Traditional conservative manifesto

Traditional conservative manifesto:

I won’t you to imagine a party which is committed to the maintenance and improvement of our society, our nation and the good of all who reside within.

This party would devolve power away from the bureaucratic, inhumane, calculating state and give it to communities and the free men who reside within. We would seek to make the UK a working nation once more and a nation. We would reinforce are working class communities by championing community groups and neighbourhood policing and ridding them of the drugs menace.

We would make schools disciplined and safe places, quickly removing those pupils disturbing the learning of others. We would take the same attitude with problem households and criminal families. Communities would be empowered to intervene and remove. We will no longer force communities to suffer the consequences of failed families.

We would free Britain from the European Union reaffirming Britain as the only parliament with the right to pass laws in Britain. We would aggressively pursue a pro export policy, no longer binding exporter hands with endless paperwork or moral foreign policies. We would have lower tax rates for exporting businesses and manufacturing businesses in order to get Britain back working.

We would set the tax rate in order to punish immoral behaviour both personal and in the city but to get Britain back to work We would crack down on and shame those who do not pay their share and kick out businesses that did not pay there’s. We would ensure care the neediest but also crack down on welfare manipulation by both the middle classes and the poor. We would reinforce the NHS and end all government re-organisations, whilst directing it recourses towards the youngest in our society.

We would also encourage an increase in the British birth rate by offering nationalised child care and child tax breaks. We would remember the importance of mothering and families within our society, promoting society to play its role and giving what help we can. We will focus are efforts of communities and families, offering a helping hand but never thinking we know best.

With these principles and many more we shall call this party the Conservative party 

Self-interest and the banks

So why did bankers rig an internal banking rate, well very simply it was in there interest to do so. Actually it will have been in there short term interest to do so.

Before I continue I must admit my starting premise and this is we all act as self-interested individual. We do not operate in either perfect knowledge or wholly freely therefor we act in a limited rational way in the furtherance of our own or perceived self-interest.

So let us look at the starting question again; why did investment bankers rig the interbank rate? Answer, it was in there self-interest at that time. What does that mean, well as they saw it they would get a reward that outweigh the risk of losing their licence to trade and cause a scandal that would harm there means of making a living.

Wow! That reward must have been high. Actually I doubt it; the banks did in the end manipulate this rate to ensure there continuation (thus the risk was much reduced) but before this stage the rigging had already become systematic and the reward at individual banker (the achievement of targets and the reward for doing so) could simply not out weight the risk.  

So what can we conclude from the fact they did. One that they value the risk of being caught, very low; two that the punishment for bad behaviour must have either been no existent or very lenient; I suspect it was a combination of poor monitoring both internal / external and a very lenient punishment for  unacceptable behaviour and hear we have the nub of the issue.

Clearly the banks rewarded risky behaviour (again acting in there limited self-interest) and sought out and promoted risk taking individuals – actually this is untrue. I expect they did seek out risk taking individuals and rewarded successes but more importantly they must have stopped asking questions and demoted people unwilling to take extreme risks in the sight of others. Therefore you have an environment in which risk is rewarded and ill behaviour not punished whilst those unwilling to act in such a manner (for whatever reason) were side lined.

As you can see no memo insisting on the rigging of libor was required, indeed no knowledge of it in the higher Escalon’s would ever be heard, as no one wanted to know or sought to know. Simply by rewarding risk and not punishing ill behaviour an organisation will guarantee some law is eventually broken, as more and more risk will have to be taken to achieve increasing targets. This is the problem with limited self-interested rationality, it is often short sighted and often lacking in prudence, epically when the organisations does not punish ill doing. 

Earthly powers

I believe we Christians have a problem

This problem is not unique to us as a people of faith and nor it is at its most extreme

The problem is this we live in a society which no longer shares our beliefs

We are still blessed that they are sympathetic to are core beliefs

But we are now a people of faith in a sea of at best indifference

So the problem is this how can we preserve our faith?

How can we maintain the covenant we have made in the blood of Christ?

Jesus in Mark 14:24 refers to his crucifixion as forming a covenant with believers

In the first reading God reminds us of the covenant and of the cost of breaking it

The main part of this covenant we still share – “have no other Gods”

The Jews had assimilated foreign Gods

They has submitted to alien influence and ease

But God had maintained his covenant with them and demands reciprocation

In are second readings of Luke we hear about the cost of following Jesus.

On the face of is this passage is about physically following Jesus

But it can also be read as the cost of accepting Jesus

“No one who puts a hand to the plough and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God”

When we accept Jesus we agree to the cost in other words;

In this passage people ask to follow Jesus

And Jesus warns the of the cost

He warns the first about personal privation (no home, no rest)

He warns the Second that if he chooses to follow him he must forsake any human concern

Even the burial of his farther

And to the last man he warns:  that once he embarks on this path there is no turning back

This is the cost of following Jesus

A cost anyone who choose to follow him must pay

I think this should be taken as a warning

Often people follow Christ and talk only of the rewards

Only of the joys

But I can testify to the cost

Of the sacrifices

All I accept as my part of the covenant formed on the cross

As in Luke though Jesus I was warned and accepted.

So far so good and then the third reading

Well – cripes

Where to start?

Well first the lectionary is supposed to be Romans 13:1-10

But to me Peter 1 make similar point and better.

Peter’s words have direct implications for us today.

As I said at the start like peter we live in a society which does not share our beliefs

And in which the government which allows actions which run contrary to are beliefs

So how can we react?

Shall we shut the doors of are temple?

Shall we kneel before the might of the state?

Shall we adopt the norms of our society like those in the first reading?

Or shall we react in violent revolution?

No we must stay the course.

We must preserve the conversant with God

And we must maintain the law of the land

We are not called to take power for ourselves or to revolt against the powers that be

Indeed both Peter and Paul tell us to submit to earthly power

Peter extols the virtues of suffering for doing good

He predicts the glory of the martyrs whose power came not at the sword but on the cross.

As odd as some of you may find these teachings they do give us a model of living in this world

It accept that powerful people may not always be good or believers

It accept man’s law shapes the world we live in and that we may not like it

But people will not hear good news from a violent man

A man with blood on his hands cannot proclaim love

No Peter and Paul call us to show the ways though our silent suffering

Buy living as Christ wants us we will show the follow of the foolish man

By living by Gods laws first and man’s second the follies of these as well

So whilst we must accept we live in a world of laws we do not like

The oath to altering this is not violence or revolution

But silent resolve, good deeds and following Gods laws above all

Whatever the cost may be

Earthly power

Sermon:

We have already explored the idea of covenant

The very first conversant wans between Noah and God is that after the flood

And it was sided arrangement. 

God continued to forge relationships with his chosen people

These relationship were based on Gods protecting the Jews

And the Jew worship in God alone

This idea is given human form in the new testernment:

Jesus in Mark 14:24 refers to his crucifixion as forming a covenant with believers

This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many,’ 

Of course this new convernatal relationship

One which is drastically different from that between Noah and Mosses.

In the first reading the prophet Jeremiah is recounting a meeting with God

In this meeting God is demanding that his people stop worshiping false Gods

He refers to the current covenant (made with Mosses)

In which God has delivered them from Egypt to Israel

And he is warning Jeremiah that the Jews are not keeping their part of the agreement

And that the cost of this is God would end the protection of the ppl of Israel 

In are second readings of Luke we hear about the cost of following Jesus.

One the face of is this passage is about physically following Jesus

But it can also be read as the cost of accepting Jesus

“No one who puts a hand to the plough and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God”

Indeed if you take the covenanter view of is passage

Jesus is asked by many good men who fell called to follow him

He warns the first about personal privation (no home, no rest)

He warns the next good man that if he chooses to follow him

He must forsake any human concern

And to the last man he warns that once he embarks on this path there is no turning back

This is the price of entering a covenant to follow Jesus

I think this should be taken as a warning

Often people follow Christ and talk only of the rewards

But I can testify to the cost

And the greater the commitment the greater the cost

The Jews merely had to have one God but we the followers of Jesus have to give of ourselves

The Jewish covenant was flesh for protection but are Christian on is the blood of God for grace

So far so good and then the third and fourth reading

Well – cripes

Where to start?

Well to me Peter 1 and Romans 13:1-10 make similar point

but for me Peters words have a direct implications for us today.

Today we are faced with a situation similar to that described by Peter

We live in a society which does not accept our beliefs

And in which the government allows actions which run contrary to are beliefs

So how can we react?

Shall we shut the doors of are temple?

Shall we kneel before the might of the state?

Shall we adopt the norms of our society?

Well we have been reminded that we must maintain are covenant with God

And we must maintain the law

We are not called to take power for ourselves or to revolt against the powers that be

Indeed both Peter and Paul tell us to submit to earthly power

Peter extols the virtues of suffering for doing good

As odd as some of you may find these teachings they do give us a model of living in this world

It accept that powerful people may not always be good or believers

It tacitly accepts that after Gods law man’s law shapes the world we live in

These passages guide us when those around us forsake the Lord our God

We must keep the covenant with are God first

But stay within the laws of men second

For no one will hear good news from a condemned man

It remains us that when surrounded by pagan men

We must shine all the brighter with goodness

And never restor to evil or violence

We must in short submit ourselves to the care (for better or ill to earthly authority)

Regardless of our physical comfort we must maintain the covenant

We must alone keep the lord they god as sovereign

We alone must keep his law 

It is not an easy message but remember

No one who puts a hand to the plough and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God.’

16062102 service

Call to worship: Psalm 92: 1-4, 12-15

1 It is good to praise the Lord

    and make music to your name, O Most High,

2 proclaiming your love in the morning

    and your faithfulness at night,

3 to the music of the ten-stringed lyre

   and the melody of the harp.

 4 For you make me glad by your deeds, Lord;

    I sing for joy at what your hands have done.

5 How great are your works, Lord,

    how profound your thoughts!

12 The righteous will flourish like a palm tree,

    they will grow like a cedar of Lebanon;

13 planted in the house of the Lord,

    they will flourish in the courts of our God.

14 They will still bear fruit in old age,

    they will stay fresh and green,

15 proclaiming, “The Lord is upright;

    he is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in him.

Let us prepare as sinner before God with are first hymn

H&P 460: Come, sinners, to the gospel feast

As sinner let us bring are sins to the lord so we can be forgiven of them: with our Prayers of confession

Inspired by Psalm 109

Lord Forgive us  when we failed to extend kindness to others

Lord Forgive us  when we did not take pity on fatherless children.

As we forgive those who have sin against us

Lord we know we fail you when we held the son accountable for the iniquity of his fathers

Lord we know we fail when we made the daughter pay for the sin of his mother

As we forgive those who sin against us

Lord we need forgiveness as a church family for when we failed to be a good family

Lord we need forgiveness as a church family for when we failed to care for new members 

As we forgive those who sin against us

Introduction to the theme

Reading: 2 Corinthians 5:6-10, 14-17

Reading: Mark 4:26-34

Let us give thank for the fruit of the faithful life with are next hymn

H&P 139: The kingdom of God is justice and joy

What are your thoughts on the theme?

 Let us come together for a time of thanks giving with are Prayer of thanksgiving

Let us proclaiming Gods love in the morning and praise his faithfulness at night.

Let us give thanks to the Lord our farther for the gifts he freely gives us.

Let us give thanks to the lord are father who cares for all his children.

He is the eternal father of all the people of the world and we are joyful to be counted among his children.

Let us be thankful that our farther that he has paid the cost of sin for his children.

Let us be thankful that Lord our farther that he continues to love and guide his children

He is the eternal father of all the people of the world and we are joyful to be counted among his children.

We rejoice with eternal joy that you Fathers do not exasperate your children.

We rejoice with eternal Father that you do not embitter your children.

We rejoice with eternal Father that you will never become discouraged with your children

 He is the eternal father of all the people of the world and we are joyful to be counted among his children.

Let us continue giving thanks with are next hymn

H&P 355: Come ye thankful people come

Offertory

Lord takes these monies as a conversant that we will continue ion the family of church, welcoming and support new members and honour you are heavenly father

Ode to my majestic lady

Whenever I think of the pageantry and tradition the British wrap the power and glory of the state in I cannot help recall the phrase the Iron hand in the velvet glove and in this case the state having to carry though the austerity is the iron first and the monarchy as they have been since King Charles days is the most splendid of splendid velvet gloves. So why celebrate this deception? Well deception it is not Burke says “A nation which is just force will not stand for no one can love it but a nation covered in mercy of velvet will stand for others for it can do what must be done but also bring joy and glory to its people”. Today we celebrate our monarch and through it are nation for the real reason the real meaning behind our monarchy is not some tedious constitutional role but as a symbol of everything we take pride of in this nation and such a symbol must by its necessity be a-political. Unless a nation be defined by its politics (and what a sad nation that would be) the symbol of itself must be beyond the temporary and faddish claims of politics. The monarch is beyond it and has steadfastly remained beyond it, allowing itself to be moulded and adapted to the needs of the people. I think sadly of the self-harmed caused in republics to the nationhood caused by the political infighting and the shattered nationhood this leave behind a danger our apolitical head preserves us from. The monarchy and the almost Wallace and Grommet contraption which serves as our nation’s constitution has proved a very effective break of the lust and whims of are leaders (both elected and otherwise). It is impossible to radically alter the constitutional arrangements of this nation without removing the monarchy (a beloved institution and often far more well-loved then these hidden changes). There are those that say the monarch herself does not veto bills and quite rightly so; we have an entire democratic structure to deal with that but the existence of the monarchy and thus the preservation of the pseudo constitutions prevents radical constitutional reform without the whole system crashing down upon the deranged heads of those little men trying to reshape the system in there temporal and self-serving image. Link to both these points; that the monarch is the self-image of the nation and a break of the lust of powerful men is there role as that most important pillar of good order the pillar of tradition. Now those who oppose the monarchy will cry out that slavery was once a tradition but this is both not true and a misunderstanding of the greatness of tradition. A tradition survives you cannot quote something that occurred and declare it tradition. A nation with no tradition is not a nation but a collection of squabbling idea with no senses of itself or perspective and it also have nothing it values beyond itself. Tradition becomes part of the whole, it give all a sense of continuity and place and a reservoir of values to resort to in time of hardship. Indeed given this year the wonder of the tradition that has surrounded and glorified the jubilee has lifted our nation. One of the other great features of the monarchy is there holistic leadership. This is both due to their apolitical basis and of their traditional standing. Think back during the war and the three pillars upon which the survival of our nations rested; the people, Churchill and of course the monarchy. The monarchy who withstood bombing and threats against their person and the monarchy which forsook its golden throne to participate in the war effort whilst still carrying the nation. I can think of the sons of any presidents whom have left the comfort of their families office to adorn uniform and fight for their nation but that is the depth of leadership and selfless devotion the monarchy embodies and performs. I could go on and on about the glories of a monarchy alongside a democratic parliament; I could talk about economic benefits, I could talk about embodying duty and I could talk about their faith role but I do not wish to bore my reader. I will simply conclude with this, whilst the monarchy inspires national devotion and love. A selected head of states (the standard system for the symbolic head of state in a parliamentary system) adds none of these things and even an elected symbolic head add nothing but merely electing the now empty symbol and that is not enough to remove a well-loved and significant aspect of British life.

On Gender:

On Gender: I must declare certain facts; one sex is unacceptable concept within traditional conservative circles, this is not to sex is unacceptable full stop but we consider it not a valid topic for the public sphere in which political debate takes place. This awkwardness with this most private of topics has led to traditional conservatism being wholly unable to engaged with identity or gender politics at all. This inability to engage with the new politics of self and of definition has led to the abomination of neo conservatism the first split from the conservative family since the dawn of man. These market worshipers believe that man must be made to confirm to wider social needs though they are very vague about the results. We cannot accept this; man should love his community and his place in the order of things, we acknowledged that this may require a shortening of the self but this should not be seen as a sacrifice but an exchange for participation in a larger self and to be able to partake in the glory of community and nation. So what does this mean for those whose gender or sexual orientation forms part of their selfhood and this selfhood is in opposition to the gender aspect of the selfhood of their community? Much more simply put how should conservatives react to none heterosexual people. Well let us start with first principles. God ordained the order of the world; all things that exist within these orders are thus part of the divinely inspired and sanctioned order. God ordered that man should mate with women for the increasing of his kingdom and the mutual joy of both parties. Thus we state and we state as an article of truth that there is only man and women and only man and women can be joined together in a meaningful union. So what about those who gender is not recognised, without accepting there union we are abridging there selfhood. Well firstly we do not accept that one’s sexual preference is part of one’s selfhood. This obsession with sex is a product of a decaying and self-centred society and will be of a lesser concern to them once we heal the harm market and self-worship has done to community. For the3 time being however, the harm has been done and thus we must respond to these misguided calls. In order to restore the idea of unions for life and of the centrality of the family I would suggest it be best that we allow those who have a non-ordained sexual preference be allowed within their own community to join together in empty union with one another. These unions would not be acceptable as a moral union or an ordained union as they serve no purpose and are alien to Gods divinely inspired order but they would increase mortal unions and once more increase and retrench the idea of monogamous family units in our society. So beyond marriage what else must we do? I really believe the best we can do is ignore it. Communities will accept or exclude them and it would be unacceptable to force communities to share the same sex obsession which they themselves share and it would be equally unacceptable to stoke the fires of hatred based on the same sexual obsession. Thus the best solution to these issues is to retrun society to a stage were once more sex is not part of the public discourse and where those who has issue with it can be allowed to deal with it without a great deal of interference.