Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
I don't have a problem with the name, per se. I don't think a charity with the name 'Christian' in it makes all other charities un-Christian or less Christian.

But a few years ago, I saw one of their leaflets. I don't recall the exact words on it, but I think it listed a number of 'evils' or a similarly emotive word. 'Drought', 'famine', 'disease' were all on this list, as one might expect, alongside 'free trade'. I thought that was an extremely offensive thing to put on a leaflet and I haven't given them any money since.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Why? Free trade has been extremely damaging to a lot of developing countries, and Christian Aid are entitled to think that it is evil because of this. I share their opinion.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
I haven't given them any money since.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
Well there's being political and there's being political. I'd suggest that the statement I've quoted would alienate a good number of Christians in Britain.

I think the RSPCA is a good example of how hard-liners with a distinct political agenda are hijacking charities. It's a worrying trend.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Garasu:
But what does that mean?

Am I supposed not to give to charities that don't identify themselves as Christian? Should I give to all charities that do self identify?

How does it actually help me to discern whether to support Christian Aid?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Worldly righteousness might be a very fine and praiseworthy thing, but unless it proceeds from faith it fails before God's judgment.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by shamwari:
Christian Aid week starts on Sunday ( in the UK).

I wonder what Shipmates think.

I am not happy about the Title. Are not other Aid Agencies to be regarded as "Christian" in what they do even if they dissociate themselves from any religious affiliation? What is distinctively different about "Christian Aid"?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dafyd:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Worldly righteousness might be a very fine and praiseworthy thing, but unless it proceeds from faith it fails before God's judgment.

---

Jesus, in the parable of the sheep and the goats, says the opposite.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Free trade. You just don't get it do you Anglican't ? Can't in fact. Or won't.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin:
By the end of the lesson, the group who started with the most resources won the game, and they were all suitably full of indignation at the unfairness and impossibility of winning, and so learnt something important.

---

But I'm guessing all the groups managed to make at least a few paper circles...? If so, the exercise showed that free trade can result in everyone getting something useful, if (an important 'if', I realise) they start with some resources. So free trade benefits everyone!

I should say 'benefits everyone who takes part', with the corollary that those who cannot take part should be given aid so they can join in. ISTM the problems with free trade really arise when it's not actually free, i.e. when you have cartels, tariffs, government corruption and so on.

--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.

Posted                          

quote:

---

posted by Jade Constable
Most well-known charities are political to some degree - whether it's the RSPCA campaigning for tougher animal cruelty laws, or Shelter campaigning for regulation in the private rental sector. Part of advocating for people (or animals) is taking part in political campaigning, because politics affects everything.

---

Sorry Jade, but over the past weeks I've been giving an elderly friend a hand with a rental property the income of which forms their pension (the company they worked for didn't have a scheme).

Because of advancing years and increased legislation (MO Cert, Gas Safety & Electrical Safety certs, deposit protection legislation, etc, etc) they now use an agency to let and manage the small house...

This is what we found when the last tenants moved out

• backyard full of rubbish - and more empty bottles and cans than I've seen outside a recycling place
• front door lock superglued
• curtain poles pulled out of wall - only curtain to be found half-burnt in back yard
• extensive damp patch on wall near revolting cat litter tray (lease was "no animals")
• abandoned furniture in living room, plus bag of rotting rubbish with maggots
• all kitchen cupboards had been relieved of their shelves - nowhere to be found
• bathroom full of mould - fan disconnected and ventilator stuffed with newspaper
• the WC - there are no words... total replacement required
• carpets filthy - and covered in mud and cat hair
• 2 bedroooms have had Japanese manga cartoons drawn on the plaster with marker pen, remaining wallpaper shredded
• all light fittings broken
• fridge-freezer full of rotting food, doors wrenched off

The above is not complete, just a brief snapshot

The agent was meant to do quarterly inspections but was refused entry on last 2 occasions because "people are asleep": in any case, they've been told by "the council" that a landlord "cannot impose their own standards on tenants".

The deposit won't cover anything like the cost of putting the house to rights - estimates received so far come to approximately 4 times the amount of the deposit and we still haven't got to the bottom of the list.

We have deduced at least 2 cats from the variety of hair colours and the presence of 2 flea-ridden cat beds. Obviously they never went out since about the only litter or filth not in the backyard is cat faeces.

They left owing more than 2 month's rent - which money they had had as HB but not passed on. They put keys through the door of the agency knowing they were useless because of having glued the locks.

I wish this were a very isolated case but I know that it isn't.

Are these the "animal lovers" and (presumed to be beleaguered) private tenants you feel need protection?

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Both the sheep and the goats in that parable are ostensibly concerned with Jesus, but only those who care for the poor had sincere faith.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by JonahMan:
Firstly, so-called free trade is not free, but heavily stacked against the poorest countries in favour of the richest - just look at agricultural subsidies in the EU and the USA and compare this with how the IMF and World Bank insist on subsidies being removed in developing countries.

---

quote:

---

In Uganda, the price of coffee fell from US$0.63 per lb in 1999 to US$0.25 per lb in 2001.

• Coffee accounts for more than two-thirds of Uganda’s exports, so government revenue from its sale dropped by 36 per cent.

• Global trade rules and pressure from the IMF make it hard for the Ugandan government to increase the support or protection that it gives to its coffee farmers, so many of them are going out of business.

---

quote:

---

Secondly, the reason why the rich countries are rich and the poor countries are poor isn't because of differences in intelligence, had work or abundant natural resources. Putting it bluntly it is because we developed technologically before they did and went and stole most of their stuff - land, mineral rights etc etc.

---

quote:

---

You also have to address the underlying structural causes.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:
I was intrigued by this section in Christian Aid's game:

quote:

---

In Uganda, the price of coffee fell from US$0.63 per lb in 1999 to US$0.25 per lb in 2001.

• Coffee accounts for more than two-thirds of Uganda’s exports, so government revenue from its sale dropped by 36 per cent.

• Global trade rules and pressure from the IMF make it hard for the Ugandan government to increase the support or protection that it gives to its coffee farmers, so many of them are going out of business.

---

If these facts, as stated, are correct, then the obvious solution to me is for coffee farmers to get out of the coffee farming business and to something else (and they should be supported in doing so). Subsidising unprofitable farmers in a declining market will surely lead nowhere? (Apart from Uganda's eventual bankruptcy.)

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable
Christianity is inherently political

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dafyd:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Both the sheep and the goats in that parable are ostensibly concerned with Jesus, but only those who care for the poor had sincere faith.

---

The parable starts by talking about all the nations. It can plausibly be interpreted as, 'everybody', or more likely 'Gentiles' (excluding Jews), or even more likely, 'non-ostensible followers of God' (excluding Christians as well as Jews). There isn't any way to interpret it as covering only ostensible Christians.

What's more the sheep explicitly do not realise that they were concerned with Jesus: they thought they were just feeding the hungry, etc.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Taliesin:
My daughter was taught a 'free trade' game at school, in RE lesson.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dafyd:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Worldly righteousness might be a very fine and praiseworthy thing, but unless it proceeds from faith it fails before God's judgment.

---

Jesus, in the parable of the sheep and the goats, says the opposite.

---

quote:

---

Anglican't: If these facts, as stated, are correct, then the obvious solution to me is for coffee farmers to get out of the coffee farming business and to something else (and they should be supported in doing so).

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

It reminded me also of the parable of the Good Samaritan.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Zach82: Can we have a little context please? I know we want to say "This Jesus business isn't really important so long as we have charity," but is that what the Gospel writers are trying to say?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:

quote:

---

posted by Jade Constable
Most well-known charities are political to some degree - whether it's the RSPCA campaigning for tougher animal cruelty laws, or Shelter campaigning for regulation in the private rental sector. Part of advocating for people (or animals) is taking part in political campaigning, because politics affects everything.

---

Sorry Jade, but over the past weeks I've been giving an elderly friend a hand with a rental property the income of which forms their pension (the company they worked for didn't have a scheme).

Because of advancing years and increased legislation (MO Cert, Gas Safety & Electrical Safety certs, deposit protection legislation, etc, etc) they now use an agency to let and manage the small house...

This is what we found when the last tenants moved out

• backyard full of rubbish - and more empty bottles and cans than I've seen outside a recycling place
• front door lock superglued
• curtain poles pulled out of wall - only curtain to be found half-burnt in back yard
• extensive damp patch on wall near revolting cat litter tray (lease was "no animals")
• abandoned furniture in living room, plus bag of rotting rubbish with maggots
• all kitchen cupboards had been relieved of their shelves - nowhere to be found
• bathroom full of mould - fan disconnected and ventilator stuffed with newspaper
• the WC - there are no words... total replacement required
• carpets filthy - and covered in mud and cat hair
• 2 bedroooms have had Japanese manga cartoons drawn on the plaster with marker pen, remaining wallpaper shredded
• all light fittings broken
• fridge-freezer full of rotting food, doors wrenched off

The above is not complete, just a brief snapshot

The agent was meant to do quarterly inspections but was refused entry on last 2 occasions because "people are asleep": in any case, they've been told by "the council" that a landlord "cannot impose their own standards on tenants".

The deposit won't cover anything like the cost of putting the house to rights - estimates received so far come to approximately 4 times the amount of the deposit and we still haven't got to the bottom of the list.

We have deduced at least 2 cats from the variety of hair colours and the presence of 2 flea-ridden cat beds. Obviously they never went out since about the only litter or filth not in the backyard is cat faeces.

They left owing more than 2 month's rent - which money they had had as HB but not passed on. They put keys through the door of the agency knowing they were useless because of having glued the locks.

I wish this were a very isolated case but I know that it isn't.

Are these the "animal lovers" and (presumed to be beleaguered) private tenants you feel need protection?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable
Christianity is inherently political

---

But not necessarily left wing.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

Anglican't: If these facts, as stated, are correct, then the obvious solution to me is for coffee farmers to get out of the coffee farming business and to something else (and they should be supported in doing so).

---

That's not so easy, even with help. If you're a small-scale coffee farmer, you can't just start growing cotton next year because the coffee prices fell. The solution isn't subsidizing (I doubt that Christian Aid proposes this), it's making international trade more fair.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JonahMan:
Firstly, so-called free trade is not free, but heavily stacked against the poorest countries in favour of the richest - just look at agricultural subsidies in the EU and the USA and compare this with how the IMF and World Bank insist on subsidies being removed in developing countries.

---

I'm no fan of agricultural subsidies and I think the tariff barriers that the EU sets up should be torn down (hopefully tearing down the EU with it, but that's a different discussion).

I was intrigued by this section in Christian Aid's game:

quote:

---

In Uganda, the price of coffee fell from US$0.63 per lb in 1999 to US$0.25 per lb in 2001.

• Coffee accounts for more than two-thirds of Uganda’s exports, so government revenue from its sale dropped by 36 per cent.

• Global trade rules and pressure from the IMF make it hard for the Ugandan government to increase the support or protection that it gives to its coffee farmers, so many of them are going out of business.

---

If these facts, as stated, are correct, then the obvious solution to me is for coffee farmers to get out of the coffee farming business and to something else (and they should be supported in doing so). Subsidising unprofitable farmers in a declining market will surely lead nowhere? (Apart from Uganda's eventual bankruptcy.)

quote:

---

Secondly, the reason why the rich countries are rich and the poor countries are poor isn't because of differences in intelligence, had work or abundant natural resources. Putting it bluntly it is because we developed technologically before they did and went and stole most of their stuff - land, mineral rights etc etc.

---

I would suggest that the reasons for the continued problems in places such as Africa is because of serious structural problems in the countries concerned. For example,

- Democratic institutions are strengthening, but they aren't what they could be.

- Security of land tenure. In order to be an effective commercial farmer, one needs to know for certain that one has definite, enforceable legal rights over the land one holds. Are African economies underpinned by effective Land Registries? I imagine most are not, hence why subsistence farming will always be more attractive.

- Strong corporate institutions. How long does it take to set up a limited company (with all the advantages that brings) in the UK? Not long at all - I'm sure with a bit of effort I could start trading as Anglican't Limited by Monday morning if I wanted to. How does that compare to setting up a company in, say, Tanzania? I dread to think.

quote:

---

You also have to address the underlying structural causes.

---

I agree. What I've listed above are three, off-the-cuff but practical examples of why I think Third World economies lag behind. Campaigning on these issues would, I think, be more useful than whining about a global system of trade that has been around for centuries and isn't changing any time soon. Sadly, I can't see anything on the Christian Aid website about these very practical problems, but it's a big website with lots of detailed papers, so I'll keep looking.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Anglican't: What does 'more fair' mean?

---

quote:

---

Anglican't: Christian Aid complains that the Ugandan government cannot 'increase support' to otherwise unprofitable farmers. I'm not sure how to read this other than 'subsidies'.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeRoc:

quote:

---

Zach82: Can we have a little context please? I know we want to say "This Jesus business isn't really important so long as we have charity," but is that what the Gospel writers are trying to say?

---

Well, the Parable says very clearly:

The Priest and the Levite who were all pious but didn't lift a finger = bad guys
The Samaritan who doesn't have our religion but who helped = good guy

There are many ways to interpret this parable (I seem to remember we discussed it a couple of weeks ago), but independently of your interpretation it becomes very difficult to hold up "Worldly righteousness might be a very fine and praiseworthy thing, but unless it proceeds from faith it fails before God's judgment" in the light of it.

The Good Samaritan had worldly righteousness, but it didn't proceed from faith. It sais nowhere in the parable that it did; from the listeners' point of view he didn't even have the right faith. Yet, his actions didn't fail before Jesus' judgement.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Zach82: The argument is for the possibility of righteousness in non-standard-Jews

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Zach82: The text doesn't explain the motivations of the Samaritan at all.

---