You are here: Home » Comment »

The faith of One Nation Labour

October 11, 2012 11:11 am

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

“He who smiles last longer”, so read the Wayside Pulpit message outside a rather bedraggled Methodist church I passed on the way back from Labour Party Conference last week.

Our Wayside Pulpit message is of course now clear; One Nation Labour, which as Matthew d’Ancona alluded to means social cohesion, the shared obligations that bind us, and our collective mission.

In terms of our collective mission towards One nation a country for all, with everyone playing their part, we have seen policy nudges for example towards a cap on the fees charged by pension funds, a move to replace Ofgem with a tough regulator that would force firms to pass on price cuts in the wholesale energy market.  Both of course are veritable measures.  Good stuff.  Add to this as Andrew Sparrow also wrote “the 2012 gathering in Manchester leaves us better informed about the party, its leader, its policies and its electability”.  This is all positive for the public at large.

As for the conference itself of course Ed’s brilliant speech was obviously a highlight.  Enough ink is already being spilt eulogising its tone, no note delivery, and yes we had forty six mentions for the word(s) one nation.

What has not quite been so widely acknowledged is the reference to faith (twelve times). Whilst Ed does not hide under a bushel his religious faith free soul, elsewhere in the Party the evidence of Christian influence again amongst the Party is noticeable.   From Christian Socialist Movement fringe events discussing poverty, green issues and ethical banking to Lord Glasman discussing Labour’s “responsible recovery” the role of faith appears increasingly significant.  Indeed Glasman was emphatic in his view that a future Labour government would only be able to balance economic and social priorities if it nurtured a relationship with business, trade unions and faith.

Now a collision course within the Party where naysayers of no faith and those who do “do God” lock horns is in no one’s interest.  Yet as Michael Sandel has written the gap in the diminished place of moral argument on the political left has been prevalent since the 1960s.

For those of us within the party who do “do God” there is no better time to re-kindle the moral imperative of a Christian Socialist message as central to everything we want to achieve.  Does that mean aligning ourselves with a fundamentalist American neo-liberal view?  Absolutely anything but.

What we do do as Christians in the Labour Party committed to social justice, equality and liberation for the poor is fight for a living wage, for a financial transaction tax, for a more radical redistribution of wealth from rich to poor, and for a society that crucially embraces relationship in a new way.  A relationship that reconciles, offers hope, speaks truth and justice and offers therefore a better way.

I do wonder then whether Labour’s collective mission to transform our divided nation into One Nation will be achieved rather quicker if we finally put to rest a widespread tendency in the party to “disown God”.

Indeed who knows, if the Labour Party truly rediscovered its Christian heritage and roots, this might mean we are all smiling for longer.

Related posts:

  1. The value of faith
  2. How do we open up admissions to faith schools?
  3. Could faith be the saviour of politics?
  4. What Ed Miliband didn’t tell you about One Nation Labour
  5. Why, in spite of my Faith, I still believe in separation of Church and State
  • Redshift1

    I don’t really understand your point to be honest.

    You’re on the one hand arguing that you’re happy from a moral point of view that we are putting more attention into a variety of issues you care about ‘as a christian’ despite our leader’s lack of religious faith. And on the other you’re arguing that people who ‘don’t do god’ are somehow putting you down, despite them like you also being happy with the moral direction (without an overtly religious link). 

    What exactly do you want to happen? Seems quite comfortable for all as it stands to be honest. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

    No, I don’t think that Ed’s speech is an opportunity to push religion, and given that Ed couldn’t be more open about his own atheism, its a strange conclusion to draw.

    What Ed noted – and I would agree – is that as Labour people, as socialists and social democrats, we share a faith. For some of us the inspiration will be humanistic, for others religious – but it is built around the wish to work for a better, kinder society, in other words, an overtly ethical stance.

    I felt it was in many ways a very clear explanation of what a left wing ( as opposed to right wing) approach to the rebuilding of Britain might be like – even cleverer that Ed nicked a Tory term in order to do it!  But given that many of us don’t do God, and really aren’t in the mood to be dragooned into religionism, lets look for those issues we share and leave the inspiration for those beliefs to the private sphere

  • uglyfatbloke

    Ed Miliband’s lack of religion is one of his better qualities – and he has a number of good qualities. Now, if he’d just embrace fairness…like fair elections for example….

  • Brumanuensis

    I know Sandel tends to take a more benign view of religion than some progressive thinkers – seeing modern atheism as the kind of value-free philosophy that he criticises in his books – but I don’t think, as Mike’s pointed out, that Ed has the same view.

    I would certainly be averse to religion influencing policy. As an atheist, I don’t need god to subscribe to an ethical system that complements left-wing politics and I don’t think religion, with its emphasis, ultimately, on a hierarchical relationship between believer and deity – and sometimes clergy too – is a particularly good match for socialism. Equally, the very fact that religion relies on faith, which by definition is meant to be distinct from reason – i.e. we believe in some things regardless of the evidence or lack thereof, for them, as proof of our religious affiliation – isn’t a healthy impulse to encourage in policy formation, where we must remain reasonably sceptical and willing to tolerate differences of opinion and philosophy, for the sake of tolerance and pluralism. I always did think the ‘faith’ part of Blue Labour was its most problematic aspect.

    • Dave Postles

       There’s also an element in all religions that is transcendent rather than immanent.  IMHO, we do not need to compromise the immanent with the transcendental.  We are here and now.

    • Paul Bickley

      Is that Stafford Cripps as your avatar? Author of “Towards Christian Democracy”?

Latest

  • News Labour Equal marriage amendment gets Tory backing

    Labour Equal marriage amendment gets Tory backing

    From: HERBERT, Nick Sent: 20 May 2013 16:29 To: HERBERT, Nick Subject: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill – voting today   Dear Colleague Thank you for your support for the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill at Second Reading. You will be aware of the amendments tabled by Tim Loughton and others (new Clauses 10 & 11) to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples I have no issue with the principle of this proposal, but I am very worried that adding this measure to the [...]

    Read more →
  • News Whitewash report claims that there’s no such thing as DWP “league tables” for sanctions

    Whitewash report claims that there’s no such thing as DWP “league tables” for sanctions

    Whilst the Westminster village has been working itself up into a lather over the rise of UKIP and when/if there should be an EU referendum, the DWP snuck out a report on the evidence of DWP league tables that we brought you recently. It’s a total whitewash. The report – which you can read here – argues that claims of a league table are entirely down to individual managers at a number of job centres. You could call it the [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured Equal Marriage is the most important thing – but Labour can’t let Equal Civil Partnerships get the “long grass” treatment

    Equal Marriage is the most important thing – but Labour can’t let Equal Civil Partnerships get the “long grass” treatment

    By Mark Ferguson

    So after toying with support for the Tim Loughton amendment over the weekend, Labour has decided to abstain on that particular amendment, and propose their own. Let’s be clear – the most important news today is that Equal Marriage will pass through the commons, and that’s a cause for huge celebration for all but an isolated minority in the Labour Party. I made clear this morning that I didn’t buy the argument that supporting the Loughton amendment would stop or [...]

    Read more →
  • News Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

    Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

    Labour MPs will be encouraged to back this amendment – rather than that of Tory backbencher Tim Loughton – today: House of Commons Monday 20 May 2013 CONSIDERATION OF BILL New Amendments handed in are marked thus * MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL MANUSCRIPT AMENDMENT (a) As an Amendment to Secretary Maria Miller’s proposed New Clause (Review of civil partnership) (NC16):- Kate Green (a)(a * Line 8, leave out from ‘practicable’ to end of Clause, and insert ‘and include a [...]

    Read more →
  • News Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

    Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

    By Mark Ferguson

    In his interview with the Observer yesterday, Ed Miliband singled out Google as a company who aren’t “living up to their responsibilities” on tax, saying: ” I don’t think [Google] are living up to their responsibilities at the moment, and I will be very clear about that on Wednesday. It is part of a culture of irresponsibility. If everyone approaches their tax affairs as some of these companies have approached their tax affairs we wouldn’t have a health service, we wouldn’t [...]

    Read more →