These are disturbing thoughts for a people, most of whom profess a Christian allegiance, facing the important business of a general election. If one engages at the level of what Professor Hudson calls “true religion” then we have got to seriously question the value system that informs our approach to politics. Straightaway it suggests that what is on offer from most of the political establishment is frankly unbelievable and even irresponsible. It’s all good news with lists of achievements and promises of more. That is not to criticise or reject the process of healthy political debate. That is something we should cherish and preserve.

But we must challenge the spin-doctors and others who combine to mislead or confuse us while hiding less palatable facts and possibilities. It would be helpful for example if they would tell us what plan B is if the economy fails to reach the economic growth rate that current plans rely on. A number of responsible commentators have warned of problems ahead so if there are to be serious cutbacks in government spending who will pay?

Some politicians treat us as if we know little or care little about the real world, the world of the Celtic tiger. A world of ignored and abandoned children at risk. A world of seriously ill people lying for hours and even days on hospital trolleys. A world of disabled people including little children dragged through the courts. A world of women denied vital healthcare facilities. A world of up to 150,000 people on public housing waiting lists. A world of the frail elderly denied their statutory rights to nursing home care and cheated out of their pocket money. A world adjudged by others to be the most corrupt country in Europe. That’s not even the half of it and yet it is difficult to get even a whiff of any of it behind the meaningless handshakes or slick photo calls that pass for political engagement. It is so obvious they don’t want to know or be troubled by it.

But why do they treat us this way? How do they get away with it election after election after election?

Could it be that we want to be misled and like them don’t want to be troubled? That we have a need to be assured that there is always more for us? Are we in fact the guilty ones who create the environment of greed and indifference and even corruption, which is not about voting for Councillor X or Senator Y but is essentially about voting for ME. It is no accident that the word individualisation crept into the tax code in recent times. It’s the culture of every one for him or herself echoing Mrs. Thatcher’s famous phrase: “There is no such thing as society”. We choose not to be our brothers or our sisters keepers.

Of course, we are concerned for the sick and the homeless and the young and all those other poor people. We don’t like ugly scenes of need or desperation on our TV screens. And yes, of course, something should be done about it but not at my expense. Not by increasing my tax bill or reducing my spending money. Could it be that this is the mindset of many and the carefully researched and informed politicians know it full well? In the temptations of Jesus one of the slick offers was simply: “All this I will give you.” Isn’t that a temptation we still face?

We need to reflect more deeply on what it means to be a Christian engaging with society. There is nothing whatever wrong with wealth or prosperity but there are choices to be made about how we use it. The Christian Gospel is a radical Gospel strong on social and community issues with a large dose of self-denial, emphasising our responsibilities for the poorest and the weakest. 

If Jesus were to write an election manifesto what would be in it? Certainly health and health care for everyone who needed it no matter who they were. The value of every individual would be affirmed. Foreigners and the disabled would be given their place and people on the margins made welcome. Criminals would be offered restoration, a used woman, given back her dignity. And the care of the young would receive the highest priority with dire warnings to those who would injure or neglect them.

These of course are some of the ingredients of what we might call to day a Just Society. We like them, they appeal to us and they have an enormous emotional pulling power. We feel they are right and good. But would we ever vote for them? May be, some day