Movement 100

More documents

Recommendations

Info

-l I J. lrt lTt =t o TT =t E -O l- -, =ct) -ct) ll I co \ F t J co \ CO It was an era when the SCM moved to an intentional community near Bristol, and Movenent moved to lreland and became one of the better known radical Christian journals of that time. Michael Feakes looks at one of the most prodigious phases in Movenent's history 0f Outrageous Experiments I I n the summer of 1974 SCM left its long-standing headquarters, Annandale, in Noith London, and moved to Wict< Court, a rural manor house in the West Country. I Before the move IoWick, Movementwas edited jointly by Viv Broughton and Richard Zipfel, an American who had worked with draft resisters and the Jesuits. Zipfel moved to a new role in SCM, and Broughton was joined as co-editor by Mary Condren, a former nun who became involved in SCM while studying at the University of Hull. Whereas Broughton had never been to university, Condren joined the SCM staff directly after completing her degree, and over the next few years she became the dominant intellectual and strategic force behind the magazine. Wick was a ferment of ideas and ideals. For many in the movement, it embodied the communal, agrarian, hazily Christian way of life to which they aspired, The staff and their families all lived there (although the distinction between staff and non-staff residents was never great), and conferences and evenis were held throughout the year on almost every weekend. Wick had a constant stream of visitors: students and other SCM members, South African exiles, peace activists, draft resisters, social drop outs, various radicals from within and without the Church. Goats would wander in from the garden and surprise visiting representatives of the SCM trustees, down from London to be horrified by how the movement's resources were being spent. From within the Wick melting-pot Movenent reflecled many of the concerns of the socially active, left-leaning Christian of the time. With Viv Broughton involved there would always be a fair dose of humour (later manifested in his own back-page column 'An Ear to the Ground"), but in general the magazine reflected the seriousness with which the issues were taken by the Wick community. While the tone was sometimes irreverent, the political creed was strongly anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist, anti-authoritarian, and ultimately anti-Church. There were numerous reports on right-wing governments in Latin America, apartheid in South Africa, radical priests in Asia, and dissidents from around the world. This was the era of student protests and sit-inssuch as the one at Lancaster University demanding better conditions for cleaning staff-which were faithfully reported by Movement, SCM was on the side of prisoners, workers, and minorities every'rrhere. ln late 1975 Mary Condren became sole editor and took the magazine to Dublin, from where she produced it until 1979. This gave the movement (still then the SCM of Britain and lreland) a presence in lreland at a time when there was no radical Christian voice there and the seriousness of the sectarian conflict was becoming apparent. Whilst the move gave Condren some breathing space away from the maledominated hot-house of Wick, it also gave Movement a separate identity as one of the better-known radical Christian journals of the time, The magazine was also insulated from direct involvement in the on-going turmoil over SCM's direction after the move to Wick. (Even so, the magazine was nearly forced to become a self-sustaining project of its own, but succeeded in remaining a part of SCM). Condren now brought a change Io Movenent.Ihe articles became longer and more contemplative. There was still passion, but a more intellectual tone. Thanks to Condren's own connections and Movemenls participation in the Underground Press Syndicate, writers as erudite as Rosemary Reuther and Gustavo Guttierez were turning up within its pages. As a theology graduate (a surprisingly rare breed in SCM) Condren was able to introduce more theological reflections on the themes until then covered in a form of reportage. Throughout the mid to late 1970s SCM's publications outpui was prodigious. There were up to seven editions of the magazine a year, and, more impressively still, standalone pamphlets were also produced to be included free with the magazine and sold separately. The pamphlets drew writings from disparate sources around the world, although much of the material was original, produced by SCM members and staff. Many of these were among the first publications on their particular subjects, and the topics give a good indication of SCM's interests at the time: the militant Church around the world; "signs of the kingdom" in Casiro's Cuba; lreland; liberation theology; gender politics; Latin America; male clericalism and so on. Two pamphlets in particular stand out: For the Banished Children of Eve, an introduction to feminist theology one of the first widely-published treatments of the topic, and perhaps Mary Condren's finest legacy to SCM; and Towards a Theology of Gay Liberation-a piece which saw SCM draw the wrath of the Church, and which led directly to the founding of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement. Another often-visited topic in the magazine was the life and work of communities, which were perhaps the overriding interest ol Movement aI the time, whether the base communities of South America or communal houses in South Wales. After all, SCM had consciously tried to model itself on communities such as lona and Taiz6, with Wick as the focal point and community houses around the country. But in doing so SCM had lost touch with many of its core supporters. lt was being pulled in too many different directions, and eventually the movement came to a halt. The gyre had widened loo far. Movenenf came back to Britain under a new editor, Wick was sold, and SCM moved into humbler accommodation in Birmingham, The end had come to an outrageous experiment, and a glorious adventure. El Michael Feakes was editor of Movenent trom 1 993-1 994. He is now a solicitor in London, movemGnt 100 8
One of the most popular pamphlets printed in Movement during the 1970s was "Why Men Priests". ln this pamphlet's introduction, Mary Condren explains why this question should be considered. Why Men Pr-i ests? from a pamphi et publ i shed wj th Movement 34 0978) his pamphlet 'Why Men Priests'will come as a f welcome change to many for whom the question 'Why Women Priests' or'Women Priests, Yes' or'Women I Priests, No', insofar as these do not take account of the wider questions of minisiry in the church and are simply means of avoiding the crisis facing the churches regardlng ministry in general. The way in which the question is posed very often determines the answer. By asking 'Why Women Priests?' one assumes that women are the problem, The assumption in this pamphlet is that the clericalised male dominated forms of ministry in the churches today represent a far greater apostasy from the teaching of Jesus than any number of women priests could hope to achieve in their lifetimes. As such, this is the problem which has to be faced and so long as the debate centres around women priests, this merely serves as a distraction from the issue. This is not to say that the question of women priests is irrelevant; in fact it is our contention that the clericalism of the churches today and the forms of power and hierarchies are the logical consequences following on the exclusion of women. This pamphlet then, is not about the case of women priests. lt is taken for granted that the recognition and validation of women's ministries is an urgent necessity, by ordination and other means. Howeve,r the debate which has surrounded the question of women priests raises serious problems which the church will have to face if it is to have any integrity in this matter. These are not merely questions of theological scholarship (although this is relevant); more serious is the question of the deep-seated male prejudice against women which prevails in the church and which needs to be exposed for the sake of the qhurch and its future. {HHhg {HBu, flppnsn flHrnns flrdimratinn 1l Erceura man't plnr+ la in thE arfiy 2l Ecc*ugr no rerlly murlv msfi $rafit8 to r.lfite dbputia oth.rwl3e thqn by llght|ng €borrt lt. 3l womEn *Truhl not re8fiftct man drc{aed ln rklrtr. 4l Eocaus* mEn arc too efirofffid lc bd pdeit!. Th€lr Gonduat at tofftb.l m.tch6-, lh the rrmy. at FdlltlcEl lnnrta tendarcy to rpparl to forc€ snd violcncc rrndsrc them unfit to rsprrs€nt J€sua. 6l Eecgrtso aomE lrrsl e?u Eo hffrdg'(El& thEy vlill ditlraEt womon *o|rfilpFstN. Gl If th. Church 19 th6 Erld| of qhrlst, EHd blrhopr tre Er hurbEndr to ihe Church, rll grle.tr ahould hG{em!la. There seems to be a marked correlation between advanced clericalism, 'other worldly' forms of religion, authoritarianism, domineering personalities and the fear of women. This correlation has been particularly remarked on in Sweden where they have had women priests now for twenty years and is worthy of further examination in this context, Recently moves have been made to abolish the clause which grants male priests who do not agree with women priests the right to refuse to officiate or participate in services or other occasions in their company. This has provoked a widespread debate on the issue of women priests again at all levels of the population. Twenty years ago the attiiude towards these people was one of respect for their right to hold diverse views. Now they are clearly seen as oddities deserving special sociological and psychiatric study. A recent psychiairic report suggested that these men had what was called a 'pairiarchal mentality' derived from problems they may have had of authority with their fathers or moihers. A remarkable feature of this new debate has been the number of young male ordinands refusing to be ordained alongside women, The study suggested that these particular people have naive infantile personalities; that they did not trust themselves and needed to make laws for their own security For this purpose they constructed very safe theological and sexual universes from which they were intent on keeping out every form of threat. A national poll which was conducted showed that whereas ninety per cent of the general population was in favour of women priests, about forty six per cent of male priests were still against women. It is remarkable that after twenty years little has changed in the theological debates on the question of women priests but popular opinion has swung solidly behind the women to such as extent that the formal relationship between the State and the State Church which was to have been severed in the next few years has now been delayed because people have reallsed that a likely consequence of this separation would be serious threats to the position of women in the church. People are unwilling to give much authority to people who could use the kind of irrational and academically dishonest arguments against women priests coupled usually with pathological behaviour patterns. For instance some believe if a woman conducts a funeral while menstruating the service does not'take'. A writer in Nya Vaktaren, a High Church journal, claimed that some male priests who met women priests died soon afterwards as a result. Recently there were deadly serious discussions about the ordination of a pregnant woman in Uppsala. Those who did noi feel that the ordination was valid in the first place were nevertheless disturbed that should the foetus be male then the Apostolic Succession would automatically be conferred on the child. The ordination went ahead. There are still several 'clean' Gouer me BEAUTIFUT lfiilovE:tiJltEhlrr Re?cnEret AdcAtstuu RM* Itrgt), .IFT.E A FFESI{W) hrt.'Cbr6, lt€jwffi GK,EffiS' SEITIIreUP ACOMMI'IVE t{a,rarrtrlnt hsilA kcn thelbol pr6 trith the rove to Dublin, l,'lovqBnt changed its format to become a glossy magazine (apparently because 'it was cheaper!) The covers were m:ch improved and featured better 'integrated photos and an explosion of fonts. The best of these has to be No. 30 (above), which in an article during lbvarcnt' s 25th anniversary Y{as voted all-time best cover because of its loopy photo of llarty Feldman in episcopa'l garb, drinking a pint and smoking a fag. l,le would concur with this assessnnt vttpl dpartedly. Also notenrorthy is No. 27 (below). The fashions of the protest marchers, and its shocking fuchsia hue is L003 pure 1970s. movement 100 e
Page 1 and 2: movement t.-i1 " alr aE )r..r.. rif
Page 3 and 4: Wow! One hundred issues and almost
Page 5 and 6: a Kirche Uberfiilltl Alan Yearsley
Page 7 and 8: We recently spoke with four people
Page 9 and 10: understanding and denies mystery. A
Page 11 and 12: . SPECIAL SECIION . fnovefnent T{OV
Page 13 and 14: 4,'f :r'*frf'ttt t:: ti ::r t t \a
Page 15 and 16: \n1974, Movement asked: "What is th
Page 17: The Fi rst Edi tori al 1A ome of ou
Page 21 and 22: Star Wars: Cruel Fantasy? I I track
Page 23 and 24: By the early 1980s, there was a ple
Page 25 and 26: The Fal kl ands Cr.i si s T he loss
Page 27 and 28: Mark Pryce revisits Matthew's Passi
Page 29 and 30: doctors wear masks. Being near me i
Page 31 and 32: The Church t,'li I I Eat Itsel f J
Page 33 and 34: lnterviews with Dorothy Day. Rants
Page 35 and 36: ln lndia, the Dalits are, according
Page 37 and 38: Millennium Dreams (No Knitting; Ple
Page 39 and 40: Robert Jones reviews Tori Amos' lat
Page 41 and 42: The man who added Oeneration X to t
Page 43 and 44: , THE GREATEST STORY Once there was

Movement 100

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?