Skip to main content

Chaos, Confusion and Coalitions

All night long I searched and I scoured, I flicked between television and online coverage, I rummaged through my twitter feeds, in the forlorn hope of finding something that would explain it all. But as the results came rolling in and the blue column overtook the reds and the yellows never really took off, I could not find a theme to explain what was going on.

This election campaign has been unusual and failed to conform to the pattern of previous years. The leaders' debates shook up the electoral dynamic and gave Nick Clegg a platform he would not otherwise have had. His ratings rocketed and for a while it seemed as though everyone agreed with Nick. And the abuse of parliamentary expenses still hung as a dark cloud over the reputation of politicians, and trust in politics descended into deep disenchantment.

So as I settled down to watch the grandiose election night specials there were two themes vying for the limelight. Would Cameron be the 'change we can believe in', or would Nick Clegg bring coalition government to the British Parliament? It all felt simple enough, if Cameron won then the theme of the election was change, if Clegg's rise forced a hung parliament, then coalition, and the need to work together, took centre stage.

But that wasn't how things stacked up. The exit polls were vindicated as seats started to declare; Cameron had not received a ringing endorsement from the electorate and would be short of an overall majority. Yet it was the Liberal Democrats who once again surprised, as they will have less seats in the new parliament that they did in the last.

So I tracked through lists of target seats and projected swings and tried to work out what was happening. But there was no pattern, the Conservatives would secure a shock win, and then fail to pick up a vulnerable seat next door. The Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives traded seats and confusion reigned.

And then I realised: why should the entire country behave as one? I thought back to what Paul wrote to the church in Corinth (1 Cor. 12ff), when he reminded them that the body is made up of many parts. Many parts that are different, yet part of the same body. As this train of thought took over the patently obvious dawned on me. No two constituencies are the same and every candidate provokes a different response. Democracy is not just a way of aggregating the views of many different people to a single sound-bite. Perhaps in the process we can falsely get the im press ion that once the votes are counted, they all lead to the same singular outcome.

Sometimes I struggle with difference. I want things to conform, I want nice, simple, understandable concepts that fit into convenient boxes. Unfortunately for me, that does not reflect the world that I live in. It doesn't apply to politics and it doesn't apply to the church.

This indecisive election result half-heartedly points to change and reluctantly requires cooperation. Yet maybe in the midst of the chaos that lingers in the aftermath, we can think again about difference and confusion, and hear Ecclesiastes tell us (8v17), ‘No-one can comprehend what goes on under the sun. Despite all his efforts to search it out man cannot discover its meaning. Even if a wise man claims he knows, he cannot really comprehend it.’

Confusion and complexity reflect our differences, and difference shouldn't be a threat, otherwise we would be afraid of everyone but ourselves. Difference should be a commodity that we cherish and value, that we protect rather than stifle.

What would a political system resemble if going off message was the norm and not a catastrophe? Come to think of it, though I ask the question of our politicians it applies equally to the church. Sometimes we can be so sure of what we believe that we hide from dissenting voices. But as we look to our political leaders to come together and put aside their partisan priorities for the good of the nation, let us look a little closer. And think about how we can embrace the complexity and accompanying confusion of living in a world that cannot be boiled down to the lowest common denominator. Where politics isn't all about uniform swings. And church unity is about our diversity as much as our similarity.

Article by:
Danny Webster, Parliamentary Officer


Popular posts from this blog

When God turns a deaf ear on prayers

Does God always hear people’s prayers, or do some pray in vain thinking that God hears them, when in reality He chooses to turn a deaf hear to their cries? Some may perhaps have a notion that all prayers are worthy, and God being who He is is by nature willing to listen and hear their prayers delightfully. They entertain the notion that it is their birth right for God to listen to their prayers and answer them accordingly. Also, there are some who come before the presence of the Lord with severe doubts, defeated by the devils whisper that they are such an unworthy soul that for them to lift up their cries to the Lord is an abomination. They are mute by their own wickedness, depressed and thus fail to pray.

What does the scripture say about God turning a deaf hear to prayers? It is to be said that God is sovereign and can choose to answer any prayer as He sees fit. He is altogether happy and never backed into a corner, God always does whatever He pleases for He is free to do as He wills…

What does it mean to live a godly life?

If you ever asked yourself the question, what does it mean to live a godly life? and if your not exactly sure what living a godly life involves, this extract taking from Charles Seet book 'A Christian in a non-Christian world' provides ample guidance on just what to do.

Now it is worth asking the question then, 'What does it mean to live godly?' It does not mean that we are just to confine ourselves within a set of rules and regulations. Some people reduce godly living to a list of 'do’s and don'ts.' But the meaning of godly living goes far deeper than that.

Godly living means living in the manner that God wants us to live. It means having the same feelings, attitudes and heart's desires that God has. It means that we love the things that God loves, care for the things that God cares for, and dislike those things which He dislikes. And since God loves righteousness, a godly person also loves righteousness. Since God hates sin, a godly person also hates …

Women of the Bible: Adah and Zillah

The Sin of Adam and Eve resulted in the fall of humanity. Every generation after them became wicked and that is why scripture affirms, ‘that there is no one righteous, no, not even one.’ Mankind became enslave to the passions of its flesh, its desires became its ruler and men followed the natural dictates of their hearts; and were it not for Sovereign grace, the race of men would now only be read of by angels in the library of extinct creatures. Adam and Eve witnessed the consequences of their sin in the death of their beloved son, Abel, by the hands of Cain who murdered his brother in anger and was thus sent away from the presence of God. My dear sisters, sin is not only sin when it is found in its extremes, sin is also sin in its subtlety and vanity. Sin is sin when one's affection is set on another and not on God, when one lives to please a thing or a being which is not God; this is also sin.
This becomes especially evident in the lives of Adah and Zillah the wives of Lamech. Th…