Everyone,

I've been too preoccupied with the millennial drama playing out in my own backyard to follow the events in London very closely, but apparently evicting protesters from the grounds of St. Paul's Cathedral was NOT one of the administration's better ideas. A couple of heads have rolled already, and they are now in damage control mode. A coalition of Christian groups have raised the stakes even higher should they decide to go the strong-arm route again, but they seem to be having second thoughts about that. Never underestimate the power of YouTube.

Check out the sign in the top picture at the beginning of this article!

--Linda

Occupy London could be protected by Christian ring of prayer

Coalition of Christian groups plan to prevent forcible attempts to remove tents outside St Paul's Cathedral

Mark Townsend
Saturday 29 October 2011 14.57 EDT

Christian groups have drawn up plans to protect protesters by forming a ring of prayer around the camp outside St Paul's Cathedral, should an attempt be made to forcibly remove them.

As the storm of controversy over the handling of the Occupy London Stock Exchange demonstration deepened on Saturday, Christian activists said it was their duty to stand up for peaceful protest in the absence of support from St Paul's. One Christian protester, Tanya Paton, said: "We represent peace, unity and love. A ring of prayer is a wonderful symbol."

With senior officials at St Paul's apparently intent on seeking an injunction to break up the protest, the director of the influential religious thinktank Ekklesia, Jonathan Bartley, said the cathedral's handling of the protest had been a "car crash" and predicted more high-profile resignations from the Church of England.

The canon chancellor of St Paul's, Dr Giles Fraser, and the Rev Fraser Dyer, who works as a chaplain at the cathedral, have already stepped down over the decision to pursue legal action to break up the camp.

Meanwhile, it has emerged that Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, is attempting to mediate in the dispute. She said she had contacted the corporation, cathedral and protesters to offer a "neutral space" to sort out the impasse. The corporation had not yet responded, she said, although St Paul's had acknowledged her offer. She said the protesters had been enthusiastic in their desire for dialogue and a peaceful resolution.

"It would have been easy to opt for a line of action that would have led to images of police dragging away protesters, but they want to talk."


It was claimed last night that a highly critical report into the moral standards of bankers has been suppressed by St Paul's amid fears it would inflame tensions over the protest. The report, based on a survey of 500 City workers who were asked if they thought they were worth their salaries and bonuses, was due to be published last Thursday.

But publication of the report, by the St Paul's Institute, has been delayed in apparent acknowledgement that it would give the impression the cathedral was on the side of protesters.

Christian groups that have publicly sided with the protesters include one of the oldest Christian charities, the Fellowship of Reconciliation, and the oldest national student organisation, the Student Christian Movement, Christianity Uncut, the Zacchaeus 2000 Trust and the Christian magazine Third Way. In addition, London Catholic Worker, the Society of Sacramental Socialists and Quaker groups have offered their support.

A statement by the groups said: "As Christians, we stand alongside people of all religions who are resisting economic injustice with active nonviolence. The global economic system perpetuates the wealth of the few at the expense of the many. It is based on idolatrous subservience to markets. We cannot worship both God and money."

<snip>

Source: The Guardian

Here's a related editorial from the Guardian. Please note that nobody has any doubt which side Jesus would have taken--whether they like it or not. How embarrassing!

Jesus may be with Occupy London, but St Paul would have sided with health and safety

The cathedral's namesake was a sucker for authority – as the church is and ever was

Marina Hyde
Friday 28 October 2011 15.30 EDT

'I could imagine Jesus being born in the camp," mused Giles Fraser, the departing canon chancellor of St Paul's who so rebelliously made the church relevant this week. For my part, I could imagine St Paul siding with health and safety.

Forgive the lapse into theological technicalese, especially from a pagan such as myself, but the cathedral's namesake was a bit of an arse. For St Paul, established authority took precedence over even moral authority. The New Testament reverentially preserves a letter in which our hero writes that he is sending a runaway slave back to his master, specifically violating an Old Testament command. "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee," runs the relevant passage in Deuteronomy. "He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him."

So, after a week in which the instinctively malign bumblings of British authority yet again had the flavour of a debased Ealing comedy, Rev Fraser's principled departure brought a sense of clarity. Friday's summoning of the lawyers by St Paul's merely underscored it. We now know that Giles's erstwhile colleagues do not want those who perceive themselves the slaves of capitalism dwelling where it liketh them in the church's gate. They would liketh the protesters to "move on", in fact – even though it seems likely to lead to ugly scenes and possibly violence – and allow them to resume the softly-softly behind-the-scenes work in fighting injustice and selling £180 cufflinks which has done such a bang-up job of making the victims of their City neighbours feel empowered.

At some level you have to admire the church's absolute insistence on ineffectuality. Speaking of which, what a nostalgic pleasure it was to see the former archbishop of Canterbury George Carey wheel himself on to the Telegraph comment pages to dispense a column that would be absurdly flattered by the description of useful idiocy. "How could Occupy be unaware?" wondered His Pointmissingness, of all the work the church was doing to promote justice. "The St Paul's Institute alone has been raising precisely the issues Occupy is raising."

How on earth did they miss that? It feels the moment to reprise the old rumour of how George Carey landed the big job. Legend has it that the Anglican establishment's wildly preferred candidate was John Habgood, the hugely intelligent Archbishop of York. Fearing Habgood was too much of a lefty for Margaret Thatcher to anoint, the bishops hatched a plot: the only alternative they would submit would be a candidate of such transparent uselessness that she could only give the job to Habgood. I need hardly tell you how that one turned out.

<snip>

Source: The Guardian

I don't get it, Sean. Isn't that the same link I posted, the link to the second article? What did you want me to look at?

Linda,
Your link does not work for me; the one I supplied does reach the target.
Seán