I suppose many bloggers are frustrated op-ed writers - I'm a frustrated everything I try at the moment, but that's an altro discorso. Anyway, having listened to various views about the St Paul's Cathedral encampment, I feel waves of familiarity sweeping over me.... I even heard GP - my former fellow church member in London asking about the 'St. P's affair from a PR point of view. I think bad PR is probably the worst of it - ironically, it's not what they are doing, but how it looks that concerns the Church. Great.
Probably, in 80% of other cathedrals across the land they would have accommodated the encampment and engaged with the protesters, brought them soup and gradually made them see that the CoE had its hipper elements. But because it was St Paul's - and the Establishment, and the rather conservative Diocese of London, they couldn't think about it properly, as Christians, instead they thought about it as a nuisance to be cleared. I was a bit puzzled. Why couldn't they make an agreement with the protesters to clear a path in the middle of the steps, so people could get up and down easily - they might even have agreed to a low barrier to remind people not to crowd the area too much. I don't believe the protesters would have had a problem with that. Then all the services, tourists, weddings and valuable revenues could have continued to flow in without a problem.
I was slightly surprised that the revenues were only £16,000 per day - the caff, the gift shop and the expensive entrance fee... perhaps they didn't find as many visitors coming as one might expect. Or perhaps, like me, people would sneak in for evensong for free... and dawdle sightseeing on the way out.
Health & Safety is becoming such an old chestnut. When the Cathedral chapter blamed H&S I felt an inward sigh. It had the ring of truth - I know those pusillanimous types from past experience on Parochial Church Councils, and Deanery Synods. It is a shield for the timorous, the unadventurous and the plain idle, to protect them from having to be active or imaginative... I remember all those people who said it would be "too dangerous" to distribute Millennium Candles in the parish, in case people burned their houses down. Just such attitudes, writ on a larger scale, probably informed the Dean & Chapter's deliberations, coupled of course with their broadly establishment attitudes.
The latest thing is this "shelving" of the St Paul's Institute report about the ethics of the City of London - well, maybe it is simply postponed, but it sounds like it has been kicked into the long grass (as everyone likes to say). And now - mirabile dictu the Bishop has said he is afraid of "violence" - why? There hasn't been any so far - if they involve the police of course, that will no doubt result in some - answer: don't bring in the police. And the idea that the Cathedral will offer "a public debate" on the issues in exchange for the Occupy the City crowd dispersing... well, gosh, that sounds an immensely reasonable exchange. If there was somewhere to send my CoE membership back to, I think I would. Generation of wimps!
Probably, in 80% of other cathedrals across the land they would have accommodated the encampment and engaged with the protesters, brought them soup and gradually made them see that the CoE had its hipper elements. But because it was St Paul's - and the Establishment, and the rather conservative Diocese of London, they couldn't think about it properly, as Christians, instead they thought about it as a nuisance to be cleared. I was a bit puzzled. Why couldn't they make an agreement with the protesters to clear a path in the middle of the steps, so people could get up and down easily - they might even have agreed to a low barrier to remind people not to crowd the area too much. I don't believe the protesters would have had a problem with that. Then all the services, tourists, weddings and valuable revenues could have continued to flow in without a problem.
I was slightly surprised that the revenues were only £16,000 per day - the caff, the gift shop and the expensive entrance fee... perhaps they didn't find as many visitors coming as one might expect. Or perhaps, like me, people would sneak in for evensong for free... and dawdle sightseeing on the way out.
Health & Safety is becoming such an old chestnut. When the Cathedral chapter blamed H&S I felt an inward sigh. It had the ring of truth - I know those pusillanimous types from past experience on Parochial Church Councils, and Deanery Synods. It is a shield for the timorous, the unadventurous and the plain idle, to protect them from having to be active or imaginative... I remember all those people who said it would be "too dangerous" to distribute Millennium Candles in the parish, in case people burned their houses down. Just such attitudes, writ on a larger scale, probably informed the Dean & Chapter's deliberations, coupled of course with their broadly establishment attitudes.
The latest thing is this "shelving" of the St Paul's Institute report about the ethics of the City of London - well, maybe it is simply postponed, but it sounds like it has been kicked into the long grass (as everyone likes to say). And now - mirabile dictu the Bishop has said he is afraid of "violence" - why? There hasn't been any so far - if they involve the police of course, that will no doubt result in some - answer: don't bring in the police. And the idea that the Cathedral will offer "a public debate" on the issues in exchange for the Occupy the City crowd dispersing... well, gosh, that sounds an immensely reasonable exchange. If there was somewhere to send my CoE membership back to, I think I would. Generation of wimps!
No comments:
Post a Comment