If you are unconvinced by secular multiculturalism and do believe that Christians should get involved in public life, then you may feel like you have nowhere to go but into the arms of Christian Nationalism. I consider the dichotomy false and so over a few articles I want to offer some different alternatives. First let’s look at multiculturalism.
First we need to do two things. We need to understand the end goal of the Church and we need to understand what being British and being English entails. With regards to the first, Revelation 7 points to a people from every nation, tribe and tongue drawn together to worship God.
In terms of British and English identity, it is worth restating again that there has never really been a specific English or British culture. There’s a mix of Anglo Saxon, Celtic, Franco-Norman cultures in our heritage and constantly new cultures evolve or are assimilated. And in the 20rh Century that meant that new cultures came with new immigration but even those cultures has been influenced and changed by context with British culture through the Empire. Today you can observe cultures shaped by set and music, cultures relating to class, cultures shaped by political ideology and cultures specific to generations. That’s because that’s how culture really works.
That being so, I also think we can offer a tentative definition of British identity as it really is rather than how we might want it it be. British identity is about a willingness to share geographical space and historical heritage for the purpose of mutual flourishing.
Where does a Christian multiculturalism fit in? Well, first of all, we are God’s alternative society in John Stott’s words. We are grafted into God’s people and so we can look back through Scripture to see what God’s people are meant to be like. What we see is that spiritual purity trumps ethnic purity. Some nations are excluded from God’s people not because of ethnicity but because of idolatry but even Moabites can become part of Israel and part of the royal bloodline. It means that those who seek salvation from Israel’s God become part of God’s people so the Israel who left Egypt were a mixed company. It means ethnicity is no bar to fellowship in the new covenant.
I think this helps us to start to think about the church. Is it mono cultural? No. It’s a people with shared spiritual heritage and space. Our concern is mutual flourishing in Christ, until he comes again. This means in the church there can be a sense if shared culture without it being mono cultural and that culture can be one but many rather than a blended culture. This means that we don’t just accept behaviours and perspectives as “cultural” and so unchallengeable. Our cultures are subject to God’s Word. It also means that we do not treat one culture or ethnicity as above others in a hierarchy even if it is one of the cultures associated with the host nationality.
This brings us to implications for wider society. My approach might be referred to as a Christian Realistic approach to public theology. Thst tht church is meant to be both an alternative society and for the good of the city/nation means that we do desire a wider society that reflects God’s purposes. However we are realistic about the ability of the world around us to achieve that whilst relaxed about the implications of that now because we don’t trust in political instruments to achieve that and we have a greater hope that one day all will be made new and good.
So our strategy is to focus primarily on making disciples so that those disciples benefit now, as much as possible from the benefits and blessings of this new alternative society
At the same time we do expect a level of common grace as the world around us benefits from an overflow of the good we experience as part of tht church. This is not a lesse-faire or trickle down approach. Christians will want to speak, work and support efforts for good in our society. In this case it will mean working for fairness and against racism whether that is direct or seen in structures and systems.
