Why is a Christian church hosting a far-right party?

Why is a Christian church hosting a far-right party’s conference?

The Emmanuel Centre, part of Emmanuel Church in Westminster, is today the venue for a major event run by Advance UK.

The Centre has so far failed to respond to concerned Christians and journalists who have asked why they are prepared to profit from hosting a racist party.

If you’re not familiar with Advance UK, they split from the far-right Reform UK, in part because they seemed to regard them as too soft and not right-wing enough. The main figure associated with Advance UK is Ben Habib, a former senior figure in Reform who fell out with Nigel Farage and went off to set up his own party.

Other Advance UK members include Rikki Doolan, a far-right Christian minister best known for his role in the reported conversion to Christianity of racist activist Tommy Robinson.

I cannot of course see into the hearts of Robinson and Doolan. It is not for me to judge the sincerity of their faith. What I can say is that I see no connection between the views they promote and the teachings of Jesus.

Doolan spoke at Robinson’s far-right “carol service” in London in December. He repeatedly attacks Muslims, refugees and LGBTQ+ people.

Meanwhile, you only have to look fairly briefly at Advance UK’s social media stream to see claims about refugees that can easily be demonstrated to be factually untrue. They confuse asylum-seekers with “illegal immigrants”, even though claiming asylum is entirely lawful and an internationally recognised human right.

As with most far-right parties, the one minority who they don’t attack is the rich and powerful.

Racism, deceit and demonisation of minorities are clearly at odds with the most basic aspects of Jesus’ teaching. Like many other Christians, I often fail to live up to the values that I believe in. I am not expecting all Christians to agree with me. The far-right’s misuse of Christianity, however, is a fundamental distortion of the Gospel. The Gospel of Jesus tears down barriers and upholds the value of all people, while the Bible is full of calls to welcome migrants and other people who are marginalised.

As a Christian, I believe in loving my enemies. I am not suggesting that members of Advance UK should be barred from churches. There is a big difference, however, between welcoming people as individuals (while also challenging them) and using your church to promote a party and their policies.

So why did the Emmanuel Centre think it was acceptable to host this party’s conference?

It won’t wash to say that Advance UK were simply booking a room in a conference centre. Most churches (and many other venues), have ethical lettings policies setting out who they will and won’t rent rooms too. It is inconceivable that a major conference centre in central London has given no thought to the question of who may be barred from hiring space there.

Even if they had allowed the Advance UK booking through naivety or incompetence, they have received emails and messages in recent days from a number of Christians expressing their alarm. Thus, while it’s hard to believe that the Emmanuel Centre’s managers were ignorant of the reality of Advance UK, it is literally impossible to believe that they still are.

The Emmanuel Centre urgently need to:

  • Explain how they came to host Advance UK’s conference.
  • Rule out hosting them in future.
  • Publish their lettings policy and rule out all bookings by far-right groups.

At a time when the far-right is on the march, it is vital that Christians work with people of other faiths and none to resist fascism and racism. Far from resisting far-right groups, Emmanuel Church are promoting and profiting from them.

If you want to urge the Emmanuel Centre not to host the far-right again, you can contact them at enquiries@emmanuelcentre.com or on 020 7222 9191.

Reform UK’s MPs are ready to justify violence – whether it’s carried out by the police or used against them

It has not taken long for the five MPs from Reform UK to reveal themselves as a gang of far-right thugs in suits.

Nigel Farage has spent much of the last two days denying that he stoked up the racist violence in Southport on Tuesday. The reality is that Farage recorded a video only hours before the violence began in which he challenged the police’s statement that the murders of children were “not terror-related”.

Farage told his viewers:

“I just wonder whether the truth is being withheld from us. I don’t know the answer to that.”

Farage is right about one thing: he does not know the answer to that. He knows no more about this horrendous attack than most of us do – which is very little. He also knows that despite saying he does not, know, his comments were likely to be heard as strongly implying that the truth is indeed being withheld from us.

Yesterday, he defended himself on GB News, claiming that the police should have been clearer about the identity of the murderer. Disgracefully, Farage claimed:

“That’s what led to the riots last night. That’s what led to people being outside that mosque in Southport. You know, sometimes just tell the public the truth and you might actually stop riots from happening.”

If Farage is implying that people would not have attacked a mosque if they had known the murderer was not a Muslim, then he is in effect suggesting that it would have been acceptable to attack a mosque if the killer were a Muslim.

Reform UK leader’s reluctance to believe police statements contrasts remarkably with Reform UK’s attitude when a police officer was filmed jumping on a suspect’s head as he lay prone on the floor in Manchester airport last week.

Reform MPs rushed to defend the police involved, saying that police officers had been viciously attacked, including by the person whose head one of them later jumped on.

They missed the point that nobody was defending violent assaults on police officers. But Reform MPs defended equivalently vile behaviour – because it was done by police officers. There is no context in which it is acceptable to kick and jump on someone who is lying prone on the floor, whatever that person has done.

Tice went so far as to post a photo of a young police officer with blood on her face, claiming she had been attacked by the men in Manchester Airport. The picture turned out to have been taken in Leicestershire four years ago.

A week later, this demonstrably false photo is still on Tice’s Twitter feed.

Tice, however, must cede the award for most ludicrous response to his fellow Reform MP (and former Tory MP) Lee Anderson – the man known for telling refugees to “fuck off”, telling anti-monarchists to emigrate and telling people in poverty that it is possible to cook a meal for 30 pence.

Anderson didn’t just try to shift the focus away from police violence. He actively welcomed the violence. He wrote on Twitter:

“The vast majority of decent Brits would applaud this type of policing. We are sick of the namby pamby approach. Time to back our boys in blue.”

This is the first time I have known the phrase “namby pamby” used to mean “not jumping on people’s heads”. Anderson (as usual) cites no evidence that “the vast majority of decent Brits” are in favour of police assaulting suspects as they lie prone on the ground.

But Anderson surpassed even himself in his comments in a BBC interview, saying:

“The message I am getting loud and clear from my constituents is they are fed up with seeing police dancing around rainbows and being nice to people and running off from rioters. They want police to do their job, and I think these police yesterday should be commended. In fact, I’d give them a medal.”

You might need to read that again. The most shocking statement from Anderson is not that he wants to give a medal to people engaged in a violent assault. It is that the police behaviour to which he objects include “being nice to people”.

Yes, he really said that. He said his constituents are fed up with seeing police “being nice to people”.

What an outrageous way to behave – being nice to people. This is a party whose MPs defend people who engage violence against a man lying prone on the floor, but who object if those same individuals are being nice to people.

Reform’s enthusiasm for the police suddenly changed, however, when it came to the horrific murders of children in Southport on Monday.

With the Manchester airport incident, Tice, Anderson and their mates had taken it for granted that everything said about the suspects’ attacks on police was true. Now it may well be true, but it’s worth noting that they did not even stop to consider whether it was.

In contrast, the police statements that they do question are not those involving the disputed details of a violent incident but factual statements about an arrested individual.

The police in Southport said that the individual they have arrested is 17 and was born in Cardiff to parents from Rwanda. Today a court ordered that his name be made public. The police have said the incident is not “terror-related”, which I think is a bizarre expression but basically seems to mean that the motivation was not an attempt to bring about political change.

While I have little or no faith in the police, the police statements that seem to me to be most likely to be accurate are those concerning the age, nationality and so on of suspects.

This has not stopped far-right types claiming on social media that the killer is a Muslim and/or an asylum-seeker. But as he was born in Cardiff, he literally cannot be an asylum-seeker. A Rwandan family is pretty unlikely to be Muslim. Even if he were Muslim, this would not take away from the reality that Muslims in Southport are as appalled as anyone else by the horrific murders of children.

Farage’s language about the truth being withheld played directly into the hands of those who claimed that the basic factual statements about the arrested individual are not true. Reform MPs were too late to undo their damage when they took to social media on Wednesday morning to condemn the violence in Southport the previous night.

Within less than a month of Reform UK gaining five MPs, they have revealed the reality that they side with violent thugs – whether those thugs are attacking police officers, or are police officers themselves.