The Manna Society is an excellent organisation working in the Diocese of Southwark to provide food, clothing, medical advice, and a hot shower for people who are homeless. You can even get your toenails cut. Anyone who has been on a walking pilgrimage for any length of time will appreciate the importance of this service. My parish supports them a little by sending up clothes and food and the proceeds of fundraising events from time to time. I must check whether we have sent anything recently because their Christmas newsletter (pdf 278Kb) which I read today, reminded me of the importance of their work.On page three, there is an article by the Campaigns Worker, Bandi Mbubi with some disturbing news. Apparently, the London Borough Councils are preparing a Bill to set up designated areas where the distribution of food and refreshments will be banned. Exemptions would be made for sporting events or for companies giving out free samples to advertise their products. Thus the Bill is aimed squarely at the soup runs.
The rationale behind this quasi-Stalinist nonsense is that soup runs create "public order issues" ("an ishoo, an ishoo, we all fall down") and that people who use soup runs may be former rough sleepers saving money. So flippin' what! If someone is hard-up enough to go and get their tea from a soup run on the street, I think it counts are a reasonable act of Christian charity to provide for them.
Then there is the pious self-justification that soup runs foster dependency and do not enable vulnerable people to make contact with services that could help them. That would be the services that have helped them so much that they are on the street, I suppose. It is advisors from places like the Manna Centre that actually enable homeless people to negotiate their way round the bureaucracy of the "services" that are supposed to help them.
The excellent article by Mental Health Nurse Marc Thurgood in the same issue (page four) explains in simple terms, that even London Councils could understand, just why it is that people end up on the streets. In many cases, rough sleeping is part of the aftermath of local authority care as a child, service in the armed forces, or a spell at Her Majesty's Pleasure.
The Manna Centre and other voluntary initiatives pick up the pieces after the "action points" of the last policy-making committee meeting have proved useless. In any society there will be a need for good people to offer basic material help to the poor. Our society is not currently blazing a trail in reducing this need. As Bandi Mbubi points out:
This proposed ban tests the very foundation of our faith and may not stop many of us to continue the distribution of food and refreshments as before. What is a decent and peaceful activity may turn into a series of confrontations in which people would be hurt and councils and other authorities brought into disrepute. It is simply immoral and unworkable to enact such a law.If you are looking for a suitable destination for one of your charitable donations over Christmas, the Manna Centre would be a good choice. See their Financial Donations page
5 comments:
GKC observed in his particular way that the Englishman passes a law requiring the homeless man to go home and sleep at night.
This appears to me to be about two things:
1) The rich in Westminster borough do not wish to be reminded that there are others less fortunate than themselves.
2) The increasing self belief among central and local government officials that only state provided services are worthwhile and anyone else doing such things is at best misguided.
The latter is leading to all sorts of injustices and absurdities such as
a) A government heavily promoting women going out to work and then making it impossible for them to do so because they lump so many regulations and checks on the nurseries, putting up the prices as a result, that the said mothers cant afford the fees
b) A government that sanctions children being taken into state care on the merest suspicion that the child might come to harm (see Munchausens syndrome by proxy, shaken baby syndrome and various other medical fantasies) despite the appalling fate many children in care meet (about half end up in prison or on the streets). Meanwhile the same government makes abortion easier.
c) A government that constantly makes more imprisionable offences for trivial matters (eg the latest being two years for driving while using a mobile phone) while at the same time releasing murderers robbers and burglars early from prison because prisons are so overcrowded.
d) A governmemt that refuses to pay for a woman with cancers medicine and when she offers to pay for it say that if she does she will have to pay for all her medical treatment because by doing so she has elected to "go private"
The problem is that they think the state is omnipotent and can solve all societies problems. Its not, only God is, and the wheels are coming off fast -so they are becoming more and more authoritarian in a desperate attempt to keep the lid on.
Sadly the problem will only go away when the government is bankrupt and has to sack two thirds of all public servants - the growing credit crunch - the result of a monumental pyramid of greed - might well bring this sooner rather than later - at which point there will only be the Church left to help.
I wouldn't get too excited about the pretend reasons for this. How can a soup run constitute a public order offence? And if it does, isn't that what the Public Order Act is for? The real reason is to do with dependency. The Government (local or national!) doesn't want people being dependent on church-groups because it wants them to be more dependent on the Government. It's just another example of Government overstepping its authority one more time.
Do priests anywhere ever mention the principle of subsidiarity in their sermons? (Did they ever?)
I am sure when they read Charles Dickesn ``A Christmas Carol` these London Councillors must be on the side of Scrooge. "Are there not prisons, workhouses" Scrooge paid his taxes for the relief of the poor. The poor had these institutions to look after them. He had done his duty.
Oliver - I'm sure you are right and the real agenda is to make people dependent on the State.
Do priests anywhere ever mention the principle of subsidiarity in their sermons? (Did they ever?)
Well I do from time to time at Blackfen. But then my sermons also include other unpopular topics like hell ...
Post a Comment