19 February 2012

 

In Defence of Secularism

Bishop Tim Stevens, writing in his February's Mercury column, worries about the erosion of Christianity from public life. He suggests that secularism, i.e. the separation of the church and state, threatens the whole fabric of the church. However, one only has to take a look across the pond to America to realise that a secular constitution will not impede the practice of religion, in fact quite the reverse! As the bishop mentions in his article, the ruling on council prayers will not prohibit groups of people from praying before council meetings, if they so wish. The ruling just upholds the right of individuals in office not to be forced to take part in religious practices. Personally, I would not dream of forcing my own ideology upon others.

I suspect that the real reason for advocating keeping the church and state together is that this arrangement best suits the interests of the church, as the religious customs of the state help to promote the church’s message and give it credibility it would otherwise not enjoy. The bishop’s position is, therefore, not motivated out of fairness for other religions and beliefs but purely out of interest for his own church. It is true that the constitutional arrangement between church and state is a long established part of our history. However, so was public hanging. Simply because an arrangement has been present for centuries does not mean it is fit for the 21st century.

Secularism is not about getting rid of Christianity. In fact, secularism serves to protect all religions equally and to defend the right of people to practice whatever faith/belief they wish. What secularists are against are the privileges the church enjoys, which are purely down to an accident of history, rather than anything else.


Comments:
Good blog Rich. But when I think about the omnipresence of religion in secular states like the USA, Turkey and India I sometimes wonder whether it might be best to leave the Anglican Church in place as the established religion here as association with the state seems to be slowly eroding its influence without any help from us crazed secularists!
 
I agree, the fact that the church is allied with the state hasn't done much to improve its influence, although it might think otherwise.

I think the church is behind its own decline - not militant secularists. For example, the church has been slow to change the format of its services, which are not that appealing to the younger generation. Maybe this failure to change is due to the fact that the activities of the church here are largely subsidised, like some nationalised industries were. In America, churches don't own assets, like land etc., so have been quicker to adapt to bring in revenue.
 
In a phase of decline, of course, any company will look to its major partners as a source of strength - and for the Anglican Church that means the state. They have vested interests in maintaining the cosy relationship and not letting criticism go too far. An outright attack on the government, for example, would probably not help their struggle to keep their influential bishops in the Lords through the impending reform.

Nobody seems to be discussing the fact that the decline in Christianity has not been as great as the decline of the Anglican Church. The difference is that a great number have moved into the happy-clappy set of the new evangelical churches.

The revival of the fortunes of the Catholic Church, against a background of appallingly widespread child abuse by sex-starved priests, can be attributed to Eastern European immigration, while the many Christians from Africa and the Caribbean favour the evangelical churches and weirder forms of Christianity where witchcraft still pervades daily life.
 
Great blog, If you're a student and you need a reliable minibus service, then look no further than Albatross Cars! Check out our mini bus range on our new website! http://www.derbyminibuses.co.uk/en/
 

Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?