Why politicians should give up talking about God for Lent
WHEN Theresa May decided to let the world in on her Lent abstinence plans – no salt and vinegar crisps for the full 40 days — some writers rushed to say how good it was that she was up for talking about Christianity and God. “Refreshing,” wrote one rightwing commentator. This was a surprising comment really, because it seems, in fact, that one of the things that has characterised the recent string of British prime ministers has been the fact that they have been none too reluctant to do God. It’s not that Christianity has long been off the menu, rather that it has been flavour of the moment for the last few premierships, with the exception of Gordon Brown, right back to Tony Blair.
One of the perturbing things that has happened since 1997 and the election of Tony Blair is that in a time where Britain has become an increasingly less Christian country and now only 43.8 per cent of people define themselves as Christian, British prime ministers have become increasingly more vocal about their own faiths, or advocacy of Christianity. For half a century at least, talk of personal faith had been mostly avoided by our political leaders, then Blair came along, and in spite of his spin doctor Alastair Campbell’s famous statement “We don’t do God”, he has been part of a trend towards doing just that.
Even David Cameron, who at one point said that his faith was “a bit like reception for Magic FM in the Chilterns: it sort of comes and goes” seemed to increasingly feel the need to assert how “evangelical” he was about his Christian faith and that Britain was built on Christian values. Then, we had May talking back in November of how her Church of England faith lies behind what she does.
Of course, people can give up whatever they fancy for New Year, Lent, or any other period or reason, but May seems to be making too much of her faith-signalling. I would rather see a Prime Minister who was very vocal about her tolerance of all faiths, than one who wants to lead by example, expressing and drawing attention to her own faith. I would also rather not see such signalling in a Prime Minister who has the kind of history she has, of, as Home Secretary, pushing through policies aimed at criminalising and extraditing Muslims, refugees and migrants.
When political leaders focus so strongly on their own Christianity and the “Christian values” they espouse, they can stoke a feeling of false division. They create an “us and them” when really they should be finding the common ground between belief systems. What were the Christian values, for instance, that David Cameron was rattling on about? Were they the 10 commandments and core message of Jesus, the golden rule of “do onto others what you would have them do onto you”? Because Christianity has no monopoly over these principles. The 10 commandments are shared with Islam and Judaism, and there is a version of the golden rule in the majority of world religions.
There are many reasons why faith has become part of the story of current politics – whether because 9/11 and the rise of Islamist terrorism, or the rise of other faiths in British society. As a 2013 Demos report, God In Government: The Impact Of Faith on British Politics And Prime Ministers, 1997-2012, observed: “Faith has played a more prominent and open role in British politics in the past 16 years than it has done at any time since the time of William Gladstone in the late 19th century and arguably ever. The premierships of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron have seen faith issues, groups and causes rise up the political agenda.”
It seems to me it’s exactly in the context of the rise of these faith issues that politicians should just get on with politics, and keep their religion to themselves. Meanwhile, the very fact that it was Tony Blair who started the trend for doing God should be enough to make us a little suspicious. Blair and George Bush were, famously, faith-inspired leaders whose connection with God permitted, and perhaps fuelled, the war in Iraq. Bush later said that after giving the order to invade he prayed “for strength to do the Lord’s will”.
By all accounts, Blair’s Christianity, was at the heart of his politics. In We Don’t Do God: Blair’s Religious Belief And Its Consequences, author John Burton writes that it “affected his policy-making on just about everything” and said it was “Christian fervour that spurred him into action for better or worse”.
But fervour is not what we want in our politicians. Fervour can bring heat to situations that need cooling. Far from it being refreshing and new that May talks about her faith, it seems part of a global trend. Such is the state of modern politics that it seems, whether in the United States, Russia, the UK, or any part of the world, faith is all too prominent. In this context, I would rather see a Prime Minister, who, frankly, kept her faith to herself. Aren’t politicians elected to reflect the will of the people, not the will of God? Wouldn’t it be better if instead of talking of Christian values, if politicians named and broke down those values, speaking of compassion, for instance, or fairness, or love?