Brexit and the Church of England: a correspondence

I received this email yesterday. My reply to it is below. I have anonymised it and publish it here because I hope it echoes a wider concern about the failure of the Church of England to engage at an institutional level with Brexit. This was always regrettable, but is especially so now that a No Deal Brexit is a real threat facing this nation. My reply says nothing that I haven't rehearsed on this blog many times before. And I do recognise that Church leaders have been active behind the scenes in debates and discussions about our future in relation to Europe, not least in a recent symposium held at Lambeth Palace. 

However, when it comes to speaking in the "public square", entering the political fray, reframing the debate so that it is not dominated by self-interest, and not least, helping to shape at least the questions its own membership ought to be asking, I'm afraid I find a lot that falls short of a truly prophetic and wise contribution to this crisis that will go on dominating our lives for many years to come. 


Dear Michael, N and P

Forgive my temerity in writing to you all. 

I am quietly going mad on the subject of Brexit and noticing how few prophetic Christian theological voices are being raised against the forthcoming national disaster. 

All my political education is now coming from Twitter but sadly there is virtually no overlap between my political life and my church life. 

You three are the only senior people I’ve read speaking out strongly positively with a pro-EU vision and warning of the dangerous territory we are entering.

So I thought I’d write to you all and ask if you know if there is any big hitting “Christians Against Brexit” type of grouping that I haven’t yet found. 

And if there isn’t, to ask if you would consider starting one. 

And if you do, please count me in as first follower. 

I’m a newbie activist and currently limited to Twitter and supporting crowdfunding of the major legal cases. Would be willing to put a few personal ££ behind setting up a wee website as a repository of good writing worth sharing, and linking to all the other Remain campaigns. 

I don’t even know why I’m writing this because the day job is already way too big, but just feel I can’t stand by and do nothing. 

Best wishes – and thanks for your voices. 

S

********

Dear S,

Thank you for writing. As you know I share your concerns entirely. 

However, I’m at a loss to know how to reply with any ideas. As you know I’ve blogged regularly about Brexit (http://northernwoolgatherer.blogspot.com) and what I perceive as the failure of the Church of England to engage with it at a public, institutional level (which is different from individuals including the Bishops of Europe and Leeds among others who have regularly spoken personally about it). 

My argument has been that as Brexit profoundly affects national identity, both of the UK as a whole and of the four nations that comprise it, it is properlye the concern of the two national churches of the UK. The Church of Scotland has consistently spoken up for our EU membership, while recognising that there is room for debate and dissent because not all its members will see things that way. But the Church of England has not done so, despite the fact that Brexit is predominantly an English phenomenon. It has observed a studied neutrality and our Archbishops have taken the line (which is deeply questionable in my view) that because the referendum delivered a Leave result in 2016, we are bound to respect that vote and should not question it. There was no General Synod debate when it might have made a difference before the referendum. I was assured there would be a debate in the House of Bishops at that time, but I don’t believe this ever happened. How could these opportunities have been passed by as if Brexit were a thing indifferent, and not the proper business of the national church in England to discuss?

I can’t deny how deeply disappointed I am in the church I’ve served as an ordained minister all my adult life. I believe it has behaved in a cowardly way during the greatest crisis to face England and the UK since the last war. It’s not too much to say that I’m ashamed of its performance and am afraid that history will demonstrate that the national church stood back when it ought to have been engaged in a critical national debate. I think it has forfeited its role as an established church, though that’s perhaps a different matter from the one you’re raising in your email.

I convened an online forum called “Christians for Europe” which was (in a non-overt way) hosted by the LibDems and had a presence on FaceBook and Twitter as well as a website. It was active during the referendum campaign and can still be found online, though I discontinued actively tweeting a few months after the referendum. I’m not inclined to reactivate it unless there is clear institutional support from the Church of England - which there won’t be.

I know that there are a great many Anglicans in England who are profoundly worried about the nation’s future. This includes, I believe, the great majority of its leaders, particularly the bishops. It’s for them to speak up now. A superannuated jobbing priest like me has a much diminished influence. I’ll continue to be a campaigner against Brexit, especially in any No Deal form. I am a European through and through. But I am not hopeful it can be averted. And I’m ashamed that our church has not done more to point to the threats that face us and, at the very least, try to reset the terms of the debate not as a matter of self-interest and economic prosperity only, but of loving our neighbour and building global communities of peace, friendship, reconciliation and justice for the world’s voiceless and poor. 

Sorry I can’t be more positive! 
Best wishes
Michael

********

And here is another response received on 12 August.

I can only echo what you have written. I too feel pretty helpless. After my letter in the Church Times (which I shared with all my contacts) the Guardian published another, saying much the same in a different way. The latter was largely talking to the converted. It should probably have been in the Mail or Telegraph. All this has led to a lot of follow up. I've had some moving, even heart-rending responses. I have totally kept clear of social media... and that has left me some space to think and write.... A very few bishops are doing their best. but only corporate action could have done some good. In response to the CT letter Justin [Welby] said it was no use shouting at poiticians. I replied that what I hoped for was  leadership, signs of the kingdom, for his 'little flock'. I'm afraid my former NSM curate writing to me was right when he said 'most of the bishops know the score but are afraid of the dwindling number of churchgoers who voted leave'. The same lot mutatis mutandis who in 1933 thought Hitler was a godsend. It is small comfort to know we are nowhere near alone.and probably even a majority. At Peterloo the state sent in the cavalry. The mood now seems to be 'keep calm and drink strong tea'. If not even our genocidal submarines will bring Christian people on to the streets, this near coup d'etat will not either. Optimistic?  No. Hope, however, is on another plane.

P

********
And another....

The more important issue now is to imagine and envisage some vision for a post-Brexit UK. I have not hidden my views about Brexit, but we still have to offer hope for beyond an outcome we don’t want and even think will be seriously damaging. We also have to be hard-nosed about some of this: speaking out is not always good leadership – especially if it is an exercise in salving our own conscience by having ‘done something’. Our primary task now is to keep asking the questions, making the case and holding the government to account, but the reality is that Cummings/Johnson populist communication is likely to be more effective and emotive than rational recourse to reality or facts – something I think is appalling, but I also think is real. Doing this at local level is as – or more – important than at national level.

I think it generally unwise and inappropriate to compare Brexit to Germany in the 1920s and ‘30s (despite some apparent populist parallels), but, if such comparisons are at all useful, then the need for people to look beyond the immediate and have some vision for the future (in exile?) is essential. It seems to me that this is the prophetic calling, too.

N

********

And here is a further comment from the person who originally wrote to me and to others.

Really appreciate you taking the trouble to respond – it’s tough stuff and given me lots of food for thought. I was reaching out feeling particularly Gloomy and Despondent on the subject and this conversation has encouraged and disheartened me in approximately equal measure. I think my own path has to be to continue to campaigning at least to block no deal, and although revoke/referendum hopes are now vanishingly slim I do want to feel I’ve tried even if I have to accept the charge of a degree of self-indulgence in that. And if we fail then I’m glad people like N are doing the thinking ahead. And maybe the case does just have to be made politically now and theology is not relevant. No, it must be there between the cracks so I guess I keep looking. I do feel sad that there isn’t a consolidated Christian voice regardless of whether that’s the established church or an informal grouping. Will keep reading your respective blogs/articles for inspiration and maybe it even challenges me to be more serious in trying privately to articulate this theologically for myself too…

S 

Happy Birthday to the European Union!

Today is Lady Day, the Feast of the Annunciation. The day falls exactly nine months before Christmas, and commemorates the message the Angel Gabriel brought to the Virgin Mary to tell her that she would give birth to Jesus. So the day heralds good news, deliverance, salvation.
 
Was it by design that on this very day sixty years ago, the leaders of six European countries bound themselves together in a treaty that would bring into being the European Economc Community, what we now call the European Union? Those who originated the European project after the devastation of war were largely Christian politicians and statesmen. They fervently believed that such a treaty was the only way to save the continent from future wars and ensure that nations would flourish together by working together. They were deeply influenced by the insights of Catholic social teaching. Hopes were high as they signed the Treaty of Rome on Lady Day 1957.

So for those of us who still believe that it can only be good when nations and peoples grow closer to one another, the EU’s sixtieth birthday is a milestone to celebrate. And today's pro-Europe march in London will be one way in which this country’s Europeans want to shout it loud and clear. Happy Birthday to the European Union! We want to recognise the lasting benefits that the EU has brought, not only to the members of its own family of nations but far beyond through its capacity to influence the whole of humanity for good.

What are our reasons for celebrating today?

The economy and our global trading relationships overwhelmingly dominated the rhetoric of both sides of the EU Referendum campaign and indeed the debate since the nation voted to leave. These will be the big themes of the Brexit negotiations that are shortly to begin. We have heard far less about what I think are the best of all reasons to celebrate the achievements of the EU. These are about raising the capacity of nations to think geopolitically - which means realising that there are global threats that we can only address by working together. The founding vision of a Europe that would for the first time in centuries be spared the attrition of war was based on a pragmatic assumption about how nations tend to behave in their own interests. How to make self-interest enlightened and constructive rather than competitive and destructive was the question the Six set out to solve in 1957. They thought that if nations like France and Germany needed to trade iron, steel and coal with each other, they would be less likely to find themselves dragged into conflicts that risked destroying each other as had happened in the past.

So I want to put the tasks of peace-making and peace-keeping at the top of my list of reasons for being thankful for the EU's achievements in the past sixty years. In a world where resurgent nationalisms threaten to pull apart the delicate threads that bind peoples together for their own safety and the world's good, the EU has taught (I should say, is teaching) its member nations to transcend narrow self-interest and look beyond their own borders. And this applies to the other huge global challenges we know we must either face together through partnerships and treaty obligations, or we do not face them effectively at all. On their own, nation-states are severely limited in the difference they can make in the areas of climate change, poverty, health care, literacy, migration, inequality, human rights, corruption and all the other ways in which social justice must always be at the heart of our perspective on the world of which we are a part.

It's a bitter thought that just a few days after this diamond jubilee birthday, our Prime Minister will have written the Article 50 letter that will trigger the formal process by which the United Kingdom will leave the European Union. At least she did our partner nations the courtesy of not dating it 25 March, though it is a great pity that she and other UK leaders declined to attend the celebrations in Rome tomorrow. Had we joined the party, it would have helped in a small way to create a positive environment in which to begin the vastly complex Brexit negotiations. This lack of imagination (not to say courtesy) is disappointing when the UK is going to need all the friends it can get in the next two years among the other twenty seven EU nations.

I am not naïve about the EU as it has evolved over sixty years. Its lofty ideals have not yet been fully realised, and the febrile atmosphere among many of its member states makes me wonder whether they ever can be in the foreseeable future. Brexit is both a symptom of this malaise, and is also helping to fuel it. The damage caused by the Euro crisis has not only been economic but reputational too. There is a real crisis of "ownership" across the Union: hearts and minds need to be won, or won back. That, as much as Brexit, may mute today's celebrations.

There is also substance to the arguments of Brexiters that there is democratic deficit in the architecture of the EU's decision-making, with not enough power belonging to the Union's elected representatives in the European Parliament. But these are not arguments against the idea of the European Union. The challenge is to make it more accountable and transparent. I'd hoped David Cameron's promise to negotiate the goal of a "reformed EU" would focus on these systemic difficulties. Instead, all that seemed to concern him was special pleading based on "what's best for Britain" - hardly a slogan that is in the spirit of Europeanism.

By contrast, Pope Francis yesterday outlined his own concept of a union of nations. At a special audience of EU leaders to mark the anniversary, he pleaded with them to place humanity, not mammon, at the heart of their vision. He told them he believed that a generous, outward-looking solidarity among peoples and nations was the only antidote to self-serving populism. And he left his guests in no doubt about their task. "Solidarity is expressed in concrete actions and steps that draw us closer to our neighbours. This is your duty: identify the path of hope."

And this is indeed a day to be upbeat and hopeful. On the day after the EU Referendum, I blogged these words on the Christians For Europe website:

During the campaign, "Christians for Europe" has tried to help frame the referendum as a matter not simply of pragmatic politics ("what's best for Britain") but also of social ethics and a theology of society. We've emphasised the central tenets of our faith: loving our neighbour, standing in solidarity with the disadvantaged, seeking the common good, promoting life together rather than apart. We've wanted to argue that the European project is based on a fundamentally Christian vision of nationhood and common life.

All this still stands. So even if, to our immense sadness, the UK will soon be walking away from the EU, it mustn't stop us from being good Europeans who will continue to work closely with the peoples of our continent who are our natural allies and friends. We must go on taking a global view of our place in the world and not draw in our horizons as if we were some insignificant offshore island. We must continue to work away at trying to create a more wholesome politics of respect and compassion both internationally and in our own country.

In that spirit we shall go on seeking the welfare of the human family and playing our part as good citizens of our nation and our world. That will involve the healing of the divisions that opened up during the Referendum campaign, and we are committed to this too in both word and action. And it goes without saying: we must now, more than ever, say our prayers. 

The Christian gospel of Jesus's death and resurrection makes us people of hope. We do not lose heart.

That was nine months ago precisely. On this Feast of the Annunciation, those words still stand, I believe. Today's party is a celebration of what it means to be good Europeans and to work together as friends and allies. The good news that the Angel Gabriel brought to Mary was about keeping hope alive for the transformation of the human family. So as we wish the EU a happy birthday, we can look back with gratitude for our own part in it, wish it well for the future and pledge that we shall go on being loyal friends and neighbours in this continent that we share together.

Europeans who Live in Britain. Europeans who Love Britain

Last night I went to a meeting with nationals of other European Union countries who are living in our part of Northumberland. We gathered in a café at Hexham's independent cinema. Others in the room were looking forward to the evening presentation - Hidden Figures, maybe, or Fences. There was the happy atmosphere of expected enjoyment.

But our gathering was not for entertainment. On the night before The Queen was due to sign off the legislation paving the way for Article 50 to be invoked and the Brexit process triggered, this group of fifteen or so was contemplating what their destiny could be after the United Kingdom had left the EU. For as we all know, the UK government has failed to offer any undertakings to non-UK citizens of EU nations about remaining in this country once Brexit is a reality.

In this fascinating, articulate group of people many nationalities are represented: German, Dutch, Polish, Spanish, Greek, French, Swedish and Italian. They had lived in the UK for many years, decades even. Some were retired, some in employment. They were entirely indigenised. Their English was fluent. Their children had known no other life but in Britain. They paid taxes and social security in the UK. They owned property and had put down roots here. Most had long since ceased to feel they belonged anywhere else. Some had all but forgotten what it was like to live elsewhere.

You'll realise why I felt that my presence at this gathering was under somewhat false pretences. I am not facing their anxieties. I don't have to fear for the future of my family's or my own life in Britain. But I do know something about what it means and even how it feels when your future is not secure and you don't feel safe. Regular readers of this blog know that my late mother was a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany who came to Britain in the late 1930s. Her parents escaped with their lives because they had been taken in and cared for underground in German-occupied Holland. Books of German poetry, 19th century Jewish prayer books, some pieces of china, a seventeenth century map of Edam on in our entrance hall and an old Dutch cupboard in the living room symbolise that story and help keep it alive as it recedes in time from the present.

I'd been invited to attend as a known champion of the EU in Tynedale. A few knew about Christians for Europe which I co-convened during the Referendum campaign (and where a still active Twitter feed @Xians4EU can be viewed if you are not on Twitter yourself). A couple of other people from continental Europe had acquired UK citizenship. But most had not. They had assumed that in a United Kingdom that was an EU member state, there was no need to worry about national citizenship because now, after a terribly destructive war, we were at last Europeans together. Why shouldn't they make that assumption?

I heard a lot that helped me to empathise with the predicament of these good people. "We love Britain. It's our home. We belong here. We've worked here for years. We contribute to its wellbeing. We make a vital contribution to our locality here in Northumberland. We do not want to live anywhere else. We are all Europeans now - or thought we were." In all this, there was a striking lack of bitterness or self-pity. Yes, there was a lot of anxiety, together with puzzlement and hurt that their host country had not offered any undertakings about staying in Britain after Brexit when it could so easily have done so.

Indeed, I think it was the not-knowing that was the worst thing. Some said that British friends and neighbours had tried to reassure them by telling them that they wouldn't have to leave, even if they would have to wait to be told. Nobody said they had experienced hostility from locals; indeed they spoke of the warmth and friendliness of Northumberland people. (As a southerner blown in from London, I could identify with this.) But wonderful though this all is, anyone can see why it isn't enough.

Listening to the members of this group, I couldn't but feel a sense not only of profound sympathy but of shame. Many of them spoke about what it was like to contemplate being treated as "bargaining chips" in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations. They believed it would not have cost the UK much to take the generous, moral high ground and offer unconditional undertakings to long-standing European citizens from other countries who have made their home in these islands. They spoke about Britain's famous traditions of welcome to people from overseas (not simply continental Europe of course).

I didn't think I should say too much as a native Brit, but I did want to tell them that many of us, even some Brexiters I'd spoken to, were completely on their side. We understood their fears. We wanted to do all we could to help. And many of us were, I also said, ashamed that our country had treated them so badly, not just because of all they were contributing to the UK but, more basic even than that, because they are our fellow human beings and as the Hebrew Bible says, we have a responsibility to care for the stranger in our midst. Only they aren't strangers any more. They are our friends. And that makes it all the more shaming.

I understand the arguments about UK expats who live in mainland EU countries. A number of them have become friends through our regular visits to France. They too are anxious about their future after Brexit. I sympathise very much with them too, not least with those who have lived long enough outside Britain not to have qualified to vote in the Referendum (a particularly mean attitude on the part of the government, I thought). But two wrongs don't make a right. I believe that if the UK had behaved in a principled way and given the undertakings our fellow-European friends needed, it would have created a more propitious environment within which to negotiate a good Brexit deal. Generosity begets generosity: the other 27 EU nations might just have felt more inclined to behave generously towards Britain as a result.  This country badly needs friends abroad right now. So it would have been an act of enlightened self-interest to say to my conversation-partners last night, "Yes, of course you must stay in Britain. This is your home, and we wouldn't have it any other way".

But we didn't say that, despite the best efforts of some in Parliament. And to that extent, Britain has shown itself to be a less kind, less generous and less fair nation than I thought it was. With less heart, you become less great. This is why I am ashamed. Aren't you?

So I'm going to show solidarity. I'm sure many others will do the same. We must change this situation, and give back to our friends with whom we share this continent, our brothers and sisters, the future they want in our midst and have a right to expect.

On Saying Farewell to the EU: the morning after

Here is the blog I've written for the "Christians for Europe" website in the light of the Referendum result.

********

This is the day we hoped and prayed would never dawn. 

But it has. The UK has voted to leave the European Union. After months of debate, the voters have decided. And even it's by a narrow margin, so narrow that less than half of the eligible adult population are behind a Brexit, that's the outcome. To say we are disappointed doesn't begin to express it. But a vote is a vote. We respect it.

There will be much to reflect on in the days ahead. There will be post-mortems. Why didn't we Remainers succeed in making our case for EU membership? Why did the nation fall for the self-interested inward-looking arguments of the Leave campaign? Why did our national politics become so divisive? 

And more important, there will be big questions about the uncertain future that now lies ahead. What will become of the EU after this outcome? Will the UK's Union hold together or will Scotland go its own way? How do we reconfigure our trading relationships with the EU and the rest of the world? We suddenly find ourselves in a strange Brexit-land where there are no landmarks and no map. The next few months and years could be turbulent not only for the UK but for Europe and the world.

How should we as pro-EU people of faith respond?

During the campaign, "Christians for Europe" has tried to help frame the referendum as a matter not simply of pragmatic politics ("what's best for Britain") but also of social ethics and a theology of society. We've emphasised the central tenets of our faith: loving our neighbour, standing in solidarity with the disadvantaged, seeking the common good, promoting life together rather than apart. We've wanted to argue that the European project is based on a fundamentally Christian vision of nationhood and common life.

All this still stands. So even if, to our immense sadness, the UK will soon be walking away from the EU, it mustn't stop us from being good Europeans who will continue to work closely with the peoples of our continent who are our natural allies and friends. We must go on taking a global view of our place in the world and not draw in our horizons as if we were some insignificant offshore island. We must continue to work away at trying to create a more wholesome politics of respect and compassion both internationally and in our own country.

In that spirit we shall go on seeking the welfare of the human family and playing our part as good citizens of our nation and our world. That will involve the healing of the divisions that opened up during the Referendum campaign, and we are committed to this too in both word and action. And it goes without saying: we must now, more than ever, say our prayers. 

The Christian gospel of Jesus's death and resurrection makes us people of hope. We do not lose heart.

********

Perhaps I can end on a more personal note. If I say that I am heartbroken, I don't want you to think that I'm dramatising. But as this "day after" dawns, it's hard for me to see any good in it. So much of my own story is intertwined with the story of continental Europe - if you've been reading this blog regularly, you'll understand how. So it feels as if part of my identity is being stripped away, all that is symbolised by the words "European Union" displayed in the cover of my passport. I've been immensely proud of my EU citizenship. I've regarded it as a privilege to think of myself in that way. To face the fact that I am going to lose a fundamental aspect of myself feels terrible. It's as if a light is going out.

When it was clear that Leave were on their way to winning, Paddy Ashdown tweeted: "God help our country". I share his sense of desperation. Or is it desolation? Or devastation? All those words seem to fit. At a stroke, we find ourselves in exile. It feels like a lonely place to be.

But I know, of course, that it is not the end of the world, however bad it seems. What I wrote at the end of the official blog is the most important sentence of all. It's a quote from St Paul's second Corinthian letter where, having catalogued the ordeals and suffering he has had to face for the sake of the gospel, he speaks of his indomitable hope in the God of resurrection. "We do not lose heart."

I need to say those words to myself over and over again. It will take time to come to terms with what we have done as a nation. There are "fightings within and fears without". We undoubtedly face times of great difficulty. It may be that the UK may come to rue the day. But Paddy Ashdown has given me the clue about facing the future. "God help our country" is the best prayer we can say right now. For praying is all I can think of doing at this moment. 

God will not abandon us, for all that we have done something extraordinarily foolish. His strength is made perfect in our weakness. We must trust him. 

17 Weeks 5 Days

That's how long we have before the EU referendum announced today.

My last blog was about the Twitter feed I've just set up to support a Christian case for remaining in the European Union, @Xians4EU. Under that banner, I've tried to pull together useful observations, commentary and reflection on the EU debate that I hope helps frame a Christian perspective, with some human interest now and then, and from time to time a dose of much needed humour and irony.

So what's to be said about the outcome of the EU summit from that Christian perspective? It's far too early to say definitively, and we have yet to see the small print. But here's my outline sketch.

Let's begin by accentuating the positive. It's very good news that there's an agreement at all because it wasn't a foregone conclusion. To get the twenty eight member states to sign it off called for a major collective act of the will. It wasn't only the Prime Minister who showed great stamina. Although I was one of many who didn't see the need to put ourselves and everybody else through this torturous exercise, I am greatly relieved that it has produced a result. It would have been unthinkable for David Cameron to come away having to campaign for Britain to leave the EU.

Secondly, let's be grateful that there is apparently so much goodwill towards the UK in Europe. Despite the long wrangling over migrant welfare payments, benefit payments to children of migrant workers, protecting the City of London from Eurozone regulation, national sovereignty and 'ever closer union', it's always been clear that the EU states view Brexit not just with sadness but with real alarm. I had expected that with a gun held at their head by us Brits (as it must have seemed to the others sitting round the table), we would be shown the door. But no. We should notice this fund of respect, and in some cases real affection, for Britain, and not exploit it or hurl it back in the faces of our European partners by voting ourselves OUT when they have (or at least think they have) conceded quite a lot.

Finally, let's recognise the provisions to safeguard what a majority of the electorate says it values in Britain and does not want to sacrifice. Our political integrity and self-determination as a nation is secure. We are not going to be absorbed into some European superstate (which was always a Eurosceptic fantasy, but it didn't half help ramp up their rhetoric). Our difficulties in relation to migrants and their dependants is recognised. Our financial institutions are safe from foreign interference. There have had to be compromises. But that's what happens when grown-ups negotiate about anything. Cameron has come away with more than many of us expected - and maybe more than he expected too.

But I have questions too, and there no doubt be more to come. And here is where I am especially trying to apply a Christian mind and heart.

To start with, I am troubled about a process that has seemed to deflect so much attention on the UK when Europe faces so many crises not of its making: thousands of refugees arriving on our shores, turbulence close to our borders in the Middle East, the challenges facing our financial systems and the Euro in particular. Time to discuss these urgent matters was sorely needed. Thanks to us, our leaders only brushed their outskirts. And it would have been a priceless opportunity to discuss how the EU's cumbersome decision-making processes could become more transparent and democratic, for instance by giving more power to our elected representatives in the European Parliament. Instead, we demanded that the UK should be centre-stage. (And what's to stop every nation now bidding for its own two days in the sun at EU summits now that we have what Le Monde cleverly dubbed 'à la carte Europe'?) That doesn't seem quite true to the Christian gospel.

Following from this, I have an uneasy conscience about the Prime Minister's language about Britain being a 'special case' within the EU. Why should it be? Why is Britain more special than our twenty seven partner nations, more equal than the others? It goes with the rhetoric of 'I'm going to get what's best for Britain out this negotiation and I won't come out with anything less'. Up to a point, Lord Copper. But what about what's best for Europe as a community of peoples, especially its poorer members? Or what's best for the human family for whom the EU can do so much good? A Christian social justice urges us to love our neighbour and never to neglect him or her. Ask not what the Union can do for you. Ask what you can do for it.

When it comes to all the brouhaha about 'ever closer union', I am baffled and, I have to say, worried. In every other community I belong to, whether in church or society, the idea that people and communities should draw closer together is regarded as desirable if not essential. That's how partnership, collaboration, reconciliation, peace and progress happen, precisely why the original six nations got together amid the ashes of World War 2 to build a common European home. To say 'never' smacks of a retreat into isolationism. Yes, the word 'union' no doubt puts the federalist frighteners on to some people. Yet this United Kingdom is precisely an example of how successful such an arrangement can be among four very different peoples, and what is more, with devolved powers and subsidiarities built in to make sure that 'united' doesn't mean 'absorbed'. The EU has never understood 'ever growing union', or as we might say, the convergence of its peoples, other than in the light of subsidiarity, making decisions at the most appropriate (which is often the lowest) level.

We need to recognise the nature of the world we now inhabit, and not live in some imagined past. The nation state is not the absolute autonomous entity it was. Global institutions are more and more in the ascendant. Transnational financial and trading organisations are too big for single nations to deal with on their own. Meanwhile, the world's conflicts are largely not now being fought along old national lines; security has to be understood in far bigger ways. Climate change will not be addressed by nations on their own. We need more, and more effective, partnerships and associations like the EU, not fewer. So I'm not sure that this 'never' to 'ever closer union' isn't shutting the door on an important Christian principle about how society transcends boundaries, establishes covenanted bonds and grows together for the common good.

I suppose this amounts to two cheers for the Prime Minister. Actually, I doubt if the summit will be uppermost in voters' minds when they go to the polls in June. I doubt if we shall be obsessing about benefit brakes and the Euro's effect on the FTSE (even if we should). This yes-no decision feels as though it is about much more than this: nothing less than the fundamental architecture of the European Union and whether or not Britain has a place there. It's about the basic principles of our life together as peoples and nations. A Christian mind about why this matters so profoundly is what "Christians for the EU" is about.

But in 124 days' time, it will all be down to you and me.