 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Introduction:
Christian Citizenship
Derek Poole
Comment
Priscilla Reid
From
the Director
David Porter
Outside
the Camp
Donald Watts
Citizenship
From 'For God and His Glory Alone'
Love:
An attribute of Citizenship
Graham Cheesman
Memory
and Redemption
David J Montgomery
Holy
Nation
Lois Barrett
Grace
Healed Eyes
Steve Stockman
Negotiating
the Future
Deirdre Mullan
Book
Reviews
Alwyn Thomson and Dorothy McMillan
FROM
THE DIRECTOR
I was struck by the following comment by Jonathan Chaplin, writing in
the latest issue of Third Way magazine. Commenting on the justification
for political authority he states: "In the Christian tradition, two main
(and complimentary) answers have been offered: Catholics have proposed
the imperatives of 'the common good', and Protestants the public requirements
of 'justice'."
In a way this clarified for me some of the dilemmas we faced in the debate on the Agreement. Those who saw it as evil did so because they saw it as rewarding and not punishing evil. Justice had not been served. Ironically those Republicans who opposed it were equally concerned that their understanding of justice was being betrayed. For others it was an expression of the call to reconciliation, the opportunity to make peace for the greater good. Reached by agreement and respecting the British and Irish identity of both traditions it was considered a just settlement.
Inevitably the cultural framework of the community of which we are a part shapes our approach to life. Not for the first time we must recognise that in Northern Ireland the two religious traditions that have dominated our history contribute significantly to that framework. Our political and cultural conflict is informed by theological principles and this contributes to our inability to understand each other.
Nowhere is this more evident than in relation to the peace process. Who would have predicted that the first half of 1998 would end with an agreement, a referendum and an assembly election successfully navigated by politicians and people alike? The last six months have been truly historic. It has taken five years to get here and now comes the hard part.
We have come a long way since the first public awareness of a peace process out of the embers of the stalled Brooke/Mayhew talks in 1993. Throughout this period the Unionist community, informed by its Protestant convictions, has been sceptical of a process that seemed to place the morality of making peace and ending the violence over every other moral consideration, particularly that of justice. Yet it has been the conviction of Nationalist leaders that the common good required risks to be taken that has driven the process this far.
Of course the dichotomy is not that clear cut. It is wrong to assume Nationalists are not concerned about justice, something Republicans constantly remind us is all they seek. Equally Unionists understand that the common good is best secured by the administration of justice. But again justice can mean different things to different people - punishment of evil or parity of esteem?
Jonathan Chaplin reminds us that the causes of common good and public justice are complimentary. In this surely is the basis for a fresh start in political life in this community fired by and not hindered by people of Christian principle. Could this be the space where despite our legitimate and profound theological differences, Protestantism and Catholicism can each inform the other in laying the moral framework for our future in this society? This is a political necessity for the new dawn of Ulster politics for as Chaplin comments: "Without adherence to clear principles... [national] public policy will lack coherence and will simply reflect the prevailing balance of power."
At the end of the day that is the choice we face. Do we base our future on the delicate balance of demographic numbers, the brutal balance of violence or the enforced balance of cultural and political domination? These are the issues we face in the practical choices ahead. Whether it is about parades, paramilitary decommissioning or political structures in the assembly, the question is whether we will secure our future by the balance of tribal power or co-operation based on a common political principle.
The referendum clearly suggests that the majority of the people desire such co-operation. The assembly election clarifies what I have always suspected — that the majority for co-operation based on the outcome of a 'suspect' peace process, is slim among the predominantly Protestant Unionist community. Inevitably it is those with strong religious convictions, whether from within Evangelicalism or Orangeism, who are most opposed to the accommodation on offer.
It was always going to he a crux decision as to whether in securing the Union through the principle of consent Ulster Protestants would be able to accept the legitimacy of the public expression of the religious, cultural and political identity of Irish Catholics. The inevitable 'greening' of society this implies is difficult for those who believe that the only future is 'orange'.
My passionate conviction is that the biblical roots of my Evangelical faith require that I engage in such a radical process of change. Biblical faith is best served from a position of powerlessness and not domination. It is only then that I can draw on the spiritual resources necessary for a credible witness to the Christ who did not exploit his equality with God but emptied himself, and suffered a great injustice for the common good of all who believe.
David Porter - ECONI's Director
 |
||
 |
 |
|