Evangelical Alliance ëFaith and Nationí report contains few surprises

-24/10/06

Keith


Evangelical Alliance ëFaith and Nationí report contains few surprises

-24/10/06

Keith Hebden reports

On Monday evening Joel Edwards (EA Director) and Donald Shell (Report Chairman) alongside a panel of experts, launched their one hundred recommendations on the relationship between The State and the Church.

The Report, Faith and Nation, is an ambitious analysis of the history of Christian involvement in politics in the modern age. It draws on a variety of schools of thought and even looks outside the conservative evangelical tradition to writers like John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas.

Edwards told the be-suited crowd in the salubrious Liberal Club in Westminster that his intention was to ìraise dialogueî between faith groups on the means of political engagement. He went on to refer to the increasing challenge of Muslim terror for Christians in the West.

The concept of Just War or the way that the War on Terror was being conducted however are not addressed in the report. The only question asked of the panel on this subject was given short shrift. Most of the discussion focussed only on the threat of terrorism – and as one might expect, the ëproblemí of homosexuality.

One guest at the launch told me, ìYou would have thought that a major report on faith and nation would have had something to say about what Jesus’ ethics have to say about war and violence.î Another told the panel, ìItís a shame that the report takes such a hard line on homosexual relations when evangelical opinion is so dividedî.

The report, in many respects, is what one might expect from the Evangelical Alliance. Lip service is given to supporting and encouraging ìequality in the areas of race, gender, sexual orientation, disability and age.” But whilst still conservative in its approaches to homosexuality a change of approach can perhaps be detected in the report’s pages. Issues of homosexuality are often framed as ëissues of religious freedomí for Christians. Attention is being turned to Christians who will find themselves increasingly having to deal with gay adoption, civil partnerships, and providing goods and services for lesbian and gay men and women, where they might not want to. Where some would term this ëdiscriminationí, the Alliance is focusing on the rights of Christians to make such choices.

The report’s timing is also interesting. The report comes four months after the publication of a book by Ekklesiaís director Jonathan Bartley, Faith and Politics After Christendom, which addresses many of the issues that the report does – but also predicts the direction that the report seems to have taken on them.

Donald Shell explained the motivation for the report: ìChristianity is not predominant any longerî he said, and cited the example of evangelicals not being allowed discriminate against homosexuals when working as social workers any more. Shell also complained about the new ëmega-Mosqueí proposed in Newham saying ìwe have every right for our voice to be heard.î

As might be expected the report take a quote from the Bible (Romans 13) to suggest that ìNations, states, governments and civic institutions are part of Godís planî and that Christians should embrace a ëdegree of compromiseí when engaging with civic life.

What is notable though is the reportís reference to civil disobedience. The report adds the caveat that ìresistance maybe necessary, particularly when faced with tyrannical ruleî. Revd Elfred Goddick, Director of the Evangelical Alliance in Wales, told Ekklesia that this was because Christians had to ìbalance what is clearî in the Bible ìwith common senseî and that Christians should submit to government ìunless they instruct us to do something in opposition to our faithî.

But this reference to breaking the law may be significant, as Christians come to terms with what they perceive as issues of religious liberty, and the increasingly ënegative radicalisationí of Evangelicals which Bartley identifies in his book.

The report however still takes the line one would expect when it comes to government. It endorses voting, and suggests that Jesusí ìgodly use of powerî is akin to that of good government showing respect and compassion for the poor. Goddick explained this by saying the ìnature of his [Jesusí] power as the incarnate Son of Godî allowed him to influence the government of his day.

The Report was met with high praise from the two MPs invited. Conservatives Alistair Burt and David Burrows welcomed the ìwisdomî of the recommendations. Burt went further and said the report would help Christian MPs to be taken more seriously by their colleagues.

This will not doubt be welcome as another identifiable theme in the report is the feeling that Evangelicals in general, and the Evangelical Alliance in particular, is not getting its voice heard enough.

The Alliance claims to ërepresentí a million Evangelicals in the UK, although this claim is challenged in Bartleyís recent book. Nevertheless it also suggests that Evangelicals are struggling to communicate their message.

The report suggests that “the term evangelical is much misunderstood and often vilified in public discourse. However it also suggests that ìattempts to abandon it are unwarranted.î Its solution? ìA constructive presentation of evangelical faith and practice must be a priority in the area of public policy.”

So some slick PR may soon be forthcoming ñ and if anyone has the resources to do it, the Alliance does with its multi-million pound turnover. But if Bartley’s book is right, it is less the style of the message than its substance that is the problem. The report provides little that is new in terms of the Evangelical approach, and no amount of spin is going to change that.

You can read the full text of the faith and nation report here


Evangelical Alliance ëFaith and Nationí report contains few surprises

-24/10/06

Keith Hebden reports

On Monday evening Joel Edwards (EA Director) and Donald Shell (Report Chairman) alongside a panel of experts, launched their one hundred recommendations on the relationship between The State and the Church.

The Report, Faith and Nation, is an ambitious analysis of the history of Christian involvement in politics in the modern age. It draws on a variety of schools of thought and even looks outside the conservative evangelical tradition to writers like John Howard Yoder and Stanley Hauerwas.

Edwards told the be-suited crowd in the salubrious Liberal Club in Westminster that his intention was to ìraise dialogueî between faith groups on the means of political engagement. He went on to refer to the increasing challenge of Muslim terror for Christians in the West.

The concept of Just War or the way that the War on Terror was being conducted however are not addressed in the report. The only question asked of the panel on this subject was given short shrift. Most of the discussion focussed only on the threat of terrorism – and as one might expect, the ëproblemí of homosexuality.

One guest at the launch told me, ìYou would have thought that a major report on faith and nation would have had something to say about what Jesus’ ethics have to say about war and violence.î Another told the panel, ìItís a shame that the report takes such a hard line on homosexual relations when evangelical opinion is so dividedî.

The report, in many respects, is what one might expect from the Evangelical Alliance. Lip service is given to supporting and encouraging ìequality in the areas of race, gender, sexual orientation, disability and age.” But whilst still conservative in its approaches to homosexuality a change of approach can perhaps be detected in the report’s pages. Issues of homosexuality are often framed as ëissues of religious freedomí for Christians. Attention is being turned to Christians who will find themselves increasingly having to deal with gay adoption, civil partnerships, and providing goods and services for lesbian and gay men and women, where they might not want to. Where some would term this ëdiscriminationí, the Alliance is focusing on the rights of Christians to make such choices.

The report’s timing is also interesting. The report comes four months after the publication of a book by Ekklesiaís director Jonathan Bartley, Faith and Politics After Christendom, which addresses many of the issues that the report does – but also predicts the direction that the report seems to have taken on them.

Donald Shell explained the motivation for the report: ìChristianity is not predominant any longerî he said, and cited the example of evangelicals not being allowed discriminate against homosexuals when working as social workers any more. Shell also complained about the new ëmega-Mosqueí proposed in Newham saying ìwe have every right for our voice to be heard.î

As might be expected the report take a quote from the Bible (Romans 13) to suggest that ìNations, states, governments and civic institutions are part of Godís planî and that Christians should embrace a ëdegree of compromiseí when engaging with civic life.

What is notable though is the reportís reference to civil disobedience. The report adds the caveat that ìresistance maybe necessary, particularly when faced with tyrannical ruleî. Revd Elfred Goddick, Director of the Evangelical Alliance in Wales, told Ekklesia that this was because Christians had to ìbalance what is clearî in the Bible ìwith common senseî and that Christians should submit to government ìunless they instruct us to do something in opposition to our faithî.

But this reference to breaking the law may be significant, as Christians come to terms with what they perceive as issues of religious liberty, and the increasingly ënegative radicalisationí of Evangelicals which Bartley identifies in his book.

The report however still takes the line one would expect when it comes to government. It endorses voting, and suggests that Jesusí ìgodly use of powerî is akin to that of good government showing respect and compassion for the poor. Goddick explained this by saying the ìnature of his [Jesusí] power as the incarnate Son of Godî allowed him to influence the government of his day.

The Report was met with high praise from the two MPs invited. Conservatives Alistair Burt and David Burrows welcomed the ìwisdomî of the recommendations. Burt went further and said the report would help Christian MPs to be taken more seriously by their colleagues.

This will not doubt be welcome as another identifiable theme in the report is the feeling that Evangelicals in general, and the Evangelical Alliance in particular, is not getting its voice heard enough.

The Alliance claims to ërepresentí a million Evangelicals in the UK, although this claim is challenged in Bartleyís recent book. Nevertheless it also suggests that Evangelicals are struggling to communicate their message.

The report suggests that “the term evangelical is much misunderstood and often vilified in public discourse. However it also suggests that ìattempts to abandon it are unwarranted.î Its solution? ìA constructive presentation of evangelical faith and practice must be a priority in the area of public policy.”

So some slick PR may soon be forthcoming ñ and if anyone has the resources to do it, the Alliance does with its multi-million pound turnover. But if Bartley’s book is right, it is less the style of the message than its substance that is the problem. The report provides little that is new in terms of the Evangelical approach, and no amount of spin is going to change that.

You can read the full text of the faith and nation report here