In seeking submissions for its Inquiry, the Commission drew up a comprehensive list of individuals and organisations who have either made significant contributions to the subject under consideration or who have evidenced a keen interest in the topic. Every significant Christian denomination was invited to provide evidence, along with selected representatives of other faiths. Messages of support were received from some faith leaders such as the Chief Rabbi, Dr Jonathan Sacks, who wrote:
I send you my wholehearted support in this vital area of strengthening civil society and its moral and spiritual foundations. To be true to our own faith and at the same time a blessing to others – the challenge set by God to Abraham and Sarah remains a compelling challenge in the ongoing work of bringing the divine presence to our shared life Each member of the Evangelical Alliance Board and Council was personally invited to submit contributions. In addition, advertisements were placed in key national and Christian press inviting submissions. Subsequent reminders were issued three months before the stated closing date to those who had been approached directly but who had not yet made any submission. The Commission’s operational methodology was based loosely on the process of a Royal Commission or a Parliamentary Select Committee, inviting witnesses to provide written submissions, with selected individuals invited for further oral exploration by the Commission. In a few instances sub-groups decided to set up an ad hoc focus group to examine specific issues.
1.6.1 Written Submissions
In total, fifty eight individuals and seven organisations or churches contributed ninety eight separate submissions of written evidence during an open nine month period. A list of submissions received appears in the Bibliography. It is intended to publish these separately. Contributions received were examined by sub-groups in the first instance as appropriate. A number of potential contributors contacted the Alliance to indicate that they were after all unable to submit papers within the timescale, despite an earnest wish to do so.
1.6.2 Oral Contributors
Following sifting of written submissions by sub-groups, the Commission chairman and sub-group chairs agreed a priority list of those who should be approached to follow up their written submissions by graciously agreeing to oral review of their contributions. Although a few key individuals were unable to attend, most did so, with 12 witnesses in all being examined in 13 separate sessions organised and chaired by the sub-groups. The Commission chairman and Evangelical Alliance secretariat also took part in the oral sessions. All sessions were recorded and transcribed. The relevant transcriptions are expected to be published along with written submissions.
1.6.3 Plenary Sessions
As part of the overall Inquiry process a number of plenary sessions were conducted where all Commission members were invited to be present. These occurred at the beginning of the process, mainly to agree terms of reference, and at the end of the process when draft reports were analysed and discussed and recommendations to the Evangelical Alliance Council approved. A list of plenary and other meetings appears in Appendix 2.
1.6.4 Handling Diversity and Accord
The stated intention of the Commission of Inquiry was to consult widely, identify key issues, listen to diverse views, analyse and weigh the validity and implications of responses within the contemporary context, and seek to arrive at an acceptable form of consensus. Given the nature of the subject matter, it was recognised that whilst consensus might appear perfectly possible on the more fundamental and philosophical issues concerning the relevance and role of Faith in the Nation, it would become increasingly difficult to reach agreement in connection with how this should work out in practice. Though clear, united declarations of the importance of religious faith in the public arena remain relatively uncontroversial, so far as, for example, constitutional implications are concerned, the same level of agreement may not be presumed. It seemed likely that the Commission would realistically aim at offering a range of carefully weighed options to present to the Evangelical Alliance Council. Despite the difficulties anticipated by such varied perspectives, it was nevertheless universally accepted that the Inquiry process remained vital, not only for the Alliance itself, but also for the sake of stimulating national debate away from purely secular and media initiatives and agendas. The Commission concluded that the wide-ranging process proved eminently worthwhile, even though some of its conclusions and recommendations will inevitably be seen as either controversial or insufficiently radical depending on individual perspectives. The process of arrival at conclusions and recommendations to place before the Alliance Council was achieved on the basis of dedicated discussion and review, with differences being honestly ventilated and where necessary divergences acknowledged. Some members of the Commission tended to act more particularly in a peer group review role towards the latter stages of the Inquiry. The Report also benefited from extensive separate peer review. However, the Report as it stands remains the work of the entire Commission. Ultimately it is for the Alliance Council to arrive at its own views based on response to the analysis and recommendations placed before it by the Commission it set up for the purpose.
