Scotland: a personal view from within the Church of England

Five days to go until the Vote. We have set up a candle stand in Durham Cathedral at the altar of Queen Margaret of Scotland and are inviting people to come and offer this momentous decision to God. 

I've tried to get hold of some 'official' statement from the Church of England about how we view the independence debate south of the border. As far as I know, the English church has confined itself to promising prayers in advance of the vote, and for the healing of divisions once we know the result, and to pledging the CofE's continued goodwill and partner and friend to the Scottish churches and people for the good of all in these islands.

I can understand this carefully measured, even-handed, typically Anglican approach.  I can see why the Scottish churches, which have to live cheek by jowl with the consequences of the decision whichever way it goes, have been scrupulous about not publicly taking sides. But when the Supreme Governor of the CofE says that the decision 'is a matter for the people of Scotland alone', I want to say 'up to a point Lord Copper'. For there is far more to it than people north of Berwick simply deciding whether or not to pursue self-determination. This is where England comes in. 

So what has it got to do with us in England?

The answer is: everything! The future of the United Kingdom is of concern to all its citizens, not just those who have a vote. And it seems to me that the Church of England could have contributed to the debate about the Union by offering some commentary, its own theological and spiritual perceptions, and not least its hopes and fears for next week and its aftermath. It would have been a way of demonstrating what we already acknowledge, that the future of Scotland is also about the future of England. Up here in the borderlands of Northern England, we are deeply aware of how a Yes vote could have a dramatic impact on life south of the Tweed. I believe this is true for the whole of England - and for Wales and Northern Ireland too.

If you regularly read this blog or my tweets, you will know that I am a firm believer in the Union. So I am praying with some feeling that Scotland does not decide to walk away from it (though I should add for the avoidance of doubt that our Cathedral prayers do not steer people towards one specific outcome or the other). I take this view not simply for historical, political or economic reasons, though I believe they all point in the same direction. I believe that it's fundamentally a matter of good theology too. And here is where the Church of England or its House of Bishops might have been more forthcoming in offering an official perspective. 

Running through the Bible and Christian thought is the conviction that the idea of covenant lies at the heart of God's relationship with human beings. It is therefore at the heart of how we as peoples relate to one another. 'Better together' is almost an echo of 'It is not good for a human being to be alone' in the book of Genesis. Therefore, any covenanted relationship based on mutual trust, fidelity, common purpose, interdependence and a care for one another's welfare is always better than being independent and alone. The breakup of the united kingdom of Israel and Judah was regarded as a disaster by the prophets because it flew in the face of a covenant between peoples. 

This is why I think that for Scotland to say no to the Union of which we have all been a part for 300 years would not only be a tragedy, but also a denial of a hard-won principle of human society that the United Kingdom expresses. The point is not whether Scotland could be a successful, prosperous nation on its own.  I am sure it could. But the Christian ideals of mutuality, partnership and service surely point in the opposite direction from narrow nationalisms and self-interest. The question for all the member nations of the UK isn't merely, what are we getting out of the Union? but, what can we put into it? What gifts and experience do we bring to it? What can we contribute to the flourishing of all our peoples? This suggests that we should be investing more in the relationships between us, not dismantling them. 

The United Kingdom is not a perfect union: far from it. The English have a long history of treating the Scots with disdain, even contempt. Durham Cathedral, 'half church of God, half castle 'gainst the Scot' in Sir Walter Scott's famous words, epitomises an often violent, destructive relationship. We English need to repent of this, and start treating Scotland as an equal partner in the Union. We should always have been celebrating the intellectual, social, economic, cultural and spiritual benefits Scotland has brought to the UK, not belatedly talking them up in the weeks before a referendum. 

A new covenant between Scotland and England would entail real devolution of power, something that many of us in the North East of England, also far away from London, hope for too. Here, the progress already made in Scotland could show us English a more excellent way. But if Scotland turns its back on the UK, it will, I fear, be a step back from a noble vision of what can bind nations and peoples together. Federation, commonwealth, and partnership are ideals that should inspire us to work for a good future for all our peoples in a proper, respectful mutuality and recognition of each other's dignity and worth. 

Something along these lines is I believe what the great 16th century Anglican theologian Richard Hooker, in his generous vision of an inclusive polity, would have urged us to pray for and work towards. I believe he would have argued that the welfare of both England and Scotland needs both to be part of a healthy, flourishing Union. In particular, the CofE has a duty of care towards the English. We in the CofE should be saying loud and clear that a future in a truncated UK, whatever it may mean for Scotland, would vastly diminish England. Unity is a value of the kingdom of God, and when a human society embodies it, however imperfectly, something of God's vision for humanity is expressed. 

So I hope the people of Scotland, especially its churches, are in no doubt that we in the Church of England care very much about what happens next week, not as observers but as those committed to the bonds that have tied us together for centuries. Our unity-in-nationhood and our common destiny matter to us. How could they not? This is why my impassioned plea to friends north of the border is: please do not leave us. You are fellow-travellers with us. Stay with us, and help us all to journey on together in peace and hope. 

The Scottish Referendum: a simple question

Earlier this year I attended a ceremony to mark the 500^th anniversary of the Battle of Flodden in 1513. It’s a stone’s throw from the River Tweed which marks the present Anglo-Scottish border. This was the last of a long line of Anglo-Scottish battles, and it was one of the bitterest. Its outcome changed the history of Scotland, and arguably paved the way towards the Union of the crowns in 1707. The memorial cross on the hilltop that overlooks the battlefield says simply, and movingly, ‘to the brave of both nations’.

In North East England we have been a border people for centuries.  These marcher lands have long been fought over as their array of castles and fortifications show. The Durham Palatinate ruled by its powerful Prince Bishops was a buffer state within a state set up to guard the rest of England from invading Scots. Yet all that belonged to the middle ages. It’s odd to think that we were still fighting these battles on the threshold of modernity in the early 16^th century.

I write this on the day the SNP publishes its vision for an independent Scotland. It’s a milestone on the long journey that leads up to next September’s referendum. It’s obviously a matter of keen interest to all Scots. But here in the borderlands, it’s a matter of concern to the English too. The decision Scotland makes about its future will have effects south of the border. If Scotland votes for independence, there will be consequences for the North of England that are economic, political and social. But these wouldn't merely affect the North. They would affect the whole of England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well. Independence would radically alter the way the surviving peoples of the Union saw themselves. It would need us to re-group in order to face a future that could be very different from what we know at present.

I happen to think that the Union is a good thing, and so far, the evidence is that a majority of Scots feel that way too. The Union as a federation of peoples is one of the world’s most successful nation-states. There is no doubt room to re-calibrate the precise ways in which our nations, provinces and regions relate to one another within a united whole, but that is no argument for dismantling it.

But this isn’t my principal concern right now. What baffles me is very simple. Why is the future of the Union, which is the business of all UK citizens, to be decided on our behalf by the Scottish people alone?

The more I try to get my mind round this question, the more puzzling it seems. I can’t find a flaw in the argument that the future of the Union is the business of the whole Union, not just part of it. It may be that in North East England, because of our violent history, we feel the force of this particularly keenly. What matters at the border, what kind of border it even turns out to be are as important to us south of it as to those on its north side. But as I’ve said, it affects all of us who are citizens of the UK. Profoundly and probably irreversibly. I am not sure we have woken up to this yet.

I can’t see that it is good politics, let alone justice, to delegate the dismantling of the UK to the say-so of 10% of its total population (fewer than 6 million out of more than 60 million). Whichever way it goes, it does not look like a well-founded plebiscite that acknowledges the legitimate interests of all UK citizens. I'd like to be clearer what the role of the Westminster Parliament is in this watershed constitutional decision. I am not comfortable about being disenfranchised, relegated to the role of onlooker gazing at a drama acted out on the Scottish stage that will have far-reaching consequences for the large audience sitting impotently in the rest of the UK.

For the avoidance of doubt let me add that I honour the Scots for many things, not least their intellectual rigour, their love of fairness and their strong sense of common purpose. We need all these qualities in the Union. But if there is a decision to make about the future of the Union, it should be through a process that is rigorous, fair and that has regard for the purpose and flourishing of all its peoples, not just some. I am sure the Scots don't dissent from that.