Children, Churches and the Big Society: Calling Church and Nation, as the Forum is entitled, will focus upon the place of children and young people in the Big Society. It will take place on at 11am on 2 November 2011 at Regent Hall, Oxford St, London W1.

Plenary sessions will be given by The Rt. Rev. Paul Butler, Bishop of Southwell Nottingham and the Church of England’s Advocate for Children, who will give the opening address. Sarah Hayes of Anthony Collins Solicitors will speak on the topic of From Grants to Investment.

Six workshop presenters are announced today. Justin Humphreys of CCPAS will look at Navigating the e-world safely. Edwina Turner of Anthony Collins will examine Setting up a church project. Keith White of Mill Grove and Benedict Mwendwa of the Salvation Army will consider the proposition that It takes a village to bring up a child. Manoj Raithatha of the Evangelical Alliance South Asian Forum will consider Minorities in the Community. Tom Jackson of Resurgo Trust will analyse how best to Help young people into employment. And Jim Davis of the Children’s Society will focus on the questions Is the Big Society big enough to love all children? Do some exclude themselves?

David Lane, Chair of the CCCF said: “We are delighted to announce this outstanding line of plenary and workshop speakers today. With young people having hit the headlines so dramatically in last month’s riots, the questions our speakers are asking – and the answers we hope will emerge – will we hope demonstrate the extent to which the church in the UK can and does engage with our young people.

“We are expecting over 300 people to attend the Forum, which we are sure will be a great success.”

Places at the Big Society Forum are available at just £30, with lunch included. CCCF has deliberately underwritten the price of the tickets in order to attract as many delegates as possible.

To book, call 0845 120 4550 (option 3) or go to: http://www.ccpas.co.uk/BigSociety.html

Big Society Forum                      November 2011
Outline of a Vision Paper
Title:  Children, Churches and the Big Society Forum:
a Challenge to Church and Nation

CCCF and why it is convening the coalition and conference

CCCF has been around for thirty years in one shape or form.  It has its roots in Christian endeavours to give practical support and care to children and families in the name of Jesus Christ.  Founder members include Spurgeons, Fegans, Mullers, Mill Grove, CCPAS, and Mission of Hope. Since then it has gathered together hundreds of Christians and Christian organisations engaged with children and families in conferences, and initiatives.

Over the years it has crystallised its vision as:

promoting a contemporary society in which children and young people have a rightful place, and… responding in love, from common Christian perspectives, to the needs of children and families.

When it comes to the “Big Society” therefore we find that CCCF, like a number of churches and denominations, has already anticipated and put into action many of the ideas and concepts.

For this reason the launch of a Christian coalition under the banner Children, Churches and the Big Society Partnership, of which the national conference is a part, is a logical step in this process.

Background to the “Big Society”

Although the words may be relatively new, the ideas and themes that seem to make up what the Prime Minister, David Cameron means when he uses them, have a long history. Of course no words uttered by a politician can ever be used as if they are without political significance.  In this case one common interpretation is that in an age of austerity, with cuts to central and local government budgets, the Big Society is an attempt to get voluntary effort and charitable organisations to fill the gaps.  CCCF and the coalition it has drawn together is not unaware of this perspective.

One way of understanding the Big Society is to contrast it with what it stands against.  And that is relatively uncontroversial.  Throughout history there have been those who have argued for a strong state that provides universal services for its citizens.  In this way the needs of all, including the weak and vulnerable are best met.  It follows that to have a strong society of this sort, there needs to be Big Government. Examples of this in world history can be found on the right and left of the political spectrum.

The Big Society is not about Big Government, but it intended to represent an alternative to it.

In its present form in the UK it was launched in the 2010 Conservative manifesto.  It had five main aims/themes:

1. Give communities more powers (localism and devolution)
2. Encourage people to take an active role in their communities (volunteerism)
3. Transfer power from central to local government
4. Support co-ops, mutuals, charities and social enterprises
5. Publish government data (open/transparent government)

It is supported by a Big Society Network, and the plans include setting up a Big Society Bank and introducing a national citizen service.

Much of this thinking resonates with ideas that contributed to the European Union, for example, “subsidiarity”.  And the whole concept is closer to Edmund Burke’s political philosophy that values “the small platoons”, than grand schemes and ideas for the betterment of society at the cost of traditional local groups, communities and organisations.

The notion has been criticised for its lack of clarity, but that is inherent in the very idea.  If a government were to set out a template for what it meant in every community, then it would inevitably represent a Big Government!  Rather there is the idea that a proper role of governments is to create the space, opportunities and resources which local communities and voluntary organisations need if they are to thrive.  There are many countries around the world where political and economic conditions undermine the social fabric of neighbourhoods, kinship and voluntary networks.

There is disagreement between political parties on how best a government creates such conditions, and what minimum levels of government funding and resources are needed to do so.

Aware of some of the pitfalls CCCF believes that it is appropriate to be involved in the process, and in particular in spelling out what Christian churches and organisations believe a Big Society that is child-friendly would look like.

A good example that has come to our attention is from community leaders among black neighbourhoods in London.  Rather than criticise the Big Society as a cover up for the lack of government funding to underprivileged groups in society, these leaders have included those who welcome the opportunity to shape aspects of future society.  For too long, such groups have been enlisted to support government projects and initiatives. In this new idea they see the possibility of having a significant say in how they would like society to be, and in helping to build it alongside government, local and central.

A Child Friendly Big Society

It is neither the intention, nor the role of CCCF to seek to speak for the whole Christian church about every aspect of the Big Society.  Rather it focuses on what it chooses to call “child-friendly” society.  It is our view that where societies, are at every level, child- friendly, then they will inevitably be just and benevolent.  One of the members of the coalition has been engaged for several years in what it has called “the good childhood”, and the essence of that research and programme chimes with what CCCF means for a child-friendly society.

Children have however often been marginal in society, and in political, sociological, economic, theological and psychiatric discourses.  And one of the dangers of the Big Society is that it perpetuates, albeit unwittingly, this marginalisation.

One of the purposes of the Children, Churches and Big Society Partnership is therefore to articulate those aspects of a Big Society that we believe from our long experience alongside children and families, are crucial in the creation and sustenance of a child-friendly Big Society.

Resources of Christian Churches in the UK

This section reminds both members of the coalition and the state of the huge resources represented by the Christian churches when Big Society is in view.

There are estimated to be 47,000 places of worship in the UK. There are 27,000 parent and toddler groups run by or held in churches.

Faith groups play a vital role in serving poor and disadvantaged communities and despite the growing recognition of the significant resources available in the third sector, many underestimate their importance.

Faith based organisations represent approximately 14 per cent of the sector (25,500 out of 180,000 charities registered have a religious basis by Charity Commission estimates).

Faith based organisations often have a large volunteer base. The Home Office Citizenship Survey (2003) estimated that in the previous year, 57 per cent of those actively practising a religion had also been involved in formal volunteering in comparison to 38 per cent of others.

According to research conducted on behalf of the Northwest Regional Development Agency (2005) faith based organisations in the contributed approximately 8.1 million volunteer hours per annum, with an estimated economic value of a little under £64.7 million.

Faith communities often exist in areas where there are few, if any, community buildings, making them crucial cohesive agents in their communities.

Apart from economic contribution, local faith sector organisations often have extensive community knowledge and presence. They are often able to quickly assess community need and deliver a highly personalised service.

Church Schools are one of the most popular institutions in the UK.

Heritage:

• Commandments: good relationships and communities
• Biblical Narrative: formation, repair and maintenance of societies
• Long-term commitment: beyond short-term fixes
• Visions of child-friendly societies: without a vision the Big Society will perish

Strategic Issues to Inform Debate and Action

In 2006 CCCF convened a group of leaders of Christian children’s organisations at Royal St Katharine to explore some of the key strategic themes to be held firmly in such a process.

These included:

multi-culturalism and the increasing questioning of it in Europe, as it affects our life and work alongside children and young people;

a chronic concern with education/learning models, and an emerging sense that new technologies and demography may well result in profound changes (will schools become as obsolete as workhouses and large psychiatric hospitals, for example?);

the significance of play and story in children’s lives;

the importance of attachment and permanent commitment of at least one adult in each child’s life to nurture the potential for resilient attitudes and behaviour;

concerns over the relation of children and young people to a democratic process that excludes them (one adult: one vote) locally and nationally while all the time paying sincere attention to “children’s rights” and “children as agents”;

faith-based organisations operating on behalf of the state and all that this implies;

the prophetic role (often known as “advocacy”) of Christian organisations and people alongside children;

the growth of capitalism and consumerism as they affect children and childhood;

critiques of “child development theories” in their inherent stress on the “not yet” of adulthood at the expense of the “now” of childhood;

the future of Planet Earth, climate change and the associated anxieties…

These were set in a changing global context that included major changes in family relationships and life, values, globalisation, media, capitalism, consumerism, communication, identity formation and meaning, peer groups, travel, religious awareness, fundamentalism, belonging, learning, the storage and dissemination of knowledge and information.

This is a timely reminder that any Big Society that seeks to replicate a new version of Little England, is doomed from the start: completely out of touch with the social world that our children and young people encounter and help to form in new ways.  In many ways children will be leaders in the creation of the Big Society: agents in the process, rather than passive recipients of services or structured information.

Conclusion

CCCF has stated aims:

By providing a means of sharing experience and insights, and of increasing understanding and cooperation on matters of policy and practice the Forum seeks to sustain and develop the contribution of Christian resources to the well-being of children and young people.

It recognises the following:

1.1 The great potential of co-operation within an interdenominational Christian grouping such as a Forum.

1.2 The importance of guarding the spiritual dimension of children’s lives at a time when there is evidence of some anti-religious feeling, or antipathy to Christianity, in some sectors of the children’s services.

1.3 The need to keep the spiritual element to the forefront and to help those people who are grappling with the inter-face between religion, race and culture.

1.4 The frequent lack of opportunity for (daily) religious observance in schools; yet recognition of the role of OFSTED in affirming the right to Christian nurture.

1.5 The need to discern/comprehend the ‘value-base’ in secular child care organisations.

1.6 The difference that it would make if our organisation did not exist.

1.7 The value of Advocacy with and for children, among Christians and the churches, as well as in the public domain.

And underlines the following distinctive contribution of Christian organisations in child care:

2.1 Their foundation within, and inspiration from, the Christian faith.

2.2 Theological understanding of the nature and integrity of the individual; physical, mental and   spiritual development through and beyond childhood; the value of relationships within and between generations.

2.3 A particular commitment and sense of vocation, able to engage with both religious and secular structures/communities. The opportunity, among Christians, both to offer and to receive support.

2.4 Roots and relationships within local communities, denominational structures and varied     communities within the Christian faith.

2.5 Links with other faith communities, as distinct from simply ethnic and cultural links.

2.6 A willingness and the resources (not restricted to State funding) to provide services either        distinctive from, or complementary, to the formal care system.

2.7 A desire to optimise Christian support in response to the needs of children and families within the four nations.

Given these aims and resources it seeks to draw together all those who identify with them to play their part in shaping and developing a Big Society that is child-friendly, and in line with our understanding of God’s will for human beings in community.

As part of the process CCCF has convened a national conference in November 2011.  Before this it seeks to widen the membership and increase the input of the coalition, and after the conference, it seeks to work with church and nation in pursuit of its goals.

Keith J. White

28.06.2011

Major new forum to take place on 2 November

The government should help re-establish social cohesion in the wake of last week’s riots by radically refocusing the Big Society. David Cameron must change its direction, so it leverages many more community initiatives along the lines of the spontaneous ‘Broom Armies’ which took to the streets last Tuesday.

This was the call from the Christian Child Care Forum (CCCF) today as it announced a major new conference on 2 November, which will take place a few yards from the epicentre of the Oxford Circus riot. Children, Churches and the Big Society: Calling Church and Nation will focus upon the place of children and young people in the Big Society. This is especially relevant as more than one in five of those charged with riot-related offences are aged under 18.

David Lane, Chair of the CCCF said: ‘The Broom Armies of last week are just the latest high profile examples of the vast amount of effort that is put in, day in day out, by thousands of unsung, ordinary people across the UK as they care for the people and communities they love.

‘This is a part of British society that is not broken, but it does need support in terms of both leadership and finance, especially as the spending cuts bite. So acute has the financial crisis become that we are now regularly told that there is no little or no new money available - not even to pay for necessities such as policing our streets properly and clearing them up in the aftermath of the most serious riots for thirty years.

‘David Cameron and the coalition government should now use the Big Society as part of the solution, refocusing it as a seedcorn initiative. Small amounts of money targeted upon small, very specific projects will return their monetary value many times over by strengthening local communities and lessening the likelihood of future civil disorder.

‘Motivating and encouraging young people to get involved, positively, in their communities should be at the heart of every such initiative, so that they can be proud of their neighbourhoods. Were they to take off along the lines of the Broom Armies – and there is no reason why they should not - they would go a long way towards mending the broken Britain that our politicians are currently wringing their hands over.

‘Churches have always been at the forefront in delivering community services. They are often the organisations best placed to deliver such initiatives, especially in inner city hot spots. This is why a group of 14 leading organisations* has got together to host the Forum. Here they will work through what the Big Society should be and what role they can play in giving meaning and purpose to the lives of our children and young people’.

The key questions the Forum will address include:

* What is the Big Society?
* What is the role of children and young people?
* Hasn’t the Church been doing the Big Society for 2,000 years anyway?
* What’s different now?
* Isn’t the Big Society just a way of doing things on the cheap?
* If not, what opportunities does the Big Society offer today, and what should churches be doing to further its aims?

Media Enquiries: Iain Taylor
CCPAS
0845 120 4550 or 07979 914217
iain@ccaps.co.uk

NOTES TO EDITORS:

The Forum will take place at Regent Hall, 275 Oxford Street, London W1C 2DJ, at 11 a.m. on 2 November 2011. The charge, including lunch, will be just £30 per delegate.

Plenary speakers will include Bishop Paul Butler, Sarah Hayes, and Rev Steve Chalke. Workshop sessions will cover internet safety, youth work, minorities in the community, parent/toddler groups, foster care, street pastors, setting up church projects and more.

The fourteen leading Christian partner organisations sponsoring the event are CCPAS, CCCF, the Children’s Society, Anthony Collins, Oasis, Frontier Youth Trust, Scripture Union, Children Matter, Ci 2 eye, Compassion, Livability, Fegans, the Salvation Army and Spurgeons.

Thursday 11th August 2011

My Lords, along with all of the members of Your Lordship’s House, I wish to associate myself with the tributes that have been paid to the work of the police force in recent days, and the work of the emergency services. These are people who have put themselves at risk in a very costly way in order to minimise the risk to others, and we are reminded by what we have seen in recent days of the crucial role that these services play in our society. I believe there are indeed questions about the right level of policing that is appropriate to a complex and troubled society like ours, and I hope that those are questions that will be seriously addressed in the days ahead.

I wish also to express the deepest sympathy to those who have lost members of their family, who have lost their livelihoods, who have in some measure lost hope and confidence in recent days. And it is perhaps that loss of hope and confidence that is the most serious, the most long-term issue which we have to address as a society. In the events we have seen in recent days, there is nothing to romanticise and there is nothing to condone in the behaviour that has spread across our streets. This is indeed criminality – criminality pure and simple, perhaps, but as the Prime Minister reminded us, criminality always has a context, and we have before us the task of understanding that context more fully.

Seeking explanations, it is worth remembering, is not the same as seeking excuses, and in an intelligent and critical society, we do seek explanations so that we may be able to respond with greater intelligence and greater generosity. My Lords, one of the most troubling features, as I think all would agree, of recent days, has been the spectacle of not only young people, but even children of school age, children as young as 7 taking part in the events we have seen. And surely, high on our priorities as we respond to these circumstances must be the question of what we are to do in terms not only of rebuilding the skills of parenting in some of our communities, but in rebuilding education itself.

Over the last two decades, many would agree that our educational philosophy at every level has been more and more dominated by an instrumentalist model; less and less concerned with a building of virtue, character and citizenship - ’civic excellence’ as we might say.  And a good educational system in a healthy society is one that builds character, that builds virtue.

In the wake of the financial crisis a few years ago, we began to hear more discussion than we’d heard for a very long time about the need for a recovery of the virtues. The need for a recovery of the sense of how character was to be built in our society, because character my Lords, involves an awareness not only of the connection between cause and effect in my own acts, but a sense, a deepened sense of empathy with others, a deepened sense of our involvement together in a social project in which we all have to participate.

There are indeed, as we’ve been reminded, no quick answers here. And I believe one of the most significant questions that we ought to be addressing in the wake of these deplorable events, is what kind of education we are interested in, for what kind of a society. Are we prepared to think not only about discipline in classrooms, but also about the content and ethos of our educational institutions – asking can we once again build a society which takes seriously the task of educating citizens, not consumers, not cogs in an economic system, but citizens. Yesterday I was speaking to a friend who teaches in higher education, who said that she had been overwhelmed with the number of messages she had received from the young people she was involved in, expressing their anger and their frustration at what they had seen on television. They believed that their own generation was being betrayed by the activity of many young people.

And that, My Lords, is simply a reminder that the young people of this country deserve the best. The reaction of so many of them to the events of recent days has been, as we’ve already been reminded, an inspiration. Just as has been the reaction of so many in our communities - generous, sacrificial, and imaginative. My Right Reverend Brother the Bishop of London has already spoken in other contexts about the way in which communities have rallied, and the place of churches and other faith communities in that rallying, to provide support, to provide emergency help, and simply to provide a quiet space for reflection. Communities deserve the best, and above all, let me repeat it My Lords, young people deserve the best.

I would hope that in our response to these events we shall hold in mind what we owe to the next generation of our citizens - and I underline that phrase “the next generation of our citizens”. What we have seen is a breakdown, not of society as such, but a breakdown of the sense of civic identity, shared identity, shared responsibility. The Government has very rightly made a priority of building community cohesion in what it has spoken of in recent months. Talk of the “Big Society”, of which we have heard a great deal, has focused precisely on the rebirth, the renaissance, of that civic identity. Now we need to see what that is going to look like. Now we need - all of us, without any point-scoring from a partisan approach - we need all of us to reflect on what that building will require in terms of investment in the next generation – in formal education, but also in the provision of youth services, imaginatively and consistently, across the country.

My Lords, I’ve spoken a little about the way in which communities have responded, not only volunteer bodies, but local businesses and also individuals, building new friendships, new networks. People have discovered why community matters. They’ve discovered why solidarity is important. They have begun to discover those civic virtues that we’ve talked about in the abstract. In other words, My Lords, I believe that this is a moment which we must seize, a moment where there is sufficient anger at the breakdown of civic solidarity, sufficient awareness of the resources people have in helping and supporting one another, sufficient hope (in spite of everything) of what can be achieved by the governing institutions of this country, including in Your Lordship’s House, to engage creatively with the possibilities that this moment gives us. And I trust, My Lords, that we shall respond with energy to that moment which could be crucial for the long-term future of our country and our society.

© Rowan Williams 2011

‘In many ways children will be leaders in the creation of the Big Society: agents in the process, rather than passive recipients of services or structured information’ (Keith White in original BSF vision paper)

The above comment encapsulates one primary reason for British children and young people taking part in this Forum which seeks to address their interests and future welfare. In this respect, the Forum is an opportunity not only to speak forth but to demonstrate child-friendliness. Put succinctly, the smallness and simplicity of children hold value and are latent resources to be utilized now.

The objective here is not political correctness (in keeping with the contemporary trendy ‘participation’ movement) but the integrity of the Forum’s expressed goals. Including children and young people (14-25 years) can also help to ensure an inter-generational network and sustainability of the Forum’s ultimate goals. Moreover, this bid for inclusion need not result in time consuming or expensive initiatives. It would need to acknowledge both the capabilities and limitations of children and young people.

GENERAL

- Drafting an annotated address merge and listing of children’s / youth groups/ schools or other resources which could be helpful to the Forum and to subsequent activities
-

IDEAS FOR CHILDREN’s PARTICIPATION (under 14 years)

- Video- sharing thoughts about their neighbourhood and what community love –in- action could actually look like. Do they see themselves as being ‘helpers’ in this process? Video can be shared on the day of the Forum and strategically distributed to stakeholders (securing permission of parents would be critical)
- Encouraging children’s visualization of the above in a poster etc. which could be helpful in the future publicity of the Forum’s goals
- Supporting a post-Forum children’s project which promotes any relevant goals of the Big Society
- Hosting an engagement/ reporting chat session after the Forum and gathering children’s inputs on the way forward

YOUNG PEOPLE’s PARTICIPATION

- Using the theme: ‘Children, Churches and the Big Society: Calling Church and Nation’ as the focus for all exhibits at the Forum (as opposed to groups erecting general information booths about their charity or association
- Designing a structured electronic questionnaire for youth groups and associations CYC and UCCF) for individual responses to the Big Society concept and, how it might be realized. A synopsis of findings could be highlighted at the Forum.
- Creating a video vignette of youth responses to the Big Society concept (Social Work, Sociology and Policy Students). Would any journalism students be interested in crafting this project or working alongside another group?
- Actively advertising the Forum among Christian students, youth groups and pursuing early attendance confirmation- reserving a space for??? youth delegates at the Forum (out of the expected 300)
- Special invitation of a cadre of Christian social work/ sociology students to the Forum. Could they right a Paper about implications on the way forward?
- Inviting Young people to work with adults as stewards in the preparation and delivery of the Forum
- Organizing a Post Forum invitation for a Face Book chat session and report. How might any relevant ideas be animated by the young people in question?
- Building awareness of core documents related to the Big Society on the Forum’s webpage or associated WebPages.

POTENTIAL GAINS FROM INCLUSION. . .

- The vision and methodology of the Forum are more closely aligned and potentially productive
- Training in leadership and supporting development of ministry gifts of the young people involved
- Utilizing the available resources of youth groups and youth networks already linked to the Coalition
- Results gleaned from any social enquiry could help to further the growth of the Coalition
- Expansion of awareness about the Forum and its goals

ResPublica recently hosted a talk by Robert Putnam, the Harvard professor who is author of Bowling Alone and now co-author, with David Campbell of the University of Notre Dame, of American Grace. American Grace, describes the impact that going to church, synagogue, mosque or temple has on society.

This is a very serious, scholarly, tome of over 600 pages, based on respected social surveys. It has a startling conclusion, that those who go to church regularly are two or three times ‘nicer’ than those who do not go, where ‘nicer’ is a short-hand term for more likely to give time, talents and money to good causes. This is after all adjustments have been made for other factors such as age, gender, race, class, wealth. It holds true even for giving to, or volunteering for, secular causes. That is to say, a regular church-goer is two or three times more likely than a non-church-goer to give money and their own time even to a secular charity.

The authors do not seem to think that this is to do with beliefs so much as to having ‘church friends’. This point is illustrated by their interest in people who do not believe in God but who go to church just as regularly as those who do, for instance because their spouse is a believer. Such a person will acquire ‘church friends’ and will similarly be more likely than those who do not go to church to become involved in philanthropy and volunteering.

The American Grace authors have social survey data for the UK as well as the USA and believe that their findings hold true across the Atlantic. ‘Church’ is shorthand for faith communities so the same applies to people of other faiths who go to their synagogues, mosques or temples.

The distinguished authors say they cannot tell from their data why the conclusions follow. The significance is so great, however, especially in the light of the Big Society debates, that the quest for the causal link is fast becoming the holy grail of modern political and social science.

When challenged by Phillip Blond and others at the ResPublica talk in St Martin’s in the Fields as to why people of faith make such a difference to their societies, Robert Putnam said he does not know the answer, that he is not a theologian. That begs the question whether theology or any particular discipline is the source of answers. So social scientists and others are on a mission to find a common denominator in church-goers but that is perhaps misguided. Indeed, it could be that being engaged in religious communities is about learning to cope with diverse characters, rather than about all thinking alike.

ResPublica deserves credit for highlighting the overlapping spheres of interest in these questions from the worlds of politics and of faith communities. When the Archbishop of Canterbury was guest-editing the New Statesman earlier this month, the Archbishop of Westminster was also talking about the Big Society but at the Caritas Network conference of Catholic charities, offering some perceptive insights arising from a process of sustained consultation and engagement. He said that he ‘was struck by the result of the poll which Edward Stourton conducted at our conference on 6 April in London when he asked all those present whether or not they thought the “Big Society” was a cover for cuts. The overwhelming majority said no. They felt there was a genuine moral agenda here. Furthermore a number of the MPs who were present – in particular some from the Labour Party – also made clear that the moral motivation behind what David Cameron has advocated is something they supported.’ Yet he was not uncritical of the government’s approach because you do not automatically grow a bigger-hearted society by simply reducing the size of the state.

Then the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, spoke about Faith and Social Action a week later in Westminster Central Hall at a Cinnamon Network meeting. He was positive but used an unfortunate turn of phrase at the crucial point of his speech when he said that, ‘We want to tap into that secular side of your work’. Even though that might be politicians’ shorthand and even though he went on immediately to say, ‘into your huge potential to do good’, his phrase ‘tap into’ struck a jarring note.

My own view is that the American Grace phenomenon, of church-goers giving so much more of themselves to others, has something to do with at least four factors: with beliefs, the ethos of church communities, the example of others in those communities, especially families, and the experience of being asked to get more involved.

On the 4th of July, America’s Independence Day, it seems apposite to consider an American example of transforming grace. The movie, The Blind Side, for which Sandra Bullock won the best actress Oscar last year, is based on the true life story of Michael Oher becoming a part of the Tuohy family. He was a teenage African-American boy, fending for himself. They were a white conservative Christian family in the South. Our prejudices might include that it would not work out (whereas it did) or that secular, liberal and politically correct Hollywood would not make the movie (whereas again it did). The Tuohys are Good Samaritans. They saw Michael walking in torrential rain, wearing only shorts and a t-shirt, and stopped to give him a ride. They eventually adopted Michael, who turned his life around and has become a professional American footballer.

The Tuohys have now written their own book, In a Heartbeat, which explains what I would call their American Grace. Incidentally, they also explain the title of the movie which comes from ‘the uniquely valuable role Michael plays on the field. At left tackle, he protects the quarterback’s most vulnerable spot, his “blind side”. We all have to protect each other better, individually.’

The parents, Leigh Anne and Sean, were brought up as Christians. Leigh Anne was Baptist. Sean was Catholic. As a young married couple in Memphis, they attended the ‘nondenominational Central Church led by Jimmy Latimer, the pastor who had married us’, whose sermons affected them. They tithed, that is to say, they committed to giving away, a tenth of their income. Then they helped to found ‘one of the fastest-growing congregations in Memphis, Grace Evangelical’. They evolved their own way of life based on St Paul’s message that ‘God loves a cheerful giver’. They decided to ‘do small things with great love’. In terms of answering the question why church-goers create so much social capital, there is here an inspirational example of belief.

It is also about the example of their own upbringing and their own church communities. It was not accidental that the Tuohys stopped when others did not help Michael. Leigh Anne, the character played in the movie by Sandra Bullock, explains that her own mother ‘was always mothering strangers’. She had ‘a habit of looking after stray kids’. She became a second mother to one of Leigh Anne’s friends, Liz, who has ‘passed it on … in turn, she’s practically adopted half the city of Memphis’. Leigh Anne explains that, ‘Liz has a contagious passion to better kids’ lives’ and that, ‘Liz borrowed a quality from my mother: she takes each kid personally’.

All this explains why the Tuohys did something, they stopped to help, when others just walked or drove past Michael: ‘Thousands of people failed to notice Michael Oher’ even though he was hard to miss. In their book, the Tuohy children, Collins, Sean Junior (known as SJ) and Michael also all contribute thoughtful reflections. They share their parents’ faith and love-in-action, explaining their stories by reference to beliefs and example. The daughter, Collins, explained that she and SJ were not resentful of Michael because ‘After years and years of watching how my mom and dad treat people, it got across’ and that ‘God puts things and people in your life for a reason’. SJ reports that, ‘When the movie came out, Collins, Michael and I put some of our money together and gave it back to our church’. Michael says, ‘The Lord kept his hand on me by finding the Tuohy family, my family, and bringing me to them.’ He says, ‘I was blessed’ and he was blessed, I would add, by American Grace.

People do not have to share the Tuohys’ beliefs or faith to be interested in trying to understand how they exemplify American Grace. The anti-God squad are keen to explain the failings of church people and pride themselves in placing a high premium on facts and evidence but how do they explain the findings of Putnam and the creation by church-goers of this social capital? If we are trying to understand the Big Society, the example of the Tuohys might point us towards answers to the deeper questions prompted by American Grace. The Tuohys conclude with a message for the Big Society: ‘Government programmes are great - we need a safety net. But the one thing government cannot do is to look someone in the eye and say, “I love you, I want you in my home”.’

Many people remain in the dark about the Big Society. So the Christian Child Care Forum (CCCF) is hosting a one day conference to stimulate debate, answer some of the key questions and send a message to government and others about what churches think.

The key questions include:

• What is the Big Society?
• What is the role of children and young people?
• Hasn’t the Church been doing the Big Society for 2000 years anyway?
• What’s different now?
• Isn’t the Big Society just a way of doing things on the cheap?
• If not, what opportunities does the Big Society offer today, and what should churches be doing to further its aims?

The Forum will take place at Regent Hall, 275 Oxford Street, London W1C 2DJ, at 11 a.m. on 2nd November 2011.

Plenary speakers will include Bishop Paul Butler, Sarah Hayes and Rev. Steve Chalke. Workshop sessions will cover internet safety, youth work, minorities in the community, parent/toddler groups, foster care, street pastors, setting up church projects and more.

The Forum is sponsored by a partnership of fourteen Christian organisations with a concern for children, young people and the services they require. The charge, including lunch, will be just £30 per delegate.

Listen to what children think about the Big Society at http://vimeo.com/31429215

Click the image to view talks from the 2010 CCCF Annual Forum, ‘The Well-Being of Children, Carers and Communities’