If you live in the UK, by this time, you will have heard all the arguments for and against each of the political candidates, and soon, you will be putting your final decision down to record your voting intentions to carry you through the next few years. Only the real enthusiasts will join a political party, but we all have an opinion, and fortunately we live in a country where we can express it openly. Your vote is special. It is unique, and yet you will be one of many people who share the same ideal for parliament. As adults, we all have the intelligence to understand the differences between the policies, and we can tell which people can best deliver those promises, so that's where the cross goes. Your choice is beside the cross, but you have still not signed up to the party you vote for.
Our attitude to Faith is very like that too. We listen to the sermons, and watch the people who call themselves by the name Christian, and we decide whether we are convinced to put our name beside the Cross. Of course in this ballot, you can also abstain, and not show any allegiance at all. And you don't even need to be a member of a church, to be a Christian, although I do believe it is to be encouraged. At some time in our life we will have to make that eternal decision. Do we believe enough to be identified with the Cross? Like you, I know many people who have seen the lives of Saints on this earth, and heard all the arguments to make them convinced in what they should do, but they don't quite go as far as being a disciple.... yet....
In the UK, one choice is needed on the 5th May, but the other is open ended. It's a big question. Which Cross will your name be beside? Decision time!
The aim is to provide a stimulating mix of personal opinions (from a mainstream Christian worldview), and associated comments, which will be accepted and published if they comply with the usual courtesy and decency.
Showing posts with label cross. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cross. Show all posts
Wednesday, 4 May 2011
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
Freedom of Expression??
This is in reference to my earlier blog posted on 29 March!
Nurse Shirley Chaplin was in court to defend her right to wear a cross on a chain, around her neck, while performing her ward duties. She had been wearing the cross for 38 years! However Royal Devon and Exeter NHS determined that she lost her case, and with it the right to wear a small cross 'for health and safety reasons'. Her conviction for wearing it, and the Archbishop of Canterbury's comments are shown below, as reported in Sky News.
"To deliberately remove or hide my crucifix or to treat it disrespectfully would violate my faith," she testified. But the tribunal ruled against the nurse, who had worn the emblem throughout her 30-year career. Mrs Chaplin's case was highlighted by the Archbishop of Canterbury in his Easter sermon last weekend. He referred to "wooden-headed bureaucratic silliness" which has seen some Christians stopped from wearing religious symbols at work.
There is a General Election coming up on the 6 May, and I for one, will be watching closely the positions of the parties on matters of the Christian Faith, and the Church's freedoms. It seems we now have to stand up and be counted, because the established government bodies, like the NHS, are starting to take away common sense rights on a whim. What possible reasons can there be for anyone NOT to wear a cross around their neck as a symbol of their faith?
These changes are being brought about by stealth, and under the guise of spurious legislation like 'health and safety'. I think it was well expressed by the Archbishop as,"wooden-headed bureaucratic silliness" which has seen some Christians stopped from wearing religious symbols at work.
We now need some straight talk from our government bodies and MPs as to how they will defend the basic Christian principles like this one. Do we wait until all rights have been removed before we wake up?
Monday, 29 March 2010
Taken to Court for Wearing a Cross on a Chain
Last year, long serving nurse Shirley Chaplin was banned from working on hospital wards for wearing a cross around her neck. This week she will take the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust to an employment tribunal after she was told that she must 'hide or remove' a small cross on her necklace if she wanted to continue working on hospital wards.
Why should such a position ever be taken by an NHS authority? You may remember a similar story of an airline employee being told to remove her cross, as it may have been an offence to others. What reasons could force these issues into a court situation? Obviously, Shirley Chapman's case has not been completed, so we don't know how it will turn out, but I am left wondering what pushed the case to this extreme? To me, the possibilities are few, but can be reasonably taken to be one of the following.
1. There may be a safety issue, where a patient could grab the chain, deliberately or by mistake, and injure themselves and the nurse. The trouble is there have been no instances of this happening before, either to this nurse of many years experience, or in the hospital to other nurses. It is therefore doubtful that it could be for safety reasons.
2. It is personal, and the nurse is not liked by her bosses who have forced the issue. I don't think a boss of any sense would pick this to go to court with. Surely, if the nurse wasn't liked, they could have come up with a better, and more credible story? So, I don't think it is this.
3. It is an anti-Christian position. This is particularly likely, as the nurse wasn't asked to stop wearing the chain, just remove the cross from it, or hide it from view. This also takes care of the position of it being a safety issue, as a patient could still grab at the chain. It may also explain that there may be a personal difference with a colleague who has forced the situation through their boss. If this is the case, then some questions need to be answered, like,
a/ is this not a bit extreme? Nurses of other religions are allowed to show their 'symbol of faith' in the same hospital, for example being allowed to wear headscarves.
b/ is Britain still considered a 'Christian' country? Apparently this is in question now, even though Christianity is still the majority religion by far.
c/ is the NHS being too Politically Correct for the Christian employee, but not for the Muslim employee?
d/ is there someone in the NHS chain of command with a grudge against Christianity, and they are trying to push something through the courts to make a precedent? (Think about that one carefully, and don't rule it out of hand too quickly.)
This kind of case worries me on many levels. This nurse is not a 'fanatical Christian'. She just wants to wear a cross to show her faith as she has done for 38 years! Am I to be offended by people of other faiths who show their allegiance by wearing things like, a turban, a veil, a headscarf, a full burka? It would be very interesting to see what would happen if one of these UK 'minority religions' was taken to court in the same way. It is wrong to assume anything, but yes, I think I know the answer to that one, and doesn't that give us all cause for concern?
Why should such a position ever be taken by an NHS authority? You may remember a similar story of an airline employee being told to remove her cross, as it may have been an offence to others. What reasons could force these issues into a court situation? Obviously, Shirley Chapman's case has not been completed, so we don't know how it will turn out, but I am left wondering what pushed the case to this extreme? To me, the possibilities are few, but can be reasonably taken to be one of the following.
1. There may be a safety issue, where a patient could grab the chain, deliberately or by mistake, and injure themselves and the nurse. The trouble is there have been no instances of this happening before, either to this nurse of many years experience, or in the hospital to other nurses. It is therefore doubtful that it could be for safety reasons.
2. It is personal, and the nurse is not liked by her bosses who have forced the issue. I don't think a boss of any sense would pick this to go to court with. Surely, if the nurse wasn't liked, they could have come up with a better, and more credible story? So, I don't think it is this.
3. It is an anti-Christian position. This is particularly likely, as the nurse wasn't asked to stop wearing the chain, just remove the cross from it, or hide it from view. This also takes care of the position of it being a safety issue, as a patient could still grab at the chain. It may also explain that there may be a personal difference with a colleague who has forced the situation through their boss. If this is the case, then some questions need to be answered, like,
a/ is this not a bit extreme? Nurses of other religions are allowed to show their 'symbol of faith' in the same hospital, for example being allowed to wear headscarves.
b/ is Britain still considered a 'Christian' country? Apparently this is in question now, even though Christianity is still the majority religion by far.
c/ is the NHS being too Politically Correct for the Christian employee, but not for the Muslim employee?
d/ is there someone in the NHS chain of command with a grudge against Christianity, and they are trying to push something through the courts to make a precedent? (Think about that one carefully, and don't rule it out of hand too quickly.)
This kind of case worries me on many levels. This nurse is not a 'fanatical Christian'. She just wants to wear a cross to show her faith as she has done for 38 years! Am I to be offended by people of other faiths who show their allegiance by wearing things like, a turban, a veil, a headscarf, a full burka? It would be very interesting to see what would happen if one of these UK 'minority religions' was taken to court in the same way. It is wrong to assume anything, but yes, I think I know the answer to that one, and doesn't that give us all cause for concern?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)