Much of the public discourse about ‘conservatives’ treats those who are conservatives as a bloc. In all the discussions about diversity in the work place, no one asks how many conservatives there are in university humanities departments; I doubt if even the most rigid quota system would produce many conservative lecturers in gender studies; being an ‘out’ conservative in academia is a hard row to plough. Academics studying left-wing thought can do so in their senior common rooms; those working on the right cannot. But like all political opinions, conservatism occupies a spectrum. I keep being told Mrs Thatcher was a conservative. Here was a woman who refused to accept the orthodoxy, common at the time, that the job of a British Government was to manage the process of decline peacefully, who seems to have regarded all professions with deep suspicion as conspiracies of the experts, and who took the decision to let market forces do whatever it was they were going to do to communities whose way of life was based on declining industries; although in practice less ideological than she was in rhetoric, she was still more ideological than any other leader of the British Conservative Party. Her social attitudes were, of course, deeply conservative on matters of personal morality (even if the practice of some of her favourite Ministers was less so), but I was not then, and am not now, convinced that previous Conservative leaders would have recognised her as a Conservative; there was, at best, a deep admixture of radicalism, in her thought and practice.
Most people are conservative in some aspects of their lives. even in a profession as profoundly liberal and reformist as academia, the suggestion that you change something can be met with the sort of resistance that the most diehard peer of 1911 would have envied. People get attached to places and to ways of doing things. They develop routines, they systematise, and they develop rules. Even when the Son of God comes to make all things new and to call for repentance and amendment of life, men manage to develop that into a routine with systematised rules and set ways of doing things; transformed by the Holy Spirit – well abide by the rules and we shall know it is so. We can see how very early in the history of the Church that conflict developed if we read St John’s letters. Even in a community founded by the Beloved Disciple and with him as its spiritual leader, there were those who claimed their own revelation gave them a superior access to revelation. Without some source of authority and order, chaos develops – and that is as true for disciples of a religious revelation as it is of States. Marvellous though it would be if all men and women of good will could simply agree, splendid though it would be if all who claimed the inspiration of the Holy Spirit agreed on what they had been told, in this fallen world it is not so.
One of the many charges levelled against the Catholic Church is that in its period of secular triumph, it seemed not to witness much to the Lord Jesus who loved the marginalised and the outcasts as well as those in the mainstream, and indeed, that some of its leaders behaved more like the Pharisees the Lord excoriated. There is too much in that charge for comfort, and it should prompt from us not indignant responses which show that some Catholics always bore witness to the teachings of the Lord, but a reminder that it is the latter, and not the former, who should be our guides.
The tensions we see in the Church in our own day are echoes of ones that we see as early as St John’s Epistles. Development is a feature of any organism which has life, but in a revealed religion, the question is by what authority do we determine the authentic from the modish? Indeed, there is always the question as to whether the two have to live in conflict. Jesus’ words, and actions, implied there will always be a tension between the ways of this world and God’s ways, and for His Church, the vote of our ancestors in the faith should always count in the balance. Does that mean that the Church is conservative with regard the the mores of any particular era, or simply make it a witness to eternal values? The Kingdom is at hand, we none of us know the hour when our soul might be demanded of us. We all have a choice to make.
All Along the Watchtower 
Christians are tempted to believe that our mores originate from the Bible. We believe it is inappropriate or appropriate to drink alcohol, for example, “because the Bible says so.” The trouble is, what is “proper” by our standards – even by our Christian standards – is as often projected onto the Bible as it is determined by it. This is because our cultural mores can lead us to emphasize certain passages of Scripture and ignore others. – Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes
I learned that mores are often what goes without being said. Take the topic of gender out of Scripture. Why are roles emphasized when Jesus never spoke on them and Paul’s teaching is the equivalent of an advice column telling people how not to upset the Romans? Since the household codes talk just as much about slaves (male and female) submitting to their masters as wives submitting to their husbands, are we so sure we’re getting the heart of Scripture right by talking about the latter while denying the former still applies to us?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jamie – excellent points, which go to the heart of the discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As I see it Jesus changed a whole lot of water into wine and ever since Baptist have failed to turn it back.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have next to no understanding of economics but have often thought that the economy of a country cannot be run on the same lines as the grocers shop run by Margaret’s father. I think there are times when an industry is better subsidised, reinvested in and reorganised rather than decimated. This surly applies in a global market where the foreign industries we compete with are subsidised or currency exchange rates are manipulated for advantage.
Thousands of tax paying workers may well contribute more to an economy that the subsidies their industries receive. I considered this on when moving from the UK we rented our family home to a guy (for his son) that built power stations – the son travelled to Poland to by millions of pounds worth of coal at a time.
The social effects of unemployment and its legacy to following generations in deprived communities must be considered and they also have a price tag.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree entirely Rob. The theory that somehow those made unemployed all get jobs and cost the taxpayer nothing seems not to work. In which case is it better to subsidise the dole or revamping industries?
LikeLiked by 2 people
The other big issue was how much were our manufacturing industries ect disadvantage due to the lack of reinvestment. Could they have been more profitable if manged more appropriately in this respect. I do not know enough to answer that. I know that our businesses require constant reinvestment and for a couple of years we ran one at a loss until we recovered from a downturn.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My colleagues who do that type of history tell me we have a dreadful record of under-investment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s what I have always thought about the UK but without sufficient evidence. When my wife did her MBA the tutor asked the class what the two biggest causes of business failure were. She replied greed and theft. He asked how she knew, she replied “I read the Bible”.
Trying to get more out of business is the root of much lack of investment – it’s a short term non-sustainable policy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Germans manage this so much better than we do. We operate too close to what I would call the ‘robber baron’ model – I made my money, I want more, and blow the business – Sir Philip Green, for example.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, we (and you, I think) depend too much on MBAs (whatever you call them), essentially accountants to strategize (spell check says stigmatize, it’s not really wrong!) our business plans. The thing is, in accounting, and in selling stock and such) nothing matters much beyond the quarterly bottom line.
If we apply this to manufacturing, we end up considering something as basic as maintenance (of even the production line) a cost, which can be deferred, until it can’t.
We call that crisis maintenance, because the line is shut down. That’s expensive, say one car every minute, that will never get made. Almost all breakdowns can be prevented, and most maintenance techs know how, but they can’t get it funded, because it’s simply a cost.
And that’s a large part of the reason I’m basically retired. My head got too bloody from that (and other) brick walls.
‘Robber baron’ mentality (excellent phrase) yes, but the barons are not management, labor, nor even the stockholders, they are the bankers and stockbrokers, who make their money on ‘the churn’.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excellent points, Neo – and yes, I can certainly confirm what you say.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now, if I could only find a solution.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We need to recover our sense of values and end our obsession with price.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, that would be an excellent start.
It’s a bit strange, at least here, there is still a market for quality, although it is small. Not least because most consumers cannot figure out that a higher cost that lasts, is actually cheaper than a low cost disposable item. I see it mostly in tools, but a $30 dollar shirt that one wears fifty times, is far cheaper than a $5 dollar one that one wears twice.
A lot of this, I think, is our obsession with instant gratification, combined perhaps, with poor education.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Alas, that is very much so. Discount stores play on the ‘cost’ issue and encourage us to ignore the quality ones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, although they have a place. But for things that we use repeatedly, quality always pays for itself.
Business, even big business, is by no means immune to this either.
LikeLiked by 1 person
On one of my blogs I have this quote from Macaulay-
““Everywhere there is a class of men who cling with fondness to whatever is ancient, and who, even when convinced by overpowering reasons that innovation would be beneficial, consent to it with many misgivings and forebodings. We find also everywhere another class of men, sanguine in hope, bold in speculation, always pressing forward, quick to discern the imperfections of whatever exists, disposed to think lightly of the risks and inconveniences which attend improvements and disposed to give every change credit for being an improvement” (History of England Vol I)”
I argue that since Thatcher it is the Right who have been the innovators and the Left the defenders of the past. You can see more here https://thoughtfullydetached.wordpress.com/2015/11/01/the-left-as-a-conservative-force/
So far as the Church is concerned I think she is neither a force for ‘progress’ or ‘reaction’ but rather a witness to those values which may exist in time but which have their roots in eternity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
First, that is a superb article, which clarifies many things. I think you are essentially correct, and have found the source of much of the cognitive dissonance many of us have noted on the left. Many of us, who feel somewhat uncomfortable with identifying as conservative, of do identify as classical liberal, perhaps this is why.
The continuation of the quote, “The extreme section of one class consists of bigoted dotards: the extreme section of the other consists of shallow and reckless empirics.”, is an extremely good guide to practicality, in my view.
I also like your characterization of the church, only adding that she has been critical through the ages in making sure that the damage done to our people, if not eliminated, is ameliorated.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excellent thoughts Steve, and thanks for sharing them – yes, the Macaulay is spot on, as are your comments about the right and left.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am very happy to be conservative in matters that do not result in other people being disadvantaged; those that relate purely to myself and my own faith and its expression. Nobody is hurt by any of that, and I am grounded by it but I don’t expect anyone else to follow the same path; it is mine.
Where others are likely to be disadvantaged in any way, treated as second class or sub human I think it is impossible to be too liberal. In every homeless person, every refugee, every child made homeless by heartless housing or benefit legislation I see the face of Christ, daring me to look the other way.
Market forces are an utter disgrace when it leads to amputee army veterans living on the streets. I found such a man in a wheelchair next to a hospital on my last trip to London; he had just been discharged from an inpatient stay and was trying to get enough money for a bed for the night.
This is beyond shameful and it is not an accident. This is deliberate.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I demur only on the last point. I do not believe anyone is wicked enough to deliberately consign that veteran to where you found him. I do, however, believe that those who design systems often do so without an ounce of common sense, and that this creates the impression of utter heartlessness.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Nothing in the world is more heartless than a government program, designed by a bureaucrat who has never been exposed to the real world, and that is what most veteran’s care systems are.
Kipling wrote:
They sent a cheque to the felon that sprang from an Irish bog;
They healed the spavined cab-horse; they housed the homeless dog;
And they sent (you may call me a liar), when felon and beast were paid,
A cheque, for enough to live on, to the last of the Light Brigade.
O thirty million English that babble of England’s might,
Behold there are twenty heroes who lack their food to-night;
Our children’s children are lisping to “honour the charge they made – ”
And we leave to the streets and the workhouse the charge of the Light Brigade!
And Heaven is high, and the Czar is far away.
LikeLiked by 2 people
As so often, RK said it best.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Didn’t he though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That captures it perfectly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cathy’s comment instantly brought it to mind. Not only in Britain sadly, we have the same problem.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is quite disgraceful that those who have given their health for the safety of their country should be deserted by it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, it is. Sadly, as the Russian adage I ended with indicates, it has always been so, and if we, the people don’t do it ourselves, it will always be so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is interesting how the same problems existed in past times. I recently read ‘The Ruin of Britain’ by Gildas a sixth century Welsh saint and was struck that his complains about society in general sounded very similar to those of today’s Christians.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doesn’t sound like we’re going in the right direction if we can draw parallels with the sixth century.
LikeLike
You can read the text online a a couple of minutes dipping into Gildas’ complaints I think would give you the same sense. Certainly far from the golden age of saints.
LikeLiked by 2 people
And thus arose the infamous Benedict Option: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/benedict-option-faq/
LikeLike
Thanks for the link – enjoyed it.
” To oversimplify, modern forms of Christianity do not challenge modernity’s assumptions, and are therefore highly susceptible to being colonized by it.”
Christian communities living out the faith are essential to salt and light society. Individualistic conversions are inadequate for the task. For many years I lived in what was much more of a Christian community than a church. It had many strengths and some weaknesses that should have been addressed. So I apreciate the value of this article.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I stand by my comment. It is deliberate. Even if it was originally some kind of oversight it has gone on for so long now without being addressed that this can only be regarded as policy. If targeting the poor and vulnerable were a mistake it would have been corrected. It has not been corrected; it has been increased, year on year.
Whatever kind of people we have in power, and I really don’t think ‘conservative’ is a fair description, they are content to allow the creation of deserving and undeserving poor, with the vast majority in the latter category. Once undeserving they can very easily be punished for being poor, and this has been clear Government policy for longer than I can remember. Even when punitive measures are shown to cost more than they save, they are still continued. People in prison cannot be left to starve;
unemployed people can, and have been. This is not a mistake; this is a choice.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/11043378.Man_starved_after_benefits_were_cut/
This is not even party political because Labour went along with these ‘austerity’ policies very cheerfully. Shortly before the last election Ms Rachel Reeves announced that ‘Labour was not the party for people on benefits.’ I rang my (Labour) MPs office and told them that they had lost the election at that point, on that day, because of what Ms Reeves said.
Political parties have to represent everyone; rich, poor, waged and unwaged, old, young, sick and well. Everyone. We cannot have a Government that is run for one section of society at the expense of the rest. Sadly, this is what we have had for a long time, from both Labour and Conservative.
I don’t want Labour to punish rich people. I don’t want Conservative to punish poor people. I want a Government which will be fair and equitable to everyone.
LikeLike
I don’t see how that would be possible. Governments act through people, people are variable, and so is the way in which rules get applied. If someone in the world has invented a system which is fair to everyone, I think it would be good to be informed of it so that it could adopted everywhere. That it is not political suggests that this diagnosis is correct. It may be that everyone on benefits has no choice, it may be that no one on benefits plays the system. I can only say that when I was growing up on Merseyside on a council estate, I was surrounded by people who knew how to play the system and did very well out of it. I think it is when middle class people come into contact with it that the problems begin. We do not know how to play it, we know we are only there because we have no choice. I suspect if no one was playing the system it would become easier. We can can all of us only speak to how we have experienced it, but when I was a young man, my mother’s neighbours, all on benefits, were much better off than she was, and she worked. To imagine this was a one off scenario seems unlikely.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Experiences that friends who are truly disabled have related suggests that you are correct. They are having an immensely difficult time, while others with much lesser (if any) real disability sail through. The system is the system, some people play it well, and often they are not the ones who need the help. That is why I distrust government involvement, local people, such as clergy, with local knowledge do a much fairer job. That too is imperfect, of course, people are people, and all the tick-boxes in the world won’t change it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the situation today is very far from what it was all those years ago. And those in charge of creating systems are just as different.
LikeLike
It may well be, but I am doubtful that human nature has changed that much. My youngest brother who still lives near where we brought up is amazed at the number of his clients (he’s a window cleaner) who have Sky and are on benefits. Again, you seem to believe there is a class of humans determined to be horrid to their fellow citizens, whilst I hold there is no such class. There may be isolated individuals, but when you outsource what is in effect charity to the State, what do you expect? The State is by its nature distant and uncaring. The problem is similar to that of the NHS. You could spend the entire GDP on the NHS and there would still be cases where people were badly treated, neglected and got poor service – as there are now. The only difference is now people can blame it on ‘cuts’ – when, in fact, more money is being spent than ever. The only ‘cut’ is in the rate of spending. Even the Government which brought the NHS in realised there was a limit to what could be afforded – and it’s initial assumption was that having dealt with the backlog of neglect, the NHS would get cheaper. But when we’re paying for so many abortions, sex changes, lifestyle drugs and IVF for people who didn’t want to have babies at the usual age, as well as for people in genuine need, what do you expect? It is the same with benefits, it goes from those in genuine need to those gaming the system – few middle class people know the latter, but my brother could introduce you to whole estates of such people. Governments can only do so much. But it is easier to blame it on politicians than to put the blame on us all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I expect the same from the DSS as I do from any other public service; for its clients be treated as human beings.
LikeLiked by 2 people
So do I, but then we are dealing with people, and if anyone has found a way to ensure they always behave as they ought, they’d make a fortune.
My own brother is a good example of the problem. For quite a few years in the early 80s he claimed the dole while working on the side. It was only when the predecessor to the DSS began a clamp-down that he decided to come off the dole and do the work full-time. I doubt he was, or is, the only one.
None of that makes bad service justifiable, of course.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As you know, I was on benefits for years. I did not ever cheat, not by a single penny. I declined payment for baby sitting for neighbours, and I declined payment for verger services at church. I judge other people by myself, because that is what I know.
We all have anecdotal evidence, but the facts show benefit fraud to be very low indeed; certainly far lower than we have been taught to believe. There is now a subliminal connection in pretty well everyone’s thinking, that means we cannot talk about benefits without also talking about fraud. We don’t do this to MPs, even though there would be far better justification for it; no, it is only the most poor, the most vulnerable, who are treated as guilty until proven innocent.
Cheats aside, my former h worked years ago at a Job Centre and took genuine pride in helping people. I think those days are now long gone.
LikeLike
But I think we do do it with MPs, no one ever mentions their expenses claims without a nod and a wink. You are, I fear, very atypical, but which of us knows? Is anyone typical? If a system is open to exploitation it will be exploited, often legally, just look at the new Duke of Westminster’s death duties, or indeed, those of the late Tony Benn, who, despite his advocacy of high taxes for the rich, managed to (legally) ensure his own estate paid the minimum tax possible.
Fallen human nature is not just a theory- alas 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
Recent post by Greg Boyd of ReKnew consider our relationship to politics and may be of interest to some.
A Brief History of Political Power and the Church: The history of the church has been largely one of believers refusing to trust the way of the crucified Jesus … It’s the history of an institution that has frequently traded its holy and distinct mission for …
http://reknew.org/2016/08/brief-history-political-power-church/?utm_source=Website+Signup&utm_campaign=b1cac5562d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0de6226b5c-b1cac5562d-42046169
Conservatives and Liberals in the Same Kingdom: Jesus did not allow the world to set the terms for what he did. For instance, he called … Tax collectors the farthest right wing of Jewish politics, and zealots on the farthest left. …
http://reknew.org/2016/08/conservatives-liberals-kingdom/?utm_source=Website+Signup&utm_campaign=b1cac5562d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0de6226b5c-b1cac5562d-42046169
Politics & the Kingdom of the World
Instead of aligning any version of the kingdom of this world with the kingdom of God—as is common in American Christianity…
http://reknew.org/2016/08/politics-kingdom-world/?utm_source=Website+Signup&utm_campaign=b1cac5562d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0de6226b5c-b1cac5562d-42046169
Making America an Idol
America is presently the dominant empire in the world. … my calling is to resist nationalism even in the midst of appreciating my own country.
http://reknew.org/2016/08/making-america-idol/?utm_source=Website+Signup&utm_campaign=b1cac5562d-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0de6226b5c-b1cac5562d-42046169
LikeLike