Your Letters — Your Chance to Bite Back

Dear Christis,

On reading Gareth Knight’s article Conservatism and Christianity in the last issue, we felt the need (after recovering from a certain amount of hysterical laughter) to write in to politely challenge him on one or two points.

In the first place, the article appears less an articulation of the alleged links between party and faith than a largely unsubstantiated attack on the present government for no particularly clear reason — this perhaps leads to Gareth trying to score cheap political points, rather than make social or theological ones. We feel that this may also betray and worry many less presumptuous or hasty Christians who belong broadly to Gareth’s part of the political spectrum. However, we do not intend to argue from that point of view, neither of us professing a “Conservative” political agenda.

Gareth’s opening statements regarding the similarities between Christianity and the Conservative Party, together with a general lack of relevance to a Christian philosophy in this article, suggest that he has, at best, a blinkered view of Christianity’s social relevance. His main ideas of what Christianity is about seem to be directed towards “strengthening the family”. While Christianity has a great deal of relevance here, as in much of society, we do not feel it is, as Gareth expresses it, the full sum of the Christian faith. With specific reference to Conservative policy we would contest the inference that legislative discrimination against single parent and same-sex families fully supports Christian ends.

The article also gives no indication that Gareth is aware of what Socialism represents or claims to represent. If he were, he may have addressed some of the inescapable arguments, revolving primarily around social justice. Issues of social justice are mentioned in passing, but there is no attempt by Gareth to deal directly with the arguments concerning such issues. Bizarrely, the quotation made by Gareth at the end of his article that “The Holy Ghost … moves some men to be socialists and others Tories” negates his earlier assertion that there would be no point in socialism “if people listened to each other and accepted that they might be wrong” — unless he believes the Holy Spirit to be occasionally “wrong” also? There would thus appear to be little understanding of Christianity or Socialism openly displayed in Gareth’s article.

Primarily, we feel Christianity in the wider world is (or should be) about forgiveness and community, and against factionalism or obsession with politics as an end in itself. Christian churches and bodies in this democratic country have a right to interact fully and honestly with the political and social life of the nation. If this is done openly and intelligently, it can be great “evangelism” . Perhaps Gareth and others would find interesting the joint statement the Anglican and Catholic Bishops in England and Wales made together with the Methodist Conference and the Evangelical Alliance whilst this letter was being written. It roundly and constructively criticised the policies and statements of both major parties on asylum and immigration law — surely Christians have both the right and the privilege to be politically independent in this way, when it seems just to speak out?

We do not claim to be authorities on Christianity, and neither do we wish Gareth ill. Rather, we hope that interacting more with Christianity and its claims through Christis leads him into more thoughtful and spiritual modes, and less strident or abrasive language than that which he uses at present.

Yours,

Matt Campbell and Matt Topping

Dear Christis,

I would like to agree with Gareth Knight’s opening statement (Conservatism and Christianity, Issue 66) that it would be “very wrong for politics and religion to become dependent on each other” . In fact, I would go further than this and argue that religion and politics should have absolutely nothing to do with each other. One look at America and the immensely powerful Christian Right will show that the combination of politics and religion leads only to hypocrisy, prejudice and hatred.

I do, however, object to his definition of what Christians believe. Christians emphatically DO NOT believe in self-reliance. They believe in denying themselves and relying solely on God. They do believe in freedom, but a very different kind of freedom to that which I think Gareth Knight is referring. That is, freedom from sin and death, not freedom to drive a car to work!

I would further question the claim that “Christians believe in being proud of their beliefs”. Paul wrote in Galatians, “ May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ … ”. I’m not sure that Paul and Gareth Knight are talking about the same thing here!

I also take great offence to the claim that socialists are “intolerant bigots”. Although I do not consider myself a socialist, I have friends who are, and who show great respect for what I believe.

The crux of the matter is this: If God had meant politics to be the vehicle for the spread of Christianity, Jesus would have gone straight to Herod and Pontius Pilate. Instead he went to the prostitutes, the beggars and the criminals. There was a reason for this. A Christian political party is a contradiction in terms. Politics is about power and influence. Christianity is about love and humility. This is a far more liberating and reforming message than anything conservatism or socialism has to offer.

Vicki Russell-Smith

Dear Christis,

Being a progressively more concerned Christisian, I take great comfort from the “old school” declaration of aims, as Christis provides "a forum and a mouthpiece for concerned Christianity".

Firstly, however, congratulations on taking the bold step of relaunching the magazine. Year on year, Christis evolves according to the drive and commitment of those behind it, and much is owed to them. I am convinced that Christis magazine is good and I believe that God thinks so too!

I am more worried that Christis seems to be becoming a “closed shop”. The presence of an “ on page two and a Thinker exclusive to Vanbrugh Stalls? I firmly believe that Christis belongs to all and should be run as such, and that the Thinker is an ideal opportunity for the coming together (ecumenism, if you like) of members, non-members and ex-members (like me!), and of the theological and the flippant (like me again!).

Furthermore, and speaking of flippancy, where has the fun gone? Christis, in its exciting history, has remained more than a magazine to those involved in it, and its sense of humour has been misunderstood more than once: issues 30 (a Christmas issue featuring Santa eating Rudolph) and 32 (with an Editorial having “the verve of a lower high school fanzine” according to D. D. McKelcall and an abortion article containing a cartoon entitled … er … “Shag Pile”) spring to mind, mainly because I was Production Manager at the time! However, the game of “Nehemiah!”, Mark Ford’s German Beer article, and the issue of “Point Christis? Shirley Not!” (for those who know their arts from their elbows) will, quite rightly live on forever.

People have read Christis just for the cartoons. Yet Christis is discarding the light-hearted in favour of pretentious University pseudo-highbrow. Despite the unreserved excellence of the “arkhive” cartoon, perhaps this is the time to commission the long-awaited article from Messrs. Thomas Cannon and Robert Ball?

I, for one, thank God for his precious gift of humour. I will welcome the day that Christis publicly thanks Him again, and does so on a flamboyant page two.

Yours in His love,

Alan Beebe.

Alan Beebe is an ex-Production Manager and an ex-Cuddly Toy of Christis. He is also a Mathematics graduate of 1997.