Fantastic disruption of Olympic Flame ceremony
Along with people all over the world, I was watching live as the Free Tibet protestor ran behind the spokesman of the repressive Chinese regime who have in recent days slaughtered 130 Tibetans and imprisoned many more. No-one got harmed in the peaceful demonstration, but I think it was a fantastic protest, and I was delighted for the point to be made, because to be honest bullies have to be stood up against.
This makes me wonder about the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, which was also disgraceful and the action of bullying nations, ignoring the wishes of the international community.
Are the churches too conservative on issues like these? Too quiet and respectable and by implication acquiescing in the status quo? I remember when Tony Blair was preparing to attack Iraq. We mobilised anti-war demonstrations in our town and lined the main street. Two million of us marched in London.
But at my evangelical church, not a single word was spoken out against the impending invasion. Not a single member of my church took part in the demonstrations. It was left to largely non-christian groups to speak out for decency.
There are indeed christian groups involved in human rights issues. But I feel that all too often the church is pre-occupied with a religious agenda and a religious lifestyle, and a somewhat insular and middle-class respectability, that tends to remain too silent on human rights.
Many christians *now* say they think the Iraq invasion was a mistake, but how many actually demonstrated and protested at the time? Or did they adopt that viewpoint when it started to become "respectable"? Should christians be more militant against repressive regimes? Should christians be at the forefront of demonstrations and the struggle for human rights?
This makes me wonder about the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, which was also disgraceful and the action of bullying nations, ignoring the wishes of the international community.
Are the churches too conservative on issues like these? Too quiet and respectable and by implication acquiescing in the status quo? I remember when Tony Blair was preparing to attack Iraq. We mobilised anti-war demonstrations in our town and lined the main street. Two million of us marched in London.
But at my evangelical church, not a single word was spoken out against the impending invasion. Not a single member of my church took part in the demonstrations. It was left to largely non-christian groups to speak out for decency.
There are indeed christian groups involved in human rights issues. But I feel that all too often the church is pre-occupied with a religious agenda and a religious lifestyle, and a somewhat insular and middle-class respectability, that tends to remain too silent on human rights.
Many christians *now* say they think the Iraq invasion was a mistake, but how many actually demonstrated and protested at the time? Or did they adopt that viewpoint when it started to become "respectable"? Should christians be more militant against repressive regimes? Should christians be at the forefront of demonstrations and the struggle for human rights?