The faiths and public-health policy
From Dr Chris Wild
Madam, — Professor Raman Bedi (Comment, 27 February) provides many insightful observations about the positive part that faith groups can play in the implementation of the National Cancer Plan for England, as borne out by the success of such groups in promoting public-health measures internationally. Supporting the Cancer Plan is particularly important, because data from the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership show the UK lagging behind comparable countries in terms of cancer survival, partly because of delays in diagnosis and treatment.
The support of faith groups for public-health interventions cannot, however, be assumed: the relative reluctance of US white Evangelical Protestants to receive Covid-19 vaccines provides a striking recent example of contention, mirroring earlier cases involving different vaccines and faith groups in other parts of the world. These instances point to the importance of engaging with faith groups early in order to communicate better the benefits and to minimise the risks of potential disruption during subsequent implementation of public-health measures.
Nevertheless, beyond involvement in the delivery of healthcare programmes, faith groups should participate actively in their development. Notably, Christian values have much to contribute in shaping societal approaches to health, ensuring that the benefits reach all people equally and that programmes are both effective and caring.
An excellent example of engagement is the Archbishops’ Commission on Reimagining Care, which points to human value, flourishing, dignity, mutuality, and interdependence as foundations to social care. Recently, the General Synod (Synod, 27 February) urged the UK Government to draw on the report’s National Care Covenant model when designing a National Care Service.
This form of public engagement, rooted in Christian values, speaks loud about the relevance of our faith and our commitment to the life challenges faced by each of our neighbours.
CHRIS WILD
Address supplied (Rustington, West Sussex)
The charge of anti-Semitism against the hymn ‘My song is love unknown’
From the Rt Revd David Wilbourne
Madam, — I first sang “My song is love unknown” in 1970, when it cheered the chilliest of Scarborough Lents. It suddenly dawned on me that Christianity wasn’t as miserable as it liked to pretend. More than that, its stricture “Love to the loveless shown, That they might lovely be” fired a lifetime’s vocation and ministry.
So contra the Revd Dr Alan Race (Letters, 6 March), I will sing Samuel Crossman’s hymn this year, which draws on George Herbert’s poem “The Sacrifice”, where each of its 63 searing stanzas ends with ‘Was ever grief like mine?’ Would Dr Race include Herbert and indeed the Gospel of the Passion in his cancel culture?
Rather than explicitly blame the Jews, Crossman’s magisterial verses make us realise that we are all complicit in Jesus’s death. More importantly, the hymn rightly questions the wisdom of vox pop in every age, all too prone to spare murderers and to slay the Prince of Life. As Inspector Morse concludes at the end of The Settling of the Sun, “When Christ’s no longer available, we crucify the next best thing. . .”
DAVID WILBOURNE
Scarborough, North Yorkshire
From Canon R. H. W. Arguile
Madam, — After reading Dr Race’s letter about Samuel Crossman’s hymn, I opened my hymn book at the appropriate page. No specific reference to Jews, a quotation from the Gospel, not even a reference to the worrisome response in St Matthew’s Gospel “His blood be on our heads and those of our children.”
Given that, St Paul’s railing against circumcision in Galatians is presumably just the first of a number of pieces of our liturgy to come under the cosh. Anti-Semitisim is horrendous; I cannot fathom it. In so far as I can, my own marginal experiences lead me to notice that the shadow of the Shoah is cast over everything that we say or write.
But the answer is not to censor either the liturgy or our hymn books. Crossman’s hymn is lovely; if it rejects anything, it is hatred. It was “men”, human beings, who “made strange and none the long-for Christ would know”. They rejected Christ; how else did he come before the Sanhedrin? And, according to Luke, he forgave all those who brought him to the cross. I can think of many hymns whose words or tunes empty my spiritual being, but that is not one of them.
R. H. W. ARGUILE
Wells-next-the-Sea, Norfolk
From the Revd Martin Jewitt
Madam, — The Revd Dr Alan Race raises the history of Christian anti-Semitism in the hymn “My song is love unknown”. It is based on the Passion story, which, in John’s Gospel, unlike the hymn, “the Jews” are mentioned several times as persecuting Jesus.
Of course, Jesus and his disciples were all Jews; so “the Jews” mentioned in this derogatory way are the abusive leaders, representing all abusive tyrants. I cringe when I hear sermons on these passages in which the preacher doesn’t think to point out whom the term actually represents, or warn of the danger of anti-Semitism. And the same rule can apply to announcing this hymn.
Unless this is pointed out, the spectre of anti-Semitism will loom large in much preaching in Passiontide.
MARTIN JEWITT
Folkestone, Kent
Control UK borders to prevent hardened attitude
From the Revd Kenneth Madden
Madam, — I write as one of those described by the Bishop of Leicester, the Rt Revd Martyn Snow (News, 6 March), as the “faithful Christians sitting in our pews who support tighter border controls not out of hatred, but out of sincere concern for social cohesion, pressure on resources, and the pace of cultural change in their communities”.
The commentary on the asylum and immigration debate is constantly polarised and presented as a binary choice — Right versus Left, inhumane exclusion versus compassionate inclusion, populist fear-mongering versus progressive tolerance — which I find deeply frustrating and unhelpful. A key principle of public policy must surely be legality, and a key requirement for successful delivery of policy has to be retaining public consent and support. Both principles seem to be at risk at the moment.
I am not old enough to remember the extraordinary Kindertransport operation before the Second World War, but my wife’s aunt was one of those who gave sanctuary to two European Jewish children and gave them a future, at no small financial cost and inconvenience. I am old enough to remember the arrival of the Vietnamese Boat People, the Ugandan Asians, and, more recently, those displaced from Hong Kong, Afghanistan, and Ukraine.
Britain has a long and mostly, but not entirely, honourable history of giving refuge to those fleeing persecution. The British people have traditionally been extremely generous and welcoming towards such minority groups. But public policy, as distinct from private charity, must have some boundaries and a rational, coherent foundation. All the schemes that I have mentioned were facilitated as part of official government policy; they were legal, finite, and accountable, and, as such, commanded general support.
The current debate all too often fails to acknowledge this distinction between legal and illegal immigration and asylum claims. Many of us want to welcome the persecuted stranger and are relaxed about managed and controlled levels of immigration in order to fill skill shortages, gain access to higher education and training, and contribute to the economy.
My big concern is that the current failure to control our borders, typified by the illegal arrival of small boats, is seriously undermining the traditional British sense of fair play and our natural desire to welcome the stranger, and is leading to a hardening of attitudes. This is not the only area of national life and policy where respect for the rule of law is a foundation of the common good.
KENNETH MADDEN
Bath
Shakers’ Ann Lee started out C of E, not Quaker
From Tim Gee
Madam, — I enjoyed both the film The Testimony of Ann Lee and Stephen Brown’s review of it (Arts, 27 February).
In slight contrast to something that the review says, though (echoed elsewhere on the internet), I am not aware of any historical Quaker or Shaker record that shows that Ann Lee or any of her close family were ever members of the Society of Friends (Quakers).
What I can find, though, are accounts of the baptismal and wedding records, showing she was baptised and married in an Anglican church. The parts of Shakerism shared with Quakers, such as the commitments to simplicity, peace, and gender equality, seem to have been transmitted through Jane Wardley, co-founder of the Shaker movement, who had previously been involved with Friends.
As a Quaker born in Manchester, I am in some ways a bit disappointed that this rebellious pioneer of Christian feminism was not originally “one of us”. But how brilliant, at a time when we celebrate the long struggle for gender equality, that we now know that she is part of the Anglican story!
TIM GEE
General Secretary, Friends World Committee for Consultation
London NW1
Attendance at Ajuba conference questioned
From the Revd Dr Charlie Baczyk-Bell
Madam, — Last week’s GAFCON meeting appears to have been something of a disappointing anticlimax for those hoping for the long-awaited schism. Beyond the fact that the outcome was a total ecclesiological shambles, the attendance list is also worth some attention.
Not only was the Church of England Evangelical Council’s National Director — an alleged “good faith” partner in Living in Love and Faith groups to date — present. The Bishop of Ebbsfleet, a suffragan of the Archbishop of Canterbury and an asserted supporter of the Five Guiding Principles, was vested in the procession and an engaged attendee.
Given the intended aim of the meeting, it is not remotely feasible for him to remain in post. Alongside this resignation, might we also be reassured that not a single penny of Commissioners’ or diocesan money or time went towards this schismatic holiday?
CHARLIE BACZYK-BELL
Cambridge
Exeter school campaign
From Sam Engle
Madam, — Britain’s cathedral schools are facing a national crisis as a result of government policies on VAT, business rates, and National Insurance, leading to cuts and even closures.
For centuries, these centres of musical excellence have educated choristers from all backgrounds and have been integral to our cultural, religious, and public life. Once lost, they cannot be replaced.
I write on behalf of a small group of parents campaigning to keep open Exeter Cathedral School, which is due to close in July after nearly 850 years (News, 16 January; Letter, 23 January).
We hope that this will mark the beginning of a wider movement to safeguard cathedral schools across the country, before an irreplaceable part of Britain’s history and heritage disappears for ever.
SAM ENGLE
Exeter
Flowers for the Maundy
From Mr Leigh Hatts
Madam, — It is suggested that there should be a movement towards using Fairtrade flowers from the Co-op at Easter (Letter, 27 February). The King has given us an example by requesting local flowers be found for the Royal Maundy nosegays. The arrangements two years ago at Worcester Cathedral included daffodils picked near by and plenty of pear blossom from Worcester trees.
LEIGH HATTS
London SE1
