Seeking a creative Christian response to a crumbling UK society

Preparing ourselves for an uncertain future

Terror, plague and disease threaten the future - but there is a better way!

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘Dominion: The Making of the Western Mind’ by Tom Holland (Little, Brown, 2019)

Whom will it serve?

You don’t have to be a prophet, or even a believer, to recognise that deep divisions are wracking Britain today. The 2016 Referendum exposed some of these. People are starting to realise that ‘politics as usual’ is no longer possible: we have entered a period of unprecedented turmoil and upheaval: what we have frequently referred to on Prophecy Today UK as part of the ‘shaking of the nations’.

While the spiritual forces underneath this shaking may be black and white, so to speak, how all this bears out in individual thinking and behaviour was never going to be clear-cut, because human beings are complicated. For instance, the unforgiving binary options of the Referendum masked complex concerns and ideological standpoints on both sides, which has been a point of frustration for many.

But despite this complexity, the oppositional worldviews underlying the battle for the soul of the West are gradually becoming more and more apparent. At the polls and in virtually every sphere of daily life, people are increasingly being forced to choose, one way or the other.

Political Polarisation

It may have taken a generation for the cultural Marxism being preached in universities to filter down into mainstream culture, but that project is now nearly complete, enabled and encouraged by a political establishment purporting to take the centre ground. Those who accept this radical left-wing worldview are lining up on one side of the debate; those who react against it on the other. Because the worldviews at stake are vastly opposing, we are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes.

This polarisation is visible in the recent EU election results, which saw centrist parties lose considerable ground to parties both farther to the left (e.g. greens, ultra-liberals) and farther to the right (e.g. nationalists). Whether ordinary citizens are becoming more radical in their politics, or simply expressing frustration, the result is an empowering of parties farther outwards on the political spectrum.

We are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes, underlain by worldviews that are vastly opposing.

Dig a little deeper than left-right divisions, however, and the battle lines are really being drawn up either around the defence of the ‘old order’ that emerged from Christendom (including the nation-state system, a strong family unit and the importance of individual freedom from state interference), notwithstanding its imperfections, or around its destruction and replacement with the inverse (i.e. globalism, anti-life and anti-family movements including LGBTQ+/radical feminism/abortion/euthanasia, and the subjection of the individual to increasing state control).

All this means that wherever one sits on a variety of hot-button issues, it is increasingly difficult to forge a compromise path or remain neutral. This is especially the case for Christian institutions and ministries, who ostensibly hold the truth. The time has come to nail some colours to the mast.

Oceans Apart

The reality of this was exposed strongly this week with news of a vicar in Essex resigning, from both his positions as governor of a CofE primary school and local vicar, over the promotion of transgender ideology. The school had allowed a child under 12 to announce his gender transition to his class, without any agreed procedures and without informing other parents, but with the full support of the diocese. The Revd John Parker submitted his resignation letter, in which he expressed concerns that children are being “sacrificed on the altar of trans ideology”.¹

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles and into radical left-wing identity politics (the schools issue being just one manifestation of this) for as long as they can, hoping and praying for change from the inside, but who have finally decided that enough is enough.

These defectors are seeking spiritual safe havens in other denominations or breakaway Anglican groups, including GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference, an international Anglican body championing traditional biblical teaching), while the CofE establishment has drifted ever farther out to sea, lured by siren calls of ‘compassion’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘welcome’.

Across the vast distance that has opened up in between, calls for unity, dialogue and peaceful disagreement sound ever-more faint and hollow. It is difficult to see any other future for the CofE than one of disintegration, barring some drastic repentance, especially within the upper tiers of its leadership.

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles for as long as they can, but have finally decided that enough is enough.

However, there is yet a sense that the CofE has not capitulated completely, but is still being pulled in both directions. The Lambeth 2020 international meeting of bishops, for example, is being boycotted by both conservative GAFCON members and ultra-liberal bishops who think the Church is not going far enough in its ‘welcome’ of gays and lesbians.

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s weak attempts to appease both sides in the sexuality debate have failed to give strong leadership one way or the other, permitting the gradual permeation of the Church with LGBTQ+ ideology in a way that has angered both pro-LGBTQ+ activists (for not being fast or far-reaching enough) and those trying to remain faithful to Scripture. In other words, attempts to forge a middle-ground, compromise position have only made matters worse, fuelling polarisation – just as we have seen more widely in national politics.

The Time is Now

All this is really to say that the era of easy ways out – of fudging compromises, of appeasement and of sitting on the fence – is all but over. But perhaps that is not a bad thing, for, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm…I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (Rev 3:15-16).

The Church in all quarters badly needs to choose whom it will serve (Deut 30:19; Josh 24:15), heeding James’s warning that “whoever chooses to be a friend of the world renders himself an enemy of God” (4:4). The disagreements in which the CofE is mired result from it befriending a worldly ideology that stands in total opposition to God. This ideology cannot save, and only leads to division and disintegration. As with the Church, so with the nation.

Our study this week looks at Jeremiah, the ‘weeping prophet’, and expresses hope that in our day we will see people who humbly cleave to the Lord’s council, grieving over the nation and daring to speak prophetically from that place to both king and priest. If ever Britain needed such prophets, it is now.

Meanwhile, may the faithful continue to rally – not primarily to one political party or another, but to the Lord and his word, just as the Levites rallied to Moses (Ex 32). Therein we will find salvation, security, hope and light which will radiate out through us to the nation.

References

1 Read more at Christian Concern.

Why are we often so different?

In response to Linda Louis-vanReed’s recent article ‘The War on Trump’, Jock Stein muses on the contrasts between American and British attitudes to life and liberty.

In earlier life I had an American colleague who, domiciled in Scotland, heroically adopted three children from Devon. The oldest had an inherited genetic condition and suffered from depression as an adult. Last year, living on his own in California, he took his own life – but not before seeking help from three hospitals who all refused him admission because he had an insurance card called ‘Obama Care’.

The hospitals all refused to use the Obama Care card because they had been purchased by large hospital conglomerates, who wished to pursue more expensive insurance options.

American Christians have a record second to none in dedicated missionary and humanitarian engagement. But it has always puzzled me why their attitudes to healthcare provision, as well as to other political issues, are often so different from ours in Britain. If it were a matter of Christians thinking differently from others, I would expect and understand that – but my impression is that these attitudes represent the majority of Christians as well as Americans in general.

This article is an attempt to explain why this may be the case; it draws upon conversations with Americans as well as past reading, but I am open to correction.

1 Separation of Church and State

The Declaration of Independence is premised on belief in God. But because the American colonies saw church affiliation as directed by the attitude of the reigning monarch (rather than based on theological principles) they decided to allow for a separation of Church and State, hoping that this would make differences between denominations less problematic. Indeed, America was big enough to allow what missionaries called a ‘principle of comity’, with some States being mainly Presbyterian, others Baptist and so on.

Those who signed the Declaration never intended this separation to rule God out of public life. They just wanted to avoid the ‘establishment’ model being replicated in America, so that Christians (especially Non-conformists) would have a freedom they had not enjoyed in Britain. This has resulted in thousands of denominations freely proliferating.

On the one hand, this has allowed a freedom of theological inquiry which is non-aligned to political identity. On the other hand, it has inevitably led to the emergence of ‘tribal’ political identities, with politicians courting ‘the Christian vote’, just as Britain has had ‘the Non-conformist vote’ and ‘the Catholic vote’.

Those who signed the Declaration of Independence never intended the separation of church from state to rule God out of public life.

Since the Constitution does not actually name God, in the 20^th Century atheists began to argue more strongly not just to keep church out of state business, but to keep God and the Bible out of it too. Abortion and religious education in schools became crunch issues. While much the same kind of situation has now been reached in Britain by a different route, nevertheless here there is not the same stark gap between faith and public life that exists in the USA.

For example, take the polarisation between Christianity and science. In the USA, believing scientists such as Francis Collins (who cracked the human genome) have to tread very carefully around this issue when they write (as Collins does in his latest book The Language of God, which includes his testimony), despite the fact that 70% of US scientists across the full spectrum of disciplines identify as being ‘people of faith’ (Christian or otherwise). In the UK, there has been a far greater historic acceptance of faith and science rubbing along together.

This modern American attitude to separation – keep faith out of public life – seems to have embraced aspects of service also, feeding the arguments (outlined below) that welfare and healthcare are private matters - the responsibilities of individuals and churches, rather than the state.

2 The Formation of American Identity

The century leading up to the First World War did a lot to found American values. It was a Cowboys-and-Indians century in which Americans drove the frontier westward, with a belief (parallel to the spirit of British Empire) that the United States had a destiny to subdue the entire continent in the name of God.

A nation of self-made people was in the process of forming its own identity, especially after the Civil War, which left the country shaken and wounded. During this century, the steel magnate and self-made multi-millionaire Andrew Carnegie wrote a book called The Gospel of Wealth. In it, he argued that economic inequalities then emerging in American society should be tackled by the wealthy upper class, who should put their hard-earned millions to good use, engaging in thoughtful, responsible philanthropy.

A sense of individual responsibility came to characterise white American society and its Christianity.

This sense of individual responsibility came to characterise white American society and its Christianity, while it was black people who began to identify the Gospel communally – i.e. with a people and a race.¹ This contrast between individual and communal aspects of Christianity is expanded later.

Both Britain and the US have struggled to work through their race issues, but in Britain the work of those like ‘the Clapham Sect’ extended far beyond slavery into other social issues, and eventually Christians and non-Christians formed a consensus to support ‘the welfare state’ after the Second World War, which included the provision of social care. The same did not happen in USA.²

3 Individual and Social Provision of Care

The Old Testament teaches that God’s justice and care for the poor does require some social provision, not just individual charity (e.g. Lev 25). Similarly, the New Testament teaches that equity cannot be left simply to the goodwill of individuals (e.g. 2 Cor 8:13-14). This has often been reflected in the teaching of Christian leaders – for example, Calvin’s concern for his neighbour led him to support low interest rates and a city-sponsored job creation programme.

The theological underpinning of this comes from the biblical idea that each individual human being is made in the image of God (Gen 1:26) and is in need of rescue from sin through the coming of Christ and his sacrifice (John 1: 14, 29). But we also see (e.g. in Hebrews 2:5-10) a social or corporate focus – Jesus taking on humankind as a whole and dying, once for all, on the cross.

That is why the early Church Fathers described the incarnation as having both an individual side - the Lord coming to earth as a specific individual (enhypostasia in Greek) – and a corporate side - the Son identifying with humanity by taking on human nature (anhypostasia). And it is why the illustration of the Church as the Body of Christ – one body with many parts – is so powerful.

In other words, both the social and the individual matter when it comes to salvation, and this affects how we see the Gospel impacting society. My impression is that Christians in Europe, perhaps more influenced by Calvin, have taken on both these aspects of our salvation, the corporate aspect which lends itself to socialism, and the individual aspect, favourable to capitalism. This has led (all told) to a centrist economic position incorporating aspects of both in the provision of social welfare, but without the exclusion of charity.

Both the communal and the individual matter when it comes to salvation – and this affects how we see the Gospel impacting society.

In the US, it is the individual emphasis which has largely prevailed, while socialism has often been identified with communism (seen as the great rival of the American way of life, especially since the McCarthy era), and so rejected.³

In Britain the founder of the Labour Party (Keir Hardy) was a Christian; and early Trade Union branches, especially in Wales, were known as ‘chapels’. While of course many Christians held other political views, socialism was respected in Britain and found political expression in a way that did not occur in the States. The US Democratic Party had very different roots.

Final Thought: How Far is Grace ‘Unconditional’?

Healthcare is expensive, and understandably all governments struggle to put a cap on cost in one way or another, especially in ageing societies like Britain and the US. Both countries continue to debate this.

Although the contexts are very different, there is one question about attitudes which both societies face: do you help the poor regardless, or only the ‘deserving’ poor? And – to pick up the story I began with – do people really have to be wealthy enough to afford a certain level of health insurance before they qualify for assistance?

In other words, should the State set ‘conditions’ for the receipt of benefits, and if so, what conditions should it set? This may be directed by cost, but it is also a moral dilemma. Responses on each side of the pond will, at least in part, reflect the cultural differences outlined above.

Christians face this with regard to their own giving: do you help the poor, whether they deserve it or not - whether they belong to your group or not? Or do you limit generosity to ‘those and such as those’? In Roman times, the Emperor Julian used to complain how Christians supported pagan poor as well as their own, even though they would also have known Paul’s priority expressed in Galatians 6:10. And beyond the Church, is ‘charity’ only a private and individual concern, or is taxation and welfare a proper concern of ‘charity’?

In the days of the New Testament, Christians had to work out these issues within a minority group of believers – and in many respects we are now back where they were then. But the laws of Western nations were drawn up when Christians were at least nominally in a majority.⁴ Our social and political witness does, I think, require us to put these questions on a wider canvas, while we still retain the freedom to do so.

References

1 The formation of this ‘evangelical identity’ is well documented (see for example George Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, 1980, OUP).

2 A recent interesting book which explores the history of these ideas is by the American writer Marilynne Robinson, The Givenness of Things (2016, Picador).

3 See Bob Goudzwaard, Capitalism and Progress: a Diagnosis of Western Society (1979, Wedge Pub. Foundation).

4 See The Evolution of the West, by Nick Spencer (2016, SPCK), Research Director of Theos.

The twin movements of social change turning British society upside-down.

I’m sure there must be days when our Prime Minister regrets having won the leadership contest for the Tory Party when David Cameron departed in 2016, after he backed the wrong side in the Referendum. The media assault upon Theresa May has intensified since her success in negotiating the first stage of Brexit with Brussels.

Those who are determined to keep Britain under the authority of the European Union are using every weapon at their disposal. They are actively seeking to destabilise the country by concentrating their fire upon Theresa May and her leadership in the hope of creating such confusion that public opinion will swing around against Brexit.

The central issue is not political and it is not economic. In fact, all the prognostications of gloom and doom from the Remainers have not happened. Unemployment has not soared, it has fallen; the economy has not collapsed, it is doing moderately well; we are not back of the queue in doing trade deals with America and other parts of the world; both the USA and China are eager to make trade agreements with Britain.

The central issue, as we have said many times before on Prophecy Today, is spiritual. In fact, the battle for Brexit is part of a much bigger spiritual war for the heart and soul of Britain - and the West at large. This war is changing the fundamental structure of our nation, and yet most people, even if they are aware of it, do not understand it.

The battle for Brexit is part of a much bigger spiritual war that most do not understand.

A Tale of Two Movements

If we are to understand the battle currently assailing Mrs May and the Brexit process, therefore, we must zoom out and take a longer-term perspective. Such a perspective reveals that there are two movements of social change running parallel in British society, which are also visible across the whole of Western civilisation.

One is the philosophical movement of secular humanism, the roots of which go back to 18^th Century Enlightenment philosophers, and through which emerged both the pseudo-scientific theory of Darwinian evolution and the political ideology of Marxism. Secular humanism seeks to set society free from the restrictions of religion and elitism to enable each individual to make their own decisions and to determine their own destiny in line with secularised principles of liberty and equality.

The second movement is far more deadly and destructive because its objective is simply social anarchy. This is the LGBTQ movement – the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and queer movement. Their major objective, quite publicly stated since the early 1970s and the rise of the Gay Pride Movement, is the destruction of the family, which they see as a fundamental ‘source of oppression’.

If the LGBT movement can destroy traditional family life based upon the covenant of marriage with its roots in Judeo-Christian biblical teaching, they can achieve their goal of a society entirely free of all restrictions, in which all forms of sexual activity, including paedophilia, are legal. That is what they are aiming to establish and that is what lies behind the most recent campaign to promote ‘transgenderism’ as a normal part of society, starting with little children in infants’ school.

There are two movements of social change running parallel in British society – secular humanism and the LGBT movement for sexual liberation.

Both of these movements of social change have a spiritual basis, being driven by the powers of darkness rather than philosophical concepts. Both became entwined about 30 years ago and since then have run parallel, feeding upon each other and causing confusion in the public square, such that the true objectives of each are not discerned. Both are fundamentally connected in with the EU project. So, the danger of the destruction of all our social institutions and the collapse of social order in the nation is not being perceived.

Church Decline and Weakness

All this has happened during a period of Church decline and weakness and when biblical truth has not been taught to children in schools or at home. We now have a situation where half the population have virtually no knowledge of the God of Creation and ultimate standards of truth. Only a tiny minority of those under the age of 50 have any knowledge of the Bible, upon which the whole basis of Western civilisation is founded.

It is this spiritual vacuum in the nation that has paved the way for a major assault upon truth, which has also given us today’s fake news, driven by the enormous power of social media.

Sadly, we have a generation of clergy and preachers who have little or no understanding of what’s going on. I remember my confusion when I began in my first church in London. I was fresh out of college and I was expected to preach twice on Sundays and minister to an ethnically mixed working-class congregation among whom I had never lived or had any experience. Virtually none of my theological education and training was any use to me. I had won my university’s prize in classical Greek, but it was about as much use as yesterday’s newspaper in dealing with the issues I now faced on a daily basis.

It was for this reason that I enrolled at the LSE to do a Masters in Sociology leading to a doctorate. I was determined to understand the forces of social change that were sweeping through society at a bewildering pace.

While forces of change have swept society at a bewildering pace, the Church has been in decline and weakness and biblical truth has not been taught to children in schools or at home.

As far as I’m aware, theological education of clergy has not changed much since my day, so most of them are like King Saul’s army facing the Philistines – “On the day of battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in his hand; only Saul and his son Jonathan had them” (1 Sam 13.22). If church leaders are not armed for the battle they will not be able to teach their people to understand the complex mission field that faces us today, nor equip them to fearlessly declare the truth to a dying nation.

Unconditional Affirmation?

Hence, we have the appalling ignorance of an Archbishop and a House of Bishops who have just declared, “The House of Bishops welcomes and encourages the unconditional affirmation of trans people”. Clearly, they do not understand either the biblical and theological significance, or the sociological significance, of what they’re doing. They are like the religious leaders who Jesus faced, “though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” (Matt 13:13).

Writing about the new ‘liberal democracy’, which he sees as a quasi-religious movement that has swept away most of our Christian traditions, Dr Joe Boot says:

The seemingly unstoppable and rapid advance of this neo-Marxist and neo-pagan worldview, aided by a largely unprepared and ineffective church pulpit, means a religious revolution has left many Christians stunned, confused and often afraid to do anything but retreat or concede.¹

The plain fact is that we don’t know what to do to stop the total secularisation of our society in which, once the older generation has gone to glory, Christians will become a tiny, persecuted minority. Our greatest need is for clear direction from the Lord. In this editorial we have simply outlined the problem and not attempted to offer a response. That is what we hope to seek the Lord for in the next few weeks. We would greatly appreciate feedback from readers.

References

1 Boot, J, 2017. GOSPEL WITNESS: Defending and Extending the Kingdom of God. Wilberforce Publications, London, p2.

Catharine Pakington reviews ‘The Marriage Files’ by Patricia Morgan (Wilberforce Publications, 2014).

I read this book with interest since we live in a time when once-accepted norms about sexual identity, marriage and the family face constant challenge. Until recently, there was an agreed understanding of the definition and role of marriage – but no longer.

Dr Patricia Morgan, a leading sociologist and respected family policy analyst, has brought careful research together on the subject in this scholarly yet readable book, well-supported with extensive references. It was not a quick read but I found that it answered many of my questions and made evidence on the matter accessible.

A Long-Term Perspective

Morgan assesses the historic contribution that marriage, with its responsibility for the procreation and education of children, has made to the stability of society.

Once upon a time, the Government defended marriage on principle - but since no-fault divorce was introduced in 1969/70, marriage has steadily been undermined. Today, this vital biblical institution has been ‘re-defined’, continues to be in decline and faces attack from all major political parties with a tax and welfare system that penalises couples living together.

Dr Patricia Morgan has brought careful research together on the institution of marriage in this scholarly yet readable book.

Throughout the book, Morgan looks critically at evidence from different studies, assessing the extent to which it supports the clear agenda that has been progressed over recent decades. Importantly, we are given the opportunity to test this evidence out for ourselves, so that we can recognise unfounded slogans and distorted statistics when we see them.

Focus on the Children

A particular focus of Morgan’s scholarly research is how the huge changes wrought over recent years have impacted children – whose welfare has largely been forgotten in the clamour for ‘equality’ and ‘rights’.

Repeated studies from different nations confirm that, on average, children thrive best when growing up in an intact, heterosexual marriage with their two biological parents. This also benefits the parents and is good for wider society; for example, marriage is the greatest factor in reducing crime in men.

Morgan outlines the advantages of conjugal marriage as compared to other environments for raising children, and considers why it faces such antipathy, being labelled as patriarchal and outdated.

Shifting Battlegrounds

Finally, Morgan looks in depth at studies supportive of same-sex ‘marriage’, which are often quoted to show public support for such unions or to suggest positive outcomes for children brought into these families. She allows us to consider how the studies have been conducted and how reliable they really are.

She also looks ahead as the campaign continues through educational policies and manipulation of the media to normalise all kinds of relationships. We are told that the LGBT lobby seeks equality, but what we see are the interests of a small minority eclipsing the interests of all others.

A particular focus is how the huge changes wrought over recent years have impacted children, whose wellbeing has often been forgotten.

Indeed, the battleground is moving from combating homophobia to the overthrow of ‘heteronormality’, so all believe that there is nothing special about a male-female family unit. Meanwhile, as the differences between male and female are denied, so fathers are marginalised, mothers are expected to work and childcare becomes the domain of the State.

Looking to the Future

We need to be aware not just of the upheaval taking place in our society but also of the implications for the children caught up in this great social experiment. What are the consequences going to be for future generations?

Morgan’s book is invaluable for its observations as well as for its provision of factual evidence. Well recommended for those who are interested in learning more about this issue.

‘The Marriage Files: The Purpose, Limits and Fate of Marriage’ (276pp) is available for £10.99 (paperback) on Amazon. Also available on Kindle.

Magna Carta Unravelled (Wilberforce Publications, 2015, 217 pages, £7.99)

This book, a joint venture between Wilberforce Publications and Voice for Justice UK, is a collection of essays by eight experts in various fields (eg politics, law, the Church) largely based upon talks given at a conference held in May to commemorate the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta. Among the better known contributors are Baroness Cox, Lynda Rose, and Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, but all those involved have distinguished reputations and are highly experienced.

Six of the original talks were expanded by the speakers into written form and to these were added two extra chapters. The overall result is a comprehensive survey covering the origins of Magna Carta, the development of its ideas throughout history, and its relevance today. The whole makes an important contribution towards the discussion on the contemporary challenges we face in our nation regarding our freedoms.

The opening chapter provides an excellent overview and sets the scene, declaring that "what we need to recognise today is that we are in the middle of a predominantly three-stranded ideological war: between Christianity, secularism, and Islam" (p29). Society is now in the grip of competing belief systems as the ruthless imposition of non-Christian values with their own ideas of 'rights' and 'freedoms' are being selectively applied. The result is a vigorous shaking of our foundations which is causing many to wonder what the eventual outcome will be.

This is an important contribution towards debating the ideological war currently gripping British society."

Other chapters cover the historical and theological background to Magna Carta, its Christian origins and legacy, the role of the State concerning freedoms, and the rise of Islam and sharia law in the UK. The final parts focus on the current challenges to individual liberty. On reflection, not all sections are of equal interest or engagement; some are more difficult to follow and rather stolid. Certainly, there are also many anecdotes and testimonies, including up-to-date personal stories, but often these have been well covered elsewhere and are over-long in the context of this particular book. There is even some overlap between speakers, which may be one of the disadvantages of a book produced from a conference. Overall it is difficult not to be disappointed at times that this is not a more enjoyable read.

However, the book clearly has a place within the current re-assessment and evaluation of Magna Carta. It is of a suitable length to fit between short introductions and fuller studies, and above all it does ask the right questions. Realising that the UK is "at a crossroads, with the soul of our nation at stake" (p17), it is very pertinent to consider the relevance of Magna Carta. Clearly it is an important historical document but what about now, eight centuries later, in our multi-cultural society? The fundamental principles and freedoms that it established have recently been attacked, dismantled and shattered. How did this happen and why? And where do we go from here?

This book asks the right questions about the present situation and future outlook in Britain, showing how Christian principles and values are not just being eroded and marginalised, but being branded as dangerous."

As the authors show, Christian principles and values are currently being marginalised, rebranded as hate speech and provocation if expressed publicly, and even portrayed as dangerous to a liberal and secular modern society. At the very least the likelihood is that there will be continuing attempts to contain Christian views and eventually eliminate them in the cause of new freedoms and ideas of tolerance. The ultimate fear is that we will lose our specifically Christian freedoms altogether.

Is this unduly alarmist or a wake-up call? You decide! Either way here is an informative and valuable resource for those seeking to think through these vital issues.

'On Rock or Sand? Firm Foundations for Britain’s Future', edited by Bishop John Sentamu (SPCK, 2015, 258 pages, £9.99).

This essay collection features several members of the various symposia called by the Archbishop of York over the past four years to assess the effects of the recent economic crisis and the challenges facing the nation in areas such as welfare, education, poverty, health and work.

It examines the underlying values of our society and looks for hope amidst the shock and confusion caused by the shaking of our financial and political systems. How firm are our foundations today, and what can be done to make them more stable for the future?

Some of the contributors are well known, others less so, but all are experts in their fields, both as academics and practitioners. The Archbishop’s website offers background information on the authors and their work, but the book provides more depth.

Each chapter contains plenty of analysis with an abundance of facts and figures. For some, this might be heavy going and can be skimmed over to gain the general gist, but by the end of each section there are always principles affirmed and practical approaches suggested, clearly set out and theologically based.

Judeo-Christian values have historically been the lifeblood of the nation but in recent times the body has been bleeding profusely. It is now pale and weakened. A new infusion is required. Solutions to our nation’s ills are sought within the teachings of Jesus and a Christian vision for society based upon the value and well-being of individuals. Too often this has been defined in narrow economic terms. Rather, it is argued, we need a better understanding of real wealth and what it means for everyone in society to flourish.

"Judeo-Christian values have historically been the lifeblood of the nation but in recent times the body has been bleeding profusely."

Perhaps most thought-provoking is the section on ageing. Is living longer a blessing or burden? How does society respond to a greater life expectancy and value those of extreme old age? We are encouraged to look upon the elderly in terms of our own personal futures. One day we will be them. This challenges us to also put ourselves in the shoes of others we may not usually associate with - the poor, underprivileged, those out of work or seriously ill.

Overall, the book advocates a role for the Christian faith in all aspects of the nation’s life. Politics and politicians alone cannot piece together a shattered society. The Church must have a public role. At the very least it should hold up a mirror to society and show what it has become. But before the Church can earn the right to be heard it must demonstrate a clear understanding of what is needed.

"Sentamu suggests that, like the Old Testament prophets, it is essential for religion to speak truth to power"

As Sentamu suggests, like the Old Testament prophets it is essential for religion to speak truth to power (p6). The work of the symposia as outlined in this book provides the necessary clarity to discern what is sand and what is rock, as Britain decides what kind of future it wants to build. In an election year, here is a thoughtful contribution to the democratic debate.