Yesterday the Archbishops of Canterbury and York attacked the government's plans to deport asylum seekers in the UK to Rwanda. I use the term deport carefully, because these asylum seekers will be forcefully removed from the UK to a country not of their choosing, which is illegal. There is no return ticket.
The reaction has been furious, and hostile. Jacob Rees Mogg said the Archbishops did not understand the spirit of redemption within the scheme. It's quite reasonably been argued that only a Pharisee could see what he finds in it.
Priti Patel has said the Archbishops offered no alternative. Actually, I think she will find they did. The Christian message has always been of welcome to the stranger, albeit the Church forgot it for long periods.
Tom Hunt MP and other Tories argued that the Church should not be teaching about the gospel of Jesus at Easter, of all times (their choice fo words, not mine).
The media reaction has seen The Times, Mail, Express and Telegraph all run front-page stories criticising the Archbishops for being political. These paper's claim is that is not the role of the Church. Clearly, none of them has read the New Testament. It is a profoundly political text. It was only when it was depoliticised by Constantine, and hidden from many by only being available in Latin for more than a millennia that this was forgotten. Until then the reason why Christians were persecuted was that they profoundly upset the political status quo.
And so they should. Especially now. You do not have to be a Christian to appreciate the radical teaching of Jesus of Nazareth. His instruction was to have bias to the poor, to love your neighbour, to forgive debts, to end the tyranny of the money changers and much more. All of that is deeply radical. Try the Magnificat in Luke for a flavour. That is said or sung at evensong every day in the Church of England. This is no peripheral text: this is what is at the core of CoE thinking.
But of course, the Tories and their media supporters do not know that, or want to know that. Let alone do they want to hear it. They want to believe God is on the side of the achiever and that the sacrament of wealth (there isn't one, just for the record) is the true outward sign of inner grace.
If they can't have that from the Church then something more sinister happens. They now demand silence. “Who will”, the papers ask, “rid us of these troublesome priests?” (I only misquote a little). The precedent is not encouraging, but relevant. In these demands there is an implicit menace. The threat is that the Church should comply, or be silent. The demand made of it by the Toriues is for endorsement, not questioning, let alone opposition.
I know that the Tories are aware that from many churchgoers acquiescence will be forthcoming. But they will also know that amongst the very early inmates of Dachau concentration camp there were quite a lot of priests whose silence could not be bought.
In that case every priest now has to face the question we all might have to consider at some time, which is whether we have the courage to oppose, come what may?
The Tories need to also consider this question, because their whole modus operandi is now based on intimidation in the expectation of fearful response. Priests, they say, must not teach Christianity. Lawyers must not uphold the law. Opposition politicians must not oppose. Acquiescence is now the demand. And some will give it.
But others won't. And that number will grow. That is because courage is, at least in part, liberated by the realisation that there is no alternative but to take a stand. Those who will do so on principle are small in number but big in impact.
But they are going to be joined by millions who are pragmatically fearful. They will be those who can no longer pay the bills. Their houses will be unheated. They or their children will be unfed. Their homes will be at risk. They will also have nothing left to lose. Their families are at risk. They too will cross a line.
And their condition is commonplace. It is not one chosen, politically. It is one imposed, actually. So even those inclined to oppose those with principles will recognise themselves and those they know in these people.
There is in this the real danger for the Tories. And danger for us all, of course. Creating the potential for volatility, which someone as calm as Martin Lewis thinks likely, is an inherently reckless political act. The risk for everyone is that much might go wrong. But the simple fact is that Tory politics is now moving so far into extremism, and appears so fascist in its approach, that many will see no option soon but to oppose a government that is giving them no choice but to oppose, because all other options will have gone.
I wish we did not live in such dangerous times. But it seems that we do. And we have to ask in that case what this demands of us.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
What an Easter message from the Tories – Fear Us, for we are strong.
Welby has had to speak up only because it appears that God’s (still) away on business.
Personally I prefer rendition as the description for what is planned; deportation sometimes has a true legal basis.
Perhaps more worrying for the Tories is the discontent amongst the crumblies (I am one) over the cost of living. Food bank attendance in this group is rapidly rising, and they do tend to vote.
I accept, but rendition is maybe too technical
And poverty amongst the elderly is going to be a very big issue
to follow the last sentence…
“I wish it need not have happened in my time,” said Frodo.
“So do I,” said Gandalf, “and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”
Agreed
It would seem to be the case that this Government has run out of ideas, if the major criticism they can make is that no one else has come up with a better solution to the problem. Do they mean a solution that suits their purpose? When the bastions of their traditional power base start to stand up and say no, we do not like what you do, then they should perceive they have a problem.
They want to stop the people smugglers? Surely they epitomise the ultimate in business getting on and doing things without all that pesky red tape that held them back? If this party was serious, they would throw appropriate resources at stopping the people smugglers through thorough investigations with other nations…..or does that require too much co-operation with those nasty EU nations who cannot be trusted?
On another matter, the Head of State has the power to sack a prime minister in another country that has a written constitution (ie Australia November 1975). This constitution was orginally approved by the Mother of Parliaments in Westminister. If the Head of State has that power for a former colony, why does it not have that power in this country? Let the Head of State tell the PM that he no longer has the confidence of HRH, and work with her Parliament to remove him from office. Invite the Leader of the Opposition to form a Government of Coalition with other MPs to govern until an election can be called. is that possible?
It is a possible solution to a whole range of issues that have been created since 2010. Falling life expectancy for poorer half of the nation, limited job prospects for those outwith London, curtailing of the right to protest, managing the biggest drop in living standards in 40 years (well they did want to be the best in Europe at something), lying to the nation monarch and Parliament, creating artifical trade barriers with the once biggest trading partner, threatening the breakup of the United Kingdom….and so much more.
The big idea put forward by fascists according to Prof Tim Snyder is that there are ‘no ideas’ and he is right.
Ideas lead to dissent and competition – especially from better, more intelligent and enlightened human beings.
Fascism and its economic bed fellow Neo-liberalism abhor competition. They are monopolists – plain and simple.
In Russia, priests are now expected to glorify war, murder and child abuse. This is what happens when the church complied with the state. Russian orthodoxy is now profoundly anti Christian in the most literal and apocalyptic sense.
It would appear that this is a compliant church
Welcome or not, we are matched with the hour.
A terrifying honour.
It is not inherently political for the Archbishops to simply point out that the choices being made by the politicians are uncharitable, immoral, and unchristian.
As for alternatives, we perhaps ought to consider what Priti Patel claims her policy will do. She claims that separating out a few hundred people each year from the thousands who seek asylum in the UK and deporting them to Rwanda will inhibit the business of people traffickers, and stop people putting lives at risk. As if punishing the victims will somehow magically hurt the perpetrators and make them reconsider their life choices. Or as if this one change will force desperate people fleeing from their homes to claim asylum somewhere else. She has not herself explained how this is meant to work. It won’t.
As to saving lives, according to the International Organization for Migration, who track these things, 200 cross-Channel migrants have died or gone missing since 2014. That includes 39 who suffocated in a lorry in Essex in 2019, and 27 who drowned in one incident in November 2021. The total drownings in that period that period of just over 8 years is 58. Which to be clear is 58 too many. But as things stand perhaps two or four times that many people are dying in this country, each day, every day, from Coronavirus.
https://missingmigrants.iom.int/region/europe?region_incident=4061&route=3896&incident_date%5Bmin%5D=&incident_date%5Bmax%5D=
Anyway, the obvious alternative is of course to create safe and legal routes for people to claim asylum and come to the UK, and then to integrate them into our society. Just like we have started to arrange for people fleeing Ukraine. Except of course our hostile and understaffed Home Office has made that a bureaucratic nightmare, notwithstanding approaching 5 million Ukrainian refugees in other countries already (almost all women and children, and more than half of them in Poland) and approaching 8 million internally displaced people within Ukraine, from a country of 40 million people, fleeing tanks and bombs and rape and murder.
Rather than showing any compassion, we are going to send some traumatised people to a troubled country thousands of miles away (seemingly after several other places turned us down, this was the only one corrupt enough to take our money) which the UK and other independent observers regularly criticise for its human rights abuses. A country from where the UK regularly accepts a few asylum cases each year.
This abortion of a policy is not a dead cat to distract us from the failings of this government and its leaders. It is a flashing sign pointing out how utterly disgusting they are. No pasaran.
Your conclusion is wholly appropriate
Fun fact: the UK is one of the most densely populated countries in Europe, with a population density of about 270 people per square kilometer. England on its own has over 420 people per square kilometer.
And Rwanda? Over 440 persons per square kilometer: the highest in Africa, after Mauritius. It is already more crowded than England, and about twice as crowded as the UK.
The GDP of the UK is around $50k per person. In Rwanda, it is below $1,000. (Even considering purchasing power parity, it is $52k versus under $3k.)
An obvious destination then……
“They will also have nothing left to lose. Their families are at risk. They too will cross a line.” The anarchist in me now echoes the words of Janis Joplin: “Freedom’s just another name for nothin’ left to lose”. Frightening.
I saw the Mail on Sunday today at my local shop and nearly bought them all just to put them on the fire.
These Tories are unique – having successfully ablated human ethics from Government policy since 2010. They are the worst of the worst.
If you read that rag and agree with it’s front page then shame on you. You really are the lowest of the low and are totally misled.
And Rees-Mogg – you the ‘Catholic’. The bible you say you read says something about the ‘the first being last’ in the kingdom Heaven you apparently believe in.
Well, you and your Tory mates had better make the most of it whilst you’re still here is all I can say.
Because you and Boris and the rest of you are going to hell for this – you really are.
Unbelievable.
I hope you saved your money….
I do not have the money to be honest, but if I had, I would have bought the lot, burnt them all and put a vid up on some social media channel or other with a commentary to match (pun intended).
The other thing is that I work in the public sector and such behaviour would mean that career wise I would be toast .
Last night I watched the film ‘The Trick’ – about ‘climategate’ and the way in which Professor Phil Jones was hacked and his work on global warming discredited by vested interests. It is really good – made by the BBC.
Like Jones, Mr Welby and his associates are going to get the same treatment but from a sovereign Government instead just for ‘looking up’. Phew – what a twisted world.
True
Strangely that thought occurs to me too whenever I wander into our village shop and see the pile of Mails with their latest shrieking front page. Perhaps a national day of action is called for – mass purchases of the Mail to frustrate its readers.
More seriously, I struggle to see what will put off their core vote, that remains stubbornly in the mid-30s. Its become like Trump saying that he could shoot someone in broad daylight and they’d still vote for him.
Today will be interesting
As others have observed, if archbishops are not qualified to comment on morality then who is? I’d include rabbis, and imams come to that. Cleverly’s complaint that the archbishop was virtue signalling was just laughable. Its in the job description…
Interesting comment about what was achieved in the past
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/19/britain-ugandan-asian-family-priti-patel-refugees-rwanda
Thanks
I had missed that