Saturday 30 November 2013

WoWPetition's 100K



Some time shortly after eight this evening WoWPetition reached and breached the 100,000 signatures needed for consideration of a debate in Parliament. It attained the target not with a trickle but with a flood with some five hundred signatures in that hour.



This means that WoWpetition is one of two current epetitions that has exceeded the 100K required to trigger a debate.



However, WoWPetition is the number one (#1) epetition effecting the notorious Department for Work & Pensions (DWP). It is only the third ever petition relating to this noxious department of government ever to attain the necessary 100,000 signatories.


As far as I know, thus far - at the time of publishing according to Google - only the Mirror has covered WoWPetition's success.


WoWPetition does not close until 12th December at 12.12. One still has an opportunity to add one's monicker and metaphorically stand in solidarity with disabled &/or chronically sick folk. To those of you who already have signed, my and my fellow WoWriers' gratitude. %)

A DWP Apology - No, Really!

On Friday I suffered another panic-attack, induced once again by the arrival of a brown envelope from a DWP agency. I was in such a state, even five hours later, that I had to wait for my house-mate to turn up and read the contents for me.

Regular readers may recall my having openly wondered whether the DWP is deliberately harassing Employment & Support Allowance (ESA) Support Group claimants after I received a summons to a work-related interview (WRI). The actual letter (q.v.) neither states nor implies anywhere that such an appointment is totally voluntary.


The letter I received on Friday 29th is dated Monday 25th. To my surprise it is an apology. I was so incredulous that I had my house-mate read it again and then had to see it for myself before I believed it to be true. It is actually a truly pleasant letter and reads as if the Personal Adviser (PA) is genuinely sympathetic.

The PA does indeed quite clearly state that:

"As you are in the support group your contact is voluntary and I apologise that the wording on the letter does not make this clear."

Nonetheless, I wait to see whether there is further mix-up and/or harassment and I end up being sanctioned for not attending the WRI.

And in relation to the print-outs I received earlier in the week with no covering letter, I shall be emailing my new PA for advice.

Naturally, I shall keep you apprised in due course of any resolution - but please do not hold your breath!

Thursday 28 November 2013

Pope Francis & his Exhortation


No longer a person of faith, an apostate if one will, I still hold on to spirituality, a deep sense of ethics and a fervour for genuine and lasting Social Justice.

I have seen fanatic adoration and cynical character-assassination of the new pope, Pope Francis. Via news reports I respected his travails as a hard-working bishop in Latin-America. I was filled with Hope when he was elected. Having read the latest papal exhortation, Evangelii Gaudium, I am convinced he is no sentimentalist and no career cleric, but rather an intelligent and genuinely spiritual expositor of truths for all humanity.

The quotations below are the parts of Francis' pamphlet that I found particularly apposite to myself in the current milieu of UK tyranny contra "the poor" in the wider sense of that collective noun. I have endeavoured to keep my comments to a minimum, hopefully permitting the voice of Francis to speak out.

Throughout, the bold text is this writer's iteration. I may need to point out to the reader that the document is written using American English spelling: I have quoted as is. Some of the Scriptures quoted will not be found in Protestant Bibles, so reference to a Roman Catholic or ecumenical Bible may prove helpful. The cited footnotes can be found at the bottom of this post.

***

According to Pope Francis the poor and the sick are the priority:
48. If the whole Church takes up this missionary impulse, she has to go forth to everyone without exception. But to whom should she go first? When we read the Gospel we find a clear indication: not so much our friends and wealthy neighbours, but above all the poor and the sick, those who are usually despised and overlooked, “those who cannot repay you” (Lk 14:14). There can be no room for doubt or for explanations which weaken so clear a message. Today and always, “the poor are the privileged recipients of the Gospel”, [52.] and the fact that it is freely preached to them is a sign of the kingdom that Jesus came to establish. We have to state, without mincing words, that “there is an inseparable bond between our faith and the poor”. May we never abandon them.
Francis encourages the Church faithful to get their hands dirty with good works:
49. Let us go forth, then, let us go forth to offer everyone the life of Jesus Christ. Here I repeat for the entire Church what I have often said to the priests and laity of Buenos Aires: I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security. I do not want a Church concerned with being at the centre and then ends by being caught up in a web of obsessions and procedures. If something should rightly disturb us and trouble our consciences, it is the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are living without the strength, light and consolation born of friendship with Jesus Christ, without a community of faith to support them, without meaning and a goal in life. More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe, while at our door peo[p]le are starving and Jesus does not tire of saying to us: “Give them something to eat” (Mk 6:37).
And this could be on British society today:
No to an economy of exclusion
53. Just as the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say “thou shalt not” to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills. How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points? This is a case of exclusion. Can we continue to stand by when food is thrown away while people are starving? This is a case of inequality. Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape. Human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded. We have created a “disposable” culture which is now spreading. It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new. Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the “exploited” but the outcast, the “leftovers”.
54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting. To sustain a lifestyle which excludes others, or to sustain enthusiasm for that selfish ideal, a globalization of indifference has developed. Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own. The culture of prosperity deadens us; we are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase; and in the meantime all those lives stunted for lack of opportunity seem a mere spectacle; they fail to move us.
I do not think Francis is the biggest fan of lucre:
No to the new idolatry of money
55. One cause of this situation is found in our relationship with money, since we calmly accept its dominion over ourselves and our societies. The current financial crisis can make us overlook the fact that it originated in a profound human crisis: the denial of the primacy of the human person! We have created new idols. The worship of the ancient golden calf (cf. Ex 32:1-35) has returned in a new and ruthless guise in the idolatry of money and the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose. The worldwide crisis affecting finance and the economy lays bare their imbalances and, above all, their lack of real concern for human beings; man is reduced to one of his needs alone: consumption.
And on the global neo-liberal financial system, Francis has this to say:
56. While the earnings of a minority are growing exponentially, so too is the gap separating the majority from the prosperity enjoyed by those happy few. This imbalance is the result of ideologies which defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation. Consequently, they reject the right of states, charged with vigilance for the common good, to exercise any form of control. A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. Debt and the accumulation of interest also make it difficult for countries to realize the potential of their own economies and keep citizens from enjoying their real purchasing power. To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which have taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits. In this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, which become the only rule.
No to a financial system which rules rather than serves
57. Behind this attitude lurks a rejection of ethics and a rejection of God. Ethics has come to be viewed with a certain scornful derision. It is seen as counterproductive, too human, because it makes money and power relative. It is felt to be a threat, since it condemns the manipulation and debasement of the person. In effect, ethics leads to a God who calls for a committed response which is outside of the categories of the marketplace. When these latter are absolutized, God can only be seen as uncontrollable, unmanageable, even dangerous, since he calls human beings to their full realization and to freedom from all forms of enslavement. Ethics – a non-ideological ethics – would make it possible to bring about balance and a more humane social order. With this in mind, I encourage financial experts and political leaders to ponder the words of one of the sages of antiquity: “Not to share one’s wealth with the poor is to steal from them and to take away their livelihood. It is not our own goods which we hold, but theirs”. [55.]
58. A financial reform open to such ethical considerations would require a vigorous change of approach on the part of political leaders. I urge them to face this challenge with determination and an eye to the future, while not ignoring, of course, the specifics of each case. Money must serve, not rule! The Pope loves everyone, rich and poor alike, but he is obliged in the name of Christ to remind all that the rich must help, respect and promote the poor. I exhort you to generous solidarity and a return of economics and finance to an ethical approach which favours human beings.
A call for Social Justice which brings to my mind my studies into Liberation Theology:
No to the inequality which spawns violence
59. Today in many places we hear a call for greater security. But until exclusion and inequality in society and between peoples is reversed, it will be impossible to eliminate violence. The poor and the poorer peoples are accused of violence, yet without equal opportunities the different forms of aggression and conflict will find a fertile terrain for growth and eventually explode. When a society – whether local, national or global – is willing to leave a part of itself on the fringes, no political programmes or resources spent on law enforcement or surveillance systems can indefinitely guarantee tranquility. This is not the case simply because inequality provokes a violent reaction from those excluded from the system, but because the socioeconomic system is unjust at its root. Just as goodness tends to spread, the toleration of evil, which is injustice, tends to expand its baneful influence and quietly to undermine any political and social system, no matter how solid it may appear. If every action has its consequences, an evil embedded in the structures of a society has a constant potential for disintegration and death. It is evil crystallized in unjust social structures, which cannot be the basis of hope for a better future. We are far from the so-called “end of history”, since the conditions for a sustainable and peaceful development have not yet been adequately articulated and realized.
And the Pope rails against corruption in all its forms:
60. Today’s economic mechanisms promote inordinate consumption, yet it is evident that unbridled consumerism combined with inequality proves doubly damaging to the social fabric. Inequality eventually engenders a violence which recourse to arms cannot and never will be able to resolve. This serves only to offer false hopes to those clamouring for heightened security, even though nowadays we know that weapons and violence, rather than providing solutions, create new and more serious conflicts. Some simply content themselves with blaming the poor and the poorer countries themselves for their troubles; indulging in unwarranted generalizations, they claim that the solution is an “education” that would tranquilize them, making them tame and harmless. All this becomes even more exasperating for the marginalized in the light of the widespread and deeply rooted corruption found in many countries – in their governments, businesses and institutions – whatever the political ideology of their leaders.
Society must be all-inclusive, of rich and poor alike, using Jesus as an exemplar:
II. THE INCLUSION OF THE POOR IN SOCIETY
186. Our faith in Christ, who became poor, and was always close to the poor and the outcast, is the basis of our concern for the integral development of society’s most neglected members.
In union with God, we hear a plea
187. Each individual Christian and every community is called to be an instrument of God for the liberation and promotion of the poor, and for enabling them to be fully a part of society. This demands that we be docile and attentive to the cry of the poor and to come to their aid. A mere glance at the Scriptures is enough to make us see how our gracious Father wants to hear the cry of the poor: “I have observed the misery of my people who are in Egypt; I have heard their cry on account of their taskmasters. Indeed, I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them… so I will send you…” (Ex 3:7-8, 10). We also see how he is concerned for their needs: “When the Israelites cried out to the Lord, the Lord raised up for them a deliverer” (Jg 3:15). If we, who are God’s means of hearing the poor, turn deaf ears to this plea, we oppose the Father’s will and his plan; that poor person “might cry to the Lord against you, and you would incur guilt” (Dt 15:9). A lack of solidarity towards his or her needs will directly affect our relationship with God: “For if in bitterness of soul he calls down a curse upon you, his Creator will hear his prayer” (Sir 4:6). The old question always returns: “How does God’s love abide in anyone who has the world’s goods, and sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses help?” (1 Jn 3:17). Let us recall also how bluntly the apostle James speaks of the cry of the oppressed: “The wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts” (5:4).
The nature of solidarity:
188. The Church has realized that the need to heed this plea is itself born of the liberating action of grace within each of us, and thus it is not a question of a mission reserved only to a few: “The Church, guided by the Gospel of mercy and by love for mankind, hears the cry for justice and intends to respond to it with all her might”. [153] In this context we can understand Jesus’ command to his disciples: “You yourselves give them something to eat!” (Mk 6:37): it means working to eliminate the structural causes of poverty and to promote the integral development of the poor, as well as small daily acts of solidarity in meeting the real needs which we encounter. The word “solidarity” is a little worn and at times poorly understood, but it refers to something more than a few sporadic acts of generosity. It presumes the creation of a new mindset which thinks in terms of community and the priority of the life of all over the appropriation of goods by a few.
189. Solidarity is a spontaneous reaction by those who recognize that the social function of property and the universal destination of goods are realities which come before private property. The private ownership of goods is justified by the need to protect and increase them, so that they can better serve the common good; for this reason, solidarity must be lived as the decision to restore to the poor what belongs to them. These convictions and habits of solidarity, when they are put into practice, open the way to other structural transformations and make them possible. Changing structures without generating new convictions and attitudes will only ensure that those same structures will become, sooner or later, corrupt, oppressive and ineffectual.
190. Sometimes it is a matter of hearing the cry of entire peoples, the poorest peoples of the earth, since “peace is founded not only on respect for human rights, but also on respect for the rights of peoples”. [154.] Sadly, even human rights can be used as a justification for an inordinate defense of individual rights or the rights of the richer peoples. With due respect for the autonomy and culture of every nation, we must never forget that the planet belongs to all mankind and is meant for all mankind; the mere fact that some people are born in places with fewer resources or less development does not justify the fact that they are living with less dignity. It must be reiterated that “the more fortunate should renounce some of their rights so as to place their goods more generously at the service of others”. [155.] To speak properly of our own rights, we need to broaden our perspective and to hear the plea of other peoples and other regions than those of our own country. We need to grow in a solidarity which “would allow all peoples to become the artisans of their destiny”, [156.] since “every person is called to self-fulfilment”. [157.]
191. In all places and circumstances, Christians, with the help of their pastors, are called to hear the cry of the poor. This has been eloquently stated by the bishops of Brazil: “We wish to take up daily the joys and hopes, the difficulties and sorrows of the Brazilian people, especially of those living in the barrios and the countryside – landless, homeless, lacking food and health care – to the detriment of their rights. Seeing their poverty, hearing their cries and knowing their sufferings, we are scandalized because we know that there is enough food for everyone and that hunger is the result of a poor distribution of goods and income. The problem is made worse by the generalized practice of wastefulness”. [158.]
192. Yet we desire even more than this; our dream soars higher. We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a “dignified sustenance” for all people, but also their “general temporal welfare and prosperity”. [159,] This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labour that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives. A just wage enables them to have adequate access to all the other goods which are destined for our common use.
The practice of mercy:
Fidelity to the Gospel, lest we run in vain
193. We incarnate the duty of hearing the cry of the poor when we are deeply moved by the suffering of others. Let us listen to what God’s word teaches us about mercy, and allow that word to resound in the life of the Church. The Gospel tells us: “Blessed are the merciful, because they shall obtain mercy” (Mt 5:7). The apostle James teaches that our mercy to others will vindicate us on the day of God’s judgement: “So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgement is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy, yet mercy triumphs over judgement” (Jas 2:12-13). Here James is faithful to the finest tradition of post-exilic Jewish spirituality, which attributed a particular salutary value to mercy: “Break off your sins by practising righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your tranquillity” (Dan 4:27). The wisdom literature sees almsgiving as a concrete exercise of mercy towards those in need: “Almsgiving delivers from death, and it will purge away every sin” (Tob 12:9). The idea is expressed even more graphically by Sirach: “Water extinguishes blazing fire: so almsgiving atones for sin” (Sir 3:30). The same synthesis appears in the New Testament: “Maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins” (1 Pet 4:8). This truth greatly influenced the thinking of the Fathers of the Church and helped create a prophetic, counter-cultural resistance to the self-centred hedonism of paganism. We can recall a single example: “If we were in peril from fire, we would certainly run to water in order to extinguish the fire… in the same way, if a spark of sin flares up from our straw, and we are troubled on that account, whenever we have an opportunity to perform a work of mercy, we should rejoice, as if a fountain opened before so that the fire might be extinguished”. [160.]
194. This message is so clear and direct, so simple and eloquent, that no ecclesial interpretation has the right to relativize it. The Church’s reflection on these texts ought not to obscure or weaken their force, but urge us to accept their exhortations with courage and zeal. Why complicate something so simple? Conceptual tools exist to heighten contact with the realities they seek to explain, not to distance us from them. This is especially the case with those biblical exhortations which summon us so forcefully to brotherly love, to humble and generous service, to justice and mercy towards the poor. Jesus taught us this way of looking at others by his words and his actions. So why cloud something so clear? We should not be concerned simply about falling into doctrinal error, but about remaining faithful to this light-filled path of life and wisdom. For “defenders of orthodoxy are sometimes accused of passivity, indulgence, or culpable complicity regarding the intolerable situations of injustice and the political regimes which prolong them”. [161.]
195. When Saint Paul approached the apostles in Jerusalem to discern whether he was “running or had run in vain” (Gal 2:2), the key criterion of authenticity which they presented was that he should not forget the poor (cf. Gal 2:10). This important principle, namely that the Pauline communities should not succumb to the self-centred lifestyle of the pagans, remains timely today, when a new self-centred paganism is growing. We may not always be able to reflect adequately the beauty of the Gospel, but there is one sign which we should never lack: the option for those who are least, those whom society discards.
196. Sometimes we prove hard of heart and mind; we are forgetful, distracted and carried away by the limitless possibilities for consumption and distraction offered by contemporary society. This leads to a kind of alienation at every level, for “a society becomes alienated when its forms of social organization, production and consumption make it more difficult to offer the gift of self and to establish solidarity between people”. [162.]
Developing not just sympathy but a genuine empathy:
199. Our commitment does not consist exclusively in activities or programmes of promotion and assistance; what the Holy Spirit mobilizes is not an unruly activism, but above all an attentiveness which considers the other “in a certain sense as one with ourselves”. [166.] This loving attentiveness is the beginning of a true concern for their person which inspires me effectively to seek their good. This entails appreciating the poor in their goodness, in their experience of life, in their culture, and in their ways of living the faith. True love is always contemplative, and permits us to serve the other not out of necessity or vanity, but rather because he or she is beautiful above and beyond mere appearances: “The love by which we find the other pleasing leads us to offer him something freely”. [167.] The poor person, when loved, “is esteemed as of great value”, [168.] and this is what makes the authentic option for the poor differ from any other ideology, from any attempt to exploit the poor for one’s own personal or political interest. Only on the basis of this real and sincere closeness can we properly accompany the poor on their path of liberation. Only this will ensure that “in every Christian community the poor feel at home. Would not this approach be the greatest and most effective presentation of the good news of the kingdom?” [169.] Without the preferential option for the poor, “the proclamation of the Gospel, which is itself the prime form of charity, risks being misunderstood or submerged by the ocean of words which daily engulfs us in today’s society of mass communications”. [170.]
201. No one must say that they cannot be close to the poor because their own lifestyle demands more attention to other areas. This is an excuse commonly heard in academic, business or professional, and even ecclesial circles. While it is quite true that the essential vocation and mission of the lay faithful is to strive that earthly realities and all human activity may be transformed by the Gospel, [171.] none of us can think we are exempt from concern for the poor and for social justice: “Spiritual conversion, the intensity of the love of God and neighbour, zeal for justice and peace, the Gospel meaning of the poor and of poverty, are required of everyone”. [172.] I fear that these words too may give rise to commentary or discussion with no real practical effect. That being said, I trust in the openness and readiness of all Christians, and I ask you to seek, as a community, creative ways of accepting this renewed call.
"The economy and the distribution of income":
202. The need to resolve the structural causes of poverty cannot be delayed, not only for the pragmatic reason of its urgency for the good order of society, but because society needs to be cured of a sickness which is weakening and frustrating it, and which can only lead to new crises. Welfare projects, which meet certain urgent needs, should be considered merely temporary responses. As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, [173.] no solution will be found for the world’s problems or, for that matter, to any problems. Inequality is the root of social ills.
203. The dignity of each human person and the pursuit of the common good are concerns which ought to shape all economic policies. At times, however, they seem to be a mere addendum imported from without in order to fill out a political discourse lacking in perspectives or plans for true and integral development. How many words prove irksome to this system! It is irksome when the question of ethics is raised, when global solidarity is invoked, when the distribution of goods is mentioned, when reference in made to protecting labour and defending the dignity of the powerless, when allusion is made to a God who demands a commitment to justice. At other times these issues are exploited by a rhetoric which cheapens them. Casual indifference in the face of such questions empties our lives and our words of all meaning. Business is a vocation, and a noble vocation, provided that those engaged in it see themselves challenged by a greater meaning in life; this will enable them truly to serve the common good by striving to increase the goods of this world and to make them more accessible to all.
204. We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the invisible hand of the market. Growth in justice requires more than economic growth, while presupposing such growth: it requires decisions, programmes, mechanisms and processes specifically geared to a better distribution of income, the creation of sources of employment and an integral promotion of the poor which goes beyond a simple welfare mentality. I am far from proposing an irresponsible populism, but the economy can no longer turn to remedies that are a new poison, such as attempting to increase profits by reducing the work force and thereby adding to the ranks of the excluded.
205. I ask God to give us more politicians capable of sincere and effective dialogue aimed at healing the deepest roots – and not simply the appearances – of the evils in our world! Politics, though often denigrated, remains a lofty vocation and one of the highest forms of charity, inasmuch as it seeks the common good. [174.] We need to be convinced that charity “is the principle not only of micro-relationships (with friends, with family members or within small groups) but also of macro-relationships (social, economic and political ones)”. [175.] I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor! It is vital that government leaders and financial leaders take heed and broaden their horizons, working to ensure that all citizens have dignified work, education and healthcare. Why not turn to God and ask him to inspire their plans? I am firmly convinced that openness to the transcendent can bring about a new political and economic mindset which would help to break down the wall of separation between the economy and the common good of society.
206. Economy, as the very word indicates, should be the art of achieving a fitting management of our common home, which is the world as a whole. Each meaningful economic decision made in one part of the world has repercussions everywhere else; consequently, no government can act without regard for shared responsibility. Indeed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find local solutions for enormous global problems which overwhelm local politics with difficulties to resolve. If we really want to achieve a healthy world economy, what is needed at this juncture of history is a more efficient way of interacting which, with due regard for the sovereignty of each nation, ensures the economic well-being of all countries, not just of a few.
207. Any Church community, if it thinks it can comfortably go its own way without creative concern and effective cooperation in helping the poor to live with dignity and reaching out to everyone, will also risk breaking down, however much it may talk about social issues or criticize governments. It will easily drift into a spiritual worldliness camouflaged by religious practices, unproductive meetings and empty talk.
"Concern for the vulnerable":
210. It is essential to draw near to new forms of poverty and vulnerability, in which we are called to recognize the suffering Christ, even if this appears to bring us no tangible and immediate benefits. I think of the homeless, the addicted, refugees, indigenous peoples, the elderly who are increasingly isolated and abandoned, and many others.
Next Francis looks at the nature of the common good:
III. THE COMMON GOOD AND PEACE IN SOCIETY
218. Peace in society cannot be understood as pacification or the mere absence of violence resulting from the domination of one part of society over others. Nor does true peace act as a pretext for justifying a social structure which silences or appeases the poor, so that the more affluent can placidly support their lifestyle while others have to make do as they can. Demands involving the distribution of wealth, concern for the poor and human rights cannot be suppressed under the guise of creating a consensus on paper or a transient peace for a contented minority. The dignity of the human person and the common good rank higher than the comfort of those who refuse to renounce their privileges. When these values are threatened, a prophetic voice must be raised.
We must be active citizens which means getting involved with politics in its broadest sense:
220. People in every nation enhance the social dimension of their lives by acting as committed and responsible citizens, not as a mob swayed by the powers that be. Let us not forget that “responsible citizenship is a virtue, and participation in political life is a moral obligation”. [180.] Yet becoming a people demands something more. It is an ongoing process in which every new generation must take part: a slow and arduous effort calling for a desire for integration and a willingness to achieve this through the growth of a peaceful and multifaceted culture of encounter.
The need for dialogue:
IV. SOCIAL DIALOGUE AS A CONTRIBUTION TO PEACE
239. The Church proclaims “the Gospel of peace” (Eph 6:15) and she wishes to cooperate with all national and international authorities in safeguarding this immense universal good. By preaching Jesus Christ, who is himself peace (cf. Eph 2:14), the new evangelization calls on every baptized person to be a peacemaker and a credible witness to a reconciled life. [187.] In a culture which privileges dialogue as a form of encounter, it is time to devise a means for building consensus and agreement while seeking the goal of a just, responsive and inclusive society. The principal author, the historic subject of this process, is the people as a whole and their culture, and not a single class, minority, group or elite. We do not need plans drawn up by a few for the few, or an enlightened or outspoken minority which claims to speak for everyone. It is about agreeing to live together, a social and cultural pact.
240. It is the responsibility of the State to safeguard and promote the common good of society. [188.] Based on the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, and fully committed to political dialogue and consensus building, it plays a fundamental role, one which cannot be delegated, in working for the integral development of all. This role, at present, calls for profound social humility.
241. In her dialogue with the State and with society, the Church does not have solutions for every particular issue. Together with the various sectors of society, she supports those programmes which best respond to the dignity of each person and the common good. In doing this, she proposes in a clear way the fundamental values of human life and convictions which can then find expression in political activity.
Love:
272. Loving others is a spiritual force drawing us to union with God; indeed, one who does not love others “walks in the darkness” (1 Jn 2:11), “remains in death” (1 Jn 3:14) and “does not know God” (1 Jn 4:8). Benedict XVI has said that “closing our eyes to our neighbour also blinds us to God”, [209.] and that love is, in the end, the only light which “can always illuminate a world grown dim and give us the courage needed to keep living and working”. [210.] When we live out a spirituality of drawing nearer to others and seeking their welfare, our hearts are opened wide to the Lord’s greatest and most beautiful gifts. Whenever we encounter another person in love, we learn something new about God. Whenever our eyes are opened to acknowledge the other, we grow in the light of faith and knowledge of God. If we want to advance in the spiritual life, then, we must constantly be missionaries. The work of evangelization enriches the mind and the heart; it opens up spiritual horizons; it makes us more and more sensitive to the workings of the Holy Spirit, and it takes us beyond our limited spiritual constructs. A committed missionary knows the joy of being a spring which spills over and refreshes others. Only the person who feels happiness in seeking the good of others, in desiring their happiness, can be a missionary. This openness of the heart is a source of joy, since “it is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). We do not live better when we flee, hide, refuse to share, stop giving and lock ourselves up in own comforts. Such a life is nothing less than slow suicide.
274. If we are to share our lives with others and generously give of ourselves, we also have to realize that every person is worthy of our giving. Not for their physical appearance, their abilities, their language, their way of thinking, or for any satisfaction that we might receive, but rather because they are God’s handiwork, his creation. God created that person in his image, and he or she reflects something of God’s glory. Every human being is the object of God’s infinite tenderness, and he himself is present in their lives. Jesus offered his precious blood on the cross for that person. Appearances notwithstanding, every person is immensely holy and deserves our love. Consequently, if I can help at least one person to have a better life, that already justifies the offering of my life. It is a wonderful thing to be God’s faithful people. We achieve fulfilment when we break down walls and our heart is filled with faces and names!
This is one of the best and most succinct explanations of resurrection I have encountered and can be read without a religious sensibility:
276. Christ’s resurrection is not an event of the past; it contains a vital power which has permeated this world. Where all seems to be dead, signs of the resurrection suddenly spring up. It is an irresistible force. Often it seems that God does not exist: all around us we see persistent injustice, evil, indifference and cruelty. But it is also true that in the midst of darkness something new always springs to life and sooner or later produces fruit. On razed land life breaks through, stubbornly yet invincibly. However dark things are, goodness always re-emerges and spreads. Each day in our world beauty is born anew, it rises transformed through the storms of history. Values always tend to reappear under new guises, and human beings have arisen time after time from situations that seemed doomed. Such is the power of the resurrection, and all who evangelize are instruments of that power.
277. At the same time, new difficulties are constantly surfacing: experiences of failure and the human weaknesses which bring so much pain. We all know from experience that sometimes a task does not bring the satisfaction we seek, results are few and changes are slow, and we are tempted to grow weary. Yet lowering our arms momentarily out of weariness is not the same as lowering them for good, overcome by chronic discontent and by a listlessness that parches the soul. It also happens that our hearts can tire of the struggle because in the end we are caught up in ourselves, in a careerism which thirsts for recognition, applause, rewards and status. In this case we do not lower our arms, but we no longer grasp what we seek, the resurrection is not there. In cases like these, the Gospel, the most beautiful message that this world can offer, is buried under a pile of excuses.


Notes:
[52.] BENEDICT XVI, Address to the Brazilian Bishops in the Cathedral of São Paulo, Brazil (11 May 2007), 3: AAS 99 (2007), 428.
[55.] SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, De Lazaro Concio, II, 6: PG 48, 992D.
[153.] CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Instruction Libertatis Nuntius (6 August 1984), XI, 1: AAS 76 (1984), 903.
[154.] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 157.
[155.] PAUL VI, Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens (14 May 1971), 23: AAS 63 (1971), 418.
[156.] PAUL VI, Encyclical Letter Populorum Progressio (26 March 1967), 65: AAS 59 (1967), 289.
[157.] Ibid., 15: AAS 59 (1967), 265.
[158.] CONFERÊNCIA NACIONAL DOS BISPOS DO BRAZIL, Exigências evangélicas e éticas de superação da miséria e da fome” (April 2002), Introduction, 2.
[159.] JOHN XIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), 3: AAS 53 (1961), 402.
[160.] SAINT AUGUSTINE, De Catechizandis Rudibus, I, XIX, 22: PL 40, 327.
[161.] CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Instruction Libertatis Nuntius (6 August 1984), XI, 18: AAS 76 (1984), 907-908.
[162.] JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), 41: AAS 83 (1991), 844-845.
[166.] SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS, S. Th., II-II, q. 27, a. 2.
[167.] Ibid., I-II, q. 110, a. 1.
[168.] Ibid., I-II, q. 26, a. 3.
[169.] JOHN PAUL II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte (6 January 2001), 50: AAS 93 (2001), 303.
[170.] Ibid.
[171.] Cf. Propositio 45.
[172.] CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Instruction Libertatis Nuntius (6 August 1984), XI, 18: AAS 76 (1984), 908.
[173.] This implies a commitment to “eliminate the structural causes of global economic dysfunction”: BENEDICT XVI, Address to the Diplomatic Corps (8 January 2007): AAS 99 (2007), 73.
[174.] Cf. COMMISSION SOCIALE DE L’ÉPISCOPAT FRANÇAIS, Réhabiliter la politique (17 February 1999); cf. PIUS XI, Message of 18 December 1927.
[175.] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), 2: AAS 101 (2009), 642.
[180.] UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS, Pastoral Letter Forming Conscience for Faithful Citizenship (November 2007), 13.
[187.] Cf. Propositio 14.
[188.] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1910; PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR JUSTICE AND PEACE, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 168.
[210] BENEDICT XVI, Encyclical Letter, Deus Caritas Est (25 December 2005),

39: AAS 98 (2006), 250.

Tuesday 26 November 2013

International Day of Persons with Disabilities 2013

Edited at 14.00: Note I suffer from dyscognition and memory problems; I am a week ahead of myself; no wonder there's no news!!!!

Today is International Day of Persons with Disabilities, 3 December 2013. The theme for this year is “Break Barriers, Open Doors: for an inclusive society and development for all”


This is what the United Nations Enable site has to say:
"It’s time to effectively implement the Outcome Document of the High Level Meeting and to break barriers and open doors: to realize an inclusive society and development for all!
 The commemoration of this year’s International Day of Persons with Disabilities provides an opportunity to further raise awareness of disability and accessibility as a cross cutting development issue and further the global efforts to promote accessibility, remove all types of barriers, and to realize the full and equal participation of persons with disabilities in society and shape the future of development for all!"

One might have thought that this would be an important and newsworthy event. Well if Google is anything to go by, it looks as if there has not been a single UK news story about it in the last twenty-four hours (see the screen-shot below for confirmation).



So maybe one might expect the UK Government's department, the Office for Disability Issues (ODI) [which incidently is run within the notorious DWP] specifically set up to look out for disabled people's interests to cover the day, even if it does not wish to celebrate disabled folk. Well, I first of all checked out their news page - it has not been updated since July 2013 - see the screen-shot below.




However, to give the ODI their due, I did find a link on their home-page. It reads:


21st International Day of Disabled People – 3 December 2013Every year the International Day of Disabled People is used to promote an understanding of disabled people and encourage support for their dignity, rights and well-being.The United Nations chooses a different theme for the Day and in 2013 it’s going to be: ‘Break barriers and open doors: to realise an inclusive society for all”.We know that the barriers that disabled people face can take a variety of forms. They might relate to the physical environment or to information and communications technology (ICT) which are not accessible. They could result from legislation or policy. Or they might be the result of attitudes in society, or discrimination.The International Day is a great opportunity to celebrate the achievements of disabled people and their contribution to society. This year’s theme offers the opportunity to highlight barriers, and how they have been successfully challenged and overcome. This year on 3 December, ODI will be publishing the second edition of Aspire 2, the online magazine which aims to inspire young disabled people to get involved with disability issues. The magazine’s theme will be Attitudes and it will include articles by the Minister of State for Disabled People, Mike Penning;  Channel 4 presenter Alex Brooker; and Paralympian Louise Hunt.Find more information about the International Day including how the United Nations encourages it to be commemorated, and the themes adopted in previous years.We are encouraging disabled people and their organisations to celebrate the Day. We want to help share information about what is going on, and think how we can collectively make an even bigger splash next year.So if you are planning an event, you can let us know by emailing ODI at:fulfilling.potential@dwp.gsi.gov.ukPlease head your email: International Day of Disabled People.

Interestingly, despite the glib spin, the ODI does not acknowledge its part nor it's parent department's huge influence in actually creating barriers to independent living. Nor do they confess to starving the disabled of funds to pay for the essentials of quotidian life: vital food, heating, medications, transport, education and jobs, due to the incompetence, negligence and in some cases deliberate actions inspired by their harmful ideological policies.

I have been connected with the WoW Campaign for more than a year now. The WoWpetition has just nine days left to garner the remaining 6,000 or so signatures needed to attain the 100K that will ensure the petition is considered for debate in the House of Commons (the elected part of the UK Parliament).

If you are a UK citizen resident at home or abroad, you are entitled to add your electronic monicker here:

Signing the petition might lead to governmental barriers to independent living being removed. Thanks. %)

fantasy

fantasy

racy
spicy
sultry
fiery
foxy
sexy
fleshly
lusty
randy
manly
horny
worldly
earthy
dirty
mucky
smutty
sweaty
sticky
seedy
filthy
nasty
bawdy
raunchy
fun


Monday 25 November 2013

DWP Aggro & Clairvoyant Nurse

Regular readers will know of my own personal struggles with DWP which is a mere reflection of what is happening to millions of disabled and/or chronically sick folk throughout the UK.

In March I wrote about my personal ongoing torment of DWP's ESA50 form.

In April I wondered whether I actually had an agreed settlement in ESA50 Resolution? As I stated at the time I wrote a detailed letter with several queries in order that I could determine my position, as the DWP's communications are far from elucidatory. They did not bother to respond, not even a holding letter.

Earlier in November, I received a further DWP letter advising me that I would be required to attend a work-related interview. In my post Is DWP Harassing ESA Support Group Claimants? I included the text of my last letter.

Today I received the following, with no covering letter and certainly no answers to my queries. The third print-out has a printed date of 21st November 2013.






It would probably also be useful for the reader to see my letter of 10th to 27th April 2013 to DWP.


re award of employment & support allowance

With reference to your letter of 4th April (received 10th inst.), confirming the award of ESA, I note that there is no information to enlighten me as to how the DWP reached the decision. However, your letter does state I am permitted to:

" •     ask for an explanation

  •     ask for a written statement of reasons for our decision "

I think it is in my best interests that I do so, as one never knows what future changes are up the politicians' sleeves; so I really do need to know on what basis the decisions were reached. Please therefore provide me with a full explanation and full written statement of the reasons for the DWP decision.

Furthermore, the contents advise me that I am "entitled to contribution-based Employment and Support Allowance"; but oddly enough there is no explanation as to what this is or what the ramifications are, if any. I should appreciate some clarification.

Additionally, the letter states I "have been placed in the support group because [my] illness or disability restricts the possibility of working." Again no elucidation. Can you explain what this support group actually is. I know the current Government has repeatedly stated that those disabled folk who need extra support will receive it. Is this the support group? What extra support am I or shall I be receiving?

Apparently I am also going to get a '"top-up" payment; but I am uncertain why it is needed or what it is. Or is this the extra support referred to in my paragraph above?

As you are no doubt aware, many of my conditions are untreatable currently, and unlikely to be within at least the next fifteen years if ever, and some are simply degenerative. In addition, I have now been transferred to an “indefinite” award in respect to my DLA. I note there appears to be no reference in the letter to when I might be assessed again. Could you please provide an estimate. I need this re-assurance so that I can consider (assuming I am not to be re-assessed imminently) coming off anti-anxiety medication which I have had to take since the current welfare reforms began some two-to-three years ago (due to the immense worry created in the media and on social networks, including by ministerial and DWP statements and press releases). May I also remind you that my conditions tend to ameliorate in the summer months (typically May to August) and so it is better for my health if claim forms were to be issued during these months. I would consider this a reasonable adjustment to make to take account of my disabilities and so trust you can accommodate.

I think that is everything I need to ask at this juncture; but obviously I may need to come back to you, depending on the contents of your response.

I look forward to your reply in due course.

Yours sincerely,


It is quite clear that my queries have not really been answered. Furthermore, I now have more queries.

Page 1 of my ten page list of illnesses and conditions states I suffer from anxiety and depression; page 9 that I have made several suicide attempts. The list quite clearly reveals mental health, neurological and progressive issues. As I understand it, nurses are not qualified to review cases such as my own, so I have to wonder who permitted Ms Emma Roberts (Registered Nurse) to do so. Also why did she not refer my case to a properly qualified medical expert?

It is also interesting to note that Ms Roberts also felt able to judge that "work could be considered in 18 months." There is only anecdotal evidence that folk suffering from the severe form (as diagnosed by my hospital specialist consultant in line with the NICE guidelines) of ME/CFS ever recover and certainly no mainstream medical evidence. On what basis therefore has Ms Roberts come to such a judgement?

Additionally, whilst admitting I did submit a hundred pages of evidence, my submission contains information pointing to deterioration not amelioration in my condition. If Ms Roberts had looked at the information submitted to DWP over some fifteen years, she would have also realised that this has been a gradual but continuing trend.

My health is so complicated that I have joint lead healthcare professionals, not a single lead HCP as is the norm. Neither my consultant, who specialises in ME/CFS treatment nor my GP feel they can offer me hope of recovery sufficient to be able to look after myself let alone work. How is it that Ms Roberts is able to do so?

My application also quoted the as were Reg. 29 & Reg. 35 clauses that enable one to remain in the "support group" rather than the WRAG when such work would be detrimental to one's health. How could Ms Roberts ignore them?

I wonder whether the Bolton office realised something might be awry and hence decided not to respond to my letter from late April. Or is all just cock-up, bureaucratic inefficiency!

It certainly feels like torture. I am still calming down from my panic-attack on reading the latest communication from DWP. Surely the officials must know they are complicit in mental torture, shouldn't they?

I'll give the DWP a few days to get a follow-up letter to me; then it will be all guns blazing. Time to get my MP involved. Oh, and Ms Roberts RN, I'll be lodging a complaint against you with your medical body.