Tommy Robinson, notorious for his toxic far-right sanity, recently revealed that he had made a major spiritual step. He claims that while in prison he had a conversion and became a Christian. However, his newfound faith has provoked spirited debate among theologians and religious leaders. Instead, they are focused on the sincerity of his convictions and what his ties to the Christian right could mean.
Though incarcerated, Robinson professes to have had a radical conversion. This transformative moment was, for him, his conversion experience to Christianity. Since then, he became intentional about networking with other believers who share his values. Key advisors in his orbit are Pastor Rikki Doolan and the Bishop Ceirion Dewar. Through their public discourse, Robinson embodies this new identity and invites others to join them. His relationship with Christianity has us wondering about the sincerity and depth of his convictions.
Ravi Holy, rector of The United Wye Benefice in Canterbury, Kent, has openly questioned Robinson’s status as a genuine Christian. By Robinson’s conversion, he argues, it shouldn’t give him the license to hijack the faith for personal benefit. “Tommy Robinson’s conversion did not give him the right to subvert the faith so that it serves his purposes rather than the other way round,” Holy stated.
Robinson takes delight in these fruits of “masculine Christianity.” Some critics point out that this Cold Warrior ideology was, and is, directly contrary to the spirit of Jesus Christ. This particular strain of faith reinforces patriarchal strength and masculinity. Others claim it goes against some of Jesus’s main teachings based on compassion and humility.
In a now deleted tweet Robinson retweeted this statement from Bishop Dame Sarah Mullally in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. He added his own commentary, declaring, “Their churches will stay empty, a Christian revival will grow on the streets. Masculine christiany [sic] is coming not this weak drivel.” Cue huge outrage from nasty households, as this comment has marinated with plenty of indignant liberals. Critics counter that it sends a more insidious signal encouraging racial and religious discord.
The debate around Robinson’s beliefs is only exacerbated by the conversation about true repentance within Christianity. Furthermore, we’re taught in scripture, “by their fruits you shall know them.” This involves that real faith must manifest itself through behaviors that reflect Christ’s example. To the untrained observer, Robinson’s public persona and statements seem in direct conflict with these principles.
The issue of who counts as a “real” Christian has been one of the most important issues in the debate over Robinson’s faith. Holy points out Jesus’s teaching that genuine repentance should produce fruit. Words are insufficient, and we can’t stand on claims of faith without action that exemplifies the love and compassion that Christ showed the world.
Undoubtedly, many of our friends in the Christian community have deep concerns. In other words, they think that Robinson’s understanding of Christianity is more in line with his politics than the actual teachings of Christianity. Many of his critics charge that his incendiary rhetoric is purposely directed at a very targeted demographic. Often, they read it as simply code for “white” and as explicitly “not Muslim.”
Robinson’s upcoming carol service is sure to attract international attention from supporters and critics alike. This controversy is a reminder of the broader divide among Christians over his legitimacy as a representative of their faith. The event is likely to serve as a platform for further discussion about what it means to be a Christian in contemporary society.