Putting fear in its rightful place

When the wicked prosper, is God unjust?

Disaster unless repentance.

“‘Flee for safety, people of Benjamin! Flee from Jerusalem! Sound the trumpet in Tekoa! Raise the signal over Beth Hakkerem! For disaster looms out of the north, even terrible destruction.’” (Jeremiah 6:1)

The whole of chapter six is of great importance for an understanding of the nature of God that is revealed through Jeremiah’s writing. There is probably no other chapter in the Book of Jeremiah that more clearly encapsulates both the justice and the love of God, and also the tenderness of his care for his covenantal people.

The Heart of God

In his times of standing in the Council of the Lord, Jeremiah senses the grief in the heart of God as he looks at what is happening among the people with whom he established a covenant relationship of love.

The chapter begins with the command to sound the trumpet warning of the approach of a mighty army that will bring destruction upon the cities of Judah. Then there follows: “This is what the Lord says: ‘Look, an army is coming from the land of the north; a great nation is being stirred up from the ends of the earth. They are armed with bow and spear; they are cruel and show no mercy’” (Jer 6:22-23).

Jeremiah then adds his own plea: “We have heard reports about them, and our hands hang limp. Anguish has gripped us,… Put on sackcloth, my people, and roll in ashes; mourn with bitter wailing as for an only son, for suddenly the destroyer will come upon us” (Jer 6:24-26).

Although these reports are clearly about the Babylonian army being on the move, it would be a mistake to think that this was a warning from God telling them to prepare the defences of Jerusalem and put the army of Judah on red alert to resist an invasion. Certainly, this was an accurate description of the international situation. But the whole purpose of this chapter is not to warn about a Babylonian attack even though Jeremiah could see it as vividly as though it were already taking place.

Jeremiah senses the grief in the heart of God over his covenant people.

The Real Danger

The danger is not from the Babylonians. The danger is that God will withdraw his covering of protection over the land and over his covenant people because they have broken the covenant and poured out wickedness, violence and corruption like a fountain gushing out water from a well (Jer 6:7). The next verse delivers the heart of the message: “‘Take warning, Jerusalem, or I will turn away from you and make your land desolate so that no one can live in it’” (Jer 6:8).

This is a poor translation that fails to express the heart of the message that Jeremiah is trying to convey. The Authorised Version gets closer to the Hebrew for this verse – “Be thou instructed, O Jerusalem, lest my soul depart from thee; lest I make thee desolate, a land not inhabited.” The command to ‘be instructed’ (Hebrew ysr) or to ‘learn a lesson’ is not a warning or threat as the NIV states. It is a cry from the heart of God for the people he loves who are so unfaithful to him. It represents an element of indecision in the heart of God that is similar to that reflected in Hosea: “‘My heart is changed within me; all my compassion is aroused. I will not carry out my fierce anger, nor will I devastate Ephraim again. For I am God, and not a man – the Holy One among you. I will not come [in wrath]’” (Hos 11:8-9).

That was said shortly before God withdrew his covering of protection over the northern Kingdom of Israel and allowed the Assyrian army to ravage the land and take the people into exile. Jeremiah was constantly aware that this same tragedy could fall upon the southern Kingdom of Judah where the people were just as idolatrous and unfaithful as their northern brothers and sisters had been. The fate that befell Israel was now looming over Judah.

The danger is that God will withdraw his covering of protection over the land because his people have broken the covenant.

Words of Warning

It was Jeremiah’s prophetic calling to blow the trumpet in Jerusalem, but all his words of warning were ignored, “To whom can I speak and give warning? Who will listen to me? Their ears are closed so that they cannot hear. The word of the Lord is offensive to them; they find no pleasure in it. But I am full of the wrath of the Lord, and I cannot hold it in.” (Jer 6:10-11).

Jeremiah’s dilemma was a reflection of what he saw in the heart of God. He knew God’s great love for his people, yet he knew God to be a God of righteousness who was utterly faithful in keeping his promises. Yahweh, the God of Israel, who had delivered his people from slavery in Egypt and had brought them into the Promised Land, had established a solemn covenant: so long as people were faithful to him, worshipping no other god and putting their trust in him, he would watch over them, protect them, bless them and give them prosperity.

But if they were faithless and turned away from him to the gods of the world, he could do no other than withdraw his presence and the power of his protection. This was the fate that had befallen Israel and was now about to fall upon Judah. Jeremiah sensed a moment of indecision in the heart of God: the fate of Judah did not depend upon Nebuchadnezzar or the army of Babylon. It depended entirely upon God.

Jeremiah knew God to be a God of righteousness who is utterly faithful to his covenant promises.

The Need for Repentance

There was still just the faintest chance that Judah would be spared the inevitable disaster. God had not yet declared: “‘Hear, you earth: I am bringing disaster on this people, the fruit of their schemes, because they have not listened to my words and have rejected my law’” (Jer 6:19).

If there were the slightest sign of repentance – a recognition of their wrongdoing and a willingness to seek the forgiveness of the Lord and put their trust in him, God would remain faithful to keep his word. The Babylonian army would be powerless to put a foot upon the soil of Judah: Jerusalem would be safe because God is a God who keeps his word and he is the God of Creation who could wipe out the Babylonian army at a stroke.

The fate of Judah depended upon people hearing and heeding the word of the Lord. Disaster was inevitable unless there was repentance. The “UNLESS” was still there: but for how long?

This article is part of a series on the life and ministry of the Prophet Jeremiah. Click here for previous instalments.

The cry for justice (Amos 5:24).

What is the reason for the leaders of the churches - Anglican, Roman Catholic, Free Church – being so conspicuous by their absence and silence concerning the definite increase of anti-Semitism, especially in the Labour Party? Where is their prophetic voice of solidarity for the despair and fear of the Jewish people, who have made such a great contribution at all levels of our society?

It is impossible to separate the events of the Bible with the Jewish people living in the Land of Israel and here in Britain. The very foundations of the Christian faith are based on the Torah (Laws) of Moses, the Psalms of David and message of the Prophets. Jesus the Messiah was Jewish, and lived this out faithfully – including being circumcised on the 8th day and participating in the Jewish Feasts, particularly Passover. The Christian Communion service is directly related to the Passover celebration. All of the 12 Apostles were born in the Land of Israel.

In the 19^th Century Bishop John Lightfoot from Durham, in discussion about God's purpose for Israel, emphasised “the miraculous preservation of Israel throughout history”. And in the 20^th Century, Dean Inge of St Paul's Cathedral said "The Jewish people stand at the graveside of their persecutors". Archbishop William Temple addressed the House of Lord in March 1943 concerning the tragic events befalling Jews in Europe: "We stand at the bar of history, of humanity and God. At this moment we have a tremendous responsibility and opportunity of showing mercy".

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s parents were dedicated Methodists. When he attended Sunday School at the local Methodist Church, he must have heard the famous story of Jesus and encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well. In this conversation, Jesus stated "Salvation is of the Jews" (John 4:22). This tremendous truth is still valid today. Christianity owes an immense debt to the Jewish people.

So, I say again: why are our Church leaders silent as the scourge of anti-Semitism raises its ugly head in our nation once more?

Gerald Gotzen

UK Board Member of Jewish Voice Ministries International, Founder of Beit Shalom Project in Ethiopia, providing practical support for Jewish people who are waiting to make 'aliyah' to Israel.

What Britain’s treatment of the ‘Empire Windrush generation’ says about our society.

I have fought against prejudice and injustice throughout my adult life and I really thought that in Britain we were, in recent years, seeing the back of it.

But I have been shocked at the stories coming to light in the past week of the treatment of some of those who came over from the Caribbean in the early days of the migration after the Second World War. I lived and worked among them in West London in the 1950s and in Tottenham in the 1960s.

I found the first generation of migrants to be extremely friendly, hard-working and trustworthy people and I had a great love and respect for them. Some of them are still my friends today. Many times I was shocked and angry at the treatment some of them received in London. I used to feel ashamed when I saw the street corner newspaper shops with their adverts for rooms or flats to let with the inevitable caveat, “No coloured, No pets, No Irish”.

The Windrush Generation

The early migrants from the Caribbean faced an enormous amount of prejudice, but they bore it with great patience and humility that won the admiration of those who took the trouble to get to know any of them on a personal basis. They played a vital part in the re-building of Britain after the Blitz, both physically and in terms of its economy which was booming in those days, but there was a shortage of manpower as so many men had been lost during the war.

Many hundreds of worker migrants came to my church in West London in the days before and after the Notting Hill riots of 1958. They not only brought fresh culture and enthusiasm into the fellowship but they also enriched our worship with their singing. We had a quartet that sang beautiful four-part harmony and they took part a number of times in broadcasts from the church.

The large number of migrants coming to my church, however, attracted opposition from the National Front who picketed the church and then attacked my house, throwing white paint over the front door and painting abusive words (‘NIGGER LOVER’) on the pavement outside the house. This atrocity backfired against them as it attracted a huge amount of local support as well as publicity in the press.

Left: Commonwealth Sunday Service 1962, High Cross Church Tottenham. Right: Workmen turning over the paving stones outside the church house, Tottenham, August 1962.

A Prejudiced System

I was a member of the Home Office-sponsored ‘Commonwealth Immigrants Committee’ and I saw at first hand the prejudice in the system that the migrants faced. It was strong in the 1960s because the Home Office was involved in framing the Immigration and Race Relations Acts.

Both the Labour and Conservative parties supported the immigration controls which sent a message to the public that there must be something wrong with these people because their numbers had to be limited. That prejudice continued for decades and became increasingly hostile in the run-up to the 2016 Referendum.

The early Caribbean migrants faced an enormous amount of prejudice, but they bore it with great patience and humility.

Evidence of Discrimination

This past week has seen the 50^th anniversary of Enoch Powell’s infamous ‘Rivers of blood’ speech that attracted massive publicity and revealed to the world the level of racial prejudice in Britain. The speech shocked many people and was denounced in Parliament by Powell’s own party, but evidence at the time showed that Powell was expressing the views of millions of ordinary people in Britain such as the London dockers who exercised a ban on black workers.

There was plenty of evidence of discrimination in employment, such as black bus conductors being permitted but not black drivers, and it was many years before the first black inspector of buses was appointed by London Transport. There were lots of surveys of prejudice in Britain and many activists calling for social change, but cultural attitudes change slowly.

Heart-Searching Needed

In Britain we don’t like to admit it but we have lots of prejudices: like between north and south – northerners don’t like southerners and Londoners think that civilisation ends at Watford - or over regional accents. And of course, Scots stereotypically don’t like Sassenachs and would like to be independent of the English - while the English have historically not been too keen on foreigners of any origin (hence Brexit can’t come too soon!)!

But our treatment of the ‘Empire Windrush’ generation whose landing passes and other documents were destroyed by the Home Office has really been unforgivable. It is amazing that it has taken so long to come before Parliament and it is only because of media publicity that apologies have been tumbling out of the Government.

Men and women who have lived in Britain for more than 50 years and greatly contributed to this nation have been issued with deportation orders or even locked up in detention centres. Surely this is more than just an administrative error! It means we have never really valued many of those who have come to Britain from the Commonwealth.

In Britain we don’t like to admit it but we have lots of prejudices.

Acknowledging Past Injustice

Our mistreatment of people from the Caribbean islands goes back at least 200 years to the days of slavery under British colonial rule. This legacy of slavery has never been finally expunged from our social attitudes and culture, as we remarked just two weeks ago on Prophecy Today UK.

It is the legacy of slavery that the Movement for Justice and Reconciliation (MJR) is working to overcome. MJR’s Chairman sees this legacy as fuelling knife crime on our city streets (see his article, also in this week’s issue). Why is it that more young men of Caribbean origin are in British prisons than in our universities?

The Bible says “He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honours God” (Prov 14:31). It is surely time to take a hard look at our inner cities to see how we can improve life for those who are often stuck in ghettos of poverty, lacking hope and opportunity. This is not a call for compassion - it is a call for justice and righteousness, because “Righteousness exalts a nation but sin is a disgrace to any people” (Prov 14:34).

More analysis on this issue can be found in ‘Free at Last: The Tottenham Riots and the Legacy of Slavery' (Hill, C, 2014, Wilberforce publications Ltd, London), particularly pp72-74.

MJR exposes a root cause of violent crime in the capital.

The publicity surrounding the rising incidences of knife crime on the streets of London, which has brought about the tragic deaths of 50 (mostly young) people since the start of the year, has led to much questioning and heart-searching about causes.

The Movement for Justice and Reconciliation (MJR) believes that these are rooted in the legacies of the past. In 2019 MJR will be sailing a replica slave-ship around the UK to bring this legacy to the attention of the public.

Unacknowledged Injustice

While not condoning or excusing knife crimes, MJR wants the general public to be aware that these events are not isolated, and that they cannot be simply explained away as ‘criminality’. For them to be dealt with, they and their mostly young perpetrators need to be understood: and that means looking into context.

We believe this context includes issues of historic cultural legacy, where particular pre-dispositions or mind-sets have been passed down through the generations unseen.

Chair of MJR, Rev Alton Bell, said: “An increasing body of academic research is showing that certain negative behavioural symptoms manifesting in modern society can be traced back in our history to the twin oppressions of colonial slavery and industrial exploitation. These symptoms can include violence such as is being currently witnessed on our streets.”

In 2019 MJR will be sailing a replica slave-ship around the UK to bring the legacy of slavery to the attention of the public.

Wide-Reaching Implications

For those of our communities descended from slaves these legacy issues can include personal problems with identity and belonging but, importantly, the legacy problem is also far more wide-reaching, even systemic.

The racist attitudes – structural, organisational and personal – with which our wider society struggles, and which result in black people being far more likely to be poor or in the prison system, can also be shown to be part of this legacy. The fact that it remains largely unacknowledged, let alone addressed, is a massive injustice.

MJR trustee Paul Keeble said: “Our historical amnesia about the exploitation of African slaves that helped make this country rich, has been an attempt to sweep an injustice under the carpet, but it has just left a huge lump that we keep tripping over as a society. Until we admit it is there and seek to address it, these legacy-related tragedies will continue. We cannot simply ‘move on’.”

Raising Public Awareness

In an attempt to bring the issues of legacy to wider public attention, in the summer of 2019 MJR will be sailing a replica slave-ship, called the ‘Zong’, to a number of key ports with associations with the slave trade.

Through on-board and dockside exhibitions, MJR will seek to inform people about the brutality of slavery and the human cost of the Industrial Revolution that has benefitted us all.

Notes

1. The Movement for Justice and Reconciliation is a registered charity, no. 1161441. More information on the MJR website, or email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
   
2. The original ‘Zong’ was infamous for the owners claiming on their insurance for the loss of ‘property’ after 133 slaves were thrown overboard when the ship had apparently got into difficulties.
   
3. The 2019 Zong tour schedule is currently being finalised and is subject to confirmation of funding. Ports of call being prepared include Plymouth, Scilly Isles, Bristol, Ilfracombe, Liverpool, Manchester, Whitehaven, Lancaster.

Can justice be done in a society that no longer accepts responsibility for its wrongdoing?

In a week that has seen the end of the 28-year campaign for justice on behalf of the 95 football fans who lost their lives at the Hillsborough disaster, it’s a good time to reflect on the issues of blame when something goes wrong.

Back in the 1980s and 90s when I was minister of a church in London, I used to exchange churches (and our house and car) for a month in the summer with the minister of a church in the USA. I would just preach once on a Sunday morning and in return we would have a holiday in California or Vermont or some other State. One year we took a church in the Bronx where there was a murder almost every day, which made us happy to get back to the East End of London where, at least, we understood the culture!

One of the things that surprised us was that Americans went to law over the slightest dispute. One of the church members in Los Angeles was sued by a delivery man who tripped on the front garden path which he claimed was uneven. Law firms would advertise to represent anyone who had an accident on a ‘no-win-no-fee’ basis, which encouraged people to sue their neighbours on the slightest pretext.

That ‘blame game’ culture has spread to Britain where law firms specialise in getting compensation for victims of road accidents – fake or genuine – with whiplash being the favourite complaint. It is because of the huge increase in such insurance claims that we all have to pay such high premiums. The Government is preparing legislation to try to deal with the blame game culture that is spreading in Britain.

Change in British Character

Is it my imagination, or has there been a fundamental change in the British character in recent years? We used to be known as a stoic nation. People coped with adversity and accepted personal responsibility when things went wrong. Nowadays when anything goes wrong we look round to see who we can blame! We certainly don’t accept any personal responsibility. If we have an accident our car insurance tells us never to say ‘sorry’, even if we know we were to blame. We must never admit we made a mistake!

American blame culture has spread to Britain and changed our national character.

It is this kind of culture that lies behind the saga that has followed the Hillsborough tragedy. If the policeman in charge of crowd control had immediately admitted that his decision to open the gate to relieve the crowd pressure outside the ground had caused the pressure inside the ground, we would never have had this 28-year enquiry. It would appear that he made an error of judgment, but he is now being charged with manslaughter, which will require proof that he deliberately sent 95 people into mortal danger.

Even if he is sent to jail, it will not bring the dead back to life, but will it give satisfaction to those who have lost loved ones? Is this really what they want – just to be able to blame someone and punish them for their human error of judgment? Of course, there were lies and ‘cover ups’ involved in this particular incident which have complicated the whole tragic affair. And the relatives of the dead are perfectly justified in demanding the truth and punishment of those who lied.

From Hillsborough to Grenfell

My concern about ‘the blame game culture’ is that it is going to be with us for a long time to come in settling the latest tragedy, the Grenfell Tower inferno. We are now learning that the heat inside the building was so great that those who lost their lives will never be found so that their relatives can have the satisfaction of burying them.

This is tragic for those who are grieving the loss of loved ones. There are bound to be calls for the punishment of those who were responsible for the construction and maintenance of the building, which only had one staircase. There was no emergency lighting on the night of the fire and the fire appliances did not have the capability of reaching the top floors to rescue those trapped.

There are so many things wrong with this terrible tragedy – and so many who could in some way be held responsible for it - that the enquiry now starting is likely to last a long time and be highly complex. But in calling for injustice to be exposed and those responsible to be held to account, we also need to temper the righteous public anger that is being widely expressed – lest justice be lost to vengeance and public order be lost to anarchy.

We need to temper the righteous public anger that is being expressed, lest justice be lost to vengeance.

There is a difference between seeking justice and simply trying to deal with deep anger and sorrow by finding someone to blame; but that is what is happening as the ‘blame game culture’ spreads.

Taking Responsibility

In Britain, our biblically-based personal and corporate values used to put God first, ‘others’ second and ‘self’ last. In our modern era, however, we have dropped God and reversed ‘others’ and ‘self’. We never admit to personal error. It’s always someone else’s fault when things go wrong.

Is it because we are so insecure that we cannot admit any personal failings? Do we lack the self-confidence to be able to say “Sorry, I messed up”? It takes what Christians know as ‘grace’ (loving-kindness and favour we do not deserve) to be able to deal with issues where we know that we’ve made a mistake, or done something wrong.

The reason that Christians can handle these things better than non-Christians is due to our relationship with God, whom we know is infinitely better than we are, which makes us humble in his presence. Additionally, we know that God is a loving Father who created each of us in our mother’s womb and knows us better than anyone else. He knows our weaknesses as well as our strengths and he loves us despite our failings.

It takes what Christians know as ‘grace’ to be able to deal with issues where we know that we’ve made a mistake, or done something wrong.

It is his grace that covers our wrongdoing. He holds us accountable for our actions but, when we confess wrongdoing, God is always willing to forgive us and to restore us to right relationships with himself and those whom we have offended.

Life-Changing Grace

This is basic Christian teaching – but it is what is lacking in our society today and what is at the root of the ‘blame game’ which is so damaging to individuals and to the whole community. It would be life-changing if we could each exercise grace and so reverse this culture that destroys our relationships.

We can begin by saying ‘sorry’ silently to God next time we make a mistake. He will then give us the courage and strength to say ‘sorry’ to others. Psalm 51 is our guide – verse 12 says “Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.”

Psalm 51

Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love;
according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions.
Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.

For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.
Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight;
so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge.
Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place.

Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.
Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice.
Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity.

Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

Then I will teach transgressors your ways, so that sinners will turn back to you.
Deliver me from the guilt of bloodshed, O God, you who are God my Saviour,
and my tongue will sing of your righteousness.

Open my lips, Lord, and my mouth will declare your praise.
You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.
My sacrifice, O God, is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart you, God, will not despise.

May it please you to prosper Zion, to build up the walls of Jerusalem.
Then you will delight in the sacrifices of the righteous, in burnt offerings offered whole;
then bulls will be offered on your altar.

Pippa Smith reviews ‘The Evil That Men Do’ by Marcus Paul (Sacristy Press, 2016).

This is a timely and scholarly book which reminds us of the significance and importance of our Christian heritage. In his comments, the Rt Revd Nick Baines, Bishop of Leeds, said, “It is always vital to check our assumptions about historical judgements – not least in the twenty-first-century west. Marcus Paul invites us to correct our memory and to look afresh at assumptions about religion in general and Christianity in particular. Read it and be challenged.”

As the author says, “every healthy society has needed its prophetic figures who will stand out against the prevailing corruption of the time and be prepared to pay the consequences.”

We seem to be living in such times; Christians are facing great injustices, not only around the world but here and now in our own country. This is compounded by modern life, as he so rightly says: “our opinions are formed en masse by an astonishingly small number of TV, press and internet journalists and editors.”

What Christianity Has Done for Us

It is more important than ever that we should not forget what Christianity has given us, through the education and culture bequeathed to us by monasticism, missionary work, the preaching of John Wesley (which prevented us following bloody revolution) and the more recent social campaigns of Wilberforce and others.

It is more important than ever that we should not forget what Christianity has given us.

Paul takes his narrative not only from serious historians but from poets, philosophers, novelists and others – those who were contemporary with the events which today are placed so often under a negative spotlight. He draws out where and why the Church really did fail in following the teaching of Christ and his apostles, and reminds us that there are many areas today in which there is still considerable room for improvement. These sincere calls for reflection mark the author’s commitment to an improved debate which is both honest and self-critical.

Defending the Church

How often have we heard the mantra, ‘I might consider Christianity if the Church had not done so many bad things.’ In this eloquent, historically informative and most readable of books lies the answer for Christians, to such a concern. I hope and pray it will be read widely by those of faith and none, because it lights the path to understanding. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

‘The Evil That Men Do: Faith, Injustice and the Church’ (266 pages, paperback) is available from the publisher for £10.99 + P&P.

Greg Stevenson reviews Magna Carta Unlocked (DVD, 2015).

This time two years ago, we were celebrating a major anniversary of the Magna Carta, the document which founded so many of Britain’s Christian legal principles and freedoms. In view of the election, this week we are highlighting a resource released then which is still extremely pertinent now to Christians wanting to better understand the Judeo-Christian foundations of our nation.

This DVD set is a five-part documentary released by Sceptred Isle Productions. It examines the politics, science, society, law and warfare related to the Magna Carta, especially in areas of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. It is written and presented by Philip Quenby, who was a partner in an international law firm.¹

The DVD was issued to mark the 800^th anniversary of this powerful document of democracy, sealed on 15 June 1215 at Runnymede. Magna Carta established the basis for no man being above the law, for limiting the power of the king, for laying down the principle that punishment should be in accordance with the law and for assuring access to justice for all accused.

The document to which King John attached his Great Seal was the 48 paragraphs of the 'Articles of the Barons', later re-issued as 63 clauses by Henry III in 1217 and named 'Magna Carta'. Although the Charter focused narrowly on the concerns of a small elite, it established free men's rights to justice above the will of the king, and was a bulwark against oppression.

The English Battles for Freedom

The DVD throws us in at the deep end - in 1643, the middle of the battles of the English Civil War. This was the only English 'revolution' that re-affirmed the primary aims of the Charter, and established that the king (Charles I) could not rule by divine right with no opposition. It defined the limits of feudal rights of the Crown, brought an end to the sale of justice, protected the privileges of the church, and addressed due process of law.

As 'native rights' there was to be freedom of conscience, freedom from conscription into the armed forces, and equality for all before the law. Authority was to be vested in the House of Commons rather than the King and the Lords. The cost was the lives of 5% of the population (equivalent to 3 million of today's population).

Magna Carta established free men's rights to justice above the will of the king, and was a bulwark against oppression.

The freedom for which men fought was enshrined in the 'Agreement of the People' argued out by Cromwell's men in 1647 at St Mary's Church, Putney Bridge. When President Adams (USA) visited the site in 1786, he said: “Do Englishmen so soon forget the ground where liberty was fought for? Tell your neighbours and your children that this is holy ground; much holier than that on which your churches stand”.

But the battle for freedom was not over. The DVD moves through James II’s attempt to suspend laws against Roman Catholics, the transfer of the Crown to the Dutch Protestant Prince William of Orange, the Bill of Rights (1689) which further confirmed free elections and the rights of Parliament, and the impacts of these developments on the most famous written constitution of all, drafted in Philadelphia in 1787.

Two Different Champions for Liberty

Finally, the DVD gives examples of two champions of liberty, both fighting against the Establishment of their day, but with very different results: Wilkes and Rousseau.

John Wilkes, born in London in 1727, argued for religious tolerance and scorned the vested interests, bribery, and corruption he saw in England. In spite of a scurrilous lifestyle, he succeeded in removing the Crown's unfettered control over judicial appointments. Thus the freedom which Magna Carta sought was fought for in the courts.

In a Wilkes trial for outlawing, he prompted the famous comment by Lord Chief Justice William Murray (Lord Mansfield): 'Fiat justitia ruat caelum' - 'Let justice be done, though the heavens fall' (regardless of the consequences). This sentence was inscribed in American courts, though many are being removed in these present secular humanist times.

The Foundation for These Freedoms

Unlike the American Declaration of Independence, English political settlement did not rest on 'In the Name, and by the Authority of the (good) people of these colonies…' but acknowledged a higher, Divine, authority.

This principle goes back even earlier than Magna Carta, to the Legal Code compiled by King Alfred the Great (the Doom Code, c.893 AD), to which he prefixed the Ten Commandments, together with rules of life from the Judeo-Christian code of ethics. This is the connection between English law and God's laws; Christian values have thus a key role in English law.

Christian values have a key role in English law.

As we have seen in America, the idea of law having an objective standard derived from the Bible was not to everyone's taste, however. In Europe, Jean-Jaques Rousseau believed that Man had been corrupted by civilisation, and published his 'social contract',² arguing that man has only one authority to which he should submit – 'the General Will of the people'. Contempt for convention in France led quickly to rebellion and revolution (1789) and a new humanist constitution, to which Edmund Burke commented that the moral code of the law was then irrelevant.³

Thus law can override personal opinion, if the general will decides that it disturbs public order, and there is no freedom of conscience (as we have recently seen in Northern Ireland). All supposed protection of the law is thus worthless. Rousseau's brave new world was soon seen in the 'New Republic' (1793) and led to brute force, terror and totalitarian revolution, with no restraint or accountability. Even though in England there was loss of life, at least Cromwell prevented this tyrannical result in our sceptred isle, for which we must be thankful.

Rights, Justice and Security Based on God's Law

The DVD's conclusion is that Magna Carta set up some principles for a sense of law based on right and justice (albeit at that time for a very limited section of the populace) and was in accordance not with royal or parliamentary prerogative, nor with ‘the general will of the people’ who espouse their own sense of right (or none), but with God's laws (cf. Deut 12:8; Jud 12:15).

Overall, it gives a well-presented, balanced view of the fight for justice, although this struggle is far from over, for the world is not clear of revolutions or totalitarian governments. But God's word will stand (Isa 40:8). With no vision, the people will (and do) cast off restraint (Heb. let loose, perish); happiness is found in keeping the law (Torah means teaching/instruction for life) – Proverbs 29:18.

In areas of right and justice, God's word is our yardstick and our security, and Philip Quenby's presentation in this double DVD set underpins this truth.

Magna Carta Unlocked is available from the publisher to stream for £5 or to buy on DVD for £12.50 (also available from Amazon). Rated 12. Click here for more details.

References

1 Philip Quenby. Magna Carta: The missing link in the EU debate. Heart of Sussex and Surrey, June/July 2016, p15.

2 Jean-Jaques Rousseau. Principes du droit politique, 1762.

3 Edmund Burke. Reflections on the French Revolution, 1790.

With input from experts in the legal profession, Clifford Hill reflects upon some of the judicial issues involved in the Referendum debate.

The British justice system is incompatible with the system of justice operated by the European Court. That is the verdict of senior lawyers in Britain who have first-hand experience of dealing with the European Union. Problems arise from the fundamentally different traditions of law between Britain and continental nations.

British legal tradition is based upon biblical principles. Above the state entrance to the Old Bailey, Britain's Central Criminal Court, are inscribed the words:

"Defend the children of the poor. Punish the wrong doer".

These words are based upon Psalm 82:3 which says, "Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed".

Common Law Tradition

The British traditions of law, based upon the Common Law of England¹ (going back to the days of Magna Carta), are rooted in the Bible. Justice is considered on a case-by-case basis rather than in conformity to some abstract concept of law.

English Common Law is an unwritten law which has been evolving for many centuries. It reflects the common customs of the kingdom and is based upon reference to previous judgments. Precedents are formed as the number of judgments increase on a particular issue and these become guidelines for judges in deciding similar cases.

Changes in society sometimes trigger new issues in law. Common law judges are free to depart from precedent to establish a fresh judgment, thus setting a new precedent. This demonstrates the dynamic character of Common Law which is always changing in order to be relevant in a changing society.

English Common Law is unwritten, dynamic and flexible - relevant to a changing society - and has developed along biblical lines.

European Civil Law

In contrast to British Common Law, European Civil Law is a system based upon ancient Roman law in which judges resolve cases by referring to established principles. The Emperor Justinian in the sixth century AD formed a collection of ancient pagan Roman law.²

The Napoleonic Code in the Historical Museum of the Palatinate, Speyer. See Photo Credits.This became the basis of the 'Code of Justinian', which in mediaeval times quickly spread throughout the countries which now form the western part of the European Union. Local statutes and customs were codified in order to form a harmonised body of law throughout the continent. Historically only England remained apart from this until Britain joined the European Union.

Roman law had its origin in pagan and Imperial Rome and during the 18^th and 19^th centuries its codification was influenced by atheistic and humanistic ethics derived from revolutionary France. This system of Civil Law was adopted by most continental countries producing a strong measure of unification which was adopted by the European Union, replacing national differences in law with international practices.

Since the 18^th Century, political leaders in Europe have regarded legal codes as necessary instruments for establishing national unity and enforcing central authority. Napoleon's objective in the 'Napoleonic Code' was to secure his conquests and this code became the basis of the legal systems of some of the founding members of the European Union such as the Netherlands and Belgium.³

By contrast, European Civil Law is based on established principles and codes collected over the centuries and influenced by both pagan and atheistic societies.

Comparing Civil Law and Common Law

There are fundamental philosophical differences between these two systems of law.⁴ For example, the 'Law of Evidence' which is an integral part of Common Law has no counterpart in the Civil Law practised in the European Union because there is no such thing as 'inadmissible evidence' in continental Europe.

Most continental countries separate their administrative courts, from those that deal with criminal cases and private law disputes. Under Common Law all kinds of disputes are determined in the same courts, in order to apply the same rules of fairness and justice.

In England a fast growing area of law is 'judicial review' which, on a daily basis, challenges the actions of politicians and quangos, thus holding our Government accountable to law.⁵ It is difficult to imagine this happening on the continent under the philosophy of Civil Law. Civil Law systems usually uphold all contractual promises and then enforce penalty clauses. In England Lord Denning in the post-World War II period pioneered a system of justice whereby contracting parties would be protected when the contractual terms are deemed to be unjust.

Another difference between Civil Law and Common Law systems is in terms of personnel. Under Common Law judges are drawn from barristers with many years of practical experience in dealing with justice whereas under Civil Law they are usually career bureaucrats serving the state. Trial by jury is an essential element in Common Law where it is the right of individuals to be tried by their peers. This is not often used in civil law on the continent where cases are decided by professional judges. In some continental countries laymen are used but not as jurors but as lay judges alongside professional judges.

There are fundamental differences between Common Law and Civil Law, which mean different attitudes to evidence, courts, jury and personnel.

What of the future?

The continental system of law adopted by the European Union is imperial and uniform and allows no differences for national law. The EU constantly sends out a stream of legal regulations which change our laws and bind our Parliament and our courts. Even our criminal law is not safe from EU interference and we are not able to deport convicted criminals to their countries of origin who appeal to the European court on grounds of the infringement of their human rights.⁶

In the article by Viscount Tonypandy that we published last week, he referred to the famous case of our Fisheries Act being declared illegal by the European court which overrode legislation passed by our elected Parliament. This effectively destroyed the livelihoods of our fishing fleets working in our own waters from Cornwall to Scotland.

It is the declared intention of the Commissioners of the European Union to move towards closer and binding integration. If Britain remains in the EU, our entire system of justice will be threatened. The threat is from two sources: from the mass of legislation that seeks not only to regulate but to standardise all the member nations of the European Union, and from the decisions of the European court which override national laws of member states.

In a federal Europe, towards which the EU is moving, the system of law that will be imposed upon us will be interpreted by judges who bind our judges by their decisions and there will be no room for our traditions of Common Law.

In a federal Europe, the system of law imposed upon us would leave no room for our Common Law traditions.

Our national heritage, based upon concepts of law drawn from the Bible, will be swept away by the European Union. We must ask ourselves whether it is more important to ensure that justice before God is shown to all people or whether we merely administer man-made laws.

On the 23 June 2016 we will be faced with a choice similar to that offered by Joshua to the people of Israel, whether or not to put our trust in God. He said "If you forsake the Lord and serve foreign gods, he will turn and bring disaster on you and make an end of you." He added the declaration: "But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord!" (Josh 24:20 and 24:15).

References

1 See Common law, Encyclopaedia Britannica.

2 Codex Justinianus, Wikipedia.

3 See The Napoleonic Code, Encyclopaedia Britannica.

4 For differences other than those mentioned here, a useful discussion can be found here: The Common Law and Civil Law Traditions, University of Berkeley, California.

5 See Judicial review in English law, Wikipedia.

6 EU laws 'prohibit UK from sending foreign criminals home'. BBC News, 7 June 2016.