We need a truly secular political party, says religion writer

-24/05/06

The UK Liberal Democrats ought to re-fashion themselves as a party that is distinctively committed to a secular state ñ including the disestablishment of the Church of England and the ejection of the bishops from the Lords ñ says religion writer and theologian Theo Hobson.

Writing last week on the Guardianís newsblog, Hobson, an Ekklesia associate who has also penned a book about Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, says that in a bland political climate the Lib Dems ìwould be the only really convincing party of constitutional reformî if they took this step.

Hobsonís vision of secularism is one of neutrality in matters of religion, in contrast to the sponsoring of faith interests by the Labour and Conservative parties. He argues that this would be good for the churches: ìI believe that British Christianity needs to be liberated from its institutional past. It needs to become powerless to become strong.î

He continues: ìThere are two very mainstream issues related to this agenda. One is education: a party that was committed to curtailing the distinctiveness of faith-schools, by opening them to all, would win huge respect. Many Labour loyalists would instantly reconsider their loyalty. For Labour’s love of faith-schools seriously damages its claim to be the party of social equality and social cohesion, and makes it instead the friend of the pushy and hypocritical parent.î

Hobson argues that by adopting secularity, toleration, pluralism and liberality as its standards, the Liberal Democrats ìwould be the only [party] with anything really important to say about the renewal of British identity.î

Related Articles

He goes on: ìIn order to celebrate pluralism more explicitly we need a constitutional revolution. For while we have an official religion, a national church, there is not true equality between all citizens.î

The young men who blew themselves up on the tube last year ìwere, in formal terms, second-class citizens, outsiders to the national faith,î claims Hobson. ìOnly an explicitly secular state can affirm the worth of all Britons. It really is as simple as that – but at present no politician dares to say it.î

But he also makes it clear that his vision of secularity is about equality and neutrality, not anti-religious sentiment.

ìBefore Richard Dawkins and Polly Toynbee get too excited, let’s make it clear that there’s a difference between a secular party and an atheist one. The party I envisage would contain believers as well as non-believers,î concludes Theo Hobson.

In a related but different vein, Jonathan Bartley, co-director of the UK Christian think tank Ekklesia, will next month challenge the churches to reconsider their role in public life as being part of a subversive movement for change instead of seeking accommodation to power.

Seeing the regeneration of Christian action and witness through small communities, non-violence, independent political action, hospitality, a recovery of the radical vision of Jesus and disavowal of top-down control, Bartley has subtitled Faith and Politics After Christendom ìthe church as a movement for anarchyî.

The book will be launched with a day conference on its central themes.

[Also on Ekklesia: Make the institutional church history, says theologian; C of E disestablishment debate gathers pace; God and the politicians ñ where next?; Against Establishment: An Anglican Polemic, by Theo Hobson; Put the anarchy back into Christianity, say religion analysts; Anarchy,Church and Utopia: Rowan Williams on the Church, by Theo Hobson; Goth priest stirs up staid Cambridge; Former C of E head says tide is turning against the church; Anglican schools ‘will face resentment’ whilst they select on the basis of religion; Global leaders query Church of England state link; Leading humanist calls for renewed cooperation with believers; Churches in Ireland face dramatic decline; Church closes ranks over Charles and Camilla; Jesuits to discuss Church-State relations in the EU; Why the Guardian makeover excites religious fervour; Subverting the manifestos:a Christian agenda for change; Does Christianity kill or cure? asks Simon Barrow]


We need a truly secular political party, says religion writer

-24/05/06

The UK Liberal Democrats ought to re-fashion themselves as a party that is distinctively committed to a secular state ñ including the disestablishment of the Church of England and the ejection of the bishops from the Lords ñ says religion writer and theologian Theo Hobson.

Writing last week on the Guardianís newsblog, Hobson, an Ekklesia associate who has also penned a book about Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, says that in a bland political climate the Lib Dems ìwould be the only really convincing party of constitutional reformî if they took this step.

Hobsonís vision of secularism is one of neutrality in matters of religion, in contrast to the sponsoring of faith interests by the Labour and Conservative parties. He argues that this would be good for the churches: ìI believe that British Christianity needs to be liberated from its institutional past. It needs to become powerless to become strong.î

He continues: ìThere are two very mainstream issues related to this agenda. One is education: a party that was committed to curtailing the distinctiveness of faith-schools, by opening them to all, would win huge respect. Many Labour loyalists would instantly reconsider their loyalty. For Labour’s love of faith-schools seriously damages its claim to be the party of social equality and social cohesion, and makes it instead the friend of the pushy and hypocritical parent.î

Hobson argues that by adopting secularity, toleration, pluralism and liberality as its standards, the Liberal Democrats ìwould be the only [party] with anything really important to say about the renewal of British identity.î

Related Articles

He goes on: ìIn order to celebrate pluralism more explicitly we need a constitutional revolution. For while we have an official religion, a national church, there is not true equality between all citizens.î

The young men who blew themselves up on the tube last year ìwere, in formal terms, second-class citizens, outsiders to the national faith,î claims Hobson. ìOnly an explicitly secular state can affirm the worth of all Britons. It really is as simple as that – but at present no politician dares to say it.î

But he also makes it clear that his vision of secularity is about equality and neutrality, not anti-religious sentiment.

ìBefore Richard Dawkins and Polly Toynbee get too excited, let’s make it clear that there’s a difference between a secular party and an atheist one. The party I envisage would contain believers as well as non-believers,î concludes Theo Hobson.

In a related but different vein, Jonathan Bartley, co-director of the UK Christian think tank Ekklesia, will next month challenge the churches to reconsider their role in public life as being part of a subversive movement for change instead of seeking accommodation to power.

Seeing the regeneration of Christian action and witness through small communities, non-violence, independent political action, hospitality, a recovery of the radical vision of Jesus and disavowal of top-down control, Bartley has subtitled Faith and Politics After Christendom ìthe church as a movement for anarchyî.

The book will be launched with a day conference on its central themes.

[Also on Ekklesia: Make the institutional church history, says theologian; C of E disestablishment debate gathers pace; God and the politicians ñ where next?; Against Establishment: An Anglican Polemic, by Theo Hobson; Put the anarchy back into Christianity, say religion analysts; Anarchy,Church and Utopia: Rowan Williams on the Church, by Theo Hobson; Goth priest stirs up staid Cambridge; Former C of E head says tide is turning against the church; Anglican schools ‘will face resentment’ whilst they select on the basis of religion; Global leaders query Church of England state link; Leading humanist calls for renewed cooperation with believers; Churches in Ireland face dramatic decline; Church closes ranks over Charles and Camilla; Jesuits to discuss Church-State relations in the EU; Why the Guardian makeover excites religious fervour; Subverting the manifestos:a Christian agenda for change; Does Christianity kill or cure? asks Simon Barrow]