The Other View

Quite inexplicably, and without warning, the presenters of my normal morning radio started talking about Val Doonican! After convincing myself that I really was awake my mind recalled Saturday nights as a child when bedtime was slightly later than usual. This treat, however, was somewhat tainted by the fact that the only television programmes on were such efforts as the ‘Val Doonican Show’. Rocking chairs, cardigans and songs like ‘O’Rafferty’s Motor Car’, with its forty shades of green, were the order of the day.

When one considers what the evangelical constituency is thinking about the current political situation again that particular song comes to mind – at least forty shades of opinion, even if green is not the colour!

For any familiar with the evangelical family, in all its breadth, that will come as no surprise. Contrary to what some would try to tell us, evangelicalism is a broad church ranging from what might almost be described as ‘fundamentalism’ on the right wing to charismatic elements who class themselves as very much on the left – and everything in between. At its best this provides a dynamic experience of Christians celebrating diversity but united on what they perceive to be core truths; at worst, the age-old problem of continuing fragmentation as doubts are cast on the commitment of some to the core truths.

Evangelical opinion on the Belfast Agreement, reflecting the broader ‘Protestant’ community, has been divided right from the outset. Many made clear their opposition – this Agreement was morally flawed, would not work and would be opposed. Others welcomed it in almost ‘messianic’ terms – a new day had dawned and we could leave the past behind. For the rest, it was mixed emotions – it did seem like a step forward, a risk worth taking, but there were always nagging doubts.

Drawing the line between morality and pragmatism was a difficult proposition. Should prisoners be released when the State has a God-given duty to promote good and punish evil? Should political power be given to groups who, to all intents and purposes, still had ‘private armies’? On the other hand, there had to be the realism that politics is not always so clear-cut, so clean; that being so, should we acknowledge it as progress that certain groups were signalling their intent to move towards the political process and away from violence?

Despite the fact that sections of evangelicals found those questions easy to answer – ‘No’ in every instance – others were not so sure. It was dawning that whilst there was a duty to uphold high, Biblical standards, there was a sense in which risks had to be taken to enable the community to climb higher up what has been described as ‘the moral ladder’, moving away from conflict and attempting to build better relationships within a divided society.

One of the greatest risks turned out to be the strain to relationships within the evangelical community! Stance on the Agreement, for some, became almost a test of fellowship, rather than the core truths of the faith referred to earlier. Some from the pro-Agreement camp displayed more than a sense of frustration at the views of the ‘anti’ side, whilst some of the anti-Agreement wing questioned how anyone calling themselves ‘evangelical’ could support such an ‘immoral’ development. For some those divisions are still not healed.

Recent developments have tended to reinforce the opinions of those who had voiced their opposition from the start. The collapse of the regime could not have come quickly enough and revelations about the activity of certain paramilitary groups have provided opportunity for plenty of, "I told you so!" Others find themselves with a deep sense of disappointment, especially those who had viewed the Agreement as that messiah-type hope.

For the most part, however, there seems to be a realism across evangelicalism which realises that the problems of our land cannot be fixed overnight. Nor can they be settled by legislation without relationships. Perhaps the greatest flaw in the outworking of the Agreement is that it has not succeeded in bringing divided communities together. Legislation can only do so much; it can make rules and give systems for settling disputes but it cannot bring people together. Our representations to the Human Rights Commission were based on the same premise – rules and laws cannot build community; it requires relationships!

There is also a much stronger sense within evangelicalism that questions of terrorist activity must be addressed. Whatever the political arguments over the timing of Sinn Fein offices being raided the same week that the Colombia trial started and more facts were released about Castlereagh, the fact remains that we still have major players in government who have not distanced themselves from violence. Of course the same must be said of loyalist paramilitaries and evangelicals must be unambiguous in condemning violence from whatever source – a responsibility not always met by our political leaders. That being said, surely an even greater responsibility lies with those appointed to the Executive to ensure a clear break from paramilitarism? Evangelicals who were prepared, sometimes against their better judgement, to give the Agreement a chance and encourage some parties to abandon a violent past are now saying, "You have had enough time; make it happen."

That is not to say that there is a desire to put the Assembly to rest! In fact, it has been most unhelpful to hear leaders of the Republican and Nationalist community argue that the present situation proves ‘Unionists just don’t want a fenian about the place.’ Indeed, more than being unhelpful it is downright insulting to those, including those within evangelical circles, who have taken risks to give the Agreement every chance to work. Clergy and other church leaders were among those who encouraged their constituencies, despite their reservations, to take a step forward, often putting themselves out on a limb and facing the wrath of colleagues and parishioners who opposed them.

Furthermore, it is too simple to reduce the arguments to purely political terms. Whilst there may be a significant number of Christians who tend to let their politics influence their theology there is also a considerable constituency whose theology influences its politics. As a result decisions that are made about the political process are informed by sincerely held views of Scripture and of what one feels God requires in a given situation. Again, in such instances, it is inadequate to reduce the situation to anti-Catholic bias and an unwillingness to be democratic.

As the situation unfolds for us in the future evangelicals, along with every other section of the community, face serious challenges. We must acknowledge the fact that we share the blame for our problems. We are all in some way infected by the sectarianism that runs through the land and we must tackle it within our own particular communities. We must also live out the reality of what we claim to believe – that every person is made in the image of God, of unique value and capable of being changed by the power of God.

We must also do away with the naivety that thinks we would have a perfect society if we could get rid of the ‘Troubles’. Belfast suffers from similar problems to other major cities in the western world. Turf is controlled by drug barons and gangs fight for their patches, and whilst our gangs might be better armed than in other cities the same forces are at work. We must address the alienation within our broader Unionist/Loyalist community, where it is perceived that the church has deserted especially the working class. We must heal the rifts within our own faith communities – never again must our allegiance to a political entity determine our fellowship with our fellow Christians.

But perhaps our greatest challenge is not a new one. As evangelicals we claim to owe primary allegiance to a Kingdom that is ‘not of this world’ and we regularly pray, "Thy Kingdom come," trusting that the values of God’s kingdom will come to the fore on earth. It is high time we realised those values are supposed to come through us as we put them into practice in our lives; that they are not some mystical force that will somehow envelop our society. How we do that is back to O’Rafferty’s car, all kinds of shades, all kinds of ways, but if driven by that higher allegiance evangelicalism in all its diversity can have something positive and relevant to offer to the building of a community where peace, love, justice and relationship are high on the agenda.

Back to Contents