PR and the Church
Sir : In a recent issue you complained in 'Notebook' that the supporters of the National Campaign for Electoral Reform include some 'surprising names'. Apparently it is bishops who rank as the most surprising to you, for, as you see it, they have abandoned their theological concern to take up a cause the 'pastoral significance' of which escapes you.
But, sir, why should concern for electoral reform be an abandonment of episcopal responsibility ? And why should bishops by implication be told that electoral reform is the cause of Caesar, whilst true pastoral oversight in the cause of God by definition excludes this concern? There is another possible interpretation of events, and I ask you to consider it.
The Church of England is a very 'catholic' institution. It includes rich and poor, black and white, male and female, town and country, North and South, bright and stupid, old and young, left and right, high and low, all one with another. It is a matter of theological concern that this catholicity should be expressed at all levels in the Church's own self-government, so the Church of England elects its General Synod by proportional representation, and has thus acquainted its leading figures with the process long before they obtain gaiters. Furthermore, the Bishop of Liverpool has long been on the Council of the College from which I write (he is now President of it), and was elected to it by an Association which appoints by PR. To an Anglican PR ought to be as natural and right a way of voting as . 'x' is to the average party agent, and the joining of bishops in the list of members of . the NCER is a perfectly natural function of the use of PR in the Church's own circles.
At the same time, Churchmen have a word not only to themselves, but also to others. Their concern for PR is not a concern for a particular political result. It would be odd to find bishops advocating PR for Northern Ireland in order to get a coalition there, but deprecating it for England in order not to get a coalition here. The ethical concern of Christian leaders is surely first and foremost for justice, and only for the result insofar as firstly it represents the outcome of just processes, and secondly and consequentially insofar as it then commands the confidence of the country.
In a period when parties representing minorities in the country claim that because they had the right number of voters in the right place at the right time they have therefore a mandate for partisan policies from the whole country, it is a great relief to one lesser churchman to find the desire for justice being expressed by his leaders and commended to the country. May the other bishops shortly join them.
Colin Buchanan Vice-Principal St John's College, Bramcote, Nottingham
Previous page
