Faith And Finance

The Occupy London movement is directed against the proverbial “one percent” – not against St. Paul’s Cathedral. It is directed against the disproportionate concentration of wealth and power at the expense of the many. Bearing this in mind, here are 7 of the 10 trustees of St Paul’s Cathedral Foundation, the charity organisation which oversees all events and projects to do with the cathedral:

Chairman: Sir John Stuttard – Partner at PriceWaterhouseCoopers; former Lord Mayor of the City of London.

Dame Helen Alexander DBE – Deputy chair of the Confederation of British Industry, one of the largest business lobbying groups in the country

Lord Ian Blair of Boughton – Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner

Roger Gifford – Investment banker

Gavin Ralston – Global Head of Product and leading international asset manager at Schroder Investment Management

Carol Sergeant CBE – Chief Risk Director at Lloyds TSB; formerly Managing Director for Regulatory Process and Risk at the Financial Standards Authority

John Spence OBE – Former Managing Director, Business Banking, LloydsTSB

Nobody suggests that the trustees are gathering for clandestine meetings, like members of a secret brotherhood. But what we can conclude from the above, is just how collusive – how intertwined – the institution of St Paul’s is with the ideology which we are trying to fight. It would be naïve to expect the trustees to offer skills and knowledge to St. Paul’s without being influenced by their experiences and interests. Their biographies, after all, reflect a very particular way of life. St. Paul’s, as an institution, obviously lends great weight to their views and opinions.

The trustees of St. Paul’s have benefitted enormously from the present state of affairs. Yet they are now dealing with a movement that brings attention to the injustices embedded in that state of affairs and to those who do not benefit from it.

The events of the last few weeks have led to a very interesting dynamic. At the time of writing, two clerical figures have resigned over the church’s decisions. We are witnessing the clash of two visions for the role of the church. According to the first view, St. Paul’s is primarily a tourist attraction and a provider of church services. It is comfortably situated in the centre of the largest concentration of wealth in Britain even in times of economic crisis and hardship. Yet this view now clashes with the self-image of the church as the moral conscience of society.

Until recently, St Paul’s has limited itself to areas of activity where it has never had to confront this contradiction directly. Words sufficed whenever moral questions were put before the church. As recently as last week, Graeme Knowles, the Dean of St Paul’s, wrote in a statement that, “The debate about a more just society is at the heart of much our work at St Paul’s and indeed we hope to contribute to the wider debate in the very near future through a Report from the St Paul’s institute.”

To us, the vague promise of “a Report” seems disappointingly non-committal.  Fed up with the inequalities of our society, people have brought themselves out onto the streets to actually manifest change. Our unique situation of Occupy LSX has not only highlighted problems of injustice but has also shone a light on the role of the church as a moral guardian of society.

Many clerics are now faced with a moral dilemma: how will the church (and the individuals that comprise it) deal with a protest movement whose aims converge with certain ideals of the Christian faith? And how will St Paul’s financial interests influence discussions about moral leadership? The resignation of two clergy members indicates the severity of the dilemma that might eventually result in the forcible removal of protesters from the doorsteps of St Paul’s Cathedral.