ChatterBank0 min ago
Politics and religion.
9 Answers
If religion has no place in politics, should the Church of England's stance on the B.N.P be neutral?
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The Church of England constantly criticises Government policies when it feels that the Government is failing to be fair. It is fair enough for them to put a Christian and moral case instead.
Likewise with the BNP. If the Church thinks BNP policies are unChristian and morally wrong, then it is OK for it to give its alternative. This is perfectly right.
The Church can comment, but should never interfere, there is a difference.
Likewise with the BNP. If the Church thinks BNP policies are unChristian and morally wrong, then it is OK for it to give its alternative. This is perfectly right.
The Church can comment, but should never interfere, there is a difference.
The C of E's stancec is probably based more from a moral and social perspecitve than a political one.
It would be wrong of them to take on an exclusively politivcal styance, but commenting on the pastoral impact of the world around them seems perfectly reasoinable - by definition, the church is its people and cannot isoate factors which govern their lives.
It would be wrong of them to take on an exclusively politivcal styance, but commenting on the pastoral impact of the world around them seems perfectly reasoinable - by definition, the church is its people and cannot isoate factors which govern their lives.
The last 2 points are very pertinent, I'm all for a fully elected second chamber.
The crux of the question (for me) is borne more from several duels on S & C, I tend to get the overall impression (not neccessarily from here) that the it's ok for religion to rear it's ugly head in an argument so long as they agree with them.
Personally I feel the Arch Bishop has every right to voice his opinions on this (or any) subject, the same goes for Rabbis and Imams ad hom, I don't have to agree with them.
The crux of the question (for me) is borne more from several duels on S & C, I tend to get the overall impression (not neccessarily from here) that the it's ok for religion to rear it's ugly head in an argument so long as they agree with them.
Personally I feel the Arch Bishop has every right to voice his opinions on this (or any) subject, the same goes for Rabbis and Imams ad hom, I don't have to agree with them.
I take issue with your initial premise.
Politics and religion have been inextricably linked since before Thomas Beckett's murder, the reformation - you had to be religious to sit in parliament and non-Anglicans couldn't even go to University until the 1850s.
There was the issue of Catholic emancipation and even up to the present day - Blair didn't dare joint the Catholics until he'd left office because the Prime Minister effectively appoints bishops in the Church of England.
But even taking this into consideration the Church and the BNP have a fundamental conflict of values.
The church holds all men to be born equal before God. It has large numbers of coloured congretation and clergy - even the archbishop of York.
How could it possibly fail to condem a philosophy that says so much of it's membership is inately inferior?
I mean - what do we all think about the Pope's silence in WWII - was that justified by the "Not getting involved in politics" defense ?
Politics and religion have been inextricably linked since before Thomas Beckett's murder, the reformation - you had to be religious to sit in parliament and non-Anglicans couldn't even go to University until the 1850s.
There was the issue of Catholic emancipation and even up to the present day - Blair didn't dare joint the Catholics until he'd left office because the Prime Minister effectively appoints bishops in the Church of England.
But even taking this into consideration the Church and the BNP have a fundamental conflict of values.
The church holds all men to be born equal before God. It has large numbers of coloured congretation and clergy - even the archbishop of York.
How could it possibly fail to condem a philosophy that says so much of it's membership is inately inferior?
I mean - what do we all think about the Pope's silence in WWII - was that justified by the "Not getting involved in politics" defense ?
Its my understanding ( and I may well be wrong) that the reason the church has spoken out so loudly on this issue is over their concern that the Nick Griffin and the BNP were setting themselves up as the political party for christians - so in this context, It is pefectly right that they comment.
In general terms, I dislike religion having the political influence it does - It is long past time that the right of Bishops to have block seats in the Lords was removed.
In general terms, I dislike religion having the political influence it does - It is long past time that the right of Bishops to have block seats in the Lords was removed.
JTP I agree with most everything you've said, I'm not defending the B.N.P in any way shape or form, religious people have a vote so long as that is the case then they have a say.
The question is more for atheists who espouse the removal of religion from all aspects of public life, than a personal point of view.
The question is more for atheists who espouse the removal of religion from all aspects of public life, than a personal point of view.
1 to 9 of 9
