The Challenge of Secularism

The Challenge of Secularism

Key Terms Secularism: a term that’s used in different ways.
The belief that religion should not be involved in government or public life May be the principle that no one religion should have a superior position in the state Often entails the idea that religion should be restrained from public power because it’s part of private life Wish fulfillment: according to Freud, wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through a dream or other exercise of the imagination

Key Terms Secularization: a theory developed in 1950s and 60s, from Enlightenment thinking, that religious belief would progressively decline as democracy and technology advanced. Sociologists now doubt this linear decline. Secular: not connected or associated with religious or spiritual matters. Used in widely differing ways: by atheists, pluralists, those that are anti-religion. Historically used to refer to priests that worked in the world (secular priests) as opposed to those who worked in monasteries.

Topic Contents God is an illusion and the result of wish fulfillment
Religion as an illusion: Freud Religion as something for children to escape from: Dawkins Religion and belief as a source of well-being Christianity should play no part in public life The separation of Church and State in the UK Education and schools Government and state The failure of the secularization thesis Discussing the challenges of secularism Are spiritual values just human values? Is Christianity a major cause of personal and social problems? Do secularism and secularization offer opportunities for Christianity to develop new ways of thinking and acting? Is Christianity a significant contributor to society’s culture and values, and should it be?

Introduction Historically, ethics, philosophy and Christian theology would have been used to explore, question and reason religion. Now, we can use psychology and sociology to offer insights. The role of religion in Western Europe has changed: Start of C20th: 80% of marriages were in church, by the end, it was less than 40% Church attendance, participation in Sunday schools and church membership have all declined and continue to do so. Steve Bruce, a sociologist of religion, think that Christian membership will have dropped to less than 10% of the population. Many possible causes for these trends. One is the belief that religion is becoming a private matter, not a public one, leaving the public space free for views that can be justified by reason alone.

Introduction Jose Casanova: 3 ways people talk about secularisation:
“the decline of religious belief and practice in modern society. Some suggest this is a normal, universal human development process.” “the privatisation of religion, something which again is seen as a normal situation and something requited for living in a modern liberal democracy, when religion should be private and show not be seen in public (for instance in the wearing of symbolic clothing in places of work).” The secular separation of spheres of state, economy, science, which are set free from religious institutions as a new norm (for instance the religious sponsorship of state funded schools.)” Jose Casanova, ‘rethinking secularisation: a global comparative perspective.’ The Hedgehog Review, spring/summer, 2006, pg 7.

Introduction The differences between these three ways we talk about secularisation are illustrated through the question: is Britain secular? if it refers to decline in religious belief, perhaps it is. If it refers to keeping religion out of public life, then maybe no is more accurate. (church funded schools, national holidays etc) If it refers to the nature of the government, then no. (close link between government and Queen: head of CofE.) Is Britian secular? Should there be a division between private space, where religion is permitted, and public space, which is free from religion?

Introduction Vocal modern atheists (Richard Dawkins, Steven Fry and Phillip Pullman) have challenged the traditional presence of Christianity, particularly its influence over moral matters in law. Some sociologists of religion (Paul Heelas, Linda Woodhead) are saying Christianity is declining, but spirituality is increasing, particularly practices like mindfulness (Buddhism). Freud, Marx and Dawkins argue that religion is something entirely of the mind. In the 60s, sociologists said Britain would lead the way in secularisation. In some ways it has: democracy instead of monarchy, decline in relationship between religion and government. However it is simplistic to say that secularisation is becoming true for the rest of the world, or even for Britain as a whole. Is Britian secular? Should there be a division between private space, where religion is permitted, and public space, which is free from religion?

Introduction The vast majority of the world claim adherence to a religion An upsurge in religious adherence in former Soviet countries since the decline of communism Immigration has bought new religions to Britain Anglican numbers are declining, while Catholic numbers remain unchanged. The number of Pentecostals and Muslims have grown. Religion is far more prominent in the media than in previous decades. Charles Taylor: society is more in line with a pluralist religious situation, than a religious government leading a religious people Schmuel Eisenstadt, Israeli sociologist, describes the present time as one that perceives multiple modernities.

God as an Illusion and result of wish fulfillment: Freud
Freud is credited with contributing to the change in western thinking about religion. Offered explanation for religion that differs from theology, ethics and philosophy- instead focused on how the mind works. “the religion of mankind must be classed as among the mass delusions.” –Freud, 1930 “the whole thing is so patently infantile, so foreign to reality, that to anyone with a friendly attitude to humanity it is painful to think that the majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life.”

God as an Illusion: Freud
Freud was fascinated with religion but viewed it as a delusion that protects us from fate and nature. Religion is a produce of wish fulfillment. the experience of vulnerability and helplessness is made more tolerable by the invented belief that there is a purpose to life, with a moral code, where injustice will be corrected in the next. Human beings create things that they want to influence: a being that is in control when they feel out of control. Religion also represses human desires, particularly those that are destructive to society. Wish fulfillment: according to Freud, wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through a dream or other exercise of the imagination

Freud believes that religious ideas are viewed highly because they provide information that humans crave about things that cant be discovered. This affects how the religious see the non-religious: “anyone who knows nothing of [religious ideas] is very ignorant; and anyone who has added them to his knowledge may consider himself much the richer.” –Freud, 1927. Religion demands to be believed because our ancestors believed it and it has been passed down to us. Freud points out the many problems with the claims made in the name of religion “the proofs they have left us are set down in writings which themselves bear every mark of untrustworthiness. They are full of contradictions, revisions, falsifications, and where they speak of factual confirmations they are themselves unconfirmed.”- Freud 1927 Wish fulfillment: according to Freud, wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through a dream or other exercise of the imagination

Freud believed religion is unhealthy. It’s a cultural carrier for dividing people, negative information, causing conflict between believers and non-believers. Religion is also not good for the mind. It is produced by uncertainty and anxiety about things beyond our control, but it actually creates something unreliable and unstable. Wish fulfillment: according to Freud, wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through a dream or other exercise of the imagination

Religion as something to escape from: Dawkins
Richard Dawkins is a scientist who has become a prominent critique of religion. “there is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else (parents in the case of children, God in the case of adults) has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point. […] Somebody else must be responsible for my well-being, and somebody else must be to blame if I am hurt. Is it a similar infantilism that really lies behind the need for a God?” – The God Delusion, 2006.

Life should be meaningful without reference to religion Religion is repressive: he uses religious clothing as an example. The burqa for example, ensures female submission, but its also a metaphor for how religion narrows our perception of things. Religion narrows our perception, while science broadens it. Religion is also a cause for conflict, even amongst believers. (Northern Ireland, Muslim conflict in the Middle East) Dawkins has always been particularly concerned about the indoctrination of children to religion, claiming raising them in a religion is harmful. He uses extreme examples to illustrate the dangers: Instances in the C19th of Jewish children being kidnapped by priests and raised as Catholics after a secret baptism. Sexual abuse of children by Christian ministers The “sadistic cruelty” of nuns in many of Ireland’s girls schools.

His concern is not just with these extreme examples, but with children who are not of any age of consent are labeled as a religion because their parents. For Dawkins, raising your children in a religion is a form of long term psychological abuse. (the fear of going to hell is even greater abuse than sexual abuse) Should the state protect children from any harmful ideas their parents have? Examples to consider: Circumcision, healing children with exorcism, forcing children to confess their sin, teaching children that hell exists and they could go there. How could the state protect children from the harmful ideas of their parents? Controlling all education, prohibiting home schooling, prohibiting children from participating in religious ritual, removing children from parents in some cases.

Religion and belief as a source of wellbeing
Freud and Dawkins both argue that religion is harmful to the human mind and because of this, parents should be restricted on what they teach their children. However, there are scientists that actually argue some beliefs can be shown to be good for people. Jo Merchant, a science journalist, does not defend religion but she highlights a range of practices/belief, often found in religion that are good for people: Social gatherings Belief in a loving God Being part of something bigger Being still and silent

Religion and belief as a source of wellbeing
She makes reference to scientists who have found that being part of a social community, or believing in the transcendent were important features of living a longer and healthier life. These features were prominent in religious believers. “there are powerful evolutionary forces driving us to believe in God, or in the remedies of sympathetic healers, or to believe that our prospects are more positive than they are. The irony is that although those beliefs might be false, they do sometimes work: they make us better.” –Jo Merchant, 2006. She doesn’t necessarily disagree with Freud about why people are religious, but she does conclude quite different things to Freud about the harm or wellbeing of religious beliefs.

Christianity Should Play No Part in Public Space
For some secular traditions, the idea of a separation between the private and the public, particularly those associated with the French revolution. This saw the end of the monarchy and the removal of religion from established positions of power in France. This means: Religion is not involved in government affairs, Prohibition of religious influence in public matters, Absence of government involvement in religion. This resulted in: No more state funded Christian schools (although they do provide tax relief to Catholic private schools) Government banning public wearing of religious symbols and clothing

Christianity Should Play No Part in Public Space
In a world where new technologies have eroded the sense of a private, personal world, does the private space articulated by a separation of Church and State still exist? The constitution of the separation of Church and State is found in other countries as well as France: Turkey (although this is changing) and America. This is not saying that the government is neutral in matters of religion, but the key idea is that religion should have no influence or bearing on the public world and government decisions should be based on democratic, non-religious foundations. Not all secular forms of government follow the French model, e.g., the Netherlands adopted a policy of ‘Pillarisation.’ For much of the C20th century, Dutch society was divided vertically into denominations and then social and educational services were provided based on that. Each pillar had its own newspapers, political parties, trade unions, schools, universities etc. This formal structure is no longer as evident as it was, but its effects can be seen where religion is present in public life.

Separation of Church and State in the UK
In a world where new technologies have eroded the sense of a private, personal world, does the private space articulated by a separation of Church and State still exist? Separation of Church and State in the UK There are plenty of current debates about whether religion should be public or private in the UK: religious clothing in the workplace, how much people can exert their own religious views when running a business, how much religion should be involved in education. Page 278

Education and Schools In England, churches are by far the biggest sponsors of schools. More than 1.8 million are educated in CofE or Catholic schools. The British Humanist Association (BHA) campaign against this: “we aim for a secular state guaranteeing human rights, with no privilege or discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, and so we campaign against ‘faith’ schools, and for an inclusive, secular school system, where children and young people of all different backgrounds and beliefs can learn with and from each other. We challenge ‘faith’ schools’ admissions, employment and curriculum policies, as well as the privileged processes by which new ‘faith’ schools continue to open.” –BHA For the BHA, a secular state should not fund schools with religious character. Schools should not have authority to turn students away based on faith or include prayer/worship as part of their school time.

Education and Schools Dawkins is also incredibly worried about the involvement of religion in schools “fundamentalist religion is hell-bent on ruining the scientific education of countless thousands of innocent, well meaning eager young minds.”- the God Delusion, 2006 Teaching evolution as a theory alongside creationism does not give credit to the scientific evidence supporting evolution He would also have an issue with the teaching that “unquestioning faith is a virtue.” The debate is complex and fierce. The school system in England was established by Christian churches long before the national government was prepared to ensure education for all children.

Education and Schools The heritage argument is therefore a popular one- the relationship between faith and education is too deep rooted to change it. Christian churches worked hard to ensure the poorest children got an education- to remove this would be an act of robbery. Faith schools give parents the chance to have their children raised in a religious ethos. In a plural and diverse society, we should have plural and diverse schools. Religious schools aren’t necessarily less ethnically diverse than secular schools and faith isn’t the only divide in schools- socio-economic factors play a huge role as well. Does teaching children in mixed groups make them more tolerant and respectful of each other?

Education and Schools There isn’t empirical evidence that ‘separate schools’ produce children who are less open to living in diverse societies. Leslie Francis, University of Warwick, suggests that young people who are committed to Christianity are actually more open to people of other faiths. The only thing different about church schools is the greater concentration of Christian students- no evidence that these schools contribute to a more positive outlook. Although some religious groups do attempt to indoctrinate or brainwash their beliefs, it cant really be argued that faith or religion closes down scientific thinking. E.g.. Francis Collins- started as an atheist scientist, focused on genes, became a Christian after exploring arguments for and against. Critiques of Dawkins will state that his views stem from the idea that religion is fundamentalist and extreme. If religion is cultural phenomenon then it can be as much about identity and culture, than about belief and should therefore be taught. Does teaching children in mixed groups make them more tolerant and respectful of each other?

Education and Schools Charles Taylor (‘the Politics of Recognition’) argues that all religions and cultures should have recognition in societies that are increasingly multi-cultural. No culture, including the atheistic one, should impose itself on any other. Therefore schools with religious diversity help to nurture cultural diversity and prevents identities from disappearing. Christopher Dawson states that secular education systems are problematic- a professed neutrality towards religion was actually an attempt to remove it. Removing religion from art, music, culture, architecture etc., not only prevents a religion from expressing itself outwardly, but prevents people from understanding their own culture. Should schools be controlled by the government, with education designed to serve a particular government agenda? Or should it stand as a place to critique and challenge societal norms?

Education and Schools James Conroy argues that religious schools have an important role in liberal democratic society: they pose the idea to children than they are about more than education for the purpose of economy. “the student is not a resource for a nation, or one who is to be cultivated within a consumer teleology.” – James Conroy 2004. Religious schools allow counterbalance to any one single driving influence in education.

Government and State The British monarch, is also the head of the C of E, and by ancient tradition, Defender of the Faith. There are also Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords. Some will argue that the continued involvement of the Anglican Church in politics is not keeping up with the times and does not represent the diverse nature of the population. By having Anglican involvement in politics, we are excluding everyone who is not Anglican. Others would disagree: The Chief Rabbi has a seat in the House of Lords The Duke of Norfolk traditionally represents Catholics Although this is true, they cannot ignore that large number of seats held by the C of E

Government and State Both France and the USA have a formal separation between religion and government. France: laicite- refers to religion being absent from the state For example, although catholic tradition is still prominent, marriages take place in civic institutions. The religious ceremony is entirely separate. In England, the relationship between religion and state has been quite turbulent, and still is. Prince Charles has said he would be Defender of Faith, rather than Defender of THE Faith This kind of secularisation keeps religion at the heart of society but acknowledges the plurality of society. Would it be better for the UK to have a head of state who defends faith and belief of all kinds rather than one particular faith, should the head of state be an example of someone who takes commitment to religion and belief in one tradition seriously, or should mention of religion be absent from the role of head of state?

The relationship between religion and the State can be understood by looking at these two images:

Government and State First photo shows police in France forcing a Muslim woman to take her burkini off on a beach. Arguably, this is not showing secularisation, but an anti-religion sentiment at the heart of French government. The second photo shows two beach volleyball players, playing by the same rules but expressing differing beliefs and values through their clothing. This shows an inclusive secularity, where public plurality is possible. Another example of inclusive secularity is the NHS. A doctor is allowed to refuse to participate in medical procedures, such as abortions, transfusions, transplants etc, as a matter of conscience.

Government and State “you may choose to opt out of providing a particular procedure because of your personal beliefs and values, as long as this does not result in direct or indirect discrimination against, or harassment of, individual patients or groups of patients. This means you must not refuse to treat a particular patient or group of patients because of your personal beliefs or views about them. And you must not refuse to treat the health consequences of lifestyle choices to which you object because of your beliefs […] whatever your personal beliefs about the procedure in questions, you must be respectful of the patient’s dignity and views.” -General Medical Council, 2013.

Government and State In democracy, the relationship between religion and politics depends on the public’s reaction to their political leaders expressing their religious beliefs. Alasdair Campbell, the special advisor of Tony Blair, famously said, “we don’t do religion.” More recent prime ministers have been more keen to refer to their faith: Gordon Brown, Theresa May Is there a difference between the formal separation of religion and state, and politicians expressing their religious beliefs? Should politicians refer to their religious beliefs in their work?

Government and State Rowan Williams: programmatic secularism and procedural secularism Programmatic Secularism assumes any public expression of faith is offensive and any presence of religion in public life is an attempt to gain control and remove opposing views. Williams thinks this ‘neutrality’ is false as it ultimately silences certain voices in favor of a particular ideology. Claims to be neutral, but actually isn’t. Procedural Secularism permits as many public voices as possible, without privileging any of these voices. This ensures a crowded and argumentative, plural and diverse, public square, which requires the law to mediate and balance real differences.

The Failure of the Secularisation Thesis
Secularisation theory is the theory that religious belief would progressively decline as democracy and technology advanced Many social scientists, philosophers and theologians have concluded that secularisation theory is based on a mistaken assumption that change is inevitable. Luke Bretherton offers a visual depiction of an ordinary London journey that illustrates the complexity of trying to describe the modern world with the language of ‘secular’:

“I take the number 207 bus up the Uxbridge Road. On the bus is an extroadinary array of cultures, religions and nationalities, many of which are reflected in the shops and religious institutions we pass by on the street. To take a survey along one of these bendy buses would be to encounter Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians, Nigerians, Ghanaians, Somalis, Ethiopians, Lebanese, Algerians, Afro-Caribeans, Zimbabweans and many more besides. Some are Christians, some Muslim, some Rastafarians, and some mind their own business. In among the London Lite newspapers you will see the Bible and the Qur’an being read as well as texts from the Mind, Body, Spirit section of the bookshop. Here is the reality of multi-cultural, multi-faith London in full bloom. As we travel together, whether we like it or not, through a combination of the market and the state symbolised in our common dependence on the good offices of Transport for London, another public-private partnership.” Luke Bretherton, ‘Post Secular Politics? Interfaith Relations and Civic Practice.’ The Lambeth InterFaith Lecture, 2009

How are we to define the sort of scene that was described? Modern age, post-modern age, secular age or post-secular age? Is it secular and religious or neither? Peter Berger, who was an early contributor of the secularization theory, has since retracted some of his earlier conclusions: “Modernization necessarily leads to a decline in religion, both in society and in the minds of individuals. And it is precisely that key idea that turned out to be wrong. To be sure, modernization has had some secularizing effects, more in some places than others. But it has also provoked powerful movements of counter-secularization. Also secularization on the societal level is not necessarily linked to secularization on the level of individual consciousness.” Peter Berger, 1999

A secular state may be filled with religious believers- it is not necessarily atheistic. For example, America remains just as religious as a century ago, even thought the government and state are separated. Turkey, until recently, was a secular state with 99% Muslim population. Berger thinks it a false assumption that we live in a secularised world: the world is actually furiously religious. David Ford: we need to stop thinking about the development of the world in linear terms. He preferred to think about it as ‘the unpredictability of a drama.” David Ford and Jose Casanova: both critical of the idea that secular atheism is unquestionably good. Communism, captialism and fascism have all sought to remove religion from human civilisation, sometimes using brutal methods.

Discussing the Challenges of Secularism
Are spiritual values just human values? Is Christianity a major cause of personal and social problems? So secularism and secularization offer opportunities for Christianity to develop new ways of thinking and acting? Is Christianity a significant contributor to society’s culture and values, and should it be?

Are spiritual values just human values?
Consider the extent to which values are: Basic beliefs (eg. goodness, or the sinfulness of human beings) Principles (eg. Do unto others as you would have them do to you) Virtues of behaviour (eg. Courage or honesty) Hopes or aspirations (eg, world peace or unity)

Values are things that people who hold different theological or spiritual beliefs share in common, such as justice or democracy. Values are bound up in beliefs and belong to particular traditions, such as sacrificial love or the need for forgiveness. They cannot easily be shared by people who believe different things because they express theological or spiritual ideas. Values can be quite different sort of things that can be difficult to make sense of. Discuss which you find most interesting or problematic.

Are the values that Christianity offers society anything more than human values? A strong case can be made that compassion, forgiveness, justice and peace are all essential human values. These qualities create a more positive experience of life and help us to reassure others. Forgiveness is necessary to overcome failures, while justice maintains the idea of fairness. To base a society on these values, help to protect and preserve society, whether it is religious or not. These values then are arguably not Christian.

There are some Christian values that aren't that straightforward to explain. Self-sacrifice and unconditional love are less easy to explain on rational terms. Christian values like loving your enemy are counter-intuitive. It contradicts self interest and safety. It is easier to reject the stranger or foreigner because they are unknown and potentially not safe. Loving your enemy points to a greater vision- something beyond self. Perhaps spiritual values are better than human values: human values are part of the physical, sensual and morally corrupt human world, while spiritual values are pure, perfect and untainted.

Universal human rights are a human-designed value system. It is based on the belief that human beings have an ultimate worth and intrinsic dignity Is presented often as an alternative to religion. Yet human beings often act immorally both individually (lie, kill, steal etc) and collectively (resources being wasted, legal discrimination etc) This would suggest the universal declaration of human rights is based on an unfounded belief. Maybe its not possible to separate human values and spiritual values? In Christianity, God becoming human reaffirms the worth of humanity With the incarnation, the dualism that divides the sacred from the human gets rejected, because Jesus represents them both.

Is Christianity a major cause of personal and social problems?
Christianity can be seen as having a negative influence on society. It can be seen as patriarchal and sexist. It can be seen to encourage infantile or ‘unscientific’ views of the world (Dawkins: homosexuality being criminalised) He would argue the problem with this is an absolutist view because it isolates other belief systems that they cant understand and influences the law to reflect their own views. For example: Geroge Bush blocked medical research on embryonic life while simultaneously allowing at least a third of executions that took place during his presidency.

The difficulty with the argument that Christianity is a cause of social problems is based entirely on examples. What about the examples that contradict this? There are plenty of examples of Christians/churches that have spearheaded positive change: Establishing schools in England Anglican bishops were instrumental in decriminalising homosexuality Many civil rights activists who’ve played a leading role in social change were religious. Eg. MLK, Rosa Parks, Mother Theresa Many of the food banks in this country are run by churches and church organisations, as well as charities like CAP.

Another problem with this question or debate is that one side draws on examples of what might be ‘bad Christianity’ while the other give examples of what might be ‘good Christianity.’ Maybe the kind of examples that best represent the every day behaviour of Christians make their argument less powerfully: Visitting the lonely or bringing them together for lunch, Providing emotional support Meeting with vulnerable people to be a regular contact point Giving time and resources to local charitable events

When evaluating religion, what should we focus on: The institution The ideas it has The people it attracts (the followers)? This question highlights the difficulty and complexity of evaluating a religion. There are links between the ideas and what the institution does and what it’s followers are like, but its not as simple as a yes or no answer.

Does secularisation offer opportunities for Christianity to develop new ways of thinking?
David Ford: the beginnings of secularism led to important developments in Western European thinking- the idea of state tolerance. Experiences during the War led to different communities being able to live in peaceful toleration of each other. It also changed the way people saw Democracy- a new age where a monarch didn’t rule, but instead trade unions, rule of law, charities etc were established. These changes have not gone unchallenged in many Western countries.

There have been repeated attempts to assert new kinds of religion: religion of fascism and nationalism fuelled the second world war. Communism would be another example of an ideology that was imposed in replace of religion. It is is not all about society changing to accommodate religion, or society acting to eradicate religion. Some argue that actually religion can and does change in response to the society it encounters:

“practice changes, of course, over time, sometimes slowly, sometimes swiftly. And changed practice can lead to changed belief. Scriptural passages can get new interpretations. And if they cant adapt, they’re often abandoned. That passage in the Psalms about how blessed you will be if you dash Babylonian babies on the rocks; that passage in First Peter about how slaves should submit themselves to their masters, however cruel- these we can usefully look away from. St Paul’s powerful move was to hold on to the Jewish scriptures while instructing the followers of Christ that they could ignore large parts of them because they were only binding on the Jews. In short, if scriptures were not subject to interpretation (and thus re-interpretation) they wouldn’t continue to guide people over long centuries. –Kwame Appiah 2016

Militant forms of both religion and secularism are prominent. Eg. France since turkey are doing the opposite with religious clothing laws. In modern time, religious terrorism has become more prominent from extreme or militant forms of religion. Peter Berger predicted that religion would decline in a secular world, but actually the opposite has happened. “religious communities have survived, even flourished to the degree that they have not tried to adapt themselves to the alleged requirements of a secular world. To put it simply, experiments with secular religion have failed, religious movements with beliefs and practices dripping with reactionary supernaturalism have widely succeeded

David Martin noted that since the 1980s there have been an upsurge of conservative Protestant Christianity and conservative Islam. The emergence of secularism bought an end to Christendom: the idea that there was a group of states in Europe that were predominately one Christian denomination, and other denominations and religions were at best, marginalised in society and at worst, persecuted. Living in a society where government and religion and separate and religious diversity is tolerated is better for both religion and government. It protects religious authorities from the corruption of political power It helps the government to protect all religious views

However, the continued development of a secular state has led religion to reassert itself and re-emphasise it’s traditional and more conservative forms. Christianity seems to be at a crossroads. A) stand firmer in it’s convictions and stand in opposition to a secular world B) try and incorporate modern ideas, changing and growing within a secular world

Is Christianity a significant contributor to society’s culture and values, and should it be?
Today, there are many features of Christianity still present in British society. The Queen as the head of State National holidays Oaths taken in court Remembrance Sunday comes with a church service Nations flag Debates about whether Radio 4 should play worship music or whether the Queen should be head of state are asking the bigger question: should Christianity influence culture and values in our society?

Richard Dawkins is a strong defender in the Bible being taught in schools because it is a big part of Literary culture Therefore it is necessary for a good understand of English language and literature, particularly KJV He does argue that Christianity is a strong contributor to society’s culture and values, but narrowly- in terms of respecting Christianity’s legacy.

Acknowledging the role of Christianity in the historical development of our culture and values is not the same as giving religion a superior role in our future development. What do we mean by the phrase, “a Christian country?” this phrase has been criticised A believing country? Not really. A “Christian-infused” country? Yes maybe. Cultural changes, caused by migration and pluralism, mean that Christianity is no longer the sole, or dominant influence on our culture and values. It is therefore questionable whether Christianity should continue to a significant contributor to our culture and values.

Issues to Consider Religious Education should give more time to Christianity All schools should have a daily act of worship of a mainly Christian character. State holidays should follow Christian festivals. The head of the State should remain the head of the CofE

Essay Titles How fair is the claim that Christianity has a negative impact on society? ‘Christian values are more than just basic human values: they have something distinctive to offer.” Discuss.

The Challenge of Secularism

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Challenge of Secularism"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

The Challenge of Secularism

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "The Challenge of Secularism"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback