Stuff Digital Edition

A delicate balance for Luxon

LPolitics and religious belief can successfully co-exist as Jim Bolger, Bill English, and others have shown.

isteners to RNZ’s Morning Report heard an unusually tactless line of inquiry on Wednesday when co-presenter Susie Ferguson quizzed new National leader Christopher Luxon on the subject of his faith.

Although more than a third of New Zealanders still call themselves Christians, faith is now considered enough of a novelty in politics to warrant special treatment, particularly if the politician is said to come from the fringes described variously as Pentecostal, evangelical or fundamentalist, rather than the older, mainstream denominations even secular New Zealanders are familiar with.

‘‘Do you believe in a literal translation of the Bible, of miracles and speaking in tongues,’’ Ferguson asked.

There is a lot to unpack there, but the gist of it seems to be the view of the so-called ‘‘new atheists’’, such as Richard Dawkins. It hinges on the word ‘‘literal’’ and it really asks: how can an intelligent person believe this stuff? And do we really want such a deluded person running the country?

Tactless is a kind way of putting it. As was pointed out by many afterwards, a Jewish, Muslim or Hindu politician would probably not be questioned in such a bold manner.

One reason is that Christianity occupies a unique position in countries like New Zealand. On one hand. it is now just one minority voice among many. On the other, it is our cultural inheritance and still informs many of our views and values. It is the water we all swim in. That means even non-Christians feel entitled to interrogate it. There is also a view, which is far too simplistic, that saddles Christianity with colonial baggage.

It is a valuable discussion to have. But are all journalists equipped to have it?

Many churches have been wary of the media, and for good reason. Bishop Brian Tamaki has filled a vacuum, courting a level of attention out of all proportion to his true reach and influence. The distortions that result, and Tamaki’s role in disrupting social cohesion with antilockdown protests, only increase secular suspicion of more reticent church leaders and of figures such as Luxon.

Luxon might have hoped to put the matter to bed in his maiden speech when he said his faith anchors him, gives him purpose and shapes his values. Those are uncontroversial statements.

He sees ‘‘Jesus showing compassion, tolerance, and care for others’’, rather than judging or discriminating, and looks to William Wilberforce, Martin Luther King and Kate Sheppard as examples of Christians contributing to public life. The record also shows that Luxon supported rainbow communities during his time running Air NZ.

Luxon says his faith is personal, not a political agenda. But it is not always easy to keep the personal and political separate. The abortion question is a good example. Later on the same day, interviewed by Newshub, Luxon confirmed he is pro-life. Asked if abortion is tantamount to murder, he replied, ‘‘That’s what a pro-life position is.’’

This was not smart politics. Although Luxon stressed he would not try to make abortion illegal, therefore respecting the personal-political separation, he inadvertently called one in four New Zealand women murderers. This will not help National appeal to the centrist women voters who liked the more liberal John Key.

Politics and religious belief can successfully coexist, as Jim Bolger, Bill English, Jim Anderton and many others have shown.

There is also a way of expressing a pro-life position, as English has done, without falling into Newshub’s trap.

Luxon must be hoping that such questions were part of getting to know him, and that his faith can return to being personal after a bumpy round of introductions.

Opinion

en-nz

2021-12-04T08:00:00.0000000Z

2021-12-04T08:00:00.0000000Z

https://fairfaxmedia.pressreader.com/article/281831467017607

Stuff Limited