 |
| The Great Famine in Ireland |
'In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus Christ himself said: "It is more blessed to give than to receive." ' Acts 20:35
A Singapore Straits Times article (ST 22 June 2012), quoted Chen Show Mao, then a Singapore Member of Parliament, "The substance of servant leadership is about putting people at the centre of policies. The style is persuading people to come along. You no longer can say, look I am the leader, follow me. You are the leader but you’re also a servant."
Similarly, Singapore's Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong reminded MPs of their responsibility to uphold the spirit of service to the people and work hard on their behalf. (ST 28 May 2011)
These days, politicians and bureaucrats tend to make decisions based on the hard and cold statistics of gross national products as measures of growth and success. Over time, such decision making processes can become models for what is considered good for the country without paying due consideration for the real needs of the citizens.
We should learn from history. One example of the callous righteousness of decision making was the handling of the Potato Blight and Great Famine in Ireland by the government of Great Britain in the mid-19th Century.
Jesus Christ spoke of the need for humility in leaders towards followers. Masters should know how to respect servants rather than lord over them. Leaders should serve the followers. He taught and demonstrated this by the washing of His disciples’ feet.
These are the attributes of humility and servitude that characterise servant leadership. Instead of being a slogan to be used during times of election, servant leadership should become a guiding principle for current and future leaders - the leaders of countries, corporations and churches.
Similarly, Singapore's Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong reminded MPs of their responsibility to uphold the spirit of service to the people and work hard on their behalf. (ST 28 May 2011)
These days, politicians and bureaucrats tend to make decisions based on the hard and cold statistics of gross national products as measures of growth and success. Over time, such decision making processes can become models for what is considered good for the country without paying due consideration for the real needs of the citizens.
We should learn from history. One example of the callous righteousness of decision making was the handling of the Potato Blight and Great Famine in Ireland by the government of Great Britain in the mid-19th Century.
The British government of the day failed the Irish people miserably. Great Famine relief decisions were based on prevailing economic and governance theories without regard and consideration for humanitarian needs. Historians reported that in 1846 to 1852 the new administration headed by John Russell of the Whig party applied their “laissez-faire” theory of minimal government intervention.
At a time of an unprecedented national catastrophe, the political wisdom shifted from governmental relief intervention towards leaving the crisis to evolve naturally, to be influenced by 'market forces'. Saving the starving was not the government's job but that of local landlords and that of charities. The Whig government withheld food and relief works, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without any work, money or food.
Some people even justified their inactions by promoting the view that the famine was the result of divine judgment - an act of Providence. A leading exponent of this belief was Sir Charles Trevelyan, the British civil servant who was chiefly responsible for administering the Irish relief policy throughout the famine years. In his book, The Irish Crisis, published in 1848, Trevelyan implied the famine to be a sharp but effective remedy to the 'Irish problem' of Great Britain.
During the famine, approximately 1 million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland. The government could be more gracious and merciful in the making of crucial political and economic decisions. Perhaps, the scale and magnitude of the disaster and misery could have been averted.
At a time of an unprecedented national catastrophe, the political wisdom shifted from governmental relief intervention towards leaving the crisis to evolve naturally, to be influenced by 'market forces'. Saving the starving was not the government's job but that of local landlords and that of charities. The Whig government withheld food and relief works, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without any work, money or food.
Some people even justified their inactions by promoting the view that the famine was the result of divine judgment - an act of Providence. A leading exponent of this belief was Sir Charles Trevelyan, the British civil servant who was chiefly responsible for administering the Irish relief policy throughout the famine years. In his book, The Irish Crisis, published in 1848, Trevelyan implied the famine to be a sharp but effective remedy to the 'Irish problem' of Great Britain.
During the famine, approximately 1 million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland. The government could be more gracious and merciful in the making of crucial political and economic decisions. Perhaps, the scale and magnitude of the disaster and misery could have been averted.
On 1 June 1977, a different leader Prime Minister Tony Blair issued a statement that some have taken to be an apology 150 years later. He acknowledged the "deep scars left by the events of the Great Famine that began in 1845; that one million people should have died in what was then part of the richest, most powerful nation in the world is something that still causes pain as we reflect on it today. Those who governed in London at that time failed their people through standing by while a crop failure turned into a massive human tragedy."
Today, more than ever before, countries need leaders who will consider the dignity of the people when deciding what is good for the country.
Jesus Christ spoke of the need for humility in leaders towards followers. Masters should know how to respect servants rather than lord over them. Leaders should serve the followers. He taught and demonstrated this by the washing of His disciples’ feet.
“He poured water into a basin and began to wash his disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around him. When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. “Do you understand what I have done for you?” he asked them. “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you.” John 13:5, 12-16
These are the attributes of humility and servitude that characterise servant leadership. Instead of being a slogan to be used during times of election, servant leadership should become a guiding principle for current and future leaders - the leaders of countries, corporations and churches.
There is an example that all who are called to be leaders especially church leaders can follow, Jesus Christ, the 'Servant King.'
From Heaven, You came helpless babe
Entered our world, your glory veiled
Not to be served but to serve
And give Your life that we might live
This is our God, The Servant King
He calls us now to follow Him
To bring our lives as a daily offering
Of worship to The Servant King
There in the garden of tears
My heavy load he chose to bear
His heart with sorrow was torn
"Yet not My will but Yours", He said
Come see His hands and His feet
The scars that speak of sacrifice
Hands that flung stars into space
To cruel nails surrendered
So let us learn how to serve
And in our lives enthrone Him
Each other's needs to prefer
For it is Christ we're serving
This is our God, The Servant King
He calls us now to follow Him
To bring our lives as a daily offering
Of worship to The Servant King
Lionel
Updated 1st Published 27 June 2012
