CAMBODIA WILL GRIEVE BUT IT WILL RECOVER.

Throughout the year, the people of The Kingdom of Cambodia - particularly those from the Provinces - look forward to the Annual Water Festival that takes place in Phnom Penh during the month of November. It is a spectacular event that attracts literally millions of people who come to the city to watch the boat races on the Tonle Sap River.  The city lights up, the Royal Palace becomes even more beautiful when it is outlined with myriads of lights at night and illuminated floats sail up and down the river.  The opening ceremony is presided over by His Majesty The King.  This ceremony signals the beginning of three days of racing that can involve maybe 400 boats and each day is capped off with a magnificent display of fireworks across the Tonle Sap River.  To witness this festival is an incredible experience, but for me personally, having seen it twice I find the crowds too much, so now I leave the city for the few days it takes place.  But by doing that I am not in any way trying to detract from the excitement and fun of the event as well as the many benefits it brings to the country and the people.

During the past year, the "powers-that-be" here have made some tremendous improvements to the city and especially in the area along the banks of the Tonle Sap River - known as Riverside - where the festival is held.  These improvements have included garden and park areas and spaces for people to play, thus allowing so much more space.  Perhaps it was because of these improvements and the added space made available, that so many more people were attracted to the city for this year's Water Festival last week.  But whatever the reason, it has been estimated that up to 4-million people came to Phnom Penh this year against the normal 2-million in previous years.  In anyone's language, that is a whole lot of people and no matter how good and controlled the people are, it will present problems somewhere along the line.  Disasters can and do happen anywhere.


I returned to Phonm Penh around 9.30pm on the last night of the Festival and though the crowds made it almost impossible to move, it was obvious the people were happy and enjoying themselves.  In the little park between my home and the Royal Palace, a stage had been set up and a concert was going strong and thousands and thousands of people were crammed into the park listening and singing along.  It was a joyous occasion.   About thirty minutes later that all changed.  Police and ambulance sirens wailed, the concerts were stopped and the city was stunned.


This year a new suspension bridge was opened to make it easier to get to Diamond Island in the Bassac River just a short way from where the boat races were taking place.   Diamond Island itself has also been developed with many businesses, shopping areas and restaurants, and in addition a concert was arranged on the last night of the Festival.  It was to all of this that many people decided to cross over to the island after the day's racing was finished.  Many of those crossing - (and it is now estimated at the time of writing, that over eight thousand were on the bridge at any one time) - were unaware that suspension bridges are built to sway under stress.  So when the bridge swayed a little, then some believed it was collapsing and panic ensued.  What followed is history. Three hundred and fifty-six young people died and almost four hundred were injured.


When something like this happens in a far off country, there is always shock and sadness for those affected, but if a person is in any way involved, then it becomes very real.


I did not know personally anyone involved in the accident, but the following day I was asked to help locate four teenage brothers who were missing.  Not a pleasant task.  The boys had come from Battambang in the north for the Festival but now they could not be located again.     With their older brother who had come to try to find them, I visited the injured in the hospitals - many of whom were in a dazed state, not realizing quite what had happened.   We visited the place where those who died were placed lying in rows on mats on the floor waiting to be identified.


I have been in several disasters around the world in my time but this was something I had never encountered before and I am not ashamed to say I cried a lot.   Lying side-by-side fully dressed in their jeans and T-shirts or whatever and just looking as if they were sleeping because none had any visible injuries, were maybe 80 young people - boys and girls - and none more than perhaps in their early twenties.  This is a young country population-wise, where 67% of the population is under aged 25 and now these young people were no more. A huge chunk of the future of the Kingdom was gone in a matter of minutes.


Later that night we found the four brothers for whom we had been searching.  They were in a hospital injured, but they will recover in time.   For so many the story did not end the same way.  Speaking about those who died, a Cambodian friend of mine said "We cannot be sad again now for them because they are now happy and will have no more upset. Now we must think of those of their families who are left behind and those who are still recovering."  That is perfectly true. 


The people of this wonderful country are very resilient and I love all of them dearly.  They have been through so much and so many horrors within the last 30-years yet they still keep going and still smile and they will do so this time too.  It is an honour and pleasure to live among them.

However, when something like this happens anywhere, questions will always be asked, lessons will always be learned and changes to some things and ways of doing things will always have to be made.  Cambodia will be no exception and the future festivals here, I am sure will benefit from the lessons learned from this year's happenings.

CONGRATULATIONS, CHILE

For the past two days, the world has been glued to the television, the internet and the radio following the rescue of the thirty-three miners trapped underground in a copper mine in Chile.  Some fifteen hundred members of the media descended on a little known and uninhabited mountainous part of the world in order to cover the story.  The entire event is something that will be indellibly etched in the memory of the world for nothing like it has ever happened before.

Having said that some interesting things happened.

The President of Chile went to the site of the rescue and stayed there the entire time personally greeting each rescued miner as he came to the surface.  The President has to be commended for that.  It shows the deep concern the President has for his people.  So many others holding his position would just issue statements and at some later time pay "an official" visit to the rescued men which would of course, also be a photo opportunity.  Also staying there the whole time greeting the miners and also deserving commendation were the Minister for Health and the Minister for Mines.  The actions of these three men are some of the reasons for the out-pouring of patriotism displayed by the people of Chile at this time.

Several things stand out as we look back on this amazing event.

The first is the speed with which the Chilean Government dealt with the rescue once they realized that the miners were still alive.  It would seem that plans were already in place for such an occasion.  No committees, no discussions for a few days, no interminable statements from officials trying to get in the limelight as we in other countries are subjected to.  Just a straight forward "get them out now"  attitude.  Other countries can learn a whole lot of lessons from Chile.

Another thing struck me as very interesting.  In many other countries when we have seen accidents of any kind - including the oil rig disaster in the Gulf of Mexico this summer - we have been treated to endless details of the cost of dealing with the problem - on some occasions even before the rescue or whatever began.    When the Chilean mining accident  happened, the powers-that-be immediately set out three rescue plans - A, B and C and promptly proceeded to design and manufacture whatever machinery and technology was required to rescue the men.  However, at no time was there any mention of cost.  The word "dollar" was never mentioned.  The key phrase was "get them out".   

What a wonderful thing to see in this day and age when everything has a value and a dollar tag put on it.  Where the lives of these men were concerned, the Chilean authorities made it clear that their lives were priceless. They must be rescued - that is the goal. The cost is not a matter for discussion.

Congratulations Chile and your people.  Many other countires and people can learn a lot from you.

TO WHAT EXTENT FREEDOM OF THE PRESS?

I have always been in favour of free speech which is why I have been chastised so often by those who consider themselves to be "untouchable" when it comes to criticism or opposition.  I am told I "should not speak out" so much but I keep on doing so anyway whenever I think it is necessary.

Human Rights Organizations throughout the world speak out all the time about the freedom of the press and the various branches of the media and the necessity for them to publish and broadcast what they want.  Being in favour of free speech myself, I totally agree with what they say and one of the reasons for this is I have lived in, worked in and visited countries where freedom of speech and the freedom of the media has been and is suppressed.  Only that which praises the "powers that be" in those countries is allowed, and any criticism can be punishable by lengthy jail tems.  That is a "not good" situation.

However, having said that, some events of the past week are making me re-think my position on this matter in certain respects.   The world's media - from newspaper to TV to radio to internet - seems to have gone totally ballistic without thought for the end results.  Are there certains limits or bounderies within which the media should stay when reporting on subjects that can be inflammatory?   Should they "hold back" on subjects when the story on which they are reporting can inflame hatred, bigotry and indeed threaten the very security of many people around the world?  These and other similar questions have been going around in my mind.

In Gainesville, Florida in America, a relatively unknown gentleman who calls himself Pastor Terry Jones and is apparently the leader of Dove World Outreach Center with a membership of only some fifty people - a so-called Christian church (though from Mr. Jones' rhetoric I doubt if the title of "Christian" can really be applied here) decides he is going to burn some 200 copies of the Muslim Holy Book, The Qu'ran.   That in itself is not only a decidedly un-Christian act, but one that is deliberatley designed to cause hatred, racism and bigotry.

Thanks to a huge army of cameras, microphones, reporters and relay trucks from several countries around the world camped on Mr. Jones' doorstep and reporting every word he says regardless of whether or not it is true, the world over is bombarded with the hateful rhetoric of this man.  The gentleman is wallowing in the world-wide attention he is getting and thoroughly enjoying it.   However, it has caused the Secretary General of Interpol, Mr. Ronald Noble, to issue a special security alert to all of Interpol's 188 member nations at the request of the Pakistan Minister of the Interior, Mr. Rahmin Malik.  It has caused innumerable protest marches in many countries around the world.  The fact that the US Secretary of Defence, Mr. Gates was reported to have made a personal phone call to Mr. Jones requesting that he not burn the books, only added a further amount of excess fuel to the media frenzy and to the self-importance of the previously  relatively unknown Mr. Jones.

It does not take a whole lot of intelligence to see the kind of person the media is following so intently, when Mr. Jones tells them that he has been meeting for two days with the Imam of the mosque in his neighbourhood but does not know his name!   You can talk seriously with someone for two days and not know their name?   Amazing!  Mr. Jones stated he had spoken and was meeting with the Imam in charge of the controversial mosque to be built in downtown New York, yet Imam Feisal Abdul  Rauf said on TV and later issued a statement saying no meeting was arranged and he had never spoken with Mr. Jones.

Thanks to the media frenzy, this has become a world-wide controversial issue that can literally be a security issue for army personel and civilians alike in many countries.  Newsapers around the world have headlined the story and TV stations from CNN to Al-Jazeera to BBC have carried it as a number one headline.  Even here in Cambodia it has received a prominent place.

Although I have said I am totally in favour of free speech and freedom of the press/media, I have also come to the conclusion that the media people should put some restraint on themselves when it comes to reporting stories like this. Mr. Jones may be getting his "15-minutes of fame" but the fact that he is getting so much attention from the media is a very likely cause of hatred, bigotry and violence, not to mention the possible threat to the national security of several countries from extremist and radical elements.

Even at this late hour, the media would do well to pull back its microphones, cameras and whatever else from Mr. Jones' doorstep, and give him no further publicity.  This should also apply any future story that could possibly cause the same fury and hatred.

Laos - A Secret Waiting to be Found?

Some years ago when I was living in Bangkok, two friends from Hawaii - a husband and wife - came to stay there for some three months.  The week before they were due to return to Hawaii, the wife mentioned she was sorry they didn't get to visit Laos while they were in the region as it was somewhere she always wanted to go.    Well that was all she had to say.  Within two days, the three of us were on a plane from Bangkok heading to Vientiane, the capital of Laos.  That was also my first visit to the country but short though it was, it made me want to go back and see more of the country and get to know the people better.


Since that first visit, I have been back several times, and each time I have been more impressed.  It is a country whose people were more or less "kept-to-heel" during the French occupation when the whole region was called French Indo-China.  For many westerners today it is a small country somewhere in South East Asia that was heavily bombed by America during the Vietnam war and it is a country that is now one of the last remaining communist countries. So why bother with it?  For years it has been somewhat ignored by the western nations because it has such friendly relations with China and it receives much aid from there.  However, being friendly with China is a norm for Laos.  China is a big powerful country that shares a border.  Is it not sensible to be friendly with it?


To many people who have not visited this part of the world,  the idea of a country being communist conjures up pictures of scenes of grim dour buildings and clothing like we saw in the Soviet Union during the Cold War era, so why bother going there?


Let's talk about it for a short while.


Laos is a small country with a small population and when you go there you find a remarkably peaceful and quiet place.  Vientiane, the capital, is a city that was virtually designed by the French influence.  It has wide boulevards, a large memorial reminescent of the Arc de Triumph in Paris, and  so many old French colonial buildings and cafés...... in addition to beautiful pagodas and temples.  In fact it would not be difficult to use

your imagination and pretend you were in Paris except for the hot climate and the tropical trees and plants.  Traffic is almost nil and what there is obeys to the letter the rule of the road.  It stops when a red light appears it goes when it is green.  It never passes another vehicle on the inside and it will stop at pedestrian crossings whether it is a car or a motor bike.  So very different from here in Cambodia where the traffic never stops and goes every-which-way regardless of whether there is a red or green light or any other sign!!!!


Laos is an orderly country.  Taxis and tuk-tuks (the local means of public transport) line up in an orderly fashion waiting in turn for the next customer.  No individual drivers shouting at people for business. Politeness is the order of the day.  Whether all this is due to it having a communist regime, I have no idea.   I have not and don't in tend to delve into the political "goings-on" in the country.   There are, of course poor people like in every country throughout the world, but there is hardly a beggar to be seen.   The city is quiet even at night and most places close reasonably early except for the few inevitable bars that cater mostly to foreigners.


So why go there? 


The town of Luang Prabang is a popular destination for tourists, but that is it.  It is renowned for its many beautiful and exotic temples, so many people just fly in from Bangkok direct to Luang Prabang, stay two nights and fly back to Bangkok.  They have then seen Laos - or so they think!!  They have missed out on seeing the beautiful city of Vientiane and the equally peaceful city of Pakse where you feel that time has been standing still for the past twenty years.


They miss out on watching the sunset as they eat dinner in open-air restaurants beside the Mekong - a spectacular scene.  They miss out on driving maybe forty miles outside the city of Vientiane, renting their own private floating restaurant  for just a few dollars and having a two-hour lunch as their restaurant quietly glides

down one of the tributaries of the Mekong past beautiful scenary and age old fishing and agricultural villages, traditions and scenes.  They miss out on meeting a people who are hospitable and friendly but who are moving forward and yet keeping their culture.


In the years now since that first visit of mine, I have seen so much progress there.  Highways are being built, new buidlings are being constructed but they are ones that are in keeping with the original architecture of the city in both height and design.  A new rail link has been built between Bangkok and Vientiane that greatly helps both people and trade.  Vientiane has a modern but small airport and unlike so many places it is one that is suitable for the size of the country.  It has just two ramps, but they are enough to handle the number of jets that fly in and there is provision to add more if the need arises.  Smaller aircraft park out on the ramp.


Recently I have had the pleasure and privilege of meeting with and working with students from the University of Laos.  These are the New Generation of citizens eager to bring forward and improve their country.  I first came in contact with them when twelve students from the Business Faculty came to Phnom Penh last year to take part in "Business Challenge" - a competition organized by the National University of Management (NUM) here in Phnom Penh.  Universities from all over the region entered teams who presented details of businesses they intend starting.  They are hypothetical businesses, but they have to present all details of the process of starting the business from funding to budgeting, to organization to actually doing business.  It is an interesting event and an impressive one.


The students with whom I spoke on my very recent visit to Vientiane lamented the fact that so few people visit their country, but also the fact that the majority of those who do go there are back-packers whose main interest is the drug scene and just "hanging out".  They are not interested in the country itself.  Laos is part of a small area combining a part of three countries that is known as "The Golden Triangle" - Thailand, Burma (Myanmar) and Laos - which is notorious for its drug business.  Security at the airport is very tight when it comes to drugs, and many people are caught trying to smuggle it out of the country and then they complain and wonder why they are arrested.  Most of the young  people with whom I spoke said they would like more "normal" foreigners to go there and see the countryand meet the people.


As for me? I would like to see more foreigners going also and having an opportunity to meet with these young University people  - though I am not sure at this moment how that could be arranged all the time - who like the Cambodian students are of a very high calibre. Much as many foreigners would not like to admit it, these young students and graduates would be the equal of most students of the Ivy League Universities in the USA or of Oxford or Cambridge.


Is Laos still a secret waiting to be found or are people just afraid to go there because they hear it is a communist country and don't really know much about it?.  Or do they not not want to fly on Lao Airlines because they have turbo-prop planes and not jets?  So many people are what I call "snob flyers"!!!  But other airlines go there too like Thai Airways and Vietnam Airlines.  If it is a secret, then I hope people will hear about it soon and visit, not just Luang Prabang for two days, but as much of the country as they can.  They will not be disappointed.

    

WHY CAMBODIA?

Shortly after one of my first visits to Cambodia many years ago, I wrote in the Kauai newspaper "The Garden Island" about my visits to the country and described Cambodia as being "a forgotten country".   Back then, that is what it was so  far as the western world was concerned.  The country had only recently emerged from so much fighting and the atrocities of war - the secret devastating bombings of the country by the US during the Vietnam war, the genocidal regime of the Khmer Rouge, the subsequent confrontation with Vietnam and the eventual civil war.  No small country had gone through so much in so short a time span.  Yet it was ignored by the major western countries who had left it to its own devices in spite of the fact that they had known the very real possibility that literally millions of its citizens would be killed and eliminated. The only interest any western country had shown after the defeat of the Khmer Rouge was by the USA who decided that it would get rid of the then Head of State - Prince Norodom Sihanouk - and instal what was virtually a puppet govenment under Lon Nol who would do its bidding.

By the time I went there, fighting was still going on in places and some hand grenades were being thrown around occasionally but the puppet government of Lon Nol had been ousted and Prince Norodom Sihanouk was now back from exile as King Norodom Sihanouk. This did not please some western countries, so they withdrew most of their interest. China came to the fore and practically all of the much needed aid came from there.   Not many people in the west were hearing about Cambodia or knew much about it, and when I mentioned I was going there, I inevitably got the response "Are you sure you should be going?"   This was why I referred to it as "a forgotten country".

In spite of all I said above, I fell in love with both the country and the people as soon as I got here.   Literally every family - including the Royal Family - had someone who was imprisoned and/or killed by the Khmer Rouge regime alone never mind those who were wounded and killed by the bombings and fighting.  The Queen Mother had a sister and brother killed, and King Sihanouk had three of his children killed.  Nevertheless I met a people who were always happy, always smiling, always friendly and never angry.  I would walk down the street or sit on Riverside overlooking the Mekong and Tonle Sap Rivers and people I never saw before would come up and chat and ask where I came from.  In those days complete families would bring their dinner and eat it on mats spread on the grass and I would always be invited to join them.  How could I not love a people like that?

When I retired I decided to come and live here and I have never regretted that.  I expect I shall be here until I die.  That has puzzled many people too.  "Why Cambodia?" they would ask.  Apart from one very obvious reason - it is very affordable to live here especially if one is on a retirement income - there are other reasons too.

I have been living here now for exactly five years and three weeks as of the time I am writing this and in those years I have seen many changes in the country and in this city of Phnom Penh.

The country has been established as a democratic constitutional monarchy although some observers say that the Prime Minister rules the place with a "heavy hand" and not democratically.  Whether that is true or not, is not something on which a foreigner like me living in the country should comment. However what is true is that "heavy hand" or not, the Prime Minister has made this country very stable, and as His Majesty King Abdullah of Jordan famously said in an interview on CNN a couple of years ago "Democracy means different thngs to different people".  The European or American style is not always good for everyone.

There is corruption here on many levels of course, but while not condoning it in any way we have to understand it is a developing country and corruption happens in every developing country - indeed it happens in developed countries also.  The US Senate and Congress, the British Parliament, big corporations and several other European countries - not to mention the big South American countries have not exactly been free lately of corruption and greed either.  In the developed world there is totally no excuse for corruption - salaries are high and most officials get enormous "perks" as well, but still they want more.  Here - while again not condoning it - one has to understand the reason for it.  Salaries and wages are pitiful in all walks of life.  A fairly senior policeman may get $100.00 a month.  A senior bank clerk will get between $90 and $100 a month.  Until recently the judiciary received a few hundred a month and an unskilled worker is lucky if he/she gets $50.00 a month.   Many NGO (non Government Organizations) workers who come from overseas to show Cambodians how to do a job will receive several thousand dollars a month plus expenses for the same job that the Cambodians are expected to do after the NGOs leave for maybe a maximum of $100.00  It is not hard to understand why some people will try to find ways - fair or foul - to get more money.   Unfortunately, most foreigners living here are unconcerned about what they can contribute to this country.  Their main objective is to earn their big salaries, live cheap and take what they can get without giving back to the country more than they can help.  I have got into much trouble from foreigners here when I state this truth.

In spite of  all the above - the Cambodians smile and are not angry.

There is poverty here which no one can deny but there is poverty in almost every country.  One reason for this is that an entire generation received no education due to the Khmer Rouge regime and the subsequent unrest.   If you have no education, then it is almost impossible to get a job.  Many provincial small farmers survive on $20.00 a month.  These are unfortunate facts but one also has to remember it is only 30+ years since the entire economy was very successfully destroyed - together with much of the infrastructure by the Khmer Rouge and nothing can be accomplished over night.  Thirty years is a very short time in the life of a country and more especially so if it is starting virtually from scratch and is ignored by others.  However, the Government now is providing many jobs for the poor people in various ways by employing people to maintain the new public gardens, by employing others to be security personal and by providing construction and other jobs.  But it takes time.

In spite of all the above - the Cambodians smile and are not angry.

There is crime here which no one can deny, but it has dropped significantly in the last couple of years.  Every country has crime. In the last twelve days eighty-three people have been shot in Chicago alone and what about the spree of killings in the United Kingdom last month?    These things happen unfortunately these days because of the anger that is felt in most places over sometimes the smallest of things.

But in spite of the above - the Cambodians smile and are not angry....and there are even more reasons than those for liking it here.

In the past few years I have become involved in many things concerning university students and young business people and entrepreneurs and I have been so impressed and proud of their ideas, their insights and their attitudes as well as their abilities.

Education is a main concern of everyone here from His Majesty the King - who works so hard for the good of his people - downwards.  The vast majority of students at university are from poor families in the provinces.  What impresses me is the lack of selfishness in the students. They are not just studying for themselves, they are studying for their families as well.  They take on sometimes meagre jobs while they study in order to send money home to help pay for education for their siblings and to help their parents. Do we do that in the west? No!  These young people have to be saluted and admired.

The Junior Chamber International - a worldwide federation of young leaders and entrepreneurs has been started here within the last year and I have been graciously invited to go to their meetings.   The quality, calibre and qualifications of these young people reaches the standards of the highest anywhere.  This is a side of Cambodia that the tourist and casual visitor doesn't see.   What is also impressive is that these young people are not just working for themselves,  they make it quite clear that they are working also for their country to take it to the place where it can hold its head high and command a place on the world stage.   With their determination and ability, they will succeed too and the so-called developed countries should be aware that in the not too distant future, Cambodia will be an important actor on the world's stage.

These are reasons why I like it here and why I am proud to do whatever I can to help these people on their way.  Cambodia has become my adopted home and whenever I leave it, I am so happy when my plane touches down on my return.  It is a place where there are smiles and where there is a lot of friendship and where people help each other without question. I would like all people to come and see for themselves.

Are we Still Interested in the Morbid?

On June 11, 2001, Timothy McVeigh, better known to some as The Oklahoma Bomber, was put to death by lethal injection and many in the western world rejoiced.

In the days immediately prior to his execution the media was full of the details of this upcoming event.  Indeed in the first week of April that year, the U.S. Government announced that the Federal Government would provide - and pay for - closed circuit television of the execution. 

I have never been and never will be in favour of the death penalty in any shape or form but the announcement that an execution would be televised to the world totally shocked me at the time.  Following that announcement, the Chairman of Entertainment Network Inc., in Florida announced that within an hour of the execution he would have the film all over the internet.   Not a word of protest or comment of any kind came from anywhere - let alone the many church leaders - until on  April 19th the then Presiding Bishop of the Episcopl Church, Bishop Frank Griswold, issued a strong statement protesting the Attorney General's announcement.  If my memory serves me well it was not until two weeks before the execution that the Attorney General withdrew the order to have the execution televised.

On Saturday May 5th 2001, the Honolulu Star Bulletin published an article I wrote (for which I got some flack from some church authorities, I might add) querying the lack of voices of protest - especially from political and church leaders  and asking had we become so accustomed to violence and hate, that watching an execution on television was now just a matter of entertainment and daily life.   It reminded me then of the description of the crucifixion of Jesus as described in St. Luke Ch. 23 v.35  where it says: "The people stood by and the rulers jeered........", and I wondered then if we had become a society just like that.

That was then - 2001.  Now is now - 2010, and I am happy to believe much progress has taken place on this subject and the death penalty is being done away with in many states in the US and in other countries around the world.

However, as I write this a man by the name of Ronnie Lee Gardner is sitting in the condemned cell in Utah awaiting execution by firing squad in a few hours from now.  All appeals and stays of execution have expired.  Mr Gardner  was convicted of fatally shooting a lawyer in a courthouse in 1985. The fact that he is to die by firing squad has aroused the attention of the media in many countries as it will be the first such execution in the United States for quite some time.

Why am I writing this?  Because I was hoping that our love of morbid curiosity when it comes to such things was fading since Mr. McVeigh was executed.  Yet just today CNN has gone to great lengths to show again and again graphic descriptions of the execution chamber, and even a demonstration of how it will be carried out.  It showed the very rifles to be used and the bullets as well, where the shooters will be standing, together with the target paper which will be pinned to Mr. Gardner's chest over his heart, so those shooting will hit the target.  For good measure we were also given a fairly graphic description of what will happen to the heart when it is hit.

Is all this necessary? Do people really want to know all these details?  If it is something that people want, then there definitely is something wrong with society.  I wonder if anyone else apart from me has written to CNN protesting these graphic descriptions.  I was happy to see that the Peace with Justice Commission of the Diocese of Utah has raised its voice on the matter of the execution and the ballyhoo that surrounds it. 

Have any other church or political leaders spoken out?  Or in this election year in the US, are people afraid to speak out on what they fear might be an unpopular subject?

Which Way is the Church going?

As you will see from my profile I am an Anglican Priest and have been for many years.  I have worked in the Church in Ireland, Jamaica, England and the United States.  While in the United States I served as a Clergy Deputy from Hawaii to General Convention, as well as being a member of the Diocesan Council,  President of the Standing Committee and Co-Chair of the Diocesan Bishop Search Committee.  Just for good measure I was appointed by the  Presiding Bishop and President of the House of Deputies to the Commission  on International Peace With Justice Concerns and while on that Commission represented the Episcopal Church on official visits to China, Hong Kong, Cambodia and Haiti.

All of that may read like part of a resumé but I put it down for two reasons.  Firstly because this is my first blog and it will allow those readers - assuming there are any - who may not know me to get some idea of my background.  Secondly to show that the church at all levels has been very much part of my life for many decades and although I am not currently in what is termed "active ministry" and live in Cambodia, the church continues to be very much to the fore in my life.

The Bishop who ordained me Deacon and subsequently priest the following year was the then Bishop of Connor, The Right Reverend Dr. Cyril Elliott - a man for whom I had the greatest admiration.  On the evening before our ordination to the Diaconate, Bishop Elliott told all fifteen of us that we must always remember that the Church "is and always has to be first and foremost about people.  About loving them, caring for them and respecting the dignity of every human being".  Indeed that is part and parcel of our Baptismal Covenant and I have carried those words of Bishop Elliott with me ever since.

The Church - and I am speaking specifically about the Anglican Church, or the Episcopal Church as it is called in the United States - has always been an anchor in people's lives.  Many people were not regular attenders at services every week, but if there was a problem or a marriage, baptism or death, then it was to the Church that the people turned. It was always there and ready to help, advise and console. That was its goal first and foremost - quoting the words and works of Jesus as examples it tried to follow.  This sums up also the ministry of Bishop Elliott who was for ever pastorally concerned for the people of his Diocese as well as for his priests, and this was the type of ministry I tried to conduct myself over the years as did so many others.

Now that I have said all of the above,  I must also say that I am saddened by the fact that the entire Anglican Communion - not just the Episcopal Church - has changed dramatically over the years. It no longer seems to be a Church of love, understanding and compassion. Admittedly much of the dissension and anger in the Communion has arisen due to the decision by the Episcopal Church to ordain and consecrate gay and lesbian people to the priesthood and the episcopate.  But there is more to it.  Double standards and hypocrisy are well to the fore on all levels.  So much is said in public, but in private the opposite is said and done.  Pastoral care is almost a thing of the past and is quickly being replaced by putting churches into certain categories. Numbers are the important thing not people, and if a church happens to be low in numbers - then it has to close.   The quote from the Bible of "When two or three are gathered together in my Name......"  has been conveniently forgotten.  Closing churches rather than planting churches has become the order of the day in so many dioceses.  What a pity, because that immediately gives the non-church goers the impression that the church is only concerned about those places where there are large congregations and lots of money. .... and unfortunately that is sadly true in so many places. It seems the Church authorities also forget the Biblical saying "Healthy people do not need a doctor - sick people do" (New Living Translation). 

So why are the little churches so often regarded as not being worth consideration?  Unfortunately in this day and age of high tech, politics and personal ambitions they are not considered to be of any use because they don't produce large incomes or are unable to work on or get involved in big projects - even though those churches meet the needs spiritual and otherwise of those who attend and are able to pay their own way when it comes to running expenses and assessments. Still, they are considered to be more of a nuisance to the authorities as they have to be serviced.   People concern, tradition, geographical location and the understanding that not everyone is mobile and able to travel longer distances to go to another church are all things of the past unfortunately in today's Church.   Today priests baulk at having to officiate at more than one service on a Sunday.  In my day as a priest - and that may make me sound pre-historic - we were taught that Celebrating and Officiating was our job and we did it.  Very often not just two services a Sunday but multiple churches every week.  That was part of the job we were called to do.  It seems that particular thought has long since gone.  What a pity.

In addition to what I have said above, there is also a lot of anger in the Church and undeniably much of this is due to the Episcopal Church's decisions on the gay issue.  But there is also a tremendous amount of hypocrisy on the subject.  Several Bishops in the Episcopal Church who voted for full inclusion and the blessing of same-sex unions at the General Convention last July, did so because it was "the popular" thing to do, but yet they still refuse to allow such blessings in their Diocese.  To me that has the tone of hypocrisy in it.  They should have voted "no" and stayed true to their convictions.

The consecration of the Reverend Mary Glasspool as Bishop Suffragan of Los Angeles has escalated the dissension within the Communion.   I have no problems with her being a lesbian - that is her business - or a priest or even a bishop, but I do have a HUGE problem with the way the Episcopal Church and indeed the Anglican Communion Office as a whole handled the matter. Knowing that the very fact of her election would cause problems in the wider Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church threw an untold amount of fuel into the fire by making it the biggest consecration for decades with multiple processions, bands,  choirs and American Indians doing a dance thing to remove evil spirits from the place. In addition it was reported that there were more bishops present than at any other consecration except the installation of the Presiding Bishop. Not only does all that ballyhoo play into the hands of the homophobics, but Mary Glasspool herself in her address harped on the fact that she is the first lesbian bishop, as did also the Bishop of Los Angeles in his sermon and as did the Presiding Bishop when she spoke. Was it really necessary to keep on mentioning it? 

All that so angered me, because in the first place it made it sound as if they were consecrating Mary Glasspool just to thumb their noses at the world, and secondly all the ballyhoo of bands, processions, drums, dances and numerous bishops made it look as if the other consecrations for both male and female candidates that take place throughout the year in a normal and quiet fashion are much less important. Even if they had to announce she is lesbian in a committed relationship, they should just have had a normal consecration like any other diocese and leave it at that.  It would not have fuelled so much nonsense. To me the fact that she is a woman capable and competent to be a Bishop is the important thing.  Not the fact that she is lesbian.  So lets just concentrate on her ability and talents and stop shouting about her sexuality.

But the fight goes on.   The Archbishop of Canterbury throws more fuel on the fire in his Pentecostal pastoral letter, suggesting the withdrawal of those members of the Episcopal Church who sit on various commissions in the Anglican Communion. The Archbishop's suggestion has been followed by letters sent by the Rev. Canon Kenneth Kearon, General Secretary of the Anglican Communion to those Commission members telling them that they have had their membership of the respective Commissions terminated.

There is a lot of double standards, positioning and hypocrisy here again.  The terminations came about because the Archbishop said the Episcopal Church did not obey the "request" for a moratorium on the subject of decisions concerning sexuality.   But it was just a "request" and not an order, simply because the Anglican Communion Office as well as the Archbishop of Canterbury cannot legislate for the Episcopal Church.  The Secretary General also wrote to the Archbishop of the Southern Cone (South America) more or less threatening the same treament because they violated the segment of the Anglican Covenant "requesting" that there should be a stop to Episcopal visitations for dissenting churches from outside provinces.  However a double standard occurs here also because no letter was sent to the Ugandan and Rwandan Archbishops who continually interfere in the affairs of the Episcopal Church.  Are the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Secretary General afraid of hurting the feelings of the African Bishops?

Both the Archbishop and the General Secretary have said they hope for a resolution but if you kick someone out, how can you talk with them and get a resolution? Now the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church has fired back her own salvo so we have to wait for the next round! 

How long must this go on?  When will the church become the church that cares once more and is not a battle ground of angry people many of them just anxious to promote their own agenda?  We are fast getting into a situation where it will be the Church of Hate and Anger rather than the Church of Love and Peace.  It is time for us - for everyone - to stop and think.

An old friend of mine who is a Buddhist monk, many years ago told me that three things were necessary for living a harmonious life.  First - love yourself and be at peace with yourself, because if not then no one will be able to be at peace with you.  Second - understand the next person because if you understand the other person's position and where he/she is coming from, then you can have a relationship that is good even though you may disagree on many things.  Third - listen to the Divine Being.  Whether you call him/her/it the Holy Spirit, God, Divine Being is immaterial. A name is just a name, but you have to take time out to understand where one must go and what one must do and what one must say, and not just follow your own ambition.  At this time, unfortunately I don't think the Church is doing any of those three things.