This is a short blog about the link between being a UK-based Christian who is eligible to vote and the decision about who to vote for. As a regular guy who has been in in this predicament many times, and one for whom there has never been an easy (or sometimes any) answer to the question, I offer a few modest thoughts in the hope that, simultaneously, I can both get my own thinking clearer as I write ahead of July 4th, and perhaps help you to consider yours at the same time. However, I shan’t be telling you who to vote for. To get an answer to that question, you will need to engage your mind, your heart, your eyes and your ears; you will need to reach out to the Advocate, sent by the Father, who guides us into all truth. Masterfully holding all things together, he may give different instructions to people because only he sees the whole picture.
Apparently, we live in a democracy. Sometimes it seems more like a ‘demoncracy’ given the dishonourable, self-interested way in which some of those entrusted by the public with representing the electorate have conducted, and continue to conduct, themselves. Winston Churchill’s postwar quip that democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others is perhaps less convincing in contemporary times. A case for concluding that the UK’s first-past-the-post system is failing to deliver democracy in practise gathers momentum with every general election. Many now consider that we urgently need an alternative to sighing with relief that Team Disaster are out, placing our hope on the shiny commitments made by the new incumbents, Team Hopeful, (who gained, say, a mere 36% of the total vote) then repeating the same situation in mirror image the next time. Alternatives certainly await consideration by the ‘demos’ (that includes you and I), but I cannot hold my breath for that long, so for now we are left to make the best of it. What exactly is the responsible Christian citizen to do?
Let’s firstly get out of the way whether voting may be considered mandatory. Leaving aside one’s primary identity as a Christian (and it is primary) for a moment, it has been said that citizens of every persuasion should vote because many of our predecessors laid down their lives to make sure that future generations could exercise their right to vote instead of living in a nation ruled by totalitarian despots. Regardless of how I feel about the spread of political options currently before me, I have come to accept as indisputable my responsibility to vote, even if I may have failed to do so on a past occasion. However, there is possibly a caveat to this, which I shall note later.
The Christian citizen also lives under high authority in the form of the scriptures. Do they have anything to say in this space? They certainly do, but whilst certain political ideas may resonate with scriptural principles, it would be an act of theological vandalism to claim that the scriptures wholly support a party of any particular political persuasion. The political and social fabric of 1st-century Palestine was very different to 21st-century London. Roman rule was absolute, there was zero tolerance for political dissent and nobody was voting for a different Emperor. Yet, in this very context, the Apostle Paul penned the extraordinary command that Roman Christians should be subject to the governing authorities, and do good, because those authorities are instituted by God. In the midst of one of the least democratic social environments in history, and despite their being seen by society as a fringe Jewish sect, Paul instructed the fledgling church to be engaged as citizens as an act of conscience. Would he have changed his position if Rome were a democracy? Would he command anything different if he were writing to the church in London today? The principle that Christians should be fully engaged as citizens surely transcends political and social context, and being engaged implies that Christians have a responsibility to vote intelligently, the first step of which means being reasonably well informed.
It definitely is a grind to read through political manifestos, but how else can we understand what is being proposed for our nation? Merely listening to shallow 45-second soundbites presented in the media is not going to educate us on what a party is proposing to enact in our name for the next five years. However, we need to read critically, and perhaps with a sprinkling of skepticism because governments of all stripes have not only failed to honour their manifesto commitments, but have also introduced policies, sometimes far-reaching ones, that made no appearance at all in their manifesto. Unless we are gifted at foreseeing the future in detail, for now we are left to accept manifesto commitments as actual intent and although I am a political pragmatist, I have to admit that every manifesto I have ever read has contained policies I would support and others I would be opposed to, which makes it very difficult to land firmly on a choice I have been entirely content with!
On reading the manifestos, keep a close eye on the language used. What exactly is being proposed? Are there caveats and modifiers being used like “we will aim/seek/work to….”, “we intend to…” etc., effectively nullifying any actual commitment to enact policy and providing a get-out-of-jail-free card against future accusations of their having failed to honour their manifesto. Citizens are also tax payers and governments must be held accountable for making good and proper use of taxes raised, so manifesto commitments requiring expenditure from the public purse should be costed against income clearly. It may be fine to commit to doing something, but if it is going to cost money that money has to come from somewhere realistic, and preferably not from racking up the National Debt any higher – although there may be arguments for doing so under some circumstances. As has often been said, there is no magic money tree.
Before I get to the voting caveat I mentioned earlier and sign off this brief blog, here are a few more quick-fire thoughts:
• Have lively discussions about political proposals but always keep it civil
• Disagreement can be useful if it shines a light on inadequate ideas
• It’s best to avoid making one issue the only issue
• Be pragmatic rather than tribal
• Consider what smaller political parties have to offer (with the possible exception of the Pirate Party)
• I recommend listening to ‘The rest is politics’ podcast
• Pray continually
And so to my voting caveat. The impact of our vote is not only to gain seats for a party, but it also places a particular person into parliament to act on our behalf as their constituents. Where the character and/or behaviour of potential candidates for election do not meet what I consider to be a reasonable standard of conduct, I reserve the right to withhold my vote. Those who want my vote should be worthy of it, and not assume it is theirs for the taking. I do not accept that an MPs private life can be separated from their public life. It is essential to hold people in public office to high standards since they purport to make judgements on what is in ‘the national interest’. Jesus expected the same of the Pharisees, who held public office within the Jewish community in Israel. It would be a mistake to think that Jesus was against the Pharisees simply for the sake of it, or because there was something fundamentally wrong with being a Pharisee. Not at all. Jesus spoke out against the hypocrisy and corruption they at times exhibited because he expected more of them, and he was right to do so. Likewise, we should expect much of those who wish to represent us in public office.
If the candidates standing for election in my local borough are demonstrably unworthy of public office, I might have reasons to vote for ‘none of the above’. Fortunately for me, our manifestly inept local incumbent is stepping down. Alternatives may have something useful to offer, so I shall carefully be looking into them and seeking to make a prayerful, considered judgement about whether they, and their party, are most likely to be as good as it gets to run the country. Whilst many are making a foregone conclusion about who the next PM will be, I shan’t be throwing my hands up just yet, and I suggest you don’t either.
Keith Calder
