*

A Safe Bet for the Archbishop - podcast

This text will be replaced by the flash music player.

Download: A Safe Bet for the Archbishop - podcast A Safe Bet for the Archbishop podcast (opens in a new window)
(Note: Right-Click / Save Target As...)

A Safe Bet for the Archbishop - PDF

A Safe Bet for the Archbishop - PDF version A Safe Bet for the Archbishop - PDF version (opens in a new window)PDF Document

Other FNT's you may be interested in

David Cameron’s Christian country 22 Dec 2011
The birth of Jesus was a political event, through and through. Our celebration of Christmas should therefore be political also.
On Lobbying 9 Dec 2011
I often find myself denying it. Usually at social gatherings where I meet new people and I am asked: “So, what do you do?” I've developed a little patter that explains my job. I explain that I represent Christians to parliament and government, but the response is often the same: “You're basically a lobbyist then?”
Islands of humanity 18 Nov 2011
Twenty years ago today, Terry Waite was released after nearly five years of being held hostage by Islamic extremists in Lebanon.

Topic(s) for this FNT

Politics

Signup

Full Name:
Email Address:
Postcode:
How did you hear about FNT?:
 
 

Data Protection Act 1998: By providing your personal details you agree to allow the Evangelical Alliance to contact you by mail, email, telephone or SMS text message in connection with its charitable purposes. The Evangelical Alliance does not make personal data available to external individuals or organisations.

A Safe Bet for the Archbishop

15 February 2008

Rowan Williams

Of all the jobs in the world, there's one I'm very glad I don't have at the moment. The Archbishop of Canterbury. Luckily for me, I'm a woman, so the odds of me ever being in that position are somewhat slim. I wonder if, like me, you're intrigued that the debate around the Archbishop's comments are still raging, hitting the headlines and being widely discussed days after his speech. Few stories it seems, capture our attention spans for quite so long.

I can't help wondering though, if the reason the headlines are still so interested in reporting this story, is not so much because they are deeply concerned about the issues involved, but rather because of the opportunity it has presented to criticise such a high profile Church leader. From the media, you might think all the General Synod discusses is Sharia law. However, the Times has succeeded in reporting some positive news concerning the Archbishop, regarding his comments to the General synod about the the gambling trade. He calls for the gambling industry to clean up its act in light of the addiction gambling causes and the subsequent financial, family breakdown and mental health problems that frequently follow. The Archbishop referred to the campaign against gambling as going back to William Wilberforce, the slavery abolitionist. Slavery after all can take many forms, and one of those is the slavery of addiction. Good on the Archbishop - he's drawn attention to an issue that many overlook, but that can have huge social and personal consequences. Ironically perhaps, it's also an issue Muslims and Christians agree on.

The number of people affected by gambling is huge. Excluding the National Lottery, 48% of the population last year participated in gambling. Around 284,000 are recognised as problem gamblers, gamblers who carry on despite harmful negative consequences and with no desire to stop - that's a lot of families and individuals who are potentially going to be impacted by associated financial, relational and mental health issues. Consequently the Archbishop has called on the Church to act and to help "combat the detrimental effects of gambling in various forms." He urges the Church to get involved with any local consultations on new casinos, something we can act upon at local level. The raising of this issue is also a reminder for us to try and get along side and help those we may know who may be affected by gambling.

Now I'm not for one minute saying we should turn all our attention to gambling and ignore the debate about Sharia law and the potential impact and implications for the cultural and religious life in Britain. In fact, if you would like to comment on this issue, the Evangelical Alliance is inviting you to help set the agenda and provide us with your feedback. But, in the midst of all this, let's not lose sight of the many other issues out there affecting British life and about which the Church can have something positive to say. And let's not forget too, to pray for our Church leaders, as they try to navigate the way ahead for Christians, the Church and other people of faith in an ever changing culture.

Susannah Clark, Public Theology Researcher


Latest comments :
(The views below are the authors', and not necessarily those of the Evangelical Alliance.)

Written by Friar Mike on 20 February 2008 at 09.36
Whilst personal morality as presented through the gambling debate is an important element of a true evangelical's faith commitment to fleshing spiritual life in society, it is apparently the only tool the 'neo-evangelicals' have in the UK.

What Rowan has so brilliantly done is to indicate that religious minorities need to engage intelligently in public debate or be conformed to a secularized, non-religious agenda. Personal morality is about the only ground left for a privatized 'neo-evangelicalism'. This latter movement has been swift to co-operate with the secular political school in government and media to trade access and platform for the discussion of said personal morality whilst offering little substantive in effective spiritual and social transformation. This is where ?neo-evangelicals? part company with evangelicals. This is a distinct difference between Kennington and Clapham.

Written by Mr M Oakley on 17 February 2008 at 18.22
I agree with the comment already made [top one]. On the issue of sharia law, I suspect that, to allow sharia to operate on a limited basis 'in some areas' would be the thin end of the wedge. Some areas in UK have been described as 'no-go' areas for non-muslims. If we allowed sharia in such areas non-muslims there might find themselves subject to sharia by default. a case Nigeria was quoted as am example of sharia working well in a mixed faith part, but (if Christians there are in the minority) maybe they sued for the best option they could get, not the most comfortable one. I suspect that, as someone said, Islam is on the march and will take every inch of ground given and then want more. We need to be 'loving but forearmed'.
Written by David Young (keen poker player) on 15 February 2008 at 17.24
There is a particularly good reason why the press choose to criticise the Archbishop of Canterbury. He holds a position of power but is not accountable to the British electorate. That is the same reason why they often criticise the Royal Family.

There is one other reason, and gambling comes into it in some small way. Social issues are complex, and Christianity has a poor track record when it comes to anything that cannot be summed up in soundbites. I am reminded of Not The Nine O'clock News who, in their almanac, came up with 'National Day For The Church To Stop Uttering Vain Platitudes About Problems They Cannot Begin To Understand'.

There is 1 additional comment for this page.

Comments for this article are now closed


Subscribe to for those comments!