1

A critical comparison of thereligious/scriptural motivation of Jews and

Christians in social justice initiativesworking with European Gypsies, Roma and

Travellers

Margaret Greenfields

December 2013

2

ABSTRACTThis document consists of a slightly extended version of a dissertation presentedfor a Masters in Inter-Faith relations (Woolf Institute, University of Cambridge).The study sets out to critically compare and contrast the (self-reported)religious/scriptural and ethical motivation of Jews and Christians engaged inpractical social justice initiatives with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (GTR), aswell as their experiences of intra-faith reactions to their work with thesehistorically ‘unpopular’ groups.

As a minor theme, the extent of respondent actors’ activities in, and inter-faithengagement around, supporting other marginalised communities is alsoanalysed. This enables the consideration of the specificity of their work with GTRpopulations, as well as the location of inter-faith contact between Christians,Jews and other faiths1.

The elements reported on within this study consist of: a literature review of bothprimary and secondary Jewish and Christian sources pertaining to social justice,with particular reference to the mandate to support the vulnerable and sociallyexcluded (as well as – where such exist – explicit statements on GTRpopulations by faith leaders); selected thematic findings from an e-survey ofindividuals working with the above communities2; and six depth interviews withJewish and Christian activists engaged with GTR peoples, of whom three aremembers of the clergy (Rabbi/Vicars).

Findings from the depth interviews have been subjected to ‘framework’ analysisto explore the ways in which these individuals articulate the extent of, and waysin which, their faith-based identity (herewith including Jewish ethnic identity inboth religious and cultural forms) has impacted on their decision to participate inworking with these populations.

Finally, the dissertation concludes with a summary of the differences in approachbetween the two faith groups (and contemplates how variables in motivation mayimpact on inter-faith engagement) before outlining some recommendations andproposals for inter-faith action to support GTR communities ‘on the margins’ ofsociety.

1 A small number of respondents reported membership of other faith groups, e.g. Buddhist andMuslim or identified as ‘spiritual’/‘atheist’. These findings are also included in the tables presentedin this dissertation, although the main discussion focuses on similarities and differences inresponse between Christian and Jewish participants.2 The survey instrument is included as Appendix A to this dissertation. Given the extent of thedata collected and the length constraints inherent in an MSt thesis submission, it has only beenpossible to present certain key findings. It is anticipated that other unused data will be the subjectof future publications.

3

AcknowledgementsFirst and foremost, I must express my deep gratitude to all of the respondents to the

survey and those who participated in depth interviews. My thanks go also to colleagues,

contacts and friends who distributed information on this study to their email lists, those

who suggested that others may complete the e-survey, as well as those individuals who

assisted in the translation of information materials to encourage greater involvement by

potential respondents; and indeed assisted some of their friends/contacts by translating

their answers to the survey in English (as I’m advised occurred on two occasions). The

interpretation and explanation of data (and hence any errors in comprehension) are mine

and mine alone and I hope that I have not in any way misrepresented any participant

kind enough to engage with this project.

I am particularly grateful to Ms Katya Zoharit who took time out of her very busy

schedule to introduce me to contacts in Hungary. She generously translated for me

during two depth interviews that occurred in a particular city during that visit.

It is with profound gratitude that I acknowledge the unceasing support of my former line

manager Ms Crystal Oldman (at that time employed by Buckinghamshire New

University), who facilitated my participation in the MSt in Jewish-Christian Relations at

the Woolf Institute and supported my timetabling requests to enable me to attend at

Cambridge ‘in person’ for the first year of the programme.

I would also like to acknowledge the immense level of practical support provided by

Professor David Sines, Pro-Vice Chancellor of the Faculty of Society and Health, for

agreeing my career development plan devised in collaboration with Crystal Oldman and

in particular for enabling the provision of some Institutional financial support whilst I

attended the MSt programme. My thanks too to my current line manager Mrs Ruth

Clemow for enabling me to take a short period of study leave whilst writing up this

dissertation, to Ms Marcia Owen my excellent (and rapid) transcriber and to Ms Vicki

Williams for proofreading and formatting the text on completion as well as providing

editorial advice on ‘cuts’ to meet length requirements in the submitted dissertation (now

reinstated in the copy below).

4

I cannot thank enough the donors who devised and support the Woolf Institute student

bursary scheme for their most generous financial contribution towards the cost of the

Course fees. Receipt of a bursary meant that my employer felt confident in making me

an additional allowance, leaving me with an ‘affordable’ level of personal expense

towards college fees, books and travel from London to Cambridge on a twice weekly

basis. Given other substantial financial responsibilities, genuine hardship would have

resulted for my family without these most generous contributions and it is extremely

unlikely I would have been unable to undertake the course of study.

I would like to offer sincere gratitude to the staff of the Woolf Institute (executive,

teaching and administrative), all of whom have been unfailingly kind and helpful during

what has been (on a personal basis) a remarkably difficult year or so. My thanks must go

in particular to Lars Fischer, Emma Harris and my supervisor during this final year,

Shana Cohen.

Finally my thanks (and love) to my family who have had to put up with my juggling a full-

time job, being a student and significant amounts of travel and complex responsibilities

for the past two and a bit years. This dissertation is dedicated to my mother Barbara and

to my father Alexander Peter Greenfields (z"l) who passed away during my period of

study.

5

TABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction 8

1 Context of research 12

1.1 Aims and objectives 14

2 Epistemological approach/selection of methodology 162.1 Research design/methods 172.1.1 Literature review 182.1.2 Survey design and distribution 192.1.3 Depth interviews 212.2 Analysis of data 232.3 Strengths and limitations of the study 24

3 The literature review 263.1 Primary sources (Scriptural) 273.2 Secondary sources 293.2.1 Key commentary on Scriptural sources e.g Talmud and 29

Patristic literature

3.2.2 General (modern) materials on faith-based social justice 32/ethics pertaining to racial minorities/social exclusion

3.2.3 Position statements by religious leaders/central authoritiespertaining to Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (GTR) and othermarginalised or ‘racially excluded’ populations 36

3.2.4 ‘Grey literature’ and news articles on faith-basedorganisations’ support for GTR 39

4 Findings (survey data) 414.1 Demographics: respondents’ field of practice/engagement

and history of activism with GTR communities 42

4.1.1 Respondents’ contacts with faith and ‘other’ agencies on GTRissues 49

6

4.1.2 Respondents’ range of social justice initiatives and degree ofautonomy 50

4.1.3 Extent of knowledge of scriptural/doctrinal mandate for 52working with marginalised communities/GTR populationsand history of activism

4.1.4 Knowledge of denominational/faith community’s stance on 57GTR and marginalised populations

4.1.5 Respondents’ personal motivation for working with GTR 61populations

4.1.6 Resistance/challenges to GTR faith-based action by fellow 67 faith practitioners (and responses to challenges)

4.1.7 Inter-faith engagement around GTR issues (challenges, 73barriers and similarities in approach)

5 Findings: depth interviews 755.1 Interviewees’ personal motivations for working with GTR

communities and impact of scripture/doctrine on theirpractice 76

5.2 The impact of working with GTR communities on individuals’ 92social justice practice and understanding

5.2.1 Explanations and personal understanding of differences 94between Jewish and Christian approaches to engaging withGTR affairs

5.2.2 Discussions and conclusions on interviewees’ approaches to 96 social justice/motivations for practice and experience ofinter-faith engagement around GTR campaigning/support

6 Conclusions 100Bibliography 106Appendix 1: E-survey instrument 116Appendix 2: Topic guide used for depth interviews 126

7

LIST OF TABLE/FIGURES

Figure 1: Age of respondents by gender 43

Figure 2: Duration of engagement with GTR communities 44

Figure 3: Cultural/religious identity of respondents 45

Figure 4: Fields of activity with GTR people 47

Figure 5: Contact with other faith/belief groups in GTR 49 initiatives

Figure 6: Activities undertaken 50

Figure 7: Autonomy in role by faith identity 52

Figure 8: Respondents’ knowledge of scriptural mandate 57 for social justice practice by faith/identity

Figure 9: Influential teaching/statements by respondent’s 60faith leader

Figure 10: Cultural or religious influences on work with 62GTR people

Figure 11: Belief in ethical or moral duty to work with 65GTR people

Table 1: Characteristics of participants in depth interviews 76

8

IntroductionThis dissertation, which sets out to explore the faith/doctrinally-based motivations

of individuals who identify as Jews or Christians in providing practical support to

Gypsy, Travellers and Roma (GTR) populations3. It is a combination of

opportunistic utilisation of my professional and personal contacts with activists

and academics in the field of Romani studies, combined with an attempt to make

sense of lengthy observation of the fact that that a significant number of activists

and professionals working with NGOs and EU agencies in the area of Roma

rights are ethnically Jewish, regardless of their level of religious observance.

On further discussion (for example at conferences and meetings) it became

apparent that a relatively large number of non-GTR supporters and activists

professed a religious belief as Christians, and hence the theme of this study was

conceived, located in the broad realm of social action and the ways in which

members of faith/ethno-cultural groups understand and engage with a ‘doing

justice’ (Klug, 2012). In the current instance, such activities are represented by a

case study viewed through the prism of challenging the inequalities experienced

by GTR people.

Whilst it is commonly recognised that Jews (whether practising or ‘secular’) are

over-represented in terms of engagement in social action, both in the practical

3 In line with current cultural and political usage in the UK, I use the following terms throughout thisdissertation: ‘Gypsy’ to refer to English/Welsh Romanichal communities who share a similar ethnicheritage to the Roma, albeit with distinct cultural variations; ‘Travellers’ to encompass all other groups ofnomadic people, or those of such ethnic origins, resident in the UK today, specifically indigenous Irish andScottish nomadic populations; and ‘Roma’ (a term that also encompasses the Sinti population) to refer toindividuals and communities resident until the enlargement of the EC in the 1990s (and subsequentwidespread migration to the West) predominantly in East and Central Europe. Both Roma and Romanichalpopulations are of Indic origin and they are first recorded in South East Europe around the 12th Century,with groups gradually migrating further West over the next 150 years (Kenrick, 2004). The term ‘Gypsy’ iswidely regarded as derogatory in Europe, but in the UK it is the identity term of choice amongstRomanichal populations, who are recorded as resident in mainland Britain from 1505 (Mayall, 2004)around 400 years after the first documentation of indigenous Scottish and Irish nomadic populations(Windstedt, 1913). In EU documentation, ‘Roma’ is utilised as a generic term to encompass all of theabove groups (see further Council of Europe ‘homepage’ entitled ’Making Human Rights for Roma areality: promoting social integration and respect for human rights’: http://hub.coe.int/what-we-do/human-rights/roma-and-travellers accessed 12/11/13).

9

sense and in the development of theoretical models (Waltzer, 1985; Yanklowitz,

2012; Sacks, 2005; Sinkoff, 2008), practising Christians have formed the

backbone of significant numbers of social justice initiatives in the 20th and 21st

centuries, challenging inequality and social ills in many locations around the

world. In these activities (perhaps more commonly than within Jewish

communities), Christians are frequently led by key figures amongst the clergy

who have utilised radical readings of scripture as a way of galvanising members

of their congregations to ‘link faith and justice’ (Holland & Henriot, 1983). This

has been done most famously, perhaps, through the mechanisms of Liberation

Theology, a doctrine condemned periodically by senior members of the Catholic

hierarchy for being too closely aligned to Marxism (e.g. Congregation for the

Doctrine of the Faith, 2007) but retaining huge international (and increasingly

inter-denominational) popularity. The movement has famously been defined as:

"An interpretation of Christian faith through the poor’s suffering, theirstruggle and hope, and a critique of society and the Catholic faith andChristianity through the eyes of the poor" (Berryman, 1987:4).

Accordingly, within the liberation theology model, adherence to the Christian faith

is inextricably bound up with praxis, creating transparency of motivation for social

action. In contrast, for other members of the same faith, volunteering initiatives

may be rooted in a less well defined, and more personal interpretation of moral

duty or a sense of ‘Christian justice’ (Forrester, 1997).

Regardless of denominational differences, or even the wider separations

between Eastern Orthodox Christianity and other branches of the faith, identity

as a Christian is dependent upon belief in Jesus as the Messiah. Alongside this

belief, it may be assumed that there are certain common assumptions around

some degree of adherence to a code of explicit ethical conduct and behaviours

(perhaps varying dependent on an individual’s specific denomination, such as in

relation to the consumption of alcohol). For Jews, the situation is more complex,

complicating the discussion on religious and scriptural motivations for

10

participating in social justice initiatives.

As Day (2009) notes, religion and ethnicity (and what these mean to the

individual) may be more a way of identifying with the norms, practices and history

of one’s community, as well as traditions grounded in personal relationships and

expectations, than an abstract construct of group membership. Accordingly, this

study explores the scriptural (and associated textual – e.g. Talmudic/Patristic)

basis for social justice action amongst both Christians and Jews, comparing and

contrasting respondents’ theological and ethical reasoning behind engagement

with such behaviours. In particular, in an attempt to thematically identify

faithbased4 variables in practice, activists’ reasons for electing to support GTR

populations over and above other marginalised or excluded groups are

considered.

Even leaving aside the thorny question of ‘who is a Jew’ (as defined by different

authorities and at different periods in history), ‘being a Jew’ is not dependent

upon worshipping as a Jew or believing in God or the efficacy of sets of practices

– it is more a mélange of socio-cultural-ethnic-faith factors. Thus, as noted

above, in the field of social activism, one may be as likely to encounter a bacon-

eating secularist deeply engaged in a broad range of civic actions that challenge

injustice, who will still, when asked, state unequivocally that they are ‘Jewish’.

Moreover, this person can, when questioned, typically go beyond reference to

political beliefs or a family/Jewish tradition of activism to refer to scriptural texts.

On some level, this justifies their commitment to equality, social justice and a

sense of personal moral responsibility, which leads to them seeking to change

the world for the better.

Accordingly, this study explores the scriptural (and associated textual – e.g.

Talmudic/Patristic) basis for social justice action amongst both Christians and

Jews (defined in both an ethnic and religious sense), comparing and contrasting

11

respondents’ theological and ethical reasoning behind engagement with such

behaviours. In particular, in an attempt to thematically identify faith-based4

variables in practice (e.g. similarity of historical experience of oppression and

racism; or a belief that the Roma are a people who are singled out to experience

an “outpouring of God’s love... to be the first to learn of an awakening of faith”

(Burrell, 2009:3)), the question is asked why activists have elected to support

GTR populations over and above other marginalised or excluded groups, often in

the face of some negativity from co-religionists who share common prejudices

against the communities with whom they work.

4 Hereafter when presenting data by ‘faith’ categories I include the data pertaining to allJewish vis-à-vis Christian respondents regardless of their level of religiosity of Jewishparticipants.

12

1 Context of researchGypsy, Traveller and Roma (GTR) communities (when counted as a whole) are

not only the largest ethnic minority community in Europe with over 80% of GTR

populations worldwide living in EU member states (FRA, 2009), but also one of

the oldest known minority ethnic populations in Europe, with a migration history

dating back nearly 1,000 years (Amnesty International, 2010). As has been well

documented, the Roma, as a collective group, experience significant levels of

exclusion across multiple domains throughout Europe and are a source of

particular political concern and policy initiatives at international level (for

example, the United Nations Human Rights Office convenes a Regional Working

Group on Roma, engaging with a number of European nation states to monitor

and theoretically ensure GTR peoples’ ability to exercise their human rights).

Despite Europe-wide initiatives, such as: the Decade of Roma Inclusion (2005–

2015); special requirements having being placed on A2 and A8 nations in relation

to their Roma populations prior to achieving membership of the EU (Greenfields,

2012; Humphris, 2013); and the European Council requirement that all nation

states prepare a Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up until

2020 (Goodwin & Buijs, 2013), Spirova and Budd (2008) stressed the limited

progress on social inclusion in many countries. This has resulted from delays in

the ratification of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on National

Minorities and general low level of political will to challenge the multiple

inequalities experienced by these populations.

In 2012 (FRA, 2012), there was still no evidence of significant levels of

improvement on any of the Framework domains. Indeed in many member states,

and in particular in Central and Eastern European countries with high Roma

populations, there has been a remarkable resurgence in anti-Roma racism,

manifesting in overtly racist discourse from Far Right politicians who utilise

imagery familiar from the 1930s, when such rhetoric was deployed freely against

Jews (Greenfields, 2012; Kahn-Harris et al, 2011; Ben Zion, 2013), whilst Roma

13

have increasingly been attacked at work or in their homes (resulting in murder in

some cases) with apparent impunity (Pogany, 2012).

The increase in anti-Roma racism and neo-fascist activities that focus on Roma

as ‘parasitic’ and ‘alien’, as well as the segregated education and health systems

enforced on these populations in some countries (Zed & Freidrich, 2009; FRA,

2013), has led to increased rates of migration to Western Europe in recent years

(Humphris, 2013; Barnett, 2013; Schmidt, 2013). Not only have expulsions to

countries of origin occurred here (contrary to EU law in a number of cases, see

Pogany, 2012), but there are also signs of increasing hostility to migrant Roma

within some sections of the media and amongst more marginalised members of

the existing communities who feel vulnerable to large-scale and rapid population

change (Cooper, 2013).

Overall, therefore, (even within the UK where British Gypsies and Travellers do

not, in the main, experience the level of violence and racism encountered

elsewhere – see Greenfields, 2012), GRT populations experience

marginalisation in education, health and employment terms and inequitable

outcomes across multiple domains of well-being. This pattern holds true even in

Nordic countries with relatively well defined integration and equality policies

(Kammerer & Pfohman, 2012). Unsurprisingly, it is correlated most strongly in

nation states where Roma experience significant levels of racist violence

(Schmidt, 2010) and state-mandated exclusion deployed by both right wing

parties and government agencies (FRA, 2012).

As both a practitioner and researcher, the author of this dissertation has

undertaken significant amounts of research with GRT populations in the UK over

the past 20 years. More recently, she has been involved in European-level policy

initiatives and reviews of the success of interventions aimed at integrating Roma

communities and challenging their exclusion. Accordingly, selection of the GRT

community in Europe as a population group with whom to explore faith activists’

14

engagement offered a unique opportunity to make use of existing networks

amongst social actors and NGO contacts within Europe, whilst bringing an

‘insider’s’ eye to bear on the challenges and practicalities involved for those

individuals balancing a ‘faith-based’ orientation with other professional duties.

These could be: employment by a non-denominational/secular agency; seeking

to work with GTR peoples as a result of employment by a faith group having only

recently come to the field of Romani studies; or (for a minority of respondents)

being both a member of the GTR population and also a person of faith/ethical

orientation.

1.1 Aims and objectives

The primary aim of this piece of research is to gain an understanding of

Christian and Jewish respondents’ explanations of the spiritual and ethical beliefs

that underpin their social action with GTR peoples, with particular reference to

primary scriptural/doctrinal materials, as well as Talmudic and Patristic writings

on the themes of social justice.

Subsidiary aims are:

a) To consider whether the trope of similar/shared historical experience of

discrimination offers an explanatory category for activism that is separate from,

or entwined with, scriptural/doctrinal explanations for working with GTR peoples.

b) To identify what (if any) key influential statements or pronouncements

have been issued by faith leaders within the various traditions that can be utilised

in support of challenging injustice experienced by GTR peoples.

Key objectives of this research consist of:

Identifying similarities and differences between the various categories of

respondents in their selection of influential shared texts (e.g. from the

15

Hebrew Bible/Old Testament).

Documenting, comparing and contrasting respondents’ experiences of

intra-faith/community reactions to their work with GTR people and

identifying (as far as possible) if any particular faith community

demonstrates a greater level of support for, and understanding of, the

challenges faced by GTR populations.

Considering the extent of respondent actors’ activities in, and inter-faith

engagement around, supporting other marginalised communities to

enable identification of whether their activities are focused purely on GTR

communities or are part of a wider pattern of social action.

Reviewing the scope and location of inter-faith contact between

respondent Christians, Jews and those of other faiths5 who engage in

‘social action’ initiatives (e.g. volunteering to support GTR populations;

prison visiting; working with refugees and asylum seekers), with the intent

of identifying explanatory categories based on community membership or

type of activity/professional role.

5 A small number of respondents reported membership of other faith groups e.g. Buddhist andMuslim, or those who identified as ‘spiritual’/‘atheist’. Whilst these findings are included in theinitial tables presented in this dissertation, as a result of word constraints the main discussionhas had to focus on similarities and differences in response between Christian and Jewishparticipants. This unfortunately means that a number of variables have not been treated to

16

2 Epistemological approach/selection of methodologyThe design of this mixed methods study comprising a small-scale (40

respondents) survey and depth interviews with six participants is rooted in an

epistemological approach, unashamedly biased towards inductive reasoning and

social constructivism (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994). The key assumptions

underpinning the adopted epistemological approach concerns the suitability of

such methods, which focus on how knowledge and understanding and the

participants’ world view of their actions are constructed through a shared

narrative (predicated in the current case on belief in a particular socio-cultural or

faith-based approach to social justice, as well as the nature of ‘God’ and personal

identity – be that Christian, Jew, Buddhist or some other faith). Utilising such an

epistemological approach suggests a presumption by the researcher that

engagement with the research participant (whether during a face-to-face

interview or by creating a particular set of questions and free-text boxes within a

survey labeled as ‘faith-based’) affects the discourse, findings and also the

nature of the explanatory categories constructed between the parties, as does

‘local understanding’ (Denzin, 1994) of context and shared language (cultural

and/or linguistic) pertaining to faith and social action.

Adoption of this mode of enquiry indicates a rejection (in this particular context)

of positivist epistemological models, which whilst appropriate for the production

of ordinal values, are of limited relevance in formulating knowledge about the

motivations of interviewees. Whilst this study includes the use of a survey

enabling the collection of certain demographic data (age, gender, duration of

activism and other categories suitable for numeric analysis, and also requires the

selection of one of a number of fixed responses (albeit in places allowing the

option of ‘other’)), this research is far from occupying a traditionally quantitative

paradigm whilst equally failing to conform to expectations of ‘pure’ qualitative

research.

analysis and discussion in this current paper.

17

Despite what might appear to a purist apparent shortcomings in failing to adhere

to a single coherent methodological approach, Hammersley (1999), often

regarded as a ‘dyed in the wool’ qualitative researcher, proposes that research

as ‘bricolage’ has its place, requiring the researcher to utilise whatever tools are

at hand to appropriately enable them to seek to gain a sense of a situation. Given

the impracticalities of undertaking this small-scale study within particular

constraints (including the geographical spread of respondents) I have therefore

elected to operationalise a mixed methods approach, defined by Creswell and

Plano Clark (2007: 5) as one that:

“Involves philosophical assumptions that guide the direction of the

collection and analysis of data and the mixture of qualitative and

quantitative approaches in many phases in the research process. As a

method, it focuses on collecting, analyzing, and mixing both quantitative

and qualitative data in a single study”.

In the succeeding section of this chapter, the processes of the research design

and methods utilised are expounded upon further.

2.1 Research design/methodsAs noted earlier, this study consists of three phases: a background literature

review, a survey (comprising closed/fixed response questions suitable for the

production of ordinal data as well as a number of selected ‘open questions’,

which could be treated to qualitative analysis), followed up by a limited number of

depth interviews to provide richer context to thematic findings identified via the

survey phase. Thus, the study design enables the development of a background

theoretical framework located in extant writings on faith-based social action; a

more substantive focus on respondents’ engagement with GTR communities (via

survey data), and the ability to drill down in detail (with particular reference to the

experiences and motivations of ‘clergy’ and individuals working in particular

18

service delivery contexts) through the mechanism of depth interviews. Using

these range of methods permits triangulation of findings (Bryman, 2001); a term

used in the current context to refer to a strategy that enables the consideration of

multiple perspectives of the same phenomena (faith-based social action with

excluded groups) considered through the analysis of different data sources

(Denzin, 2006:5).

2.1.1 Literature reviewThe research commenced with a literature review (treated to a second and third

sweep for recently published data at the mid-point of the research and again

during the writing up phase).

In addition to careful reading of core text already known to the researcher that

deal with matters of faith and social justice (e.g. Heschel, 2001) and perusal of

easily accessible materials such as Pirke Avot (Kravitz & Olitzky, 1993) and the

King James Bible (Oxford World Classic, 2008), web-based tools including

Google Scholar, Academia.edu and EU policy sites (with a particular emphasis

on Roma) were utilised to identify relevant materials and links to articles of

interest. A number of respondents to the survey or who participated in depth

interviewers were able to provide information in relation to specific texts

produced by faith leaders or central authorities pertaining to social justice and/or

GTR communities in particular.

Use was made of the University Library ‘LibrarySearch+’ tool to identify relevant

materials for download or manual library search and review for relevance. Search

terms entered into the databases included the following: ‘faith-based’; ‘social

action’; ‘Christian-Jewish’; ‘Roma’; ‘Gypsy’; ‘Ethics’; ‘Social Justice’; ‘Tzedekah’;

‘Liberation Theology’; ‘Roma Holocaust’; ‘faith’; ‘racism’ and combinations of the

above to identify a wide range of relevant materials. In addition, specialist

resources were accessed, such as the Gypsy Lore Society (GLS) archives and

19

database (held at Liverpool University and available only to GLS members). As a

result of the publicity pertaining to this study disseminated within specialist

networks such as the GLS and Romani-Studies email list, some colleagues

forwarded on diverse helpful materials (e.g. copies of articles published in

relatively obscure or international journals, suggestions for links to agencies,

comment pieces or useful websites). In addition, I sought out ‘grey literature’

produced on behalf of, or by, agencies such as the Irish Chaplaincy Traveller

Projects, or materials recommended by professional and academic contacts who

proposed that I contact particular agencies to ask about their activities.

In addition to materials identified above or already known to the author (e.g.

those referring explicitly to the social and political situation of GTR communities),

observation was made of current news stories in relation to the populations such

as the October 2013 furore pertaining to Romanian Roma migration to the UK

and the almost simultaneous series of international stories relating to the

apparent ‘abduction’ of ‘blonde’ (hence perceived of as non-Roma given ‘dark’

parents) children who did not apparently seem related to their carers and who

were thus removed by social services and police departments prior to DNA

testing to establish parentage.

After collating the materials and a preliminary swift review of relevance, a

selection of publications and other materials was then made for inclusion or

further consultation whilst writing up this study (see Bibliography).

2.1.2 Survey design and distributionA draft survey instrument comprising a mixture of open and closed questions

designed to: capture demographic data; enable a basic understanding of the

fields of work in which participants were engaged; and also to provide space for

qualitative comments was designed and piloted via a closed call to six pre-

selected respondents (known to the researcher through professional networks)

who were known to identify as either Jewish or Christian and who had a

20

substantial history of working with GTR people internationally. The survey was

made available via SurveyMonkey for ease of completion/download and analysis.

The instrument permitted respondents to merely provide basic responses or

include additional information that would permit a more nuanced understanding

of their motivations, actions and membership of networks, as well as inter-

cultural/inter-faith engagement across professional, religious and social domains.

Following receipt of these six responses and review of comments (all participants

were experienced researchers, which assisted in obtaining feedback on the ‘flow’

of the questions), minor changes were made to the pilot questionnaire –

predominantly including ‘other’ or amending the Survey Monkey format to permit

‘skipping’ of non-relevant responses.

The e-survey (see Appendix 1) was then distributed widely via two specialist

email lists. It was sent to personal contacts with a request that they passed the

‘e-survey’ link and attached information materials onto their networks or complete

the survey themselves, and a request for participants was inserted into the

newsletter of the Gypsy Lore Society.

Despite some initial considerable interest and emails from potential respondents

requesting further information, only a relatively low level of respondents was

achieved overall (40 in total), although a stream on Roma and faith/religious

practices was initiated at an international conference in response to the email

traffic that arose following publicity for this study.

A request was made by one email-list participant to translate the questionnaire

into Italian as the individual would then be able to distribute it to the relatively

significant number of Italian speaking faith groups/individual activists working

with migrant and ‘camp-dwelling’ Roma throughout Italy. Following this request, a

professional translation of the questionnaire was commissioned. Unfortunately,

21

sending out this Italian version of the survey and arranging that responses would

be received and translated back into English by the translator failed to achieve

any additional responses.

A final ‘chase-up’ and participant call was sent out via an email list circulated to

participants at a House of Commons event on Roma migration two weeks prior to

writing up, which drew a further two responses. The survey was closed for replies

two weeks in advance of the submission date of the dissertation, eight months

after it was opened to ‘public’ response.

2.1.3 Depth interviewsAfter receiving 15 completed questionnaires and following preliminary analysis of

thematic responses of the survey data, a topic guide was drawn up for use in

depth interviews. This semi-structured interview guide (presented at Appendix 2)

explores a number of areas identified a priori as likely to be relevant in terms of

identifying trends and themes even amongst such an opportunistic, non-

randomised sample. For example, questions were asked relating to personal

history and the impact that had on engaging with GRT populations, whether

interviewees identify the communities as ‘different’ in some way from other

marginalised groups (and if so, in what ways in particular), as well as a range of

questions that explored personal religiosity and other influences on social justice

behaviours.

Selecting individuals to participate in depth interviews was, to some extent,

opportunistic: geographic proximity; level of English language skills; and the date

at which they indicated their willingness to be interviewed (all depth interviews

were completed at least five weeks prior to ‘writing up’ to allow time for

transcription and analysis) all played a part in the selection of this sample.

In addition, an attempt was made to obtain a reasonable gender balance and

equal number of Jewish and Christian respondents, with priority given to

22

individuals working in explicitly faith-based roles (or in the case of two Jewish

interviewees in explicitly Jewish-supported contexts, see Chapter 4). The

majority of respondents are, therefore, UK-based with English as their first

language. By fortuitous chance, which arose from the researcher being engaged

on a short-term unrelated project in Hungary during the early summer of 2013, it

proved possible through the good offices of agencies and practitioners working

with Roma activists to undertake two depth interviews with informants who would

not otherwise have been able to share their narratives as neither were fluent in

English, although one had some understanding of spoken English and could

speak the language to a certain extent. During these interviews, reliance was

placed upon translation services kindly provided by a tri-lingual activist and NGO

advisor who is currently undertaking her PhD and is thus familiar with academic

requirements and interview techniques.

Of the six depth interviews, all but one was audio taped after fully informed

consent had been obtained from participants and information provided on their

ability to withdraw from the study at any time. No incentives were provided to

respondents to encourage participation.

The one interview that was not audio taped took place with a Hungarian (Jewish)

Shoah survivor who was clear that whilst he was willing to discuss certain

aspects of his work with Roma, he would not speak at all about his personal

experiences in the Camps. (Albeit these had, as became apparent during the

interview, impacted on his decision to devote his retirement, as well as some of

his working life to supporting Roma people to obtain reparation for their

experiences during the War, as well as his decision to engage extensively with

Roma youth and support families in asylum cases/claims for housing and access

to other civil rights.)

An attempt was also made to interview Jewish activists working with Roma in

Berlin during a short visit to that city during the same work-related trip, but

23

unfortunately this was not successful. Accordingly, the sample treated to depth

interview comprised ultimately, three Jewish and three Christian respondents, of

which three were members of the clergy (two Christian and one Jewish).

2.2 Analysis of dataOne main advantage of using SurveyMonkey data collection tools is that

subscription to the fuller version of the service enables demographic and ordinal

data to be downloaded into Excel format. In addition, the programme contains

the potential to automatically generate tables and charts that demonstrate

characteristics of respondents in a variety of formats. Use of simple cross-tabs

for analytical purposes is also possible and these are operationalised by utilising

the built-in analytical tools embedded within SurveyMonkey. Cross-tab analysis

has been undertaken where appropriate to add depth to certain thematic

analyses and resultant discussions, which are presented in Chapters Four and

Five.

‘Framework analysis’ (Ritchie & Spencer, 2003) was used to enable inductive,

thematic analysis of qualitative data garnered throughout the research process.

‘Framework’ is a matrix-based form of analysis with which the researcher already

has familiarity and was identified as suitable for use in this study – both when

considering the qualitative comments from the survey sample and also the raw

data gathered during the depth interviews – resulting from its potential to offer

enough flexibility to deal with a priori identified themes (e.g. faith identification as

underpinning social action) and newly emergent clusters and coding groups

pertaining to identity, age, approach to GRT peoples, etc.

Secondary analysis of the findings using Framework reconfigured differently,

may potentially also lead to subsequent coding of literature, specialist web-based

materials and even texts referenced in this study to gain a deeper and more

nuanced picture of both policy approaches and faith groups/activists’ practices

and conceptualizations of working with GRT peoples, and it is intended that this

24

exercise will be undertaken in due course. For the current purposes, however,

only the qualitative data (from both questionnaires and depth interviews) has

been treated to framework analysis to identify a set of themes and concepts,

presented in Chapters Four and Five.

2.3 Strengths and limitations of the studyAs has been discussed above, this study suffers from a number of limitations –

not least that it has ‘outgrown’ the word length given the amount of data gathered

from an extensive literature review, 40 participant survey and series of depth

interviews. In the word limit permitted for this study, it is therefore only possible to

touch upon some findings lightly and to provide more in-depth analysis of certain

key themes that have been identified by triangulation of data sources.

More seriously perhaps, a major limitation concerns the fact that no coherent

data gathering strategy has been utilised (over and beyond self-selection of

respondents from those who received information pertaining to this study and

who by definition were connected to, or members of, certain Romani studies e-

lists – or who were subject to ‘snowballing’ (non-probability sampling) via contact

with those who are members of the researcher’s immediate networks (Denzin,

2006)). Accordingly, this means that the samples are likely to bear more

resemblance to each other than differences (Bryman, 2001) and that early

recruits who have disseminated information may have a particular influence on

the type of people accessed. That the language of the survey was English (other

than the failed attempt to access Italian speaking participants outlined above)

creates a further limitation, as does the (initial) bias towards those working in

academic fields and with whom the researcher thus had shared points of contact

prior to commencing the study.

Moreover, the limited number of depth interviews (recruited within the parameters

discussed above) and exclusion of some 75% of those who indicated a

willingness to participate in a follow-up interview means that the findings may

25

potentially have been significantly different had a more representative (or at least

differently constituted) sample been achieved.

There are further criticisms that may be levelled at the methods used: the

selection of those individuals who participated in depth interviews, (i.e. the

preponderance of clergy and UK-based individuals, as well as those working in

professional settings with a generally high level of education); and that in relation

to one individual (the ‘Camp survivor’) the interview did not include all elements

included in the topic guide. Moreover, for this particular gentleman, given the lack

of a recorded interview it is self-evident that analysis is dependent upon the

quality of the researcher’s contemporaneous handwritten notes, which are

themselves documentation of the translator’s phrasing.

However, regardless of the complexities’ and limitations of the methodologies

outlined above, it is suggested that a significant strength to this research is the

uniqueness of this study, in that the author (and their network of contacts) is

unaware of any project that is remotely similar in terms of seeking to explore the

motivations of self-identified ‘faith-based’ activists engaged in GTR people. It is

suggested in the information materials attached to the questionnaire that the

findings could form a pilot for another more in-depth study and it is clear from

reviewing the data that a number of themes have arisen, which could take any

future study in a variety of different ways, not least, with regard to the potential to

develop a European-wide network of activists able to utilise theological argument

to challenge anti-Gypsy/anti-Roma racism.

This study makes no claim to be representative, however the rich, thick

descriptive data (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005) obtained through the use of mixed

methods (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007) triangulate with, and complement the

suggestive findings from the survey and literature reviewed to provide a unique

contribution to our understanding of the motivations and articulation of social

justice practices with communities ‘at risk’ or facing marginalisation and racism,

26

as articulated by a particular group of Jewish, Christian and other faith activists.

That this study has allowed these narratives to emerge and has identified

coherent patterns of findings, is in itself a strength, albeit that considerable scope

exists for follow-up, more nuanced research.

3 The Literature ReviewThe relatively short literature review sets out a number of key texts relevant to

the concepts of social action grounded in faith identity and religious practice,

focusing explicitly on Christian and Jewish texts/approaches. Perhaps

unsurprisingly (see Chapter 4), whilst the majority of respondents to the survey

explicitly refer to the primary sources (e.g. chapters from the Bible/Tanakh and

Apostles/Prophets, only certain individuals – generally those working in faith-

environments or who are members of the clergy/religious orders – cite Talmudic

or Patristic materials or doctrinal/position statements when exploring the

underpinnings of their social justice action.

This finding is indicative of the proposition that many activists who identify with a

particular faith are likely to ground their social justice activities in a combination of

relative familiarity, with core (primary) texts. In their every-day actions, however,

they rely more on an assimilated group identity (Billig & Tajfel, 1973) as a

Christian or Jew (or indeed another faith) with textual/religiously mandated social

justice behaviours unself-consciously assimilated into their own identity as

something positive, which a member of their community does that fulfil ethical,

and communally expected behaviours (Bruce, 2001). A case in point might be

the growing popularity of Mitzvah Day, which emerged in the Jewish context and

is now gaining popularity amongst other faiths6. In support of this thesis,

6 Mitzvah Day was initiated in 2005 as a way of encouraging social action by Jews of all agesand abilities. By 2008, it was a registered charity and in 2013 it has over 25,000 individualsparticipating world-wide in various activities including increasingly number of inter-faith projectshttp://www.mitzvahday.org.uk/. Activities that have emerged in other faith contexts may berebranded to make them more accessible to different faith groups i.e. ‘Sadaqa’ when undertakenby or with Muslims (see Oliver, 2013).

27

Durkheim (1912/71) suggests that at regular points in time, every society seeks

to uphold certain values that give it unity, sentiment and personality. A good

example might also be the way in which ‘Crisis at Christmas’ and similar appeals

in the UK are generally successful in raising funds and attracting volunteers

through mobilising ethical behaviours around a socio-religious festival, despite

the majority of donors probably being ‘nominally Christian’ with faith associated

vaguely with membership of a particular national or ethnic group membership

(Storm, 2011; Demarath, 2000), rather than impinging on their daily life.

The remainder of this Chapter, therefore, presents not only seminal scriptural

texts and commentary pertaining to the marginalised, poor and oppressed, but

also a selection of more recent interpretations of the ‘call to justice’ by Christian

and Jewish ethical writers, statements by central religious authorities in relation

to GTR peoples (most noticeably emanating from the Roman Catholic Church)

and news articles in which calls for solidarity or action are rooted in religious or

ethno-cultural terms.

3.1 Primary sources (scriptural)Explicit references to social justice and duties towards the vulnerable and poor

are embedded throughout the Tanakh/Bible and the resultant 613 mitzvot

identified in Jewish tradition. The mitzvot are traditionally recognized as divided

between those affecting relationships between people (and treatment of

animals/birds and other living things) and those pertaining to the relationship

between Israel and God, whilst some combine both elements e.g. regulation

pertaining to Shabbat laws which are explicitly framed so as to avoid the abuse

and overwork of both animals and people. In this way in the Jewish and

subsequent Christian tradition, ethical behaviours are inextricably linked to

worship and relationship with God – a theme that arose (see Chapter 4) in

several interviews and survey responses.

Within the Christian tradition, too, the Decalogue (Exodus. 20, 24:12,34;

28

Deuteronomy. 5), or at least those elements which are not perceived of as

‘ritualistic’ and thus superceded by New Testament pronouncements (Acts. 15;

Galatians. 3), are regarded as providing core ethical guidance in relation to

attitudes towards truth and elements of intra-societal relations. This set of shared

values are not only rooted in Jewish/Christian concepts of ethical behaviour, but

are also inherently rooted in the civic-legal systems of much of the Western world

(Berman, 2000; Herman, 2011).

In the Tanakh/Bible, the notion of just treatment of the poor and the oppressed is

a recurrent trope. This is most noticeable in the legal code in Deuteronomy,

passages in the Psalms and the pronouncements in Nevi'im/Prophets

(particularly Isaiah; Jeremiah, Amos and Micah), whom Heschel (2001:12)

praises as “iconoclasts, challenging the apparently holy, revered and awesome”.

In so doing, they are seen to disrupt the status quo by exposing the illusions,

fraud and moral bankruptcy present in their society, finding resonance with many

modern social activists who are challenged by evident inequalities in their own

communities. In the Psalms too (i.e. Psalms. 14:21; 21:3; 82:3, 99:4, 112:9) we

find it is repeatedly stressed that action is required to be a just person. In the

context of the Tanakh, ethical behaviour requires a positive participation in

community life, it is not enough to refrain from doing ill – a theme revisited in the

Talmud (see below).

Deuteronomy 10 links justice to the overarching themes of welfare of the

improverished and care of the stranger: “he executes justice for the fatherless

and the widow, and loves the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of

Egypt”. The demanding cry in Deuteronomy 10 of “Justice, justice shall you

pursue", is echoed in Jeremiah 22.3, who demands that we should “deliver the

one who has been robbed of his power from his oppressor. Do not mistreat…the

stranger, the orphan or the widow”.

Moreover, the great central drama of the Exodus (for Jews re-enacted every

29

Pesach) requires the personalisation of memory of oppression and servitude,

coupled with the narrative of transformatory liberation and a requirement to tell

and retell the story to ensure that it is never forgotten (Exodus. 23:20, 23:9;

Leviticus. 19:34, and Deuteronomy. 10:19). Indeed at Exodus 23.9 the command

not to oppress others is rooted in a reminder of Israel’s own experiences in

slavery.

In addition to the Old Testament sources on social justice (reinforced in many

places in the Gospels, for example: Matthew. 5:17 in which Jesus states that he

came to fulfil the law and the prophets) Christian Biblical writings (New

Testament, Acts and Epistles) stress repeatedly that Christian agape requires the

enacting of equity and social justice (e.g. Luke 3:11; 6:20-26; 14:12-14; 1 John.

3:17). The ‘golden rule’ (Matthew. 7:12) whereby Jesus reiterates The Shema

(Leviticus. 19:18) once again emphasises the importance of valuing other as

highly as oneself; a theme repeated throughout the New Testament: as in “As

each one has received a gift, use it to serve one another as good stewards of

God’s varied grace” (Peter. 4:7-11). Thus, the foundational texts of both Jews

and Christians are resplendent with references to the positive duty to aid the poor

and the oppressed, with the Christian Bible having been estimated as containing

over 2,000 references to social justice and the plight of the poor (The Bible

Society, 2008).

3.2 Secondary sources3.2.1 Key commentary on scriptural sources e.g. Talmud and Patristic

literature

Beyond the explicit focus on deeds within the Bible/Tanakh, the Talmud (and

Patristic literature) provides significant guidance on how a Christian (or Jew)

should behave to fulfil their ethical duties. Both faiths make demands on

adherents, but for Jews in particular, the obligation to pursue justice and charity

(tzedakah) is coupled with the requirement to seek to heal the broken world

(tikkun olam), a theme to which considerable attention is paid within the 63

30

Tractates of the Talmud. “You are not required to complete the work, yet you are

not allowed to desist from it”. (Pirkei Avot , 2:21)

Accordingly, whilst the Talmud may state that Hillel’s ‘Golden Rule’ is the cardinal

principle of the Jewish law (Shab. 31a; Ab. R. N., text B, xxvi), Akiba: "Whatever

thou hatest to have done unto thee do not unto thy neighbor; wherefore do not

hurt him; do not speak ill of him” (Ab. R. N., text B, xxvi, xxix, xxx, xxxiii),

associated midrash stresses that: "As the All-present is called compassionate

and gracious so be you also compassionate and gracious and offering thy gifts

freely to all" (Sotah 14a; Sifre, Deuteronomy. section 49). Such gifts may include

sharing knowledge and skills (the act of benevolence: Sukkah 49b) so as to fulfil

the duty to ‘heal the world’ (Yalkut on Judges 4:1; Gittin 61a), as well as sharing

food, tending the sick and burying the dead of those without means to do so,

regardless of their faith. Moreover, the Talmud indicates that wanderers and the

indigent should be provided with an allowance of food and a place to stop to

assist with immediate needs (Tanhuma, Shemot, ed. Buber, p. 43a; Tosefta

Peah 4:8–13; Baba Batra 8a, 9b). In some traditions, in particular that of

followers of the Kabbalistic 16th Century mystic Rabbi Isaac Luria, the call to

tikkun olam is imbued with great moral significance so that even small acts of

engagement with social justice are seen as part of a greater religious work.

Perhaps most succinctly summing up the call to duty and tikkun olam embedded

in Talmud, the Holocaust survivor and political activist Elie Weisel (1981:43)

phrased it thus: “When it comes to helping someone in need, do not rely on

prayer alone. Let the person in need pray, not you, your task is to help". In the

following section, we see how this is interpreted by a number of modern

commentators on Jewish social justice.

The early Christian (patristic) commentary on social justice, whilst not so

extensive as the Jewish literature, demonstrates an ongoing preoccupation with

poverty and oppression, drawing upon themes from the Gospels, Acts and

31

Epistles (Oden, 2007). Saint Basil the Great, writing in the 4th century (2009)

produced a series of five great sermons that focused on issues of wealth, poverty

and inequality. In Homily 6, drawing upon the Gospel of Luke 12, he preached

powerfully in terms similar to that of the Prophets of the Old Testament on the

duty to care for those less fortunate, stating that: “Acts of charity made from

unjust gains are not acceptable to God, nor are those who refrain from injustice

praiseworthy if they do not share what they have” (2009:107), and accusing the

rich who do not take steps to support the homeless, the hungry and ill-clothed as

being “guilty of injustice toward as many as you may have aided and did not”

(2009:109). Similarly the 1999 edition of the sermons of St John Chrysostom (2nd

century Antioch) emphasises how Chrysostom remonstrated repeatedly against

those with means to aid others who failed to do so:

“There is nothing more chilling than the sight of a Christian who makes no

effort to save others, from which effort we are exempted neither by poverty

nor lowliness nor bodily infirmity. To make weakness an excuse for hiding

our Christian light is as insulting to God as to say that He could not make

the sun shine” (1999: ).

In contrast to the Talmudic pronouncements on a duty of care to all those within

the purview of Jewish communities, the themes of alleviating poverty and

oppression, and a Christian duty to the marginalised and oppressed that are

found in the early Christian writings appears to focus overwhelmingly on the need

to aid church members, rather than the more universalistic emphasis given in the

Jewish and Biblical (New Testament) texts. It is evident however from the survey

data and recent literature on faith-based social action (below) that the theology of

Christian social justice has moved (in the main) towards a more universalist

stance.

32

3.2.2 General (modern) materials on faith-based social justice/ethicspertaining to racial minorities/social exclusion

The materials revealed by a search on the subjects of Jewish and Christian

social justice (utilising the search terms detailed above) returned over 4,000 hits

(books and articles). Extending the search to include the terms ‘racism’ or ‘anti-

racist’ with the main search terms interestingly revealed an approximate rate of

content (identified crudely by faith group) as 2:1 Christian/Jewish in focus. Given

the vast array of texts it is only possible to touch lightly upon a very few key

readings undertaken whilst reading for this dissertation, of these, hardly any

focus on the situation of GTR communities, with publications pertaining to these

groups significantly more likely to be found categorised under policy and politics

(Margalit, 1996), or of historical interest (Rosenhaft, 2011). Texts that deal

explicitly with faith and GTR peoples are almost exclusively focused on the

growth of evangelism within the communities (Foszto & Kiss, 2012; Thurfjell,

2013), rather than social justice concerns or faith-group support in relation to

exclusion.

A number of reviewed texts are authored (or edited) by rabbis working in

American communities (Yanklowitz, 2012; Dorff, 2002, 2005). These volumes

typically frame the central motif as a “Jewish call for justice” (Rose et al, 2008) or

operate as a ‘primer’ to engage Jews in “pursuing social justice through Jewish

Law and Tradition” (Jacobs, 2009), rooting concerns for particular groups of

marginalised peoples (e.g. the homeless; the poor; in America those without

access to adequate health care) with reference to Scriptural and Talmudic

writings interwoven with contributors’ personal narratives of social action. A

typical trope consists of emphasising how the authors have engaged more

deeply with their faith as they came to “bring sacred text into dialogue with real-

life experience and political struggles” (Jacobs, 2009:2).

A numerically relatively significant group of publications consist of those by

Jewish philosophers preoccupied by the notion of a ‘moral contract’ between

33

Jews and wider society, located in the revolutionary nature of a call to justice for

those outside of the community and the moral responsibility arising from such a

role (Arkush, 2008; Novak, 1992: specifically the Introduction). Klug (2012), an

activist-scholar, focuses rather more than some other authors/editors on issues

of race and injustice. Utilising his training as a moral philosopher, he locates

much of his work in political controversy, debates on the nature of identity and

how socio-communal expectations (e.g. around Israel/Palestine) may create

pressure on an activist to adhere to a particular view or disengage from

challenging areas of social justice; a theme revisited in some interviews. Of value

in considering practical aspects of social action with GRT populations, in chapter

fifteen, Klug (2012: 225-239) explores the issue of solidarity with marginalised

communities who may equate external markers of Jewish ’success’ with

privilege, power and lack of understanding of their lived reality, creating mutual

misrecognition.

As a general observation on this field of literature, texts by Reform/Liberal Jewish

authors (whether rabbinic or lay) are more explicitly focused on discourse around

particular forms of action and categories of persons requiring support, whilst

Orthodox scholars (e.g. Borowitz & Schwart, 1999) tend to be both significantly

more erudite (grounded in finely nuanced readings of Talmudic literature and

Hassidic texts) and less concerned with specific present day examples. Sacks

(2005:5), exploring the macro-level of Jewish ethical behaviour suggests that the

nub of Jewish social action concerns the duty to:

“Make a difference, to mend the fractures of the world, a day at a time, an

act at a time, for as long as it takes to make it a place of justice and

compassion where the lonely are not alone, the poor not without help;

where the cry of the vulnerable is heeded and those who are wronged are

heard”.

Texts on social justice written from a Christian viewpoint inevitably share a

34

number of similarities and emphases with Jewish authors, typically selecting the

same Old Testament verses on which to base their demands for greater equality

in society. Interpretations however of the Gospel and other New Testament texts

pertaining to poverty, salvation and a focus on how Jesus would have behaved in

particular situations, or in relation to ‘outcast’ and marginalised individuals

(Burrell, 2009; Dawson, 2002; Tanner, 1992; Hjelm, 2011) have led some

Christians to an emphasis on social action.

This is at odds with some co-religionists’ belief that the self-evident infallibility of

the transcendental ‘design’ requires non-intervention over issues of redistributive

justice. Indeed for proponents (mainly American evangelical) of the doctrine of

‘prosperity theology’ those who are poor or marginalised are in that position

because of their ‘sinfulness’ (Coleman, 2000).

Thakur (1996:44), mapping (at Chapter 3) the influence of liberation theology

from the 20th century onwards, its relationship to shifting political regimes and

Vatican II, as well as the theological and philosophical roots of its challenge to a

more ‘traditional’ Christian emphasis on spiritual liberation, problematises the role

of faith in public policy debate, suggesting that this may not be an appropriate

role for religion. Whilst Stackhouse (1984:6) concurs that “modern ideas of

human rights are not related to religion at all, but are a product of quite different

forces,” he goes on to indicate that:

“Human rights are religious in this sense: each view of human rights

entails an ultimate metaphysical-moral vision about what is

meaningful…and what social ethic should be followed in order to prevent

chaos, social alienation and tyranny”.

Christian theology therefore offers a starker dichotomy in relation to social action

than the Jewish tradition, with different strands of thought existing across both

Catholic and Protestant denominations. Perhaps because there is no central

35

authority such as the Vatican, evangelical groups divide between communities

that embed clear social justice agendas into their mission in imitation of Christ

and early Church practice, and those who, broadly speaking, can be defined as

‘right-wing’, non-interventionists.

As a crude generalisation, taking their lead both from the liberation theology

movement and recent Popes (Beigel, 1997, and below re Vatican publications)

Catholic theologians have emphasised the importance of engaging theology in

both practical enactments of social justice (for example providing food to the

hungry) and entering into the domain of public policy debate (Holland & Henriot,

1983; Kammer, 2013) with the claim to the right to engage with policy discourse

and the realm of politics typically located in such statements as “racial

prejudice…denies equal dignity of all members of the human family and

blasphemes the Creator” (Kammer, 2013:1).

Christian philosopher-activists of other (often Anglican) denominations share a

number of similarities with Liberation Theologists, but tend more modestly to

propose that considering policy from a Christian standpoint may offer a

counterpoint to prevailing nation-state practice through using theological tools to

monitor whether and how God’s creation is respected (Forrester; 1997; Tanner,

1992). To this end, one Anglican churchman suggests that if Christians and world

religions are “oblivious to the world’s social injustice and suffering… in practice

their neutrality amounts to a political stance, and by default, to support for the

status quo” (St John, 1985:170).

In the concluding section of this dissertation (Chapter 6), which draws together

the key research findings, the theme of faith-based political and policy

involvement is revisited and reference made to the inherent potential of faith

groups in delivering ‘service’ and building social capital through manifesting ‘faith’

within the public domain (Wood & Warren, 2002; Wood, 2009).

36

3.2.3 Position statements by religious leaders/central authoritiespertaining to Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (GTR) and othermarginalised or ‘racially excluded’ populations

Repeat literature searches for position statements published by the main

Christian and Jewish authorities found strikingly that the Roman Catholic Church

was the only faith group to have singled out the duties of members of the Faith to

engage consistently with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (Pontifical Council for

the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, 2005; Pope John Paul II,

1989). That both the speech by the Pope and the Curial document go further

than treatment of Roman Catholic GTR people (even indicating that ‘new faith

movements’ may have their role to play in supporting the communities) is

remarkable.

Within the 2005 text, Catholic clergy are urged to concentrate on both theological

and ecclesiological aspects of the ministry, whilst reference is made to the fact

that the document has been reviewed by Gypsy communicants themselves.

There is an emphasis on the fact that care goes beyond that of the spirit and

must also relate to the physical well-being of GTR peoples. An emphasis is also

placed on the need to bring to the attention of public authorities the

circumstances of marginalised GTR communities whilst ensuring that GTR

peoples themselves take a leading role in determining their needs and forms of

worship. It is from initiatives such as this that the Travellers’ Chaplaincy (UK) and

Catholic Association for Racial Justice (CARJ) draw their authority, including the

ability to create a central hub (for example an annual Conference for

clergy/religious and lay people working with Travellers is held bi-annually under

the auspices of CARJ in the UK) for priests and other community members

ministering to the communities.

In contrast, despite the best efforts of individual Rabbis or Jewish NGOs (see, for

example, Chapter 4) there has been no clear statement or response to the plight

of GTR people from communal authorities such as the Board of Deputies in the

37

UK, the Conference of European Rabbis, or Chief Rabbis in countries in Central

and East Europe experiencing the rise of the Far Right. In part, this reluctance to

make an authoritative statement may relate to the modes of communal

organisation in which Rabbis are employed by and in many ways answerable to,

their congregations, rather than a central authority that exists in the Anglican or

Roman Catholic churches in the UK and elsewhere.

Whilst individual clergy (e.g. Zed & Freidrich, 2009) have made statements

decrying the racial exclusion experienced by Roma people, and certain English

churches or vicars with a particular commitment to GTR communities (Burrell,

2009) have on occasion produced texts on their mission, or localized leaflets for

parishioners on ‘welcoming’ new arrivals where a large population of GRT people

are known to reside, or may have recently set up a site in the area (see Ely

Diocesan Board, 2005), these are relatively rare responses. Other than the

Catholic Diocese of Westminster/Association on Racial Justice (CARJ) initiative

(2009), which are compliant with the Vatican lead, I was unable to find evidence

of authoritative statements or even ‘joint statements’ made about the need to

support GTR people by English churches or non-Roman Catholic institutions in

Britain other than in Scotland and am unaware of similar initiatives in Europe.

Action of Churches Together in Scotland appears relatively unique in issuing a

statement (2011) on supporting Travelling people in their communities. Whilst

there is a large Roman Catholic population amongst Irish and Scottish Travellers

and Roma/Gypsies in many traditionally Catholic countries, the largest (and

dramatically increasing) growth in church membership across Europe consists of

Gypsy, Roma (and to a lesser extent Traveller) membership of evangelical,

movements, such as the Life and Light Church (Thurfjell, 2013; Foszto & Kiss,

2012) and other GTR community-led pentecostal congregations.

Evidence from members of these movements (e.g. references above) suggests

that the cultural congruence and welcoming nature of pentecostal groups, as well

38

as the practice of mass conversion as families/villages offer greater attractions

than the often unwelcoming ‘mainstream’ Christian faiths, where manifestations

of ‘anti-Gypsyism’ and racism may greet the GTR individual who seeks to attend

a service.

It is noteworthy that in the main, despite a range of (relatively low-key) policy

statements and reports produced on the issues of Refugees and Asylums (see

for example the Churches Together in Britain and Ireland Website7 for an

example of ecumenical activities, as well as Jewish collective statements around

refugees and racism such as A Statement of Principles for Reform Judaism,

1999), GTR issues have failed to attract comment from denominations other than

the Roman Catholic Church.

This willingness to make statements on ‘unpopular’ issues by the Catholic

authorities appears to be a legacy of the work of both Pope John Paul II and

Pope Benedict XVI, who have been equally forthright in Pontifical and Curial

statements pertaining to broader issues of racial discrimination (Pontifical Council

for Justice and Peace, 2001). It is likely with the election of Pope Francis I that

this trend will continue, given his evident radical stance, illustrated most recently

by the publication in late November 2013 of Evangelii Gaudium (2013:42-51)

critiquing capitalism in opposition to the notion of ‘prosperity theology’ and

invoking the Prophets and Scripture in a call for State and Church to work

together to aid the poor and marginalised.

7 http://www.ctbi.org.uk/A/1 Churches together in Britain and Ireland is an ecumenical networkof Christian churches working together to ‘coordinate responses, share resources and learn fromeach other’s experience. They focus on several clusters of work, including supporting Refugeesand Asylum Seekers; outreach to international students; racial justice and ‘religion in the publicsquare’. To date it does not appear that the racial justice thread has engaged explicitly with theneeds of GRT people.

39

3.2.4 ‘Grey literature’ and news articles on faith-based organisationssupport for GTR

The search found only a relatively small number of articles/newsletters that

explicitly refer to faith-based support for GRT people. Indeed, perhaps it is more

telling when discourse on communities experiencing overtly racialised injustice is

omitted from Jewish or Christian commentary, when one might reasonably

expect references to be made to their situation as especially vulnerable groups.

At 3.2.3 (above) publications by faith networks such as CARJ and ACTS, who

have produced newsletters highlighting their activities with nomadic people in

their localities, are cited but these are very much in the minority. Since the advent

of large-scale Roma migration to Canada in the last few years, pre-existing

Jewish networks aimed at supporting refugees and asylum seekers have come

together to challenge racism and deportations, with articles appearing regularly in

Canadian Jewish news outlets (Levy-Ajzenkopf, 2013; Arnold, 2012).

Additionally, one American Rabbi has commented regularly (in tandem with a

Hindu colleague) on the situation of Roma in East Europe (Zed & Freidrich,

2009).

In an article on the increasing rate of Jewish social activism, the range of

participants attending the first Siach conference8 and the duty to be outward

looking when challenging injustice, Goldberg (2011:1) calls for increased

dialogue between the different strands of Jewishness to “give space” to explore

wider agendas in the manner found in Christian social justice networks, although

he does not explicitly identify areas of major priority.

Within mainland Europe, Jewish press coverage of the rise of the Far Right has

8 http://siachconversation.org/ The Siach Network is a loosely affiliated group of Jewish socialactivists engaged in social justice and environmental activists. To date two internationalconferences have been held with a third planned for 2014. The current theme of the network is‘Shmita’ – the Biblical Sabbatical year using the concept to explore parallel, overlappingconversations around international social justice

40

focused mainly on the threat of increased anti-Semitism, although comment is

made in a number of articles over the risks to Roma populations with an implicit

suggestion that there is a need for the Roma and Jewish communities to stand

together. These fall short, however, of a moral standpoint call for Jews to support

Roma, despite anecdotal evidence that Jews are often mobilised to attend anti-

fascist rallies or activities in support of Roma who have experienced racist

violence (Ben Zion, 2013). At a recent Christian-Jewish solidarity march in Pecs

(Comunita di Sant’Egidio, 2013) Roma were also (anecdotally) represented,

although the focus was mainly on inter-faith engagement around increased

Jobbik party activity, and was advertised as protesting against overt anti-

Semitism within the rhetoric and literature produced by Jobbik activists.

In the UK, other than the Schmidt article in Jewish Socialist (2010) decrying the

evictions of Roma in Italy and France, coverage linking faith or identity with social

action and support for GRT communities has only flowered briefly during the time

of the Dale Farm evictions in 2011. The media interest that arose at that point

was the product of a concentrated effort by the Jewish Human Rights

organisation, Rene Cassin, who partnered with concerned individual Rabbis in an

attempt to attract media publicity and encourage communal support (Kahn-Harris

et al, 2001; Elgot, 2011; Mitchell, 2011).

In the more recent upsurge (autumn 2013) of anti-Roma feeling in the UK and

internationally (see Chapter 1), those Jewish voices that have been raised in

protest have not included Rabbis. In their discourse, they have focused on

shared narratives of oppression (particularly during the Shoah/Porrajamos) and

the risk of rising anti-Semitism in Europe, rather than utilising explicitly faith-

based language when calling for Jews to stand in solidarity with GTR people

(Cooper, 2013; Barnett, 2013; Doherty, 2013). It is noteworthy that at the time of

writing there had been no comment from faith leaders of any denomination in the

UK or wider Europe in response to the political and media portrayal of GTR

communities.

41

4 Findings (survey data)

As a result of imposed word constraints (given that this study wasundertaken as part of a formal study programme and is operating as a pilotstudy for further research and potential policy interventions) only aselection of themes are presented in this current report (which isessentially a slightly longer version of the submitted dissertation withappendices incorporated into the main text) . It is particularly unfortunatethat it has not been possible at this time to present the small number ofresponses from ‘non Christians and non Jews’ or to focus on variablesbetween Gypsy/Traveller/Roma community members and gadje/gorjiorespondents.

These materials will however be treated to due consideration in the futureand the findings from the overall survey are feeding into a planned seriesof discussions (to commence in early 2014) to explore the feasibility andpotential for local, national and international inter-faith solidarity networkswith a focus on challenging anti-Gypsy/Traveller/Roma racism.

The following section presents a number of key findings from the e-survey

(presented as Appendix 1) completed by 40 respondents.

Thirty-eight out of the 40 respondents elected to provide their name. The two

anonymous surveys are unique (based on checking of and location of participant)

and have thus been included in the sample.

Twenty-four out of the 40 respondents (60%) identified themselves as living in

either England or the UK. As discussed at Chapter 2.3, this is an inevitable

artefact of the methods utilised, snowballing, and the focus on English language

as a means of communication. Potentially a wider sample would result in a

significantly different profile of activities.

42

Of the remaining 40% of the sample, three respondents (although engaging with

GTR communities in Europe) were located primarily in the United States, four

were Serbian, two were Romanian and one response each was received from

the Ukraine, Bulgaria, Israel, Sweden, Finland, Holland and Bosnia and

Herzegovina The countries (mainly in Eastern Europe) with the largest proportion

of Roma citizens were particularly under-represented as a result of the factors

considered at 2.3. A total of four respondents indicated that they themselves are

a member of the Gypsy, Traveller or Roma communities.

4.1Demographics: respondents’ field of practice/engagement and historyof activism with GTR communities

Respondents consisted of 60% female to 40% male in the UK (the country

returning the largest number of responses). Other than in the 45–54 age range,

females consistently outnumbered male respondents. This may either pertain to

the (anecdotal and observed) phenomenon of higher numbers of women

engaged in social action and explicitly working with GTR communities or be an

artefact of the research methods and networks utilised (e.g. language skills of

female respondents). The greater gender balance in relation to the group 45–54

is likely to be accounted for by the preponderance of UK males who participated

in the study, of which a signifcant number are engaged in academic posts or

pastoral/community roles.

Figures 1 to 4 illustrate findings from the following questions: respondents’ age;

gender; self-professed faith identity; duration of engagement with GTR people;

and fields of activity.

43

Figure 1: Age of respondents by gender

In Figure 2 consideration is given to the average of duration of working with GTR

peoples. No respondents were below the age of 25, although two female

respondents gave their ages as >75. One of these women (See further below)

had been working with GTR communities in excess of 40 years.

44

Figure 2: Duration of engagement with GTR communities

Whilst the vast majority of respondents (60%) had begun to work with GTR

communities in the previous 15 years, the findings from this table are indicative

of a remarkable continuity of engagement given the plethora of social action

initiatives available to volunteers. Other than the small number of women who

had worked with the communities for between 22–25 years, males showed a

greater continuity of engagement. The cluster of female respondents working

with GTR groups for between 6–10 years are congruent with the increase in

public discourse pertaining to the situation of GTR communities in the UK, the

increased publicity around ‘Dale Farm’, as well as an increased intake of

45

students into the research field of Romani studies. Moreover (see 3.2.3) this

period also encompasses the issuing of the Vatican’s guidance on ‘pastoral care

of Gypsies’ (Pontifical Council, 2005) and some increased Catholic engagement

with the communities. One male respondent (>40 years of engagement) from the

Ukraine noted that as a Roma, he has been concerned about the physical and

emotional well-being of his community for his entire life.

Figure 3: Cultural/religious identity of respondents

Overall, there was a preponderance of Christian or ‘culturally Christian’

respondents (16 individuals) with 45.7% of respondents identifying themselves

46

as practicing Christians (from a relatively broad range of denominations (as

demonstrated by the following comments): Roman Catholic, Pentecostalist,

[Russian] Orthodox, Protestant, General (Free-will Baptist) Baptist Union of Great

Britain).

A further 11.4% of respondents suggested that they were ‘spiritual but not

religious’ with comments including: “Calvinist but not practicing”; “Christened and

confirmed as Anglican, became an agnostic aged 20 but appreciative of ALL

religions as an anthropologist”; “Raised Episcopalian but don’t attend church”.

All males identified with a particular religious identity (including two Buddhists

and one Muslim) whilst female respondents were more likely to identify as

“spiritual but not religious”, “atheist” or “secular Jew”.

Jewish respondents (practicing or not) accounted for 10 responses (25%). Two

female respondents (one who ticked the ‘other’ faith category) illustrating the

complexities of Jewish identity wanted to indicate that they were a “Liberal

Jewish Humanist”, whilst another asked “Minimally practicing Jew – is that a

category?”.

Whilst the majority of respondents worked primarily in their country of residence,

seven respondents (two of whom were retired academics) indicated that they

undertook international work, including consultations, speaking engagements

and development activities. A further two spoke of “mainly online” or “the country

of the internet” [i.e. activists involved in collating data and networking participants

across Europe/the USA on GTR issues]. The inter-faith specialist has worked in

many countries in other areas of work and increasingly in their engagement with

GTR peoples receives invitations to Ireland; Scotland and mainland Europe.

A very high percentage (72.3%) of respondents were members of international

networks engaged in supporting or working with GTR peoples across Europe;

47

and it was noteworthy too that 75% of respondents indicated that they had

contact with/or offered services to GTR people from a range of communities.

Whilst this response holds true mainly for UK and USA respondents who are in

contact with a wider range of communities (e.g. Scottish or Irish Travellers as

well as Roma; Ludar; or Gypsies) than, for example, Bulgarian or Serbia

respondents who reside in countries with a large population of Roma, or

Finnish/Swedish respondents who indicate primary engagement with Kaale, this

finding is suggestive of the fact that services offered by faith groups for members

of their own community (for example, Catholic activities) attract service users

across national/ethnic boundaries, as well as being used by those of other faiths.

This latter point was highlighted in a number of qualitative comments on inter-

faith working as well as in depth interviews. Moreover, NGOs tend to offer

services to all GTR peoples in the locality, meaning that the wider the pool of

populations, the greater the degree of activity with diverse groups.

Figure 4: Fields of activity with GTR people

48

Analysis of engagement by type of activity demonstrated that 30% of the sample

were directly employed/volunteering in education or academic settings. Those

primarily engaged with voluntary sector and faith-based organisations (which

often provide a range of services including advocacy; for example: “employed to

work on a play-scheme but assist wider family members with completing forms,

escorting to health clinics etc”) each accounted for 12.5% of responses.

The greatest number of responses (33.3%) pertained, however, to ‘other’

activities, which broke down in the following way: freelance

writer/speaker/consulant (x2) volunteering with groups and raising awareness of

GRT issues; media x 1; two academics (Emeritus) whose income was derived

from their careers but who were involved in a wide variety of ways (including

educational support) with GTR communities; one inter-faith specialist and four

(10% of the overall sample) employed by NGOs/charities working with GTR

peoples, particularly in Central/East Europe.

When primary fields of activity are analysed by the faith orientation of

respondents, practicing Christians are found to be working in all categories of

activity, although at a relatively low rate in academia. This is dominated by those

identifying as “spiritual but not religious”; whilst other forms of education contains

all “atheists”, as well as secular Jews. Secular Jews are most likely to be found

working in legal/planning and ‘other’ fields of activity. Practicing Jews are

identified purely in the categories of ‘other’ (typically volunteering with NGOs);

employed by faith-based organisations (including working in inter-faith activities);

and in the voluntary/community sector who undertake some work with GTR

communities. All but one employee of a ‘faith-based’ organisation was

(unsurprisingly) practicing their faith, with the single exception of a secular Jew

employed by a Jewish human rights organisation. Two individuals who identified

as atheist (x 1) and spiritual but not religious (x 1) indicated that they did on

occasion (or had in the past) worked for faith-based organisations on particular

aspects of work.

49

4.1.1 Respondents’ contacts with faith and ‘other’ agencies on GTR issues

As Figure 5 demonstrates, it was particularly striking that 62.1% of respondents

indicated that they had contact with agencies or individuals of other faiths in their

work with GTR peoples. ‘Other comments’ typically referred to the inter-faith and

inter-denominational range of activities which were focused around supporting

marginalized communities: “I work with a number of multi faith groups locally that

work for racial equality”; “Collaborate with ministry/missionary groups who work

with the same Roma community”; “I worked in the past with the Ecumenical

Humanitarian Organization in Serbia and I sit on the board of the Ecumenical

Women's Initiative in Croatia. Both organizations work on Roma projects or

support Roma NGOs with grants”. “Muslim, Orthodox”; “Whoever is willing to

work constructively for just outcomes”. Practicing Christian respondents were

more likely to engage with inter-denominational and inter-faith groups (75%) than

practicing Jews (60%) or secular Jews (0%), whilst atheists and ‘spiritual not

religious’ respondents were evenly divided in their contact with ‘other faith/belief’

groups.

Figure 5: Contact with ‘other’ faith/belief groups in GTR initiatives

50

4.1.2 Respondents’ range of social justice initiatives and degree ofautonomy

Respondents were asked to identify the type of activity with which they engaged.

Analysis by faith/identity (Figure 6) noticeably demonstrates that Christian

respondents occupy a wide range of roles, including direct service delivery, whilst

Jewish respondents are absent in certain categories, focusing more on the fields

of campaigning, academic research and legal advice/community development.

The category ‘other’ reveals a broad range of activities including: [member of the

clergy] “Religious education and pastoral care. Preparation for Sacraments.

Education to non-Travellers (adults) within the Diocese about Travellers”

[member of the clergy]; “work as a musician as well as a researcher”; “education,

labor market integration, social economy”; “working with Roma children in State

care”; “Arts activity and curating, bible translation, politics” [policy engagement as

an international ‘expert’].

Figure 6: Range of activities undertaken

51

Consideration of the degree of autonomy (Figure 7) available to respondents

varied according to their role – hence an academic focused on personal research

or a volunteer working on an individual basis was less constrained than those

involved in agency working, where particular policies applied. The more senior an

individual, the wider their opportunity to influence the direction of particular

initiatives. Just over 58% of respondents indicated a high level of autonomy;

24.1% medium and 3.4% low autonomy (employed in a junior role), whilst a

further 17.2%, all of whom were retired/freelance or volunteering indicated

‘other’, typically stating “I’m freelance so this is in my own time”; “media so need

to toe the line to some extent or stories get dropped but autonomy over tone ”;

“mainly voluntary – talk or give seminars for any group that invites me”.

Jewish respondents were most likely to be found in the ’other’ category (i.e.

highly autonomous) or employed in a role providing ‘medium’ autonomy in

contrast to other categories of respondents. Christians respondents

overwhelmingly reported ‘high autonomy’, even when employed by an agency to

undertake a specific role i.e. within an NGO or as part of the clergy/religious

organisation working in a dedicated faith activity.

52

Figure 7: Autonomy in role by faith identity

4.1.3 Extent of knowledge of scriptural/doctrinal mandate for working withmarginalised communities/GTR populations and history of activism

Given the subject of this dissertation, the extent to which respondents’ articulate

or have a clear knowledge of their faith tradition’s mandate for working with

marginalised communities is highly relevant in explaining their involvement with

GTR communities.

Whilst four individuals explained that they were members of Roma or Gypsy

ethnic groups (and in one case had intermarried into the Roma and thus had

witnessed oppression of close family members) and hence had a strong personal

connection with working to support and assist the communities, the responses of

self-identified people ‘of faith’ pertaining to scriptural mandate were particularly

interesting.

53

Whilst space does not permit the in depth exploration of data in relation to ‘routes

into’ working with GTR communities in this paper, it is relevant that 30% of the

sample became involved through academic study or hearing a lecture on GTR

issues; 32.5% were employed in a particular role that first brought them into

contact with the communities (e.g. health worker; teacher) 20% first encountered

GRT people through religious activity – e.g. attending the same church; or faith

group mission to Roma and 22% met GTR people in social or educational

settings and subsequently found out more about their lives. The remaining

respondents provided responses as diverse as having relatives working with

Roma or Gypsies: “Parish priest asked me to help give welfare benefits advice”;

“going to school with Travellers”; “through [engaging in] Holocaust education

[Jewish respondent]”; “[via] Journalism, met and in 1990 reported on Hungarian

Roma, then Bulgarian, then Czech; invited by Refugee Legal Centre to stand bail

for Slovakian asylum seeker in 1997”.

It was of some surprise, therefore, to realise that only 47.5% of respondents

indicated an apparent awareness of a scriptural or liturgical mandate for their

work with GTR populations. Table 8 represents this information by ‘faith’ category

(with reference to Christian/Jewish and ‘spiritual not religious’ respondents.

Further analysis of the qualitative comments suggested that the phrasing of the

question to explicitly refer to working with GTR peoples may have impacted on

the rate of ‘positive’ responses as in total, 72.5% of respondents provided

additional comments (including all but one individual who identified as a

practising Jew or Christian and the only Muslim respondent). No additional

comments were provided by ‘secular’ Jews or individuals identifying as ‘spiritual’.

Interestingly, the one Quaker respondent indicated that “Quakers don't have

doctrines or creeds but it fits with being a Quaker to work with marginalised

people and aim to change the circumstances that lead to their marginalisation”.

Buddhists too indicated a “welcome to all those in need”. An agnostic academic

54

from Hungary indicated the influence of: ”The Parable of the Good Samaritan.

Luke 10:30-37”, whilst a British academic who is also agnostic indicated that she

had “imbibed the King James Bible and the lessons therein”.

Overall, specific scriptural references mapped across with a remarkable degree

of accuracy onto those identified in the literature review, whilst Catholic

respondents were all familiar with Catholic social justice teaching and statements

by central authorities (see 4.1.4). Only two Christian respondents explicitly

referred to Old Testament texts (in both cases, Isaiah 1.17 and 10.1), whilst the

most common responses were similar to: “General message of Gospels in

common with other major religions” (explicit reference was made by several

respondents to Matthew 25:31-46 and Matthew 5:2-11, as well as Luke 4:16-20).

“See the New Testament and Catholic Social Teaching”; “Do into others as you

would have them do into you. Love your neighbour”.

In addition, a Catholic NGO staff member (not a member of the clergy but trained

in theology) indicated a strong reliance on Liberation Theology messages: “the

referential option for the poor and the theology of liberation - Gustavo Gutierrez,

Boffs, Romero, even writers like Thiongo and Fanon inform our approach”.

Other than one respondent (a Rabbi), Jewish participants tended not to cite

individual texts, indicating more a sense of the ‘embedded’ nature of social

justice in Jewish scripture:

“I do not rely on faith although there is plenty in Jewish scriptures to

encourage helping those in need.” (‘other faith’ – Jewish Humanist)

“As a Jew, I am commanded to help all marginalised and minority

peoples”.

“There are several scriptural passages that support working to end

55

discrimination and treating all human beings as equals.”

“In Judaism we are told more than thirty times that we must be charitable

and compassionate to 'the stranger', which, of course, relates to our

relationship with GTR as well as all other peoples, therefore I feel

encouraged by my faith tp work with the marginalised and excluded

groups I come across”.

“Justice, justice shall you pursue, that you may thrive and occupy the land

that the Eternal One your God is giving you. - Deuteronomy 16:20; And

you shall do what is right and good in the sight of the Eternal One, that it

may be well with you…. - Deuteronomy 6:18; You shall have one manner

of law, as well as for the stranger as for the home-born, for I am the

Eternal One your God. - Leviticus 24:22.”

Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the broad familiarity with social justice and

scripture and liturgical support for such action a broad correlation exists between

identification as active in faith groups and engagement with other marginalised

peoples. Individuals of GTR origins or with close family within the community

were more likely to indicate that they ‘only’ worked with those populations; whilst

the greater the identification with active faith group membership and the more

‘multi-cultural’ their country of residence, the higher the likelihood that someone

engaged in social action with a range of other communities ‘on the margins’.

Unsurprisingly for respondents in Central and East Europe where Roma are

likely to be the most excluded populations and hence the level of unmet social

need is highest, respondents were most likely to report they worked exclusively

with the communities.

Overall, 51.7% of respondents indicated that they worked with a range of

communities (75% of ‘spiritual not religious’ respondents; 43.8% of practicing

56

Christians; 33% of ‘secular’ Jews; and 80% of practicing Jews). The range of

groups with whom respondents indicated worked are (by order of frequency) as

follows:

Asylum seekers/victims of trafficking

Diasporic communities (of respondent’s own nationality/faith group)

Impoverished/homeless

Migrant populations/2nd generation communities (including inter-faith

support)

Lesbian/gay/bi-sexual and transgender people

International aid (in Africa)

A further three respondents indicated that whilst they have worked in the field of

inter-faith work or with asylum seekers or may work with other groups in the

future, at present they are only involved in supporting GTR populations.

Given that less than half of the sample claimed that they were ‘aware’ of a

scriptural underpinning to their social justice work (Figure 8 below), the extent to

which respondents subsequently drew upon their knowledge of scripture and

how this connected to their faith/cultural identity in supporting their work with

GRT people, may potentially be explained as mediated by personal contact with

the communities or a sense of empathy re shared ‘victimhood’, enabling a post-

hoc explanation or understanding of how their social justice and faith are

entwined.

The degree to which people identified their religious or cultural origins as

impacting on their decision to work with GTR peoples is considered at 4.1.5

below.

57

Figure 8: Respondents’ knowledge of scriptural mandate for social justicepractice by faith/identity

4.1.4 Knowledge of denominational/faith community’s stance on GTR andmarginalised populations (and influential teaching by faith-leaders)

When asked to identify a particular ‘stance’ by their faith group, 44.8% of the total

sample (of which 75% of Christians responded in the positive in contrast to only

20% of Jews) indicated they had knowledge of particular faith-based activities. Of

58

the Christian respondents, most noticeably, 100% of Catholic respondents

referred in some depth to Papal and Vatican statements/speeches on social

justice, working with excluded groups and specific documents pertaining to GTR

peoples (see 3.2.3).

Other than three GRT evangelical respondents (two in the UK and the other in

Bulgaria) who referred explicitly to “Light and Life”/Evangelical outreach, all other

categories of response indicated that formal faith-based activity was intimately

connected to the engagement or support provided by a particular member of the

clergy (who may or may not be connected to wider groups such as “faith

partnership amongst network of churches” or “Bishop’s agreed local initiative”.

In some localities there was a particular history of mission and outreach, thus an

Anglican community in the Home Counties with a Priest with a particular concern

for migrant Roma, as well as a history of engagement with Gypsies in another

locality was highly active in supporting the local Roma community. In another

area, a particular Baptist church had a reputation of outreach and support for

local Gypsy (and more recently Traveller and Roma) families dating back to the

1930s. The respondent who provided information on that church’s activities drily

noted in response to the follow up question about leadership that in terms of

public influence “Baptists in the UK do not become very famous”. In mainland

Europe, a respondent from Croatia indicated that outreach occurs under the

auspices of the Orthodox Croatian Bishop’s Conference; whilst an Israeli-

Orthodox Christian spoke of “Russian Orthodox Roma priests who care deeply

about their people”.

Of the small minority of Jews who responded to their community’s stance, two

suggested that the nearest policy or community statement they are aware of

comes from the Jewish Human Rights organisation (Rene Cassin) although more

individual Jews were beginning to make the connection to similarity of historical

oppression, in particular under National Socialism and one individual stated that

59

they worked for Rene Cassin.

Figure 9 outlines the extent to which respondents were able to highlight a central

authoritative statement or leader who has addressed the situation of GTR

peoples and on whom they are able to rely when referring to their work in faith

settings. Given the findings above, it remains unsurprising that Catholic

respondents were able to point most clearly to Papal pronouncements as well as

indicating practical network activities such as:

“Every 4 years the Catholic Church organises an international conference

on the Pastoral Care of Gypsies and Travellers. Following the conference

the Church publishes the policy statements that are agreed during the

conference to guide the work for the next 4 years.”

A number of Christian respondents of all denominations referred again to

Scriptural mandate as influencing their work, for example “commitment of the

Church to all of humankind, made in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26)”,

as did all Jewish respondents to this question. In addition, a Rabbi provided a

valuable quotation from Rabbi Leo Baeck, which she has utilized to great effect

and referred to the necessity of unsentimental love, rooted in social and ethical

well-being at the root of Tzedekah. Another practicing Jew (from a different

congregation) referred to the positive influence afforded by their own “Rabbi's

commitment to 'Tikkun Olam'”, as well as participating in an ethically active

Jewish community.

Christian participants cited “[Pastor] Martin Niemoller and Oscar Romero” as role

models, as well as the influence of “religious music (Pentecostalism songs)”. An

Anglican vicar made particular mention of texts that had inspired their work

“Christianity Rediscovered, An Epistle from the Masai - Vincent Donovan”, whilst

another member of the clergy spoke of the respect for “nomadism” found in many

faiths and cultures, referring particularly to wanderings experienced by Muslim

60

and Jewish patriarchs and Prophets.

Overall, however, supporting the findings from earlier sections of this survey –

other than amongst Roman Catholic respondents who could draw upon an

organized, centralized body for guidance and support – the strongest intra-faith

influences impacting on participation in GTR issues (other than amongst

members of the Gypsy/Roma communities themselves) appeared to be liturgical

and scriptural.

Contact with ‘influencers’ such as pastors/priests committed to social action and

knowledge of the activities of renowned (typically deceased) role models, such

as Pastor Niemoller or Rabbi Baeck, coupled with membership of a faith

community active in social justice affairs, and which may already have a history

of supporting GTR peoples also appeared to be significant in terms of faith-based

activity with the communities.

Figure 9: Influential teaching/statements by respondent’s faith leader

61

4.1.5 Respondents’ personal motivation for working with GTR populations

It has been suggested in 4.1.3 that other than for those individuals who are

members of the GTR populations and thus had a pre-existing commitment to,

and understanding of, their own/communities’ circumstances, respondents who

engage in social action with Roma peoples have at some point made a

conscious decision to work with the communities.

Respondents’ history of first contact with GTR peoples is outlined at 4.1.3 and I

suggest there, that the pathway to social action may be entwined in a complex

manner with religious/cultural identity and/or personal history. If this is so,

recognition of a faith-based mandate for such work, or a doctrinal ‘call to justice’

for GTR peoples may potentially offer a post-hoc explanation for such activity. In

the alternative, it is questionable to assume (cum hoc ergo propter hoc) that

because an individual is a ‘person of faith’ or of Jewish ethno-cultural identity that

they are particularly drawn to work with GTR people. In this section of the survey

therefore, whilst it is not possible to provide a definitive answer to the above

conundrum, an attempt is made to tease out the personal motivations of

individuals who are active in social justice activities with GTR communities, and

other ‘marginalised’ groups.

Figures 10 and 11 present (by faith/identity) responses to the question of whether

an individual’s own cultural or religious background has influenced their work with

GTR peoples, and to the question of whether they personally feel that they have

a ‘moral/ethical’ duty to work with the communities.

62

Figure 10: Cultural or religious influences on work with GTR people

As can be seen clearly, there is a strong correlation between personal

faith/cultural background and engagement with GTR populations; with 62.1% of

the entire sample indicating that their personal characteristics have impacted

positively on their decision to work with the communities. Of those respondents,

two did not see any connection between their faith/history (which included one

secular Jew and all but one individual who stated that they were spiritual rather

than religious); only one person provided an explanation for this statement. This

63

individual (a secular Jewish academic) in fact highlighted the complexities of

faith/cultural-based identity that may occur when denominational approaches to

religious teaching, coupled with pre-existing stereotypes pertaining to particular

ethnic groups:

“Actually, being Jewish meant another level of explaining to do among

Gypsies who hold ‘conventional’ prejudices. Those who have become

Pentecostal have added another layer of prejudice [towards Jews].”

No qualitative comments were provided by persons who suggested that their

support was “ethical rather than religious” but it is worthy of comment that this

included 66.6% of secular Jews, whom had in other elements of the survey

returned comments indicating an awareness of calls for social justice within

Jewish scripture, as well as three practicing Christians, one of whom identified

that the ethnic minority community to which he belonged had similarities

culturally and socially to Roma people.

By far the largest group, however, consisted of those who indicated that their

own background was relevant to their support for GTR people. In addition to a

spiritual respondent who indicated that their former Christian faith had influenced

them to work with Roma as instilling “a positive approach to those discriminated

against” , all Jews who practiced religiously were in this category (albeit one

individual indicated they had “both ethical and faith-based [motivations] - it is

hard to distinguish”, as was the individual who self-classified as “Jewish

humanist” and who clearly linked their personal history to their support for GTR

peoples:

“As a Jew rescued from Nazism by coming to England on the Kindertransport,

I cannot protest at the Far Right increase in anti-Semitism unless I protest as

much against the injustices and persecution of Roma and Travellers”.

64

In total 68.8% of practicing Christians stressed how their faith had a profound

impact on their with GTR communities. A Russian Orthodox Christian who lives

in Israel and who has been responsible for a hugely influential and active internet

community disseminating information, news and policy on the international

situation of GRT people stressed how “I and my friends prayed for [success of

activities] before I started [name of virtual network] in 1999”.

Whilst relatively few explicit comments on the influence of faith/culture were

provided (49.8% of the sample), other than those above, all were provided by

Roman Catholics working in faith settings (including two nuns) or Anglican clergy.

Comments all made explicit reference to the influence of the Gospels or Christian

teachings on their actions, typically:

“As a Christian I am bound by the example of the founder of our faith Jesus

Christ and his teaching.”

“As a Catholic I had a desire to reach out to excluded, marginalised people.”

“Our project, emanates from a commitment to liberation theology; trying to

see God in the face of all people and to respond accordingly.”

“Our tradition of care for the marginalised and poor.”

Hence, findings from this element of the study suggest that Jewish respondents

are more likely to explicitly refer to personal history and/or ethical reasons for

supporting GRT communities, whilst Christians relate specifically to their faith

tradition.

The subsidiary question pertaining to a sense of duty to support GTR peoples

(Figure 11) attracted significant commentary, demonstrating the extent to which

respondents identified their work in moral terms, regardless of whether they

65

identified as a person of faith or secular. Respondents who indicated that they

did feel a sense of moral or ethical duty to engage are represented in two

separate columns (‘yes’ and those who provided additional qualitative

comments’) as a result of the vagaries of IT/ analytical tools used in this survey.

Again only findings from individuals identifying as Christian/Jewish or ‘spiritual

not religious/Atheist’ are included in these figures).

The findings from this element of the survey are remarkable in terms of unanimity

of response, regardless of denomination or faith group to which respondents

belong.

Figure 11: Belief in ethical or moral duty to work with GTR people

In total, only four respondents (of whom 75% defined themselves as “spiritual

rather than religious” and the remaining individual as a “secular Jew”) did not

indicate a sense of ethical duty to undertake social justice initiatives with GTR

66

people. All religiously practicing Jews, all Christians and 66% of secular Jewish

respondents, as well as the ‘Jewish humanist’ indicated that they felt a sense of

duty or moral/ethical responsibility to work with GTR communities in particular, as

well as other marginalized or vulnerable groups.

Individuals who indicated a more secular or Humanist orientation referred to a

sense of social justice when outlining their stance:

“There is a need and I think I have the ability to help. To sit by idly would be

cruel.”

“How can anyone have justice while the Roma and Travellers are treated so

unjustly?”

Jewish respondents (whether secular or religious) typically referred back to

biblical texts as well as sense of shared history in their comments:

“We are told more than thirty times that we must be charitable and

compassionate to 'the stranger', which of course relates to our relationship

with GRT as well as all other peoples.”

“As [Roma are] the most chronically excluded group in our society I have a

duty to use my position of relative privilege to be of assistance to these

communities.”

“We need to stand in solidarity with those who are oppressed, for in our

foundational narrative, the Exodus - we were strangers; we were vulnerable in

the land of Egypt.”

“Indigenous racism and indifference to the suffering of GTR must be tackled

as well as providing direct aid.”

67

Of the Christian respondents who provided further information (in addition to

those individuals who simply stated “I am a Roma” or “I am a Gypsy – of course I

must do my duty”) 87% made overt and explicit reference to their sense of duty

tied to their faith (in one case, indicating obliquely that they had been required to

overcome personal challenges in their work):

“Not so much 'duty' but a 'call' from God.”

“Christian duty to love – agape – especially those that one is not

temperamentally inclined to love.”

“To help others – show Christ’s love through my actions.”

“As a Christian I feel compelled to put into practice the ideals of my faith

which call on me to be like Christ to show [love] those around me.”

Overall, it was noticeable that Christian respondents made reference explicitly to

faith-based motivations (for example emulating Christ) whilst Jews (and others)

were marginally more likely to utilise ‘secularised/political’ language pertaining to

solidarity and racism, even if they underpinned their comments with reference to

Biblical/scriptural texts.

4.1.6 Resistance/challenges to GTR faith-based action by fellow faithpractitioners (and responses to challenges)

Respondents were asked a series of questions pertaining to the attitudes of their

fellow community/faith-practitioners, as well as how they responded to negative

attitudes towards their support for GTR people. Respondents indicated a

remarkable similarity of response in terms of level of hostility or negative

comments received in relation towards their work, even amongst faith

communities whom one might suppose to be familiar with the same texts and

68

ethical injunctions as research participants. That there is widespread prejudice

even within religious contexts to GTR people is however, sadly, unexpected

given the widespread nature of anti-Gypsyism and racism outlined in Chapter 1.

Overall, 56.8% of Christian respondents (of all denominations, other than those

explicitly members of ‘Light and Life’ or Gypsy/Roma-led faith communities), 80%

of religious/practicing Jews, 50% of secular Jews and 50% of those individuals

who are ‘spiritual’ or ‘atheist’ report experiencing negative comments or hostility

in relation to their areas of practice. Given the higher level of challenge reported

by religious Jews (particularly in the light of a relative over-representation of

Jewish respondents in the sample) and the emphasis on social justice in Jewish

tradition, it is of interest that overt reference to similarity of oppression and a

shared history of genocide appear to raise particular hostility in some circles.

Thus two respondents indicated that they had experienced anger at their

attempts to draw parallels between Roma and Jewish experiences of racism.

Overall, typical comments include:

“To draw a parallel between the Travellers today and the Jews in the 1940s

is [regarded by some Jews] as a travesty.”

“My family and community considered I’m crazy – they say all Travellers are

law-breakers although I take the time to challenge this and people have

come around to my way of thinking.”

“People ask why I’m wasting my time on Roma aren’t there enough needy

Jews here, in the former Soviet Union and in Israel to concentrate on?”

“Many Jews feel our priority should be with [other] Jews.”

Amongst secular/atheist/spiritual respondents the most common reasons given

69

for challenges fell into the categories of “Discrimination” and “Prejudice”.

Christians were more likely to state that:

“People don’t consider Gypsies as part of the community.”

“[other faith-group members say..] They’re Travellers - so let them keep

travelling."

“They are parasitic on the State.”

“You should be working with us – not them.” [Member of the clergy

expressing the views of some of his parishioners]

“Many Irish people are hostile towards Travellers as a result of the negative

press and high levels of criminality in Ireland amongst the Travelling

community - 8% of Irish prison population are Travellers.”

Accordingly, the tropes of GTR ‘lawlessness’ and ‘outsider-hood’ prevailed in

faith communities, whilst in the more secular context [atheist and spiritual not

religious] respondents overtly identified ‘prejudice’ as the main issue they

encountered when dicussing their work.

Respondents were asked if possible to identify up to three of the most common

stereotypes or challenges they meet with from co-religionists/community

members in relation to their work with GTR communities. Again, a remarkable

similarity could be found across faith groups (and secular communities) with

dominant tropes consisting of the following themes:

“Law-breaking: they should have to obey the law as everyone else does.”

70

“Lack of respect.”

“Disruptive behaviour.”

“Not paying taxes.”

”Jealousy of non-conformists.” [the view of one respondent seeking to

theorise the hostility towards Roma]

“They are intimidating.”

Despite these commonly cited stereotypes, overall, 51% of respondents (of all

faiths/identities) felt that their positive attitude and faith/ethical stance towards

working with GTR communities was relatively common within their

community/faith group (62.5% of Christians; 66.7% of secular Jews; 40% of

practicing Jews and 25% of secular/spiritual but not religious respondents).

Explanations for these relative positive view included:

“I am aware that some Jewish people approach Gypsies as a parallel case of

victimhood. Most know nothing about Gypsies other than that.”

“I think many Christians feel a calling to give aid to poor people. In my work, I

remain secular though. I work with Christian organizations but my purpose is

not missionary.”

“In Liberal Jewish communities, there is a natural inclination [to support

marginalised communities], we just need GTR issues highlighted, perhaps.”

“We understand the nuances of systematic discrimination on the one hand as

Irish people. Theologically on the other hand as Catholics we share a belief in

a volitional actionable love for all.”

71

In contrast, several Jewish respondents, as well as Orthodox Christian

respondents referred explicitly to the “inward looking nature sadly” of their

communities, meaning that “the Roma are a long way away from many people’s

concerns”.

In total only 37% of respondents (of all categories had attempted to adduce

theological or ethical arguments to encourage support from GTR communities.

One vicar indicated that he utilised theological discourse:

“All the time! Gradual change of hearts as they [parishioners] get to know the

Roma people and their spirituality. Many are fearful of being drawn into a

vortex of needs.”

In the main, however the response was the same from all categories of

respondent: “It takes time for seeds to grow”; “prejudice is a habit of thinking and

often not susceptible to rational arguments”. Jewish respondents indicated that in

some cases drawing clear parallels between the Porrajmos and the Shoah (as in

Ruth Barnett’s deeply personal text published in 2013) and educating their

communities in relation to historical similarity of oppression; could be effective

although “sometimes it falls on stony ground”.

As indicated in several places above, the weight of moral authority carried by

documents issued by the Vatican/papal statements meant that Roman Catholic

activists were significantly aided by support from senior clergy whilst continuing

their mission to:

“Frequently write and speak to Catholic audiences about the importance of

including everyone within the duty of Christian love, especially those

thought 'the least'”

72

In total (75%) of respondents indicated the ways in which they felt their work with

GTR people had impacted on their sense of social justice. Other than the single

Muslim respondent, who indicated that being a Muslim overrode all other

considerations (see below) there was no discernible difference in response by

faith community (other than in choice of words such as use of terms such as

‘tikkun olam’ or ‘liberation theology’) with answers typically indicating a sense of

moral responsibility for seeking to improve the situation of GTR communities:

“I have found that it has allowed me to be able to put into practice the ideals

of Social Justice in a very real and concrete way. These are the poor in our

midst rather than those in places far away where we feel concerned about

and often donate money to but never actually have to meet or engage with.”

[Christian respondent.]

It has made me more aware of social injustice than I already was.” [Quaker.]

“In my faith community the people are not divided by social or ethnic

characteristics officially, but rather they are defined as Muslims and non-

Muslims. There is not [sic] special statements regarding Roma.” [Muslim

respondent.]

“It has helped me to understand the broader structural underpinnings of

poverty and marginalisation.” [Spiritual rather than religious.]

“I am increasingly aware of how limited our scope seems to be in terms of

what we even attempt, never mind what we might achieve. People do not

realise how blessed we are, and think of themselves as poor or

disenfranchised when that is FAR from the case.” [Practising Jew.]

“I reflect that I have received innumerable privileges, often unseen, that given

me a comfortable life.” [Christian.]

73

4.1.7 Inter-faith engagement around GTR issues

On being asked about personal contact with individuals of other faiths when

working with GTR communities, overall 79.3% of respondents indicated that they

had worked alongside or been in contact with people of other faiths, with an

academic indicating “many of my colleagues in the field are of different religions

or faith traditions”. One individual indicated that they had “never asked” so were

unsure of the personal faith of their colleagues, but the degree of inter-faith

contact is striking. (NB: In a few responses there appeared to be confusion over

the difference between denominations and faiths (e.g. Pentecostalists referring to

Orthodox Christians as being of another faith and Protestant/Catholic being

regarded as distinct religions) but respondents were generally clear in their

replies.) Secular Jews were least likely to have worked with those of other faiths

(33%); 80% of practising Jewish respondents had done so; 100% of those who

were spiritual rather than religious and 81.3% of practising Christians .

A subsidiary question asked whether inter-faith work on GTR issues had

impacted on their understanding of other faiths:

“Jews, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus - all have demonstrated

their belief that without justice there can be no lasting peace.”

“[Worked with] Jewish society, Born Again [Christian], Hindu, and others.”

“It helps to have better understanding on what social justice for all means.”

“I’m now aware of the central place within Islam of the care for the poor.”

“This always strengthens the feeling that what we have in common and

what we can do together is much stronger than what divides us.”

74

The theme of inter-faith working around GTR and other social justice issues is

revisited in the discussion of the interview data in Chapter 5 below.

In the penultimate section of this dissertation, attention is now turned to using

findings from the series of depth interviews to explore in greater detail a number

of themes pertaining to explanations for involvement in social justice (with a

focus on the impact of identity and historical coincidence and personal

experiences of inter-faith working).

75

5 Findings: depth interviews

This chapter summarises a number of findings from seven interviews with eight

respondents working with GTR communities in two European countries. During

one of the interviews (that of the Jewish lawyer/volunteer), his friend and

colleague (a Roma locally elected official for the neighbourhood), was present at

some points and occasionally interjected comments with regard to the

interviewee’s activities on behalf of the local community. Where relevant these

have been incorporated into the data summarized below. Appendix 2 contains

the topic guide utilised during interviews.

Whilst there are identifiable shortcomings in the selection of the sample,

discourse analysis and analysis framework revealed a number of important

thematic elements, suggestive of an emergent typology of motivation. As noted

earlier, whilst Interview A was not undertaken in the same manner as the

remainder of the interviews ( not recorded, use of a translator, and not all

questions were asked), that the findings complies strongly to the typology (and in

addition the uniqueness of the interviewee/circumstances) warranted inclusion of

the data gleaned during this meeting.

In this section, interviewees’ personal motivations for working with GTR

communities are explored, in particular the impact of scripture/doctrine and

personal history on their involvement in social action.

A secondary area of analysis concerns the way in which working with GTR

people has impacted on individuals’ practice and understanding of social justice.

For example, whether it has deepened or altered their understanding and

attitudes towards their faith, identity or social justice practice.

Attention is further paid to whether respondents are involved in inter-faith work

around GTR communities, as well as their personal understanding of differences

76

between Jewish and Christian orientation to social action activities.

Table 1 (below) provides information on the nature of sample, including where a

translator has operated as a mediating factor in relation to access to narrative

data.

Table One: Characteristics of participants in depth interviewsRespondent Code

Gender/Age

Country/Place ofinterview

Translator used

Role ofinterviewee

Religiousidentification

GRTheritage?

A M /mid-80s

Hungary/RomaCommunityCentre

Yes(hand-writtennotes)

Volunteer(retiredlawyer)

Jewish(Orthodox)

No

B M / 28 Hungary/Faith-basedorganisation

Yes(audio-recorded)

SeniorStaff atStudentCentre

Christian(Catholic)

Yes

Ci

Cii

M / 34

M / 28

UK/Faith-basedorganisation

No(audio-recorded)

Managerof projectPolicyOfficer

ChristianChristian(BothRomanCatholic)

No

No

D M / 60s Church No(audio-recorded)

RetiredAnglicanPriest(specialistrole)

Christian No

E M / 61 Church No(audio-recorded)

AnglicanVicar

Christian No

F F / 57 Private home No(audio-recorded)

Rabbi Jewish(Liberal)

No

G F / 32 Private home No(audio-recorded)

Lawyer/CivilRightsOrg.

Jewish(Reform)

No

5.1 Interviewees’ personal motivations for working with GTRcommunities and impact of scripture/doctrine on their practice

All but one interviewee explored in some depth their personal motivation and

history of working with GTR communities (see below). Whilst one individual was

himself Roma – and hence it may be assumed that his motivation was impacted

77

by his ethnicity, personal experience and identity – his narrative (see below) in

common with other Christian respondents emphasised how his faith (which was

revitalised in his early adulthood) has strengthened his desire to work for the

improvement of his community, rather than focusing on his own personal needs.

This emphasis on religious identity enabling an individual to see beyond their

own personal circumstances and focus on broader social responsibilities

demonstrates a thematic continuity with other Christian respondents.

In contrast, it was self-evident that whilst Jewish respondents drew deeply upon

their faith-based identity in undertaking social action, that they also shared a

sense of historical similarity and experience of oppression with GTR peoples was

key to evoking a bond of empathy and responsibility. Responses from all

members of this faith group made reference to the experiences of Roma and

Sinti under National Socialism and the risks of the rise of the far right to GTR

peoples.

Data is organized in this section by religious orientation of interviewees:

Christian intervieweesGiven that all interviewees were either clergymen or working in overtly faith-

based NGOs (and moreover were all male) these findings potentially offer a

different perspective than would be found amongst a differently configured

sample.

The two Anglican clergymen both discussed the ways in which they first came to

work with GTR peoples.

D (now retired but still active in supporting GTR communities) had been a Friar

before being ordained as an Anglican priest. He had been a Priest for over 20

years when he was appointed to a specialist role by his Bishop as “Chaplain for

Gypsies and Travellers” (16 years prior to interview), a role he occupied until

78

retirement.

E had entered the clergy in mid-life having had a successful alternative career.

He was initially a Vicar in an area of southern England with a large, long

established Romany Gypsy community, working in that locality for a number of

years before being transferred to a new parish. He came into contact with Roma

migrants and developed a special affinity with them, learning Vlach Romanes9,

assisting in the formation of a ‘Roma church’ and working extensively in

community development.

Both were already ordained at the point when they first came into contact with

the communities, and as such, their role led them to their current deeply held

commitment in supporting GTR peoples, and ultimately a sense that their

vocation was to work with these communities in particular:

“I was seconded to a group of parishes in X, one of the richest valleys in X.

People like Madonna [multi-millionaire pop-star] live there, but on the other hand

there are a lot of Gypsies and Travellers. In those days they used to stop on the

drove roads [unofficial traditional stopping places]. I was a bit apprehensive, I’d

not met any nomads so I said a bit of a prayer, got in my car went down the

drove road. There was a couple of Gypsy vardos [traditional wagons] and a man

shoeing a horse. I said I’m the local vicar and he said ‘Good. My daughter wants

to get married.’ The son-in-law stuck his head out of a wagon and said ‘Are you

born again?’. It wasn’t something I expected but [the father of the family] opened

up a door that had a terrific influence on my ministry. I felt more sometimes like a

minister ‘done to’ rather than ministering, as he was a strong evangelic Christian.

He had a mystic edge and completely different view of the world and of

Christianity.” [D]

9 The Vlach dialect of Romanes/Romani (the language of Roma people) is widely understood by

Roma and Sinti from a number of Eastern European Countries.

79

“I was Vicar at X for about 10 years and got to know one or two English

Romanies living in the town who knocked on the door and wanted holly [to sell at

Christmas markets]. After a bit that led to a baptism of the children of that family

and marriage in that family, I got to know more of the relations and it kind of

snowballed. After a time we had a weekly church meeting for them [Gypsies]

especially and that kind of grew to 40 to 50 people and there were 40 baptisms in

a year. Then I moved to [current parish] in 2009, got to know the indigenous

English and Irish Travellers at the site over the hill and in the wider field. I started

work with the Romanian Roma here four years ago, there are perhaps 500 Roma

here now. What happened for me was the police phoned me up and asked if

could help Romanian Roma who were begging on the street and they gave me

an address to go to and that is how it started.” [E]

Both D and E spoke of a sense of ‘calling’ from God to work with GTR peoples,

referring in their narratives to personal spiritual experiences that they felt

occurred as a direct result of their contact with the communities who are

“particularly spiritual in a way denied to many of us who are part of the modern

world” [D]; “They have an openness an acceptance of the ways of God which is a

gift” [E].

This sense of being shown a new way of engaging with their faith through their

contacts with GTR peoples led both of these interviewees into activism as they

realized the challenges which faced the communities to which they ministered:

D stated that: “I started off as a simple pastor, then I became an activist because

once you see what is going and know there is injustice then you have to respond

to it”. He spoke further of the way during his time with the communities his

“spirituality changed. The gospel, the faith is already there but actually I had to

learn something. I am a friar and a Franciscan and the rule is that you live

amongst the people..it is a privilege and a calling.”

80

E too spoke of this sense of ‘call’: “As the years roll on - I just feel that the

moment X [Romany woman] shared with me the vision she had of the Burning

Bush which was so extraordinary for her and for me, there has continued to be

that sense of call to work with and liberate people from the sort of oppression

they have experienced, in the same way as Moses went on to rescue the Jews”.

Both D and E spoke of how their practical work with the communities has led to a

greater understanding of scripture and their faith: The more you get into this [type

of work] the more the passages of scripture jump out at you: Exodus 3; the

Burning Bush; liberation of the captives in Egypt. Jesus then picks up on it in

Luke 4:18-20 in his very first sermon on Nazareth. Jesus was a liberator, a man

with a mission to liberate people in whatever kind of oppression they find

themselves – he went out on the edges of society”.

“You have Paul writing in Corinthians 1 how God has chosen the weaker things

of this…working with groups who are particularly marginalised – it is my faith in

action.

“If you look at the story of Cain and Abel – Cain was a greedy man… so this

theme of ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’, that is the mindset, what we are living with

now. Instead of respecting the nomad and people’s different lifestyles, there is a

tendency for Cain still to be killing Abel”.

In contrast to the above narratives, Ci and Cii are both Roman Catholic

members of staff at a specialist outreach programme for Travellers emanating

from an explicitly faith-based organization which operates a stream of work with

Irish diasporic communities although “we work with Gypsies, Roma too – anyone

who needs us we’ll do what we can but we don’t have the knowledge about

Roma, there is a need for translation services, specialist advice… we do our

best”.

81

Both men were clear that whilst the agency is explicitly Catholic and targeted at

the Irish communities, staff may be Catholic but non-practising, or “not Catholic

at all” as the ethos is about delivering services to the vulnerable. Their particular

project is approximately two years old although Ci was the author of a piece of

research undertaken by the agency into the needs of Traveller prisoners, which

led to the development of the specific project.

In addition to direct in-reach work (around resettlement on leaving custody;

setting up literacy schemes; policy activity; working with probation services;

home office and GTR prisoners themselves) the two man team are active in

providing advice and support to a range of agencies but often feel over-loaded:

“We are a two man operation, there are 138 prisons and [Irish Travellers alone]

are 5% of the population. It’s about herding Government agencies into the right

direction”.

Cii is “second-generation Irish”. Before his current employment he had previous

experience of Traveller clients through a homelessness project:

“We had a few clients who were historically from a Travelling background but had

fallen away from the community, often gone into the care system and then were

in and out of prison, homeless, but I didn’t work exclusively with Travellers”.

His route to his current role arose because “I always wanted to work with people

and marginalised communities and then this job came up”.

He identifies his sense of social justice as arising from:

“The choices you make as a Catholic, growing up with that sense of Catholic

justice – the kind of values that gives you, but working here is almost an accident

– it wouldn’t have to be a faith-based organisation for me to work here. I have

worked in social justice organisations because I have grown up as a Catholic and

I’m a Catholic Socialist – that equates about not having to talk about religion as

82

our work is religious and it encompasses our work and is a manifestation of

believing in those values.”.

Ci, as a first generation migrant to the UK from Northern Ireland, expressed a

similar stance to Cii in relation to an embedded Catholic identity, which did not

require overt performance of religious practice to demonstrate a relationship to

social justice values. He has long-term awareness of Irish Travellers through

having attended school with members of the community and thus understanding

of the circumstances they face. His narrative of experiencing personal

discrimination and how this builds empathy with oppressed peoples can be seen

to share category overlaps with that of Jewish respondents and B (below).

“Growing up as a Catholic in Northern Ireland you cannot be unaware of how

discrimination works, and how you can easily become demonised. You can take

someone who is a normal human being and paint them into a monster very

easily… if you’ve experienced discrimination and marginalisation you are more

sensitive to how it happens and are keen to see that it doesn’t happen to other

groups.”.

In common with Cii he spoke of the influence of a having a family who were

attuned to social justice values: “[We were] not religious in the sense that we

didn’t have to talk about it all the time, not bible hungry but the identification of

how every human being is worthwhile and that permeates your outlook. If your

mother is saying ‘that wee woman across the road’ – who may be a Protestant –

‘has had her share of troubles’ and is treating her with respect – that is the

manifestation of your respect for everyone. It’s not an overtly religious thing or

couched in religious terms but it permeates.– it’s a form of Christianity which is

instilled at a basic level, more like loving your neighbour”.

Neither Ci or Cii identified any specific texts or doctrinal influences on their work,

although both made passing reference to liberation theology, which underpins

83

the work of the project on which they are employed:

“As a left-wing Catholic you are keen on seeing how that has a wider

influence on racial elements, the movement for justice and that

synchronism of Catholic teaching and secular politics”.

Interviewee B is a Hungarian Roma whose faith is entwined with his social

activism in a manner similar to that of Interviewees Ci and Cii and Jewish

respondents whose culture and personal experiences have merged with their

religious beliefs. In a similar manner to Ci and Cii, B did not provide indications

of any specific influential scriptural or doctrinal influence, other than being in

contact with individuals who enact their faith (see below).10 “He is not a

theologian. He reads his bible but would not quote from it. When it comes to

social action he would rather prefer to use his education”.

B is a staff member at a ‘Roma dormitory’, one of a network of hostels that

operate in Hungary and provide education “empowerment through education and

training”, a safe environment, support and food for both male and female Roma

(living on separate floors of the hostel building) employed or studying in the

locality.

The dormitories are the result of an initiative set up by young Roma intellectuals

(including the interviewee in his student days). Faith communities provide funding

for the dormitories that are Roma run and managed, with a resident

Priest/member of the clergy (by preference of Roma origins) on site.

“There is a phenomena, a background to this wave of churches and faith-

based communities trying to understand who the Roma are and what

works for them and open up their religious services to a specific group of

10 The grammatical construction of quotations from respondents A and B results from the use of atranslator and in the case of A from contemporaneous notes taken as the translator was speaking.

84

people that could not reach to the established churches who cater for the

middle classes.”

B works in a Jesuit hostel “We were open to offers of funding and after talking

for three years with preparation conversations with a Jesuit priest they were

willing to fund this work and we were happy to work with the Jesuits”, although

there are also other denominational accommodation options: Catholic,

Protestant, Reformed Church, Evangelic and Greek Orthodox.

The dormitories emerged after young Roma studying on Open Society

Foundation scholarships and other Roma professionals realised that there was a

need for a culturally congruent , ‘safe’ and respectable place for young Roma

leaving home for the first time, who may be coming to a city to study, having

grown up in rural areas. That the hostels are Roma run and associated with

religious foundations also creates a sense of security and incentive for parents to

allow unmarried daughters to take up higher educational opportunities as they

are able to meet any challenges from wider kin by pointing out that cultural

practices are respected and their daughters are protected from external hazards

whilst away from home.

Despite having a denominational link, the dormitories operate:

“Without conversion… this is not the goal, they are welcome to anyone who

wants to visit or be part of religious activities, but they are not doing any

conversion. If they [residents] accept the functioning and faith basis of this

institution it is open to any faith or any denomination”.

B states that his activism arose largely from his ability to access ‘Roma

scholarship’ support from the Open Society Foundation, leading to university

attendance and the achievement of both under and post-graduate qualifications

in Social Policy. It is worthy of comment that this educational scheme is delivered

85

by the Open Society Foundation, initiated by a secular Jew, George Soros

(Soros, 2013) the billionaire Budapest ghetto survivor who personally identified

Roma as a community whom he wished to support through philanthropic

activities although his underlying motivations for this choice of social action have

not been publically identified.

B indicated that he was originally a nominal Catholic but through his contact with

an influential Jesuit priest (who also assisted in the setting up the ‘Jesuit’

dormitory); a man well grounded in liberation theology and who delivered

“practical help” to Roma in marginalized villages for 15-16 years; B became more

immersed in his faith and the drive to social action.

B: “He [the Jesuit who influenced B] was a priest he goes to give sacraments,

preach, marry people, negotiate with police, work around evictions, burial”. B’s

own faith came to be more meaningful. “Before he met the priest he [B] knew he

was a Catholic and was baptised a Catholic but it did not mean the same to him.

They were talking about issues such as social justice just as the church has been

teaching and doing for hundreds of years. Given his own experience growing up

in many difficulties he [B] realised more and more what social justice means for

his community – more conscious of what it means and what he must do.”

“[B] has a responsibility towards his community. He was not supported by

his family and but for the Roma scholarships he would not have achieved

as he came from a very difficult situation. Now he has degrees in social

sciences he feels he is using his achievements to benefit his own

community; he realised there is a lot of talk and issues around Roma and

when he did economics the very similar discourse showed that there is a

need. So whatever he did during his education it led him towards his own

community, helping them.”

86

Jewish intervieweesThe one participant who did not describe his personal background in much detail

was Interviewee A, who as a concentration camp survivor, was clear prior to

agreeing to discuss his work that certain elements of his personal history would

not be spoken about. However, he implicitly indicated (by discussing a number of

activities with which he was involved) that a key motivation for working in

partnership with Roma was his experience during and post-War.

“He has a clear conscience – his work has been on Roma Holocaust reparation,

basically as an archivist and to name those who have suffered, to legitimate their

deaths and pain. What was important for him was that Jews have support for

reparation and that Roma do not. Then nobody was interested – Jews,

Christians, Gypsies, they only knew what they [personally] went through. In the

1990s to get reparation for Roma was very hard, he believed that he could find

the archival evidence to support families who needed reparation and support and

he went to Vienna, Berlin, and Tel Aviv to open negotiations on this and once he

started this process his other work [legal representation and advice at a local

Roma community centre] began.

A lives in an area with a large Roma community, which was closely connected to

the Jewish population prior to the German invasion of Hungary in 1941: “People

did not distinguish on ethnicity there”. The ‘mixed’ settlement grew as Roma were

originally provided with accommodation (as well as access to the local Jewish

funded hospital) by Jewish factory owners who employed them for their specialist

leather and metal working skills in the early 19th century. The close-knit

communities watched the destruction of their populations in mutual distress, and

there are narratives of the two groups seeking to assist each other during the

Nazi occupation.

Although A did not discuss his religious practice, he holds a position of some

seniority at the local Orthodox synagogue (in the heart of the Roma quarter) and

87

appears to have a close personal relationship with the Rabbi to whom I was

introduced. Synagogue members have assisted in some Roma support activities.

There have also been “collaborations between Jews and Roma to show support

in protest” against the neo-fascist Jobbik party in Budapest.

A is a retired lawyer who worked for Unions who has a clear respect still for

socialist values:

“A lot of people say bad things about Socialism but it did well for him – he

was educated and trained as a lawyer, which could not have happened

otherwise, for his family. He worked with the unions and people had better

treatment in many ways before, than now, when the Right is coming back

and there is much poverty. He believes that socialism was a good thing. It

is important to him that there is a highly educated ordinary people not just

an elite”.

Although his work with Roma survivors and their families was the focus of A’s

work on his retirement in the 1990s, since the success of that campaign and as

older people have passed away, he has largely moved on from his work on

reparations to “working with young people to give a future. There is a need for

education for Gypsies to be able to take up the challenges and to be stronger”.

He has an office at the local community centre that is packed with case files and

queues of Roma waiting to see him for assistance in welfare benefits cases,

assistance with housing and increasingly migration cases, including supporting

deportees from Canada and Western Europe.

A and his Roma friend are involved in every aspect of the youth centre, which

provides education, language, sports and is beginning to develop IT training for

Roma young people in the economically marginalised locality. They are also

seeking to obtain funding to work with older people. The centre is mainly staffed

by volunteers and Roma employed on short-term funded projects.

88

A was awarded the Raoul Wallenberg medal for his humanitarian work some

years ago. His friend was also recently honoured by the same organisation for

his political activities, as well as building bridges with non-Roma communities,

including their mutual collaborations on social justice and education. The old

friends have been instrumental in developing an exhibition on Jews and Roma in

their area of Hungary, which tells the narrative of the co-existence and the impact

of the Holocaust/Porrajmos on their local area.

When A was asked about influences on his work he did not explicitly refer to his

religious background but said “I am a Jew. This is our community. We have

responsibilities to bring up Roma children together”.

Whilst A’s motivation for this social justice action is clearly deeply related to his

personal experiences; both F and G strongly indicated the role of the Holocaust

in their understanding of the plight of persecuted GTR peoples and, in a wider

sense, the intimate connection of this tragedy to Jewish social values.

“I believe there are some very strong parallels between the situation of the

Gypsy Traveller Roma groups and Jewish history. I was involved before

the debacle of Dale Farm trying to raise the profile amongst the Jewish

community and to inspire people to get involved with fairly mixed success.

I think people made the connection but then didn’t necessarily take the

next step into action. Sometimes because it is not clear what action one

can take.” [F]

F explained that whilst she has a long history of social activism she has only

been engaged with GTR issues for 3 or 4 years as the plight of the Dale Farm

Travellers became more apparent. She first identified the connection between

Jews and Roma “after the Holocaust memorial materials really drew it to my

attention – but there was an interest there before. I remember thinking this is

89

something I haven’t paid as much attention to as I should”. She has attended

rallies, volunteered at Dale Farm and spoken to her congregants on the need to

support GTR peoples “there are the classic texts about loving the stranger but it

seems to me that people in a ‘progressive’ community [not Orthodox] are more

inspired by the historic parallels, not just the Holocaust but now even just the

rhetoric, the way they [GTR communities] are spoken about”.

F initially became involved in social action whilst living in the USA:

“My introduction to social action came with the Jewish community using

Jewish rituals to highlight things like apartheid in South Africa, anti-war

demonstrations – using the call of the shofar to call to conscience on

Capitol Hill, blowing the shofar to say ‘pay attention, think of what you are

doing’. The connection between faith and social action and political

identity was for me made very clear. I met a Chilean exile, a secular Jew. I

said [speaking of that time in her young adulthood] ‘I don’t want anything

to do with either religion or politics’, I thought both were corrupt. He said

’to choose not to engage is also a political choice’ and that hit me quite

hard”.

F explained that she realised (even before she became religiously active and

ultimately trained for the rabbinate) that Jews who are involved in social action do

so because they are Jewish, regardless of their faith:

“I asked the Rabbi specifically ‘my friends who do this work [social action]

do you think it has anything to do with being Jewish?’ and he said ‘It has

everything to do with being Jewish – nothing to do with God’”.

Another Rabbi from whom she sought confirmation suggested that:

“They [secular socially active Jews] have internalised the Jewish story so

90

thoroughly over the generations that they simply don’t recognise the

religious basis for what they do. The overarching narrative is that nobody

should be slaves. I think it is part of the reason that Jewish people have

been so involved politically and socially”.

G, a lawyer working for a Jewish human rights group also drew parallels between

the ethical core of ‘Jewish life’ and how this is played out in action:

“All my life I was interested in issues around discrimination around

education because I do believe that is a one of the most foundational

things which enables communities to access opportunity. My parents are

South African (SA) and they left there because of Apartheid. I grew up

hearing about it – it was very much a topic of discussion as I grew up that

people from some backgrounds couldn’t go to university in SA even

thought they were intelligent and qualified. I went to a Jewish school and

we did a lot of work on the Nuremberg laws and one of the first of those

meant that Jewish children couldn’t go to school with German children so

this was something which really concerned me.”

G worked in a multi-national commercial law setting but volunteered for various

NGOs with a particular focus on educational and racial discrimination

experienced by children. She subsequently moved to working in human rights

law with an interest in indigenous communities and then to the NGO sector. “I

was aware of the issues that the Roma were facing. My boss’ husband used to

be the Director of the European Roma Rights Centre so it was through her I

really started looking into that”.

On first moving to the UK to take up a senior human rights post, G was quite

shocked to release the extent of the exclusion experienced by GTR people in

Britain: “It is not really an equal society – Gypsies and Travellers are chronically

excluded, unable to access basic rights like education and healthcare”.

91

She was supported by a Trustee of the NGO who “was living in France at that

time and was very much aware of the discrimination against Roma. It’s very

visible and different to how it is in the UK. He was concerned about it and

involved in a lot of UN advocacy work and felt this was an area on which much

more needed to be done. I didn’t know much about the UK situation but I did

about the European context and had a legal perspective, so I was comfortable

with introducing it as a campaign within the organisation [about 2.5 years ago]”.

On being asked to considering whether or how she saw faith practice and Jewish

social action interacting, G was clear that:

“Judaism is a prism through which I perceive a lot of human rights issues

– it gives me a way of understanding and coming at particular issues –

those issues would be important to me regardless but I understand how

the Jewish context and identity are tied up – and for me always have been

– with human rights. I think it may be different for other faith groups.”

Her responses mirrored comments from both the Irish Catholic respondents and

the Rabbi, emphasising the way in which community history and memory is

connected with the drive to take action.

“My work – for me the origins aren’t just based on [Biblical] edicts or

anything like that, there is a compulsion but I can’t separate the

experience that Jews had at the time of the Nazis from what happened to

Gypsies – at that time and now. I find it astounding that we live in 2013

and we [Jews] are where we are and they [Roma] are still where they are.

It is absolutely imperative that we do something about it – those

communities have been discriminated against like Jewish people since the

beginning of time and their lot hasn’t improved significantly in the last few

decades, and in some cases it is worsening. I am concerned about the

92

rise of the far Right in Europe. We need as Jews to get behind this work

and do something about it because if we don’t then who on earth will do

so – how can we as the Jewish community stand by and do nothing?”

5.2 The impact of working with GTR communities on individuals’ socialjustice practice and understanding

Respondents were asked to reflect upon how their work with GTR populations

has underscored their own understanding and social justice behaviours. This

question was not asked of interviewee A, as a suitable opportunity did not arise

during the discussion and his motivations and ongoing actions were self-evident.

B (the Roma activist) indicated that:

“[His] ethnic identity and religious identity both got deeper – through his

work he gets to meet people who are writers, poets and painters and is

exposed to a lot of Roma youth, other Roma organisations and the

intelligentsia. That not only deepens his Roma identity, but he is setting a

good example being a role model and the pride that comes with that

makes him feel deeper his Roma identity. In working with the priests in

terms of religion, he is more and more amazed and aware of their

openness and sacrifices that they make as non-Roma helping Roma. The

self-sacrifice he sees from them is deepening his understanding of his

faith.”

Politicisation as a strand of religious activism was a theme that emerged in

several narratives, related to liberation theology by Catholics, a call to mission by

Anglicans and expressed by Jews as a historical and liturgically mandated

responsibility to take action in the face of oppression (see 5.1 above).

Thus B indicated that within the dormitory movement:

93

“Part of the discourse we have to talk about [is national politics]. We have

a group of future leaders here. Empowerment is a buzzword, being part of

the discourse they want to make students aware of it so they bring in

speakers from all spectrums except the Far Right, so that they have

people in the middle, the left, the right but not Far Right. What they are

trying to do is explain to the future leaders – those who are going to enter

the educated classes of the Roma – that there is a discourse that the

Jobbik are trying to create so that they [Roma students] can explain to the

majority of the population what is the actual truth”.

The concept of ‘blessedness’ (interviewee D) in being born into a particular

situation in life was also important for several respondents, with the notion that

alongside being so ‘fortunate’ came responsibility and compassion, but also the

opportunity to learn from GTR people.

“It is an invitation from God to try to get alongside this group of people and

help them, but [also] to try to learn from them. The things that they have

passed to me in my life I’m not going to get from anyone else. We are all

made in the image of God.” [E]

Interviewees Ci and Cii both spoke of the impact of seeing young Travellers in

circumstances beyond their control and feeling.

“There but for the grace of God really… There is more a necessity not to

judge cos (sic) you get to meet so many people who have literally taken so

many hits in life and suffered so much. You see man X who has

committed some crime but you also get to see man X who as a boy

suffered a hellish upbringing, so not judging people has impacted life

massively for me as a result of all you’ve seen.” [Ci]

“I realise the extent of the privilege of normality compared to what is

94

around us, the infinite horrendous stories that you see in prison, and I do

think how privileged I am all the time.” [Cii]

Jewish respondents stressed, somewhat in contrast, a more overtly action driven

and urgently politicised approach, flagging up how recognising the depths of

exclusion and the real risks posed to Roma by the rise of the Far Right led to a

need to galvanise others from within the Jewish community to:

“Become more fervent, to realize that the Roma suffered tremendously at

the hands of the Nazis and in anything perhaps came out worse off than

us, because they haven’t received the public acknowledgement or the

reparation and they don’t have a nation state. We do ourselves a

disservice too trying to separate out and highlighting our exceptionalism;

the reality is we were both in the camps together and we both died at the

hands of the Nazis” [G].

“There are very very strong parallels with [how Jews have been treated]

the way of almost treating or suggesting that Gypsies are sub-human. I

just don’t understand these metaphors of disease and corruption [still used

against Roma]. At least I can take a stand with people who are being

oppressed or losing their homes. If I’m not on their side, then I don’t know

who I am and I don’t know where I’m standing and I don’t know what my

life would mean if I’m not on their side.” [F]

5.2.1 Explanations and personal understanding of differences betweenJewish and Christian approaches to engaging with GTR affairs

Whilst the topic guide enabled consideration of the theme of whether there were

different faith-based approaches to working with GTR people, it was particularly

interesting that in the main, there was limited overlap in both action and

understanding of stance between members of the two groups. Thus, whilst

Christians in the UK were aware (for example) of individual Jewish activists they

95

typically had limited knowledge of any institutional support such as that espoused

by Rene Cassin, and Jewish activists remained aware of, but not connected to

the mainstream Christian activities such as the prison project discussed above

In the Hungarian context the degree of interfaith engagement demonstrated by A

and his community, whilst unusual was not totally unknown, with B also alluding

to the fact that whilst not working with an “organized Jewish group, he would not

doubt that there are some people working with Roma who are Jews [in his

locality]”.

Several Christian respondents indicated (see below) that they were aware of

people of different faiths (including Buddhists and Muslims who interestingly were

mentioned more frequently than were Jews) working to support GTR people. No

Christian respondent indicated an (unprompted) awareness of the parallels

between GTR and Jewish people, which seemed so obvious to Jewish

respondents.

Whilst Ci and Cii had both highlighted universalistic trends in Catholic social

action in a manner not dissimilar to Jewish interviewees discourse on their own

tradition, they also considered that evangelical Christians were (based on their

own experience) likely to take a different approach to working with GTR peoples.

Overall however, they both felt that “there’s nothing universal about how different

faith groups behave, you’ll meet Catholic chaplains who don’t do a great deal and

still others from different denominations who do a lot – it’s very individual”.

Jewish respondents however were more likely to identify a “certain Christian way

of doing community work. It’s as though, well perhaps amongst the more

evangelical there’s perhaps a more literalist tradition to not challenge, to support

but not change the world, whilst a lot of us [Jews] base ourselves on the Jewish

prophets, the idea of wanting to have a world of peace and justice” [F].

96

Whilst G suggested that: “It’s difficult to make a blanket statement – but in my

encounters Christians often approach things from a religious standpoint and it

was imperative they got involved – there were Christian teachings that meant

that if they didn’t get involved there would be no moral consequences, but they

acted out of a religious imperative and that is a bit different from how we are.”

Indeed the use of explicitly religious (rather than ethical) language to explain their

engagement with GTR peoples was noteworthy in the interviews of both

members of the Anglican clergy, contrasting with the more human rights and

universalist language used by both Catholic and Jewish interviewees. This is

suggestive of Thaut (2009) and Schneider’s (2013) claims that denominational

adherence and theological stance impacts on the way social action is internalised

and perceived.

Thus, in contrast to the Rabbi’s discussion (above) on apparently secular Jewish

social actions being rooted in unrecognised religious belief, a Vicar (E) explained

his solidarity with marginalised peoples in scriptural terms as: “Walls [that divide

communities] have already been pulled down through what happened to Jesus

dying on the cross, he’s broken them down and we just have to live out the

reality”.

5.2.2 Respondents’ experience of inter-faith engagement around GTRcampaigning/support and wider social action initiatives

As a follow up to the themes within the survey, respondents were asked explicitly

about their experience of inter-faith working not only with GTR people, but also in

wider social action fields.

Whilst all (UK) respondents have comments to make about their experiences of

cross-denominational intra-faith work, indicative of the ways in which ‘boundaries’

97

could be crossed, or identified as causing surprising challenges, there was a

fairly unanimous sense that inter-faith initiatives around GTR peoples were

underdeveloped, emerged at a point of crisis or as a result of an individually

interested individual galvanising colleagues to action. The attempts at inter-faith

support often suffered from lack of organisation and clarity over potential action:

“I think that the way in which different communities work together is to

provide practical assistance and sometimes individuals lend a hand with

their individual skills and knowledge, but I don’t think that there is any

really particularly sophisticated approach or organisation amongst any of

the communities. You meet one person who says I’m a Catholic and this is

what we are doing and meet someone else from the Catholic community

and they have a completely different standpoint” [F]

“I don’t know how much [Jews and other faith groups] know (about GTR

issues) but I suspect if they knew more they would do something. It is one

of our challenges but as a Jewish community we are probably no different

to the Muslim and Christian communities – but I don’t feel that there has

ever been any concerted effort on the Jewish community’s part to do

something about it.” [G]

“I heard that some Rabbis went down to Dale Farm but we didn’t really

have contact and I don’t know who did.” [Ci]

“We’ve worked with Imams [in prison settings] – more on a practical level,

we sometimes come into contact with someone who is interested, open to

working with people, helping people beyond their own denomination. You

don’t think it’s practical theology, it’s nothing but human relationships.” [Cii]

In some of the smaller (out of urban areas) localities where respondents were

based, inter-faith work was emerging piecemeal amongst small networks of

98

individuals who had closer personal relationships than found in formalised inter-

faith groups. D referred to occasional coordinated activities (sometimes around

responding to particular need or shared learning about marginalised groups) with

“an Immam in X he was a good chap and very sympathetic to Travellers…and

when I worked in prisons I met up with inter-faith groups about once a year. At X

we have all sorts. I have been to meetings with Hari Krishnas. Hinduism - that

sense of returning to the forest near the end of life – like the early church fathers

and being in the desert. Generally there are people who are sympathetic to [inter-

faith work] but we don’t get to do it very much”.

In Hungary, whilst Roma activists were driving conversations across

denominational lines through the activities of the ‘Dormitories’ or shared

presence at anti-Jobbik rallies (at which Christians and Jews might also be found

marching side by side (Comunita di Sant’Egidio, 2013)), the operationalisation of

political discourse appeared less controversial. B referred to the way in which the

Jesuit model of social action brought together activists to learn from each other

so that “we have learnt about Black movements in America and other ways of

organising”.

In the UK, in contrast on being asked about other (non GTR based) inter-faith

social justice initiatives, Jewish respondents were aware of the developing inter-

faith appeal of Mitzvah Day (see p26) whilst the Rabbi participates in:

“The xx inter-faith Centre. It’s one of the few places that has built up a

solid relationship with a Muslim organisation. It is sometimes difficult to

find Muslim speakers and people to work in dialogue but I don’t know why.

It can be hard to get people from our community involved too sometimes,

as the Jewish community is quite small. Of course sometimes the

scriptural connections [helps] but the supercessionist model can be very

problematic. I would like to do more interfaith practical work. We work

quite widely as a synagogue on non-controversial issues such as care of

99

the elderly, safer streets as these are things we can agree on but in inter-

faith there are things you wouldn’t want to campaign on - gay rights for

example - as there are a lot of people who wouldn’t go there. So you have

to find things where you do agree and use those as a basis for shared

political action”.

The concept of identification of shared working and the ‘caution’ that might

almost unconsciously operate in terms of overt inter-faith social action was

implicit too in the comments by E, who suggested that social action was:

“more about chance. I also know people who wouldn’t class themselves

as card-carrying Christians who are involved in [support for Roma]. Some

of different faiths and some of none, one guy is a Buddhist and one a Sikh

but the overlap is people who share the same passion and desire to help

those pushed to the edge. On that page we find the overlap, the unity

although we may not be in doctrinal love with things others believe from

something Jesus said, those that are not against us are for us in the sense

of doing good things that advance God’s kingdom even though they may

not want to name it in that particular way”.

Having identified a series of key themes and tropes from the combined data set

(Chapter 4 and 5) the conclusion now sets out to suggest a faith-based typology

of attitudes towards social action with GTR peoples, and to summarise the ways

in which the aims and objectives of this study have been met.

100

6 ConclusionsThe primary aim of this piece of research was to seek to obtain an understanding

of similarities and differences between, and devise plausible explanations for,

Christian and Jewish respondents’ social action activities with GTR peoples. The

data gathered and analysed within this explanatory study suggest that it is

possible to devise a tentative typology of faith based social action which supports

Guo et al’s (2013) identification of the relationship between religious activity and

belief, and volunteering in ‘social change’ activities.

Indeed, amongst participants who possess a communal history of

oppression/genocide and/or diaspora and who have a communal tradition of

interpreting texts in terms of demanding universal social justice this case study of

GTR engagement offers a near perfect model of Wood’s ‘fusion of faith and

politics’. Wood suggests that there is a ‘theology of organising’ which can be

represented as a symbiotic relationship “between religious culture and political

organising, which allows churches [and synagogues] to make their ethical and

democratic values active in the public realm” (2002:14) .

Jawad (2012: 239) refers to the way in which a strong attachment to voluntary

work enables faith motivated activists to enact “compassion [which] in the world

of religious welfare, animates the core concept of service..[and] caters to the

needs of others not just because they are in need, but because human life has a

broader purpose”. It is this deep rooted sense of faith (whether displayed or

articulated overtly, or “embedded…into their work while continuing to appear

secular” as Schneider (2013: 436) noted about Jewish and Lutheran work with

refugees and asylum seekers), which has clearly motivated the actions of the

religiously identified members of this sample, as well (I suggest) as secular

Jewish respondents to the survey.

Haidt (2012) proposes that an individual’s ethical stance and moral judgment

shape their reasoning, leading to an adherence to particular codes of behaviour,

101

and (it thus follows) the likelihood of involvement in particular types of activity. In

the context considered in this dissertation, I raised the question at 4.1.5 of

whether or not individuals who reported following a particular faith subsequently

identified textual and doctrinal reasons for supporting marginalised GTR people,

or if the sense of duty located in faith/identity preceded their recognition of a

moral responsibility to work with the communities. Based on the findings of this

research, I would argue that Haidt’s thesis (only drawn to my attention during the

final stages of writing up) is accurate, and that there is a strong correlation

between the pre-existing faith/ethical orientation of individual respondents’ and

their reaction to the plight of GTR peoples, but there are variables in how this is

articulated and intellectually/emotionally perceived, depending upon whether an

individual identifies as Jewish or Christian.

The findings do, however, indicate that individuals with particular types of faith

identity (for example Catholics and Jews whose doctrinal approaches emphasise

both ‘action’ and politicised universality), are likely to utilise overlapping

phraseology and tropes of ‘lived practice’, which potentially bear greater

resemblance to each other than do responses from secular Jews to spiritual but

not religious respondents, or non-Catholic to Catholic Christians.

The strongest correlation between identity, social justice orientation and

behaviours appears, however, to holds true between Jews, whether religiously

practising or not.

A number of aims and objectives were noted as central to this study and whilst

(as is a common plea in most academic studies) greater research is required to

clarify the relevance and transferability of this model to a wider sample, the

answers suggested by these findings are presented in brief below.

102

Selection of influential texts that underpin social action by faith/identitycategoryBased on findings from the survey data, and despite the sharing of a set of

scripture (the Tanakh/Old Testament) with much to say about social justice,

Christians and Jews tend to rely upon different foundational texts when seeking

to explain the underpinnings of their ethical and faith-based support for GTR

peoples.

Whilst there are variants between the approach of the diverse denominations

such that Roman Catholics can draw upon pronouncements issuing from the

Vatican (as well as a tradition of liberation theology), in the main (excluding those

with personal family connections to the community) the sample of practising

Christians referred to New Testament/Gospel sources (and in particular the

concept of agape/love) to provide an ethical and theoretical justification for their

support for GTR peoples. In contrast, Jewish respondents (whether ‘religious’ or

not), were strongly influenced by a reliance on, and reference to, the universalist

emphasis on social justice embedded throughout the Tanakh. Reference to

scripture in describing their motivations and lived experience as activists were

less pronounced in the depth interviews than in the survey sample, other than

findings pertaining to Anglican clergy who were more likely than other interview

participants (including the Rabbi) to refer explicitly to scripture when explaining

their social action behaviours.

Whilst strongly suggestive in terms of willingness to initially engage with the

communities, the influence of role models (historical, personally known or

observed through their writings/observation) on social justice (coupled with

personal contact with GTR people leading to empathy) tends to be of a

secondary order in explaining ongoing, relatively long-term support for GTR.

Over time, personal commitment to challenging injustice experienced by GTR

peoples and/or ‘living faith’ becomes more relevant.

103

Amongst the majority of Christian survey respondents, as well as clergy who

participated in depth interviews, there is a strong suggestion that their work with

marginalised communities is divinely influenced, enabling them to enact their

faith through challenging injustice to those on the margins of society, and through

this activity, bringing the individual respondent to a greater understanding of the

richness of their life and their faith.

Similar/shared historical experience of discrimination provides a very

strongly articulated explanatory category for activism amongst both Jews and

Catholics who have been influenced by ‘liberation theology’. The bond of shared

persecution under National Socialism (and in earlier eras) between Jews and

GTR populations, as well as histories of migration (‘strangerhood’/’wandering’)

were identifiable tropes in Jewish narratives, adding a conceptual symmetry to

explanatory categories. However, the strongest theme remained that of a

requirement of ‘seeking justice’ where oppression was identified, a concept

similar in outcome (if not root) to the liberation theology espoused by some

Christian (Catholic) respondents.

In the main, (other than within the Roman Catholic church) there are limited

explicit pronouncements by faith leaders or central organisations that activists

can utilise in support of challenging injustice experienced by GRT peoples, hence

respondents’ reliance on foundational texts and narratives of shared histories as

a focal point for challenging discrimination or mobilising support within their

communities.

Whilst variables existed by faith/identity (as well as ‘secular’ identities), there was

some relationship found between social justice action with GTR people and other

marginalised communities. This was strongest in relation to Jews working with

asylum seekers and marginalised migrants, mirroring Torah demands for justice

for ‘the stranger’ and ‘sojourner’. Perhaps unsurprisingly, in contrast, individuals

who are spiritual rather than religious (as well to some extent secular/Humanist

104

Jews), utilize language which is both more pragmatic and rights based in

explaining their work with GTR peoples, whilst in some cases acknowledging the

influence of foundational texts on their attitudes The majority of those [latter

category of] respondents rejected the idea of an ethical ‘call’ or ‘duty’ to work with

the communities. Despite this, secular/spiritual respondents (where they provided

additional commentary) manifested high rates of engagement in external facing

activities with a range of excluded groups (e.g. refugees, second generation

migrant families; the poor) but explained their activities across social action fields

in terms of personal (humanist) decision-making to support individuals or groups

where they felt able to ‘make a difference’ and they possessed relevant skill sets.

Despite the overlap in a range of social action activities and individual working

relationships with activists from other faiths, there was very limited evidence of

explicit inter-faith engagement around GTR peoples. In the UK context at least,

some discomfort existed over inter-faith social action around subjects that could

be deemed ‘controversial’.

The implications of this minimal level of inter-faith interaction around social

justice go beyond support for GTR people and offer particular challenges to

building engaged communities of action or political solidarity across faith and

ethno-cultural divides.

The reasons for such ‘parallel’ social action activities warrant closer observation

and theorising but scope appears to exist for building alliances around shared

interests and concerns (for example, the rise of the Far Right, which threatens

not only GTR people but also diasporic ethno/faith-groups such as Jews and

Muslims). Thus whilst some degree of political self-interest may offer an initial

route to inter-faith political and policy activity, the inherent potential of religious

groups to deliver ‘services’ and build social capital through manifesting ‘faith’

within the public domain (Wood & Warren, 2002; Wood, 2009) goes significantly

further, offering hope for greater equality and understanding of GTR (and wider

105

communities) at both national and international levels.

106

BibliographyAction of Churches Together in Scotland (ACTS) (2011) A Report on theChurches’ attitude to the Travelling community in Scotland. Clackmannanshire:ACTS.

Amnesty International (2010) Stop forced evictions of Roma in Europe. London:Amnesty International Publications.

Anderson, P. (1998) The feminist philosophy of religion. Oxford: Blackwell.

Arkush, A. (2008) Drawing up the Jewish social contract. Jewish QuarterlyReview, Vol98(2), pp255-271.

Arnold, J. (2012) Conference examines plight of Roma. Canadian Jewish News,14 December 2012 [Online]. Available at:http://www.cjnews.com/news/conference-examines-plight-roma [Accessed: 30November 2013].

Arzheimer, K. and Carter, E. (2009) Christian religiosity and voting for WestEuropean radical right parties. West European Politics, Vol32(5), pp985-1011.

Baker, C. and Skinner, H. (2006) Faith in action: the dynamic connectionbetween spiritual and religious capital. Manchester: The William TempleFoundation.

Barnett, R. (2013) Jews and Gypsies: myths and reality. London: CreateSpaceIndependent Publishing Platform.

Beaumont, J. (2008) Faith action on urban social issues. Urban Studies,Vol45(10), pp2019-2034.

Beigel, G. (1997) Faith and Social Justice in the Teaching of Pope John Paul II.New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Ben Zion, I. (2013) Don’t fear Hungary’s radical anti-semitic party, Jewish MPurges Times of Israel, 27 January 2013 [Online]. Available at:http://www.timesofisrael.com/dont-fear-hungarys-radical-anti-semitic-partyjewish-mp-urges/ [Accessed: 30 November 2013].

Berman, H. (2000) The Western legal tradition in a millennial perspective: pastand future. Lousiana Law Review, Vol60(3), pp739-763.

Berryman, P. (1987) Liberation theology: essential facts about the revolutionarymovement in Latin America and beyond. London: I B Tauris Ltd.

Billig, M. and Tajfel, H. (1973) Social categorization and similarity in intergroup

107

behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol3(1), pp27-52.

Bokser, B. (1951) The wisdom of the Talmud: a thousand years of Jewishthought. New York: Philosophical Library.

Borowitz, E. and Schwart, F. (1999) The Jewish moral virtues. Philadelphia: TheJewish Publication Society.

Brearley, M (1996) The Roma/Gypsies of Europe: a persecuted people. IJPRResearch Report No. 3. London: Institute for Jewish Policy Research.

Bruce, S. (2001) The social process of secularization. In: Fenn, R. (ed) (2000)The Blackwell companion to sociology of religion. Oxford: Blackwell. pp249-263

Bryman, A. (2001) Social research methods. Oxford: OUP.

Burrell, M. (2009) The pure in heart: an epistle from the Romanies. MiltonKeynes: AuthorHouse.

Central Conference of American Rabbis (2004) A statement of principles forreform Judaism. Pittsburgh Convention Central Conference of American RabbisMay 1999 - Sivan 5759 [Online]. Available at: http://ccarnet.org/rabbisspeak/platforms/statement-principles-reform-judaism/ [Accessed 30 November2013].

Centre for Social Concerns, Loyola University (2008) An introduction to theprinciples of Catholic social teaching. [Online]. Available at:http://socialconcerns.nd.edu/mission/cst/cst_into.shtml [Accessed: 30 November2013].

Clarke, G. (2006) Faith matters: faith-based organizations, civil society andinternational development. Journal of International Development, Vol18(6),pp835-848.

Coleman, S. (2000) The Globalisation of Charismatic Christianity: Spreading theGospel of Prosperity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Comunita di Sant’Egidio (2013) A march against anti-Semitism in the heart ofHungary [Online]. Available at:http://www.santegidio.org/pageID/3/langID/en/itemID/6865/A_march_against_antiSemitism_in_the_heart_of_Hungary.html [Accessed: 30 November 2013].

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (1984) Instruction on certain aspects ofthe “Theology of Liberation”. [Online] Available at:http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_en.html (Accessed: 30 November 2013].

108

Cooper, D. (2013) They steal children. Huffington Post, October 28 2013 [Online]Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-anthony-cooper/they-stealchildren_b_4168224.html [Accessed 30 November 2013].

Creswell, J. and Plano Clark, V. (2007) Designing and conducting mixedmethods research. London: Sage.

Dawson, F. (2002) Christian Outreach to Romany in Central and Eastern Europeand Russia. [Online]. Available from:http://www.eastwestreport.org/articles/ew10301.html (Accessed 30 November2013).

Day, A. (2009) Believing in belonging: an ethnography of young people’sconstructions of belief. Culture and Religion, Vol10(3), pp263-278.

Demerath, N.J. (2000) The rise of ‘cultural religion in European Christianity:learning from Poland, Northern Ireland and Sweden. Social Compass, Vol47(1),pp127-139.

Dempsey, C. (2008) Justice: A Biblical Perspective. Atlanta: Chalice Press.

Denzin, N. (1994). The art and politics of interpretation. In: Denzin, N. andLincoln, Y. (eds) (1994) Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks:Sage. pp 500-515.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (eds) (2005) Handbook of qualitative research. 3rd

edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Denzin, N. (2006) Sociological methods: a sourcebook. Piscataway: AldineTransaction.

Dinham, A. (2007) Priceless, unmeasureable: faith-based communitydevelopment in England in the 21st century. London: FbRN.

Dinham, A. and Shaw, M. (2012) Measurement as reflection in faith-based socialaction. Community Development Journal, Vol47(1), pp26-141.

Diocese of Westminster (2009) Awareness of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller HistoryMonth, June 2009. London: Diocese of Westminster/The Catholic Association forRacial Justice (CARJ).

Doherty, M. (2013) Romani Holocaust “has not received enough attention” saysRene Cassin. Travellers Times, August 11 2013 [Online]. Available at:http://www.travellerstimes.org.uk/list.aspx?c=00619ef1-21e2-40aa-8d5ef7c38586d32f&n=2b2a40e9-03e6-4a7d-ac48-7a306f0010b8 [Accessed 30

109

November 2013].

Dorff, E. (2002) To do the right and the good: a Jewish approach to modernsocial ethics. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

Dorff, E (2005) The Way into Tikkun Olam (repairing the world). Woodstock:Jewish Lights Publishing.

Durham County Council Ethnic Minority and Traveller Achievement Services(EMTAS) (2010) The great devouring: Porrajmos – the Gypsy holocaust.Durham: EMTAS.

Durkheim, E. (1971) The elementary forms of the religious life. London: GeorgeAllen and Unwin Ltd.

Elgot, J. (2011) Fighting for the rights of the Roma. The Jewish Chronicle, August11 2011. [Online]. Available at: http://www.thejc.com/news/socialaction/53073/fighting-rights-roma [Accessed: 30 November 2013].

Ely Diocesan Board for Church in Society (2005) Travellers and the Church – aChristian response. [Online]. Available at:http://www.ely.anglican.org/church_in_community/pdf/travellers_and_the_church.pdf [Accessed 1 December 2013].

FRA (European Agency for Fundamental Rights) (2009) Data in focus report: theRoma. Vienna: FRA [Online]. Available at:http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/413-EU-MIDIS_ROMA_EN.pdf[Accessed 30 November 2013].

FRA (2012) The situation of Roma in 11 EU member states - survey results at aglance. Vienna: FRA [Online]. Available at:http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2012/situation-roma-11-eu-member-statessurvey-results-glance [Accessed 30 November 2013].

FRA (2013) Inequalities and multiple discrimination in access to and qualityof healthcare. Vienna: FRA.

Francis I (2013) Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium. The Vatican: VaticanPress.

Fein, L. (1996)Without social justice, there is no Torah. Reform JudaismMagazine Online, Fall 1996. [Online]. Available at:http://reformjudaismmag.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=2389 [Accessed 30 November2013].

Forrester, D. (1997) Christian justice and public policy. Cambridge: CUP.

110

Foszto, L. and Kiss, A. (2012) Pentecostalsm in Romania: the impact ofPentecostal communities on the life-style of members. La Ricerca Folklorica,Vol65, pp51-64.

Frank, D. Leaman, O. and Manekin, C. (eds) (2000) The Jewish philosophyreader. London: Routledge.

Goldberg, A. (2011) The reawakening of the Jewish social justice movement.The Guardian Newspaper (Comment is Free), May 20 2011 [Online]. Availableat:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/may/20/jewish-social-justicsiach-conference [Accessed 30 November 2013].

Goodwin, M. and Buijs, R. (2013) Making good European citizens of the Roma: acloser look at the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies.German Law Journal, Vol14(10), pp 2041-2056.

Greenfields, M. (2012) Faith in action: Gypsies, Jews and post-Shoah politicalsolidarity. Perspectives, Spring, pp14-18. [Online]. Available at:http://www.woolf.cam.ac.uk/uploads/Perspectives%20COMPLETE%20WEB.pdf[Accessed 30 November 2013].

Guo, C. et al (2013) Religious affiliation, religious attendance and participation insocial change organisations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol42(3),pp34-58.

Haidt, J. (2012) The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics andreligion. New York: Pantheon.

Hammersley, M. (1999) Not bricolage but boatbuilding: exploring two metaphorsfor thinking about ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Vol28(5),pp574-585.

Hancock, I. (undated) Jewish responses to the Porrajmos (The RomaniHolocaust).University of Minnesota Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies[Online].Available from:http://www.chgs.umn.edu/histories/victims/romaSinti/jewishResponses.html[Accessed 1/12/2012].

Hauerwas, S. and Wells, S. (eds) (2004) The Blackwell companion to Christianethics. Oxford: Blackwell.

Herman, D. (2011) An unfortunate coincidence: Jews, Jewishness and Englishlaw Oxford: OUP.

111

Heschel, A. (2001) The Prophets. New York: Harper Press.

Hjelm, T. (2011) Religion and social problems. London: Routledge.

Holland, J. and Henriot, P. (1983) Social analysis: linking faith and justice. 2nd

edition. New York: Orbis Books.

Humphris, R. (2013) European Union enlargement and Roma migrants’ welfare:the role of changing migration status in UK education policy and practice. HumanWelfare, Vol2(1), pp 26-35.

Huttenbach, H. (1991) The Romani Porajmos: the Nazi genocide of Europe'sGypsies. Nationalities Papers: The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity,Vol19(3), pp373-394.

Jacobs, J. (2009) There shall be no needy: pursuing social justice throughJewish law and tradition. Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing.

Jawad, R. (2012) Religion and faith-based welfare. Bristol: Policy Press.

Jewish Publication Society (1991) The Tanakh: The Jewish Bible. Philadelphia:JPS.

Jewish Publication Society (2008) The Jewish Bible: a JPS Guide. Philadelphia:JPS.

John Paul II (1989) Address of his holiness John Paul II to the participants in theThird International Congress on the Pastoral Care of Gypsies, 9 November 1989[Online]. Available at: http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/ff1.htm#vv(Accessed 1 December 2013].

Kahn-Harris, K. et al (2011) Jews, Gypsies and Travellers: a particular empathy.Open Democracy, May 18 2011 [Online]. Available at:http://www.opendemocracy.net/keith-kahn-harris-simone-abel-shaunaleven/jews-gypsies-and-travellers-particular-empathy [Accessed 30 November30, 2013].

Kammer, F. (2013) Catholic social thought and solidarity. Just South Quarterly,Summer 2013 [Online] Available at:http://www.loyno.edu/jsri/sites/loyno.edu.jsri/files/CST-Solidarity-Summer-2013-JSQ.pdf [Accessed 30 November 2013].

Kammerer, S. and Pfohman, S. (2012) Analysis of the national Roma integrationstrategies. Brussels: European Roma Policy Coalition.

Kenrick, D. (2004) Gypsies: from the Ganges to the Thames. Hatfield: University

112

of Hertfordshire Press.

Kenrick, D. and Puxon, G. (1972) The destiny of Europe’s Gypsies (Gypsiesunder the Swastika). London: Heinemann Educational.

Klug, B. (2012) Being Jewish and doing justice: bringing argument to life.London: Vallentine Mitchell.

Kravitz, L. and Olitzky, K. (ed) (1993) Pirkei Avot: a modern commentary onJewish ethics. New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations Press.

Levy-Ajzenkopf (2013) Community involved in new group supporting Roma.Canadian Jewish News, June 11 2013 [Online]. Available at:http://www.cjnews.com/canada/community-involved-new-group-supporting-roma[Accessed: 30 November 2013].

Margalit, G. (1996) Antigypsysim in the political culture of the Federal Republic ofGermany: a parallel with Antisemitism? The Analysis of Current Trends inAntisemitism (ACTA no. 9). Jerusalem: Vidal Sassoon International Center forthe Study of Antisemitism/ACTA.

Mayall, D. (2004) Gypsy Identities, 1500–2000: from Egipcyans and Moon-Mento the ethnic Romany. London: Routledge.

Mitchell, D. (2011) Why Rabbis are supporting the Dale Farm Travellers. TheGuardian Newspaper (Comment is Free) September 13 2011. [Online]. Availableat: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/13/rabbis-supportingdale-farm [Accessed 30 November 2013].

Novak, D. (1992) Jewish social ethics. Oxford: OUP.

Oden, T. (ed) (2007) The good works reader (classic Christian readers). GrandRapids: Eerdmans Publishing.

Oliver, C (2013) Our Mitzvah Day special: the green army reaches 30,000. TheJewish Chronicle [Online]. Available at:http://www.thejc.com/community/community-life/113353/our-mitzvah-day-specialgreen-army-reaches-30000 accessed 21/11/13 [Accessed 1 December2013].

Oxford World’s Classics (2008) The Bible: Authorized King James Version.Oxford: Oxford Paperbacks.

Pogany, I. (2012) Pariah peoples: Roma and the multiple failures of law inCentral and Eastern Europe. Social and Legal Studies, Vol21, pp375-393.

113

Pontifical Commission for Justice and Peace (1988) The Church and racism:towards a more fraternal society. Vatican City: The Vatican.

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (2001) Contribution to world conferenceagainst racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. VaticanCity: The Vatican.

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (2005) Compendium of the socialdoctrine of the Church No. 192. Vatican City: The Vatican.

Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People (2005)Guidelines for the Pastoral Care of Gypsies. [Online]. Available at:http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/migrants/documents/rc_pc_migrants_doc_20051208_orientamenti-zingari_en.html [Accessed 30 November2013].

Power, M. (2005) Worlds apart: global difference and inequality. In: Daniels, P. etal (eds) An introduction to human geography: issues for the 21st century. 2nd

edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited, pp.185-212.

Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994) Qualitative data analysis for applied policyresearch. In: Bryman, A. and Burgess, R. (eds) Analyzing qualitative data.London: Routledge, pp173-194.

Rose, O. et al (eds) (2008) Righteous indignation: a Jewish call for justice.Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing.

Rosenhaft, E. (2011) Blacks and Gypsies in Nazi Germany: the limits of the'racial state'. History Workshop Journal, Vol72(1), pp161-170.

Sacks, J. (2005) To heal a fractured world: the ethics of responsibility. London:Continuum.

Schmidt, U. (2010) Hunted by hate: the persecution of Roma communities inFrance and Italy. Jewish Socialist, Winter 2010-11, pp6-7.

Schneider, J-A. (2013) Introduction to the symposium: faith-based organizationsin context. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly Vol42(3), pp431-444.

Schroeder, C. (2009) On social justice: St Basil the Great (Popular Patristics).New York: St Vladimir's Seminary Press.

Schwartz, S. (2006) Judaism and justice: the Jewish passion to repair the world.Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing.

Shatz, D. et al (eds) (1997) Tikkun Olam: social responsibility in Jewish thought

114

and law. Collected papers from the 6th Forum of the Orthodox Forum 1994. NewYork: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Sinkoff, N. (2008) Socialism. Encylopaedia Judaica [Online]. Available at:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0018_0_18779.html [Accessed 30 November 2013].

Soros, R. (2013) Europe needs a Roma working class. The Guardian (Business),26 November 2013. [Online]. Available at:http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/nov/26/europe-roma-working-classgeorge-soros#start-of-comments [Accessed 1 December 2013].

Spirova, M. and Budd, D. (2008) The Roma: a ‘European minority’? The EUaccession process and the Roma minority in new and soon-to-be member states.Comparative European Politics, Vol6(1), pp81-101.

St John, C. (1999) On wealth and poverty (Popular Patristics). New York: StVladimir's Seminary Press.

St John, J. (1985) Religion and social justice: ethics in a changing society.Oxford: Religious and Moral Education Press (RMEP).

Stackhouse, M. (1984) Creeds, society and human rights: a study in threecultures. Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Storm, I. (2011) Ethnic nominalism and civic religiosity: Christianity and nationalidentity in Britain. The Sociological Review, Vol59(4), pp828–846.

Tanner, K. (1992) The politics of God: Christian theologies and social justice.Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Thakur, S. (1996) Religion and social justice. London: Macmillan.

Thaut, L. (2009) The role of faith in Christian faith-based humanitarian agencies:constructing the taxonomy. Voluntas, Vol20(3), 319-350.

The Bible Society (2008) Bishops carry poverty and justice Bible. The Povertyand Justice Bible [Online]. Available at:http://www.povertyandjusticebible.org/news.php?NEWS_ID=30 [Accessed 1December 2013].

The Holy Bible: Douay-Rheims-Challoner (2008) London: Baronius Press Ltd.Thurfjell, D. (2013) Faith and revivalism in a Nordic Romani Community:Pentecostalism amongst the Kaale Roma of Sweden and Finland. London: I BTauris.

115

Walden, R. (ed) (2004) Racism and human rights. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.

Walzer, M. (1985) Exodus and revolution. New York: Basic Books.

Walzer, M. (2012) In God’s shadow. Politics in the Hebrew Bible. New Haven:Yale University Press.

Walzer, M. et al (eds) (2000) The Jewish political tradition volume one: authority.New Haven: Yale University Press.

Weisel, E. (1981) Somewhere a master: Hasidic portraits and legends. NewYork: Summit Books.

Windstedt, E. (1913) Early British Gypsies. Archives of the Gypsy Lore SocietyNew Series, Vol 7(1), pp5-37.

Wood, R. (2009) Taming prophetic religion? Faith-based activism and welfareprovision. International Journal of Public Theology Vol3(1), pp78-95.

Wood, R. and Warren, M. (2002) A different face of faith-based politics: socialcapital and community organizing in the public arena. International Journal ofSociology and Social Policy, Vol22(9/10), pp6-54.

Yanklowitz, S. (2012) Jewish ethics and social justice: a guide for the 21st

century. Pompana Beach: Derusha Publishing.

Zed, R. and Freidrich, J. (2009) Hindus and Jews disappointed with Pope forignoring Roma apartheid, October 2 2009 [Online]. Available at:http://www.siasat.com/english/news/hindus-and-jews-disappointed-pope[Accessed 30 November 2013].

Zinner, S. (2012) On the historiography of the Roma and Sinti "Gypsies" and theHolocaust. [Online]. Available at:http://www.samuelzinner.com/uploads/9/1/5/0/9150250/romasinti2012.pdf[Accessed 30 November 2013].

116

Appendix 1

‘Survey Monkey’ Questionnaire

Social Action with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma (the impacts of religiousbelief and cultural identity on volunteering and working with marginalised

communities)

Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study of faith-based social actionwith Gypsy, Traveller and Roma (GTR) communities.

Although you are asked to provide your name and (where appropriate)information on the organisation for which you work/volunteer; all responses willbe regarded as personal and not representative of any organisation's keyobjectives or mission unless such information is in the public domain (forexample on official/organisational websites).

Please note that all data will be stored in compliance with the Data ProtectionActs and any information or responses from this survey that are cited in thereport will be anonymised unless you explicitly provide permission for yourname/organisation to be used within any outputs of this study.

You may at any time contact the principal investigator (below) and request thatyour questionnaire is removed from the sample for analysis.

Further information on the purpose of this exploratory study (which is intended toform a pilot for a larger scale project in the future) is available by emailingMargaret Greenfields (principal investigator) at:Margaret.Greenfields@bucks.ac.uk

Data collection will take place between the late Spring of 2013 and the middle ofNovember 2013. Do please feel free to send on the link for this survey tointerested colleagues from your own or other faith groups.

117

1. Name

2. In which country do you live?

3. What is your gender?Female

Male

4. What is your age?18 to 24

25 to 34

35 to 44

45 to 54

55 to 64

65 to 74

75 or older

Other (please specify)

5. How long have you been working with Gypsy, Roma orTravellerpeople?

< 1 year

1-5 years

6-10 years

11-15 years

16-21 years

22-29 years

118

30-40 years

40 years+

Other (any additional comments you wish to make)

6. How would you define your religious/cultural identity?Christian (practicing)

Jewish (practicing)

Secular Jew

Buddhist

Muslim

Hindu

Quaker

A follower of some other religion (please specify below)

Spiritual but not formally religious (please specify below e.g. "raised Catholic but now'spiritual/ethical' rather than religious")

AtheistOther [please specify your denomination - e.g. Church of England, Liberal Jew, Sunni Muslim,

Methodist, etc.

7. Please describe your main field of employment/ or context inwhich you worked prior to retirement/redundancy etc?

Academic

Voluntary/Community Sector

Legal/Planning

Health

Education

Government Agency (please specify)

Faith-based organisation

Home-maker

Self-employed (please specify in which field e.g. IT)

119

Other (please specify) e.g. Roma NGO in Hungary; Jewish Aid Agency, USA

8. Are you employed by a faith organisation? If yes please specifyname and main field of work - please provide a web-link if possibleto your agency

Yes

No

Volunteer with faith based organisation (e.g. Caritas - please specify below)

Other (please specify)

9. Which Gypsy, Traveller or Roma (GTR) communities do youwork with?

Romany Gypsies (English/Welsh)

Roma (please specify below - if possible - the country of origin of the Roma population youwork with)

Irish Travellers

Scottish Gypsy-Travellers

New Travellers

Other (please specify)

10. In which country do you carry out most of yourwork/volunteering activities? e.g. England, France, Romania (ifappropriate, please also specify the city/region in the text-boxbelow) e.g. England, Birmingham region mainly

120

11. Do you have contact with agencies or individuals working withGTR communities in other countries?

Yes (please specify under 'other')

No

Don't KnowIf yes please explain further e.g. member of a European Network of academic or activists; workfor an NGO with Roma projects in other countries etc (if possible please provide web-site link if

appropriate)

12. Do you work with other (potentially marginalised) communitiesin addition to GTR people?

Yes (please list the other communities you work with in the text box below)

NoOther (please specify)

13. Is your work/volunteering with GTR people an 'individualinitiative' (e.g. volunteering to help complete forms etc. on apersonal basis)?

Individual initiative (e.g. I volunteer to help with literacy issues at a local site)

As a member of an organised group (e.g. ACERT/Roma Rights Group/pro bono legalservices)

Part of my job remit (e.g. my employer runs a specialist Roma support project)Other (please specify)

14. What type of activities do you carry out with the GTR peoplewith whom you work?

Campaigning

Delivery of Direct services (e.g. health care, educational assistance, etc - please specifybelow under 'other')

Provision of legal advice

Prison visiting

'arms reach' activities such as provision of policy advice to front-line services/membership

Planning advice/aid

121

academic research (please specifiy below under 'other')

Community Development practice

Any other activities - please detail below under 'other'Other (please specify)

15. How much autonomy do you have in your work with GTRcommunities?

A high degree of autonomy e.g. can initiate projects or respond directly to individual need

Medium e.g. answerable to a committee and need to follow policies but I can influence andamend practice

Low e.g. I follow instructions directly from a more senior staff member or am employed towork on a particular project

My work crosses a number of boundaries - e.g. employed to work on a play-scheme butassist wider family members with completing forms, escorting to health clinics etc.

Other (please expand your answers as required)

16. How did you first become involved in working withGTRcommunities?

Employed to work on a specific project/job role

Contact through my professional activities e.g. health worker, encountered GTR groups andwanted to work more closely with the communities

Through activities within my faith organisation e.g. religious outreach to GTR groups from mychurch

Academic study leading to personal commitment

Personal contacts with GTR people (e.g. Irish Travellers attend my church; met Gypsymothers through my children's school etc. - please specify under 'other')

Living near to site/high profile case led to interest and involvement (e.g. Dale Farm case -please specify under 'other')

Friends or relatives were already working with GTR communities/volunteering on projects

Heard a lecture/speaker or read media reports about the situation of GTR people andwanted to do more

My faith group has a 'mission' (including seeking converts) to GTR people

122

Other (please expand or provide further information as appropriate)

17. Do you know if your faith community has a particular 'stance'or programme of work with GTR communities? e.g. CatholicChaplaincy for Travelling People; Evangelical programme ofoutreach/conversion for Roma people?

Yes (please specify below)

No

Don't Know

If YES please comment further

18. If NO to the question above - are you aware of any 'centralised'policy statements which might lead to such work - e.g. statementsfrom key religious authorities in your country on engaging with'marginalised' communities; or which explicitly refer to GTRpeople? Please provide details if possible and/or weblink

19. Do you consider that your religious or cultural origins haveinfluenced your decision to work/engage with GTR people? (If yes -please expand in the text box below e.g. - As a Jew I feel empathywith …... or Methodism encourages....

20. Are you aware of any particular scriptural/doctrinal mandatewhich underpins your work with GTR peoples?

Yes (please explain below)

No

Don't knowIf YES - please provide detail e.g. my faith requires that we are welcoming to people who areregarded as 'strangers'.... Isaiah 1,17 states ‘seek justice, help the

123

oppressed'..

21. Are you aware of any influential teaching by leading figures inyour faith or key secondary sources (for example, Rabbinic texts,Buddhist leaders, individual Imams or Papal statements) whichcould be seen to support your work with GTR peoples?

Yes (please provide details below)

No

Don't knowIf YES please expand your answer if possible

22. Do you personally consider that you have a moral/ethical dutyto work with GTR people?

Yes (if yes please explain why below)

No

If YES please explain why (or add other comments)

23. Do you feel that your theological/cultural stance on workingwith GTR peoples is one which is shared by many others of yourfaith/ethno-cultural community?

Yes (if Yes please explain further below - e.g. Jewish empathy with other victims ofpersecution during the Shoah, as a Muslim I am aware that some communities explicit racism asa result of… etc.)

No (if No please explain below why you feel that you are relatively 'unusual' in yourinterpretation of theological/moral responses to GTR people?)Please expand on your answer above if possible

24. Have you ever encountered resistance/challenges to your workwith GTR peoples from other members of your faith/culturalgroup?

Yes (if YES please explain further by providing up to three of the most common reasonsgiven by members of your faith group for challenging/resisting your work)

No

Don't Know/Not Sure

124

If yes please provide up to three common responses (ranked by how frequently you have heardsimilar arguments....e.g. why don't they just get a job; they don't have to live in caravans... etc

25. Have you ever used theological /doctrinal arguments to attemptto convince other members of your community/faith group toengage with GTR peoples?

Yes

No

No applicableIf YES - please explain if these were successful or not

26. How has your work with GTR people impacted on your OWNapproach to social justice?

27. Do you work with members of other faith-based organisationson GTR issues?

Yes

No

Don't know (e.g. have never asked other volunteers about their religious beliefs ororganisations)If Yes please provide details if possible - e.g. I am part of a multi-faith group who work with

Roma in Bulgaria

28. In your work with GTR communities do you work with (or haveyour worked with) people of faiths other than your own?

Yes (see below)

No

Don't knowIf YES - do you feel that this has deepened your understanding of other faiths and theirapproaches to social justice - please explain further

29. Would you be interested in participating in a more in-depthinterview by telephone/skype or face-to-face on the topic of faithand social action with GTR communities?

Yes (If Yes please indicate your preferred method of communication and provide contact

125

details below – e.g. phone/email/ etc. Please note it will only be possible to select a fewindividuals for follow up study at this stage of the project)

NoPlease add your preferred contact details - email/phone etc if you are happy to be recontacted.

(Email preferred)

MANY THANKS FOR TAKING PART IN THIS PROJECT.

A report will be available in the late Autumn/Winter of 2013, which will detail thefindings of this small-scale study. Subject to obtaining funding, a larger scaleproject may take place on faith-based social action with excluded communities inthe future.

Please contact Margaret Greenfields at margaret.greenfields@bucks.ac.uk if yourequire further information or would like to receive a PDF version of the report indue course.

126

Appendix 2

‘Topic Guide’ for depth interviews: Faith-based social action with GTRcommunities

Name/Age/Gender/Profession/Volunteering role etc.

Faith/Ethnic status [practicing religion?/level of activity]

Duration of working with GTR groups (and what they do)

What led respondent to work with the community?

Whether they feel there is something distinct about GTR communities?[open/probe what]

Whether they are ‘called’ or compelled to work with GTR [faith/identityissues/personal history - probe]

[PROBE - what influence their faith/ethnic status has on engaging in socialjustice/action e.g. evangalisation – nb: explore key textual understanding andhow their faith/interpretation requires them to engage in social action]

In their work with GTR communities do they have contact with otheractivists of different faith/are the community they work with of a differentfaith?

If YES – probe ‘how’ work – e.g. ‘side-by-side’ (per Chief Rabbi) or using onemodel/undertaking same role – differences in how work with communities etc?

Do they feel that they have gained enhanced understanding of other faithgroups during/as a result of their work with GTR groups? [probe: - do theyhave any sense of what underlies the work of other faith groups with GTR –same motivations as themselves/own faith community or different?]

What have they learnt [if anything] from working with other faith groupsabout a) themselves/own faith community and b) other religions?

Anything else they wish to tell me?

Thank and ask if want copy of report when completed