SOLAS DEBATE ON SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE
CHARLOTTE CHAPEL - 11th June 2014
All are agreed that the decision on whether Scotland should become an independent country or remain in the United Kingdom is a political, economic and indeed emotional choice. But is it also a spiritual one? Or in other words, would God be voting ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ on September 18th this year?
All are agreed that the decision on whether Scotland should become an independent country or remain in the United Kingdom is a political, economic and indeed emotional choice. But is it also a spiritual one? Or in other words, would God be voting ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ on September 18th this year?
Both sides were quick to agree that this was not a moral issue or one on which any side could claim a higher spiritual position – but was a matter of judgement that Christians could rightly differ on. Indeed it was noted that it was a rare thing to have a SOLAS debate with Christians on both sides, as usually the subjects debated are ones with clear Biblical principles attached.
YES
The debate began with John
Mason (a Scottish National Party MSP) outlining something of his testimony –
brought up in The Church of Scotland, coming to faith through Scripture Union
camps, and now a member of Easterhouse Baptist Church in Glasgow. It was while
serving with Interserve in Nepal that he started to formulate his belief in
Independence – observing how other small countries happily and successfully
enjoyed full independence and self-governance. John outlined a number of what he saw would be the practical economic and social benefits of an independent
Scotland. Independence, he believed, would give Scotland a greater chance of
being a fairer and more equal society.
Regarding the place of the
church and Christian influence, he was frank in predicting that, independent or
not, Scotland like the rest of the Western World was going to be increasingly
secular and the environment for Christianity was likely to be more difficult in
the future. However, he stated that such adversity had actually caused the
church to grow and thrive throughout history, and he was confident it would do
so in Scotland. He also argued, however, that an independent Scotland would give an
opportunity for a constitution that could include safeguards for religious
freedom.
NO
Arguing for Scotland to
remain as part of the United Kingdom was Murdo Fraser (a Conservative MSP).
Murdo is a committed, although he added ‘not uncritical’, member of The Church
of Scotland. He began by outlining some of the historic achievements of
the Union such as the abolition of slavery in the C19, the creation of the NHS
in the C20, and the UK’s lead in being the second largest donor of overseas aid
in the world today. He argued that the ‘immigration problem’ was a sign of how
successful and esteemed the UK was, and that Scotland’s influence in the world
was all the greater as part of that Union. Murdo also argued that Scotland was
already in a position without Independence, through the Scottish Parliament, to
make the social changes many desire.
Regarding implications for
the Christian faith, Murdo expressed concern that the Independence campaign was
viewed by many in the Scottish Secular Society as a way of accelerating their
agenda. He also suggested that Scottish people were not more likely to vote for
higher taxes or have a radically different society from that elsewhere in the
United Kingdom. For Murdo the question was one ultimately of identity – which
for him was to enjoy being both Scottish and British, rather than having that
identity reduced.
BROKEN OR BETTER
The debate continued with
follow-up contributions from David Robertson and Richard Lucas. David began by
stating that his overriding concern was the spiritual state of Scotland and
quoted Proverbs 14:34, ‘righteousness exalts a
nation but sin is a reproach to any people’. He believed that the Union had gone past its ‘sell-by date’ precisely
because it was no longer a union founded on Christian values. Increasingly he
saw a rise of corruption and powerful elites making all parts of the UK more
unequal and less democratic. He argued that a smaller nation state could allow
more redress against such injustices and allow Christians to have more
influence within the political system.
Richard argued that the
issue was not one of ‘day to day’ politics but of national identity – that is, who
do I feel responsible for and part of. He argued that nationalism sought to
break that sense of collective identity by creating divisions, false problems and
dissatisfaction between otherwise contented partners. He also questioned the
economic arguments for Independence as a subtle form of greed at the expense of
others. Richard stated his belief that nationalism was subjective and had no
moral significance other than creating division.
FROM THE FLOOR
A time of questions from
‘the floor’ followed and covered a range of questions on policy implications. One questioner asked what the evidence was
that Scottish people would be better equipped or likely to create a more just
society because they were independent – when Scotland has been just as quick to
disregard Christian values as any other part of the UK. In response David
Robertson said that he fully expected Scotland to continue to go ‘downhill’
along with England, but nevertheless saw more opportunities for Christian
influence with Independence.
In the closing statements there was agreement on both sides that Independence in itself would not make Scotland a more spiritual nation, and that the ultimate hope for Scotland was in Christ.
In the closing statements there was agreement on both sides that Independence in itself would not make Scotland a more spiritual nation, and that the ultimate hope for Scotland was in Christ.
REFLECTIONS
In less than 100 days
those living in Scotland will have to make the most important political
decision for the nation in over 300yrs. For the majority it will come down to
politics, economics and emotions – but it is right that for Christians there
should also be a bigger Gospel dimension to consider. Will it help or hinder
gospel work in Scotland and indeed other parts of the UK? Would it create
opportunities or throw up barriers to Mission? Will it be more likely to
promote righteousness than facilitate sin? None of these are easily answered
but they should be key in the deliberations of Christians and above purely
political and economic considerations.
The evening was an example
of the kind of Scotland all would want to see – considered, thoughtful, civil
and good-tempered. It was great to see some representatives of the Scottish
Secular Society present and to hear their questions (asked with good grace and
indeed humour) – pray that the witness of Christians with different views treating
each other with respect and gentleness will have a big impact on them.
Pray for John Mason and
Murdo Fraser, Christian MSPs in the front-line of Scottish politics and whose
example is a huge public witness to godliness in action. Pray for Scotland,
pray for the growth and influence of Gospel churches - so that whatever the Referendum
outcome Scotland would recover its Gospel heritage and be won again for Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment