A Citizenry of Good Intent

What makes for a ‘Good City’? Is it architecture? No. Its plutocratic wealth? Certainly not. Where power is concentrated? No. Rather, it is a citizenry of good intent. What makes for a citizenry of good intent? Shared values, harmonious relationships between individuals, cultures and communities, and their joint endeavours towards the common good.

For one instance of a city that possesses this enormously important but almost always overlooked quality and one which has many other fine characteristics, I would say that Birmingham stands out. It is a good city, and a cosmopolitan world city. These qualities mean that it is growing steadily, and Birmingham is home to 1.1 million people, covering 150 square miles and including much that is green with over 100,000 publicly owned trees and 150 public parks. The Greater Birmingham area has more than double this population.

Although there are local archaeological finds going back to the stone age, far as we know, the continuous population began about twelve hundred years ago when a group of people led by a man called Beorma first settled here. The name ‘Birmingham’ means ‘Home of the people of Beorma’ (Beorma Ingas Ham) and ever since those earliest times the city has welcomed people from all over the world who wish to make their home here too and enrich the community through their work and culture and achieve fulfilment as individuals.

It is on these principles that Birmingham has become the country’s premier city outside the capital. It is the largest local authority in Europe, or, put even more expressively, the largest local authority this side of the Urals. This is something to be proud of rather than, as we're told by those intent on needless change and the further diminishment of local government, a bit of a problem.

Birmingham also has one of the youngest populations of any major city in Europe and there is pride in the open and democratic traditions on which the city’s prosperity was founded. Over 130 years ago the Council made clear that Birmingham knows: “No distinction between her citizens by birth or adoption.” And, as a city of tolerance and respect for all of its citizens, this is constantly reaffirmed. To adapt a famous expression: ‘E Pluribus Birmingham’, ‘From many – Birmingham’.

The city's motto is ‘Forward’ and it lives by this. So even in difficult times when the common good is not to the fore nationally, there will be more opportunities to improve the quality of life for everyone and preserve the city's extensive heritage. This would be in addition to an excellent cultural environment both at the highest level and throughout its communities. The city will continue to do all this along with other beneficial developments while remaining, by all objective accounts, one of the friendliest cities in the country.

All Birmingham’s citizens are encouraged to embrace the common values of our society. For example, our faith communities can maintain their essential traditions and beliefs while integrating into, and fully contributing towards, the common good of the city -  just as their predecessors have done throughout Birmingham’s vibrant history. Community has many dimensions, locality obviously but it is on the faith aspect of community that I wish to focus here.

I have taken part in a number of multi-faith events and have seen the good work of faith leaders and communities throughout Birmingham. While in my personal outlook on life and its meaning I choose to hold a greater degree of uncertainty than most people, like everyone else I seek knowledge, understanding and, where possible, personal meaning.

I am also a harvester of wise sayings – the concise wisdom of others! I take the view that we should accept truth from whatever quarter it may come and however uncomfortable it may be, revising our outlook in the light of the facts. As J. M. Keynes put it: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?” So tradition should have a vote but not a veto. The main challenges are how to be part of modernity without losing essential values and how to fully incorporate in wider society without losing cultural identity.

In terms of common ground it is worth looking for what I call the ‘sentiments within’. What I have in mind here is a constructive 'reading between the lines' of scripture or other significant texts which can expand the range of those who are reached by the essence of the message. This can certainly be unifying. In any text, we should ask ourselves what is the core intent rather than be distracted by the surface wording or contextual particularities. As Shaw expressed it: 'There is only one religion though there are a hundred versions of it.'

In most cases the principal divisive factor turns out to be ignorance, but the good news is that that part of ignorance that is not wilful or deeply indoctrinated can be dissolved – much more by friendly and informal contact than through formal education. The residual prejudice that is not dissolved by the removal of this lack of understanding is a deeper seated problem, but numbers will be reduced as communities as a whole move forward. The key questions remaining are what creates such prejudice in the first place and what sustains it.

At both individual and community levels there is much to be gained by distinguishing carefully between identity and belief. So faith and the traditions associated with it should not represent the whole of identity. The same consideration applies to those individuals with a truculent atheistic outlook – it does not make for a harmonious society, nor does it promote understanding or the common good if people see themselves or others as being defined by these positions and need constantly to put up aggressive challenges.

The question also arises as to what extent identity can be sufficiently secured with a tempering of the surface elements of religion – what I term the 'particularities'. With this in mind, there is also the question as to what extent can the initially disparate identities of communities converge over time? This would be a gradual process in which individual freedoms would have a major role.

And common to all groups, every generation needs to relearn how to live in ways that both satisfy themselves, their communities and promote the common good. In these distracted days when we can so easily become preoccupied with inessentials and become the 'tools of our tools', a highly relevant question is whether or not human beings are related to the infinite.

Birmingham has always seen good interfaith relations as vital. Opportunities for people of different faiths, or none, to learn about each other and overcome suspicions are to be welcomed. So many good things can be achieved by working together in which it soon becomes evident that the core values of the world religions (and those of many thoughtful agnostics) are common ground. Broad based knowledge and understanding are important – those who know only their own side of the case know insufficient of that.

The Cosmos contains subtle and multi-faceted truths towards which religions are pathways, so they should not, at a deep level, conflict with each other. The seeming clashes of doctrine and practice need not be calamitous and may be in fact be opportunities. What would seem on the surface to be antipathies sometimes reveal hidden affinities. Apparent discord can be harmony not understood.

Peace is the greatest good and, like its dreadful opposite, is a human concept. Peace can only come into being when people are in touch with their humanity and this I think is what the mainstream religions seek to achieve. Beyond the political realm, peace depends on harmony between all religions and this is a goal in which we all share. Harmony will have amongst its sure foundations the qualities of knowledge, tolerance, respect and love as we strive towards a world without enemies.

There are those to whom faith is a stranger. Some have this as a preference. Some, while not seeking it, are at least at ease with this state but for others it is unsettling. Wise counsel can assist them, and prayer too since the process of and preparation for prayer is valuable to people of a devout disposition but without specific faith. Preparation involves a gathering of the self, and in providing a release from the urgencies of the moment, allows a focus on a point beyond the self.

All that we do, especially in commercial life, should be done with the guidance of a moral compass knowing that all individuals are important and should be respected and that a single act of generosity or brave intentions can change the course of a life or a part of the world. We should carry our moral values into community and representative life too and thereby continue to play a major role in making us the great city that we are.

Today Birmingham is home to many religious traditions, ranging from varieties of theism through to the many strands of Hinduism and the godless spirituality of Buddhism. There are also many degrees of agnosticism adjoined to core moral values, some of which combinations are difficult to distinguish from un-dogmatic versions of faith.

The power of the state and religious power are both enormous and in the same hands amount to far too great a concentration of authority. So while state and religion should be separate, this does not mean that faith should have no say in government or that government must necessarily be conducted by faithless people. What must be avoided is the situation where religious parties legislate for sectional interests. Faith based values can be advocated with passion but should not be imposed by legislation – a point that is taken up in Appendix A on Lord Justice Laws’ ruling. Appendix B suggests a possible elements in an inter-faith compact.

There is of course a great deal more that should be kept to the fore, for example the contribution of literature and the immense value of the aesthetic sense. Art is a universal language regardless of form. Art can take us to an inner place, hinting at the thoughts that lie hidden in our hearts. Art is a global language that knows no nationality and favours no race, creed, age, class or gender. So a good city will encourage art in all its communities – as does Birmingham.

Finally, in sum what is required from people for harmony? A warm decision by the intellect, and the most rational decision that the heart can take and magnanimity - greatness of heart and mind. These individual qualities are the keys to good relationships between all communities.

And amongst many broad issues there is the necessity of sustaining the good earth, locally and globally, restoring integrity and traditional decent values in politics as well as business and embedding them right throughout society today. And vital international relief and development work will flourish all the more on the foundation of harmonious communities and the generosity of the common good.

In all of this it is relevant to ask: what is the basis of belief? Why do we believe what we do? And, equally importantly: what represents a reasonable basis for changing our minds and what makes for a context in which this can be done? The sociological view is that belief rests on the foundations of family or culture. In psychological terms belief gives the individual a sense of meaning or purpose – but may also be constraining.

A scientific foundation for holding a belief is reason and evidence and, quite opposite to this, there is deference to authority – believing something when told to do so by a person held to be significant or through having read it in an authoritative text. The rational foundation for ‘belief’ requires this to be held provisionally, in the light of the current evidence. But these distinctions are by no means as sharp as may first appear. For example, as the Bible reportedly says: Test everything and hold on to the good!

I am certainly for the common good – the common wealth as it were – enhancing the well-being of everyone, with no-one being marginalised, where the meek get some inheritance today rather than promises for delivery much later, and where well-being is defined in a broad way to include all aspects of the quality of life, not just consumption. In fact we should dispense with the vain quest for emotional well-being to be gained through material consumption. In fact ‘consumption’ is a word that was once used to describe a state of ‘ill-being’ - a wasting illness – ironically still appropriate today.

And I am equally certainly against 'sin'! To my mind sin is socially pathological behaviour. Fundamentalist violence is the worst possible example, representing that which is all too literally mortal. I wish that our language had a secular word that was equivalent to ‘evil’ – for this is surely it. But more commonplace aggressive self-righteousness, intolerance, excessive consumerism and greed are examples of social pathologies that can detract from the well-being of all communities and diminish the qualities of a good city.

But any such negative impacts will be reduced to an absolute minimum and ultimately eliminated through shared values, harmonious relationships and joint endeavours oriented towards the common good. These are all much in evidence in the good city of which we have spoken, and long may it be so.

Appendices

A: Lord Justice Laws’ Ruling

Lord |Justice Laws’ wise words in a marriage guidance case merit careful study. In his ruling Lord Justice Laws wrote:

“We do not live in a society where all people share uniform religious beliefs. The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other. If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.

The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.

In a free constitution such as ours there is an important distinction to be drawn between the law’s protection of the right to hold and express a belief and the law’s protection of that belief’s substance or content.

The conferment of any legal protection or preference upon a particular substantive moral position on the ground only that it is espoused by the adherents of a particular faith, however long its tradition, however long its culture, is deeply unprincipled”

“It (a faith) may of course be true; but the ascertainment of such a truth lies beyond the means by which laws are made in a reasonable society. Therefore it lies only in the heart of the believer, who is alone bound by it. No one else is or can be so bound, unless by his own free choice he accepts its claims.”

B: Possible elements in an inter-faith Compact

1. We accept each other for what we are without trying to change one another.

2. We will identify and promote our common core values and resolve to be people and communities of reconciliation.

3. We commit ourselves to work together for a cohesive society in the spirit of mutual respect and openness.

4. We will work together for understanding, respect, justice and peace.

5. We seek to promote the common wealth, the common good and a harmonious common life within a good city and a virtuous economy.