Beyond Tribalism: a Christian response to identity politics

The murder of Henry Nowak has understandably generated strong emotions.

Like many people, I have watched the public reaction unfold with a mixture of sadness, concern and, at times, unease.

There has rightly been much anger about the circumstances surrounding the case. It is right and appropriate to ask questions about policing, justice, immigration and whether different groups are treated equally in modern Britain, in light of what we have seen; and some of those questions deserve serious consideration.

Indeed, we should be asking these questions, because Christians should care deeply about justice. We should care when people lose confidence in public institutions. We should care when citizens feel that different standards are being applied to different groups.

Yet as I have followed some of the discussion, I have found myself wondering whether a deeper issue is also being exposed. Perhaps we might reflect not simply on whether justice has been done in this case, but on how we as a society increasingly understand ourselves.

For how we respond to cases like the murder of Henry Nowak can expose more than just righteous anger; sometimes it reveals our own fears and idols.

This week, we have witnessed again how individual tragedies can simply become a vehicle for making the case for our own bigger grievances. There are many who feed this by encouraging us to see everything through the lens of competing groups and identities. Individual cases are extrapolated to condemn societal structures or to confirm particular narratives.

I was struck by the remarkable dignity shown by Henry's father this week. Whilst speaking with understandable grief and anger about the treatment his son received, he nevertheless appealed for the case not to be used to create "further division, hatred or tension". He wanted lessons to be learned and change to follow, but he refused to allow his son's death to become a rallying cry for tribalism.

There will be some who see this case through the identity lens of race; for others, it is nationality; and for others, religion, class, gender or culture. Whatever the lens, the thought-process is remarkably similar. We increasingly sort ourselves into tribes and then interpret events according to whether they help or harm "our" tribe.

As Christians, we should be wary about this trend, whether it comes from the political left or the political right, and we should be aware that we too are susceptible to this tendency.

For many years, conservatives have criticised aspects of identity politics associated with the progressive left. There has been legitimate concern about ideas that encourage people to view society solely and primarily through the categories of race, sexuality, or gender.

Indeed, this lies underneath the Henry Nowak case, where the police officers are being accused of prioritising the (false) claims of racism from the attacker over the (true) claims from Henry Nowak that he had been stabbed. There are also real concerns over the guidance provided in the National Police Chiefs’ Council and College of Policing race action plan, which prioritises equity over equality. One section explicitly states that the police’s commitment “does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality)”.

Although Christians should be sensitive to the realities of discrimination and oppression, we can and should question whether such ‘identity’-based approaches are compatible with a biblical understanding of what it means to be a human individual.

But I have also seen first-hand how some who are so quick to reject one form of identity politics, can easily, often unwittingly, embrace another.

Rejecting critical race theory does not require us to embrace ethnic nationalism. Questioning immigration policy does not justify hostility towards immigrants. Opposing ideological approaches to sexuality does not excuse contempt towards those who identify as LGBT.

When public life increasingly rewards outrage and tribal loyalty, Christians can be tempted to fight on the same terms, and we can justify our rage by calling it righteous anger, or deploy Christian language, one-sided biblical teaching, or cry persecution to justify defending our own privileges.

But criticising double standards in public life does not give us licence us to abandon values like truthfulness, courtesy or charity ourselves.

One thing that has struck me over the last decade is how often movements that begin by opposing injustice gradually become shaped by the very instincts they originally criticised in others. The labels and the causes might change, but the underlying dynamics of grievance, tribalism and resentment remain remarkably similar. It is one of the reasons Christians need to be particularly careful. We need to remind one another that we are not immune from the temptations of our age simply because we happen to be on the right side of a particular argument or individual case.

Here the New Testament offers us a timely warning and help with a different vision.

Writing to a deeply divided society, the Apostle Paul describes Christ as the one who "has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility" and who is creating "one new humanity" out of previously hostile groups.

That is a remarkable claim.

Paul was writing into a world with its own deep divisions and grievances. Jew and Gentile did not simply disagree. They carried centuries of suspicion, hostility and competing narratives about themselves and one another. Yet Paul's answer was not to encourage each group to pursue its interests more effectively. His answer was Christ.

The Christian worldview does not deny our differences, but it does put them in proportion.

Before we are British or European, immigrant or UK-born, rich or poor, male or female, we are people made in the image of God and accountable to him. That truth gives every human being immense dignity. But it also gives every human being the same fundamental problem. We are all sinners in need of grace.

Perhaps this is one reason Christians should be particularly wary of tribal politics. Tribalism always encourages us to believe that the deepest problem lies somewhere else, whether that is with another group, another community, or another political movement. The gospel begins by reminding us that the line between good and evil runs through every human heart, including our own.

None of this means that concerns about unequal treatment, bias or double standards should simply be dismissed. Trust in public institutions matters enormously. If citizens lose confidence that justice is being administered fairly, social cohesion is weakened and resentment grows. Christians should be among those who care most about the consistent application of justice because every person bears the image of God and deserves equal treatment before the law.

That is why we should not withdraw from debates about justice, immigration, policing or social cohesion. These are important issues. They matter because people matter, but we engage them as ambassadors of another Kingdom.

Paul's description of Christians as Christ's ambassadors in 2 Corinthians 5 is particularly relevant in moments such as these. Ambassadors live in one country while representing another. They seek the welfare of the society in which they find themselves, but they do not simply absorb its assumptions, habits or methods.

In an age increasingly shaped by outrage, grievance and competing identities, Christians are called to bear witness to a better way and a better story.

We are called to pursue justice without hatred; truth without exaggeration; conviction without contempt; courage without cruelty.

I know that is not always easy. It is often far harder than simply joining the crowd, yet throughout history the Church has been at its best when it has refused to mirror the spirit of the age and has instead reflected the character of Christ. Our mission is not to seek or to gain power but to be a voice for the voiceless; to defend the case of the weak, rather than to promote ourselves; and not to compromise our convictions but to still seek to be peacemakers.

At a time when so many voices are encouraging us to retreat into rival tribes, perhaps one of the most important contributions Christians can make is to point to a deeper identity and a greater hope rooted in the God whose image we bear and the Saviour who died to make one new humanity from every tribe, tongue and nation.

The challenge for Christians is not simply whether we are on the right side of an argument, but whether we are representing the right Kingdom while making it.

Ambassadors do not cease to care about the nation in which they live. They seek its welfare. They care about justice, social cohesion and the common good. They are not indifferent to what happens around them. But they also remember where their ultimate allegiance lies.

In my experience, many of the most difficult questions in public life are not questions about what we believe. They are questions about how we choose to pursue those beliefs when the pressure is on. It is often at that point that we discover whether we have truly been shaped by Christ or merely by the culture around us.

The question facing Christians in every generation is therefore not whether we will engage in the public square, but whether we will do so as disciples and ambassadors of Jesus Christ.

Beliefs matter. But so does character. After all, God is working to make us conform to the likeness of Jesus, who didn’t just believe the right things, but who lived them out perfectly too.

At a time when so many voices are encouraging us to retreat into rival tribes, maybe this is one of the most important ways we can witness, even in the face of a tragedy like the murder of Henry Nowak.