Against seditious tumults: what the Church of England got wrong about the riots

What it thy duty towards thy Neighbour?

My duty towards my Neighbour is to love him as myself, and to do to all men as I would they should do unto me ... To honour and obey the King, and all that are put in authority under him: To submit myself to all my governors ... To hurt nobody by word nor deed ... To bear no malice nor hatred in my heart: To keep my hands from picking and stealing, and my tongue from evil-speaking, lying, and slandering.

I grew up in a society scarred by riots: mobs throwing petrol bombs; properties and businesses destroyed; sectarian thugs intimidating communities. Apart from the values of my law-abiding parents, and their deep sense of obligation to our neighbours, what most shaped my view of such disorder were the above words learnt in Catechism class in the parish church during my early teens. My duty towards my neighbour - flowing from the Commandments, as the Catechism demonstrates - was to be given expression in respect for lawful authority, for the King's Peace, for the property of others, for their safety and well-being. As for sectarian slander, it was "evil-speaking".

All this came to mind in recent weeks, as parts of the United Kingdom saw the violence of the mob. Thugs attacked hotels housing asylum seekers, mosques, businesses owned by entrepreneurial ethnic minorities, and police officers seeking to maintain the King's Peace. It was important to pray the Litany during those days:

From all sedition, privy conspiracy, and rebellion ... Good Lord, deliver us.

There is within the Book of Common Prayer a deep, profound realism about the evil that undermines and attacks communal peace and order, shaped by the experience of the confusions and violence of the times in which the Prayer Book was composed.  Contemporary liturgies, written in the late 20th century, at the supposed 'End of History', are, by contrast, marked by a deeply unrealistic assumption that such disorder belonged to the past. Prayers for deliverance from such disorder were cast aside as antiquated. As for a recognition of the good and necessity of communal order, it was rejected as offending the progressive mindset.

And so, when the mob took to the streets, when the thugs attacked, when the "evil-speaking" of sectarian hatred was spewed out on social media, what was the national Church to do? The Archbishop of Canterbury took to the pages of The Guardian, the UK's progressive newspaper. It was an odd choice, suggestive of a conversation between progressives. The opening words of the Archbishop's article did not help:

Across the UK, communities have been left horrified by the violent scenes in our towns and cities, with most of us reduced to murmuring inadequate truisms: rioting is bad. Law and order is good.

'Inadequate truisms'? Really? As violent mobs gathered on the streets? As our Muslim neighbours were intimidated? Mosques and businesses attacked? 'Rioting is bad, law and order is good' are not "inadequate truisms", but truths to be robustly proclaimed, flowing from the moral order of the Commandments, securing communal peace and order against the mob.

Rather than turn to the Book of Common Prayer and its petitions to be delivered from violent disorder, the Church of England also issued 'Prayers for Peace during Civil Unrest and Racial Tension'. These prayers appeared to recycle the language of a DEI manual. In the words of the collect provided:

We pray that closed eyes may be opened to see beyond the boundaries of race, religion, and hatred. May hearts be renewed to embrace all your children as brothers and sisters. In your righteousness, stir the hearts of your people that, rejoicing in our diversity, we may be assured of your love.

Nice, pleasant thoughts, as the mob attacked, as violent disorder was being confronted, as sectarian thuggery took to the streets. Compare this with the Prayer for Unity found in the Book of Common Prayer Accession Day service - a prayer, in other words, for the peace of the realm - and wisely used by some Church of England churches during those days:

O God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, our only Saviour, the Prince of Peace: Give us grace seriously to lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions. Take away all hatred and prejudice, and whatsoever else may hinder us from godly union and concord.

When 'Prayers for Peace during Civil Unrest and Racial Tension' referred to national life and those in authority, it only had a glib reference to "our nation and our leaders". It entirely lacked any reference whatsoever to those institutions which bind the United Kingdom together and to which we owe a common allegiance as the basis of our civic life - the Crown and Parliament. Instead, there was a generic, bland prayer for 'Anywhere', rather than a prayer offered by a national church for this United Kingdom, for the Crown and Parliament which define our common life and our mutual obligations as citizens.

This is not merely to take issue with the political and social commentary offered by the Church of England. Something much more significant than this is at stake. When the Church of England merely repeats progressive platitudes in the face of a profound national challenge, it fundamentally fails in its duty to proclaim and expound the Christian faith. 

The problem with the riots is not that they rejected progressive sensibilities. The problem with the riots is that they were a rejection of our duty to our Neighbour as defined by the Commandments. The riots were a proud, selfish rejection of what it is to "live in love and charity with your neighbours". They were inspired and encouraged by the sins of malice, hatred, and evil-speaking. It is not a DEI seminar that the rioters require from the Church of England, but the call to repentance. 

Despite the Church of England's failure in the face of the riots, we can yet give thanks that it appears the disorder has passed, the police and the courts restoring the King's Peace. The vile sectarianism - "evil-speaking" - which encouraged and inspired the riots must continue to be challenged. It is no less than what David Hume called the "bigoted delusion" of the Popish Plot. Those who promote such (and, yes, all) sectarianism are, as Burke termed those who encouraged the Gordon Riots, "wicked instigators" responsible for "a continued blast of pestilential libels". For now, however, we give thanks unto Almighty God for restoring the peace and order of this Realm. We have no need to rely on the empty language of DEI discourse to do so. We can, rather, turn to the robust realism of the Prayer Book:

For restoring Publick Peace at Home.

O Eternal God, our heavenly Father, who alone makest men to be of one mind in a house, and stillest the outrage of a violent and unruly people: We bless thy holy Name, that it hath pleased thee to appease the seditious tumults which have been lately raised up amongst us: most humbly beseeching thee to grant to all of us grace, that we may henceforth obediently walk in thy holy commandments; and leading a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty, may continually offer unto thee our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving for these thy mercies towards us; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Comments

  1. Isn’t all the DEI ideology just the ongoing Reformation of the Reformation? The rediscovery of Aristotle and Ockham’s nominalism etc was the context for the first Reformation, whereas the 60s and relativism are the context of the neo-puritan ideologies. Same spirit, different context.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No - it's just a very tired, tenuous trope. Merely saying DEI - or 'modernity' or being 'woke' or whatever else - is "the ongoing Reformation of the Reformation" does not make it so. Indeed, why not regard DEI as an expression of the Counter-Reformation? A priestly class, with an exclusive claim to truth, rejecting the norms of largely Protestant societies. Woke Warriors, after all, burn with the same enthusiasm as the 16th century Jesuits. Same spirit, different context.

      But no, this too is nonsense. Making such claims - whether about the Reformation or Counter-Reformation - is, to be frank, meaningless nonsense.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts