Truth and Integrity – Finding Common Ground – A DECLARATION, from the Quaker Truth and Integrity Group (Britain)

                   

Truth and integrity have been at the heart of the Quaker movement for over three hundred and fifty years. We were once called Friends of the Truth, and have a tradition of speaking truth to power and exercising quiet diplomacy. Whilst our record is not flawless, historically we have stood firm in relation to the abolition of slavery, prison reform and conscientious objection.

As people of faith we seek a world transformed, where compassion, equality, truth and integrity are guiding principles. In the meantime, our belief in equality and the intrinsic worth of each individual means that we value democracy as a form of government. 

Just as we wish our children and grandchildren to inherit the beautiful planet we have experienced, so we want them to enjoy the benefits of a mature democracy where truth prospers and the rule of law applies. Governing with truth and integrity is essential for generating trust; when that trust breaks down, people become disillusioned, and leaders lose their mandate to govern.

At the core of Quakerism we experience a sense of oneness, wonder and mystery. That universal sense provides the basis for the cooperation so urgently needed in our troubled world. We seek kinder ground: the ground of tolerance, respect, mutual cooperation and shared ethical and spiritual values, where oppression can be addressed and reconciliation sought between those of opposing views. We know that this vision is shared by many other individuals and groups, of all faiths and none.

The world has entered a deeply troubling phase. Standards of truth and integrity in politics, public and commercial life and social media are being undermined to the extent that democracy itself is under threat. Many of those in power would seem to act with impunity, disregarding facts and scientific findings. Respect for the judiciary is being undermined and trust in our institutions is threatened. All this is set against a backdrop of the climate emergency and increasing inequality and polarisation. 

It was in response to this need that the Quaker Truth & Integrity Group was set up as a national Quaker body in Britain earlier this year. QTIG has committed itself to:

  • upholding standards of honesty and integrity in our lives and organisations;
  • acknowledging that the majority of those in public life/politics are people of goodwill and finding ways of working respectfully with them on ‘kinder ground’;
  • helping to ensure the Nolan principles (selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership)[1] continue to govern public life;
  • working towards a system of truly inclusive, participative democracy, where people feel their wishes and needs are truly respected and taken into account;
  • encouraging constitutional reform and strengthening systems of accountability;
  • promoting higher standards of truth within the media, including social media.

With these objectives in mind, we intend to institute a national Truth Award to recognise exceptional contributions towards the enhancement of standards of truth and integrity in public life.

In a society in which lies, injustice, inequality, deception and entitlement are prevalent it is only the truth – in all its uncomfortable forms – that will heal us. 

 Where truth and integrity flourish, so too can personal relationships. Where truth and integrity stand firm, so too can our democracy and our precious traditions. Unless truth and integrity are universally acknowledged and practised, at a fundamental level, international relations cannot fully and completely address the crises that threaten our very existence.

We invite others to join us in this endeavour. We are looking to find partners, people all across the political spectrum who are of good faith and goodwill, so that we can engage together in this urgent and vital work of transformation. Can we work together?

We are not for names, nor men, nor titles of Government, nor are we for this party nor against the other … but we are for justice and mercy and truth and peace and true freedom, that these may be exalted in our nation, and that goodness, righteousness, meekness, temperance, peace and unity with God, and with one another, that these things may abound. Edward Burrough, 1659


 

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life

https://quakertruth.org/

Ever more war

It is hard to be a pacifist when yet another war starts – I am thinking of Ukraine right now, without ignoring the pre-existing wars still raging (e.g. Yemen).

Pacifists don’t start wars.  They are put in an impossible position by militarists who start them.  If we had more influence, we wouldn’t start from here.

I should add that people living in safe countries are not in a position to tell Ukrainians how to react to the Russian invasion.  The choices are stark: either nonviolent resistance or violent resistance.  I do not see a half-way house.  Each course has unpredictable consequences.  The military occupation of a nonviolent country could still be brutal and oppressive; there could be deaths; there could be arrests and detention.  Forceful resistance means deaths on both sides.  This tends to include very many civilians (on the defending side), as has been clearly seen in Ukraine.  I feel too for the Russian conscripts forced to take part in this war – cannon-fodder, I guess.

We all need to live in a climate of peace and justice.  When war crimes and crimes against humanity are committed, do the ultimate adjudicators have to choose between a just settlement and an (outwardly) peaceful one?  The latter is only viable when the offended choose forgiveness over retribution.   But again, third parties are not in a position to demand that those who have suffered forgive those that have inflicted the suffering.

Pacifists have no easy answers to these matters. 

HEROIC QUEEN CATALINA

Prior to reading Hilary Mantel’s acclaimed trilogyabout the reign of King Henry VIII of England and the career of one of his chief ministers, Thomas Cromwell, I have been looking at other works about the period.  I have re-read Robert Bolt’s play, A Man for All Seasons (1960); I have looked again at the play, The Book of Sir Thomas More (1590s); and I have just re-read J Fletcher and W Shakespeare’s play, The Famous History of the Life of King Henry VIII (written circa 1613). 

In parallel, I have found and read the eye-witness account of certain events of the time, namely: Thomas Wolsey, late Cardinal – his Life and Death, written by George Cavendish, his gentleman-usher (Folio Society, ed R Lockyer, 1962).

There are close parallels between certain passages in the prior Thomas Wolsey and the later King Henry VIII.   One is a source of the other, whether directly or indirectly (via Holinshed’s Chronicles).

At the height of his power, Cardinal Thomas Wolsey was Henry VIII’s chief minister, notorious for his avarice and ambition.  It was Wolsey who was first entrusted by Henry with the task of persuading the Pope to annul Henry’s marriage (1509) to the Spanish princess, Catalina de Aragón y Castilla, known in England as Katherine (Catherine) of Aragon.  Inevitably, Wolsey came into conflict with Katherine, who wished to stay married to Henry (see below).

The English negotiators’ failure to achieve an annulment finally resulted in the English Church being severed from the Roman Catholic Church, and the foundation of the Church of England, with the monarch as its Supreme Head.  This was the first “Brexit” – somewhat like the UK’s exit from the European Union today!

From the pages of both Thomas Wolsey and Henry VIII, Katherine herself emerges as an admirable character – faithful and intelligent, and eloquent in her self-defence. 

In 1529 the first phase of the divorce trial (Henry v Katherine) commenced – the Queen alone among an assembly of men.  Katherine states her defence case in a magnificent speech, addressed primarily to the King himself, as follows:

Sir, I beseech you for all the love that hath been between us, and for the love of God, let me have justice and right, take of me some pity and compassion, for I am a poor woman and a stranger born out of your dominion….Alas! Sir, wherein have I offended you….now that you intend (as I perceive) to put me from you?”

[Page 114]

Katherine insists that she has been a “true, humble and obedient wife”, and that when she married Henry “I was a true maid without touch of man” [114].

The Queen goes on to allude to the wise judgement of Fernando (Ferdinand II of Aragon), her own father, and Henry VII, Henry’s father, who both considered the marriage to be “good and lawful.” 

Katherine complains that false charges have been made against her.  However, she lacks the independent advocates she needs:

Ye must consider that these men cannot be impartial counsellors for my part since they are your subjects….and dare not, for fear of your pleasure, disobey your will and intent.

[115]

The Queen asks to be spared “the extremity of this court” until she receives advice from Spain.  Finally, she says, “And if ye will not extend to me so much impartial favour, your pleasure then be fulfilled, and to God I commit my cause!”  [115].

Katherine then promptly leaves the court: “And even with that she rose up, making a low curtsy to the King, and so departed from thence” [115].  She is called back into court but does not return!  But in her absence the divorce mill grinds slowly and irrevocably on. 

Compare Cavendish’s account [pages 112-117] with Henry VIII, Act II, Scene 4, where the story is extended.  The Queen’s great speech itself is versified by Shakespeare in lines 13-57. 

Katherine next appears in Cavendish’s account on pages 122f.  She receives Cardinal Wolsey and Cardinal Campeggio (Campeius) at home: they desire to talk to her further about the King’s demand that she submit to his wishes.  Wolsey starts talking in Latin.    She replies, “Nay, good my Lord, speak to me in English I beseech you, although I understand Latin.”  Compare Henry VIII, III.1, 46ff.  The content of their private interview is enlarged upon in the play.  Katherine resists their arguments and makes word-play of their titles:

Holy men I thought ye,

Upon my soul, two reverend cardinal virtues;              

But cardinal sins and hollow hearts I fear ye.

[102ff]

Katherine now disappears from the eye-witness account, and Cavendish’s attention is focussed on Wolsey’s downfall and his death (compare Henry VIII, III.2.)  In the play [Act IV, Scene 2], Katherine’s last hours (historically, in 1536) are imagined by John Fletcher, co-dramatist.  Here, she is living in isolation, with a few servants, away from London.  She is informed of the death of Wolsey (historically, in 1530).  She is portrayed, with sympathy and pathos, as philosophical and resigned to her fate, and accepting of her imminent death.  She is visited by a vision of “spirits of peace” – “a blessed troop/….whose bright faces/Cast thousand beams upon me like the sun” [83ff].  Eustace Chapuys (Capuchius), the Emperor’s ambassador visits her, and she asks him to pass on a message to Henry, commending her daughter Mary, and her own, servants to his care.  Her final words are these:

Remember me

In all humility unto his highness….

Tell him in death I blessed him,

For so I will…..

                  When I am dead, good wench,

Let me be used with honour; strew me over

With maiden flowers, that all the world may know

I was a chaste wife to my grave.  Embalm me,

Then lay me forth; although unqueened, yet like

A queen, and daughter to a king, inter me.

I can no more.

[160ff]

Katherine is both a tragic character, and a heroic one, standing up, as she did, to immense pressure.  After her death she was buried in Peterborough Cathedral; and she is still remembered there

PS: I have found Wolf Hall disappointing, despite the praise it has received.

Nineteen Seventy Six 1976

Among remarkable years, this was a truly remarkable one for me.  It was the year I qualified as a social worker, among many other things.

At the beginning, Jane and I (not long married) were living in a terraced house in Wavertree, Liverpool, but spending much time apart.  I was studying social work in Manchester, while Jane was teaching in Huyton, near Liverpool.  I spent a few nights each week at the house of a Friend in Manchester, to cut down on travel back and fore.  And when I did go to and fro between the two cities, I had a choice of the train or our little car (a Fiat 126).  I had only passed my driving test in November 1975, and now I had to cope with heavy traffic between the cities, whichever route I took. 

At the beginning of the year I spent part of my time on placement at Booth Hall Children’s Hospital, North Manchester, visiting the parents of children referred to the Child Guidance Service, to write up assessments.  This meant travelling around much of Greater Manchester, with a map but no “satnav”, and trying to find the right turning off main roads to enter the right residential street.

In the summer I spent a few months based at Denbigh Hospital in North Wales, staying in the Nurses’ Hostel during the week.  Again, this involved, not only talking to inpatients, but going to outpatient clinics and travelling around North-East Wales to see clients in their own homes.

The summer was characterised by a severe drought.  One day there was a sharp shower which made a hospital drive very slippery, like ice.  The surface made me lose control of the car and crash.  Fortunately I was not hurt, and the car was reparable.

1976 was the year Jane and I made the major decision to leave Liverpool and to move to South Wales.  We had separate job interviews with Mid Glamorgan County Council: I was interviewed in Cardiff, with work based in Bridgend in mind; and Jane had an interview in Bridgend for a teaching job in Kenfig Hill. 

Jane actually drove from Liverpool to Bridgend in one day, setting out very early.  (She had kept her commitment to the Liverpool Welsh Choral the previous day.)  Unfortunately, she locked herself out of the house.   I was not at home, and unable to let her back in.  So her intended early start was delayed.  She got back in by climbing through a window that had louvres at the top, at the back of the house, supervised by an officer from Wavertree Police Station.  Then she left about six instead of five, for an interview in Bridgend at ten or half-past, travelling along a route she did not know – at least, the far end of it.  She did not see a sign for Bridgend until she was in the Cowbridge area and she stopped a policeman to check that she was on the right road and not far.  She arrived for her interview on time.

So, we put our house in Liverpool on the market, but it did not sell for months.  We let Friends stay in it while they were house hunting, rent-free.  On one occasion I went up by train to see how they were getting on.

At the end of August we moved, with basics, to stay with my parents in Newport.  We had one stop, about half-way, in a layby in Brayston Hill, near Shrewsbury, on the A49.  I felt upset – I don’t know why.  I remember the feeling whenever we travel the same way.

The drought (just ending) meant that the water supply was rationed in Newport, whereas in the Bridgend area it was still plentiful, because of a local spring that never gave out.

Day after day we commuted along the A48 to our work-places.  Not only was the route busy and congested.  The drought ended and it rained every day till Christmas. 

We thought of ways of being more flexible.  We spent a couple of nights a week at the Friends meeting House, Park Street, Bridgend, to save on travel.  (Sometimes, in the evening, people involved in evening classes would knock on ayour door and ask us questions we could not answer.)  In those days, the Meeting House was cold and dark and not very inviting.

We bought an old “mini” van, so we had a vehicle each.  Unfortunately, neither of our cars was very reliable. 

Staying with my parents was not very convenient, for anybody.  It was hard for us, after living independently; and it was hard on my parents too.

At weekends we house-hunted as best we could.  We secured a semi-detached house in Westminster Way, Cefn Glas, Bridgend.  (We had made an offer on another house, earlier in the year, but had had to withdraw, because of not selling our own in Liverpool.)  We moved in in late December.  This was before completion of the sale, though.  We were told off by solicitors and had to pay a week’s rent for the house we did not yet own.

Just after moving in, round about the New Year, one evening, we were sitting in our new house minding our own business, when we heard a knock at our back door.  We opened it to find a young girl (about twelve) there.  She was anxious.  She had left home nearby, after a row.  We took her in and thought what to do.  After talking to her and calming her somewhat, we rang her parents, to tell her that their daughter was safe.  They asked whether we could be trusted.  We knew that we were in positions of authority and trust, in our occupations, but we did not want to say too much about ourselves.  In the end, we arranged to take the girl home, in the dark, without making direct contact with her family.  And we never saw anything of her again.

Thus ended an eventful year.

‘King Lear’ 2018

Background – general

Prof G K Hunter has written: “King Lear is generally agreed today to be Shakespeare’s ‘greatest play’….The play as a whole gives an impression of a monolithic and rough-hewn grandeur” [New Penguin edition, 1972, page 7].

Prof R A Foakes has written: “King Lear stands like a colossus at the centre of Shakespeare’s achievement as the grandest effort of his imagination” [Arden 3 edition, 1997, page 1].

However, doyen theatre critic Michael Billington has left Lear out of his 101 Greatest Plays [Guardian Books and Faber & Faber, 2015].  He explains his decision thus: “I admit it’s a craggily awesome play….I can only say that….I find it structurally unwieldy: the Gloucester sub-plot too consciously mirrors the main plot, and I find Edgar’s refusal to identify himself to his father inexplicable and needlessly cruel” [page 15].

Television productions

TV productions include the BBC Television version (1982) (with Sir Michael Hordern as Lear), the Granada Television version (1983) (with Laurence Olivier as the King), and the British-American TV film shown on the BBC in May 2018, directed by Sir Richard Eyre, with Sir Anthony Hopkins in the title role.  The running time of the latter is 115 minutes, because of substantial cuts.  Because of the bleakness and the cruelty intrinsic to the play – enhanced in performance – I have waited for nearly three years to watch it (saved as it is on my “black box” hard drive).

Evaluation

In order to properly revisit the play and to re-evaluate it, I decided to re-read it and also to compare it with the 2018 television film. 

I have found that my re-reading, at speed, with little reference to explanatory notes, has taken about three-and-a-quarter hours.  I have relied on the Arden 3 text – a conflation of the Quarto and Folio texts of the early 17th century.  A performance of all of this would take as long, if not longer, because of stage business (music and movements without speech).  It is a long play: doubtless all directors feel obliged to curtail it somewhat.

Conclusions from re-reading

1 The main plot resembles a fairy tale, with its two “bad” elder daughters and one “good” younger one.  Compare the Cinderella story, in its various versions.  The minor plot has one “good” elder son and one “bad” younger one.

2 King Lear’s career goes through the last three stages of Shakespeare’s “Seven Ages of Man” (compare As You Like It): at the outset, he is like the “justice”; as he declines there is some resemblance to the “pantaloon” and even “second childishness”.  However: (i) Lear’s character undergoes a partial reversal of this process, at the end; (ii) it is Gloucester, not Lear, who is “sans eyes”, from Act 3 Scene 7 onwards.

3 Does Lear go “mad”?  Many say so.  Does he suffer from dementia?  But he does not suffer from a readily recognisable mental illness.  The best fit is a depression, in reaction to his vicissitudes (and to his realisation of his poor decision making).

4 The language of the play is rhetorical and poetic; it is varied; but many words and phrases are obscure and require notes for understanding.  Often, the poetry overwhelms the progress of the story.  Some passages are like operatic arias: see for example Edgar’s description of the coastal landscape [4.6.11-24] from the top of the cliff, and also his pretence that his father has survived a great fall [4.6.49-59].

5 While editors Hunter and Foakes use the Folio text rather than the Quartos as the basis of their editions, several Quarto passages omitted from the Folio are useful for inclusion in a performance because of their poetic and dramatic qualities – for example Lear’s “trial” of Goneril and Regan [3.6.17-55].

6 The part of the Fool is an attractive one.  He is the only source of “comic relief” in the whole play.  Unaccountably, he goes missing in the middle of the play. 

7 The opening scene is truly magnificent – it is all that one could hope for as an exposition.  It is paralleled somewhat by the final tableau [circa 5.3.229-325], where all three daughters are re-united – albeit in death – on the stage, where Lear himself joins them.

8 The scene where Gloucester is blinded on stage (Act 3 Scene 7) is unbearable to watch.  An example of an excess of bad taste?

9 Arguably, Shakespeare loses control of his complex material in the last third or so of the play.  There are some riddles here: 

  • What happens to the Fool?
  • What happens to the King of France? 
  • What does Kent do during the battle?
  • Why does Edgar not reveal his true identity to his father?
  • How does Edgar change back into a respectable-looking man (and make a good impression on Albany)? 
  • Does Edmund die from his wounds?
  • How can a private duel take place in the aftermath of a battle?

10 The Gloucester-Edgar-Edmund sub-plot is closely linked to the main plot, but the elaborate working out of it takes up much space on the page (and much time on the stage or screen if it is given its full scope).  I have some sympathy with the judgement of Michael Billington (above), but I wonder how any excision of the sub-plot could be carried out satisfactorily.

Remarks on the 2018 television film

1 This is a “modern dress” production, which includes “soldiers” in camouflage uniform.  (Perhaps the real armed forces contribute to the pool of extras.)

2 The principal actors are justly famous, and their acting here is impressive.  Sir Anthony as Lear, Emma Thompson as Goneril, Emily Watson as Regan, and Jim Broadbent as Gloucester, fit their roles as hands fit in gloves.  The roles of Cordelia (Florence Pugh), Edgar (Andrew Scott) and Kent (Jim Carter) are much reduced.

3 The cuts mentioned above are pretty drastic; the momentum – the main thrust of the story – is maintained; some of the links in the chain of events are missing, because of these omissions.   

4 Emma Thompson and Emily Watson succeed in making Goneril and Regan appear as somewhat reasonable in contrast with their unreasonable father – that is, until their capability for mercilessness and cruelty is exposed unambiguously.

5 The film is well worth watching.

Conclusion

King Lear has many fine dramatic qualities, with memorable poignant scenes and evocations of character.  It also has many highly poetic passages.  Visiting it and revisiting it (whether on the page, in the theatre, in the cinema or on television) is a “must” for lovers of Shakespeare. 

Whether it is his “greatest play” remains a matter of dispute.  This not a competition!

A personal view of Shakespeare’s ‘Tempest’

“It [The Tempest] is an imaginary tale about real problems.”

[John Wilders, literary consultant to the BBC, 1980]

Is there anything new to say about Wm Shakespeare’s Tempest?  Perhaps not, but I fancy clarifying my thinking and putting my personal reactions on record.

Simply, it is brilliant.  I am surprised that it is not included by the Guardian theatre critic Michael Billington in his book, The 101 Greatest Plays (2015).

It is like a self-contained myth; it is like an opera, with its Act IV pageant, which forms a betrothal or wedding ceremony; its movements, which present both initial disharmony and ultimate resolution, are balletic.  

It’s about the flowering of young love and the union of families; it’s about the confrontation of offenders with their crimes, and forgiveness, and the restoration of a dukedom to its rightful possessor.  This is ample material.

Notable is the use by Prospero, the protagonist, of magic to achieve his ends, aided and abetted by Ariel.

There is a mixture of verse and prose.  There are two great blank verse monologues by Prospero, but no soliloquies.  There are several short rhymed songs, and one long one – the pageant (or masque) of Iris, Ceres and Juno, conjured up by Prospero for the benefit of Miranda and Ferdinand (in Act IV).

In the play many binary oppositions can be discovered: master v slave, so-called civilisation v the primitive, magic v the everyday, the real v the ethereal, the sea v the land, old v young, government v anarchy, rebellion v obedience, and revenge v mercy.

The Tempest does contain two conspiracies to murder, but they are foiled.  The perpetrators are pardoned, but they refuse to repent.  (Alonso of Naples, not one of the conspirators, is penitent about his past behaviour.)  Hence, while the play gives us a “happy ending”, it shows too that some aspects of evil can only be managed and not eliminated entirely.

There are echoes of earlier plays in The Tempest.  As has often been pointed out, like The Comedy of Errors, everything happens in the course of one day and in one place.  As in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, the use of magic plays a major role.  These are comedies, where potentially tragic outcomes are averted.  Boys meet girls, and in the end they marry.  (Contrast the tragic fate of Romeo and Juliet.)  In the later plays, relationships between fathers and daughters are prominent – in King Lear, Pericles and The Winter’s Tale, as well as in The Tempest.

As to the classical references, particularly in the Act IV pageant, compare the poem Venus and Adonis, and, in the plays, Hymen in As You Like It, Jupiter in Cymbeline, and (to a limited extent) Mars, Venus and Diana in The Two Noble Kinsmen. 

Power relationships

Prospero has magic powers, but they are limited.  Moreover, he relies on Ariel a great deal.  He depends on an “auspicious star”, he says, to fulfil his purposes.  A carefully managed shipwreck can be arranged, just as the ships returning from Tunis sail past the island.  Prospero can entrance the enemies that the shipwreck has brought on to the island.  He can threaten Caliban with pinching.  However, he cannot force Miranda and Ferdinand to love each other (they do, and he approves); and he cannot force his enemies to repent (see above).

Is Prospero himself a hero or a villain?  Probably more of the former than the latter.

Is Caliban a villain or an anti-colonial hero?  Probably more of the former than the latter.  But worries remain about the colonial implications of the play in general, and the status of Caliban in particular.

Film treatments

Given its embrace of magical effects, The Tempest provides directorsa template on which they can base their own vision; and the medium of film offers them the techniques to realise it, such as the use of locations, flashbacks, lighting, music, and the overlaying of one image with another on the screen.

The BBC television version (1980) is studio-based.  It downplays the use of magic, apart from appearances and dis-appearances of Ariel, from one frame to another, on occasions.  It cuts the bulk of the Act IV pageant (on the basis of the disputable claim that the words are “banal”). 

Derek Jarman’s 1979 Tempest and Peter Greenaway’s 1991 Prospero’s Books each create a phantasmagoria, albeit in different ways.  In his film, Jarman cuts most of the text.  He does provide a theatrical climax, with the young sailors’ dance, followed by the grand entrance of Elisabeth Welch, attired like a goddess in a gold dress, singing Stormy Weather (from 1933).  Perhaps this forms his own version of the pageant.

In Julie Taymor’s film (2010), Miranda’s surviving parent is Prospera, her mother.  (Why not indeed?)

Whether or not one approves of these transformations remains a personal opinion.

Translation

Among other languages, The Tempest has been translated into Welsh: by Gwyn Thomas (Y Dymestl, 1996), and by Gwyneth Lewis (Y Storm, 2012).  The latter’s version was performed by National Theatre Wales at the 2012 National Eisteddfod.  The staging was imaginative, featuring a circus atmosphere in a tent with a sandy floor, and some of the players engaging in acrobatics.  Indeed, this remains the best production that I have seen to date.

Conclusion

The Tempest offers great entertainment value, while remaining thought provoking.  It has something for nearly everyone:

“It is clear…that….The Tempest still speaks profoundly to stage and film audiences…..Shakespeare’s vision of an enchanted island, where even the worst of us can find forgiveness, remains relevant.”

[V M Vaughan & A T Vaughan (editors), Arden Shakespeare, 3rd Series, page 160.]

Historian Edward Gibbon – his Observations on the Rise of Christianity

I am revisiting the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by the 18th century historian Edward Gibbon.  He casts a cool, rational gaze upon the causes of the rise and spread of primitive Christianity, especially in his Chapters XV and XVI, which were very controversial in his day.

Gibbon’s thesis offers open-minded readers an opportunity to re-examine their own beliefs, however firmly held and cherished.  The point here is not to criticise Gibbon’s thinking but to see where it leads us.

Gibbon takes for granted the intrinsic virtues of Christianity (“the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself and the ruling providence of its great Author”).   Moving beyond these, he deals at length with five “secondary” causes of the expansion of Christianity growth throughout the Roman Empire (and even beyond).  He itemises the key factors as follows:

1. The zeal of the Christians, coupled (Gibbon says) with their inflexibility and their intolerance of the beliefs of others.

2. The doctrine of a future life, derived from the belief in the immortality of the soul, associated with the concepts of Heaven and Hell.

3. The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church.

4. The pure and austere morals of the Christians, marked by their rejection of both (a) sensual pleasures and (b) participation in the administration of the Empire, and its defence.

5. The union and discipline of the Christian republic, maintained by the new order of bishops.

QUESTIONS

1. Can a balance be struck between loyalty to one’s own set of beliefs and tolerance of others’?  How do we integrate insights from other traditions with those of our own belief system?

2. How essential (if at all) is belief in an after-life today?  Or Heaven and Hell?

3. How essential (if at all) is belief in miracles today?   Are fewer miracles reported today?  If so, why?  (Is this because of scepticism?)

4a. What is the right, healthy attitude towards worldly pleasures?  Is there a ‘golden mean’ between asceticism and hedonism?

4b. What are the citizen’s civic responsibilities today?  Are there any boundaries?

5. To what extent do we need bishops (or similar authority figures) today?  How should they be chosen?  By whom?  For how long should they serve?

The headings below refer to Gibbon’s further remarks about the context of the rise of Christianity:

6. The negative attitude of contemporary “illustrious characters” to the “enthusiasm” of the Christians.

7. The long history of schisms, and persecutions by different Christian sects of one another.

Further to point 6, note the following, from the original:

The names of Seneca, of the elder and the younger Pliny, of Tacitus, of Plutarch, of Galen, of the slave Epictetus, and of the Emperor Marcus Antoninus adorn the age in which they flourished and exalt the dignity of human nature….Yet all these sages (….) overlooked or rejected the perfection of the Christian system.

Chapter XV

Further to point 7, Gibbon concludes his Chapter XVI (which deals with how Christianity fared under the emperors that preceded Constantine, and the occasional persecutions) with a “melancholy truth”, namely, “that the Christians, in the course of their intestine dissensions, have inflicted far greater severities on each other, than they had experienced from the zeal of infidels.”  (He quotes as an example the persecution by Charles V of the Protestants of the Netherlands.)

QUESTIONS

6. What use can Christians make of the writings of non-Christian writers and philosophers?

7. How important is ecumenism?  What fundamental beliefs and values do Christians (and others) share with each other?

CONCLUSION

Edward Gibbon makes judicious observations; and (in my opinion) he forces his serious readers to think.  Very worthwhile.

The significance of Clemency in Statius, ‘Thebaid’, Book XII

Lamentations are in order

How doth the city sit solitary that was full of people! How is she become as a widow! She that was great among the nations, and princess among provinces, how is she become tributary! 

[OT, Lamentations, 1:1 (KJV/AV)]

In all cultures there are established rites around death and funerals.  The body of the deceased provides a focus for the grieving process: in its absence it is sorely missed.

Much of the story of Homer’s Ancient Greek Iliad centres not only on the deaths of the warriors but also on the disposal of their bodies.  Hence, not only is the death of Hector at the hands of Achilles itself tragic, so too is the cruel, undignified way Achilles treats his body afterwards.  (Finally, Hector’s father retrieves his body and gives him a funeral.)  See also the Antigone of Sophocles, where the eponymous heroine clashes with Creon over the need to bury her dead brother Polynices (killed in the fratricidal war outside Thebes).

The Roman poet Publius Papinius Statius (1st century CE) is not as well-known as Homer or Sophocles, nowadays, but his work is worth a look.  Moreover, he influenced poets who came much later, and who remain famous and appreciated, for example, Dante (see the Purgatorio), Boccaccio and Chaucer.

Statius’s twelve-book verse epic, the Thebaid, follows the pattern of the Iliad, in some respects: for ‘Troy’ read ‘Thebes’.  In place of the disputes between (a) Menelaus and Paris and (b) Achilles and Agamemnon, there is the quarrel between Oedipus and his two sons, Eteocles and Polynices, and in turn their own dispute over the throne of Thebes.  Moreover, the interference of ghosts, Furies and gods (reminiscent of the dramas of Seneca) exacerbate the existing tensions.

The  brothers resort to force, to back up their respective claims.  Polynices brings six warriors and their followers with him from Argos: Thebes is besieged, and war ensues.  The rivals’ mother and sisters try to intercede with them and to mediate between them, but to no avail: they are left to mourn the losses that pile up.  Finally (Book XI), after many of their allies have been killed, the war climaxes in single combat between the two brothers themselves: they succeed only in killing each other.   

Does this story reflect the turbulent history of Imperial Rome itself?

The twelfth book

After the war come the funerals.  The bereaved women of Argos set out on the journey to Thebes, to bury their dead:

Flebilis interea vacuis comitatus ab Argis                       
(fama trahit miseras) orbae viduaeque ruebant
Inachides ceu capta manus.

[Thebaid, XII, 105ff]

Meanwhile, drawn by the news, a band

Of weeping women, widowed and bereft,

Hastened from empty Argos like a troop

Of captives.

[tr A D Melville (Oxford, 1992)]

Before they can reach the battlefield, though, the women are informed that Creon, the new ruler of Thebes, has prohibited the performance of funeral rites for Polynices and his allies, still lying where they fell, exposed to the open air, and, moreover, that he has posted guards, to enforce the carrying out of his orders.  Here he acts in defiance of the established custom.

The majority of the women decide not to proceed to the battlefield but to turn to Athens instead.  But Argia, widow of Polynices, resolutely continues her journey:

Vadit atrox visu, nil corde nec aure pavescens,
et nimiis confisa malis propiorque timeri….

Tantum animi luctusque valent!  

[Statius, Thebaid, XII, 222ff]

On her grim way she went, no thought, no sound

Dismaying her, but gaining confidence

From surfeit of disaster – feared indeed

Rather than fearing…..Such the power of grief

 And passion!

[tr A D Melville]

Having reached the battlefield, Argia first discovers the body of Polynices (thankfully), and then Antigone (his brother and her sister-in-law), who has eluded Creon’s guards and has escaped from the city.  Having got over their surprise, and shared their grief, they cleanse Polynices’s body and place it on a still smouldering funeral pyre.  However, it turns out that this fire belongs to Eteocles – and even in death the body refuses to share the space willingly.  And, after all that, the two ladies are discovered and arrested, but, resolute and defiant, they still take pride in what they have done.

At the same time, the main contingent of the women of Argos reaches the Temple of Clemency (or Compassion) in Athens:

Urbe fuit media nulli concessa potentum
ara deum, mitis posuit Clementia sedem,
et miseri fecere sacram; sine supplice numquam
illa novo, nulla damnavit vota repulsa.

[XII, 481ff]


At the town’s centre stands a temple raised

To no almighty god.  It is the seat

Of kind Compassion, sanctified by souls

In grief and misery.  She never lacks

New suppliants nor will reject a prayer.

[tr A D Melville]

As Theseus arrives home in Athens, accompanied by his new queen, Hippolyte (Hippolyta), the ladies approach him and beg him to intervene in their cause: he agrees. 

The last phase of the fighting centres on the single combat between Creon (defiant to the last) and Theseus himself.  Theseus triumphs.  Peace, of a sort, is established. 

For ‘Athens’ read ‘Rome’: the Thebans become subject to Athens, just as many cities around the Mediterranean had become part of the Roman Empire.

Conclusion

The Thebaid has had an afterlife: Book XII, in particular, influenced Boccaccio (the Teseida) and Chaucer (the Knight’s Tale and Anelida and Arcite); and Chaucer in turn influenced Shakespeare.

The epic is generally dominated by the words and actions of men (and male gods), which are often characterised by competitiveness and violence.  (The exception is provided by the history of Queen Hypsipyle, in Books V and VI, which forms an interlude.)   By contrast, the words and actions of the female characters (stuck as they are in situations outside their control) reveal their fundamentally kind nature.  The women’s intercessions with the unreasonable, quarrelling men are very moving, as is their grief over the deaths that inevitably follow the fighting.  The violence is placed in context; the war has been pointless; there can be no return to the status quo ante bellum.  Here is true pathos: the epic gains by its evocation.

A MEMOIR PART SEVEN

WORK AND VOLUNTEERING

Subsequently, I worked for the Sun Alliance & London Insurance Group in the City of London for about a year.  My work had to do with translating and also corresponding with foreign government regulators and tax authorities, in English and French.  The whole place was dominated by men, and the few women present held lowly roles.  Moreover, they were paid 85% of the male rate.

I learnt a lot in my work place but I felt that insurance was not for me.  (I rented a small garret room in a town house in West Kensington at £3.12s.6d a week.  At the time I was earning the rough equivalent of £20 a week.)

In the June 1970 General Election I canvassed for the Labour Party, in support of the MP for Barons Court (West London); and I attended the party’s final rally in Hammersmith Town Hall, where the Prime Minister and cabinet colleagues were on the platform.

At the time, I was attending Hammersmith Quaker Meeting.

For a while I was on the committee of the Bedford Institute Association (now, Quaker Social Action), and I became acquainted with one of their projects in Hoxton (then a poor part of the East End), namely Hoxton Hall, run as a community centre and base for amateur theatricals.

I abruptly left the world of insurance, in late 1970.  Under the sponsorship of British and Philadelphia area Friends, I went to Philadelphia, where A Quaker Action Group was based, and later to the War Resisters League, based in New York.  And I travelled to various places in North America, including Washington DC, Ann Arbor (Michigan), Montreal, Berkeley, San Francisco, Seattle and Vancouver, by bus, train and even long distance hitch-hiking!  In Philadelphia I lived in a commune; in New York I stayed, first with Miriam Abileah, a friend of my father’s (who he had got to know in Palestine during World War II) in Queens, and later with a member of staff of the WRL, in the Lower East Side, a very cosmopolitan area.  In Seattle I slept in the Meeting House, and in Vancouver at the YMCA.  Sometimes, en route, I slept under the stars.  (Rain was a hazard!  I had to look for a bridge or any structure to shelter under.)

The big issue in the USA at that time was the long-running Vietnam War, which still divided the country politically.

Summary of adulthood

On my return to Britain, I pursued my developing interest in social work, inspired in part by work camp experiences.  I finally qualified as a social worker in 1976, after completing a Manchester University postgraduate course at the age of 29.

A truly important part of my life was meeting Jane in Manchester in 1972.  We married at Manchester Friends Meeting House on 29 June 1974, and we have been together ever since.  We lived and worked in the Liverpool area for a couple of years, but then we thought that we would seek work, either in Cumbria (Jane’s home area) or in mine.  In the event, we moved to Bridgend, in 1976, as Jane got a job as a teacher, in Kenfig Hill, and I got a job as a social worker – both with the then Mid Glamorgan County Council.   I carried on doing this, full time, concentrating on adult mental health work from 1 November 1982 till 1 October 2007.  Jane’s teaching career was interrupted by having the children, but in the end she enjoyed a variety of careers, each one leading on to the next, in a progressive way (I think). .

Reflections, summary

After retirement from full-time work, I worked part time for Bridgend Council (the successor to MGCC), looking after social work students on placement, and acting as a “best interests assessor”, on and off till I reached the age of 70, in 2017.

 

The events in my life of which I am most proud, or most glad, are these (not in any order of priority):

  • Marrying Jane Pennie on 29 June 1974 in Manchester Meeting House
  • Having three children – two boys and a girl, in the 1980s
  • Enjoying the company of young grandchildren, a boy and a girl
  • Helping to run a branch (local group) of Amnesty International UK for several years
  • Helping to set up Mental Health Matters Wales, formerly Ogwr MIND, and Platfform, formerly Gofal Cymru and originally Gofal Housing Trust
  • Helping to set up a multi-disciplinary community mental health team in the north of Bridgend County Borough (1992 onwards)
  • Passing examinations and gaining qualifications (especially those related to social work)
  • Passing my driving test
  • Joining the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) and serving in various capacities
  • Learning modern languages.

(I have regrets too, and recognise that I have made mistakes, but I see no benefit in exploring them here.)

A MEMOIR PART SIX

Young adulthood

When I was 17, coming up to 18, I felt under pressure to apply for a university course.  I genuinely feared that I might not get in.  There were fewer places in those days.  The terms for the lucky few were more generous than they are now – we received maintenance grants, and did not have to pay tuition fees.  I felt, and still feel, that I was very fortunate.

When I did secure a place (in Manchester), I found myself among a mixture of eighteen and nineteen year olds, and I considered the latter to be more mature, as they had put their year between leaving school and going to University to good use, that is, through doing paid work.   During my studies, I lived in Dalton Hall, a hall of residence founded by Quakers in the 19th century but now owned by the University.  It had a large intake of international students – a good thing.  An annual play was a feature of life there, too.

One of the extra-curricular activities I engaged in was to go on a trip with fellow students to Agecroft Colliery, a few miles outside Manchester.  It was a working colliery.  The noise at the coal face was deafening.  We had a shower when we returned to the surface.  I found coal dust in my saliva for several hours afterwards.

Another activity was taking part in the “Bogle Stroll” walk in aid of Manchester University Rag Week (in February 1966).  With many others, I walked from Lancaster to Manchester (the Student Union building) along the A6, for about 52 miles.  I became soaking wet in the rain, and cold, and very stiff.  It was easier, though, to continue walking than to stop.  I made it to the end in 20 hours of the 24 allowed.  I was stiff for a few days afterwards.  I still have the tie awarded to those who finished the course.

I spent about a year in Germany, in the middle of my languages course.  Indeed, I spent both my 20th and 21st birthdays there – the former in Kiel and the latter in Berlin.

 

In Kiel I met students from other British universities.  I attended a German language course designed for foreigners.  I also attended German literature lectures, where I learnt how to take notes in German (rather than in English).  I took advantage of the opportunity to learn basic Swedish with a native speaker, as Scandinavian language courses were on offer, at no extra cost.  I stayed in a student hostel, namely the Christian-Albrecht-Haus, where there were numerous students from abroad, which I liked.  International students were well looked after.  I had the opportunity to go sailing on the Kiel Bay.  I joined a group trip to the Frisian island of Hooge and a visit to archaeological sites in Jutland.

 

At Easter I attended a performance of Handel’s Messiah in the Castle, and I realised that it was not just for Christmas.

 

From Kiel, it was fairly easy to go by ship to Copenhagen, from Travemünde – and I went.  Well, I had to get up early, around 4am and walk the few miles to the railway station, to catch the first train, not long after 5am, in order to be in time for the early sailing. I had some bread with me, for breakfast.  I tried to cut into it, with a blunt knife, as I sat on the quayside, and cut myself.  A member of the Swedish ship’s crew bandaged me up without a fuss.

In Denmark, I stayed with family friends who lived in Hørsholm, outside Copenhagen.  (The daughter of the family, Anne Grethe, had worked as an au pair in Newport: she had had a hard time with the host family; but anyway, somehow or other she had met our family and had been befriended by us.)  The family showed me round the area: one day we went to Helsingør and by the ferry across to Helsingborg in Sweden; another day Anne Grethe took me to Copenhagen.  (Many years later, I went back, with Jane, when we were on a cruise, which also included the transit of the Kiel Canal.)

Later, in West Berlin, I was an assistant teacher of English in a “Realschule” in Charlottenburg– a school that catered for 12 to 16 year olds who had not got into a “Gymnasium” (grammar school) – in other words, it had a practical orientation.  The 1967-8 winter was very cold (to me), with lots of snow, but I don’t remember getting ill. Public transport, and the school itself, carried on running, regardless.  Lessons com-menced at 8 in the morning and ceased at about 1.30 in the afternoon; there were some lessons too on Saturday mornings.  They never stopped because of the winter cold but only because of the summer heat: when the temperature inside the school became too hot in the course of a summer morning (measured by the headmaster’s thermometer), the children had to be let go.

 

I found the teaching hard work but learnt a lot by doing it.  The teachers of English and French took an interest in me.  I had a lot of time on my own, some of which I spent wandering around Berlin (and trying to imagine what the city was like before the destruction of World War II and its subsequent division).  I made friends with two students from Newcastle University who were there at the same time: one of them  keenly missed her boyfriend, back at home, who she later married.  (She could telephone him more easily than he could ring her, because of the superiority of the German telephone system.)

 

It was always exciting to visit East Berlin, across the notorious Berlin Wall.  The atmosphere was quite different.  The West was prosperous and had lots to offer but was a bit showy; the East was quiet, with much less traffic, and fewer goods in the shops, and more ruins remaining from World War II.  Highlights in the East included the Museum Island, and the Theater am Schiffbauerdamm, where Bertolt Brecht had been active, and where the Berliner Ensemble played (worth seeing).  Berlin is full too of lakes and forests, and the public transport is excellent, so I travelled around quite a bit.

 

I attended some classes (German literature) in the Free University of Berlin (for example, on Franz Kafka).  Just at this time (1968) student protests, and occupations of buildings, were at their height, in Paris and Berlin (and to a certain extent in British Universities, including Manchester).  Once I got into a packed main lecture theatre to hear a visiting speaker, the philosopher Herbert Marcuse, who spoke in support of the students.

While in Germany, I got in touch with German Friends; Lore and Leo Engelhardt, from Karlruhe, in particular, became substitute parents to me, to a certain extent, and I stayed with them a few times.  They had four children.  Thomas wanted to be a pilot.  He had a glider, and one day he took me up in it.  (I do not have a head for heights, though!)  He let me take the controls for a little while.  It was one of the most exciting things I have ever done.

In the summer of 1968 I visited Nuremberg and Munich, staying in youth hostels.  I arrived at the Nuremberg hostel in the dark, by bus from the railway station past the walls of the old city.  The following morning I looked through the window of my room and saw the old city laid out before me in its grandeur, inviting me to explore.  (Much later, we visited with the children.)  From Munich, then, I went by train (steam-hauled from the border) to Prague (then behind the “Iron Curtain” and requiring a visa to enter).  Prague had become a popular tourist destination for West and East Germans and Austrians, because of the “Prague Spring” of liberalisation under communism.  The trams are useful; but much of the city you can walk around; and, apart from the main sights, many of the ordinary streets have harmonious architecture.  I stayed in a student hostel and got to know students from neighbouring countries.  A few weeks after I left, the troops of the Soviet Union and her allies invaded Czechoslovakia.

When I returned to Manchester, I felt much more competent in German, and more mature generally.  However, I feel now that I did not reach something like full maturity till my late twenties; and some who know me may say that I have never achieved it.

I never had a clear idea, either at school or university, about what I wanted to do, I mean, what career to pursue.  While I was thinking about this, I was tempted to take part in a work camp in (London)Derry organised by the Fellowship of Reconciliation.  (I also spent a lot of time at weekends with Young Friends and FoR members, both in Manchester and in London.)  I spent two weeks based in the Bogside, a Roman Catholic area, and two weeks at a Christian Movement for Peace play scheme work camp in East Belfast, near the Newtownards Road, which was a predominantly Protestant area.  The tension arising from the communal conflict was palpable.  It was shocking to see burnt out houses.  I was in Belfast, indeed, when the British Army moved in to support the Police.

At this time, my paternal grandmother wrote to me, telling me to get a job.  I have kept the letter.