Government Re-Education of Christian Ministers: ‘British Values’

I’ve been invited to take part in a survey on behalf of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. No problem, I’m willing to help. Its subheading is Training for Faith Leaders to strengthen ministering in the British context. Excellent- who wouldn’t want to be trained to be a better minister? But then alarm bells began to ring. Why should Her Majesty’s Government be so interested in ‘training’ religious leaders? I looked carefully at the survey’s introduction (emphasis mine):

The Integrated Communities Strategy Green Paper, published in March 2018, lays out the Government’s commitment to supporting the training of faith leaders to strengthen ministering in the British context. We want places of worship to have well-qualified, informed and confident faith leaders, who are outward-looking, involve all parts of the community (especially women and young people), and are capable of resisting, and helping their congregations to resist, intolerant or extremist arguments. Our expectation is that faith institutions will themselves address this question, but we will look to help by ensuring that suitable training is available to religious ministers to ensure they understand their rights and responsibilities, including relevant aspects of the British legal system, to help support confident ministering in the British context. In light of the Government’s commitments around supporting training for faith leaders, we’d be grateful for your thoughts on the following questions…

The survey itself was quite well-meaning: could the government help me in addressing such social evils as genital mutilation, mental health issues and domestic violence? This particular government department is benign enough, and yet certain phrases in the above paragraph brought to mind Paul Hayden’s post from China this week.

‘in the British context’

What is ‘the British context’? The gospel transcends national and cultural barriers; the British context is not spiritually unique. It’s fair to say that Christian ministers ought to be aware of their community’s history and prevailing culture, but with respect, I’ve lived here nearly forty years and have as good an idea as any other. Or is it a subtle reference to Britain’s reinterpretation of marriage?

‘who are outward-looking, involve all parts of the community’

I have no desire to be insular. Although ‘all parts of the community’ is clarified to mean women and young people especially, is it a veiled reference to sections of the community whose lifestyles or identities are at odds with the Biblical standard?

‘are capable of resisting, and helping their congregations to resist, intolerant or extremist arguments’

Excellent. We don’t want to be breeding terrorists here in the Rimington countryside. But does the intolerance here refer to terrorism or traditional views on marriage? Am I an extremist if I say that Christ is the only way to heaven?

‘Our expectation is that faith institutions will themselves address this question, but we will look to help by ensuring that suitable training is available’

‘We expect you to address the points we raise, otherwise we will step in and address them for you’. Is this too ominous an interpretation of the text? Is ‘suitable training’ an expression for ‘re-education’?

The full list of those issues troubling the government is here from page 2 of the survey:

• Marriage legislation
• Equalities legislation
• Mental health support
• Shared values
• Child sexual exploitation / grooming
• Domestic violence
• Female genital mutilation
• Spotting the signs of radicalisation
• Responding to and reporting hate crime
• Other (please specify)
   

  The state has a duty to protect the wellbeing of all its citizens, regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, race and belief. In that regard it has my full support. But this survey ominously suggests that the government has plans to regulate religion to ensure compliance with its own ideas. 

  This is worrying.