British priest: Shoplifting by poor sometimes OK

[andrewjs18]

uh...ok?

link- http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091222/...JpdGlzaHByaWVz

For a priest in northern England, the commandment that dictates "thou shalt not steal" isn't exactly written in stone.

The Rev. Tim Jones caused an uproar by telling his congregation that it is sometimes acceptable for desperate people to shoplift — as long as they do it at large national chain stores, rather than small, family businesses.

Jones' Robin Hood-like sermon drew rebukes Tuesday from fellow clergy, shop owners and police.

From his pulpit at the Church of St. Lawrence in York, about 220 miles (355 kilometers) north of London, Jones said in his sermon Sunday that shoplifting can be justified if a person in real need is not greedy and does not take more than he or she really needs to get by.

The remarks drew a summons from Archdeacon Richard Seed, who said on his Web site that the church rejects the view that shoplifting can be acceptable.

"The Church of England does not advise anyone to shoplift, or break the law in any way," he said.

"Father Tim Jones is raising important issues about the difficulties people face when benefits are not forthcoming, but shoplifting is not the way to overcome these difficulties. There are many organizations and charities working with people in need, and the Citizens' Advice Bureau is a good first place to call," Seed's statement said.

Eleanor Course, a spokeswoman for Seed, said the archdeacon wants to meet with Jones to discuss the "appropriateness" of his sermon.

"The point we are most concerned about is that shoplifting is simply not a blameless, victimless crime," she said. "We want to make clear that it simply doesn't help people. And the last thing a desperate person wants is to be caught for shoplifting, so we feel this advice is very unwise."

Jones told The Associated Press that he stands by his comments. He said he regretted only that the media is focusing on his view on shoplifting rather than the underlying problem he wanted to address.

"The point I'm making is that when we shut down every socially acceptable avenue for people in need, then the only avenue left is the socially unacceptable one," he said, adding that people are often released from prison without any means of support, leading them back into crime.

"What I'm against is the way society has become ever more comfortable with the people at the very bottom, and blinded to their needs," he said.

He said shoplifting could help people who are legally entitled to government welfare benefits but have the benefits delayed for bureaucratic reasons.

This approach was quickly rejected by members of the British Retail Consortium, a prominent trade organization trying to reduce theft.

"It's the job of our welfare system, which retailers support with the billions they pay each year in tax, to help vulnerable people," said spokesman Richard Dodd. "There are no excuses for stealing."

The North Yorkshire Police also condemned Jones' approach as counterproductive because people already in marginal conditions would find themselves in trouble with the law if they resorted to shoplifting.

"First and foremost, shoplifting is a criminal offense, and to justify this course of action under any circumstances is highly irresponsible," a police statement read. "Turning or returning to crime will only make matters worse, that is a guarantee."

People in need should turn to charitable organizations and government agencies for help, rather than take matters into their own hands, the police said.

"To do this would make the downward spiral even more rapid, both on an individual basis and on society as a whole," the statement said.

[jahwarrior72]

this subject is fascinating. i'm not sure if i sgree with the priest or not, to be honest.

i've never been in a situation where i was desperate enough to steal, and i hope i never am. however, i do know people who've been there, people who normally would never consider stealing.

i want to relate a story my dad told me. it happened when i was barely walking, in the Bronx. like most people in our area, we were living way below the poverty line; i slept in a crib, they slept on a mattresss on the roach infested floor, getting heat from the open oven in the kitchen. my dad was out of work for awhile at this point, and my parents barely ate. they made sure i had food, by going without themselves.

my father, a Vietnam vet, couldn't find work, because he was a Puerto Rican with a thick accent, because he had no education, because he was a baby-killer, because, because, because. he'd been driven to the point of desperation, taking any odd job he could find, no matter how demeaning, just to make some coin. but months had gone by, and he was losing hope. he'd been there before: when he was growing up, him and his friends would steal sugarcane, corn, and any other edible goods they could find from the trainyards in PR, not for cheap thrills, but because they were hungry. but it was worse as a man, because he had a wife and baby to support.

one day, he was walking around, thinking of shit, how he was going to come by my next meal, how to get out of this situation. there was an old lady walking towards him, holding her purse. he looked at her, and her purse, and he realized she had just walked out of the bank around the corner, and he wondered how much money she had in her purse. he thought about all this, looking at her the whole time. his thoughts must have been conveyed on his face, because, acording to him, she looked at him, and froze. she recognized something in his face, and knew she had no hope of fighting back. she simply clutched her purse, and started crying. my father snapped back to reality, looked at her, and ran home. he said he cried in the bathroom, alone, for an hour.

he got a job a few weeks later, driving a cab. later in life, he went to college, got a Master's degree, and became a teacher. that one break he got was enough to turn it all around. think about all those people who never got that break.

i looked at my dad in a whole different light that day. my father is usually guarded about his past, mostly because his life was full of suffering and tragedies, but also because he's done things he wishes he didn't, for survival. i never judge him.

i guess the point i'm trying to make is this: not everyone who steals is a thief, not everyone who kills is a murderer. sometimes, there are extreme circumstances that drive people to commit acts, acts they normally wouldn't. i myself have had to, things i'm not comfortable discussing right now. thankfully, i've never had to steal food to feed myself or my daughter. to quote Joe Strummer, "I've been very tempted to grab it from the till, I've been very hungry, but not enough to kill."

i pray for those unfortunates who find themselves having to steal to get by. i never have, but if it comes down to my daughter starving, or stealing food, Walmart's gonna find themselves short a few loaves of bread.

[greasy]

This past semester I took a course about everyday forms of political resistance. It was interesting because it covered the situations of oppressed (or subaltern) groups. I don't necessarily agree with some of the content, but it got me thinking about how life would be if I wasn't a straight, white, Christian, middle-upper class male.

I wrote a paper about the concept of a rights. It mainly concerned acts such as poaching and squatting, but I think it is widely applicable. Say you believe that drinking water should be a universal right. All wells are then blocked off and limited to certain groups of people. You tap into one though, and begin "stealing" water. The issue is that you think you have the RIGHT to take the water, yet the law says that you don't.

It is still a crime, but it makes us think a bit about the mindset of people who are committing the crimes. They may believe that they have the right to "steal" what is needed to survive.

[D10]

haha...........I've seen a Bishop in The Netherlands once that said the same thing............man did he get flamed by the Vatican............you won't believe it.

[Philbert]

This past semester I took a course about everyday forms of political resistance. It was interesting because it covered the situations of oppressed (or subaltern) groups. I don't necessarily agree with some of the content, but it got me thinking about how life would be if I wasn't a straight, white, Christian, middle-upper class male.

I wrote a paper about the concept of a rights. It mainly concerned acts such as poaching and squatting, but I think it is widely applicable. Say you believe that drinking water should be a universal right. All wells are then blocked off and limited to certain groups of people. You tap into one though, and begin "stealing" water. The issue is that you think you have the RIGHT to take the water, yet the law says that you don't.

It is still a crime, but it makes us think a bit about the mindset of people who are committing the crimes. They may believe that they have the right to "steal" what is needed to survive.

The ancient Jews were commanded to leave food lying around for the poor and the nomads:

When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, neither shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...19&version=ESV

Stealing is prohibited, but there is a mechanism in place to make it unnecessary for survival (though life would still suck for the poor). I suppose the modern welfare state is a similar idea - the moral authority for punishing stealing rests in part upon the existence of a reasonable alternative. In your example above, stealing is preferable to dying of thirst, but if someone gave me enough water to live, I would not have the right to steal some more for a swimming pool.

The concept of the lesser of two evils is something any serious system of morality has to deal with. If it really is necessary to steal, then there is still a moral obligation to minimize harm. Stealing food from Wal-Mart would be the best of the bad choices.