I see that if they can tear themselves away from the works of J K Rowling, William Hague and Paddy Ashdown, MPs will apparently be reading Richard Dawkins on the beach this summer.
I haven’t read Dawkins’ book, but I have been very impressed with a report “Doing God”, A Future for Faith in the Public Square that I’ve just discovered from a thinktank I hadn’t heard of before, Theos. It seems to me an extremely sensible and useful contribution to the debate about the proper role and contribution of faith to public debate (or the ‘public square’, as the paper calls it).
In particular, its exposing of the popular idea that a Bishop giving a view on anything affecting public life is somehow “extra-curricular”, and merely a “brief diversion from the clergy’s main roles of singing and wearing frocks in public” rather an expression of one of the core features of faith, is marvellously refreshing (and certainly far more effective than my own inadequate attempt to try and say something similar).
This is an issue which as the author, Nick Spencer, makes very clear, is not going away - indeed he argues convincingly, the very opposite.
I don’t agree with everything he says - particularly some of the questions he poses about the goal of freedom, and the relationship between the liberal state and the way individual citizens frame their own desires and goals.
However overall this report seems to me to put the general position on this important debate, as well as opening up some specific debates, very well and accessibly in today’s context, and I recommend it.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:01
OK, I got as far as:
“The annual rash of “winterval†and “political correctness gone mad†stories suggest not. Every year
some local council renames Christmas in order, allegedly, not to give offence to other faiths”
No. Every year it is reported. But the stories are all hyped up if not made up altogether. It will happen again this year.
Yes it would be nice to read an intelligent contribution to this debate. But if a report gives full credit to these persecution fantasies without checking its facts, I see no reason to read any further.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:57
Joe, you’re quite right of course - I thought most of the stories in most years were a rehashing of the one original “Winterval” incident (in Birmingham about twenty years ago I think).
There are indeed one or two hints that (unlike most Lib Dems!) local government is not the author’s area of expertise…
However I don’t think that really detracts from many of the bigger points. And in the case of this particular point, even, I think that there is quite a similarity between the fact that people believe that every year Councils are doing this (which they do), and that Councils are actually doing it (which they aren’t). This is not to excuse the fact that, as you say, he is quite wrong to claim that councils do have such a short-sighted approach.
There is an interesting chapter later on about the very positive way in which faith groups tend to work with other organisations in the community, including local councils.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:58
After many years of avowed atheism I have returned to the Church of England having come to the conclusion that us apes need a philosophical underpinning for our lives and I find the protestant ethos as practised in the good old CofE to be sufficient. The message is one of understanding, forgiveness and generally looking after your fellow ape and that seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Whether one chooses to believe the stories used to inform us about these principles is another matter.
The opposite to faith, the childish nay saying of Dawkins, suggests a deeper malaise within him that any essential problem with religion. If he cannot dream and use his imagination that is for him to deal with but I fear a world of pure, dead science almost as much as I fear one of pure, uncompromising religion.
August 10th, 2007 at 13:37
It is quite interesting to discover that in the UK you have a debate about what clergy is allowed to say publicly. We have a similar debate in Italy too. This debate has reached its climax some months ago, now has been quite forgot, but the problem situation wasn’t solved so I guess the problem will emerge again in the near future.
It is also interesting to notice that there is an article of the European Charter of Rights that talks just about this topic, I don’t know if the UK has an opt-out also on this article.
August 13th, 2007 at 0:38
Dawkins is more than a little OTT (which makes for a great fun read - highly recommended) but the logic of his position and his scientific approach is pretty much spot on. For years I’ve been agnostic but I think he’s tipping me in the direction of atheism (or at least “a-” any of the belief frameworks of any major religion).