Magazine article The Christian Century

Referendum

Magazine article The Christian Century

Referendum

Article excerpt

AFTER SEVEN YEARS living in North Carolina I made my stand about the Civil War: the South was wrong about the slaves but may have been onto something about the politics.

What I meant was that many of the fights about politics in the United States today come from the country simply being too big to be manageable. The language about Washington, D.C., being "broken" and needing to be "fixed" seems to me to come from the wrong semantic field; we're not talking about a plumbing issue--it's more like obesity. The vital organs of the capital are under major pressure servicing a body that's just too large. I thought North Carolina was a nice size for a country. It had mountains and coastline, rural areas and cities, and a diverse population of a tidy 10 million. That was plenty.

So it's with mixed feelings that I face what may be the most significant day of self-understanding for the people of the United Kingdom in my lifetime--the September 18 referendum on whether Scotland should be an independent country. In principle I'm all for devolved authority and the flourishing of free peoples; yet surely nationalism got a good airing in the 20th century and showed us beyond reasonable doubt that it's a dangerous, inhospitable, and ugly thing. Either way, the United Kingdom is poised to decide on what's been dubbed the greatest act of self-mutilation in its history. Just imagine a Union Jack flag with the white St. Andrew's cross removed from it. And the English, for the most part, whether modest or dumbfounded, are saying nothing about it.

For anyone studying or teaching ethics at a university or seminary, the debate about Scottish independence fits neatly into the categories that the discipline likes to produce. There are two conventional kinds of ethics. One looks for iron rules about right and wrong that are written into the DNA of creation, like the Ten Commandments. The other, which has fewer pretensions, is to do whatever turns out for the best.

What's happened in Western society in the last hundred years is that the second answer has replaced the first as the default setting for public morality. When politicians talk about right and wrong, the public says, "Who do you think you are?" But when they talk about what will work and turn out for the best, the public thinks they're doing their job. When Christian leaders speak about morality, people expect them to uphold a somewhat old-fashioned version of the first answer.

In the case of Scottish independence, diehard nationalists believe that every race and nation should have its own country. This has a force of rightness about it that goes way beyond circumstantial detail. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.