skip to main |
skip to sidebar
posted by Kathy
Beeston Quakers will be meeting in Chilwell Memorial Hall for the next month - and possibly for a long time to come. The hall seems to meet all our needs so we're trying it out, starting on Sunday 23rd October at 10.30 a.m. As always, visitors are welcome. Meeting for Worship lasts an hour and is mostly (sometimes entirely) silent. It is followed by notices after which we usually share hot drinks, biscuits and friendly conversation.
The memorial hall is at 129, High Road, Chilwell (near the turnings off to Cator Lane and Meadow Lane). You can find a map HERE.
Some people may find it strange that Quakers meet in a hall commemorating soldiers who died in the First World War but I think it right to remember all those who died in war. John Woolman, the 18th-century Quaker who refused to pay taxes for war, offers a more pertinent challenge. In his essay "A Plea for the Poor" he calls on Quakers to look at their own possessions and "try whether the seeds of war have any nourishment in them."
I think Beeston Quakers will also feel content that the original principles laid down by the trustees of the memorial hall included these:
“That the Institute shall be used as a club or place of assembly for the inhabitants of Chilwell and the neighbourhood and that in determining what persons or class of persons shall be entitled to use the Institute no regard shall be had to or distinction made on grounds of religious discrimination, political opinions or sex.”I reckon that chimes well with Quakers' testimony to equality.
posted by Kathy
It sounds as though celebrating the military is to become a compulsory part of life. I've blogged about this, in a personal capacity, elsewhere but I paused before posting to a blog labelled "Quaker".
I haven't read the whole document yet as it's a large pdf file but I've seen a number of the proposals (which havthe e support of the government) which are widely reported in the press. There are, so far as I can see, three categories, although these sometimes overlap.
First there is a concern to make life easier for serving soldiers, particularly serving soldiers in uniform and those returning from war. It wouldn't be realistic to expect this concern to lead the government to disengage from war at once, disband the army and compensate ex-soldiers but I note that there's more interest in homecoming parades (which councils will be expected to organise) and discounts for serving soldiers in uniform in shops and at sporting events. It's disappointing that there's nothing to meet real concerns of soldiers about housing and health treatment - and nothing about the high level of homelessness and mental health problems among soldiers who have left the army. There's a provision which would make it a crime to discriminate against a soldier in uniform that I'll discuss later.
Then there are provisions to celebrate and glorify the army. Soldiers are to be more visible. Military parades, tattoos and so on will become a more frequent part of life and will be covered on television. There will be a new bank holiday (probably in June) to celebrate the armed services and veterans.)
Finally there are the provisions that will affect people's rights, especially the rights of children and anti-war activists. "Military awareness" will become part of the national curriculum and state schools will be encouraged to set up cadet corps for their pupils. No-one is talking about a right of conscientious objection from military awareness courses. Quakers and others may feel worried about the effect of this increased emphasis on the military in schools. It's bad enough already. In addition, we should watch out for the laws which make discrimination against serving soldiers a crime - and the laws which deal with abusing soldiers.
Obviously the first response of Quakers may be to say, "But we'd never do that." Nonetheless, laws are often used against peace protestors in surprising ways. I recall when Lindis Percy was accused of racial abuse for mistreating a United States flag. Will these laws be used against peace protestors. I've stood outside Chetwynd Barracks with other members of Beeston Quakers and anti-war protestors. I've handed out leaflets and spoken to soldiers through a megaphone. Would this be treated as discriminatory or abusive? We won't know until we see the law and how it is used.
The press has, on the whole, greeted the new proposals with enthusiasm and Gordon Brown has indicated that they will become law. These could be difficult days for peace-makers.
