention and note that many of the points it makes are ones discussed at length in this blog.   Taken with the huge amount of information in the reports published by The Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the anti-poverty campaign of The Big Issue led by John Bird (co-founder with Gordon Roddick) there is a solid body of evidence and a determination to progress campaigning to make systemic change to the policies that cause and sustain poverty.  

Sadly we live in a society that, to echo the words of John Kenneth Galbraith, has the means but lacks the will to tackle poverty issues.  It is a matter of political choice.  As a follower of the teaching attributed to Jesus I am of the opinion that campaigning against the underlying causes of poverty should be an imperative for churches.  Policy makers must be challenged in robust terms. We need to go beyond providing palliatives and mitigation to the plight of those in poverty or destitution.  We should demand radical change.  Shades of Jurgen Moltmann and Gustavo Gutierrez!

*  https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/30/the-rev-paul-nicolson-a-campaigning-life-in-letters

*  https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/10/the-rev-paul-nicolson-obituary

 

Part 492. Handling nastiness

Unsurprisingly I receive many hostile, rude, vitriolic comments on some of my posts. Par for the course I suppose for anyone prepared to stand up and be counted on issues of inclusion.

Apart from this blog I am active on Facebook. I manage two groups:

*Theology and social justice

*Social Justice.

I have a Facebook page entitled: Radical, Liberal, Progressive and Deconstructivist Theology

One comment I receive often is that I am an 'armchair warrior'. Well, I am not anonymous and at my age there are physical limitations on activity.  

Over many years I was active in the voluntary sector: as a volunteer, consultant or employee. I won't bore you, or attempt to preen, by listing my activities, but I will quote this e-mail sent to me by Mr Roy Bullock, a former Leader of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council:

'Your announcement was greeted with absolute silence. Can I for one mourn your severing of all the links to the Voluntary sector. I have known you for a long time and you were always involved in one or another charity, or Community Interest Company. Whatever wheeze successive Governments came up with to try and transfer more functions from government to the voluntary sector, you were always there trying to milk as much funding as possible from the government to better the organisation you supported. John to me you are the best example of being a localist I have ever known and you will be missed. Well done though good and faithful servant of the people.'

Part 491. Here we go...again. More anti-poverty campaigns

A major thread running through the Old and New Testaments is the call for relief of poverty.  Help individuals at point of need and seek systemic change to eradicate, or at least diminish, poverty.

The command to love your neighbour extends beyond poverty issues, to seeking to alleviate the symptoms and the causes of all forms of discrimination, exclusion, marginalisation.  The aspiration is to achieve social justice: equity, equality and fairness, all subjective concepts.   These concepts are writ large in political philosophy, theology, sociology and eonomic theory and should not be considered in distinct individual silos, but explored for interactions, symbiosis, fault lines, harmony and concordance.  Often they are in conflict, particularly in the realm of the relationship between faith and political organisations.

This blog often has highlighted the failure of government to tackle the issues of poverty, destitution and issues in areas of multiple deprivation in any concerted, long-lasting, properly funded fashion.  Instead there has been a diet of short-termism, underfunding and party political disputation.  Initiatives come and go with no lasting benefit to show.

The voluntary sector (including faith groups) has proved adept at providing support to individuals at point of need.  The sector is coming under severe pressure as rising costs and reducing income from donations and contracts for services combine to place many organisations in a state of severe financial strain.  At the same time demand or need for services is increasing.

There is a raft of services provided by the voluntary sector to allievate poverty and destitution: foodbanks, clothes banks, debt advice, warm spaces, lunch clubs and so forth.  All excellent and laudable provision but they do not solve the issues, simply make life more bearable for those able to access them. They are palliatives.  Government is quite happy to let this work continue, it takes the pressure off politicians seriously and determinably to address and eradicate the root causes of the problems.  The voluntary sector is not going to eradicate poverty.  It requires systemic change, legislation, taxpayer funding and long-term commitment to achieve results.  Of course the voluntary sector may have a role to play in commenting on and delivering initiatives.  It cannot initiate change but it can campaign for change.

It is a source of shame that food, warmth and shelter — the basics of life — are now routinely being provided by churches and voluntary organisations. That should never have become normal. It represents a profound failure of the state.

Where I think the tension sits is here: the institutional church itself has become part of the stabilising machinery of government. It is protected, sanctioned, and relied upon precisely because it absorbs social strain without fundamentally challenging the system that produces it. That protection comes with limits.  Peter Hobbs

The same is true of the voluntary sector as a whole and not just faith groups.  I view with a high degree of cynicsm the creation by the government of the Civil Society Council. The government press release (for full version see blog post : On politics and theology. Part 10) states:

Leading voices from across the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector have been...appointed to the new Civil Society Council established by the Prime Minister to bring civil society into the heart of government decision-making.  

It is window dressing, an attempt to co-opt the voluntary sector into supporting government policies.  The real power and decision making remains with government.  The parameters of policy and implementation remain with government.  The voluntary sector should not have allowed itself to be sucked into a minor role in the machinery of government.  A place close to the top table, but toothless.

In my opinion significant progress in achieving social justice will only be achieved by grassroots organisations putting upward pressure on institutions and government.  Learn the lessons of liberation, black and feminist theologies.  Attack systemic injustice from below.

Currently I am aware of three important initiatives:

* The Together March, 28th March, London: For Love, For Hope, For Unity, Together.  Organised by the Together Alliance.  I have signed up through the Progressive Christian Network.

* The Big Issue anti-poverty campaign

* Taxpayers against Poverty Campaign: Prioritise Poverty Prevention 

Poverty remains a persistent problem in the UK, affecting millions of households who struggle to afford basic necessities such as food, housing, and energy. Recent data shows that a significant proportion of people live below the poverty line, with rising living costs and insecure work pushing more families into financial hardship. 

Addressing poverty effectively requires a shift in public policy from reacting to crises to preventing them in the first place. Evidence consistently shows that measures such as ensuring adequate incomes, fair wages, affordable housing, and accessible social security can reduce poverty rates and prevent long-term social and economic costs.

In response to this challenge, Taxpayers Against Poverty has launched a campaign calling on politicians to place poverty prevention at the centre of public policy following the publication of the Nicolson Report. The Nicolson Report, named after the late Rev. Paul Nicolson, outlines the economic and social case for a prevention-focused approach. 

The campaign, 'Prioritise Poverty Prevention', urges policymakers to move beyond simply managing the consequences of poverty and instead adopt data-driven strategies that stop hardship before it occurs. We aim to build cross-party support in Parliament and wider public backing for policies that address the root causes of poverty and inequality across the UK.

Read about our campaign launch:

https://www.taxpayersagainstpoverty.org.uk/post/britain-must-prevent-poverty-not-just-manage-it-says-new-campaign

Pressure for change has to come from the grassroots.  It is not simply a case of providing evidence as in the Nicolson Report and the numerous reports published by The Joseph Rowntree Foundation.  There has to be movement, a dynamic for change, to achieve major systemic change to achieve social justice.  Faith groups should be in the front line organising, demanding change, campaigning to influence those with the power to effect change.

Part 490. Walter Brueggemann on prophetic ministry: commentary by 'Royce'

⁰ Excellent exposition. Recommended.  

Becoming the People Who See Differently

“The task of prophetic ministry is to nurture, nourish, and evoke a consciousness and perception alternative to the consciousness and perception of the dominant culture around us.”

—Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination

Brueggemann names what so many of us feel but struggle to articulate: the dominant culture forms us into ways of seeing that keep us stuck. And every generation has people who help us see differently—Bryan Stevenson in the courts, William Barber in the streets, Barbara Brown Taylor in the pulpit, Cole Arthur Riley in the quiet rooms where dignity is remembered. They’re the ones who refuse to let us settle for the story the culture hands us.

But most of us don’t meet these moments with that kind of clarity. We slip into the roles we’ve been taught to play. Sometimes we try to be the hero, carrying more than any one person can hold. Sometimes we become the villain, lashing out when we’re afraid or overwhelmed. Sometimes we feel like the victim, convinced we’re powerless in the face of everything unraveling around us. These roles are deeply human, but they keep us circling the same old patterns. They drain us without transforming anything.

The invitation of Jesus is not to shame these roles but to let them be transformed. The hero doesn’t disappear; they become a teacher—someone who empowers others instead of trying to save the world alone. The villain doesn’t get written off; they become a prophet—someone who tells the truth without contempt, someone whose courage is rooted in love rather than fear. And the victim isn’t left behind; they become a Christ‑bearer—someone who carries hope into places still marked by loss, someone who knows resurrection from the inside out.

And this, I think, is what Brueggemann means when he says the task of prophetic ministry is to “nurture, nourish, and evoke a consciousness and perception alternative to the dominant culture.” Each of these transformed roles becomes a vocation in that work. When we take up the calling of the teacher, we nurture a different way of seeing—forming courage, compassion, and clarity in one another. When we grow into the prophet, we nourish truth in a world addicted to illusion—speaking with a love that refuses to dehumanize. And when we live as Christ‑bearers, we evoke a consciousness shaped by resurrection—carrying hope into places still marked by loss. These are not abstract ideals; they are the shared work of becoming a people who can midwife restoration.

The invitation before us is to take up these vocations together—teachers, prophets, and Christ‑bearers—so that restoration becomes something we participate in, not just something we long for.

Royce

About Royce:

Operating primarily on Facebook and Instagram, Royce uses the handle @notthatkindofchristian to advocate for a version of faith centered on unconditional love, social justice, and inclusion. 

Key Characteristics of Royce’s Platform

• Mission: Royce describes the platform's foundation as love and explicitly states full support for LGBTQ+ siblings and civil rights.
• Theological Stance: He often critiques what he calls "theological corruption" or "Manly Christianity," instead calling for a return to Jesus’ original message of liberation and radical love.
• Advocacy: Royce frequently speaks out against Christian nationalism and the "weaponization of faith" for political power.
• Content Format: He shares daily insights, parables, and probing questions designed to move away from treating the Bible as an "infallible rulebook" and toward a more nuanced, discerning understanding of the Gospel. 

Part 489. On politics and theology. Part 10: Another 'initiative'

 The latest foray by politicians into engaging the voluntary sector (including faith based organisations) in delivering policies to tackle "the country's most complex social challenges".

Really! All appointed by government, meeting four times a year.  Wow, it will meet at Downing Street.

It strikes me as being a complete waste of time.  Window dressing and ego massaging.  If government is serious about working with and supporting the voluntary sector it should be doing far more to relieve the financial pressures on the sector.  Voluntary organisations are closing as a consequence of cost rises (particularly employment costs) and falling income. 

The press release (in full) is below. Public relations tosh.

New civil society council established to put partnership at the heart of government

Leading voices from across the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector have today been appointed to the new Civil Society Council, established by the Prime Minister to bring civil society into the heart of government decision‑making.

From:

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street and The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP

Published

10 March 2026

• Civil society working in partnership with government at the highest level to drive implementation of the Covenant 
• Better policy delivery across government through closer partnership on issues that cut across departments, from social cohesion to public services 
• Council to provide an open and representative voice for civil society at the centre of government 

Leading voices from across the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector have today been appointed to the new Civil Society Council, established by the Prime Minister to bring civil society into the heart of government decision‑making. 

The Council will drive a new approach to partnership with civil society, overseeing implementation of the Civil Society Covenant at national and local level, and builds on last summer’s Civil Society Summit and the launch of the Office for the Impact Economy. 

Together, these steps mark a renewed commitment to working with charities, social enterprises and community groups as core partners in tackling the country’s most complex social challenges. 

The Civil Society Council will provide a central forum to address issues that cut across government, including social cohesion and public service commissioning, and to identify opportunities for civil society to play a greater role in the design and delivery of policies and services. 

The Council will be chaired by Kate Lee OBE, Chief Executive of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO), and will bring together senior leaders from charities, social enterprises, philanthropy, faith and community organisations, and the youth sector. It will meet quarterly in Downing Street and be supported by a dedicated team in No10, maximising the opportunities for civil society to contribute across government. 

Council members were appointed following an open and competitive Expressions of Interest process which received nearly 600 applications. Final members were selected to reflect a broad mix of experience, expertise and geographic representation. 

The Council will hold its inaugural meeting next month. 

A full list of Council members is set out below: 

• Kate Lee OBE (Chair) - CEO of NCVO 
• Matt Hyde OBE – CEO of Lloyds Bank Foundation 
• Gemma Peters – CEO of Macmillan Cancer Support 
• Dame Clare Moriarty – CEO of Citizens Advice 
• Mark Russell OBE – CEO of The Children’s Society 
• Emma de Closset – CEO of UK Community Foundations 
• Charlotte Hill OBE – CEO of The Felix Project & FareShare 
• Bishop Rob Wickham - CEO of the Church Urban Fund 
• Dr Tessy Ojo CBE – CEO of The Diana Award 
• Maddy Desforges OBE – CEO of NAVCA 
• Saeed Atcha MBE DL – CEO of Youth Leads UK 
• Innes Morgan – Director and Founder of Act with Purpose   
• Dr Lindsay Cordery-Bruce – CEO of WCVA