Similarly, our shared responsibility for the created world and for our neighbours in that world cannot be evaded or usurped by handing it over to governments or Parliaments. Therefore, that shared responsibility should be reflected in democratic structures which enable wide participation in the decision-making process particularly by those who have not in the past found that easy. To the extent that this implies a shift in traditional power structures in which the churches have had a significant role, it may mean a weakening of past patterns of influence as well as a challenge to go beyond speaking up for the voiceless towards enabling their own voices to be heard. "Equal opportunities" has perhaps been the most problematic of the four key principles for the churches - in ways that might be well summed-up by saying that our understanding of equal opportunities is grounded in belief in the "fatherhood of God". For some, that Biblical language is basic, and indicative of a distinction between a Christian understanding of equality and some of what is seen as appropriate to the promotion of equal opportunities. This is often linked to a rejection of "moral equivalence" or the notion that the law and government should treat as equal patterns of behaviour which are not seen as morally equal (eg heterosexual marriage and same-sex relationships). For other Christians, the language and practice of the churches represent something like our past acceptance of slavery or justification of apartheid, ie a failure to take the gospel demands for justice seriously. They would therefore offer strong Christian support for policies aimed at securing equal opportunities. The above sets a context of Christian support for the CSG principles within which we might look at the detailed issues of how well they are being practised. Before doing so, we should also be aware that these principles relate to the "how" of Parliament's work, rather than the "what". There is considerable pressure to deliver legislation and policies that make a difference; as the "Herald" leader on the day of the General Election put it, "failing to deliver breeds antipathy to politics". While that pressure may sometimes be contrived by short-term media flurries of interest, churches would be sympathetic to those who are in Parliament to make a difference and to correct injustices. The urgency of that has its own priority, which can appear to conflict with procedural issues. But, as sketched above, the CSG principles we want to see practised are designed to ensure that policy decisions are better precisely because of participative and transparent procedures. SCPO Meeting
Representatives of the churches met on 19 June to discuss a draft response; Joyce McMillan, journalist and CSG member, spoke about the principles, and SCPO was asked to submit a version of the draft revised in light of the discussion, as a response reflecting the broad view of the gathering.