casual thoughts and reflections upon life and the Creator whose idea it was in the first place

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Is faith in public life good for Britain?

Last Monday my Dad and I attended a Faithworks debate that centred around this question. Prompted by an article she had written in the wake of the London bombings ('In the Name of God') Polly Toynbee joined with Steve Chalke, Elaine Storkey and Keith Porteous Wood to discuss whether faith in public life benefits or harms British society.

Given the hotly contested nature of religion and politics, faith schools, faith-based community projects and religious fanaticism, a lively and good-humoured debate ensued.

Once opposing statistics and extremities of abuse had been exchanged the meat of the argument developed largely around education and politics. But I couldn’t help feeling that much of the arguments ‘against faith’ (I realise I maybe a little biased here!) were a little misplaced.

When it came to education the discussion really centred upon selection. While the case against ‘faith in politics’ hinged upon parliamentary privilege. As far as I’m concerned neither of these issues preclude the involvement of faith as neither selection or privilege are in-keeping with Kingdom values anyway. Surely if we (as faith communities) decide to ape the world in its desire to select the brightest and best for our schools/academies or eagerly desire seats of privilege at the top table of power then we will deserve to lose our voice and place in public life. As God’s appointed ‘seasoning for society’ we would better serve the public sphere if we remember the upside-down nature of the Kingdom and demonstrate the transforming power of role reversal epitomised by Jesus.

Actually the evening concluded shortly after a provocatively Jesus-like riposte given by Elaine Storkey. Having highlighted the inconsistent nature of gift aid that positively favours ‘faith-based’ charities, the Editor of the Christian Third Way publication was encouraged by Storkey to forego the extra 30% that he could collect from donations ‘as a witness to the injustice’.

Challenging, informative, incisive and at times uncomfortable – it was a good debate and a good evening made all the better by the fact I could chew it all over with my Dad!

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home