Westminster 2010: an election, and a Declaration of Christian Conscience

So the General Election has been called at last, for 6th May. This date had of course been predicted for months if not years. But then nearly two years ago most people were expecting Gordon Brown to call an immediate election and he didn’t. So, as he could in fact have held out for about another month, no one could be sure of the date until the official announcement was made.

So we have a month of busy politicking before we send our new batch of MPs to Westminster. I will not be reporting on this in detail here.

Meanwhile a coalition of important UK Christian leaders jumped the gun slightly, and used the Westminster name which of course has an illustrious Christian history as well as its parliamentary one. On Sunday they launched Westminster 2010: A Declaration of Christian Conscience:

Christian Leaders launch ‘Conscience Manifesto’ ahead of General Election with call to arms for the Country’s Christians – Easter Sunday 4th April

Thirty senior Christian leaders, including the former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, will launch a Christian Manifesto the ‘Westminster 2010: Declaration of Christian Conscience’ on Easter Sunday.

They continue (extracts only here):

Westminster 2010 is a rallying call to UK Christian voters and urges Christians of all denominations to vote with their conscience, guided by their faith.

With four million regular church attenders in Britain, on average 6,000 per parliamentary constituency, the move has real potential to have a significant impact on who is elected, especially in marginal seats.

The document sets out a broad range of policies that unite churches in the UK, including support for marriage, freedom for those of faith to live their lives according to their beliefs and opposition to assisted suicide and euthanasia.

It also calls for Christians to support, protect, and be advocates for children born and unborn, and all those who are sick, disabled, addicted, elderly, poor, exploited, trafficked or exploited by unjust trade, aid or debt policies.

The timing of the launch of Westminster 2010 ahead of the call of the General election is designed to send a clear message to all parliamentary candidates that Christians will be supporting those who will both promote policies that protect vulnerable people and also respect the right of Christians to hold, express and live according to Christian beliefs. …

Westminster 2010 marks a significant escalation in the battle by church leaders to protect Britain’s Christian heritage, which they feel is under threat.

The Christian leaders plan to target Members of Parliament and candidates who are seeking election to pledge that they will ‘respect, uphold and protect the right of Christians to hold and express Christian beliefs and act according to Christian conscience’.

The text of the declaration is here, and includes pledges to support human life, marriage and conscience. It ends with a list of “Key Signatories”, public figures in Christian ministry.

The declaration is interesting in that it goes well beyond what one might expect in an election campaigning document. Note the latter part of this sentence:

As UK citizens we affirm our Christian commitment both to exercise social responsibility in working for the common good and also to be subject to all governing authorities and obey them except when they require us to act unjustly.

On this basis they declare that

we refuse to comply with any directive that compels us to participate in or facilitate abortion, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that involves intentionally taking innocent human life. … we refuse to submit to any edict forcing us to equate any other form of sexual partnership with marriage. … we will reject measures that seek to over-rule our Christian consciences or to restrict our freedoms to express Christian beliefs, or to worship and obey God.

In other words, this has become a statement of intent of civil disobedience against laws which are considered unjust.

The problem I see is that all of this is very one-sided and inwardly focused. There is a mention in the declaration of those who are “poor, exploited, trafficked, appropriately seeking asylum, threatened by environmental change, or exploited by unjust trade, aid or debt policies”, but only following an “including” referring to all people. There is nothing in the pledge about standing against those who persecute asylum seekers, cause environmental change, or promote “unjust trade, aid or debt policies”. Contrast that with the lengthy condemnations of those who want us to treat with respect those who have chosen to live in same sex partnerships.

So I find myself in two minds about this declaration. I support what it actually says – although I think that if (hypothetically in the future) a democratically elected government chooses to use the word “marriage” for same sex civil partnerships it would be rather trivial for Christians to take a stand of principle against that word. My problem is with what the declaration does not say, with evils which are rampant in our society and in party policies which are ignored here. Indeed one might suggest that it is directed against the policies of one major party far more than against another’s.

The declaration does not take a stand against racism, whether open, or thinly disguised as in the policies of the BNP, or slightly better disguised in a rejection of immigrants and genuine asylum seekers which suddenly evaporates when the incomers are white southern Africans.

The declaration does not take a clearly defined stand against injustice in world trade and aid, and in a financial system which allows a few in our own western countries to grow obscenely rich, and all of us to benefit enormously, while third world countries are consigned to perpetual poverty.

The declaration has nothing to say about the huge imbalance of wealth in our own country. While there is a mention of the poor, there is no pledge to refuse to comply with laws that make them poorer. Now I’m not suggesting following the advice of the vicar who infamously encouraged his poor parishioners to shoplift. But if Christians are being taught not to obey laws which “require us to act unjustly”, then surely there are some in this area which can be disobeyed.

There are a number of other areas, e.g. climate change and the environment, which the declaration could mention in detail but has not done, but this post is long enough already. So, to close, I don’t think I am going to sign this pledge, but I am happy to let others consider it for themselves.

0 thoughts on “Westminster 2010: an election, and a Declaration of Christian Conscience

  1. Hi, Peter,

    I value your blog and have been following it regularly for the last six weeks – it has a great deal of “gentle wisdom”.

    The Westminster 2010 Declaration is not intended as an “election” manifesto, despite the opportunity to encourage sitting MPs and electoral candidates to consider their decisions in the “ayes/no’s” lobbies of Parliament. This is a Christian manifesto covering the areas in which Christians expect to have an influence over their own lives and the lives of their families – if that influence is not removed by a “nanny” state.

    All that is being asked for is that Christian conscience is not undermined by laws that criminalise us because of “political correctness.

    I am unable to influence global trafficking, terrorism, the way other nations treat their citizens and make bellicose decisions. I no longer have any power as an individual constituent in my political constituency. The bishops in the House of Lords do not speak for me as a nonconformist. This declarationj is the only way I have of declaring my allegiance to Jesus Christ, my King – and to remind anyone who purports to represent me that they must take this fact into account.

    In no way am I trying to pressure anyone else to make the same decision as me. Although I have been happily married for the last 40+ years to the same man, I am prepared to listen to anyone else’s POV. However I am not obliged to follow or obey them when my conscience is at stake. Maybe it will have to be the blood of the martyrs which will prove, once agaiun to be the seed of the church.

  2. Thank you, Beryl. I certainly respect your decision. Agreed we can’t have much influence on other nations’ governments, but we can influence our own concerning global issues as well as family ones. I also agree in opposing “laws that criminalise us because of “political correctness.”

  3. This sounds very similar to the Manhattan Declaration in the United States: http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/home.aspx

    I signed the Manhattan Declaration because I agreed with everything stated therein, even though it left out some things that I also “declare.” I like the idea that these declarations point out the historical Christian role in not complying with unjust laws.

  4. Tyson, the link with the Manhattan Declaration is not accidental. I just found this at the Westminster 2010 website:

    It was initially inspired by the ‘Manhattan Declaration’, which was launched in November 2009 and has now been signed by over 400,000 US Christians. Westminster 2010, however, is a completely independent initiative by UK Christians focused on UK issues.

    Nevertheless both declarations have the same weaknesses, in focusing too much on family issues and not enough on wider issues of social justice and mercy.

  5. The Westminster2010 website is currently being attacked by spammers posting fake signatures and sometimes obscene comments about bum sex.

  6. Pingback: Election 2010: Some Preliminary Thoughts On Christian Perspectives « Big Circumstance

  7. Those who SPAM are being rather counter productive in that surely their ‘fake’ signatures will count as much as genuine ones… I think the WD is a great idea, and the fact that is doesn’t go into detail on taxation etc is that it’s not about that.. it’s not a manifesto, simply a request to allow Christians to exercise freedom of conscience.

  8. Iain, thanks for letting me know. Some people are sick, but that doesn’t affect the declaration.

    James, I’m not suggesting that the Declaration should go into detail on taxation. I accept that action in some of the areas I mention would have financial implications, far greater in the short term than the implications of the areas highlighted in the Declaration as it stands – although the long term financial implications of manipulating the population with abortion and euthanasia could be huge. But how to deal with these financial implications, beyond what could be raised from charitable giving, is a matter for government.

  9. Pingback: Gentle Wisdom» Blog Archive » The Faithworks Declaration

  10. Hello there. I heard about the Westminster Declaration today and then went on a blog search for comments about it. I found your comments very interesting. Here’s what I thought:

    The declaration reads as quite bullish and I can understand why parliamentary candidates would be quite put off the idea of signing it if there is no explanation of what is really important to Christians. The freedom to believe the gospel (i.e. that we are all condemned unless we are saved by the finished atonement of Christ alone) is a lot more important than the freedom to believe that marriage is just between a man and woman for example. I guess my point is that if those values in the declaration are the only values we go with then we will be seen to be ‘religious’, ‘old-fashioned’ and out of touch rather than liberated by the gospel, lavished with the grace and love of God and living (as good citizens) as belonging to God, not ourselves. Obviously I agree with everything written in the declaration but I wouldn’t say I got an impression of the real Christian faith from it whatsoever (not withstanding the initial paragraph about belief in God).

  11. Pingback: Gentle Wisdom» Blog Archive » Westminster 2010 shows its true blue colour

  12. Pingback: Evangelical Alliance leader says "remember the poor", but too late - Gentle Wisdom

  13. Pingback: Issues of Christian Principles at Election Time - Gentle Wisdom

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Anti-spam image