home
radioElizabeth Berridge comments
Time flies if you work in politics, if you sign up for any rota at church (the speed of light if it is the Sunday School rota) or if you agree to write articles for a radio station. I cannot believe that three months have passed since my last contribution and here I am sitting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters on Day 12 of the 2010 Election Campaign. So, forgive me if what follows seems more like musings from someone living in a 24 hour news cycle who is answering a lot of emails from concerned Christians, than a coherent piece of prose.
I shall take it as read that, as citizens, Christians must vote, but how do we decide who to vote for? Firstly, our theology is important. "My theology?" I hear you cry. Yes, if you believe that there are a distinctive set of 'Christian issues' you have unwittingly applied a sacred/secular divide to your political thinking. Now, I am not saying there is only one 'Christian' view on issues such as schools or housing, as that would be akin to wanting a theocracy which is unbiblical. However, the Bible, understood in its entirety, provides a comprehensive worldview and therefore Christians need to consider the breadth of policy in this light when deciding how to vote. Catholics have been streaks ahead of Pentecostal and Evangelical Churches with their coherent theology of the "Common Good." Put simply, Jesus is concerned about our hospitals and our wars and therefore we should be.
In addition to theology, our hearts influence how we vote. "Now you have truly lost me", I hear you say. Well, what I mean is that too many Christians, and particularly those who write to their MPs and to party leaders, are angry and frustrated when I believe they should be penitent. "If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14. Although written to the biblical nation of Israel, could it be that even today God is looking to his people first, not the politicians? If we recognize the Church's past silence, and now often inconsistent voice, in public life, we will engage humbly and compassionately rather than angrily.
"I will only vote for a Christian" is an increasingly common statement and one which I am deeply uncomfortable with. I believe that everyone should vote for who they consider to be the best person to represent their constituency or ward and obviously the values and worldview of Christians standing for election will resonate with the church community. However, ill-equipped Christians, in any field, can sometimes do more harm than good. As a former parliamentary researcher said "Just because someone is a Christian does not mean they will make the best politician, or vote the 'right way' on particular issues. Often Christians come into Parliament without having properly thought through what their faith means for their politics and the result is that they get swept along in the busyness of Parliament and end up disappointing people who expected them to act differently, simply because they were the 'Christian' MP."
Let me cut to the chase, the inboxes of Parliamentary Candidates contain messages from angry Christians who say they will not vote for the Conservatives because of their tax breaks for Civil Partnerships as well as for marriage. I appreciate that many Christians disagree with this policy stance and it is of course a vital question of Christian orthodoxy if joining a church. However, voting in the General Election is not voting for your church minister; church and government are both ordained by God but have different roles. It could actually be biblical that our voting intention be determined by more than our views on sexuality.
Can we look at the issues for the poorest billion people in the world
and say I determined my vote purely on civil partnerships? Can we look
at the issue of 75,000 children on free school meals of whom less than
100 each year go to Oxbridge and say I determined my vote purely on
civil partnerships? Can we look at the issue of 75% of young black
people being on the DNA database and say I determined my vote purely
on civil partnerships? Can we look at the issue of a difference of 13
years in male life expectancy between Glasgow and Kensington... I hope
you get my drift and any comments on the coherency or otherwise of
these musings are most welcome to ccf@conservatives.com 
Elizabeth Berridge is the Executive Director of the 
Comment
Bookmark
Tell a friend
Print version
I just want to remind true Christians reading this piece that Christ said that if we are lukewarm i.e neither cold nor hot, we will be spat out of the mouth. In all honesty, if the writer of this piece understands that 'we ' gentiles were reconciled to God only through the blood of Jesus Christ through the promise made to Abraham, she should not say that the bible ref in 2 Chronicles 7:14 is for the Children of Israel alone. If we know our bible and if we are spirit filled, we SHOULD understand the times because the saviour told how to. There are no in-betweens, surely if you want to identify with Christ you will be ready to suffer persecution and remember that ' from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force' Mathew 11:12. There are critical issues here that the Christians in this country are worried about (and rightly so) and if you are a true believer it should cause you sleepless nights! You are being forced to accept things that the bible condemns outrightly as sins by way of law. The only succour is for chrsitians in this country to come together and make sure that the apostles of such laws do not find their way to the parliament thats what I mean by quoting Mathew 11:12. So I stand with Simon Phillips on this and think that your piece does not encourage sound doctrine which what got us into this mess in the first place.