By Rev Paul Graham
By the time this magazine reaches the end of its life we might well be looking at a very different world than at the time of writing. Currently, there are ongoing debates and discussions over how (and if) our departure from the EU will be shaped and negotiated. I’m still unsure when, let alone how this will end (in all probability on 29th March and somewhere between glorious triumph and abject failure, depending on your point of view).
One thing I do know is that it has shown how divided we have become as a race of humans.
Well, to be honest, I’m not sure that’s strictly true.
There have always been disagreements. Ever since Cain and Abel played the first fatal game of “my sacrifice is bigger than your sacrifice” we have seen the often tragic results of not being able to get along with each other, in spite of our many similarities. Wars are most often started because one group of people (race, nation, etc) decide that another group of people (race, nation, etc) need to have their differences highlighted, usually in a terminal way.
The Christian side of history is by no means immune from this. Deciding on the original doctrines of the first churches sometimes resulted in the vanquished heretic meeting a grisly fate. Crusades were fought on the basis of difference; tolerance and inclusivity were not part of Richard the Lionheart’s battle-cry.
Violent disagreement wasn’t limited to fighting the so-called infidels overseas. It isn’t that long ago that vicars could merrily report people like me for preaching in a way that was unseemly and ungodly and my meeting with the Almighty would be hastily brought forward. Only after the signing of the Religious Tolerance Act of 1689 could our Baptist forebears start to hold their heads up high without fearing that they might be chopped off.
And even that hasn’t stopped some parts of the church flexing its muscles in its attempts to win as many arguments as souls. Those inside as well as outside the Christian world have been confronted by “the truth” and have found themselves beaten into submission rather than set free.
Sometimes the only answer is to admit that the division is greater than the unity and to split away. We wouldn’t have denominations if splits didn’t occur in church life. And certainly there are those engaged in the social media conflicts over Brexit that would rather see a fully independent England, divorced not just from the EU but from the whole continental identity of Europe.
But I find myself asking “why?” Why does conflict occur so often and so easily? Time and again we fall into the trap of treating someone as our enemy because they might hold just one opposing viewpoint to us. No matter how much else we might have in common, it’s that one difference that becomes the main focus. We label people by their identifiable difference (sometimes pejoratively) and give ourselves labels (very rarely pejoratively) because our group identity (“herd mentality”) gives us strength in opposition. It becomes more comfortable to be “Brexiteer” against “Remoaner” than Sally against Phyllis or son against father.
So what is the Christian response? Because this is a magazine article rather than a book, I’ll ask questions rather than provide a step-by-step “how to” guide…
- First question is a largely rhetorical one: Can you have a disagreement with only one party and one opinion? (Answer, no, not really.)
- Second question: Therefore, with two (or more) parties in disagreement, why do people so quickly move to being enemies?
- Third question: How then do people reconcile this with Jesus’ teaching on “loving your neighbour” when it’s so much more satisfying to prove them wrong?
- Fourth question: Does this mean that people are not allowed to disagree with each other?
- Fifth question: What would the world look like if people learned to live more like Jesus?
- Final question: Why aren’t we doing it then?
