|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: David Cameron, evangelical
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by StevHep:
Evangelicals who might be inclined to sit on their hands rather than vote for any of the main parties may well re-evaluate that in the light of these comments and other similar ones that will no doubt be made. Especially when the main opposition party is led by an atheist. The bigger impact though, I suspect, is among those for whom Christianity means the world before the 1960's and all that flowed from it.
As I say, I'm not sure how Christians doing charity work somehow takes us back to the pre-1960s era, nor how DC's words about a 'Christian country' mean there are more Christians around now than there would have been without his speech. Words are cheap, I suppose.
I'm now getting the picture that DC wasn't really speaking to any of the Christians that I know, evangelical or not. But I suppose I knew that anyway.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
StevHep
Shipmate
# 17198
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by StevHep:
Evangelicals who might be inclined to sit on their hands rather than vote for any of the main parties may well re-evaluate that in the light of these comments and other similar ones that will no doubt be made. Especially when the main opposition party is led by an atheist. The bigger impact though, I suspect, is among those for whom Christianity means the world before the 1960's and all that flowed from it.
As I say, I'm not sure how Christians doing charity work somehow takes us back to the pre-1960s era, nor how DC's words about a 'Christian country' mean there are more Christians around now than there would have been without his speech. Words are cheap, I suppose.
I'm now getting the picture that DC wasn't really speaking to any of the Christians that I know, evangelical or not. But I suppose I knew that anyway.
I think you are failing to differentiate between two distinct groups of voters. One, church attending Evangelical Christians. Two, people who are not in any sense actively religious but for whom Christianity is a word that stands for the tranquility of order from a time before the UK went through the changes of the 1960's. Cameron targeted both groups with the undercurrents of his speech but it is the second which is most electorally significant and most vulnerable to UKIP
--------------------
My Blog Catholic Scot
http://catholicscot.blogspot.co.uk/
@stevhep on Twitter
Posts: 241 | From: Exeter | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Polly Toynbee is annoyed in the Guardian about David Cameron. Anything that annoys her must be good news for Christians everywhere.
Some of us don't allow ourselves to be defined by Polly Tonybee, either positively or negatively.
Having said that:
"But his "Christian country" message is really whistling to the errant flock fled to Ukip. They may never attend, but the C of E is a cultural identity marker for those sharing Nigel Farage's distaste for foreign tongues on his commuter train."
doesn't seem entirely inaccurate. The vast majority of the column is just confused guff though.
Interestingly, Ed Miliband recently claimed that Britain is a 'Christian country'. But for some reason Polly and her friends didn't get so exercised about that.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I believe that was an observation, not a recommendation.
Also quoted out of context.
The question posed is why waste perfume on Jesus' head rather than giving the money to the poor.
Jesus: the poor you have always with you so you can give to them any time you like but you will not always have me.
(Italics as in the King James Version.)
"Italics as in the King James Version" meaning, "there's a bit missing here if this passage is going to mean what we want it to mean", usually. I think we can be sure that the one thing Jesus didn't mean was "sod the poor, gimmee my foot massage!", which is the attitude we've come to expect from the spoiled privileged brats who run this country.
What mystifies me in this whole business is why the hell Church Times gave this man column space.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by shamwari quote:
Being a sporadic church-goer all your life does not account for the fact that suddenly you launch into enthusiastic "God talk" unless some kind of conversion experience sparks it.
Cameron has not suggested that this might have happened.
Far more likely it is an attempt to appeal to the 'religious right' hitherto an almost non-existent force in British politics but with the rise of UKIP it might just be a latent force with which to counter his conservative constituency who deride his other 'anti-Christian' actions.
But Mr Cameron HAS suggested that experience sparked it: maybe not in a way that some sections of Christianity would find sufficient/acceptable, but he has referred to the help, comfort and support he got from his PP in Oxfordshire (and in London, for that matter) at the time of his son Ivan'd death, and it has been noted that since then that he and the rest of the family have been far more regular in church attendance in London, Oxfordshire and near Chequers.
They also went to church when on the Cornwall holiday that saw their youngest child born - I know because a friend was gobsmacked to see them in the congregation.
I find it quite astonishing that instead of accepting that we might just have a PM who is a regular worshipper, the reaction on here is to jeer and instantly cry 'hypocrite': time for people to reacquaint themselves with John 8:7 and Matthew 7:3 ?
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I find it quite astonishing that instead of accepting that we might just have a PM who is a regular worshipper, the reaction on here is to jeer and instantly cry 'hypocrite': time for people to reacquaint themselves with John 8:7 and Matthew 7:3 ?
So you believe that he - trained PR man that he is, and with the benefit of advice - used the word 'evangelical' in the Church Times purely by accident.
In many ways I don't give a stuff anyway. His faith - whatever it consists of - neither qualifies or disqualifies him as PM. There is plenty to object to with his policies (just like that of that other 'good Christian' IBS).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I have never suggested that Mr Cameron used the word evangelical by accident - in fact I haven't referred to the word at all.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I have never suggested that Mr Cameron used the word evangelical by accident - in fact I haven't referred to the word at all.
Sure - but read the first page of the thread then - most of the 'sneering' consisted of assuming he was involved in dog whistle politics by picking particular language that would appeal to certain sets of people, without scaring other sets of people.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Interestingly, Ed Miliband recently claimed that Britain is a 'Christian country'. But for some reason Polly and her friends didn't get so exercised about that.
Possibly because he didn't try to tie it some kind of personal faith (in an entirely deniable manner).
I was rather hoping that Polly had typed a diatribe about Miliband's use of the phrase, but a dodgy internet connection in Tuscany meant that it got lost in transmission to Guardian HQ.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
What mystifies me in this whole business is why the hell Church Times gave this man column space.
I don't read the Church Times, so don't know what kind of person usually writes guest columns, but it strikes me as bizarre that any newspaper worth its salt would turn down the opportunity to have the Prime Minister of the day write for it.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by shamwari quote:
Being a sporadic church-goer all your life does not account for the fact that suddenly you launch into enthusiastic "God talk" unless some kind of conversion experience sparks it.
Cameron has not suggested that this might have happened.
Far more likely it is an attempt to appeal to the 'religious right' hitherto an almost non-existent force in British politics but with the rise of UKIP it might just be a latent force with which to counter his conservative constituency who deride his other 'anti-Christian' actions.
But Mr Cameron HAS suggested that experience sparked it: maybe not in a way that some sections of Christianity would find sufficient/acceptable, but he has referred to the help, comfort and support he got from his PP in Oxfordshire (and in London, for that matter) at the time of his son Ivan'd death, and it has been noted that since then that he and the rest of the family have been far more regular in church attendance in London, Oxfordshire and near Chequers.
They also went to church when on the Cornwall holiday that saw their youngest child born - I know because a friend was gobsmacked to see them in the congregation.
I find it quite astonishing that instead of accepting that we might just have a PM who is a regular worshipper, the reaction on here is to jeer and instantly cry 'hypocrite': time for people to reacquaint themselves with John 8:7 and Matthew 7:3 ?
Perhaps he should act like a Christian then - that might help.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
What mystifies me in this whole business is why the hell Church Times gave this man column space.
I don't read the Church Times, so don't know what kind of person usually writes guest columns, but it strikes me as bizarre that any newspaper worth its salt would turn down the opportunity to have the Prime Minister of the day write for it.
Only if you assume that the PM has something to say about every topic. In this case it ends up making a reasonably good argument for applying a two kingdoms approach to something.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
What mystifies me in this whole business is why the hell Church Times gave this man column space.
I don't read the Church Times, so don't know what kind of person usually writes guest columns, but it strikes me as bizarre that any newspaper worth its salt would turn down the opportunity to have the Prime Minister of the day write for it.
Only if you assume that the PM has something to say about every topic. In this case it ends up making a reasonably good argument for applying a two kingdoms approach to something.
Do you have in mind a list of issues on which the Prime Minister of the day shouldn't comment?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
Do you have in mind a list of issues on which the Prime Minister of the day shouldn't comment?
It would depend on largely on the individual, what their particular interests were and the particular venue in which he/she was commenting.
Additionally, in this particular case one wonders why the Church Times thought it was a good idea to publish a largely party political piece.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
While I was rather saddened that DC felt that it necessary to comment on the price of football jerseys, I struggle to see why a Prime Minister who is a practising Christian shouldn't comment on the role of the Church of England in society as he sees it.
Having re-read the article, it seems largely benign. There's some stuff about what the government is doing in the third to last paragraph but I'd hardly say that makes it a 'largely party political' piece.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
chris stiles said: quote:
His faith - whatever it consists of - neither qualifies or disqualifies him as PM. There is plenty to object to with his policies (just like that of that other 'good Christian' IBS).
Indeed. The Secular Society and assorted prominent atheists have often said that Christian politicians should not allow their faith to influence how they do their jobs.
If they are really sincere in their objections to the government's policies towards the poor and not just trying to score cheap rhetorical points, perhaps they should be more careful what they wish for.
[ 23. April 2014, 16:31: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Secular Society and assorted prominent atheists have often said that Christian politicians should not allow their faith to influence how they do their jobs.
Which is, if they'd given it a moment's thought, a bloody stupid thing to say.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
The Secular Society and assorted prominent atheists have often said that Christian politicians should not allow their faith to influence how they do their jobs.
What exactly have the National Secular Society said in this regard? I ask because I agree with Doc Tor that the above is / would be a daft thing to say, and I've not got that impression from the NSS in the past (based on things I've read, radio interviews I've heard etc.).
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
You're absolutely right; it wasn't the National Secular Society, it was the British Humanist Association I was thinking of. Specifically, Tim Minchin's comments on their letter to the Daily Telegraph.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
You're absolutely right; it wasn't the National Secular Society, it was the British Humanist Association I was thinking of. Specifically, Tim Minchin's comments on their letter to the Daily Telegraph.
Ah, that makes more sense to me. Not that I'm a keen observer of either the NSS or BHA, just that my impression is the former are pretty balanced and not anti-religion, just anti religious privilege.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merchant Trader
Shipmate
# 9007
|
Posted
A tangent:
Why do CofE Evangelicals assume that the word evangelical pertains to them? The Roman Church uses the term "evangelical Catholic" and the PMs words make even better sense if the word evangelical in understood in the sense that arguably England's largest denomination uses it. Also I have heard a liberal catholic high church priest get very upset about a suggestion that he was not evangelical. My roots are Evangelical but I have come to recognise that many in the wider church are evangelical in their practice.
--------------------
... formerly of Muscovy, Lombardy & the Low Countries; travelling through diverse trading stations in the New and Olde Worlds
Posts: 1328 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Merchant Trader:
A tangent:
Why do CofE Evangelicals assume that the word evangelical pertains to them?
We don't. My church as are many other evangelical Anglican parishes is a member of the Evangelical Alliance, which is made up mostly of non-CofE churches.
But coming out of the mouth of an Anglican PM writing in an Anglican newspaper, it's reasonable to make that assumption in this case.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Merchant Trader:
A tangent:
Why do CofE Evangelicals assume that the word evangelical pertains to them?
We don't. My church as are many other evangelical Anglican parishes is a member of the Evangelical Alliance, which is made up mostly of non-CofE churches.
But coming out of the mouth of an Anglican PM writing in an Anglican newspaper, it's reasonable to make that assumption in this case.
I thought, possibly wrongly, that the question Merchant Trader was asking was more:
"Given the Prime Minister has said this, why do CofE evangelicals assume that his use of the word "evangelical" applies to them in particular, rather than all CofE people needing to be more *evangelical* about their faith, rather than *Evangelical in their faith*?
The thread title itself is probably guilty of this, in that it suggests DC is an evangelical, rather than *an Anglican who says people need to be more evangelical* - not Evangelical. Quite apart from anything else, the services he's getting at churches in Chadlington (constituency parish) and London (where he's choosing from a much wider menu) would suggest he's middle/high...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I thought, possibly wrongly, that the question Merchant Trader was asking was more:
"Given the Prime Minister has said this, why do CofE evangelicals assume that his use of the word "evangelical" applies to them in particular, rather than all CofE people needing to be more *evangelical* about their faith, rather than *Evangelical in their faith*?
I created the thread and the title, as I mentioned on the first page, is tongue in cheek. Neither I nor DC himself things he is an Evangelical, big E.
He used the word politically, not theologically. That much is obvious. The idea that he meant it to appeal to all Christians to be small-e evangelical, rather than as a cheap attempt to garner the votes of self-identified big-e Evangelicals, is in my view a naïve one.
All Christians can be evangelistic, which as mentioned is probably what Cameron should have written. Evangelicalism is a particular Christian view on salvation and conversion and it cannot be applied to all churches or all Christians.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
The language he used was not markedly evangelical. Presses no buttons. Sounds much more MOTR in CofE terms - Common Worship with a prayerbook tinge, catholic-lite decorations, liberal theology.
That is a comment on his apparent party line or factional position within the CofE, not his personal beliefs or faith, which are of course unknown to me.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sleepwalker
Shipmate
# 15343
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Perhaps he should act like a Christian then - that might help.
Do you know him then?
Posts: 267 | From: somewhere other than here | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Perhaps he should act like a Christian then - that might help.
Do you know him then?
I don't know about you, but I find coming to a value judgement on various world leaders' actions is possible without curling up on their sofa to watch a DVD with them.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Merchant Trader
Shipmate
# 9007
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Merchant Trader:
A tangent:
Why do CofE Evangelicals assume that the word evangelical pertains to them?
We don't. My church as are many other evangelical Anglican parishes is a member of the Evangelical Alliance, which is made up mostly of non-CofE churches.
But coming out of the mouth of an Anglican PM writing in an Anglican newspaper, it's reasonable to make that assumption in this case.
I thought, possibly wrongly, that the question Merchant Trader was asking was more:
"Given the Prime Minister has said this, why do CofE evangelicals assume that his use of the word "evangelical" applies to them in particular, rather than all CofE people needing to be more *evangelical* about their faith, rather than *Evangelical in their faith*?
The thread title itself is probably guilty of this, in that it suggests DC is an evangelical, rather than *an Anglican who says people need to be more evangelical* - not Evangelical. Quite apart from anything else, the services he's getting at churches in Chadlington (constituency parish) and London (where he's choosing from a much wider menu) would suggest he's middle/high...
That is exactly what I meant, thank you.
Also I dislike the word evangelistic as inelegant and not quite what is meant. Perhaps only to be used by folk who don't like to use the word evangelical in this context?
PS: Ken is right, the whole thing sounds more naturally MOR than Evangelical.
--------------------
... formerly of Muscovy, Lombardy & the Low Countries; travelling through diverse trading stations in the New and Olde Worlds
Posts: 1328 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sleepwalker
Shipmate
# 15343
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Perhaps he should act like a Christian then - that might help.
Do you know him then?
I don't know about you, but I find coming to a value judgement on various world leaders' actions is possible without curling up on their sofa to watch a DVD with them.
Really? All you have to judge though is what you see or hear via the media and what policies his party and that of the Lib Dems promote (given that we have a coalition government at present). That is hardly enough information upon which to make a value judgement on anything other than his politics. It certainly isn't enough upon which to make a value judgement on his own actions.
Posts: 267 | From: somewhere other than here | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I don't know about you, but I find coming to a value judgement on various world leaders' actions is possible without curling up on their sofa to watch a DVD with them.
Really? All you have to judge though is what you see or hear via the media and what policies his party and that of the Lib Dems promote (given that we have a coalition government at present). That is hardly enough information upon which to make a value judgement on anything other than his politics. It certainly isn't enough upon which to make a value judgement on his own actions.
For those of us who actually pay attention to what they say and do, it's plenty.
And, FWIW, I think it's a civic duty to pay attention.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sleepwalker
Shipmate
# 15343
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I don't know about you, but I find coming to a value judgement on various world leaders' actions is possible without curling up on their sofa to watch a DVD with them.
Really? All you have to judge though is what you see or hear via the media and what policies his party and that of the Lib Dems promote (given that we have a coalition government at present). That is hardly enough information upon which to make a value judgement on anything other than his politics. It certainly isn't enough upon which to make a value judgement on his own actions.
For those of us who actually pay attention to what they say and do, it's plenty.
And, FWIW, I think it's a civic duty to pay attention.
Unless you know the man personally then all you will see by observing such things is his public persona and political preferences. You won't be in a position to judge whether or not he is a Christian.
Posts: 267 | From: somewhere other than here | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
Unless you know the man personally then all you will see by observing such things is his public persona and political preferences. You won't be in a position to judge whether or not he is a Christian.
I don't claim to have a window into his soul, but I reserve the right to call it as I see it if he takes from the poor, the hungry, the prisoner and the refugee, while giving to the already rich. His public persona and political preferences are nothing: I couldn't give a shit about them. It's what he does that matters, given he's, you know, the Prime Minister...
I mean, how bad does someone's actions have to get before you say, "probably not behaving as Christianly as I'd expect, given they claim to be a Christian"?
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Merchant Trader:
I dislike the word evangelistic as inelegant and not quite what is meant. Perhaps only to be used by folk who don't like to use the word evangelical in this context?
AS far as I understand, the two words don't mean exactly the same thing in a theological context, although they might mean something similar in a more general sense: being committed, precise and vocal about something you're passionate about.
I do think it was rather confusing for Cameron to insert the word 'evangelical' into his speech. IMO he meant it in this more general sense, but using it in a speech about (the practical benefits of) religious values was obviously going to bring the more theological emphasis to mind. Maybe this double meaning was deliberate.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sleepwalker
Shipmate
# 15343
|
Posted
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
Unless you know the man personally then all you will see by observing such things is his public persona and political preferences. You won't be in a position to judge whether or not he is a Christian.
I don't claim to have a window into his soul, but I reserve the right to call it as I see it if he takes from the poor, the hungry, the prisoner and the refugee, while giving to the already rich. His public persona and political preferences are nothing: I couldn't give a shit about them. It's what he does that matters, given he's, you know, the Prime Minister...
Well, I would suggest that in your post you are interpreting the coalition government's policies from a certain perspective rather than commenting specifically upon David Cameron's credentials as a Christian.
quote:
I mean, how bad does someone's actions have to get before you say, "probably not behaving as Christianly as I'd expect, given they claim to be a Christian"?
Again, you would need to know what his actions are before you could assess that but actually what you see, because you do not know him, are the policies of the coalition government.
Posts: 267 | From: somewhere other than here | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sleepwalker:
Again, you would need to know what his actions are before you could assess that but actually what you see, because you do not know him, are the policies of the coalition government.
You're just splitting hairs. Even I don't think Cameron is a ineffectual catspaw in the thrall of the oligarchs, and that in reality he maintains a high degree of agency.
So, to take a recent example, his spiking of Theresa May's consultation in the use of Stop and Search, he'd rather be tough on ethnic minorities rather than perceived as weak on crime. He can love kittens as much as he likes, but while he attempts to starve the poor into submission and give handouts to the City, I - and the rest of the electorate - are perfectly free to judge him on his actions and decide whether they seem 'Christian' to us.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
