There has been a lot of debate recently about British values. We are told that the Education Secretary ‘has drawn up plans requiring schools to promote the British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, mutual respect and tolerance of those of different faiths and beliefs.’ The Prime Minister has reiterated those values thus: ‘a belief in freedom, tolerance of others, accepting personal and social responsibility, respecting and upholding the rule of law – are the things we should try to live by every day. To me they’re as British as the Union Flag, as football, as fish and chips.’ Presumably the Union Flag may have to change if Scotland becomes independent. Our football record has been steadily declining and fish and chips are rarely well cooked – all of which doesn’t bode well for British values.
Perhaps the main problems with this debate are threefold. First, so many of these values could be claimed to be universal or at least not exclusively British. Second, the whole concept of ‘value’ is rather nebulous – what is a value as opposed to an ethic or a virtue? The value of something is a notion more fitted to the market place than moral debate. We might value the idea of owning our home rather than renting it – which might make us somewhat different from other parts of Europe but it is hardly a moral value to be taught in school. And third, is there not a need first to explore a broadly defined cultural environment, which influences the development, acceptance and implementation of such moral values?
Travelling through the Sussex countryside last Saturday I was struck, as I always am when I leave London, by the character of the English countryside and the place it plays in my sense of being British. The character of the countryside changes in different parts of Britain but there is some kind of truth in the notion of ‘England’s green and pleasant land’ and those children and young people who are growing up in cities without ever experiencing the countryside are genuinely deprived by that lack. How might our aesthetic response to a particular landscape affect our moral values?
And thinking geographically we might also ask how we are influenced by living on an island? Clearly where we are on the edge of the continent looking both to Europe and across the Atlantic affects who we are. It does not take us very long to get from one major city to another or to cross the country from east to west or north to south. Our sense of geographical scale can be rocked by going, for example, to America and seeing how far people travel without thinking about it. As an island nation we had in the past to develop a strong navy, and that navy and the commercial enterprise of our merchant adventurers resulted in the development of an empire and a world influence totally disproportionate to the size of our country. How does that imperial legacy influence our moral values?
Our language has evolved under the influence of Germanic, French and Latin vocabulary which makes it rich and complex, suited not only to puns and cross word puzzles but also to the development of a great body of literature in which our moral values are reflected. English has also become the ‘lingua franca’ of the world because of that imperial expansion – particularly to America. One consequence of this, however, is that we have been rather bad at learning other languages or responding to the diversity and richness of other cultures – there is an insularity to being British which may partly explain why we are so concerned about ‘British’ values – rather than seeking out the moral values which have universal application. Indeed a large part of the motivation for this interest in British values lies in our anxiety about living alongside increasing numbers of people from different cultures and faiths. We feel we cannot always look our neighbour in the eye and trust that he or she is somehow ‘like me’ in my everyday expectations about ‘normal behaviour’.
Which brings us on to the religious roots of our culture. Although Christianity is proclaimed as a universal religion – Christ died for all – it has clearly developed in different ways in different cultures. What part has Christianity as evolved through Catholic, Anglican and Free Church belief and practice, played in our self-understanding as a nation? How have our moral values been shaped by faith? And more importantly is it possible for those values to be detached from faith and maintained without the belief and spiritual practice, which explain and support them? Perhaps Christianity at its most profound requires me to look my neighbour in the eye wherever I am and regard him or her as a human being for whom Christ died and whom I am therefore bound to accept and to serve as best I can, regarding my nationality as in some sense a hindrance to that task?
Which brings us to what might seem an unexpected conclusion – given all the questions I have so far suggested we should consider when thinking about ‘British values’. Might we not consider the possibility that the very quest for British values is flawed because our Britishness may at various levels get in the way of my being able to love my neighbour as myself, irrespective of language, culture and nationality. It is important to understand all those national influences and where they contribute things of obvious value to give thanks for them. I am blessed by what is available to me through being born in this country and learning this language. But it is also important to recognise how too much emphasis on my nationality may prevent me from appreciating the humanity I share with my ‘foreign’ neighbour. Perhaps I need to learn the answers to many of the questions I have asked in order to understand what may get in the way of my loving my neighbour, personally, socially and politically.
With my love and prayers,
How beautiful to have the church always open, so that every tired wayfaring man may come in and be soothed by all that art can suggest of a better world when he is weary of this. Ralph Waldo Emerson
The Vicar writes
Stephen Tucker