22nd May 2026
Where as agents of change are we most effective?
I believe it is a Christian calling to be an agent for change. Indeed it is a necessary part of bringing in the Kingdom of God here on Earth. But bringing an agent for change is not exclusively a Christian activity – people from all different backgrounds wish to see change that makes the world a better place.
This week I have been involved in three different situations where I have been endeavouring to spur action that will address the climate and biodiversity poly-crises.
Parish Annual Church Meeting
The first was the parish’s Annual Church Meeting (we are a team ministry with three churches). Not a large turnout given we have an electoral role of over 200. The fact that we are again running a deficit of £15,000 did not unduly concern those present. Was this indifference, complacency or a feeling that it wasn’t problem that none of us as individuals could address?
I spoke under AOB about the urgency of the climate and biodiversity crises and proposed a PCC sub group to help us focus on this. I suggested a proviso that such a group should only be formed if at least two people from each church were willing to join – otherwise the group could be always fighting a loosing battle against indifference. It did spark conversation – and objections – with the conclusion that there wasn’t a sufficient desire for this policy. There was the sense that the issue wasn’t that important, and that equally the climate was too big and too complicated an issue for us to deal with.
Shell AGM
On Tuesday I went to the Shell AGM which is now held in a hotel at Heathrow Terminal 5 to prevent attendees from having to encounter protestors on their way into the meeting. Inside security was very intense – thorough bag and body checks – and during the meeting security guards were it o my on the doors but sat at each end of each row of chairs. Separated from us by a 6 foot wall, the Board sat on a raised platform. After brief speeches applauding Shell’s successes by the chairman Andrew Mackenzie and CEO Wael Sawan, the three and half hours of the meeting were dedicated to questions from the floor. Most of these were critical of Shell, questioning their policy of expanding oil and gas production, their failure to make good the environmental damage of oil production in the Niger Delta, their response to staff welfare and to whistleblowers, their contribution to the ongoing climate crisis and to the demise of AMOC. (My question is included below).
The Board’s response was largely that Shell is a good business that ensures a secure flow of energy at a competitive price, that meets consumer demand. They argued that their products were low carbon – having reduced the scope 1 and 2 emissions linked to their upstream production. They contended that their products were essential for both industry and for underpinning renewable energy systems – and that therefore it was essential that they increase production for the benefit of all.
The Board members were clearly convinced that their views about the future, about the cause and urgency of climate crises, and the importance of fossil fuels, were correct. Like most of us, I guess they pick and choose which scientific reports they read, which scenarios they believe. But I hope that having heard all that we on the other side of the floor had to say, they might at least be prompted to re-examine the evidence.
Rosebank Die-in
On Wednesday I joined Christian Climate Action’s die-in outside the Treasury. For the last two plus years, CCA along with other groups have been campaigning to persuade the government not to license for production the Rosebank oilfield. Whilst the decision finally rests with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, the Treasury also has an interest in the decision – both because the project would be underpinned by subsidies from the government and because once operational, there would be tax revenue on any profits.
The action was die-in which meant that a number of us lay on the pavement wrapped in shrouds (sheets). Banners proclaimed our demands and two activists explained the reason for the action, highlighting the impact that drilling Rosebank would have on the climate and in particular on people’s lives – or rather loss there of. The whole action was witnessed by members of the press. Subsequent press releases included mention on Christian Premier Radio and others. (1)
So where as agents are we most effective?
Is it by working for change within our local community? Although here people will argue that as individuals there actions will make no difference.
Is it by challenging the big businesses whose products are the cause so much of the world’s troubles?
Although here, the business leaders say that they are only responding to consumer demand.
Is it by challenging government departments who have the power to mandate change?
Although here ministers say they must respond to what the electorate (or rather that part of the electorate that is vocal) wants.
Perhaps the answer is to be found in the words of António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General, that we must all do ‘Everything, everywhere, all at once’ if we are going to break the cycle of ‘It’s not for me to act’!
My Question
I am one of the group from Christian Climate Action who hold a weekly vigil outside your headquarters. We spend the hour praying for the wellbeing of the planet we share, for the people and the different ecosystems, we pray for the people passing by, for the staff going in and out of the building, for the security staff, and in particular we pray for you who have the responsibility for running the business, for the shareholders and financiers, in the belief that a better business model is possible – one that protects the environment, works for the common good and ensures a sustainable future for generations to come.
Last year I asked how morally you felt able to pursue a business that was destroying the planet in which we depend for our survival. Your answer was along the lines that business is in essence amoral. Yet if business is both part of economy and part of society, morality surely has a role to play. Simply to pursue profits with no regard for the impact your business has on the health of the planet, on the sustainability of life, on the wellbeing of generations to come, is surely not good business.
What I really want to know is when you will stop extracting oil and gas, and rather develop safe and secure renewable energy?
The Green Tau 
Thank you Judith, you are inspiring, as are your reflections, and a great role model for climate activism .
LikeLike