A Christian country – but what kind of Christianity? A response to David Cameron and Justin Welby
.gif)
By Andrew Symes
Senior Conservative politicians have been declaring their support for the Christian faith during the Easter season. Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and then more recently David Cameron himself have stated that Britain is “a Christian country”. This has been greeted with predictable fury by secularists who think that this is somehow privileging Christians over those of other faiths and none, and will fuel “sectarianism”. A Jewish commentator in a radio interview dismissed this, pointed out the irony of the secularists’ complaint coming during the official public holiday celebrating Easter, and said he was very comfortable about being in a Christian country. Secularism, far from being neutral about religion as they claim, is much more hostile to all faith than Christianity is to other belief systems.
The majority of ordinary people identify with the Christian religion even if only a small minority are regular churchgoers. Campaigning secularists come disproportionately from well educated and affluent sectors of society; they are not representative but highly influential. Because of their success in this life and their dismissal of the idea of the afterlife, they will usually tend towards Darwinian and even Nietzschian views about weakness and suffering, and are often strong proponents of liberalisation of abortion, euthanasia, sexual ethics, and new genetic and reproductive technologies. They believe they are not accountable to any God, and history has shown how this can lead to dangerous and tragic arrogance when applied to government policy. While Mr Cameron did not take on the secularists about these issues, it must be seen as a good thing that he has maintained the validity of the Judaeo-Christian worldview as the basis for many of the good things in our culture. Hopefully the Bishops will take the opportunity to follow up, and explain the folly and sinister consequences of secularism, as well as the meaning of God and the relevance of proper Christian faith.
However, there were problems with Mr Cameron’s message. Firstly, its timing, just after fierce criticisms from church leaders about the effects of reformed welfare policies, and just weeks before elections where Conservatives are tipped to lose many European seats because of defections to UKIP over gay marriage, smacked of political opportunism. Secondly, his urging of Christians to be more up-front about their faith rings hollow for those who have to silence their views for fear of dismissal, as another recent case reminds us.
But thirdly, when Cameron tries to define what Christianity is, he falls woefully short. He describes the values of “tolerance… hard work, compassion, humility and love”; great cultural contributions and social action initiatives of the church, and a message of: “If we pull together, we can change the world and make it a better place". In his Church Times article he specifically avoids any mention of Jesus or even God in a message geared for the Easter weekend, and in fact defines evangelism as talking about the Church's role to improve society, and not talking about religious doctrines. In doing this he has not promoted peace within the church but has taken sides with a liberal understanding of Christianity which in the end is the ally of secularism against authentic faith. I suppose we cannot blame him for this – he is not a theologian after all – but rather speculate on who from the church hierarchy he has been working with to produce his statements.
Another old Etonian describes his understanding of the Christian faith
Many, including me, might have hoped for a break from the ‘gay culture wars’ over the Easter period. But sadly the headline in Saturday’s Daily Telegraph was back to the issue of the day, and in this case, Justin Welby’s “anguish” over gay marriage. According to reporter Cole Morton, the Archbishop of Canterbury says that the suffering of traditionalist Christians in parts of Africa as well as the promise of two years of facilitated conversations are the reasons for holding back on full C of E support for gay marriage. Lambeth Palace clearly have had some say in the timing and content of this, as we’re told that the paper has been given “unprecedented access” to the Archbishop, presumably as part of a plan to get on the front foot in terms of controlling the narrative. The choice of friendly reporter is significant as well: Moreton is a fine journalist but now very much a post-evangelical, progressive Gnostic rather than a committed believer. His book “Is God still an Englishman?” (2010) describes his own loss of faith but his continued appreciation of personal spirituality and traditional cultural Englishness underlying an ethic of loving one’s neighbour.
Welby’s dilemma is summed up by the fact that on one hand, he wants to end any kind of discrimination or lack of welcome by the church towards LGBT people. The article signals clearly that although he continues to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, he is “sympathetic to calls for” the blessing of same sex couples in church. On the other hand, Christians experiencing terrible suffering in South Sudan, Nigeria and other parts of Africa would not be able to maintain strong links with the C of E, and may even refuse to accept financial and other kinds of support, if the “Mother Church” fully accepts homosexual practice. This is explained in terms of vulnerable Christian communities becoming more of a target for aggressively anti-gay militant groups because of their perceived association with a pro-gay church.
The Archbishop is aware of the criticism he received for articulating these views in his LBC Radio interview of two weeks ago. Many of those who attacked him on the blogs and comments are of the view that full gay rights in this country should take precedence over any sensitivities about the poor in African conflict zones – and this is often being expressed in worryingly racist terms. In contrast Justin Welby’s deep knowledge of Africa and his recent eyewitness experience of trauma suffered by fellow Christians whose faith he deeply admires back up his powerful argument about the need to try to hold together a church with continuing mutual accountability, despite deep divisions over theology and sexual ethics. He is also warning against Western lobbyists who assume he will be easier to sway than those in the global South. As Moreton states, “Justin Welby believes that to shift doctrine too quickly or too far would be to turn his back on those in South Sudan whose tears he has shared”.
However Welby’s attitude, however carefully and compassionately expressed, will cause concern among confessing Anglicans around the world. The Archbishop does not try to justify his caution against blessing of gay relationships using theological arguments, but pragmatic and emotional ones. He makes no attempt to explain to the Telegraph’s considerable readership why Christians in Africa (and indeed, many in his own country) take a strong traditional biblical line on marriage and sex. It is surely primarily because they believe in God and his word, rather than their fear of anti-gay militants? The article does not begin to explore why poor people might consider their Christian faith so important that they are prepared to suffer attacks from evil killers in their midst and ignorant racists in the West with their modernist agendas for the sake of their crucified and risen Saviour.
Both the Prime Minister and the Archbishop have their dilemmas, there is no doubt, and they need our prayers. But we should save our tears and our passionate intercession not for the equivocating leadership of the C of E or politicians looking to see where they can get votes, but those who have taken a stand for Christ and are prepared to speak clearly of him and the new life that he offers, and if necessary die for him.
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
